Harry Potter 5-worst movie ever (spoilers inside!)

Rot your brains, then rot our boards

Moderators: SecondTalon, Prelates, Moderators General

Harry Potter 5-worst movie ever (spoilers inside!)

Postby qualex » Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:03 am UTC

If you're going to say 'worst book ever' then please don't. This is only for those who actually liked the book =)

First thing: NO QUIDDITCH?! It's half the friggin' book! Harry misses the most important game thanks to Umbridge and then the dementors come in half through the game and Harry falls and his broom is ripped to pieces.

Second thing: They didn't take the OWLs? Fred and George come in and wreck everything, leaving everyone without taking the OWLs, which is a clear lie since Harry gets the scores of his OWLs later on in book 6.

Third thing: Collective punishment with the pen that writes on the back of your hand? That is a blatant lie, there was not collective punishment for that, only Harry had that.

Fourth thing: The centaur who teaches Astrology instead of the teacher that got fired is never in the movie.

Fifth: Hagrid is in the movie like 5 minutes. Hagrid is way more important to the movie than that.

Sixth: When Harry grabs the prophecy it reveals its contents immediately. That only happened in the book when it was smashed, and not everybody could hear the entire thing (there was more to the prophecy than what was heard).

Seventh: When they get to the Dept. of Mysteries there are a lot of obstacles to get through to the final room, which I believe would have made a great scene for the movie.



of course you can't put an 800 page book into a 3 hour movie, BUT you can try your best.

WHAT WERE THEY THINKING?!

edit:

eighth: Voldemort's snake is never shown in the movie, but then when Harry sees himself attacking Mr. Weasley, and then confesses to Sirius that he was the snake... how did he know he was a snake? I didn't see no mirror around.
User avatar
qualex
 
Posts: 41
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 5:02 am UTC

Re: Harry Potter 5-worst movie ever (spoilers inside!)

Postby Belial » Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:06 am UTC

qualex wrote:First thing: NO QUIDDITCH?! It's half the friggin' book! Harry misses the most important game thanks to Umbridge and then the dementors come in half through the game and Harry falls and his broom is ripped to pieces.


The thing with the dementors happened in Prisoner of Azkaban, not Order of the Phoenix.

In OotP, Umbridge banned him from quidditch for life for something or another. I think he played in one game early in the book, and then got banned.

So yeah.
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.
User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
 
Posts: 30227
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC

Postby qualex » Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:09 am UTC

Yeah, excuse that, I was actually starting to wonder when that had happened.
User avatar
qualex
 
Posts: 41
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 5:02 am UTC

Postby Belial » Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:11 am UTC

It's okay. I read that book for the first time, like, a week ago, so it's fresh in my brain meats.
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.
User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
 
Posts: 30227
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC

Postby German Sausage » Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:13 am UTC

so... you're done with the rant?
<bakemaster> Only German Sausage can prevent forest fires
<felstaff> Hype is like a giant disappointment ray aimed squarely at the finished article.
<watson> Treat me like a criminal, Holmes!
TMT4L
User avatar
German Sausage
3 of 5
 
Posts: 2933
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2007 9:45 am UTC

Postby saxything43 » Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:14 am UTC

So, Belial finally decided to read the HP books?

I didn't actaully see the movie yet, but I'm sure they had to chop out a bunch of stuff in order to have a two-hour movie that still made sense. Cutting out Firenze, Hagrid, Quidditch, and the Dept. of Mysteries probably actually made a better MOVIE than it would have been with them included. Sometimes having three or four plot lines going at the same time can be hard to watch and follow. And actually, if you recall, Hagrid really wasn't that important. He was gone for half the book, didn't get back til Christmas, and then the only thing that was ever mentioned about him was how beat to shit he looked all the time because of his giant brother. Finally, Harry did not get the only writing on the hand treatment: Lee Jordan had a bad time with it to, that's how the last batch of Skiving Snackboxes were fixed up: essence of murtlap fixed Lee's hand and got rid of the twin's boils.

Wow, that's a ridiculous amount of writing, even for Harry Potter. Toodles!
This post brought you to by the number 42.
User avatar
saxything43
 
Posts: 179
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2007 4:03 pm UTC
Location: The band room, probably.

Postby Belial » Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:15 am UTC

So, Belial finally decided to read the HP books?


