Wow…couldn’t disagree with you more, Harborwolf.
FWIW, noone that saw the movie with me agreed with me either. Mayhap I should’ve titled my post “There. I’ve said it.”
Felt it needed saying though. I thought the movie was worse than the thematically absent Prisoner of Azkaban.
As I said back on page one, I was hugely disappointed, but I don’t think I hated it quite as much as you. 
And Azkaban was my favorite to date.
Hate is a strong word, but I’ll say there are few things more disappointing than a really bad movie.
Azkaban was great visually, but I felt the lack of the paternal theme really gutted what that particular book was about.
And speaking of Azkaban and Prongs, did Harry’s patronus look oddly formless to anyone else?
That does not immediately strike me as a very apt way to describe Harry Potter. Do you have any particular scenes in mind which could illustrate your characterization?
-FrL-
Me too. I know it’s a massive book, but how much was left out!? And the directing was quite bad As mentioned upthread, some of the omissions led me to conclusions about Deathly Hallows - the biggest one was the two-way mirror Sirius gives Harry. I was sure this would be a plot point in book 7 - now my theory is dashed.
One scene I did like was the DA learning the Patronus charm. Maybe residual daemon-coveting from the Golden Compass trailer.
Yes, his patronus did look only vaguely like a stag. The look of the Dementors took me aback as well. My son (who is 9) turned to me and whispered, “that’s what Dementors look like without their cloaks.” heh.
I opened the thread to say exactly that.
Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix is a terrible book. It’s twice as long as it needs to be, spends too much time on secondary and tertiary characters, and horribly overdoes the “Harry left in the dark” angle. It’s a two-hundred-page story squeezed into eight hundred pages. The final battle is awfully, confusingly written and reduces magical combat into what, to be honest, reads just like a paintball gun fight.
The movie subtracted almost all the crap while leaving in the absolutely crucial elements of the story. Consequently, it’s a shockingly good movie - in my opinion it’s far and away the best movie in the series, so far. If I could add just two minutes I’d have had them show Neville’s parents in their awful state, if only to emphasize the evilness of Voldemort’s gang.
I’d also agree that the acting was exceptional. The British veteran standbys are always reliable, but the trifecta of Radcliffe, Grint and Watson are getting better, too. That’s especially remarkable in Emma Watson’s case, as she was pretty awful in the first few movies.
Some, apparently, didn’t like it. Beats the hell out of me why not. As compared to the plodding efforts of the first four movies it was great. And it was STILL a long movie.
She said “Hi, mum” as she barely appeared on screen darting around Mrs Weasley as everyone came down to dinner right after the Extendable Ears scene.
Re: Harry’s Patronus, I figure that the dementor attack weakened him enough and caught him off-guard enough that he wasn’t able to get a fully formed patronus going. Hence his comment during the training scene that the “shield form” of the patronus can still be effective, even if not as good as the full form.
Some of us save our fanboy (or girl) geek love for other authors, like this one.
If you just introduced me to a series of well written books that become an obsession to my thoughts and dorkdom, I might have to beat you with a wet noodle. I don’t have any more time for any more obsessions.
I’m not the biggest fan of swords & horses fantasy, but those books are great.
I haven’t seen the HP movie yet - waiting for my son to get back from a trip - but I’m encouraged that lots of people who loved *Azkaban *also love this one; *Azkaban *is my favorite of the movies. The fourth movie didn’t do anything for me at all.
As someone who hasn’t read any of the books, but was beginning to get into the series through the movies, I had mixed feelings about this one.
Everyone other than Umbridge and Harry felt completely wasted in this movie to me. All the older veteran actors were reduced to cameos, including the main villain (but I suppose that’s more a fault of the original plotline than the screenplay).
The battle at the Ministry should have been half an hour long, at a minimum. Instead it felt about 10 minutes. I had read synopses for the books online, and someone can correct me if I’m wrong but:
I read that in the OotP, during the battle, Hermoine is pretty badly taken down by a death eater. Considering how she’s the most booksmart and also seems to be the best at casting spells of the trio (dispite Harry having actual battle experience), having her placed into a real life situation where she fails would have been a really crucial and interesting piece of character development that sadly this movie decided to not include.
