New Harry Potter movie, what did you think?

[Dark Matter]

One let down for me in this last Potter movie was the Horcrux scenes, more than one are destroyed in it. Now usually when you destroy one bad things happen afterwards with spells attached to them. That side of things was lacking I thought in this movie, and it was an interesting aspect to the potter films to see what happens when one is destroyed.

It's like they wanted to cram so much into this film, that some things had to be sacrificed a little. But still, that's just a small gripe from me that I picked up on watching it.

 

[Kier]

'Some things'... like intelligible plot, character development, reasonable dialogue, suspension of disbelief...

 

[Dark Matter]

I take it then your not a Harry Potter film fan in general? That's fair enough, not everyone has to like them. They are not everyone's cup of tea for watching. The same way I can't stand watching comedy films, they bore me to tears!

 

[Shelley]

I still think the young chap was the wrong choice for being casted to play Harry Potter.

 

[Forsaken]

I still think the young chap was the wrong choice for being casted to play Harry Potter.

View attachment 17167​

Thats just creepy.

 

[TheLaw]

I take it then your not a Harry Potter film fan in general? That's fair enough, not everyone has to like them. They are not everyone's cup of tea for watching. The same way I can't stand watching comedy films, they bore me to tears!

I felt the same way and it has nothing to do with being or not being a fan. Some books that are 500+ pages long cannot be adequately crammed into a 2.5 hour movie. There is a reason why a good movie or Sparks Notes is not a true alternative to the experience of reading well crafted prose, meant to be delivered over a much longer period of time. As much as I thought the Lord of the Rings series was true to the book and a good visual, even that was a tad light at times -- although at least it wasn't completely ruined by too many subplots. I felt the ending of that series was easily the thinnest of all the movies and, at times, major characters were reduced to movie catch phrases. Some good examples lost from my fleeting memory - Aragorn's romantic relationships seem mostly superficial given how quickly they must progress.

If you've never read the Potter books (I have not), the films seem to get thinner as you move along and the overall plot feels the same with contrivances thrown in with explanations whizzing over your head. "My name is the one whose name cannot be spoken. I killed your parents. Prepare to die... slowly... over the course of 8 episodes!" I saw #7. Was fun eye candy but I was lost for a portion of the movie as to why certain sequences of events took place. My guess is that if I had the time (and interest) to read them, the books would probably be a much better experience than the movies. The Potter films are well done but for $13 per person, I'll usually opt for some good indies first that do what they are intended to do over the course of their run time.

 

[Dark Matter]

I won't disagree that reading books and watching movies made from them don't compare. Very rarely do films ever live-up to books. I've read a lot of books in my time, not so much now though. Steven King, James Herbert and other Horror fiction writers was my thing, and I remember reading two books called "The Rats" and "The Lair" by James Herbert.

Later I watched the "The Rats" movie and it was a shadow of the first book. But the thing is though, isn't that usually always the case with most films made from popular book titles? Very seldom does a film ever live-up to a book of it.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think this last Harry Potter movie was perfect, far from it really! But it was a good film in my opinion none the less. Also, I've not said a lot to avoid spoiling it for others who have not seen it yet. Yes, the ending was fairly weak, I expected a much better one after so many previous Potter films all leading up to the final climate battle with Harry and "he who should not be named". I was even expecting an unexpected (punch line) to happen at the very end, but it never did and that was it film over. I think it should have been longer, 3 hours long maybe like Avatar was. 2 hours wasn't long enough for this one and it showed because things moved along too fast in order to try and cram everything in, with some scenes suffering as a result of it only averaging 2 hours long for a movie.

 

[Panupat]

You should check out Game of Thrones if you're looking for something very true to the book.

 

[TheLaw]

I think it should have been longer, 3 hours long maybe like Avatar was.

Have mercy on us. Not a great example. Avatar was beautiful to watch but would have been a far superior film with a soundtrack, sans dialogue.

 

[Kier]

Have mercy on us. Not a great example. Avatar was beautiful to watch but would have been a far superior film with a soundtrack, sans dialogue.

Making the Harry Potter films any longer would have me gazing longingly at my wrists while clutching a straight razor.

