jmurrayhead
Well-known member
I haven't yet seen the final HP movie, but I've seen all the others. I thought they were all pretty fun and enjoyable with exception to DH Part I, which left me wondering. I still enjoyed it though.
New Harry Potter movie, what did you think?
- Thread starter Dark Matter
- Start date
Shelley
Well-known member
I might give the harry potter movies a try, I like to see movies with a sense of realism attached to them though. I can't really see how Harry potter and the gang managed to fool gravity and take to the skies with their Broomsticks. I refuse to go back to the odeon to watch any more movies so I'll wait till the latest installment of the harry potter movies gets released on dvd, hire a truck and rent the movies.
jmurrayhead
Well-known member
Well, there is nothing real about Harry Potter, so might not be something of interest to you then. They are wizards and use magic to fly on brooms. This is just one of those movies where you have to tell reality to shove it and just enjoy the fantasy world.
Onimua
Well-known member
Magic.
Jeremy
in memoriam 1991-2020
I couldn't stand the Lord of the Rings books. I may be able to stomach them now, but I couldn't get past the 20 page scene where Frodo and them are in a tree. I loved the movies, couldn't do the books.
However, I believe the books (especially the last 4) are amazing for anyone of any age to read at least once. Especially if you were a fan of the movies. I usually don't read books and see movies, or watch movies than read books. I did so two years ago with Legend of the Seeker. Its a little of Harry Potter, a little of LotR. Its amazing (as a book series).However, I was very disappointed. The way things were revealed to Harry was out of order, confusing, and took out good story lines. I was disappointed, and the fact that they left the horrendous epilogue untouched, made it even worse. Out of all the things they left alone... Really?
EQnoble
Well-known member
Yeah ...
Unabridged HP &the DH Audiobook: Running time 21 hours
average potter movie: 2.5 hours.
Complete potter series:
140+ hours on audiobook
20 hours on video
It's a shame how they had to chop up a pretty well written story flow (unabridged book or audiobook) in order to cram it in the few movie hours they did and before the kids playing the parts grew out of being able to play the parts and it be believable while watching.
In the end the I listened to the audiobooks in the background while messing with my computer a time back... and after seeing some of the details I thought pertinent to the story line wiped from the previous movies I decided to not put much stock into the latest being anything to get excited about.
Unabridged HP &the DH Audiobook: Running time 21 hours
average potter movie: 2.5 hours.
Complete potter series:
140+ hours on audiobook
20 hours on video
It's a shame how they had to chop up a pretty well written story flow (unabridged book or audiobook) in order to cram it in the few movie hours they did and before the kids playing the parts grew out of being able to play the parts and it be believable while watching.
In the end the I listened to the audiobooks in the background while messing with my computer a time back... and after seeing some of the details I thought pertinent to the story line wiped from the previous movies I decided to not put much stock into the latest being anything to get excited about.
Fred Sherman
Well-known member
Here's an interesting question...
Go back to the first movie. Had HP not already had a cult following, four books completed and three additional movies planned, would there ever have been a second? If it had to stand on its own as a movie, with no series fans or book-based pre-exposure, I don't think it makes it.
I think for the most part, fans of the books support the movies with cultish loyalty. I think some of us got pulled along (me) and some checked in just to see what the hype was all about. In the end, I think each movie failed to deliver on the pre-release hype and after every movie, I would hear how much better the book was and about what was left out. And we always knew the last movie was a stepping stone to the next, complete with unresolved issues left hanging like an anvil over Wiley E. Coyote. No deft subtly required or attempted.
Which brings us to the final book. Splitting it was a bad idea as the first one was just plain boring. I felt like the message was, "Please forgive us, but we have to trudge through this or the next one won't make sense. In return, we'll delver the next one in record time." The idea was no one would sit through one movie the length of the two combined.
Then we come to the midnight premiere, which features....wait for it... both movies back-to-back.
What comes next is a bit of a spoiler, but not really. If you get it, you've already read the book anyway.
Even the final battle was disappointing. Harry isn't the hero, just lucky. I get why. He had to have some role in the final outcome. Across several books, there was the whole, "What if it isn't Harry? What is its..."
But that was never brought up in the movies, so why stick to that in the final battle?
It would have been epic wizard vs. wizard, good vs. evil. It should have taken Harry to the brink of defeat and the moment of self-surrender or self-actualization. The "object" should have done more than change possession, it should have been the hammer by which he fights back from the brink, turns the tide and ultimately delivers the death blow. Think Rocky Balboa Potter. On the ropes, then on the canvas, the count hits 9, then fights back to deliver the knockout. Where was that?