Yes. And I am SO ANGRY about it.
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.
User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
 
Posts: 30227
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC

Postby mercurythief » Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:17 am UTC

As soon as they entered the Ministry at the beginning, I was thinking how cool the end was going to be with all those giant statues coming to life. . .

The scenes with the Aurors in Dumbledore's office and Fred and George's escape were not as cool as I thought they would be either.

Overall, I thought the movie was quite good, just rather disappointing because I loved the book so much.

Also, don't see it in Imax, the 3d at the end is distracting and blurry.
User avatar
mercurythief
 
Posts: 112
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 2:21 am UTC

Postby Toeofdoom » Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:28 am UTC

Also... ron and hermione were meant to be prefects...

Seriously, this movie sucked, it missed out almost everything apart from the main plot. They didnt even get that right, changing it in places where it was easier to squish into less scenes. And then it was just a lame special effects filled piece of crap.

It could have been done so much better... and why was it a 2 hour movie anyway?
Hawknc wrote:Gotta love our political choices here - you can pick the unionised socially conservative party, or the free-market even more socially conservative party. Oh who to vote for…I don't know, I think I'll just flip a coin and hope it explodes and kills me.

Website
User avatar
Toeofdoom
The (Male) Skeleton Guitarist
 
Posts: 3446
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 10:06 am UTC
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Postby qualex » Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:35 am UTC

mercurythief wrote:As soon as they entered the Ministry at the beginning, I was thinking how cool the end was going to be with all those giant statues coming to life. . .

The scenes with the Aurors in Dumbledore's office and Fred and George's escape were not as cool as I thought they would be either.

Overall, I thought the movie was quite good, just rather disappointing because I loved the book so much.

Also, don't see it in Imax, the 3d at the end is distracting and blurry.


Indeed I forgot to mention that, the statues did not come to life.

Even if someone else did get the pen treatment, it was not as a class.


All this movie did was change how everything was in my mind. The scenery, some characters (which, Umbridge was totally disappointing. She wasn't at all as fat as the book says and she didn't look like a toad).

I though Harry was going to get it on with Ginny, with some scenes focusing on her jealousy towards Cho, but no cigar. They didn't emphasize well enough how Cho ratted them out (even if it was with veritaserum).

How could've that squib from Little Winging have seen what happened if it was in a CLOSED alleyway? all that happened on the street, from where she saw everything from her house.

Even being a 3 hour movie, having included at least a quidditch scene (those excite me quite a lot), would've been better.
User avatar
qualex
 
Posts: 41
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 5:02 am UTC

Postby Belial » Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:39 am UTC

I though Harry was going to get it on with Ginny, with some scenes focusing on her jealousy towards Cho, but no cigar. They didn't emphasize well enough how Cho ratted them out (even if it was with veritaserum).


Harry was macking on Cho all throughout OotP. The Ginny-love didn't start until HBP. She was dating some other kid until then.

And Cho didn't sell them out, one of her friends did. Her friend still has the rash across her face by HBP.
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.
User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
 
Posts: 30227
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC

Postby qualex » Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:42 am UTC

I gotta read 'em books again, I seem to be getting a little rusty.


They left out a TON of details anyway, not to mention with the changing of directors and whatnot, when somebody in the future sees the 7 movies in a row, they'll be like 'WTF?!' because the scenery changes quite a lot. a LOT. Just check where Hagrid's hut is in every movie (at least from the third movie and on).
User avatar
qualex
 
Posts: 41
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 5:02 am UTC

Re: Harry Potter 5-worst movie ever (spoilers inside!)

Postby thefiddler » Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:50 am UTC

qualex wrote:If you're going to say 'worst book ever' then please don't. This is only for those who actually liked the book =)

First thing: NO QUIDDITCH?! It's half the friggin' book! Harry misses the most important game thanks to Umbridge and then the dementors come in half through the game and Harry falls and his broom is ripped to pieces.

Wrong. He only gets to practice. Umbridge bans him.
qualex wrote:Second thing: They didn't take the OWLs? Fred and George come in and wreck everything, leaving everyone without taking the OWLs, which is a clear lie since Harry gets the scores of his OWLs later on in book 6.

Assumedly, they retake them later, but don't have enough time in the movie. Also, they missed the best part of Fred and George's escape: the pond.
qualex wrote:Third thing: Collective punishment with the pen that writes on the back of your hand? That is a blatant lie, there was not collective punishment for that, only Harry had that.