 

[Slavik]

Avatar was beautiful to watch but would have been a far superior film with a soundtrack, sans dialogue.

Indeed, I didn't pay to watch avatar 8 times for the plot or hideous acting, it was 100% for the orgasmic visual effects.

 

[Dark Matter]

it was 100% for the orgasmic visual effects

Glad to hear you got off!

Think I might watch Avatar again tonight!

 

[Onimua]

Making the Harry Potter films any longer would have me gazing longingly at my wrists while clutching a straight razor.

Had they followed much closer to the books, increasing the length of the movies wouldn't be a problem and be much more interesting since they'd then be able to cover more of the intricate details that's contained within the story. As it stands, they cut out a lot of details, lengthened others that really didn't need it, and altered how certain events happened.

As to this movie, I was disappointed with 7.2 but not necessarily in a bad way. It felt incomplete to me, and what was shown felt a little too spread out, not to mention Voldemort's death was a little too quick and anticlimactic. He shouldn't have just disintegrated like paper and just float away in the wind. Bellatrix's death was more satisfying. I was expecting to cry in this movie too, it being the end and all, but I just got a few sniffles here and there. I did cry towards of 7.1, but the deep emotional impact wasn't there, especially when it came to the deaths of specific characters like Fred, Tonks, and Lupin.

I liked the movie, but I left feeling like something was missing. They should've split the story across the movies, instead of placing the story-telling mainly in part one and leaving the action in part two.

 

[Kier]

What they should have done is get scriptwriters and directors capable of producing compelling cinema, rather than the hollow and tedious merchandising vessels that were actually presented.

 

[Forsaken]

Had they followed much closer to the books, increasing the length of the movies wouldn't be a problem and be much more interesting since they'd then be able to cover more of the intricate details that's contained within the story. As it stands, they cut out a lot of details, lengthened others that really didn't need it, and altered how certain events happened.

As to this movie, I was disappointed with 7.2 but not necessarily in a bad way. It felt incomplete to me, and what was shown felt a little too spread out, not to mention Voldemort's death was a little too quick and anticlimactic. He shouldn't have just disintegrated like paper and just float away in the wind. Bellatrix's death was more satisfying. I was expecting to cry in this movie too, it being the end and all, but I just got a few sniffles here and there. I did cry towards of 7.1, but the deep emotional impact wasn't there, especially when it came to the deaths of specific characters like Fred, Tonks, and Lupin.

I liked the movie, but I left feeling like something was missing. They should've split the story across the movies, instead of placing the story-telling mainly in part one and leaving the action in part two.

I'm still laughing at you for crying btw .

What they should have done is get scriptwriters and directors capable of producing compelling cinema, rather than the hollow and tedious merchandising vessels that were actually presented.

To be honest, there isn't all that much to work with from the book in the first place. The books really is just a one time good read (And barely that).

I'm not a fan of most of the actors as well. I mean, they play the roles alright, but they don't really become the roles (With the exception of Snape, and that seems like way to much over acting and Dumbledore who fits the role perfectly).

The movies are alright... If you don't go in expecting something spectacular .

 

[Dark Matter]

What they should have done is get scriptwriters and directors capable of producing compelling cinema, rather than the hollow and tedious merchandising vessels that were actually presented.

Name me a good movie then? I'm very curious to know what is a good film in your opinion?

 

[TheLaw]

Name me a good movie then? I'm very curious to know what is a good film in your opinion?

Ever hear of "The Godfather?" A guy by the name of Mario Puzo authored the book. "One Flew Over a Cuckoo's Nest" is another, I think it was by Ken Kesey. I've read both books and seen both movies.

 

[Panupat]

I only liked the first movie. God Father 2&3 put me right to sleep. I barely understand a thing.

 

[James]

The Shawshank Redemption is a good movie too

 

[Dark Matter]

Goodfellas - was an example of a very well made film.

The Shawshank Redemption is a good movie too

Yes, that was a brilliant movie, couldn't agree more with you about that film.

Ever hear of "The Godfather?"

The Godfather - bored me to death, I've the same view as the other person about that film.