[HoosierDaddy]

It didn't matter what he said, in the end. That's the point to lots of the stuff in book 6 and 7.

I'll agree. It could have been better. However, look at a post a couple above us. Harry still pretty much blows compared to good older witches and wizards. He isn't going Rambo on nobody.

[Yellow]

I haven't read the last book, and didn't check that spoiler... but I'm starting to suspect it has something to do with love, or sacrifice or something. Which might make me vomit.

[HoosierDaddy]

Neither, luckily for you! Lol.

[Traveller]

I saw it, I liked it. Well directed, lots crammed in but with more of a natural progression than Order of the Phoenix.

I really liked the brooding atmosphere of it, and the way they've ommited areas like the moving stairs - slight changes that mean the films don't retread the same scenes over and over, but feel new.

I thought it was great until the end, when

Spoiler

Harry wasn't paralyzed while Dumbly was offed; and there was no battle scene. Why would the deatheaters all break in to Hogwarts, just to watch Snape, who was there anyway, do the deed? And then leave? Couldn't see why they blew up the burrow either.

I'm guessing it's because the scenes in the next films would have been too similar - the Battle of Hogwarts should be amazing, so they possibly didn't want a similar scene in this film. Did fall a bit flat though - no-one seemed to even notice that the deatheaters had got in!

I still liked it though.

[Bauchelain the Evil]

I could very well say that this is the worst HP film.
Dumbledore looks as an idiot in most of the film and so does Slughorn. Okay, I know that Slughorn is a fat man who enjoys a confy life and isn't the most brave of people but in the book he's still portraited as a poweful wizard. In the 7th book

Spoiler

he fights against Voldermort for heaven's sake!

.
Second, most of the film revolves around Harry following Malfoy( who was actually one of the best actors along with Snape and Bellatrix) and yes that's what he also does in the book but dammn they could have made it more interesting.
Third, the memories. They skipped most of them! I would actually be surprized if someone who hasn't read the books would understand the next film. Wouldn't they wonder why the hell Voldermort chose exactly those objects as Horcruxes?
Fourth and worst: the scene at the Weasleys.Where did they took that from? It was just a way to put more cool magic in the film and, for me., they utterly failed. In fact there was only one scene with magic that I found great:

Spoiler

the flames Dumbledore conjured in the cave

This post has been edited by Bauchelain the Evil: 18 July 2009 - 11:46 AM

[Ain't_It_Just_]

It was odd. It was 2.5 hours long but it seemed kind of empty.

It was OK. The books are far better.

[Sir Thursday]

Ain't_It_Just_, on Jul 18 2009, 12:12 PM, said:

It was odd. It was 2.5 hours long but it seemed kind of empty.

I know what you mean. 2.5 hours and most of the characters barely got a scene, and in fact generally there wasn't a massive amount of plot going on. This was to an extent a problem with the books too, but I would argue that it is easier to get away with a slow moving plot in a book.


Sir Thursday

[RodeoRanch]

I liked it. Very much a setup film for the grand finale film(s) to come.

[Giles]

I saw it today, i thought it was ok, it had some moments that were good, the entire part before they got to hogwarts had me thinking it was going to be as awful as the last film but it got better and i actually thought it wasnt too bad. Definitely better than Order of the Phoenix which has to be one of the worst films ive ever seen.

Spoiler

I definitely liked the Die Hard moment when Dumbledore was falling out of the tower, made me crack up

[Grimjust Bearegular]

I found it disappointing. The magic and atmopshere of previous films was gone. And Radcliffe isn't that great of an actor to be honest. Malfoy should've gotten more screen-time, or Snape or even Ronny and Hermoine.

I hope the next two are better.

[Cougar]

I went to see it with one of our esteemed forum colleagues on Sunday and it was OK, I haven't read the books really so I'm picking up the story.

Things that anoyed me specifically about this film:

as the children have aged the acting defecit of the core characters has become more stark, in a scene with say Snape and Harry then Rickman can carry Radcliffe, or Broadbent can carry Watson etc but in the scenes where they are all together it's just gash

There is just too much kid sex in it, really didn't do much for the story. I gather this is more entertaining in the books.


