Well, for the third time in three and a half years, I bought a movie ticket and waited with bated breath next to a four-year-old (this year's seat neighbor was named Kylie) for that tell-tale "dum-da-dum-dum... dum-dum-dum... dum-da-dum-dum... dum-dum" to start. The lights went down... then the lights went up... then the lights went down again... then up... Yes, Harry was practicing his "Lumos" spell, while trying to keep cruel Uncle Vernon Dursley clueless about his study habits.
Just like in the book, the movie begins with a visit from fat Aunt Marge and her little beast of a dog. Pam Ferris did a fair job with what I have always considered to be one of the most annoying characters in all the Harry Potter books. After she insults Harry's parents, she is blown up like a balloon and bobs down Privet Drive.
Harry is picked up by the purple triple-decker Knight Bus, where he meets Stupid Stan Shunpike, Ernie the Driver, and Shrunken Head dude. Shrunken Head dude is mainly there to provide the obvious jokes that are still somehow funny.
Of the returning characters, the teenagers are growing up, Fred and George have revisited the 1970's, Hermione is much more of a spitfire, Ron is much less stupid and much more funny, and Harry is beginning his trip down Woe-Is-Me Lane.
Before going to see the movie, I read about a Harry/Hermione/Ron love triangle. I am here to put that rumor to rest. There is some hand-holding on both sides, but the way it is done makes it fairly obvious that Hermione and Harry are friends and only friends, and Hermione and Ron have some feelings for each other. The same can be said of all the hugs (and there's a LOT of hugs... Hermione has turned into a much more touchy-feely person).
The entire set has gotton a makeover, and not to make it look better, but to make it look worse. About 1000 years worse. The Hogwarts Castle and grounds now look as though they have been around for 1000 years.
Sorely missing from the story was Sir Cadogan, the insane knight. While he made a brief appearance, there were no monologues or challenges to all who pass him.
While watching the movie, one can't help be sad that Richard Harris is no longer alive to bring Headmaster Albus Dumbledore to life. While the new actor plays him beautifully, it just wasn't the same. I must say, I did grow tired of Professor Dumbledore's little life lessons that were inserted into every line.
I must admit, I had my doubts about David Thewlis playing Professor Lupin, but he and Harry had some beautiful scenes together. The only scene that left me thoroughly unsatisfied was the Shrieking Shack scene. I feel like it went much too quickly, and the story didn't unfold as neatly as it did in the book.
A bright, shining star in this otherwise dark movie was Gary Oldman playing Sirius Black. Oldman brought a sense of humor to the role that few others could have pulled off.
There were some beautiful special effects (including Buckbeak the Hippogriff, a half-eagle/half-horse that looked as though you could really go up and pet it), and the movie carried a tone true to the book.
If you go see the movie with the realization that it is a movie, and it stands alone, not to be compared to the book, you will really enjoy it, I think. If you are the type (and you know who you are) who get upset over every minute difference from the book, I fear you will walk away feeling violated. For timing and dramatic reasons, scenes and characters have been cut or changed, and you should be aware of this before going.
Overall, I give it three out of five wands. It's hard to explain, but if the previous two movies had been similar to this one, I would have liked this one more, but I really enjoyed the more fantastical, mystical feeling the previous two movies had that this one somewhat lacked.
Still, I would recommend any Harry Potter fan see this third installment of the movies, and I am looking forward to the next one, due out late 2005.
Athena's Comprehensive Review of PoA: SPOILERS
Moderators: Nightcrawler, Snow_Crystal
16 posts
• Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2
Athena's Comprehensive Review of PoA: SPOILERS
by Athena Appleton » Friday 4 June 2004 10:19:23pm
-
Athena Appleton - Hogwarts Librarian, Headmistress of the Little Wizards Academy and Kisser of Boo-boos
- Posts: 2267
- Joined: Sunday 25 January 2004 6:42:54am
- Location: Easin' down the yellow brick road....
by Gower » Friday 4 June 2004 10:56:20pm
I gave it four out of five wands. I liked the special effects too, and the magical creatures were excellent 
I thought that the jokes were funny and well timed, and that the main problem was, as you said Athena, that some of it just went too fast. If you were someone who hadn't read the book before seeing the film(very rare I suspect) then you probably would't have understood some of what was going on near the end.
