The Harry Potter Movies

[Ceruleana]

Satrunrose, word to your entire post especially:

 

I almost would rather have Movie Harry end up with Movie Hermione.

 

Chalk that up to DRad and EmWat's really great chemistry (and alleged romance).  I just really hate how RG got the red-headed stepchild treatment, especially when he was the most natural actor of the trio for the first three films, at least.  He fades a bit in the next three, then steps up in DH1 & DH2, but I'd have to watch DH again as it's been a while for me.

 

And this:

 

 

The only part I really can't stand is the bit at end of HPB when Harry does that stupid and cliched "You can't be my girlfriend anymore because I'm a big hero and you'd be in danger" speech to Ginny. Ginny's been his girlfriend for all of five minutes and she has five wizard brothers. I think she can take care of herself in most situations.

 

Chalk that up to JKR needing to create another conflict for Harry.  "I love her!  Wanna be with her!  But Moldy Voldy comes after everyone I love!"  But he most certainly underestimated Ginny, who was able to intimidate her five, very capable, older wizard brothers.  That says quite a lot.

 

Anyway, I didn't care for MovieGinny at all; I didn't like her look (although I thought Bonnie Wright was attractive, huh), and they didn't do a damn thing with her, really.  I noticed there being more focus on Luna Lovegood, but the majority of the focus (even as much as Harry) was on Hermione.  My personal theory with the HP films (especially due to the many different characters and all the editing), was if you couldn't make your mark somehow or bubble over with charisma...Sayonara.  The veteran actors obviously had a better opportunity of presenting their characters in a way that would be memorable, but the younger ones?  Not so much.

[Spartan Girl]

I guess I have the unpopular opinion that I like book Ginny.

 

 

You aren't alone, I liked her too.  I really wish they had expanded her role in the movies, but I guess they wanted to focus more attention on the trio.

[Dandesun]

 

I guess I have the unpopular opinion that I like book Ginny.

 

Book!Ginny actually got a personality. Movie!Ginny seemed to have all of one expression the entire run.

 

My unpopular pairing wish was Harry/Luna... particularly in the movies. They really had a good vibe to me.

[Athena]

I keep liking everyone's posts because I liked Book!Ginny too. I didn't hate anyone in the books except the ones I was suppose to (e.g. Umbridge). While the romance writing in the books is not great, I didn't begrudge or resent the canon pairings.

 

For the movies, the script did a disservice to Ginny and the H/G pairing. Probably in large part to Kloves Harry/Hermione leanings. I don't really have anything against Emma Watson, but I actually think Bonnie Wright is very pretty too and could act about the same opposite Harry if given the chance. 

 

Harry/Luna had a lot of potential from the movies though. They were true to the books there and even better. 

[VCRTracking]

It's not just a matter of acting, it's a matter of chemistry and if the chemistry is already there it's great, Daniel and Emma had it, as did Daniel and Evanna but Daniel and Bonnie didn't. If it was Hermione asking Harry to zip up her dress or her bending down to tie her shoe it would feel way more intense. Just Harry taking off the locket from her neck in the tent had some heat to it.

 

 

My personal theory with the HP films (especially due to the many different characters and all the editing), was if you couldn't make your mark somehow or bubble over with charisma...Sayonara.  The veteran actors obviously had a better opportunity of presenting their characters in a way that would be memorable, but the younger ones?  Not so much.

 

Jessie Cave as Lavender Brown and Freddie Sroma as Cormac McLaggen are the exceptions but they were hired specifically for the sixth movie. They weren't background players brought into the fore at least in the film version. Their characters were mentioned and spoke in the books prior to Half Blood Prince and I think Lavender actually appeared, played by a black actress but had no lines. In HBP its the first time the audience sees either of them and their roles were more memorable. You're going to remember the girl who calls Ron "Won Won" or the guy who licking ice cream off his fingers seductively at Hermione!

Edited October 31, 2014 by VCRTracking

[Spartan Girl]

Stepping aside from the shipping/chemistry issues for a moment, did anyone else love the moment in DH2 when Harry finds out he's a Horcrux?  I really think Daniel Radcliffe nailed that scene: the look on his face captured all the horror, shock, rage, betrayal, numbness, and resignation Harry underwent in that chapter JK Rowling wrote.

[truthaboutluv]

I thought she was a bit of a bad ass, but I guess now that I think about it, most of the bits about her raising Hell in the DA, especially during the Deathly Hallows are just references to stuff that we aren't shown in the books.

 

 

And that for me was the major issue with Book Ginny (Movie Ginny was just hopeless in my opinion - no offense to Bonnie but girl and DanRad were like a sleeping pill together). Ginny's entire presence in the books consisted of in my opinion being a nonentity that creepily looked at Harry through cracks in doors and ran away when he looked at her and later getting a personality that we only ever heard about from everyone else. She had a couple of snarky lines in HBP that was supposed to be funny but honestly I found more obnoxious than anything. But all the supposed bad ass things she could do and all the great talent she had, we only ever heard about from others. 

 

Like when someone would say Hermione was smart, readers actually saw that repeatedly throughout the series. Ron being funny and even his talents at Chess was another thing we saw throughout the series. Ginny was just wallpaper for like the first four books (save for being the person who let out Tom Riddle in COS and even then she was barely in the book except for acting strangely a few times until the end when Harry rescues her) and then suddenly in OOTP she was given a personality but all JK did was have everyone else go around telling Harry and by that token the readers, how amazing and super special she was, rather than actually showing it. Note, that even in the big battle at the end when all the kids went off together, she put Hermione with Harry and had Ginny and Neville and company off in another group. So I can't knock the screenwriters and the movie people if Ginny came off bland and like a nonentity in the movies because I'm sorry, she was a nonentity in the books too as far as I'm concerned. 

