Harry Potter, the movie

Discussion in 'General' started by ice-9, Nov 17, 2001.

  1. ice-9

    ice-9 Well-Known Member

    Hey guys, just came back from watching the flick.

    My bottom line review is that the movie is personally disappointing...maybe it's because I just recently read the book, but the movie was boring to follow and way too predictable as it was a little TOO faithful to the book. My friend who never read HP liked it a lot though, and felt the pace was fine. Watching the movie, I kept thinking: "Man, if I didn't read the book I would be so lost!" But after speaking to my friend, I realized that's only because we know what the movie's missing, whereas to someone who never read the book, he/she would probably automatically make the assumptions to bridge one thing to another.

    Overall I had the impression that the movie was rushed. There were a few scenes that were unacceptably boring/staid/cheesy. There's one bit where Dumbledore obviously messed up his lines...but the scene wasn't redone. Many of the special effects are lame and B-rated. The ghosts especially suck. I understand if the movie could not possibly have the details that made the book so compelling, but there's no good excuse for the lack of visual details.

    Oh yeah, last thing: Harry Potter's actor doesn't know how to act, and Hermione Granger is CUTE! I can't wait to see her 10 years from now!
     
  2. ice-9

    ice-9 Well-Known Member

    Sorry, addendum:

    It's not a BAD movie, but for people who really, really like the book it'll probably end up being disappointing. For those that haven't read the book, I expect y'all to enjoy the movie and it's definitely worth the price of admission.

    All in all, the movie's probably perfect for the person that read Sorcerer's Stone long, long ago and really liked it, but forgot many of the book's details.
     
  3. Genie47

    Genie47 Well-Known Member

    LOTR and HP are going to be released about the same time here. I would rather watch LOTR: FOTR
     
  4. uk_kid

    uk_kid Well-Known Member

    ...the movie's probably perfect for the person that read Sorcerer's Stone long, long ago...

    you mean 'philosopher's stone', no? ;)

    i agree with genie - lotr will (hopefully) be much better than harry potter.....or at least really good in its own right...
     
  5. Genie47

    Genie47 Well-Known Member

    Since the posts here are about movies. I would highly recommend "Brotherhood of the Wolf". Its a French movie and the French really know how to make movies. Story is based on the mysterious Beast of Gevaudan. Acting is very good. Mark Dacascos does a really fine job as Mani. Fight scenes are the best I've seen. Matrix-like but yet with its own style. The movie has everything. Occut, horror, martial arts, conspiracy, romance, sex, fantasy and brutality. It is very intelligent in its own right.

    2 humbs up. Jet Li's The One is just a sheer waste of money that could have been better spent on playing VF.

    Can't wait for Luc Besson's Yamakasi to be screened here on 13 Dec. Hollywood movies are sorta going downhill for a while. Will consider getting DVDs for both of them.
     
  6. Kid_Karumba

    Kid_Karumba Member

    Jet Li

    Have you seen 'Kiss of the Dragon'? I was greatly dissappointed. It had Hollywood type martial arts and the way it was shot you couldn't actually tell exactly what he (Jet Li) did.
    Me: "Did he punch that guy with his right or his left hand?".
    My Friend: "Dunno! I think it was a kick!"
     
  7. Llanfair

    Llanfair Well-Known Member

    I dunno - I've read all 4 books twice. And I thought the movie was fantastic. I wasn't expecting something different from the books - I'm glad it was fairly close to the books, really. Quidditch was so well done, it's amazing.

    The only thing that I thought was a bit 'off' was that my impression of wands from the novel was thinner, and whipier. Not quite as clunky, I guess. Although I thought Hermione's wand was nice and closer to what I thought they should look like.

    Just curious, why were you expecting a better acting performance from Harry? It's the kid's first film and every reviewer thought he did a bang up job. I thought the same. The visual effects weren't that bad. The only thing I can think of needing improvement was Fluffy. And why make the ghosts better? They play such a small role - it's not important. It looks like they spent most time on Quidditch, as they should have. Even Firenze was done well. It's no Monsters Inc., but it was definitely a satisfactory display of effects.

    Comparing this to LOTR is a joke, right? We're talking about two very very different movies, representing two very very different book series. Apples and Oranges. And their targeted audience is quite different as well.