I thought that the jokes were funny and well timed, and that the main problem was, as you said Athena, that some of it just went too fast. If you were someone who hadn't read the book before seeing the film(very rare I suspect) then you probably would't have understood some of what was going on near the end.
-
Gower - Gryffindor Prefect, Head of Gryffindor Security Force and Member of Hogwarts Chess Team
- Posts: 1429
- Joined: Monday 8 September 2003 11:02:54pm
by Alice I » Saturday 5 June 2004 3:54:19am
Well I guess I am just the spoiled reader.
I gave it 2 out of 5 because I thought 1 out of 5 was not quite fair.
The Stuff that was good:
I loved Buckbeak!
I thought the songbirds that flew too close to the Whomping Willow were hysterical. My girls loved that bit too.
I was impressed with the werewolf transformation as well.
I don't know if it was their lines, (taken from the book of course), or the actual performance of the twins that I liked but I was quite pleased with them too.
The scene in the boys dorm with the magical candy was neat and it explained why in the trailers I thought I was seeing Luna with the lion hat (it was Ron)
Ok here is the bit that most will disagree with me on:
The stuff that was not so good:
Tom from the Leaky Cauldron (see comments below)
The clothes were awful!
The hair on the twins and Malfoy was dreadful.
Crabbe and Goyle did not look anything like big thuggish body guard types.
The fact that Hogwarts looked like it was the condemned wreck that muggles see when they happen upon it
The shrieking shack scene was a huge letdown as was
That ridiculous romp through the forest with Lupin hot on the heels of Harry and Hermione in the process of saving Harry.
The Actors:
Daniel's performance has improved somewhat but that kid can not cry to save his life.
Ron was alright
As Athena said; Hermione has become much more touchy feely which actually is OK with me. She was such a little snot in the first film.
I thought that Malfoy was a little too wimpy. OK I know that he is a bit of a wimp even in the books but not that much!
Snape was wonderful as usual but well Alan Rickman is Alan Rickman.
I will have to mull it over a bit before I decide on Lupin. That actor, doesn't he usually play a bad guy? Is he the same bloke in the movie Dragon Heart?
Dumbledore was acceptable but I really miss Richard Harris.
McGonagall’s part was far to small
Hagrid was so nonchalant with everything that was happening. He was hardly broken up at all about Buckbeak.
Boy has Neville grown up. He is so tall and different from one and two. This is not a bad thing.
Tom from the Leaky Cauldron - I have no words for how much I detested the way this character was portrayed. I know he is just an ancillary character but really this isn't "Young Frankenstein" which is exactly how that character was portrayed i.e.: Igor.
I don't think I will bother going to the theater to see GOF if it is the same director because I think he did a spectacularly lousy job with this film.
I understand that lots of things had to be cut for it to work, I understand that condensing the story was an absolute necessity but there was a lot of added stuff that was not in the book that simply did not belong there. JKR is a wonderful writer and there is absolutely no need to embellish on her work
I gave it 2 out of 5 because I thought 1 out of 5 was not quite fair.
The Stuff that was good:
I loved Buckbeak!
I thought the songbirds that flew too close to the Whomping Willow were hysterical. My girls loved that bit too.
I was impressed with the werewolf transformation as well.
I don't know if it was their lines, (taken from the book of course), or the actual performance of the twins that I liked but I was quite pleased with them too.
The scene in the boys dorm with the magical candy was neat and it explained why in the trailers I thought I was seeing Luna with the lion hat (it was Ron)
Ok here is the bit that most will disagree with me on:
The stuff that was not so good:
Tom from the Leaky Cauldron (see comments below)
The clothes were awful!