 

It is interesting the comments about Kloves and his not so secret Harry/Hermione shipping (honestly I think he copped to it in some interview either before the last film came out or after the movies were done) influencing the script writing because honestly I think JK herself had some kind of character bias. No, I don't think she was shipping Harry/Hermione and she definitely intended for Hermione to be with Ron but I think at some point she became just as enamored with Hermione and that influenced her writing somewhat. I do remember reading some interview where she admitted to Hermione being something of her self-insert in the books and more telling, apparently, at some point after or before OOTP the book came out, she made a comment that some of the characters were getting away from her somewhat and she had to reign them back in and this was especially true of Hermione. 

 

The reason I mention this and to tie it to Ginny is that I think JK had a plan for Ginny but somewhere along the way things went completely off road and it never happened and it's why her character turned out to be such a fail in my opinion. It is a known fact that JK wrote the crappy epilogue of the series at the same time she wrote the first chapter of the series. So she clearly had a plan and idea for where she was going with the series. However, completing the seven books spanned more than a decade of her life. In that time she became freaking loaded, remarried a guy who eerily looked a little like how you would picture Harry, had another child, etc.

 

Many authors have admitted that often subconsciously, their real lives and what they're going through at that time can and does influence their writing. All that to say that I just really think JK herself became more and more enamored with Hermione and because of that Ginny, who was supposed to be Harry's great love, fell to the wayside. And then when she realized time was running out, she threw some contrived personality on her, threw in some lame, half-assed developed romance and then they were married at the end of the series with really, really stupid named children. And because Ginny fell to the wayside, so did Harry's love story. I will always say that it is the weirdest thing ever, that she wrote a story about the hero's journey, told in the first person and yet his relationship was far less developed than that of his two best friends. 

 

As for the movies, honestly, none of them were amazing in my opinion but I really enjoyed GOF, OOTP and the last two films. I hate the book and movie HBP. One thing I especially loved about GOF is that it was the first time I could tell that Daniel really was getting better because yeah he was really pretty mediocre in the first few films but I thought he was amazing in the big dramatic sequence where Cedric is murdered and Voldemort comes back to life. 

Edited November 2, 2014 by truthaboutluv

[KatWay]

I agree that Book!Ginny wasn't much better than Movie!Ginny in my opinion. At least Movie!Ginny, while bland and boring, seemed to be a real, albeit not very interesting person, while Book!Ginny to me felt like she got a complete personality transplant between books and then reappeared as the ultimate male fantasy girl. Super hot, super talented, super sporty, snarky and fun and outgoing, every boy in the school wants to date her....all of that happens off-screen of course, while people tell Harry about it.

 

I would have preferred Harry to just be single, if they couldn't manage to include Ginny more in the actual plot, so she felt less like "Oh yeah, Harry has to have a love story too" tack-on. Seriously, as awkward as it got, I preferred his relationship with Cho - at least that felt real to me.

[truthaboutluv]

while Book!Ginny to me felt like she got a complete personality transplant between books and then reappeared as the ultimate male fantasy girl. Super hot, super talented, super sporty, snarky and fun and outgoing, every boy in the school wants to date her....all of that happens off-screen of course, while people tell Harry about it.

 

 

Perfectly said. It got borderline nauseating hearing repeatedly about how hot Ginny was, how bad ass, how amazing. Wasn't there even some line about some Slytherin guy who was attracted to her even though all we'd heard from Book 1 was how Slytherins seemed predisposed to hate everyone else and especially Gryffindor house members. But Ginny's hotness was just that palpable. Of course we never see any of these bad ass and amazing things she could do and I felt like Harry and Ginny in HBP took on his "most popular guy and girl on campus" personae I hated, especially with regards to Harry who one of the things I always loved was that for all his "fame" he was still kind of a dork and a loser.

 

I would have preferred Harry to just be single, if they couldn't manage to include Ginny more in the actual plot, so she felt less like "Oh yeah, Harry has to have a love story too" tack-on.

 

 

Well for the longest time I was a Harry/death shipper myself and I loved Harry. I was just totally fine with his dying at the end of the series. But accepting how controversial that may have been and realizing JK wouldn't go for it, I too was totally fine with him being single. That's why I hated the damn epilogue and wished the series had just ended after the war. 

 

In my opinion, Harry should not have been with anyone. Aside from his multitude of issues, I found Harry somewhat emotionally withdrawn, likely because of his multitude of issues and because of that didn't buy him with anyone. But I will say that that's probably why despite the glaring evidence of Hermione/Ron and there not being necessarily romantic chemistry, I could see why some book readers still shipped him with Hermione because she was probably the girl he opened up to the most in the series, with the small exception of funny enough, Luna. These were the only two females Harry ever had any kind of emotional connection to in my opinion. 

 

All we got about Harry and Ginny is that they both liked Quidditch and she didn't cry which apparently was something Harry found oh so offensive. Reason again I say Harry had no business being with anyone because dude was kind of insensitive and frankly a little emotionally cold. The last thing I thought Harry needed at the end of that series was romance but more likely a lot of therapy. 

 

Seriously, as awkward as it got, I preferred his relationship with Cho - at least that felt real to me.

