Love the books. Love the series. Loved the first movie.
Not happy with the second movie. I mean, it was good, don't get me wrong, but the story was choppy -- waaaaay too much stuff was cut from the book, IMO. For example, where was Nick's Deathday Party? And a lot of the best stuff ... gone.
I'm hoping that when released on DVD, the film will reincorporate what I'm sure is quite a bit of footage cut to trim the time.
I hope that when "Prisoner of Azkaban" is released, the film will be longer (much longer) to accomodate a well-written script that stays as true to the book as possible.
I'm not that worried with "Goblet of Fire", but that's because the book is going to be cut into two films -- each roughly the length of "HP&TSS" or "HP&TCOS" and released within a few months of each other (YAY!)
Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :
quote:Not happy with the second movie. I mean, it was good, don't get me wrong, but the story was choppy -- waaaaay too much stuff was cut from the book, IMO. For example, where was Nick's Deathday Party? And a lot of the best stuff ... gone.
I haven't seen the second movie yet, but I felt the same way when I saw the first movie. For example, the whole thing with the Norwegian Ridgeback was extremely shortened.
Posted by RAMAGNUS PYM (Member # 239) on :
"the film will be longer (much longer)"
Jesus. The film's already 161 minutes. That's already about forty minutes too long.
Posted by EdipisReks (Member # 510) on :
i think it's about 161 minutes too long.
Posted by Free ThoughtCrime America (Member # 480) on :
When does The Two Towers come out?
Posted by Nimpim (Member # 205) on :
Now, now, we can at least pay the proper respect to Potter within the context of his own thread.
What worries me is how they'll keep the boy playing Potter young until they've made a film of the last book, they'll have to give him growth-stinting medicine. I'm talking big fucking red warning triangle on the label.
So when he stops taking them, I'm worried his body could get overenthusiastic with its newfound freedom and spurt his body into Richard Kiel-mode.
And that's against nature, there can only be one Richard Kiel on the Earth at a time and that's Richard Kiel himself. Then he and Yulaw would have to duke it out, we'll see how far his fancy Broadway-kicks can take him.
I'll go and see "Chamber of Secretions" anyway, my girlfriend likes the books. And she's so cute when she's sitting on my chest, banging Potter-books at my forehead. Naturally I mellow.
Posted by EdipisReks (Member # 510) on :
Harry and the Chamber Pot of Secrets. *zing*
Posted by Snay (Member # 411) on :
Those of you who don't care for Harry Potter, that's fine, kindly fuck off and eat your own poop or whatever it is you do.
This thread is for people who've seen the movie and care to comment on it, and the books, etc. Thank you very much, and have a nice fuckin' day.
Posted by RAMAGNUS PYM (Member # 239) on :
Sensitive about Harry Potter. That's pretty funny.
Posted by Snay (Member # 411) on :
As sensative as you are about your precious anus.
Posted by Siegfried (Member # 29) on :
Everyone: hugs and kisses. Now.
This thread will stay on the topic. If you want to debate the qualities of the Harry Potter series, feel free to start your own thread.
Posted by RAMAGNUS PYM (Member # 239) on :
"As sensative as you are about your precious anus."
What?
What?
Posted by Snay (Member # 411) on :
Please go away, UM.
Posted by Vogon Poet (Member # 393) on :
quote:I hope that when "Prisoner of Azkaban" is released. . .
Er, yeah, about that: Isn't the word 'Azkaban' going to be a little bit hard for Americans to pronounce? I mean, first you had "philosopher's stone" changed to "sorceror's stone", what next? Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Alohadude? Still, I suppose I can find solace in the second film not being called Harry Potter and the Room of Stuff. 8)
Posted by Free ThoughtCrime America (Member # 480) on :
Maybe "Philosopher's Stone" isn't as snappy a title as "Sorceror's Stone" is.
Besides, I'm surprised a movie full of English accents is tearing up the box office.
Star Wars aside, of course.
Posted by RAMAGNUS PYM (Member # 239) on :
Real English accents, though.
Posted by Obi Juan (Member # 90) on :
quote:Originally posted by Snay: Not happy with the second movie. I mean, it was good, don't get me wrong, but the story was choppy -- waaaaay too much stuff was cut from the book, IMO. For example, where was Nick's Deathday Party? And a lot of the best stuff ... gone.