The hair on the twins and Malfoy was dreadful.
Crabbe and Goyle did not look anything like big thuggish body guard types.
The fact that Hogwarts looked like it was the condemned wreck that muggles see when they happen upon it
The shrieking shack scene was a huge letdown as was
That ridiculous romp through the forest with Lupin hot on the heels of Harry and Hermione in the process of saving Harry.
The Actors:
Daniel's performance has improved somewhat but that kid can not cry to save his life.
Ron was alright
As Athena said; Hermione has become much more touchy feely which actually is OK with me. She was such a little snot in the first film.
I thought that Malfoy was a little too wimpy. OK I know that he is a bit of a wimp even in the books but not that much!
Snape was wonderful as usual but well Alan Rickman is Alan Rickman.
I will have to mull it over a bit before I decide on Lupin. That actor, doesn't he usually play a bad guy? Is he the same bloke in the movie Dragon Heart?
Dumbledore was acceptable but I really miss Richard Harris.
McGonagall’s part was far to small
Hagrid was so nonchalant with everything that was happening. He was hardly broken up at all about Buckbeak.
Boy has Neville grown up. He is so tall and different from one and two. This is not a bad thing.
Tom from the Leaky Cauldron - I have no words for how much I detested the way this character was portrayed. I know he is just an ancillary character but really this isn't "Young Frankenstein" which is exactly how that character was portrayed i.e.: Igor.
I don't think I will bother going to the theater to see GOF if it is the same director because I think he did a spectacularly lousy job with this film.
I understand that lots of things had to be cut for it to work, I understand that condensing the story was an absolute necessity but there was a lot of added stuff that was not in the book that simply did not belong there. JKR is a wonderful writer and there is absolutely no need to embellish on her work
-
Alice I - Fully Qualified Wizard
- Posts: 1585
- Joined: Thursday 4 March 2004 5:13:01pm
by Athena Appleton » Saturday 5 June 2004 8:03:50am
haha, what'd I tell ya? I was actually sitting in the theater thinking "Alice is not going to like this movie." 
k...
Yeah, I liked that part.
I didn't like the werewolf transformation part that well, mainly because I thought he looked like a grey, hairier, skinny human with an abnormally large head.
I definately agree, they were much better this time around. I think it was both (they got better lines, and they've improved as actors)
Yeah, I thought this was a fun little cut scene...
Ok here is the bit that most will disagree with me on:
The stuff that was not so good:
Absolutely agree
I don't know... it was a definate step up from wearing their uniforms all the time, which I find to be highly unrealistic.
Like I said - Fred and George look like they visited 1975... I didn't mind Malfoy's hair, though. I never liked the slick-back look, and this way he reminds me of a guy I went to school with (who, coincidently, had the same lovely personality as Draco Malfoy)
This, I think, is where you come into a problem when you hire actors when they're 11 to carry roles through adolescence. Matthew Lewis (Neville) is no longer the chubby kid in the books. Crabbe especially has slimmed up (happens to most boys when they reach adolescence). Despite how unattractive Hermione is in the books, Emma Watson is growing into quite a young lady. Poor Harry what's-his-name who plays Dudley either has to keep getting fatter and fatter, or has to have some serious padding (he's very large in this movie). It's not their fault, but they could have tried to make Crabbe and Goyle more intimidating through their behavior to make up for the fact that there's not much of a size difference.
I actually kinda liked that it was so grimy... It's supposed to be 1000 years old. I've lived in a house that was built in the late ninteenth century, and it didn't look as nice and clean and new as the Pre-PoA Hogwarts did.
absolutely
The one good part about this scene: I love it when Hermione calls for Lupin, and then when he starts coming towards them, says "Yeah, I didn't think of that."