 

 

Oh don't even get me started on how JK basically shit on Cho's character and that whole mess. Yes I never expected Harry to live happily ever after with Cho but she was presented as a nice girl who seemed bright and talented. It was obvious in OOTP that Cho was not over what happened with Cedric and should not have tried dating Harry and that's fine. What turned me off was how much of an ass Harry was towards her and later how he, along with Ginny mocked her and somehow Cho was made into this annoying, childish person all because "omg she cried...the horror". And we had to hear again how much Ginny wasn't a crier. Except funny, I sure remembered her crying in COS when she unwittingly released Tom Riddle. But how horrible of Cho to still be emotionally upset over her serious boyfriend dropping dead less than a year before. The nerve. 

Edited November 2, 2014 by truthaboutluv

[Snow Apple]

Oh, I hated what JK did to Cho. I thought the scene where Harry first saw her was so cute. And she was fine in book four; it seemed like she was heading towards something for future books, even if it's just friendship with Harry. But then book five happened. I agree Cho was ruined and Ginny became a completely different character. I actually liked Ginny better in the early books when she was awkward and had a crush on her brother's best friend. She seemed more like a real person back then.

 

The books didn't have the same magic and wonder after that long break between four and five.

[Athena]

It's not just a matter of acting, it's a matter of chemistry and if the chemistry is already there it's great, Daniel and Emma had it, as did Daniel and Evanna but Daniel and Bonnie didn't. If it was Hermione asking Harry to zip up her dress or her bending down to tie her shoe it would feel way more intense. Just Harry taking off the locket from her neck in the tent had some heat to it.

 

I just didn't really see the chemistry as anything other than platonic. Yeah Movie H/G was boring, but it didn't make me want to ship H/Hr either. As I said above, if anything, Luna/Harry had the best chemistry in the movies for me.

 

Kloves did admit that he shipped Harry/Hermione in an interview. I really like Harry and Hermione as just friends so when they wrote it in almost as a romance, I rolled my eyes especially in the OOTP scene where she hugs him.

 

I actually got more annoyed at Hermione at times in the books because I could tell JKR was giving her a lot. 

[VCRTracking]

I liked that Harry and Cho exchanged that look in the last movie. That was more sad breakup when Harry and the other DA members shunned her because they thought she ratted out and then find out she was given veritaserum. I always preferred movieCho mainly because Katie Leung's Scottish accent made her seem like a nice country girl.

 

 

[Sharpie66]

One thing I especially loved about GOF is that it was the first time I could tell that Daniel really was getting better because yeah he was really pretty mediocre in the first few films but I thought he was amazing in the big dramatic sequence where Cedric is murdered and Voldemort comes back to life.

 

 

The first time in the movie series that I ever sat up and said, "Hey, Radcliffe might actually be able to act!" is in the Hogwarts Express in PoA, when they're trying to find an open carriage. Harry says (re: blowing up Aunt Marge), "Actually, I'm surprised I wasn't expelled..." and the way that DR delivered that line just really struck home with me as being super-natural and totally believable, even though it was very much a tossed-off line. He had some issues with later scenes (in the snow after finding out about Sirius being "THEIR FRIEND!!!"), but I had faith after the train scene.

[TheGreenKnight]

I agree that Book!Ginny wasn't much better than Movie!Ginny in my opinion. At least Movie!Ginny, while bland and boring, seemed to be a real, albeit not very interesting person, while Book!Ginny to me felt like she got a complete personality transplant between books and then reappeared as the ultimate male fantasy girl. Super hot, super talented, super sporty, snarky and fun and outgoing, every boy in the school wants to date her....all of that happens off-screen of course, while people tell Harry about it.

 

I would have preferred Harry to just be single, if they couldn't manage to include Ginny more in the actual plot, so she felt less like "Oh yeah, Harry has to have a love story too" tack-on. Seriously, as awkward as it got, I preferred his relationship with Cho - at least that felt real to me.

To be honest, I thought both of Harry's love interests were failures, but Ginny more than Cho. I actually did like Ginny up until HBP. I especially liked her in OotP, as a matured girl who had overcome the childish/delusional crush on a guy she'd barely talked to. HBP honestly irritates me the most of all the books--and the romance/suddenly-introduced "hormones" is the main reason, from Bill and Fleur down to Lupin and Tonks. Even Ron and Hermione, who I think were perfectly developed both individually and as an endgame couple up to that point, were nearly ruined for me in this book by making Ron almost irredeemable and forcing Hermione to act out-of-character. All the characters pushed into relationships were less likable by the end of this book. I'm just glad the series didn't stumble like that early on.

[Eeksquire]

 

HBP honestly irritates me the most of all the books--and the romance/suddenly-introduced "hormones" is the main reason

This honestly didn't bother me as much in the book as it did in the movie - it seems normal for 16 year olds to be more interested in romance and have that be a realistic part of the story BUT (and this is a HUGE but): The movie cut out so much of Voldemort's backstory by cutting all but two of the flashbacks to Tom Riddle's life that it makes it nearly incomprehensible as to how the Trio would have ANY IDEA what the remaining horcruxes were in the final movie.  The time spent reviewing the memories in the Pensieve was, imo, absolutely critical to setting up the final book and they left it out in favor of endless "Won-Won" scenes.