And also, Emma, please for the love of God stop taking a long pause and acting as if the next line you’re about to deliver is The Big Important Line of the Movie. You’ve still got two movies to get it together.
Umbridge stole the film. I found myself about an hour and a half in wondering why neither Harry or any of his crew had just flipped and crucio’d her ass or something. They really did a wonderful job of getting the audience (or at least me) to truely hate the character. The downside to this was that I was quite unsatisfied with her lack of comeuppance.
I started out thinking that Harry Potter was quite lame, then the third movie was pretty interesting, then I really liked he last one. But sadly this one just left me feeling like it was a 2.5 hour preview for the Real Battle.
This was the first HP movie where I had read the book at before-hand. And I felt the movie experience was a bit choppy. On the other hand, the book is much too long. I’d prefer choppiness to unmotivated length.
Here are some thoughts on my behalf:
-
Cornelius Fudge appeared more cartoonish than he should have. He’s not stupid, he’s just in self-denial because of the immense threat that Voldemort poses. But in the movie, the character dumbfoundedly clamors “He’s back!” at the sight of the dark lord. I didn’t like that change.
-
McGonagall should have had more balls. She had so much dignity and toughness in the book, it hurt me to see her take so much crap from the newcomer. Honestly, I felt it was a bit out of line.
-
The Voldemort duel did not excite me as much as the final scenes in the previous film. Fiennes portrayal is still excellent though.
-
I loved that Umbridge was not as ugly-looking as in the book. I felt that was very bad writing on Rowling’s part, that an unlikable character obviously *has *to look like a toad and be uncharming. The change of apperance makes the character so much more interesting (meowing kittens in a torture scene? Genius).
-
I’m glad Harry was not as angst-ridden as in the book. Some of his dialogue there is quite painful to read.
-
The models of the undead horses looked great.
-
Sometimes emotions are overplayed, but sometimes it’s really underplayed. It’s *all right *to look disappointed if you’re expelled from Hogwarts. It’s *okay *to look scared if your best friend is lifted by a possibly hostile giant.
I flipped through this scene in the book real quick right after seeing the movie, and the book battle is much more vicious. Hermione is petrified (and they have to drag her around), Neville’s nose is broken, and Ginny breaks an ankle. Ron and Luna might suffer some nasty bumps, too; I didn’t read real closely.
The patronus thing has been mentioned here, and I was wondering about that. Why didn’t we get to see prongs chase down the demontors?
Since it is mentioned in the book as significat that Harry can produce a corporeal patronus, why would the director make the decision not to have him make one.?Resistance is futile. HBO has recently acquired the rights to make a TV series based on the novels, at the rate of one book per season. I am already drooling in anticipation, and they haven’t even started production yet.
Not to mention the fact that the children are very impressed by Harry’s ability to produce a patronus, although eventually it’s handled pretty well by several in the group, like it wasn’t that much of a challenge after all.
Loved the movie. The show I saw was on the evening of premiere day in the Netherlands, and some adults came dressed up, which was festive fun. During the break I was interviewed by a reporter from the Daily Prophet.
The only one miscast in his role was David Thewliss as Lupin. I haven’t seen any love for that casting choice upthread, either. I first saw Thewliss in a thoroughly unsympathetic role, (Naked and later Dragonheart) so that may have ruined his acting for me forever. To me the guy looks just sneaky, selfishly evil. Not like I had pictured Lupin at all.
Hermione is not just petrified, everyone thinks she’s dead. One Deat Eater (Dolohov) curses her with something deadly and the only reason she survives is that she had put a Silencio curse on him, and he couldn’t say the curse word, making the curse slightly less powerful.
Ron Weasley suffers some “psychic damage” from a brain attaching itself to his arms, and previously had already been injured from something else that we don’t see. Luna is thrown to the floor and made unconscious.