The Actors:
I definately agree. In most parts of the movie, Daniel Radcliffe had made a great improvement as an actor, but they should have left the Invisibility Cloak on him if he couldn't do a better job crying than that.
Actually, this is the first film I've actually liked Ron in. He got some wonderful lines that really bring the character that's in the books to life, and Rupert Grint pulled it off nicely. Ron is such a fun character to read, and I hated him in the first two movies. He was one of my favorites in this one.
Actually, as the books progress, Hermione does become a lot more touchy-feely
Ahhhh... like Ron, Draco is one of those characters that I love reading, but hated watching in the first two films. I think they got the essence of Malfoy perfectly.
I would have liked to have seen him more (did they even mention the bit about Snape having found out about Lupin while at school, etc.?)
No idea... I still think he did a great job with almost everything, except the Shrieking Shack, when I think things should have gone a little slower and we see Lupin putting the pieces together like he does in the books. But I can understand why they did it the way they did: all that confusion about what in the world Lupin is doing acting friendly with Sirius is easy to write, but hard to pull off
Nope, it's a different director again. Mike Newall, I think he directed Four Weddings and a Funeral.
k...
I loved Buckbeak!
I thought the songbirds that flew too close to the Whomping Willow were hysterical. My girls loved that bit too.
Yeah, I liked that part.
I was impressed with the werewolf transformation as well.
I didn't like the werewolf transformation part that well, mainly because I thought he looked like a grey, hairier, skinny human with an abnormally large head.
I don't know if it was their lines, (taken from the book of course), or the actual performance of the twins that I liked but I was quite pleased with them too.
I definately agree, they were much better this time around. I think it was both (they got better lines, and they've improved as actors)
The scene in the boys dorm with the magical candy was neat and it explained why in the trailers I thought I was seeing Luna with the lion hat (it was Ron)
Yeah, I thought this was a fun little cut scene...
Ok here is the bit that most will disagree with me on:
The stuff that was not so good:
Tom from the Leaky Cauldron (see comments below)
Absolutely agree
The clothes were awful!
I don't know... it was a definate step up from wearing their uniforms all the time, which I find to be highly unrealistic.
The hair on the twins and Malfoy was dreadful.
Like I said - Fred and George look like they visited 1975... I didn't mind Malfoy's hair, though. I never liked the slick-back look, and this way he reminds me of a guy I went to school with (who, coincidently, had the same lovely personality as Draco Malfoy
)Crabbe and Goyle did not look anything like big thuggish body guard types.
This, I think, is where you come into a problem when you hire actors when they're 11 to carry roles through adolescence. Matthew Lewis (Neville) is no longer the chubby kid in the books. Crabbe especially has slimmed up (happens to most boys when they reach adolescence). Despite how unattractive Hermione is in the books, Emma Watson is growing into quite a young lady. Poor Harry what's-his-name who plays Dudley either has to keep getting fatter and fatter, or has to have some serious padding (he's very large in this movie). It's not their fault, but they could have tried to make Crabbe and Goyle more intimidating through their behavior to make up for the fact that there's not much of a size difference.
The fact that Hogwarts looked like it was the condemned wreck that muggles see when they happen upon it
I actually kinda liked that it was so grimy... It's supposed to be 1000 years old. I've lived in a house that was built in the late ninteenth century, and it didn't look as nice and clean and new as the Pre-PoA Hogwarts did.
The shrieking shack scene was a huge letdown
absolutely
as was
That ridiculous romp through the forest with Lupin hot on the heels of Harry and Hermione in the process of saving Harry.
The one good part about this scene: I love it when Hermione calls for Lupin, and then when he starts coming towards them, says "Yeah, I didn't think of that."
The Actors:
Daniel's performance has improved somewhat but that kid can not cry to save his life.
I definately agree. In most parts of the movie, Daniel Radcliffe had made a great improvement as an actor, but they should have left the Invisibility Cloak on him if he couldn't do a better job crying than that.