[vibeology]

I was watching OotP on TV today and it reminded me just how much I hate so much of the adult casting in the series. I love Alan Rickman but he along with every other actor in the parent generation is just too old for the plot to make sense. Snape shouldn't be any older than 35 and I think the official timeline puts him even younger. Same would be true for Lupin, Sirius and Pettigrew. But the thing that really bugs me is that Lily and James die young. They're like 21 or so when they die but for some reason every time they show up in the mirror or as visions or in pictures they're these 40 year old people. Its such a bad choice because it would be so much more powerful if they're more like Harry's contemporaries. It would have really driven home the risks that Harry and his friends faced. Its easier to play around with the Weasley's ages or Hagrid or the Malfoys, but the Mauraders/Snape/Lily are just sooo old considering what we are told about them and it always takes me out of the movie.

[VCRTracking]

It would have been fun casting to have gotten the cast of Trainspotting to play them: Ewan McGregor and Kelly MacDonald as James and Lilly, Jonny Lee Miller as Sirius,  Kevin McKidd as Remus, Robert Carlyle as Snape, Ewan Bremner as Pettigrew. Kelly MacDonald as Rowena Ravenclaw was good at least.

 

Edited December 29, 2014 by VCRTracking

[Rick Kitchen]

Kelly Macdonald is good in everything she does.

[Helena Dax]

I think Tom Felton  was one of the best kid actors. I don't like the way Draco's written in the first books -I can't imagine him having a life beyond insulting Harry,  he's too unidimensional-, but Felton  gave him humanity since the beginning (his flick of fear when  it's his turn in the Sorting, by example). He had only a bunch of lines and he made the best out of it. 

 

While I like the Weasleys just fine, I must admit my favourite adult actors/characters in the  movies were Lucius, Snape and Lockhart. You just can tell  the actors were having such fun... Branagh as Lockhart is pure gold. I agree that Rickman, Oldman etc were too old for that roles, though.

 

I don't like Harry/Ginny in the books, but I despise it in the movies. Radcliffe and Wright were HORRIBLE together. And don't make me start with that "let me tie your fucking shoelaces" bullshit. 

[VCRTracking]

 

While I like the Weasleys just fine, I must admit my favourite adult actors/characters in the  movies were Lucius, Snape and Lockhart. You just can tell  the actors were having such fun... Branagh as Lockhart is pure gold. I agree that Rickman, Oldman etc were too old for that roles, though.

Jason Isaacs tells how all the adult actors in the HP are trying to outham each other in 1:24 of this interview and Branagh's great response to when Isaacs admits him while they're in makeup that his(Isaacs) performance is a bit too big. He later tells a great story of working with Michael Bay on Armageddon).

 

[Browncoat]

I've been watching these all weekend, and was reminded of something that really bugged me in the last one.  Just before the Dursleys have to leave Little Whinging, Petunia says she knows what "they're capable of."  That Harry didn't just lose a mother that day, she lost a sister as well.  It just seems so hypocritical for her to suddenly care that she lost a sister -- she let Aunt Marjorie go on and on about what a bad mother Harry must have had, after all, and is so embarrassed by her freak sister. 

 

Also, every time I see/read The Deathly Hallows, I always wonder if the Dursleys ever returned to #4 Privet Drive and if Hermione could or did un-obliviate her parents.  I suspect they would have been thrilled to have grandchildren. 

 

I also believe Harry should have remained single (or possibly gotten together with Luna), and should have become the teacher of Defense of the Dark Arts at Hogwarts before eventually becoming Headmaster.  Ginny should have ended up with Neville. 

[VCRTracking]

 

I've been watching these all weekend, and was reminded of something that really bugged me in the last one.  Just before the Dursleys have to leave Little Whinging, Petunia says she knows what "they're capable of."

 

That scene wasn't in the theatrical release. It was put back in along with other deleted scenes when it aired on ABC Family.

[Browncoat]

Makes sense.  It's not in the book, either, and it just seems so out of character. 

[nomodrama]

I've been watching these this weekend as well. And I just want to echo that my dream pairing for Harry would have been Luna. I just found her so deliciously kooky and I think that Harry mostly appreciated her personality and was amused by it. And I think she knew how to get thru to him and despite her hippie way, had a profound insight into things, especially when it came to Harry. I loathe book and movie Ginny. I fully believe she was just a device for Harry to become an official part of the Weasley family. Something completely unnecessary in my opinion and the whole group treated him like family regardless. I'm actually watching DH1 right now and the whole "zip up my dress" thing still makes me roll my eyes. 

 

Switching gears from the "ship" discussion. I really love the HP series, both the films and the movies, but I always end up upset when watching or re-reading them. I understand that JKR wanted to end everything on a realistically somber note, and that war is gruesome and there are casualties. But it always seemed to me that she caused so many unnecessary deaths on the good side, while letting the baddies get off way to easily. Did she really need to kill off Dobby, a Weasley twin, and Remus and Tonks (they just had a baby for crying out loud). Yet somehow ALL the Malfoys escape unscathed (I mean, Lucius at least should have been offed - he deserved it). That always gets me riled up!
 

[Bean421]

I also believe Harry should have remained single (or possibly gotten together with Luna), and should have become the teacher of Defense of the Dark Arts at Hogwarts before eventually becoming Headmaster.  Ginny should have ended up with Neville.

I felt this way too! Harry and Luna had great chemistry and if he wasn't going to die he should be with her. The books established that Ginny and Neville interacted more than H/G. I guess the Happy Weasley Family ending was too tempting.