WHich brings me to the problem with all HP books. They were, at their core, an attempt to bring a book to life instead of adapt a book to good cinema. And thats why, at the end of 8 of these, you feel cheated. There is no next movie to emotionally invest your disappointment in, hoping for future returns.
Go back to the first movie. Had HP not already had a cult following, four books completed and three additional movies planned, would there ever have been a second? If it had to stand on its own as a movie, with no series fans or book-based pre-exposure, I don't think it makes it.
I think for the most part, fans of the books support the movies with cultish loyalty. I think some of us got pulled along (me) and some checked in just to see what the hype was all about. In the end, I think each movie failed to deliver on the pre-release hype and after every movie, I would hear how much better the book was and about what was left out. And we always knew the last movie was a stepping stone to the next, complete with unresolved issues left hanging like an anvil over Wiley E. Coyote. No deft subtly required or attempted.
Which brings us to the final book. Splitting it was a bad idea as the first one was just plain boring. I felt like the message was, "Please forgive us, but we have to trudge through this or the next one won't make sense. In return, we'll delver the next one in record time." The idea was no one would sit through one movie the length of the two combined.
Then we come to the midnight premiere, which features....wait for it... both movies back-to-back.
What comes next is a bit of a spoiler, but not really. If you get it, you've already read the book anyway.
Even the final battle was disappointing. Harry isn't the hero, just lucky. I get why. He had to have some role in the final outcome. Across several books, there was the whole, "What if it isn't Harry? What is its..."
But that was never brought up in the movies, so why stick to that in the final battle?
It would have been epic wizard vs. wizard, good vs. evil. It should have taken Harry to the brink of defeat and the moment of self-surrender or self-actualization. The "object" should have done more than change possession, it should have been the hammer by which he fights back from the brink, turns the tide and ultimately delivers the death blow. Think Rocky Balboa Potter. On the ropes, then on the canvas, the count hits 9, then fights back to deliver the knockout. Where was that?
WHich brings me to the problem with all HP books. They were, at their core, an attempt to bring a book to life instead of adapt a book to good cinema. And thats why, at the end of 8 of these, you feel cheated. There is no next movie to emotionally invest your disappointment in, hoping for future returns.
Edrondol
Well-known member
You have to remember that they changed the movie so much at the end that it basically alters the hero of the story.
Spoilers to an extent follow!!
In the book, Neville cuts the head off of Nagini right at the start of the Battle of Hogwarts, allowing Harry to finally confront Voldemort and have a chance of actually winning. Then Harry puts up a dome so that nobody could interfere with the final fight. Then he taunts Riddle until they both finally attack at dawn. When the bad guy goes down, there is a moment of silence and then all hell breaks loose with death eaters fleeing and the defenders mobbing Harry in jubilation.
In the movie, Neville gets knocked out and Harry and Voldemort start a duel that Harry can not win. Then Neville wakes up, kills Nagini and that act causes Voldemort to lose control or something and Harry wins. Voldemort doesn't die, he kind of breaks apart and floats away. Harry walks off dazed while nobody pays him any mind at all.
See the difference? In the book, Neville was heroic but Harry was the Hero!! You had the build-up, the confrontation and the aftereffect. The denouement was more when the families of the slain mourned and the three friends sneaked off to try and figure out if it was truly over. In the movie, Neville was the hero and Harry again survived only because of others and not because of anything he ever did.
A lot of things in the movie short-changed the scenes in the book and lessened the impact of what could - and should - have been. The only thing they really did differently and correct were Snape's redemption and the tale of the three brothers in Part 1.
I liked the movie but wanted to love it.
Spoilers to an extent follow!!
In the book, Neville cuts the head off of Nagini right at the start of the Battle of Hogwarts, allowing Harry to finally confront Voldemort and have a chance of actually winning. Then Harry puts up a dome so that nobody could interfere with the final fight. Then he taunts Riddle until they both finally attack at dawn. When the bad guy goes down, there is a moment of silence and then all hell breaks loose with death eaters fleeing and the defenders mobbing Harry in jubilation.
In the movie, Neville gets knocked out and Harry and Voldemort start a duel that Harry can not win. Then Neville wakes up, kills Nagini and that act causes Voldemort to lose control or something and Harry wins. Voldemort doesn't die, he kind of breaks apart and floats away. Harry walks off dazed while nobody pays him any mind at all.
See the difference? In the book, Neville was heroic but Harry was the Hero!! You had the build-up, the confrontation and the aftereffect. The denouement was more when the families of the slain mourned and the three friends sneaked off to try and figure out if it was truly over. In the movie, Neville was the hero and Harry again survived only because of others and not because of anything he ever did.