I hope that when "Prisoner of Azkaban" is released, the film will be longer (much longer) to accomodate a well-written script that stays as true to the book as possible. (YAY!)
Well, I'm about to totally disagree with you, so I guess I should prepare for some less than flattering anus comments.
I was hoping they would cut a lot from the movie. CoS was by far my least favorite of the books. However, I figured that with the proper editing it could still be made into a decent movie. And it was. A very good movie in fact. Even the lame ending played much better on-screen. That won�t be a problem next time�Rowling discovered the talent of writing a decent (make that excellent) ending with her third book.
What could a scene like the Deathday party possibly have done for the movie? It was unnecessary. This is a movie�you have to very mindful of pacing and CoS wasn�t very well paced.
Of course, this little tirade isn�t just based on the fact that I didn�t like CoS the book. Prisoner of Azkaban was my favorite of all the books, yet I still think there is a lot of material they can cut without hurting it as a movie. Cutting Goblet of Fire down to even a three-hour movie would be a challenging job though...
Posted by EdipisReks (Member # 510) on :
quote:Originally posted by Free ThoughtCrime America: Besides, I'm surprised a movie full of English accents is tearing up the box office.
that's nothing. i'm surprised that SodomySnay isn't tearing up the anus.
Posted by Siegfried (Member # 29) on :
I said earlier in this thread to play nice. That was directed at everyone. Keep this civil.
Posted by EdipisReks (Member # 510) on :
i was playing nice. the Snay Sodomy thing is this running gag we have between us.
Posted by newark (Member # 888) on :
This is a complaint I have for both the books and the movies. There isn't a whole lot on Harry Potter's life outside the wizarding world. I feel the Dursley family is one-dimensional. They are prejudiced against the wizardry world and this prejudice is a strong motivation for Harry Potter's quest for a family in the wizard world. I hope in the next book, if and when this appears, we don't have Harry Potter's further adventures with the Dursley family. It is repetitive and dull.
Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
I don't know why I like these books, I relaly don't. There are no characters! The people generally fall into the categories of good, evil, or indifferent, and have one more character trait of some sort. That's it. Even Harry isn't that well developed as a character.
Posted by EdipisReks (Member # 510) on :
i don't like the books because they are stupid and poorly written, and the age group that they are aimed at should be reading real books. i was reading Moby Dick in 3rd grade. not that hard of a book.
Posted by Free ThoughtCrime America (Member # 480) on :
At least kids are reading. Oops, sorry for the cliche.
Posted by RAMAGNUS PYM (Member # 239) on :
I was snickering at Moby Dick in third grade. I mean, because Dick is a euphemism for penis. It still slays me.
Posted by Free ThoughtCrime America (Member # 480) on :
Moby gets me. The DJ, I mean. He's such a goofy looking bastard.
Posted by Charles Capps (Member # 9) on :
UM, ThoughtCrime, please explain how either of those posts contributes to this topic in any realistic way whatsoever?
Posted by Free ThoughtCrime America (Member # 480) on :
Do you ever have conversations with people? Do they always stay on track like a structured debate?
This is ridiculous. Chill out.
Posted by Charles Capps (Member # 9) on :
ThoughtCrime, well over half of the posts you've made in the past two days have been meaningless, contentless fluff that provides no real substance to the topics at hand.
In case you have not done so, I suggest you read this recent announcement. You will comply with the policy or you will be forcefully removed.
There is a major difference between going off on a tangent and spouting bullshit left and right.
Posted by Free ThoughtCrime America (Member # 480) on :
Look, I don't care. It seems like I'm doomed for the ax anyway, even though I've been as much on topic as anybody outside of the Starship threads.
I backed off on the Rama attacks, since it's your forum. But this holy-than-thou-everything-has-to be-perfectly-on-topic stance is an large overreaction on your part, and I don't see it working.
Yeah, I read your manifesto. I don't see myself changing the way I post, so...
Hey, I had fun while it lasted. Sorry to get kicked out of your little club for making jokes you didn't like. Apparently that's what this is all about.