Wrong. Lee Jordan had to do lines, too. Harry put him on to the essence of murtlap (or whatever it was) to soothe his hand.
qualex wrote:Fourth thing: The centaur who teaches Astrology instead of the teacher that got fired is never in the movie.

Apparently, this isn't that important. They conversed with J.K. Rowling over stuff like this and she said it was OK to leave it out.
qualex wrote:Fifth: Hagrid is in the movie like 5 minutes. Hagrid is way more important to the movie than that.

His importance was revealed within those minutes. He was an emissary to the giants and brought back Grawp.
qualex wrote:Sixth: When Harry grabs the prophecy it reveals its contents immediately. That only happened in the book when it was smashed, and not everybody could hear the entire thing (there was more to the prophecy than what was heard).

Not all of the prophecy was revealed, true, but enough was revealed to give the next two movies shape. And they had to cut back on time. Of course they may have cut out the elaborateness of the prophecy and it being revealed, but that doesn't mean it sucks.
qualex wrote:Seventh: When they get to the Dept. of Mysteries there are a lot of obstacles to get through to the final room, which I believe would have made a great scene for the movie.

Again, time.
qualex wrote:of course you can't put an 800 page book into a 3 hour movie, BUT you can try your best.

WHAT WERE THEY THINKING?!

They did the best they could and a pretty damn fine job. They consulted Rowling on everything, so things vital to the next movies and the last book are shown.
qualex wrote:edit:

eighth: Voldemort's snake is never shown in the movie, but then when Harry sees himself attacking Mr. Weasley, and then confesses to Sirius that he was the snake... how did he know he was a snake? I didn't see no mirror around.

Yes, the snake was shown in an aerial point of view. Also, Harry "attacked" Mr. Weasley. It's pretty apparent that happened.

Anyway, this movie, as a stand-alone movie (not counting books) was amazing. The cinematography was good, the script was good, the acting brilliant. The scenes were a bit rushed; there were a lot of cut scenes, but that's fairly standard for a movie adaptation.
User avatar
thefiddler
The Fora's Prophetess
 
Posts: 4035
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 3:07 am UTC
Location: The-middle-of-bumfuck-nowhere

Postby qualex » Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:55 am UTC

I remember the overview of the snake now. I keep forgetting things, but some of the things you explained were already explained, but thanks anyway =)

Good movie with very good effects. Not much good acting on part of D.R. though, he still doesn't do it with heart (just an opinion, which is just like an asshole).

It was an atrocious thing to do to such a fine storyline, to put it like that to the public. If the general public does not read the books, they'll have a different view on the story.

I mean, look at LOTR. I read the books and a LOT of stuff was left out, but you get the same feeling when you finish watching/reading either.
User avatar
qualex
 
Posts: 41
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 5:02 am UTC

Postby Aglet » Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:56 am UTC

How could've that squib from Little Winging have seen what happened if it was in a CLOSED alleyway? all that happened on the street, from where she saw everything from her house.


Well, anyway, J.K. Rowling has said before that, in fact, squibs can't see dementors, but the one in the book (Mrs. Something-or-Other) knew enough about them to lie in court.
Image
User avatar
Aglet
 
Posts: 364
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2007 12:26 am UTC

Re: Harry Potter 5-worst movie ever (spoilers inside!)

Postby 4=5 » Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:58 am UTC

thefiddler wrote:Assumedly, they retake them later, but don't have enough time in the movie. Also, they missed the best part of Fred and George's escape: the pond.

QFT
my favorite part of the whole book
User avatar
4=5
 
Posts: 2068
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2007 3:02 am UTC

Postby qualex » Sat Jul 14, 2007 6:05 am UTC

I definitely have to read book 5 again at least, to get a fine tuning of the details.

I could listen to the audiobook, but it's just not the same (amazing how Jim Dale has so many voices though).

I'm hoping movie 6 is a lot better because it DESERVES to be better aannddd I am so sad that this will all end July 21st. I assume most people will read it in 2 hours about 54 times and brag about it for as long as they need to (if you're one of them, I hate your kind).
User avatar
qualex
 
Posts: 41
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 5:02 am UTC

Postby BlochWave » Sat Jul 14, 2007 6:30 am UTC

They didnt even get that right,


They can't get it WRONG, it can only get it different. I'll ignore other similar phrases in this topic like "they MISSED something", as though they did all this on accident

I can't stand it when book fans say a movie sucked, then list only how the movie differed from the book. Movies are intrinsically different from books, and have vastly different needs.

