I'm still partial to the earlier Chris Columbus films. They're more in line with the way I envision the books...and they followed the books far more closely than the last two directors. I understand the interpretation offered by the last two directors, but I feel that they're leaving out critical items of importance. For example, my wife and I are wagering whether the mysterious golden locket will appear in the next film at all. We both feel that the house elves are going to play a vital part in book/film #7...and yet...****, can't go there yet without a spoiler. Bottom line...I didn't enjoy Film #4 as much as #1 & #2. Personal opinion.

Skip

I feel that this is was a movie for Potter Fans. Can you imagine someone walking in who never read the books NOR ever saw a previous HP movie at this? I can, and did. Numerous audience members brought whining 4 year olds because they thought they were going to a "children's film".

HP never disappoints me but this movie had some wonderful CG (Dragon on the castle wall) and some terrible CG (Harry looking like a video game shooting through the water or soaring through the air with his square back and Polar Express face). The video game look was a real turn off. The arrival of our guests from the other Wizard schools was fantastic.
Their entrances to the school was so cool ! Editing was choppy and I agree with others that Ron's sulking was unexplainable (except to us readers). Visual scenes were EXACTLY like they appeared in my mind when reading the book which is a credit to JK and her perfect descriptive style.
This director is sub-par and the screenwriter of all the HP films to date (Steven Klover) Refuses to do the next film but will do the one one after --Half Blood Prince. In fact check out how many have not signed on for the next one (OoP) but have for the Half Blood Prince. There is a story behind that.

Oh yeah..You would think I didn't like GoF..No way..I Loved this film!

Best line in the movie is when Harry exclaims, "I LOVE MAGIC!"

I'm just the opposite. I think that 3 & 4 are far more enjoyable as I felt 1 & 2 were far too slavish to the books. Granted Columbus had a much easier go of it as the first two books are relatively short and much more straight forward in their story telling. I too think that far too much information is being left out but hey it gives everyone a reason to go and read the books to find out what they are missing.
These would have made far better mini series on the BBC as you could have taken the time to tell the full stories.

A quick question.

I'm deaf as many of you know and I haven't been able to enjoy a movie in theaters in years. Well, I did go see "The passion" because the entire movie was subtitled. Some of you have said that there is a lot from the book in this movie yet many parts aren't there. I understand the reason for this. But I'm wondering I having recently reread the book. Do you think I'd be able to enjoy the movie in theaters without the CC? I know no one can answer that for sure but would you think I'd be able to fallow. Is it based enough on the book (order of events and so forth)?

I hope this doesn't take this discussion off topic. I can't wait to see it. I usually have to wait until it comes out on video/DVD to see movies but I'm thinking about going to the theater to see this one.

Ron Jaxon

There is another thread here that talks about the movie with spoilers. Feel free to ask away there. I don't want to say much for the folks that have not seen it yet.

Well I liked this one the best of the lot, but still . . .

I just find that movie magic leaves me cold. Special effects, so what? They're even less entertaining than watching card flourishes. Where's the meaning and humanity?

I liked the warmth and sexiness of Emily Watson though.

So call me a curmudgeon,

Jack Shalom

I tought this was the best so far.

Hated #3. Imagery was all wrong.

The Chris Columbus films were ok, but this latest one shows how lacking the first two really were.

Geoff