Ron was alright
Actually, this is the first film I've actually liked Ron in. He got some wonderful lines that really bring the character that's in the books to life, and Rupert Grint pulled it off nicely. Ron is such a fun character to read, and I hated him in the first two movies. He was one of my favorites in this one.
As Athena said; Hermione has become much more touchy feely which actually is OK with me. She was such a little snot in the first film.
Actually, as the books progress, Hermione does become a lot more touchy-feely
I thought that Malfoy was a little too wimpy. OK I know that he is a bit of a wimp even in the books but not that much!
Ahhhh... like Ron, Draco is one of those characters that I love reading, but hated watching in the first two films. I think they got the essence of Malfoy perfectly.
Snape was wonderful as usual but well Alan Rickman is Alan Rickman.
I would have liked to have seen him more (did they even mention the bit about Snape having found out about Lupin while at school, etc.?)
I will have to mull it over a bit before I decide on Lupin. That actor, doesn't he usually play a bad guy? Is he the same bloke in the movie Dragon Heart?
No idea... I still think he did a great job with almost everything, except the Shrieking Shack, when I think things should have gone a little slower and we see Lupin putting the pieces together like he does in the books. But I can understand why they did it the way they did: all that confusion about what in the world Lupin is doing acting friendly with Sirius is easy to write, but hard to pull off
I don't think I will bother going to the theater to see GOF if it is the same director because I think he did a spectacularly lousy job with this film.
Nope, it's a different director again. Mike Newall, I think he directed Four Weddings and a Funeral.
-
Athena Appleton - Hogwarts Librarian, Headmistress of the Little Wizards Academy and Kisser of Boo-boos
- Posts: 2267
- Joined: Sunday 25 January 2004 6:42:54am
- Location: Easin' down the yellow brick road....
by Phinea Rogue » Saturday 5 June 2004 4:42:54pm
Alice I wrote:I will have to mull it over a bit before I decide on Lupin. That actor, doesn't he usually play a bad guy? Is he the same bloke in the movie Dragon Heart?
That actor who played Lupin (Thewlis?) played in "Seven Years in Tibet" with Brad Pitt. In Dragon Heart it was Jason Isaacs (Lucius).
-
Phinea Rogue - Slytherin Prefect
- Posts: 1252
- Joined: Friday 5 December 2003 8:51:50pm
- Location: hiding from the moonlight
by Alice I » Saturday 5 June 2004 7:12:10pm
Phinea Rogue wrote: In Dragon Heart it was Jason Isaacs (Lucius).
Are you sure?
Maybe I have the title of the movie wrong but I am thinking of the movie where the dragon is played by Sean Connery (the voice that is)
The main character is played by Dennis Quaid and the evil king who has half a Dragon's heart is played by:
But I am positive that it is not Jason Issacs.
So like I said maybe I have the title wrong.
-
Alice I - Fully Qualified Wizard
- Posts: 1585
- Joined: Thursday 4 March 2004 5:13:01pm
by Evil Wizard Petting Zoo » Saturday 5 June 2004 7:58:22pm
Here's my take on PoA...
I thought the trio improved tremendously.
The set as a whole was very different, not too sure if I like it or not.
Yeah, too bad Sir Cadogan wasn't in it, he was one of my favorite parts of the book.
I wish they would have had the scene where Ron is attacked in his sleep.
I agree that the Shrieking Shack scene went too fast, as did the movie itself.
I loved the twins and Malfoy, well I love Malfoy anyhow because he's beautiful and evil. rrrrrrrrr.
I guess I'll give it 3 out of 5 wands. I think Chris Columbus would have done a better job.
I thought the trio improved tremendously.
The set as a whole was very different, not too sure if I like it or not.
Yeah, too bad Sir Cadogan wasn't in it, he was one of my favorite parts of the book.
I wish they would have had the scene where Ron is attacked in his sleep.