    I'm surprised you didn't like the movie as much, Jeff. Perhaps you should read the rest of the books...they're fantastic.

    cheers,
     
  8. Llanfair

    Llanfair Well-Known Member

    Like I said to Jeff,

    "Comparing this to LOTR is a joke, right? We're talking about two very very different movies, representing two very very different book series. Apples and Oranges. And their targeted audience is quite different as well. "

    Sure, I'd *rather* see LOTR as it hits closer to home and has been such a passion for me almost my whole life. If I had to choose only one. But the HP series is on its way to being a classic of literature and the movie was, imo, excellent.

    See both.

    cheers,
     
  9. ice-9

    ice-9 Well-Known Member

    Hey Llanfair,

    I didn't compare it to LOTR, but I'm looking forward to that movie as well! Currently reading the book for the first time.

    As for Harry...hmm, I dunno, I felt he wasn't dorky enough in the beginning and not passionate enough towards the end. I felt he was very stiff throughout the whole movie; he had very little body language. The times that he was supposed to be scared/full of wonder/surprised etc. I just didn't feel convinced...he had only one body posture, and that's arms straight down by his sides, standing straight.

    Compared to Ron and Hermione, Harry could've been better.

    I don't think it's a bad movie at all, and I have heard that most reviewers gave the movie a very, very positive review. There was one review that I read that totally disliked the Quidditch match...I actually share your opinion in that it was pretty good...better than expected at least. However, after Gryffindor won, the ending shot of Harry raising his fist to the air, camera panning around, and the background obviously superimposed...ehh, I dunno, could've been better.

    I've actually read books 1-3 and am halfway through book 4...I definitely like the book better!
     
  10. uk_kid

    uk_kid Well-Known Member

    We're talking about two very very different movies, representing two very very different book series. Apples and Oranges. And their targeted audience is quite different as well.

    well, the books are very different, but (in the UK at least) the target audiences (for the films) are pretty similar. i dunno 'bout NA, but lots of harry potter readers here are actually adults. (lots of = a high percentage of total readership.)
     
  11. sta783

    sta783 Well-Known Member

    I didn't compare it to LOTR, but I'm looking forward to that movie as well! Currently reading the book for the first time.

    Good luck finish reading the series before the movie is out *grin*

    I'm doing my best to educate my GF on the whole backgrounds of LOTR. For someone who does not even know what elf is, I'm afraid that LOTR the movie will be quite over her head. I'm pushing her to read the Hobbit first, which gives out background infomation, as well as being an easier read.
     
  12. ice-9

    ice-9 Well-Known Member

    When is the movie going to be released again? LOTR so far is very good; much darker than HP. I guess I'm going to be doing some heavy duting reading this Thanksgiving, heheheh...
     
  13. Shadowdean

    Shadowdean Well-Known Member

    Or be real cruel shota and force her to to read the Similarian.
     
  14. Mr. Bungle

    Mr. Bungle Well-Known Member

    What the FUCK is a "Similarian"?
     
  15. Llanfair

    Llanfair Well-Known Member

    It's the "Silmarillion"

    Rich, the Silmarillion is a book published by Tolkien's son Christopher after his father died. It's written, mostly, by JRR. It's about the First Age of Middle Earth in which the elves (first children of Middle Earth) rebel against the gods and battle Morgoth (evil god) for the Silmarils - the three perfect jewels created by the elf Feanor.

    It's a wonderful book - tough to read but worth it.

    cheers,
     
  16. Llanfair

    Llanfair Well-Known Member

    Dec 19.
     
  17. Mr. Bungle

    Mr. Bungle Well-Known Member

    I know what the Silmarillion is. I was wondering what "Similarian" was. Josh likes to invent words (and insist that they're real). I wasn't sure if this was a new one.
     
  18. sta783

    sta783 Well-Known Member

    It's a wonderful book - tough to read but worth it.

    Tell me about it.... I actually tried to read this book BEFORE LOTR, thinking that reading in chronology is the right approach. For someone who was in English 101 in Japan, that certainly was not a clever decision.
     
  19. sta783

    sta783 Well-Known Member

    Or be real cruel shota and force her to to read the Similarian.

    Heh...forcing someone to read LOTR is tough enough, as much as I know how fun the series are.

    I was about to turn my sarcasm on regarding "Similarian" too, but I see that the others were even quicker than I was.
     
  20. Daniel Thomas

    Daniel Thomas Well-Known Member

    It could've been worse -- you could be reading Shakespeare.
     

Share This Page