Harry Potter: Goblet of Fire

[Varia]

RE: Re: RE: Harry Potter: Goblet of Fire

Snape kills Dumbledore.

I just think the outcome of the books is predictable, and most of the stuff that isn't, is random BS. I know it is based in a world with magic, but a lot of it just doesn't even make sense for that.

[Pumble]

RE: Re: RE: Harry Potter: Goblet of Fire

The only problem i had with the movie is that it was more of a supplement to the book rather than a stand-alone movie. The thing that makes this blatantly obvious is how Harry just wakes up at Ron's house, goes to the Quidditch cup, match ends, grounds are destroyed in a range of about 15 minutes, with mostly NO EXPLANATION. Other parts are skipped too, but that was just the main part.

However, 80% or more, i'd say, of the people going to see the movie have read the book, so they know what's going on. Plus, if they had covered everything relevant, the movie would be about 5 hours long. Personally i would have watched it even then, but a lot of people would become bored. The challenges are nice and action-packed, but the maze was severly dissapointing, Harry didn't run into anything except Krum, which would have been stupid if he didn't. Come to think of it, i don't believe that they ever said that Krum was under the Imperius curse in the movie.

Most of this sounds pretty negative, but i'm a fan of the series, and yes, of course the book was better, but the movie shouldn't be compared to the book constantly, otherwise you won't have any fun watching it, and if the only reason you've come to the theater is to point out how the book was better to your stupid friends, don't bother, nobody cares. I really did enjoy watching this. A-, B+, what have you.

...and nearly every girl in the movie was hot.

[whorlichan]

RE: Re: RE: Harry Potter: Goblet of Fire

Just saw it...I planned to go to the 7 pm showing, but when I got there at 6:50 it was sold out. So I bought a ticket for the 7:30 (they're showing it every half hour on 3 screens!) and sat through the entire reel of stuff before the 20, and then the 20, and finally the previews.

It was not as good as some people have been telling me, and it was not nearly as bad as others have been telling me. I think what got to me the most was that half the audience I saw it with had NOT read the books--so there were a lot of whispers about "who's that?" "what just happened?" "omg is he DEAD?" They did indeed cut out a lot, and it wasn't completely obvious what was happening if you hadn't read the books. Still, I enjoyed it a lot.

A couple of things:
- Emma Watson's acting is not that bad, Guido, but I don't think she's all that attractive, either, so...meh.
- The hair on ALL the boys needs to be cut IMMEDIATELY. I kept mistaking Gred and Forge for girls.
- Why did Harry get the ugly Patil twin?
- Why was Krum so...not scary or duck-footed or anything that actually described him in the book?
- Why was Cedric so very very flaming? Come on. "Harry, go take a bath. With all the hot water. In the prefect's bathroom. Where I go, because I'm a prefect." *winkwink*
- Being evil apparently kills your appearance--Wormtail's losing all his hair, Voldie lost his nose...only Lucius can keep a perfect coiffure and still be evil.

[Afrobean]

RE: Re: RE: Harry Potter: Goblet of Fire

@Pumble: things removed from the movie were done so because they were not relavent. They'd have done nothing to aid the story and it'd simply slow things down. It would have sucked if they had taken like 5 minutes just to explain why Harry is with Ron when most people would just assume that, in being good friends, they'd spend the night at each others house or something.

Wormtail's losing all his hair, Voldie lost his nose...only Lucius can keep a perfect coiffure and still be evil.

Wormtail's appearance is from his having been a rat so long, I'd assume. And I heard from a person at school that Voldemort looks as he does because his face has taken on a serpant-like appearance which makes sense given the whole talking to snakes thing.

PS I haven't read the 4th book, but I had an easy time figuring things out. Only thing that got me for a bit was Nevel looking different than I'd remembered him. Wasn't he a bit more... chubby before?

EDIT:

Come to think of it, i don't believe that they ever said that Krum was under the Imperius curse in the movie.

Actually, I'm sure they did. They might not have actually said that he was under the Imperius curse, but Harry definitely did say "he's bewitched," and given the whole explanation of the unforgiveable curses earlier in the movie, it'd be relatively easy for someone to figure out that he was under the Imperius curse.

[MalReynolds]

Re: RE: Re: RE: Harry Potter: Goblet of Fire

Snape kills Dumbledore.

I just think the outcome of the books is predictable, and most of the stuff that isn't, is random BS. I know it is based in a world with magic, but a lot of it just doesn't even make sense for that.