I agree that the Shrieking Shack scene went too fast, as did the movie itself.
I loved the twins and Malfoy, well I love Malfoy anyhow because he's beautiful and evil. rrrrrrrrr.
I guess I'll give it 3 out of 5 wands. I think Chris Columbus would have done a better job.
-
Evil Wizard Petting Zoo - Fully Qualified Wizard
- Posts: 330
- Joined: Friday 19 March 2004 10:52:56pm
- Location: Snape's Tea Room
by hoopsmaster88 » Sunday 6 June 2004 12:11:25am
i wrote a post with my views on the movie in the other movie thread, but i'll put some of them in here too.
i really didn't like the new hogwarts grounds at all, i could barely tell they were at hogwarts when they were outside.
everything was majorly rushed, if you blinked too long you probably missed something very important.
where did all of the talking heads come from? those were kinda weird, i didn't like them.
emma watson and rupert grint impressed me a lot while radcliffe was still so-so.
like somebody else said, hagrid didn't seem upset at all about buckbeak, he gave the impression that buckbeak's execution was something that happened everyday for him.
i think it made the movie a lot better without the students having to where those robes the whole time, i liked the regular clothes much more.
having tom look like the hunchback of notre dame was retarded.
they put some funny parts in the movie that i thought were great, they kept it from being too serious and dramatic.
with all of the criticisms that i have of the movie, i still thought it was great and gave it 4 out of 5 wands
i really didn't like the new hogwarts grounds at all, i could barely tell they were at hogwarts when they were outside.
everything was majorly rushed, if you blinked too long you probably missed something very important.
where did all of the talking heads come from? those were kinda weird, i didn't like them.
emma watson and rupert grint impressed me a lot while radcliffe was still so-so.
like somebody else said, hagrid didn't seem upset at all about buckbeak, he gave the impression that buckbeak's execution was something that happened everyday for him.
i think it made the movie a lot better without the students having to where those robes the whole time, i liked the regular clothes much more.
having tom look like the hunchback of notre dame was retarded.
they put some funny parts in the movie that i thought were great, they kept it from being too serious and dramatic.
with all of the criticisms that i have of the movie, i still thought it was great and gave it 4 out of 5 wands
- hoopsmaster88
- Head of Muggle Games and Sports and Landlord of The Three Broomsticks
- Posts: 831
- Joined: Tuesday 8 July 2003 3:56:01am
- Location: Michigan, Home of the NBA Champion Detroit Pistons
by paintballdecoy » Sunday 6 June 2004 1:15:09am
Well, I just walked in from the cinema thoroughly pleased. I enjoyed the movie greatly. While it wasn't the book, it was a great film. If I hadn't read the book, the movie would be a cinematic masterpiece. While they left out parts of the book, they did include the important bits. But that 2 hours and change flew by. I really did enjoy about how everything came together, and made sense, ie: the rocks, howl, and Macnairs chopping of Beaky. I thought the Dementors were brilliant, yet the Werewolf was thoroughly unbelievable. It looked terribly like a lanky Gollum from Lord of the Rings.
Over all- 4 Wands out of 5
I can't say a much enjoyed the cosmetic changes to the grounds and castle, but hey different director, different look.
Oh and the not wearing the uniforms all the time didn't bother me too much.
And the acting was better, except for Daniel Radcliffe's crying, I think they should have struck him with a rock or something to make him cry for real. Becuase it was said before, they should have left the cloak on him
Over all- 4 Wands out of 5
I can't say a much enjoyed the cosmetic changes to the grounds and castle, but hey different director, different look.
Oh and the not wearing the uniforms all the time didn't bother me too much.