Time being the obvious, but also different needs for pacing and expositionary and explanatory content. They probably could've made a 2.5 hour movie that pleased YOU, and other super crazy hardcore book fans who have specific desires and will denounce anything less, but left the vast majority of moviegoers(casual fans of the books who don't really care if they write around Ron and Hermione's prefect-ness, or slip it into the next movie, such as myself, and people who just haven't read the books)kind of annoyed by a ridiculously fast paced movie that felt overloaded and rushed. It felt rushed AS WAS, I would've hated to see them try and shovel more of the book into it. It follows the essential details of the plot

If the general public does not read the books, they'll have a different view on the story.


No, they'll have a different view on the minor details and side stories(thank God SPEW got tossed from the movies)and that's the best you can hope for. Trying to translate a book longer than about 200 or so pages DIRECTLY into a movie without many changes is asking for massive failure, and many books aren't suited to be movies anyways(Dune Messiah leaps to mind, there's a reason the sci-fi channel skipped that one, though HP works well)But anyways, considering what the movie is and what it had to do, I think it did well

Sidenote: I think miniseries format has a better shot overall, my immediate thought being A Song of Ice and Fire coming to HBO, with each book being a season(likely 13-15 hours of content) But anyways, considering what the movie is and what it had to do, it did fine

Minor edit: Excuse my several capitalized words, you can consider this a rant >_> It's a pet peeve of mine. Before each LOTR I practically had ready made generic responses to topics like this saved and ready to go for message board use. I simply urge you to judge the movie for what it is, a movie sequel to the four preceding movies and to remember that you undoubtably had very specific expectations for what you had expected to see, and any variation from those expectations seemed to lead to automatic dismissal of the movie
BlochWave
 
Posts: 233
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2007 8:02 pm UTC
Location: TX

Postby _TiM_ » Sat Jul 14, 2007 7:18 am UTC

I though it was meh. The book is way too long and has some boring bits to fully fit into a movie but I felt that the film was too rushed and unfinished. i give it 3.65/5
User avatar
_TiM_
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2007 8:59 am UTC

Postby Dibley » Sat Jul 14, 2007 8:51 am UTC

I haven't seen it yet, but I'm glad they cut pretty heavily. I like the books, but movie 4 sucked because they tried to include every scene from the book, and it was basically just a long series of vague sketches of scenes. It was more or less incoherent if you didn't already know the plot.
User avatar
Dibley
 
Posts: 1346
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2007 8:00 pm UTC
Location: Napa Valley, California

Postby hyperion » Sat Jul 14, 2007 10:37 am UTC

You have to remember that they're making a movie, not a visual book. The directors are allowed to take artistic license, and I have no doubt that the changes were discussed with Rowling. If you want the story, read the book. If you want to see a half-decent movie, watch the movie. They're different things.
Peshmerga wrote:A blow job would probably get you a LOT of cheeseburgers.
But I digress.
User avatar
hyperion
"I'll show ye...."
 
Posts: 1569
Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2006 2:16 pm UTC
Location: Perth

Postby fjafjan » Sat Jul 14, 2007 10:43 am UTC

Except you more or less have to have read the book, or at the very least the previous books, to get what the hell is going on.
Listened the radio yesterday and they sent some lady who had only heard about HP to watch the movie and it took like an hour for her to get any context of what was going on and she fell asleep before the end.
I dunno.. I am still going to watch it
//Yepp, THE fjafjan (who's THE fjafjan?)
Liza wrote:Fjafjan, your hair is so lovely that I want to go to Sweden, collect the bit you cut off in your latest haircut and keep it in my room, and smell it. And eventually use it to complete my shrine dedicated to you.
User avatar
fjafjan
THE fjafjan
 
Posts: 4765
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:22 pm UTC
Location: Down south up north in the west of eastern west.

Postby SecondTalon » Sat Jul 14, 2007 12:36 pm UTC

Saw it last night, I recall it feeling... sped up? The pacing seemed artificially rushed, sped up, whatever you want to say. Like every third scene was cut out, almost.

Didn't make it bad, just kinda... strange.

Also, after th deal made of the invisible dead whatchacallit horse-things, the scene that tied in to that was apparently cut, as there was basically no mention later of "we can't see it"

Which would have been while they were flying. I was wanting to see a shot from, say, Ron's point of view... flying on nothing in a strange crouched position.