Things that I find generally annoying about the films:

The magic system is appalling and clunky.

Everyone spends ages talking about how Harry is the most powerful wizard since voldemort or whatever and in every scene he gets his arse handed to him by the opposing wizards. I kept expecting there to be a moment like Dumai wells or Rand showering the army with lighting from Jordan but it never happens.

I still can't get away from it feeling like Roald Dahl wrote a rip off of the Worst Witch.

Right now as I say I don't know how this ends but it seems rather telegraphed in this film that Harry either is or contains the last hawkrux so he's going to die although I'd expect her to do something with this rather than just bump the poor fucker off, still, yawn. If the farmboy has to die to save the world at least let us have one "I AM THE PRINCE OF THE MORNING!" moment before he shuffles off. I hope we'll get this in the last 2.

This post has been edited by Cougar: 21 July 2009 - 02:26 PM

[Aptorian]

In the books the kids around him think he's strong or talented or what ever because he survived Voldemort, but I don't remember anyone actually thinking he is wizard in the league of Voldemort, Snape, Tumbledoor, etc.

And he does get his ass handed to him time and again in the books, so does the Phoenix Order.

All in all, the good guys suck and the bad guys suck less.

[lobo the wolfman]

This film was very disappointing, it felt it was really going no where. Then at the end when

Spoiler

Dumbledore was facing the Deatheaters, i was hoping he would just cut loose and lay waste but nothing.

Is the book any better then the film, or is it if you dislike one you won't like the other?

[Raymond Luxury Yacht]

The book is good. Haven't seen the film, but everyone I've talked to who have both read the book and seen the film say this film is the worst of the bunch, and a poor representation of the book.

[Grimjust Bearegular]

lobo the wolfman, on Jul 22 2009, 06:35 AM, said:

This film was very disappointing, it felt it was really going no where. Then at the end when

Spoiler

Dumbledore was facing the Deatheaters, i was hoping he would just cut loose and lay waste but nothing.

Is the book any better then the film, or is it if you dislike one you won't like the other?

Book is much better, especially at the end. And in the book you get a lot more insight into Voldemort's past life and how he was as a kid. Interesting stuff.

[Traveller]

Yes, and more info on the half-blood prince - like why he is called the half blood prince, something they also kind of missed out of the film for those that haven't read the books.

A few more creepy flashbacks would have been good - voldy chose those objects and places for personal reasons.

(Incidentally, the One Ring sounds a bit like a Horcrux - an object in which a torn part of your soul is kept; and the part that is in it survives even if you are killed, and can be used to return you to life. And, the influence of the soul frament in the horcrux can influence/affect anyone else that holds it, or tries to destroy it).

EDIT I'm not saying that's a bad thing, I just like comparing ideas - like that Bogarts are like the fetches in Proven Guilty. Except less homicidal.

This post has been edited by Traveller: 22 July 2009 - 05:19 PM

[Cougar]

Well there isn't anything original under the sun and that's especially true for JK Rowlings work.

[Aptorian]

What's original about JK rowling work is that her world building makes the environment in the books feel magical. The books are about magic and magic is everywhere in the wizards land.

I find that refreshing compared to your average fantasy book that takes place in an exact copy of earth cirka 1500 AD and the only thing magical about the world is old guys with a beard who can throw fireballs and some giant flying lizards.

[caladanbrood]

In fairness, a lot of the stuff was missed out of the books because the book is too long to be made into one film. They could have swapped some stuff for other bits, but really then people would have complained that they had missed out the other stuff. It was still nearly two and a half hours long!!

[Daser]

I saw this with a friend yesterday and he is huge HP fan, and when we came out we just looked at eachother and said "what a total waste of time, lets get some beer and forget about this crap".

We did agree that HP is so huge that nobody seems to be able to accually see just how bad this is, or just dont dare say it. Not 1 Danish paper had given it a bad review.