I think, although they left out a lot of important, humourous and character-establishing scenes the movie was still excellent. They covered everything they could in such a short amount of time with just the perfect amount of energy and film space. The actors have all improved, the humour/dramatic scenes were very well done. Though I adore dear Mr. Williams and miss his wondrous contributions to Harry Potter, the music was still great. The final scenes were just... perfect.
I saw it again last night. Brilliant!
One of my fav shots is when Dumbledore explains bout the tournament and the Weasly twins say "Wicked", and that look on their faces.. I love them!
Voldie still was great, Cedric died wonderful!
And my dear sweet Ron, OMG, I would see the movie 10 times just to see him 😄
Originally posted by DarkC
I think it was stupid how they didn't show much as a single play from the World Cup. The rest of the movie was okay, though.
Well, the quidditch scenes aren't all that fun, anyway, in movie form. After all, Harry Potter isn't all about quidditch. They needed to move the story along. Besides, they showed plenty broom flying in the first task. it wouldn't have been the best thing to do to spend so much time on quidditch type scenes.
Originally posted by danagrint
well, imagine the 5th book, it's the biggest book yet, and everything in that book is important and I wonder how long the movie will be?
Well, not everything was important. they won't really need to have that article thing that Rita Skeeter helped write. They could easily take that out, because all it did was let Harry say what he saw. And everybody finds out that he was right anyway.
It would have been good if they'd explained that in some way. Even just include Harry's question to Dumbledore following his little Pensieve adventure. For those who've read the books it makes perfect sense that Neville should be crying but for those who haven't... My brother was watching the third film with me (he hasn't read the books) and when Harry conjures the Patronus he asked me why it was a stag. I said something like because that was his father's animagus. Obviously the whole thing made no sense, I had to explain it all to him.
Well, my brother had some questions about the third one, but he understood the fourth one, completely. he had no questions about it, and he's in college. neither did my parents, and a few of my friends. I think that it's just because we've all read the books, and we're just trying too hard to put ourselves in the non-hp readers' shoes, and we conclude that they'd have so many questions about it, even though a lot of them probably don't. that's just my opinion
As with all of the films, they cut a whole load out. I think the openings with the Dursley's were brilliant, but then they just cut out. What also really surprised me was that they cut out the world cup and it was only about 10-15 minutes before they were on the train. All the others films had a setting up for the rest of the book and while the Deatheaters did this quite well, it wasn't the same as having the harry gang meeting up just before the holidays finishing and then Harry learning that something isn't right again.
A lot of the book stuff was cut out too, which I was really mad about as the film just seemed to zoom through the story, which it did well, but it was going so fast, I half expected to see the maze at about 1hr 35 mins. As always, the characters of Ron and Hermione were used well, and all the othere really shone in this film like never before.
Now, the finale, I must admit, I was looking forward too. I expected a huge wizard duel between Harry and Voldemort, and yet I was a little disapointed. Harry and Cedric arrived in the graveyard, then after only half a minuete, Wormtail shows up, kills Cedric and then Voldemort is back. I wanted there to be a lot more of the graveyard and how it would play tricks with thier eyes, before showing the true reason behind it all.
Voldemort was also a disapointment. I wasn't sure what I was really expecting, but I wanted something more than some kind a vampire-type guy in robes. I imagened him as some kind a monster/type human who was going to be a lot more scary. His apperance didn't really do much for me, probably because I was expected it. Overal, it was a great film, not as good as the first, but an alright film that I would see again.
I loved it but I missed the meeting snuffles in hogsmede and wtf is gambon doing to our beloved albus he made him look like a lunatic, so not happy with him in Albus role I wish Warner Bros would approach Ian McKellan for the role hes the most dumbledore as Gandlaf which is as close as the master Richard Harris himself could even play
Originally posted by #1Rupert_Lover
Well, my brother had some questions about the third one, but he understood the fourth one, completely. he had no questions about it, and he's in college. neither did my parents, and a few of my friends. I think that it's just because we've all read the books, and we're just trying too hard to put ourselves in the non-hp readers' shoes, and we conclude that they'd have so many questions about it, even though a lot of them probably don't. that's just my opinion