A lot of things in the movie short-changed the scenes in the book and lessened the impact of what could - and should - have been. The only thing they really did differently and correct were Snape's redemption and the tale of the three brothers in Part 1.
I liked the movie but wanted to love it.
Fred Sherman
Well-known member
Funny, I never saw Snape as being redeemed. Snape was malevolent, sadistic and narcissistic. If it wasn't for his puppy dog crush on the only person who was ever kind to him, he would have challenged Voldie for the title of Pure Evil. And because the object of his unrequited desire married another, he truly and honestly hated the child of their union. Big D used Snape to save Malfoy because he was not yet evil, had not killed. Malfoy could be redeemed. He had ole Gloom and Doom do it because he could not.
Fred Sherman
Well-known member
I sure hope so. You know its bad when she floats the idea of an 8th book and Daniel Radcliffe calls her on it that evening.Yey! Is it over now?...
He doesn't want it any more than the rest of us.
TheLaw
Well-known member
I just saw the movie tonight in 3D at the IMAX. My friend decided she wanted to engage in some pop culture. Good grief. I've seen the first seven which were mostly somewhat confusing, entertaining, forgettable fun. The earlier ones a bit better than the later ones. This one was... to sum it up:
The Good:
The Good:
- The 3D was fun. Takes getting used to but was a change of pace and worked decently here.
- No terribly slow moments (the pace was way too quick - left all of us who didn't read the books with many "WTF" moments.)
- Had pretty good special effects.
- Our seats in a mostly empty theatre were excellent. I convinced the establishment to give us free soft drinks and popcorn (don't ask, lol.)
- My company for the evening was excellent.
- The least intelligent dialogue since Avatar. Neville's inspired rubbish when he encounters the Dark Lord was particularly hysterical.
- The most awkward kiss in movie history (followed by another of bizarre timing.) The audience laughed.
- Yet another movie/story that believes sledgehammering in obvious Christian motifs and symbolism is clever and poetic but is just lazy screenwriting (see also "The Matrix I and III.")
- While there is all this crying, does anyone actually die? Or is it only the baddies that implode, never to be reincarnated again?
- Let's get past the absurd plot twist regarding puppy love Snapes. Let's also wonder how darn fortunate it is for Harry that the Dark Lord didn't sense him just 10 feet away... perhaps he jammed the interpersonal radar. So if the person who kills the owner of the wand becomes the new master, then why in Dumbledore would both Voldemort and the Snake leave Snapes alive instead of making sure he's dead? In addition, wouldn't it have been opportune for Harry to perform a mercy killing and then be the master of the wand? Oh wait - do we need to encounter yet another plot twist/deus ex machina?
- Had the obligatory cheeseball end of movie hand-holding fade out with the three main characters. A love-in would have been more natural and appropriate.
- Couldn't even just end with cheese and had to add one additional, unnecessary scene to suggest the possibility for a sequel series.
EQnoble
Well-known member
In regards to The Rest #5.
According to the story one must only disarm the wand's master and that person could claim an allegiance to the wand...just like the first book said...the wand chooses the wizard. Harry disarmed drako so he became the master of the wand. That being said I believe you are absolutely right story wise that it would make sense that a person like voldemort would make sure the person he was killing was dead...especially since he believed snape was the rightful owner of the elder wand.
As far as the matrix symbolizing christian views....well ... after Mouse takes a shot being called "a digital pimp hard at work"...he responds to Neo...'To deny our own impulses is to deny the very thing that makes us human'....that is not a christian view at all in fact that is pretty much opposite of don't eat the apple. I also believe in not coveting my neighbors wife but not for any religious meaning...but to someone looking from the outside not knowing my logic behind it they might just assume I was a practicing Christian.
I love the matrix movies...watched em a bunch of times....I have not thought of religion once while doing so (I have thought of something else though)...but people see what they want to see so it is hearsay. I have what I think is a solid argument for my position on this but this is the HP thread so I will leave it for a different thread.
According to the story one must only disarm the wand's master and that person could claim an allegiance to the wand...just like the first book said...the wand chooses the wizard. Harry disarmed drako so he became the master of the wand. That being said I believe you are absolutely right story wise that it would make sense that a person like voldemort would make sure the person he was killing was dead...especially since he believed snape was the rightful owner of the elder wand.
As far as the matrix symbolizing christian views....well ... after Mouse takes a shot being called "a digital pimp hard at work"...he responds to Neo...'To deny our own impulses is to deny the very thing that makes us human'....that is not a christian view at all in fact that is pretty much opposite of don't eat the apple. I also believe in not coveting my neighbors wife but not for any religious meaning...but to someone looking from the outside not knowing my logic behind it they might just assume I was a practicing Christian.