Posted by RAMAGNUS PYM (Member # 239) on :
You know what? You're right. It has nothing to do with anything. Absolutely none. At all. Certainly, if I were to go through the archives and look at threads past, I'd certainly not discover that the majority of them have been derailed with unincidental posts. AND! Here's the kicker: some of them NOT by myself! Wow! And, here's the second kicker: those people weren't publicly scorned! Golly gee!
I can understand being upset about flagrant attacks on members. I am not so innocent. But more innocent than some. Or being mad about swearing and talking about anuses like certain people have been recently. I can see how those would incite a scolding. But, when someone talks about child reading and Moby Dick in a thread, and then I come back with a lame, unfunny, nearly family friendly joke about Moby Dick and child reading, I'm at a loss to see why that is rong, and so unlike what people do anyway. And then, instead of solving problems by private messages of warning, one this far more public and childlike approach of "Don't do this! I am the boss! Don't do this! I am mad!" certainly this makes me feel very fuzzy and warm.
I mean, for fuck sakes, I'm the ninth most fluent poster on this board. Sure, I don't know much about anything, and am not so smart at all, but if I were such an antagonist and a problem, I'd have been warned or something beforehand. But, I wasn't. It seems that with your newfound return and glorious "Listen to me, even though things run perfectly smoothly without me, now that I am watching, I will be the swift hand of justice!" attitude, that I am now not on the level, and because for one day, you don't like what you've seen me post, I get on the outlist.
Well, whatever. Instead of simply approaching myself in a private method, and not publicly singling me out for things, that, if I cared, I'd argue in my defense about, I don't know.
But, I'm not in your little clique, and while it's been fun, it's not so much anymore. I'll save you the effort of banning me, though. Because, you know, I'm outta here like a razor rocket to hell!
I'll start up a new Harry Potter thread, so you can close this one.
Posted by Charles Capps (Member # 9) on :
UM, when I see a long time, supposedly respected member of the online Trek community brought down in a flamefest on these very forums, there is something wrong with the community.
I'm disappointed. No, I'm not disappointed, that's not a strong enough word. I'm outright fucking ASHAMED at this behavior. Ashamed.
This is what I spend my time on? This is where $100 of the money I don't have every month goes? So some jackasses can go free for all at each other?
There is a difference between a digression off topic (as naturally tends to occur) and complete bullshit.
And there's a *MAJOR* difference between the Lounge and the other forums on the board.
If this topic had been in the Lounge, this might have been OK... but this topic was supposed to be about a movie, not about your immature reaction to the word "Dick" years ago.
It does not contribute to the topic. It does not help advance the discussion - in any direction. Therefore, it doesn't belong here.
If you wanna leave, be my guest, just let me know when I can lock your account. Just know there's no going back.
Same for you, Thought.
Oh, and for the record, UM, you received your warning months ago when I first told you to knock off the BS or you would be yanked. You apparently didn't get the message then, so I doubt that anything I've said since has mattered anyway.
Posted by Nimpim (Member # 205) on :
Right, then. Back on track. I just saw "Chamber of secrets" with my girlfriend, on the day of the premiere. Snay, how did you get to watch it so early, three days before the world premiere?
I realize the difference between book and movie can be astoundingly different, so therefore my points will be directed at the movie alone. That is, my views, nothing else.
My first point is Dobby. Never mind his pathetic selfpunishments and antics, how can a race that obviously has incredible magical powers inherent in their species be slaves under humans (telekinesis, pyrokinesis, teleportation), and how can there exist slaves at all?? Does the Hogwart's "special" status, that frees them from having to explain their existence to the real world, also free them of inailable rights of existence and treatment?
Secondly, how can anyone condone or allow the sort of behavior and treatment of the house-elf (kicking Dobby right in the back, sending him down a fleet of stairs)?
Also, how can a school of magic let a poor, murdered girl's spirit remain and continue to torture herself in the girl's lavatory? What was it Dumbledore said? "Remember, you can always come to us and ask for help". That dim friend of Potter didn't even sound surprised when he guessed the flooding of water could be the ghostgirl's doing. If she's such a bother, why not try to alleviate her? And where do the girls go to the bathroom, if nobody goes there?
