Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire - - (Spoiler zone)

innerSpaceman · 11-21-2005, 06:16 PM

Yeah, but as soon as I saw his actual performance in PofA, I was won over.

And EH1812, I agree with you on a tremendous number of your Potter points (especially about the masterpiece Prizoner of Azkaban).

[Oh, and I didn't edit your post but merely the grammar within your quote of my post that was within your post which as a layperson I can edit in my own post and as an all-powerful and dangerous moderator I can edit in your post as well. Mwuhaha.]

wendybeth · 11-21-2005, 06:20 PM

I have to say that Gleeson was great, and it will be interesting to see his paranoid, OCD Moody in next film. I hope they keep the "Blow your buttocks" line in as well.

Snowflake · 11-24-2005, 06:53 PM

Part of my Thanksgiving treat was a trip to the local multiplex to see HP & tGoF. Altogether an entertaining mix. Not without flaws, to be sure. GoF is my favorite of the 6 books, it is a rich rich book and I knew that severe cuts would have to be made, and they were.

I've got to start with Miranda Richardson as Rita Skeeter, she is always a delight in every film I have seen, she captured the acidity of Skeeter to a tee, I only wish there had been more of her. The beetle scene would have been great and I did miss it. I did like to see that she was in the ministry pensieve scene, duly taking notes when Karkarov was spilling his guts to save himself from Azkeban.

I loved the Weasley twins getting ample screen time in this film, as has been mentioned by others. They were great and like WB, I missed them getting Harry's winnings in the end to start their joke shop. Perhaps that can somehow be woven in the next film as they depart school (and WHO will they cast as the nasty Dolores Umbridge?)

Wheras the twins received ample screen time, Ron was merely a shadow on screen. I could swear his only lines were "blopdy hell" until he whined "piss off." This was a real pity, Rupert Grint has such a natural flair for comedy and since he is part of the trio, I do wish they would write something a little more challenging for him (and give him a better haircut too).

I loved Neville Longbottom in this film. He was so charming and cute in the ball and the dancing practice scenes. I realize they had to make cuts, but then why use Neville when Mad-Eye was illustrating the crustacias curse, have him become upset and then not share why he was so upset by it. Loved the stained glass window, though.

The Moaning Myrtle scene was hysterical! That was the improvement over the book, beautifully handled and it worked totally.

Like everyone else, the maze sucked the chi right out of me. The sphynx and the spider, where were they? So what is all you got was Devil's Snare? It was lame and kept me thinking they were stealing from The Shining.

The dragon has been covered, it was impressive. The underwater sequence played very much as I had imagined when I read the book.

Now, to Michael Gambon. My earlier posting on the subject was my feeling before I saw the film, I have now changed my mind. Gambon has become the Dumbledore I imagine in the books (except he stills looks like Richard Harris). I feel he was spot on in this film. I liked the "in your face" (was that you IsM? I can't recall) aspect of him. I loved how they did the pensieve, exactly as I imagined! I will look forward to more of that in the next film. So, count me among the Michael Gambon converts, with this film he won me over completely.

Ralph Fiennes was merely okay as Voldemort. I did like the scene of the re-birth of Voldemort's body and his self examination. I'm not sure what I have been visualizing when it comes to Voldemort, but somehow this was not it. It was properly scary, however.

All in all, I thoroughly enjoyed the film. It was not a bright film, by any stretch. The cinematography was very muted and dark. Loved the ice cave, a great choice for setting the yule ball.

My friend who has seen all the films with me, but not read any of the books, declared this the best of the series so far. I think I'd agree.

Donna

wendybeth · 11-24-2005, 09:49 PM

When we saw the movie a second time, I did notice a reference to Longbottoms and the fact that they were tortured into insanity, but it was too fleeting and I doubt anyone who hasn't read the books would have readily picked up on that. (In the pensieve scene, when Karkaroff was spilling his guts). I suppose it's enough in the film version to show that these are nasty spells, and a big no-no in the wizarding realm.

Alex · 11-25-2005, 06:12 PM

Quote:

(and give him a better haircut too).

Just out of curiousity, are the haircuts described in the books and the movies are just matching them? Lani and I were speculating that perhaps they were giving the boys such atrocious hairstyles to help hide the fact that they don't remotely look 14 in this movie. So I'm curious if there is a better reason.

wendybeth · 11-25-2005, 08:03 PM

Harry's hair is always longish and unruly- it is one of the early signs of his magical background: no matter how many times his Aunt and Uncle would shave his head, it would grow back by the next day. As far as the others, I think they're going for a contemporary feel. ( Believe it or not, the boys are actually quite fashionable). Still, they fit their characters descriptions remarkably well.

Btw, at the time of filming this movie, Daniel Radcliffe was only 15, just a year older than his character. I think the kids all look pretty darn close to their character's ages. Many of the characters, such as Fred, George, Cedric, etc, are several years older than Harry.

Alex · 11-25-2005, 09:33 PM

I certainly am not up to date on how the teenagers are wearing their hair these days. Though I did just spend Thanksgiving at a house where one kid had hair similar to this and was teased mercilessly about it by the other kids so it may not be trandy in this neck of the woods yet.

We'll have to disagree on how old they look (particularly Rupert Grint who was 16 and looks it), but I think we're old hat on that now.

Out of curiosity, even if you don't think it an issue in this movie, do you think these three actors can play the characters through all seven movies if they're made at the current pace? The actual-to-screen age disparity is only going to get bigger. Will it end up like the last season of Head of the Class when most of the high school students looked like they were ready for their first AARP mailer?

11-21-2005, 06:16 PM	#1
innerSpaceman Kink of Swank Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Inner Space Posts: 13,075	Yeah, but as soon as I saw his actual performance in PofA, I was won over. And EH1812, I agree with you on a tremendous number of your Potter points (especially about the masterpiece Prizoner of Azkaban). [Oh, and I didn't edit your post but merely the grammar within your quote of my post that was within your post which as a layperson I can edit in my own post and as an all-powerful and dangerous moderator I can edit in your post as well. Mwuhaha.]
	Submit to Quotes

11-21-2005, 06:20 PM	#2
wendybeth Nevermind Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 7,847	I have to say that Gleeson was great, and it will be interesting to see his paranoid, OCD Moody in next film. I hope they keep the "Blow your buttocks" line in as well. __________________
	Submit to Quotes

11-24-2005, 06:53 PM	#3
Snowflake lost in the fog Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: San Francisco Posts: 7,831	Part of my Thanksgiving treat was a trip to the local multiplex to see HP & tGoF. Altogether an entertaining mix. Not without flaws, to be sure. GoF is my favorite of the 6 books, it is a rich rich book and I knew that severe cuts would have to be made, and they were. I've got to start with Miranda Richardson as Rita Skeeter, she is always a delight in every film I have seen, she captured the acidity of Skeeter to a tee, I only wish there had been more of her. The beetle scene would have been great and I did miss it. I did like to see that she was in the ministry pensieve scene, duly taking notes when Karkarov was spilling his guts to save himself from Azkeban. I loved the Weasley twins getting ample screen time in this film, as has been mentioned by others. They were great and like WB, I missed them getting Harry's winnings in the end to start their joke shop. Perhaps that can somehow be woven in the next film as they depart school (and WHO will they cast as the nasty Dolores Umbridge?) Wheras the twins received ample screen time, Ron was merely a shadow on screen. I could swear his only lines were "blopdy hell" until he whined "piss off." This was a real pity, Rupert Grint has such a natural flair for comedy and since he is part of the trio, I do wish they would write something a little more challenging for him (and give him a better haircut too). I loved Neville Longbottom in this film. He was so charming and cute in the ball and the dancing practice scenes. I realize they had to make cuts, but then why use Neville when Mad-Eye was illustrating the crustacias curse, have him become upset and then not share why he was so upset by it. Loved the stained glass window, though. The Moaning Myrtle scene was hysterical! That was the improvement over the book, beautifully handled and it worked totally. Like everyone else, the maze sucked the chi right out of me. The sphynx and the spider, where were they? So what is all you got was Devil's Snare? It was lame and kept me thinking they were stealing from The Shining. The dragon has been covered, it was impressive. The underwater sequence played very much as I had imagined when I read the book. Now, to Michael Gambon. My earlier posting on the subject was my feeling before I saw the film, I have now changed my mind. Gambon has become the Dumbledore I imagine in the books (except he stills looks like Richard Harris). I feel he was spot on in this film. I liked the "in your face" (was that you IsM? I can't recall) aspect of him. I loved how they did the pensieve, exactly as I imagined! I will look forward to more of that in the next film. So, count me among the Michael Gambon converts, with this film he won me over completely. Ralph Fiennes was merely okay as Voldemort. I did like the scene of the re-birth of Voldemort's body and his self examination. I'm not sure what I have been visualizing when it comes to Voldemort, but somehow this was not it. It was properly scary, however. All in all, I thoroughly enjoyed the film. It was not a bright film, by any stretch. The cinematography was very muted and dark. Loved the ice cave, a great choice for setting the yule ball. My friend who has seen all the films with me, but not read any of the books, declared this the best of the series so far. I think I'd agree. Donna __________________ Be yourself; everyone else is already taken. - Oscar Wilde
	Submit to Quotes

11-24-2005, 09:49 PM	#4
wendybeth Nevermind Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 7,847	When we saw the movie a second time, I did notice a reference to Longbottoms and the fact that they were tortured into insanity, but it was too fleeting and I doubt anyone who hasn't read the books would have readily picked up on that. (In the pensieve scene, when Karkaroff was spilling his guts). I suppose it's enough in the film version to show that these are nasty spells, and a big no-no in the wizarding realm. __________________
	Submit to Quotes

11-25-2005, 08:03 PM	#6
wendybeth Nevermind Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 7,847	Harry's hair is always longish and unruly- it is one of the early signs of his magical background: no matter how many times his Aunt and Uncle would shave his head, it would grow back by the next day. As far as the others, I think they're going for a contemporary feel. ( Believe it or not, the boys are actually quite fashionable). Still, they fit their characters descriptions remarkably well. Btw, at the time of filming this movie, Daniel Radcliffe was only 15, just a year older than his character. I think the kids all look pretty darn close to their character's ages. Many of the characters, such as Fred, George, Cedric, etc, are several years older than Harry. __________________
	Submit to Quotes

11-25-2005, 09:33 PM	#7
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	I certainly am not up to date on how the teenagers are wearing their hair these days. Though I did just spend Thanksgiving at a house where one kid had hair similar to this and was teased mercilessly about it by the other kids so it may not be trandy in this neck of the woods yet. We'll have to disagree on how old they look (particularly Rupert Grint who was 16 and looks it), but I think we're old hat on that now. Out of curiosity, even if you don't think it an issue in this movie, do you think these three actors can play the characters through all seven movies if they're made at the current pace? The actual-to-screen age disparity is only going to get bigger. Will it end up like the last season of Head of the Class when most of the high school students looked like they were ready for their first AARP mailer?
	Submit to Quotes