And the acting was better, except for Daniel Radcliffe's crying, I think they should have struck him with a rock or something to make him cry for real. Becuase it was said before, they should have left the cloak on him
-
paintballdecoy - Chief Paintball Wizard, Theory Master and Voldemort Spy
- Posts: 295
- Joined: Saturday 28 February 2004 3:01:53am
by Marcus Baker » Sunday 6 June 2004 2:06:01am
Here is what I thought about the movie. Overall, I was really anxious while watching it, and PoA is my fav book in the whole series, but the Movie did justice to the novel 
and THANK GOD that was so! I am quite dissapointed about the ending when he flies off on the Firebolt, but what can I say, its a movie ending! The actors were great, I liked Daniel Radcliffe and Harry going to "the dark side...dum dum dum!" Haha, the Ron/Hermoine thing was intresting, cuz I do remember them both detesting each other in the novel, as they constantly fought! But overall, I think the plot was well plot out (hehe), and that the actors did a marvolous job. Sir Cadogan: ahh yes that was a pity, however I saw a very obnoxious looking knight in the pictures next to the fat lady. Dispite what everyone here t hinks about the set, I enjoyed it. A) It was something different. B) IT was kind of like how I imagined it to be like, so this is probally why I liked it instead of most people. Also, we do see a lack of teacher participatoin in the movie, like McGonnagel and other teachers. However, the thing that sort of bugged me the most about the film was...Dumbledore. I know its strange, and he ws an awesome actor, but he is different, and whenever he talked, I always thought he was a new teacher or something. It was VERY WIERD, but thats what happened. So when Harry and Ron and Hermione opened up to him, I always thought he was some sort of new teacher. Kind of strange huh? Well, other than that, the Movie was really good. Have you guys noticed: whenever the HP book gets longer, the movie gets shorter 
and THANK GOD that was so! I am quite dissapointed about the ending when he flies off on the Firebolt, but what can I say, its a movie ending! The actors were great, I liked Daniel Radcliffe and Harry going to "the dark side...dum dum dum!" Haha, the Ron/Hermoine thing was intresting, cuz I do remember them both detesting each other in the novel, as they constantly fought! But overall, I think the plot was well plot out (hehe), and that the actors did a marvolous job. Sir Cadogan: ahh yes that was a pity, however I saw a very obnoxious looking knight in the pictures next to the fat lady. Dispite what everyone here t hinks about the set, I enjoyed it. A) It was something different. B) IT was kind of like how I imagined it to be like, so this is probally why I liked it instead of most people. Also, we do see a lack of teacher participatoin in the movie, like McGonnagel and other teachers. However, the thing that sort of bugged me the most about the film was...Dumbledore. I know its strange, and he ws an awesome actor, but he is different, and whenever he talked, I always thought he was a new teacher or something. It was VERY WIERD, but thats what happened. So when Harry and Ron and Hermione opened up to him, I always thought he was some sort of new teacher. Kind of strange huh? Well, other than that, the Movie was really good. Have you guys noticed: whenever the HP book gets longer, the movie gets shorter -
Marcus Baker - Supreme Auror and Vanquisher of Evil
- Posts: 2370
- Joined: Wednesday 16 July 2003 12:13:05am
by Devinci » Sunday 6 June 2004 8:53:15pm
I gave the movie three out of five...because it was okay. Not terrible, but not brilliant either.
I've already given my opinion in other threads...so I'll spare thee this time.
Oh, and the twins hair, as soon as i saw them I expected Penny Lane to start playing...
I've already given my opinion in other threads...so I'll spare thee this time.
Oh, and the twins hair, as soon as i saw them I expected Penny Lane to start playing...
-
Devinci - Hugger of Trees and Saver of Whales
- Posts: 377
- Joined: Monday 7 July 2003 12:54:36am
- Location: Underneath it all
by choki » Monday 7 June 2004 4:36:41pm
The movie was too fast! I mean they should do more of the Shrieking Shack scene. I always thought it will be neat to see the 3 of them casting Expelliarmus at the same time...
Oh well, it seems like none of my friends know what was going on in the movie....
Oh as for Harry's patronus...it should be a more distinctive looking stag!