Next, there's the whole Slytherin-detail. If the first-ever Slytherin (the claimed fourth founding member of Hogwarts) was a problem, a threat and an arrogant, careless practitioner of dark arts, why not kill him immediately? Why let a whole section of Hogwarts students get taught in the style of Slytherin? Malfoy and his group of over-emotional, chip-on-their-shoulders ruffians would be expelled in other schools for the numerous threats and abuses they do. Just look at the magic-fencing scene in the middle, where Malfoy, after stric instructions to disarm his opponent, summons a fucking poison snake at Potter? How would he go about using a snake to disarm? At that instance his teacher should've kicked Malfoy off the table and killed the snake, but somehow his direct violation was "okay", and instead Potter gets crap for snaketalking? Ha!
And the guy Kenneth Branagh played, how could he have gotten to Hogwarts when his incompetence showed at every given moment? Sure, he used amnesia-spells on professors and critics to get fame, but the leaders of Hogwarts should stand over his low-level spells. But why did they let Potter's friend bash his skull in with a rock? It was a nauseatingly brutal and cowardly move. Didn't it strike anyone else as excessive?
Onto the end fight. The whole basilisk-thing was confusing, the whole situation getting solved because of a "Deus Ex Machina" that is a red bird carrying the special-hat? Conveniently supplying Potter with a sword? Not that the basilisk exactly tried to eat him, it just kind of waved in front of Potter ten times until he got a lucky thrust up the brain. Even Kevin McCallister could done that. This is a school about a Messianic wizard-kid? In a school of wizards? Why not make him resolve scenes WITH MAGIC???
Then the very end, where Rufus Malfoy attempts to kill Potter over him taking over his servant? Right outside the Principal's Office? Smart move.
Single good thing about the whole movie? Alan Rickman. He rocks, give him some more space. Richard Harris was very good of course, bless his soul, but he plays exactly as I've seen him in his last four roles (esp. Caesar Aurelius), so he feels typecast.
Summary: A visually stunning production, I like everything in the movie, the beautiful castle/school, the quality work on the props (all the flying-brooms and the wands are really cool, and all the clothes are beautiful), even the wall-textures and stone walls are a feast for the eyes. And don't get me started on the rooms, the famous dining hall and all the living quarters are a dream, I'd like to live there myself.
The rest, the script, the contradictions I mentioned, and Robbie Coltrane, suck. But that's just my opinion, mind you.
Interestingly enough, I thought "Die Another Day" sucked for almost the same reasons, and I saw it yeasterday, how ironic that I would watch them one after another. Well, more on that later.
Posted by EdipisReks (Member # 510) on :
Fuck you, Charles. I'm gone.
Posted by Snay (Member # 411) on :
Nim,
Chamber of Secrets opened in the US last Friday.
quote:Does the Hogwart's "special" status, that frees them from having to explain their existence to the real world, also free them of inailable rights of existence and treatment?
I don't know if you've read "Goblet of Fire", but Hermoine goes on a campaign to bring rights to Houselfs ... very much against the grain of the wizarding population. It very much seems that with rare exception, Houselfs are viewed as servants. I don't know WHERE they come from, their origin is unknown.
I will say that all the Houselfs seen have a DESIRE to serve -- I don't wish to spoil "GoF" for you, but I would say that Malfoy's treatment of Dobby is very much an abuse of the more traditional relationship between Wizard/Houself.
quote:Also, how can a school of magic let a poor, murdered girl's spirit remain and continue to torture herself in the girl's lavatory?
What are they going to do, give her an eviction notice? Myrtle seems to like wallowing in self-pity. There's a huge ghost population within the walls of Hogwarts - Nearly Headless Nick, Peeves, the Bloody Baron, for example - for Myrtle to turn to when she tires of crying in her toilet.
quote:And where do the girls go to the bathroom, if nobody goes there?
There are many OTHER bathrooms. For example, the bathroom in the first film wherin Hermoine is tormented by a troll ...
quote:But why did they let Potter's friend bash his skull in with a rock? It was a nauseatingly brutal and cowardly move. Didn't it strike anyone else as excessive?