I love the matrix movies...watched em a bunch of times....I have not thought of religion once while doing so (I have thought of something else though)...but people see what they want to see so it is hearsay. I have what I think is a solid argument for my position on this but this is the HP thread so I will leave it for a different thread.
TheLaw
Well-known member
The entire Matrix trilogy contains an embarrassingly large number of Judeo-Christian references. For starters, the highly unusual name of the ship, the biblical inscription, the name of the place of salvation, Neo's girlfriend's name, Neo's name (the "one" savior), Neo's resurrection -- should I go on?
For starters, here's one article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/3027027.stmAs far as Harry Potter goes, Harry is Jesus - he is The One. He must sacrifice himself to save humanity, which he does. At that time they introduced "the resurrection stone." After Harry is supposed to die, being one of the Horcrux', he is resurrected to finish his saving of humanity.
Perhaps I'm missing something from the books but the movie flubs the ending, IMHO. If Harry is told that he needs his friends to help him and that he needs to die at the appropriate time, then:
(1) If Harry offers himself to die before the snake is killed, he's accomplished nothing. Nobody knew that the snake was the last Horcrux until after Harry returns back to earth and tells the gang to kill the snake. It's also clear he has no clue what's going on when he's talking to Dumbledore in the white train station and questions whether the snake is still alive. ????
(2) This is the obvious and logical plan: He'd need to bring some of his posse to meet Voldie in the woods and have them kill that snake - instead of walking in like an idiot. He'd hold off Voldemort until after the snake is killed - which would bring about the right moment for Harry to offer himself up to die and save humanity. Voldemort's killing HP would, unknown to him, kill Voldemort as well. But hey, having a "resurrection" of the martyr also provides a happier ending that can also lead to child HP sequels...
PS - What makes this funny to me is that Pirates of the Caribbean 1 got this same sequence right (Black could only kill the Captain at the right moment.)
EQnoble
Well-known member
The entire Matrix trilogy contains an embarrassingly large number of Judeo-Christian references. For starters, the highly unusual name of the ship, the biblical inscription, the name of the place of salvation, Neo's girlfriend's name, Neo's name (the "one" savior), Neo's resurrection -- should I go on?
As far as Harry Potter goes, Harry is Jesus - he is The One. He must sacrifice himself to save humanity, which he does. At that time they introduced "the resurrection stone." After Harry is supposed to die, being one of the Horcrux', he is resurrected to finish his saving of humanity.
Perhaps I'm missing something from the books but the movie flubs the ending, IMHO. If Harry is told that he needs his friends to help him and that he needs to die at the appropriate time, then:
(1) If Harry offers himself to die before the snake is killed, he's accomplished nothing. Nobody knew that the snake was the last Horcrux until after Harry returns back to earth and tells the gang to kill the snake. It's also clear he has no clue what's going on when he's talking to Dumbledore in the white train station and questions whether the snake is still alive. ????
(2) This is the obvious and logical plan: He'd need to bring some of his posse to meet Voldie in the woods and have them kill that snake - instead of walking in like an idiot. He'd hold off Voldemort until after the snake is killed - which would bring about the right moment for Harry to offer himself up to die and save humanity. Voldemort's killing HP would, unknown to him, kill Voldemort as well. But hey, having a "resurrection" of the martyr also provides a happier ending that can also lead to child HP sequels...
PS - What makes this funny to me is that Pirates of the Caribbean 1 got this same sequence right (Black could only kill the Captain at the right moment.)
I want to respond to this better but I am near sleep and fighting it...
I agree that there is religious values embedded all over the movies (I just don't think the writers are focused on one religion but rather the choice of and subsequent choices people make once embracing a practice) but there is some other things as well that actually are purposely put there to stress that the view of the writer is impartial...references to many religions and also non-religious political values are applied as well. It is like it represents humanity as a whole...which to do so accurately you would have to include the subdivisions and classes and orders that over time we as a species have applied to ourselves.
If you start a thread for this movie I would be happy to participate in a debate on this topic. I have always had a suspicion about one character name and his purpose in the movie and if you introduce religion as mitigating factor to the underlying overall message of the movie, his presence and purpose makes too much sense and only becomes clear as to why when you have religion on the brain
TheLaw
Well-known member
LOL, no need to start a new thread. I wasn't talking about values in the film, more about the lazy plot and writing. Martyrdom followed by resurrection... okey dokey. The gaping plot hole with him not first killing the snake which extends to the grand finale? It's just a movie.