Oh well, it seems like none of my friends know what was going on in the movie....
Oh as for Harry's patronus...it should be a more distinctive looking stag!
-
choki - Gryffindor Prefect and Silent Guardian Of Stars
- Posts: 3165
- Joined: Thursday 1 May 2003 2:10:00pm
- Location: Riding a black chocobo
by hoopsmaster88 » Monday 7 June 2004 5:23:59pm
choki wrote:Oh as for Harry's patronus...it should be a more distinctive looking stag!
yeah i would have liked to see the stag more. they only showed it once (if i'm remembering correctly). when the 2nd harry cast the patronus across the lake all it was was a huge blinding white light, not a stag galloping across the water.
- hoopsmaster88
- Head of Muggle Games and Sports and Landlord of The Three Broomsticks
- Posts: 831
- Joined: Tuesday 8 July 2003 3:56:01am
- Location: Michigan, Home of the NBA Champion Detroit Pistons
by pallas artemis » Monday 7 June 2004 9:16:23pm
Backing up
You have the movie correct. Phinea Rogue was correct and incorrect. Jason Isaacs is in Dragon Heart but he had a smaller more supportive role. David Thewlis does play the Evil King and From that I was quite hesitant about him playing Lupin but he was pretty good after all
In Dragon Heart it was Jason Isaacs (Lucius).
Are you sure?
Maybe I have the title of the movie wrong but I am thinking of the movie where the dragon is played by Sean Connery (the voice that is)
The main character is played by Dennis Quaid and the evil king who has half a Dragon's heart is played by:
But I am positive that it is not Jason Issacs.
So like I said maybe I have the title wrong.
You have the movie correct. Phinea Rogue was correct and incorrect. Jason Isaacs is in Dragon Heart but he had a smaller more supportive role. David Thewlis does play the Evil King and From that I was quite hesitant about him playing Lupin but he was pretty good after all
-
pallas artemis - Fully Qualified Wizard
- Posts: 404
- Joined: Friday 23 April 2004 1:16:07am
- Location: looking out over Eriabor with Glorfindel by my side
by tiggirl » Tuesday 8 June 2004 5:28:03am
Ok, I skipped work and saw the movie. (I know, that's so bad) Here's my take. . .
I didn't like the new castle. Like everyone else said, the shrieking shack scene left me severely disappointed. What can I say, I miss Richard Harris as Dumbledore. And what was up with Hagrid? He seemed so unnaffected by Buckbeat's execution. And they never address how or why Lupin knew how to work the marauder's map.
Other than that, it was pretty good. It lacked the enchanted magical feel but it was good none the less. The whompoing willow was great! As well as the twins. I think all the kids did a pretty good job . . . except for the sorry crying bit. The dementors were definitly scary. And it was sad watching Harry and Sirius get attacked by them. Buckbeat looked great.
All in all, 3 of 5. I'm like Alice, I missed the stuff from the book that they left out. I love PoA too much to be completely objective about the movie.
I didn't like the new castle. Like everyone else said, the shrieking shack scene left me severely disappointed. What can I say, I miss Richard Harris as Dumbledore. And what was up with Hagrid? He seemed so unnaffected by Buckbeat's execution. And they never address how or why Lupin knew how to work the marauder's map.
Other than that, it was pretty good. It lacked the enchanted magical feel but it was good none the less. The whompoing willow was great! As well as the twins. I think all the kids did a pretty good job . . . except for the sorry crying bit. The dementors were definitly scary. And it was sad watching Harry and Sirius get attacked by them. Buckbeat looked great.
All in all, 3 of 5. I'm like Alice, I missed the stuff from the book that they left out. I love PoA too much to be completely objective about the movie.
-
tiggirl - Fully Qualified Wizard
- Posts: 781
- Joined: Wednesday 23 April 2003 10:01:32pm
- Location: Hanging out in the Gryffindor common room
16 posts
• Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest