|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sun Jan 15, 2006 10:46 am
Eh......I really wanted to see the movie but I haven't yet so yea... xd
I read the book though and it is my favourite out of the sereis. biggrin There are so many different opinions on the movie though I don't know what to expect sweatdrop
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2006 2:23 am
I was overall very pleased with the movie. I think it was the change in set. It was so much more like Hogwarts than any of the others. I was pissed off with the last two movies. The third one made me want to gouge out my eyes. Hermione's little pink bunnyhug made me want to kill things... *sigh*
Anywho, I agree that there was a lot of things skipped. I was so looking forward to the sphinx. ;-; But the mer people were fabulous.
Hermione's dress was horrendous. It made it look like she had no boobs and had stuffed her dress with something pointy to give the illusion of cleavage. ._. And am I the only person who doesn't think she's all that pretty?
Krum needed more hair. I imagined him with really bushy eyebrows.
I missed the ghosts. Peeves always entertains me so much. *sniff*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 29, 2006 11:43 am
It was certanly the best movie out of the four... the things they left out from the book I understand why they did because otherwise it would have been a fifteen hour movie xd but I would liked to have seen Hermione trap Rita Skeeter in a jar... it makes me wonder what they are going to do with that part of the story line for the fifth movie!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2006 7:33 am
I hated that movie! They cut all side stories from it, including ones that are actually necessary to later book's main plots. The 4th book is (I'm pretty sure) the longest for a reason, because so many side stories are more important than Harry getting a date.
If they needed to do two movies, they should have. It would have least then not be total crap.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2006 11:34 pm
[The best movie of the four, that's a given. Though what they left out can affect what happens in the next movies, the directors and Rowling will fix around it.]
[I do miss Peeves, even though we never see him at all.]
[The main reason because of so many left out things was budget. You have a movie that cost more than the three LotRs you're going to have to leave out stuff. Anyways, I would rather have a three hour good movie that has to leave out some details instead of having two, probably five hour movies and see every little detail down to the most pointless class.]
[In my opinion, the Hp movie guys are doing great. (:]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Feb 05, 2006 6:39 pm
Kiara Rouge [The best movie of the four, that's a given. Though what they left out can affect what happens in the next movies, the directors and Rowling will fix around it.]
[I do miss Peeves, even though we never see him at all.]
[The main reason because of so many left out things was budget. You have a movie that cost more than the three LotRs you're going to have to leave out stuff. Anyways, I would rather have a three hour good movie that has to leave out some details instead of having two, probably five hour movies and see every little detail down to the most pointless class.]
[In my opinion, the Hp movie guys are doing great. (:] Sorry, that was vent time. Are you sure it cost more than the three LotR movies? I also understand leaving out some side stories, but shoving in part of some stories without the rest of it (i.e. little miss journalist Rita) was... disappointing. It was still better than the first two, which were bad in my opinion for technical reasons. I won't discuss the third, because that director did attempt to allow for interpretation. We're not talking about sacred texts here, which is what the first two almost implied.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Feb 05, 2006 7:35 pm
[Nono, it's fine. Vent time is a good thing. :3]
[About the price, I heard it from somewhere... Lets see if I can find something... Ok, I can't really. xD It may not be true or it may not, it might just be close to the budget.... I agree with you about being better than the first two. There was a better visual representation in the 4th and it kept true to the book but, wasn't every sentence and punctuation, and line.]
[The third was my least favourite, if you hadn't read the book you wouldn't know what's going on and would miss out a lot of the elements the book gave. Also it just went from one event to another not giving much if any in between. It was just bam, bam, bam, bam, done for me. :/]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Feb 12, 2006 6:58 pm
True, concerning the third. It was a neat interpretation, but would've been more effective as an independent/side project instead of part of the movie's storyline.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 07, 2006 5:50 pm
the goblet of fire was the second best the sorcerrs stone is the best
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Aug 16, 2006 8:24 am
I admit, I like the 4th movie better than the 3rd. In the 3rd, there was random scenes about bunnies and birds that could've been used to explain to Harry that Prongs, Moony, Padfoot and Wormtail were really James, Remus, Sirius and Peter. Seriously, they never explained it to him. I got really ticked.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