Anyway, I still enjoyed it greatly. I was also mildly drunk, but that still doesn't stop the logic centers of my brain from working, it just means they get voted down.
"When Archie is too progressive for you, that's how science identifies you as an earlier species" - Luke McKinney, Cracked.com

Honestly, if you're talking BBQ and 'a guy in a parking lot' isn't part of the conversation, something's wrong."
User avatar
SecondTalon
SexyTalon
 
Posts: 23088
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 2:10 pm UTC
Location: Louisville, Kentucky, USA, Mars. HA!

Postby bigglesworth » Sat Jul 14, 2007 1:58 pm UTC

fjafjan wrote:Except you more or less have to have read the book, or at the very least the previous books, to get what the hell is going on.
Listened the radio yesterday and they sent some lady who had only heard about HP to watch the movie and it took like an hour for her to get any context of what was going on and she fell asleep before the end.
I dunno.. I am still going to watch it


In all honesty the quality of intelligent journalism on the radio...

Unless it's Radio 4
Generation Y. I don't remember the First Gulf War, but do remember floppy disks.
User avatar
bigglesworth
I feel like Biggles should have a title
 
Posts: 7295
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 9:29 pm UTC
Location: The British Empire

Postby SecondTalon » Sat Jul 14, 2007 2:15 pm UTC

fjafjan wrote:... sent some lady who had only heard about HP to watch the movie and it took like an hour for her to get any context of what was going on and she fell asleep before the end.



Well.. if one has no experience with the subject matter, perhaps #5 is not the correct entry point? I could see the radio experiment holding water if it was the first movie, but if she'd only heard of the Potter Franchise... I mean, it's not like we're talking about the Rocky or Aliens franchises, where the moves are either simple or very far apart.

I'm just imagining someone watching the third Lord of the Rings movie. "Why do they keep showing the two midgets in the firey place? What do they have to do with that dreamy guy, the dwarf, some elf, and that scruffy dude?"

Yes, I just called Gandalf dreamy. Wanna fight about it?
"When Archie is too progressive for you, that's how science identifies you as an earlier species" - Luke McKinney, Cracked.com

Honestly, if you're talking BBQ and 'a guy in a parking lot' isn't part of the conversation, something's wrong."
User avatar
SecondTalon
SexyTalon
 
Posts: 23088
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 2:10 pm UTC
Location: Louisville, Kentucky, USA, Mars. HA!

Postby Narsil » Sat Jul 14, 2007 3:10 pm UTC

Most of you people really don't need to be going to a movie adaptation of a book if it's going to make you this angry.

I, personally, thought the movie was the best Harry Potter film yet.

You know why? I took it for face value. Yes, it's easy to say "Well, they didn't get this, this or this EXACTLY how they had it in the book." But I really don't see why that makes it bad. It's just different. And in my opinion, that's a very good thing.

I already know what happens in the book, having read it several times. If the movie was a straight-up rip from the book, that would be pretty boring. This way, it's a new experience. Scenes were cut out, others were put in, and overall it kept me feeling like this was something new.

And about the "special effects filled crap" comment from earlier, what the fuck? Do you mean to say it cut out all the deep philosophy from the book? Don't throw around the term "special effects" like a bad thing. It just makes you sound like you have no idea what you're talking about. Frankly, the effects were amazing. With the dementors (love how they did them this time) to Fawkes the phoenix, to the fire dragon thing at the end, and those newspaper scene transitions in the middle, I was consistently wowed by the effects. Art direction as well, as each scene gave a very specific mood that really amazed me.

Lastly, it really bugs me when people act like they know more than the people who made the movie. Because the thing is, not only are you making a movie for the fans, you're making a movie for kids, and the adults that take them to it. You have to put in as much as you can from the book while still maintaining a coherent plot that moves quickly. Ultimately you don't have nearly as much time to work with, going over two and a half hours is pushing it for a movie. In the end, you have to accept that not every little cool scene from the book can make it in. And moreover, you have to accept that this is an art form, and just like any art it is subjective. Some people will agree with this imagining of the tale, and some won't. But you have to understand the limits of the art of film making or you're always going to be disappointed.
Spoiler:
EsotericWombat wrote:MORE JUNK THAN YOUR BODY HAS ROOM FOR

Mother Superior wrote:What's he got that I dont?
*sees Narsil's sig*
Oh... that.
User avatar
Narsil
Ask me about my junk!
 
Posts: 2994
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 6:59 pm UTC
Location: Columbus.

Postby TRM » Sat Jul 14, 2007 3:14 pm UTC

Sometimes I'm happy that I haven't bothered to read past the Prisoner of Azkaban so I wouldn't have to pressure myself into raising my expectations when a movie comes out -- e.g. I can rate the movie based on rating a movie, not an adaptation.

Anyway, Narsil made some great points, most notably:
Narsil wrote:Ultimately you don't have nearly as much time to work with, going over two and a half hours is pushing it for a movie.


My sister, a hardcore HP fan, said that what they did add into the movie was relatively accurate.

Personally, I liked the action. For some reason I absolutely loved what Bellatrix said when she was casting her finishing blow spell on Sirius -- can anyone tell me what she said, by chance :)?
PandaFluff wrote:I learned a few lessons from this... Don't trust epiphanies that come from a General Ecology lecture.
User avatar
TRM
 
Posts: 198
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2007 9:56 pm UTC
Location: Belgium

Postby Belial » Sat Jul 14, 2007 3:15 pm UTC

TRM wrote:Personally, I liked the action. For some reason I absolutely loved what Bellatrix said when she was casting her finishing blow spell on Sirius -- can anyone tell me what she said, by chance :)?


"I haven't been fucked like that since gradeschool"?
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.
User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
 
Posts: 30227
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC

Postby thefiddler » Sat Jul 14, 2007 3:21 pm UTC

May I add that Helena Bonham-Carter is one of the best actresses ever? Her portrayal as Bellatrix was amazing; she's believably psychotic and it rocks.

There's only one scene that really bothered me, and I'm sure they did it the way they did for a reason, but Grimmauld Place is supposed to be unable to be found. However, with three raps of his cane, Moody reveals it, instead of having Dumbledore as the secret keeper and Harry reading the location. As such, it makes it more plausible that someone could turn on the order and disclose the location, whereas having the secret keeper means that no one can tell except Dumbledore.

@Jordan - Hahaha, what about "I want to have your abortion"?
User avatar
thefiddler
The Fora's Prophetess
 
Posts: 4035
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 3:07 am UTC
Location: The-middle-of-bumfuck-nowhere

Postby Castaway » Sat Jul 14, 2007 3:28 pm UTC

"You're the worst thing that ever happened to me"?

Anyway, I thought that movie kicked ass, and for one, simple, private reason, and that is because throughout the movie I pictured Equus. The dude has sex with horses, and that is hilarious.

Seriously though, I really did enjoy the movie. The cast is unrivaled because not only are they all celebrities, but they are all celebrities THAT CAN ACT. Helena Bonham Carter: Awesomesauce. Gary Oldman: kicked ass. Alan Rickman: A true thespian. Also, the directing and cinematography in this movie was far more advanced than its predecessors.

Also, that Dumbledore clap thing was AMAZING. I do it all the time now.

Finally, when they had the wide shot of Azkaban with its shit all ruined, did anyone else immediately think, "FUCK YEAH, SEAKING!"
You've just lost twenty dollars and my self respect.

Rat wrote: so i sprinted back down this hill like a fucking mountain goat
User avatar
Castaway
Mr. Fancy-Pants
 
Posts: 2150
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 1:05 am UTC
Location: Brooklyn

Re: Harry Potter 5-worst movie ever (spoilers inside!)

Postby PatrickRsGhost » Sat Jul 14, 2007 3:30 pm UTC

Belial wrote:In OotP, Umbridge banned him from quidditch for life for something or another. I think he played in one game early in the book, and then got banned.


I've just finished re-reading the book yesterday right before lunch, so it's fresh in my hard drive as well.

It was after a game, actually, after Ron was first made Keeper. Ron, of course, sucked big time as Keeper. After a heated game between Gryffindor and Slytherin, in which Gryffindor won by a nose, Malfoy and some of the other Slytherin players began taunting Harry and Ron. Due to Ron's poor Keeping skills, the Slytherins had made up an insulting song about Ron, and sang it throughout the game. Malfoy admits to having written it, and begins teasing and taunting Harry and Ron, insulting Ron's entire family, since they don't have a big income, unlike the Malfoys. Once Malfoy insults Ron's dad, George tears at him, as does Harry. Madam Hooch stopped it, sent them to their Heads of Houses, and Umbridge steps in and takes over for handing out punishment. She indicates that both Harry and George should receive a life-long ban, as well as Fred, even though Fred didn't fight at all. He was luckily restrained by the three Chasers. She also ordered their broomsticks to be confiscated, and locked up in her office, chained to the floor. After someone broke in, she had them moved to an empty classroom down in the dungeon level (where Snape teaches Potions), and it was believed she had put a troll down there as security.
Last edited by PatrickRsGhost on Sat Jul 14, 2007 3:37 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
PRG

An important message for you:

010000100110010100100000011100110
111010101110010011001010010000001
110100011011110010000001100101011
000010111010000100000011110010110
111101110101011100100010000001100
010011000010110001101101111011011
1000101110
User avatar
PatrickRsGhost
 
Posts: 2278
Joined: Fri May 04, 2007 5:43 pm UTC
Location: ZZ9PluralZAlpha

Postby Castaway » Sat Jul 14, 2007 3:34 pm UTC

Also, i'd like to point out that there isn't that much to ruin of the book. It's not exactly a deep and profound book. The thing that draws people to the Harry Potter series is the fact that the entire thing is plot driven. Every single detail comes back around to explain something larger. It's a style of writing that most people think is really cool, but it's not a "literary masterpiece", as it were.
You've just lost twenty dollars and my self respect.

Rat wrote: so i sprinted back down this hill like a fucking mountain goat
User avatar
Castaway
Mr. Fancy-Pants
 
Posts: 2150
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 1:05 am UTC
Location: Brooklyn

Postby PatrickRsGhost » Sat Jul 14, 2007 3:50 pm UTC

Aglet wrote:
How could've that squib from Little Winging have seen what happened if it was in a CLOSED alleyway? all that happened on the street, from where she saw everything from her house.


Well, anyway, J.K. Rowling has said before that, in fact, squibs can't see dementors, but the one in the book (Mrs. Something-or-Other) knew enough about them to lie in court.


Mrs. Figg knew enough about the Wizarding world to know what a dementor is, and what the effects of it are. Muggles and Squibs cannot see dementors, but they can feel the effects of one that is close by. In book 6, which I am currently re-reading, the new Prime Minister of England is talking with Fudge. Fudge had explained about the dementors having left Azkaban and joining Voldemort, and that they are breeding.
PRG

An important message for you:

010000100110010100100000011100110
111010101110010011001010010000001
110100011011110010000001100101011
000010111010000100000011110010110
111101110101011100100010000001100
010011000010110001101101111011011
1000101110
User avatar
PatrickRsGhost
 
Posts: 2278
Joined: Fri May 04, 2007 5:43 pm UTC
Location: ZZ9PluralZAlpha

Postby Narsil » Sat Jul 14, 2007 3:51 pm UTC

@castaway- That's what I was trying to get at. It's entertaining escapism, but not much more.

Also, one thing that really surprised me here was that they actually showed Azkaban. I don't remember any of the books ever describing it. This is really cool, as now I have some hope that maybe part of Deathly Hallows will take place there.

In my head I had always sort of imagined Azkaban as a giant platform or building somewhere where the prisoners would just sit there as Dementors patrol the perimeter. This didn't make a lot of sense, so it was cool to get a brief glimpse of what it actually looks like- almost like the Monolith from 2001 in it's simple grandeur.
Spoiler:
EsotericWombat wrote:MORE JUNK THAN YOUR BODY HAS ROOM FOR

Mother Superior wrote:What's he got that I dont?
*sees Narsil's sig*
Oh... that.
User avatar
Narsil
Ask me about my junk!
 
Posts: 2994
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 6:59 pm UTC
Location: Columbus.

Postby aldimond » Sat Jul 14, 2007 3:53 pm UTC

SecondTalon wrote:Well.. if one has no experience with the subject matter, perhaps #5 is not the correct entry point? I could see the radio experiment holding water if it was the first movie, but if she'd only heard of the Potter Franchise... I mean, it's not like we're talking about the Rocky or Aliens franchises, where the moves are either simple or very far apart.


I saw one of the Harry Potter films, don't remember which one. It was one of the earlier ones. I was confused about what was going on almost the whole time and couldn't keep the characters and plotlines straight. I felt like I should have done some research beforehand. For reference, the first Rocky movie I saw was Rocky IV. I knew as much about Rocky as I knew about Harry Potter before seeing that movie. And I didn't waste all my time watching just trying to figure out what the fuck was going on. So to me, someone that's willing to invest himself into a film for all of its running time and not much more, Rocky IV is probably better than any of the Harry Potter films.

You can make a film that's a good film by itself, or you can make a film that's good for people that have read all the books and just had a marathon film-watching session before coming to see the latest one. The filmmakers have that choice. To say that her entry point is "incorrect" is silly; a lot of people with very different levels of knowledge about the franchise are going to watch the film, and it's just as important that people with very little knowledge about it know that they're going to be confused all the time as it is that experts are going to be disappointed about stuff that's left out.

For another reference, the people that did the Lord of the Rings films did a pretty good job of balancing the needs of different audiences. Now they had an easier job. Their story was finished, and the author dead, so they knew exactly what they were leading to the whole time. The characters in LOTR, to my understanding, are a lot simpler than those of HP; LOTR characters could be easily termed good or evil. And I think they had many fewer total pages to work with. Easier job or not, I don't care; they made a set of films that I can watch, understand and enjoy, despite not even being able to get through the first LOTR book before getting bored of it.
One of these days my desk is going to collapse in the middle and all its weight will come down on my knee and tear my new fake ACL. It could be tomorrow. This is my concern.
User avatar
aldimond
Otter-duck
 
Posts: 2665
Joined: Fri Nov 03, 2006 8:52 am UTC
Location: Uptown, Chicago

Postby Narsil » Sat Jul 14, 2007 3:58 pm UTC

aldimond, that's a very good point. The directors have little to no idea where the story is leading, so they have no idea what is okay to take out and what is okay to throw in.

Example, Azkaban could actually be some sort of platform in the middle of the ocean in Deathly Hallows, instead of a giant triangly tower thing. If so, they just fucked up.

Now, Rowling probably gave the okay to that little detail, but maybe not. We'll find out.
Spoiler:
EsotericWombat wrote:MORE JUNK THAN YOUR BODY HAS ROOM FOR

Mother Superior wrote:What's he got that I dont?
*sees Narsil's sig*
Oh... that.
User avatar
Narsil
Ask me about my junk!
 
Posts: 2994
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 6:59 pm UTC
Location: Columbus.

Postby thefiddler » Sat Jul 14, 2007 4:01 pm UTC

Have I not already told you that Rowling was very involved in what could and could not be cut out of the film and how things were portrayed? Basically, what was shown was probably pretty accurate to her idea and will be integral to the last book.

In any case, Azkaban was described as a stone fortress in the middle of the ocean. Not exactly something easy to fuck up, if you ask me.
User avatar
thefiddler
The Fora's Prophetess
 
Posts: 4035
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 3:07 am UTC
Location: The-middle-of-bumfuck-nowhere

Postby Narsil » Sat Jul 14, 2007 4:02 pm UTC

I am owned.

I'm just going to go turn my testicles in at the door, and go sit in a corner somewhere and feel bad about myself. Maybe I'll take up knitting as well.
Spoiler:
EsotericWombat wrote:MORE JUNK THAN YOUR BODY HAS ROOM FOR

Mother Superior wrote:What's he got that I dont?
*sees Narsil's sig*
Oh... that.
User avatar
Narsil
Ask me about my junk!
 
Posts: 2994
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 6:59 pm UTC
Location: Columbus.

Postby thefiddler » Sat Jul 14, 2007 4:05 pm UTC

Narsil wrote:I am owned.

I'm just going to go turn my testicles in at the door, and go sit in a corner somewhere and feel bad about myself. Maybe I'll take up knitting as well.

*hug*

I think you may be the third guy I've emasculated on this fora. >.>
User avatar
thefiddler
The Fora's Prophetess
 
Posts: 4035
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 3:07 am UTC
Location: The-middle-of-bumfuck-nowhere

Postby Narsil » Sat Jul 14, 2007 4:09 pm UTC

DON'T YOU MEAN E-MASCULATED LOLZ?

I'm really sorry. God I wish I could un-type some things.
Spoiler:
EsotericWombat wrote:MORE JUNK THAN YOUR BODY HAS ROOM FOR

Mother Superior wrote:What's he got that I dont?
*sees Narsil's sig*
Oh... that.
User avatar
Narsil
Ask me about my junk!
 
Posts: 2994
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 6:59 pm UTC
Location: Columbus.

Next

Return to Movies and TV Shows

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 3 guests