Who is they? The only people in the sewers were Harry, Ron, and Lockhart. And given that Lockhart had just tried to wipe out both their memories, taking him out of the picture was a good tactic, IMHO.
quote:where Rufus Malfoy attempts to kill Potter over him taking over his servant? Right outside the Principal's Office? Smart move.
Actually ... it's Lucius Malfoy. No one ever accused him of being smart
Nim,
You should really read the books. They're very good. Compared to the book, the movie version of CoS was lacking.
Edepis,
Could you please tell that to Charles in ANOTHER thread? I'd rather this one not be closed.
Posted by Siegfried (Member # 29) on :
Last chance.
Problems with the administration of this board or moderation in this forum belong somewhere other than this thread. Preferably, private messages or email.
Insulting other posters is still not allowed. Take it to email or private messages.
Posted by The Mike from C.A.P.T.A.I.N. (Member # 709) on :
i cant believe you locked the sane thread and left this madhouse open.
oh well.
Harry Potter. I hear they are going to keep making these things. how indulgent!
Posted by Siegfried (Member # 29) on :
I did it as a favor to a friend.
And, yes, there's going to be more Harry Potter movies. There's what four books? With a fifth on the way eventually? As long as people keep eating this up (and if the trends continue, they will) there will be more movies. Kinda like James Bond, Friday the Thirteenth, and Star Wars.
Posted by Nimpim (Member # 205) on :
Thanks for the insightful answers, Snay. With they I meant the scriptwriters, I thought it looked brutal, is all, but I realize it had to be done some way, no biggie.
I probably will read the books, there must be something special that makes all these people all fussed about it. ;-) When Hagrid came into the dining hall in the end and said this letter had been delivered by some mixed-up, old owl (meaning Weasly's senile owl) some old woman practically screamed with laughter. I didn't get the pun the way she did, obviously.
Posted by Snay (Member # 411) on :
Weasley's owl (who crashes into the window at the beginning of the film) is not the brightest of creatures Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
I saw it last night and quite enjoyed it; I thought it was much better than the first, both in terms of the story and acting. I got a little bored during the first but this one kept me interested (despite the exceptionally uncomfortable seats). Kenneth Branaugh (sp) and Alan Rickman were especially good I thought. Hermione still annoys me though and it wasn't as good as the book, but then films hardly ever are, are they?
Posted by Balaam Xumucane (Member # 419) on :
I thought it was quite a bit darker than the first film, and that might turn some people off. Not me, though. I think I liked it better. I've only ever read the first book, so I couldn't compare there, but I really enjoyed the film. There was more violence and more blood and things seemed a bit more cut-throat. Ron's back-firing spells and lots of petrified stuff. The spiders were pretty dang creepy, and I loved that car. The phoenix did seem pretty Deus Ex Machina, but I felt like the sequence still worked well, and I was surprised by the violence. I'm told that in the books as the series continues it gets progressively darker. In that case I very much look forward to the next installment. And directed by the director of 'Y Tu Mama Tambien'. Should be interesting.
Posted by Veers (Member # 661) on :
Well, I have seen it, thought it was great (especially Branagh). I don't feel like writing a full-fledged review, though.
Qestion: Did anyone stay unitl the very end? I stay through the credits for every movie, just to see if there's something extra. And there was. Right after the end, the movie started again, and it had Professor Lockhart's new book, Who Am I? on a shelf in Diagon Alley. On it was a moving picture of him squirming in a strait jacket.
The things patience will let you see. Posted by P0sitr0nic (Member # 553) on :
There's supposed to be 7 books, and if they make movies out of all of them, they SHOULD keep Daniel Radcliffe, because every book Potter grows a year older, so it would fit.
Posted by Kosh (Member # 167) on :
Right now, I'm a liilte indiferent about the movie. I have now read the books, and am hooked as anyone, but I know that they had to cut a lot out of this one, and it will get worse as the movies come out, since the books get bigger, and the story and the characters grow. Damn, I'm just waiting for number 5.
Posted by Snay (Member # 411) on :
Kosh,
As far as "Goblet" goes, they're going to produce it as two different films, each roughly two and a half hours long, and release the two halves within a few months of each other (sort of like what is going on with Matrix 2 & 3).