Well, Var, good job at quoting the internet. Now, go read the other books. I didn't like #5, but six was incredible. It was very depressing as well, so I sugguest before you go on quoting things you really don't know about, you do some legwork. The next two in the series are more enjoyable to a broader audience, and alienating to the younger crowd simply because of the overall darkness that the series is taking on.

Plus, people are getting offed left and right. It's exciting.

Dhur.

Mal

[Varia]

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Harry Potter: Goblet of Fire

I like your stories better.

[vashthestampede0987]

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Harry Potter: Goblet of Fire

@Afro:Baby fat maybe?

[lord_carbo]

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Harry Potter: Goblet of Fire

Seriously, can someone just give me a 2 page summary on what happens during Harry Potter 5? It totally destroyed my intrest on the series, and supposively 6 is really good.

Still doesn't mean Harry Potter is overrated, just not as sucky as some other stuff, like the even more overrated Eragon.

[kmlt]

Good but could be Great

The 4th movie was really good, and I know it would have been like 5 hours long if they had everything. I've read the first 4 books 7 times each, the 5th twice and the 6th once, so I having read them a lot I have to say they took out way too much in the 4th one.

They skip the whole house elf part, they didn't have the muraders map, they didn't show the part before the third task. And If I recall wasn't this the book that the Fred and George were supposed to start making those tongue toffees and wasn't Percy suppose to start working for the Ministry and Harry meets Bill and Charlie? The biggest dissapointment was that they didn't even show the quidditch match.

If they didn't have the Quidditch match you would think that they wolud at least put in parts to help with future movies.

The movie didn't explain enough about Barty Crouch and that Bagman guy wasn't even in the movie.

Also I wish the first Dumbledore never died, because to me he was like Dumbledore, perfect for the role. And in this movie the dumbledore they have is way more agressive than I thought he would ever be.

I could tell you a whole bunch of other parts they missed but the one thing that really bothered me was the part before and during the third task. Before the task the kids were supposed to meet up with Bagman and be told the task then Krum was supposed to ask Harry If he liked Hermione and then he got petrified and then Barty Crouch was found dead and then Harry practiced for the task. During the task he just runs around and tries not to get eaten by the maze. That was stuppid because they didn't have the skrewt or the magic thing where Harry was afraud to move and then they took out the sphinx. And Harry was supposed to use that 4 point spell.

Okay so now I've complained. It was a really good movie but I think they could have made it better.^^*

[psychic25]

RE: Good but could be Great

Saw it yesterday, and I liked it overall. They left out some plot points, but at least they got all the major events.

Yeah, Shox, in the DVD for the third movie, at least, there's a bunch of deleted scenes that show parts of the book they just didn't put in the movie. Good stuff.

Oh, and the foreshadowing annoyed me. The book has almost no foreshadowing, but the filmmakers put in as much as they possibly could. Ugh. And they cut that whole Barty Crouch Jr. subplot too (although I can see why, because that would have just taken way, way too much time to explain).

[Tps222]

RE: Good but could be Great

It was decent. I didn't like the Voldermort entrance, expecting something cool like you guys described. Plot line was touched on, but I wished they would have foucsed more on the preparation for the events, and the emotional development between the characters. THe whole Ron is mad at Harry thing was a waste of time, should have focused more around HErmoine and Ron/Krum.

[mead1]

RE: Good but could be Great

Anyone ever seen Aphex Twin's "Come to Daddy" Video? Voldemort is totally ripped from there. It made me burst out laughing in the theater.

[-Fallen-]

RE: Good but could be Great

Harry Potter must of had a lawsuit on their hands cause this movie was "internationalized". Tons of asians, indiands, russians and french, don't forget the sad attempt to modernize the whole series with the little mosh pit of wizards during that rock show rofl.

That was the only part of the movie that didnt sit quite right, everything else is awesome. A+

[jewpinthethird]

RE: Good but could be Great

I just saw it. It was a fairly decent movie, worth watching. Doesn't compare to the book. But movies rarely ever do.

Why did Harry get the ugly Patil twin?

Exactly what I was thinking. Not that she was ugly, just not the better looking of the two.

When did Ginny get to be so cute? Oh, and Cho is so hot. Especially her accent.

[oversole]

RE: Good but could be Great

This film iis sooooooooooooooooooooooooooo good i loved it so much i watyched it again, and im going to see it for a thrid time next week