[benteen]

I would have been happy with Harry and Luna.  It would have been a fun relationship to explore.  I do like Ginny and am glad Harry married into the Weasleys but good lord, Rowling didn't handle the actual relationship very well.  We hear more about their relationship than actual see it, as if it would have caused Rowling physical pain to actually show Harry being happy for more than two pages at a time.

 

Yeah, the Cho Chang thing is weird.  It's clear the girl needed grief counseling but everyone just gets annoyed with her crying.  I've noticed these misanthropic tendencies in Rowling's other stories where the main characters seem constantly annoyed with just about everyone around them.  It makes me wonder if that's how JK views most of the people around her and whom she encounters in real life.

[blueray]

What do people think were the best and worst HP movies? Does it correspond to your opinions about the best and worst HP books? 

My favorite movie is the POA. I really feel like they put most of the third book into the movie and it didn't feel rushed or anything (like the forth one did).

 

My least favorite is probably GOF mainly because they rushed everything and what was with showing the hype for the Quiddich match than not showing any of the game.

[SilverShadow]

I cannot stand the POA movie because it changes nearly everything and doesn't explain anything about the Maruaders and their nicknames. The direction is gorgeous though.

 

OOP is my favorite movie despite being one of my leas favorite of the books. The script manages to keep the essentials of the book while cutting the chaff and relieving some of the unending bleakness.

[ZootSuitWyatt]

I cannot stand the POA movie because it changes nearly everything and doesn't explain anything about the Maruaders and their nicknames.

This drove me crazy. Even two lines of dialogue would've been good enough.

[benteen]

Alfonzo Cuaron did an amazing visual job with POA but I still never forgive him for cutting out the Marauders Map backstory.  Inexcusable and it showed a poor understanding of the series from a so-called "genius" like AC.

 

Kloves characterization of Ron and Hermione doesn't help much.  Ron is turned into the dumb, cowardly lion who publicly agrees with Snape that Hermione is an insufferable know-it-all despite the fact that Ron STICKS UP FOR HERMIONE during that scene.  His best moment, when he stands up on a broken leg and tells Sirius that if he wants to get to Harry, he'll have to go through him is given to Hermione.  My apologies...SUPER HERMIONE.  Super Hermione has all of Ron's bravery and insider knowledge on the wizarding world.  Super Hermione can travel back in time to take extra classes without breaking a sweat, despite that fact that it pushed Book Hermione to the limits and made her realize that she couldn't do absolutely everything.  It was a human moment for Book Hermione, which meant that Super Hermione wasn't allowed to be human.

 

One thing I did like about his characterization of Movie Hermione is that unlike Rowling, he didn't have Hermione break into tears in every other page.  I was starting to think that Book Hermione had serious emotional problems with her never-ending tendency to get weepy (which Harry despises with every other woman).

 

Ron's characterization got better as the films went along, particularly in OOTP (the one script Kloves didn't write).  The best characterization of Ron was Deathly Hallows Part I, which Kloves did right.  In both the books and movies, I regret we didn't see Ron and Hermione's early days as a couple.  That would have been a lot of fun.

 

I did like that Harry did seem to be happier in the movies, though I think some of his angst got lost.  But I'm mostly okay with that.  Like I said, I liked seeing Harry happy.  Sometimes Rowling seemed to enjoy reveling in Harry's misery.

Edited January 3, 2015 by benteen

[VCRTracking]

 

Alfonzo Cuaron did an amazing visual job with POA but I still never forgive him for cutting out the Marauders Map backstory.  Inexcusable and it showed a poor understanding of the series from a so-called "genius" like AC.

 

I saw the POA movie first before I read the book, and the book did help explain a lot like the Marauders, but I do get why it wouldn't work onscreen. Reading the book it's pages of exposition as Sirius and Remus explains to the kids who they are and why they're animagus and the history of the Shrieking Shack and everybody's so calm. In the movie it makes sense more dramatically as Harry is angrily confronting the man he think betrayed his parents while Sirius has finally found the man who really did it and framed him and their emotions are amped up and they don't have time to go into details. The book reads better than it would actually play out in real life IMO.

 

It's like in the book of Deathly Hallows, when they go see Xenophilius Lovegood and he's like "Oh come right in!" and everything seems to be fine and he just happily explains what the Deathly Hallows are like nothing's wrong, with no indication at all that Luna's been captured by Death Eaters. It's written that way so it would be a surprise when he sells them out but isn't realistic in terms of how people would behave. In the movie, he is shown to be visibly upset and agitated from the start and when he tells them about the Hallows is too worried about Luna to really care.

Edited January 3, 2015 by VCRTracking

[benteen]

Xeno's behavior in the movie was definitely a lot more realistic though it sacrificed him as an interesting personality.

[HoodlumSheep]

I cannot stand the POA movie because it changes nearly everything and doesn't explain anything about the Maruaders and their nicknames. The direction is gorgeous though.

Just popping in here to say that I'm happy I'm not the only one who dislikes the POA movie. I just don't understand why people always seem to rave about how good it was, but I just can't see it???

POA was my favorite book. The movie just makes me sad (and yeah, I'll admit some of the reasons are quite nit-picky).

Maybe I just didn't like the director's style?? I don't know. I was upset about quidditch being cut, although I completely understand why it was. I just wish we could've gotten to see Gryffindor win the cup. I loved reading the final match in the book. I wish the had expanded on the marauders a little more too. There are a bunch of other little things that bothered me, but I hesitate on listing them because they're kind of petty.

I guess if there was a way to describe my overall feelings toward the film...if there was one book I would rage at for not following the book down to the last detail, it would be this one. Which is funny, because I rather enjoy the GOF movie, even though it really only covered the bare backbone of the book. So I guess I have conflicting thoughts?

Does any of this make sense?

[KatWay]

I thought PoA was the worst adaptation in many ways, because lots of important stuff was cut or changed significantly, so it is I think the one that's most different from the book. That's also why I was so mad at it when I first saw it.

 

But the direction is amazing, probably the best of all the eight movies. The first two look incredibly amateurish and bland in comparison (I can barely watch them anymore!), and while the movies after PoA were notably better (quite good actually!), I thought the third one was magic in terms of cinematography and style (no pun intended).

Edited January 4, 2015 by KatWay

[scarynikki12]

I agree.  I wish they'd kept Cuaron and paired him with a better adapter than Kloves (who I'm convinced hasn't actually read the books).  His direction was pitch perfect for the series and, while I agree that I wish the Marauders were explained, it makes up for the script issues when I watch it. 

[VCRTracking]

Maybe I just didn't like the director's style?? I don't know. I was upset about quidditch being cut, although I completely understand why it was. I just wish we could've gotten to see Gryffindor win the cup. I loved reading the final match in the book. I wish the had expanded on the marauders a little more too. There are a bunch of other little things that bothered me, but I hesitate on listing them because they're kind of petty.

    I guess if there was a way to describe my overall feelings toward the film...if there was one book I would rage at for not following the book down to the last detail, it would be this one. Which is funny, because I rather enjoy the GOF movie, even though it really only covered the bare backbone of the book. So I guess I have conflicting thoughts?

    Does any of this make sense?

 

I've been on lots of HP fansites and message boards and most hate the POA adaption. People who have never read the books or only casually read them think it's the best movie because cinematically and artistically it's way better than the Chris Columbus movies and it's the first one to go into that darker tone. Also the maturation of the actors. Having finally read the books after watching Azkaban I finally understood what fans were feeling. I read Goblet of Fire and was just blown away by it but was disappointed when I saw the adaptation. I think it's primarily because what I imagined in my head was better. Scenes like the flashback to the trial of the Death Eater and the reveal of Barty Crouch. I will say seeing it again that GOF director Mike Newell nailed the graveyard scene.

Edited January 4, 2015 by VCRTracking

[HoodlumSheep]

I've been on lots of HP fansites and message boards and most hate the POA adaption. People who have never read the books or only casually read them think it's the best movie because cinematically and artistically it's way better than the Chris Columbus movies and it's the first one to go into that darker tone. Also the maturation of the actors. Having finally read the books after watching Azkaban I finally understood what fans were feeling. I read Goblet of Fire and was just blown away by it but was disappointed when I saw the adaptation. I think it's primarily because what I imagined in my head was better. Scenes like the flashback to the trial of the Death Eater and the reveal of Barty Crouch. I will say seeing it again that GOF director Mike Newell nailed the graveyard scene.

I actually think one of the main problems witht the third film was that it went dark too quickly. Was the source material darker than the first two books? Yes, but I really didn't feel the series shift into darker territory until the fourth book, when people kept on disappearing and getting murdered, etc.

I guess I wasn't really expecting the dramatic shift from magical wonder and color in the first two films into doom, gloom, clouds, rain, crows etc.

Was there ever a sunny day in the third film, except for maybe right at the end? I thought the books had a better handle on the magical(?) aspects. Harry was still discovering the wonders and mysteries of the magical world up until the 5th book (he never stopped learning, i just mean that it seemed like he managed to settle into the magical world by about the 5th book in my opinion). I didn't really get any of that feeling in the POA film. I was happy with the GOF restoring some of that feeling (and colors) in the film.

That brings me to another thing I didn't like about POA. I missed the colorful/sort of dazzling spells. They seemed to have traded those in for just little flashes of white light at the end of their wands for what seemed like a majority of the spells. :(

The GOF is my second favorite book, but I wasn't too disappointed in the adaptation. The movie still managed to be over 2 hours having been stripped down to pretty much just the Tri Wizard tournament.

They skipped all my favorite parts, which pretty much encompassed all of the, what should I call it?, B-plot?, that surrounded all the shady stuff happening in the background (all the Crouch stuff) in the books?

Some of my favorite parts of the book were probably when Harry almost gets caught with the egg by Filch and Mrs. Norris, the whole harry/viktor/crazy crouch situation, and the ending when Dumbledore gathers every one and starts the counter attack.

Sadly, none of that made it into the movie, but I'm oddly okay with it. I did like how the film managed to capture the relationship between Harry/Neville and Fake! Moody pretty well, though. Too bad he turned out evil. They casted Moody well.

Editing just to say that I read some of the earlier posts, and I would like to say:

I didn't care for Ginny at all in the movies, she's okay in the books, but I never liked her with Harry. It just felt like she was paired up with Harry just for the sake of Harry not ending up alone. they just didn't mesh right in my opinion and the movies didn't help with that feeling. Dan and Emma definitley had more chemistry than Emma and RG, also, the movies seemed to support the Harry x Hermione ship at least in the beginning. In the movies they made the Ron x Hermione ship seem pretty toxic. All I can remember is them yelling or being rude to each other in what seemed like all their scenes until pretty much the last 2 movies.

Count me in as a secret Harry/Luna shipper. I think they could have worked ", and I liked their scenes both in the movies and in the books.

One last, random, thing. i wish they would have included the scene with Nearly Headless Nick from the near the end of the book. I loved that scene. It made Sirius's death seem...final, in a way. Wishful thinking, I know.

Edited January 5, 2015 by HoodlumSheep

[KatWay]

 

I actually think one of the main problems witht the third film was that it went dark too quickly. Was the source material darker than the first two books? Yes, but I really didn't feel the series shift into darker territory until the fourth book, when people kept on disappearing and getting murdered, etc.

I guess I wasn't really expecting the dramatic shift from magical wonder and color in the first two films into doom, gloom, clouds, rain, crows etc.

I didn't think the third film was that dark. The source material definitely was darker already - there was the personal betrayal, a serial killer on the lose and after Harry (it wasn't just about solving a mystery anymore, it was trying to find and punish the man who betrayed Harry's parents) and we as readers were denied the real happy solution and instead Wormtail got away and Sirius had to go on the run, Harry back to the Dursleys etc.

 

There were also definitely moments of joy in PoA, like when Harry flies on Buckbeak and when they escape with Sirius at the end. New magical stuff is done fairly well in the movie, I loved Hogsmeade, Trelawney, the bus and the monster book.

 

I remember when I first saw it I was annoyed that the kids ran around in their street wear so much and that still bugs me, but other than that, the movie felt more magical to me than the first two. What I loved about the first two movies were the setpieces (Howarts really came alive) and the music. Other than that, boy, is the direction awful. Chris Columbus does not have a lot of artistic vision, that's for sure.

 

The fourth movie is my second favourite though, because of the reasons you described.

[Dandesun]

One of the problems with making movies before the series of books they're based on is over is that mistakes are going to be made in the over-all product. For example, I totally get why they cut out all of the stuff with Hermione and SPEW but it did turn out to be significant to the overall storyline Rowling was trying to tell regarding wizards and other magickal beings AND the more contained storyline of Regulus Black and Kreecher. Basically, Rowling had a point for pretty much everything she put in there and the movies, simply because they could not keep up with the volume of story she was telling, had to sacrifice more and more as things went on.

 

Things I miss in the transition from book to movie: the above mentioned stuff with SPEW resulting in Hermione's recognizing that Kreecher loved Regulus and Harry's realizing that as well...  The description of Luna's paintings of her friends, the detailing of that was beautiful and heart-breaking in a way... Luna had been such an outsider but she did become friends with Harry and the rest, the gold chain encircling the pictures she had made of them all and Harry realizing that Luna's room had not been used in some time... all of that was excellent. And then Bill getting clawed by Greyback and the Weasley's being all upset but Mrs. Weasley in particular lamenting the loss of his good looks and 'he was going to be married' and Fleur stepping right the fuck up to call her out on suggesting that Fleur was only with Bill because of his looks. "I am good looking enough for both of us I theenk! These scars say that my husband is brave!"

 

That's just a small amount but they were things I really loved in the books that didn't get translated to the big screen.

[GaT]

To me the biggest thing missing from the movies was the scene in DH when Percy comes back to Hogwarts to fight with his family. I love that scene, but since they barely had Percy's name in the movies, never mind his story, I knew it wasn't going to be in the movie. 

[KatWay]

I kinda wish we could have kept all that and left out Tonks and her baby instead. Honestly, I know this is a majorly unpopular opinion, but I never got the purpose of her character in the books other than being a "reward" for Lupin, which in itself was kind of pointless because they died one book later. She seems like a cool character at first but you could cut her out of the books without any problem and it wouldn't affect the major storylines one bit. Same goes for her special ability. Why does she even have it if it's never relevant for the plot? Why are there wizards and witches who have special extra powers anyways? Parseltongue was one thing because it was pointed out as being evil and served to strenghten the Harry/Voldemeort connection, but the Metamorphmagus thing had no purpose in the stories.

 

IDK, when I read the epilogue, I thought Rowling thought up the character of Teddy in her headcanon, as the new Harry (orphaned and special) and Tonks was needed to get him there, with the added benefit of being someone for Lupin (who I think is one of Rowling's favourites). That's one bit BTW I don't mind being missing in the movie, as well as the ridiculous child names of the main trio.

Edited January 6, 2015 by KatWay

[VCRTracking]

 

And then Bill getting clawed by Greyback and the Weasley's being all upset but Mrs. Weasley in particular lamenting the loss of his good looks and 'he was going to be married' and Fleur stepping right the fuck up to call her out on suggesting that Fleur was only with Bill because of his looks. "I am good looking enough for both of us I theenk! These scars say that my husband is brave!"

 

That's my absolute favorite part of the Half Blood Prince book. I will say some things do work better in the movies like Harry on Liquid Luck. Daniel Radcliffe is just so funny throughout that scene!

 

And then Bill getting clawed by Greyback and the Weasley's being all upset but Mrs. Weasley in particular lamenting the loss of his good looks and 'he was going to be married' and Fleur stepping right the fuck up to call her out on suggesting that Fleur was only with Bill because of his looks. "I am good looking enough for both of us I theenk! These scars say that my husband is brave!"

 

That's my absolute favorite part of the Half Blood Prince book. I will say some things do work better in the movies like Harry on Liquid Luck. Daniel Radcliffe is just so funny throughout that scene!