Posted by Tora Ziyal (Member # 53) on :
Order of the Phoenix will be even longer, so I've heard.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
The time it's taken her to write it, I'm not surprised...
The thing is, Goblet of Fire isn't really THAT much bigger than Prisoner of Azkaban. Look at the font sizes. POA uses the same size and spacing as the first two books, whereas GOF uses Really Spaced Out Lettering, in order to make the book look bigger.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Well I loved the movie and I saw it the other day! I've got the soundtrack. I'm all totally HP since I decided to buy HP&TPS a month or a bit more ago. I've since read the rest of the books including the two little books about Quidditch and Magical Beasts.
I'm REALLY looking forward to the next book.
quote:You should really read the books. They're very good. Compared to the book, the movie version of CoS was lacking.
It wasn't really LACKING as such - it's lacking to someone who has read the book - because as ALWAYS there is SO much more in the book. They have to get the plot done in the movie in the time alotted and there's no time for more character moments like you'd see in the book.
After the first movie (when I saw it to see it - I hadn't read the books then) I did noticee that the effects in Quidditch did look a LITTLE wierd here and there - and for CoS I was really keep a close eye on the Quidditch scene... I WAS TOTALLY ENRAPTURED!! There were NO effects 'probs' in CoS AT ALL! Quidditch was fantastic and really exciting. I read where they had filmed the quidditch scenes first so they had more time to do the effects. GREAT move!
Love the movie. Soundtrack great!
WOO! Goooooooooo HARRY!
Posted by Kosh (Member # 167) on :
Thanks Snay, that's good to know.
quote: The thing is, Goblet of Fire isn't really THAT much bigger than Prisoner of Azkaban.
"Prisoner" will be the one to suffer the most cuts then, instead of "Goblett". To bad, it was a fine story.
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
Incidentally, neither a one-part nor two-part HP:E5:HP&TGoF (Mimpower!) has had a penny spent on it by the studio yet, so it would be presumptuous to say that a two-parter has been decided-on. Speculated, certainly, but it ain't a done deal by a long shot. A writer hasn't even been signed yet.
Posted by Snay (Member # 411) on :
E5?
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
Erm, E4. Or would that be EIV?
Posted by Snay (Member # 411) on :
We should ask Mim.
Harry Potter - Episode IV: Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, Part I: The Test - Special Extended Edition DVD.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
quote:Originally posted by AndrewR: I'm REALLY looking forward to the next book.
quote:You should really read the books. They're very good. Compared to the book, the movie version of CoS was lacking.
It wasn't really LACKING as such - it's lacking to someone who has read the book - because as ALWAYS there is SO much more in the book. They have to get the plot done in the movie in the time alotted and there's no time for more character moments like you'd see in the book.
I really have to visit this parallel dimension where the CoS novel was actually not a bit cack.
Posted by Snay (Member # 411) on :
I'm sorry, what does "cack" mean?
Posted by StarFire (Member # 748) on :
Oh dear. I saw HP: CoS twice in the first week (long story). I must say, the visuals, espically in the Chamber itself were definately much better than the book described.
I would have loved to have seen the deathday party even though it wasn't essential to the plot. But I can understand why they didn't go there. Same thing with the Weasley family's garden gnomes.
However, the one point that really bugged me was at the very end when Herminoe runs into the room and she and Ron just kinda...stop short of hugging each other. It seems someone was jumping the gun at hinting what later books (specifically the 4th one) will hint at. Also, I think Herminoe and Ron should really fight more-- like in the books. But that should come about in the 3rd one for sure.
Overall, I liked this movie loads more than the 1st one. And cannot wait for the next movie-- and book! Im actually looking forward to that book much, much, more. Posted by Nimrod Pimding (Member # 205) on :
Just finished the ultrashort "Chamber of Secrets" PC-game, downloaded it from 3dgamers.com. Great easy kid's game, a must-buy for little nephews and stough. The controls felt great, spellcasting is rather funny. The big jellybeans you collect, although pointless except for gathering a score, are pretty. :-)
Posted by StarFire (Member # 748) on :
ANNOUNCED TODAY!!!
The 5th book in the series goes on sale Saturday, June 21st, 2003.
Will I be the only one standing in line for this one??
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)