[blueray]

I've been on lots of HP fansites and message boards and most hate the POA adaption. People who have never read the books or only casually read them think it's the best movie because cinematically and artistically it's way better than the Chris Columbus movies and it's the first one to go into that darker tone. Also the maturation of the actors. Having finally read the books after watching Azkaban I finally understood what fans were feeling. I read Goblet of Fire and was just blown away by it but was disappointed when I saw the adaptation. I think it's primarily because what I imagined in my head was better. Scenes like the flashback to the trial of the Death Eater and the reveal of Barty Crouch. I will say seeing it again that GOF director Mike Newell nailed the graveyard scene.

I still think POA is one of the best even though I've read the books so many times I can't count. I guess that could belong on an opinion for one. Sure there's no quiddich which would have been good and I too wish they explained the map more but it's not like I didn't know about it anyway lol.

 

I think that each movie does sometimes really good and other things not so good. And it really depends on what each fan wanted to see, and I noticed with myself this may change as I got older, like I remember not really caring for HBP's movie but I saw part of it recently and was getting into it. But honestly they are all good movies since they are based of a great series.

Edited January 6, 2015 by blueray

[VCRTracking]

To me the best thing you get from the movies that you don't get from the books is seeing the kids grow up right before your eyes(even if it's not that much since Daniel's short).

[stealinghome]

I think Prisoner of Azkaban and Deathly Hallows Part 1 are my favorite of the movies...for PoA, while I agree that cutting all the Marauders backstory is inexcusable, it's also really the only film in the series that has any sort of artistic vision at all (and it's a beautiful vision to boot). Moreover, Cuaron played fast and loose with the specifics, but I thought he really nailed the heart of the book, which so many of the other movies drastically missed (HBP, looking at you). And Deathly Hallows Part 1 was just emotionally wrenching. It manages to fully communicate the despair of the seventh book without a lot of the interminable wandering. It's just so visceral and effective. That scene where Hermione wistfully suggests to Harry that they just run away sums that movie up in so many ways, imo.

 

My least favorite movie is easily Half-Blood Prince. They totally cut out everything that was interesting and necessary in that book--the Horcruxes backstory--for the teenage love story shenanigans, which were far less interesting.

 

I don't particularly like Order of the Phoenix in book or movie form, but that's the one installment where the movie may actually be better than the book, imo (though Chamber of Secrets is close too). The book needed an editor in the worst kind of way, and while I REALLY hate that the end battle between the kids and Death Eaters was made so lame in the movie, Dumbledore's battle with Voldemort is EPIC on-screen. Also, Harry was much more tolerable in the movie. Book!Harry got very tiring to read very quickly.

Edited January 12, 2015 by stealinghome

[Dandesun]

PoA is my favorite of the books. It really blew open the whole wizarding world and was the first to really stretch out and I loved that about it. Plus, it's also the one that made the history very personal... connecting it to Harry very deeply and digging into his father's young years and all of that. I would agree that the movie had a good grasp of vision... but I'd also agree that cutting out the Marauder's detailing was a huge mistake.

[Athena]

PoA the film worked for me because it was beautifully directed and shot. It felt like the book in a lot of ways. It also felt genuinely darker and more real than both the films before it and even after it. I am biased because I've enjoyed Cuaron's style since A Little Princess, and he has this way of capturing the feelings and characters from books (even his 90s Great Expectations had its moments) so well. I did notice the changes, but as someone who reads a lot and watches a lot of movies, I'm much less annoyed about getting the details correctly. It is a big detail, but I did enjoy the movie so there's that.

[stealinghome]

I also found that Cuaron just really captured the WHIMSY of the wizarding world very well. The wizarding world, and magic in general, felt kooky and amazing and surprising and limitless and wonderful and just magical in a way that it didn't in the other films. And I loved that exhilaration.

[avecsans]

For some reason Goblet of Fire is on constant HBO rotation. That may have been my favorite book but I was really disappointed in the movie. The acting was so hammy and over the top. I will never not hate Michael Gambon's Dumbledore. He had none of Dumbledore's kindness, gentleness or humor. Emma Watson often seemed to be in a different movie than everyone else because her reactions and demeanor were out of proportion to the scenes she was in. And Fleur and Krum were miscast. Fleur had no personality or presence and Krum was wrong physically. Much too big and imposing.

I think I've only seen HBP once because I so hated the way they changed Dumbledore's death scene. Harry needed to be immobilized because there was no way he would have stood by and let Dumbledore be killed without trying to intervene.

[scarynikki12]

HBP changed so many things that it feels like they only had the Wikipedia summary as a reference.  At no point did the movie imply or say that that Harry was under heavy, and constant, protection from the Death Eaters.  It went out of its way to demonstrate the opposite, which made Voldemort look like less of a threat than he actually was.  Harry could have easily been killed or captured several times from beginning to end and he wasn't.  The Death Eaters were right there at the Burrow yet they didn't follow through.  The only conclusion to be taken from the movie is that they didn't do anything to Harry because they knew they had two more movies to make and needed to keep the narrative in tact.  Contrast to the book which goes into detail as to how heavy his protection is and how it successfully keeps the Death Eaters and Voldemort at bay during that year (hence Draco having to come up with another way to get them into the school to fulfill his mission to kill Dumbledore).  Harry's protection is so successful that we know the exact moments when it's gone: during the Seven Potters scene and again when the Ministry falls during the wedding.  The movies would have us believe that Harry was up against a group of incompetent mean people rather than a feared terrorist organization whose leader was so successful that the wizarding world was afraid to say his name.  Hell, Voldemort casts a spell on his own name as a method of capturing his enemies (including Harry as he knows he's not afraid to say it) yet this intelligence is nowhere to be found in the movies once he returns.