Larry Gardener and the Order of the Fiery Bird-Thingy [Spoiled]

[The Vorpal Tribble]

*wakes up from a midnight showing that didn't start until 2 am*

This... was definitely the strangest Harry Potter movie to date. I've never read the books, but this one left me feeling really... let down in a way.

#1. The movie felt so rushed. Everything in it felt like it should have been drawn out a bit more and, well, EXPLAINED. If you've read the books thats all well and good, but so many elements were just dropped in and you are left wondering where the boop that came from.

I mean, whats with the Lovegood kid they bring in? She adds practically nothing besides some adorable weirdness but they treat her as someone who's actually part of the plot or is going to be useful.

#2. In the other movies at least the plot was moved along... this... didn't explain anything. Not a single thread was tied up, even the tiny little things.

What was the use in Harry taking lessons to shield his mind when he never seemed to learn a thing?

Isn't it just a little convenient that their own personal magical-version of a holodeck has been built into the castle?

How was Hagrid related to the retarded giant and how does it catch food if it is tied up?

Did Harry apologize to his girlfriend for giving her the snub after finding out she ratted them out under the influence of a truth serum?

And dozens more beside.

#3. The thing ended pretty lamely with a rather half-hearted attempt at some 'wise words'.


The entire thing was fascinating, and rather darker than the others, but... as a lot of folks in the theatre were saying, it leaves you not knowing if you liked it or not.

Oh, and there were the Thestrals. Those things are too cool.

[Wizzardman]

...Yeah, it sounds like they've been tossing information that was plot relevant in the book without providing any explanation of it for the movie.

I always got the impression that they did that with all the other Harry Potter movies, too.

...If you want to know what you're missing, I'll set up a little spoiler box down here for you:


Luna Lovegood is a random other character that Rowling introduced in this book. She's important in that (a) her father runs the wizardly equivalent of the Weekly World News, which is where Harry publishes his 'Voldemort is back' interview, and (b) she has also seen someone in her family die, and thus can [like Harry] see the Thestrals. Also, she's awesome, and probably insane.

The Point of Harry's lessons on shielding his mind: well, yeah, I was wondering about that after reading the book, as well. So far, it appears that the only point of these lessons was to provide more backstory on Snape, and possibly force Dumbledore to give Harry lessons himself [which happens in the next book].

The Holodeck: yeah, its kinda convenient. It is mentioned in one point during the first book, however, so its not entirely random.

The Giant: Said giant is actually Hagrid's half-brother, whom Hagrid rescued from a camp full of other giants during the summer proceeding the 5th year at Hogwarts. He usually catches birds and small animals to feed himself, although Hagrid does occasionally bring him food. I'm not entirely sure why the surviving birds don't eventually learn to "not go near the gigantic horrendous retarded monster", but I guess Rowling still needs to leave a few mysteries for us.

Cho Chang: Wait... no, that must be something from the movie. Cho didn't rat them out in the book; they were ratted out by an unnamed friend of Cho's who was also attending the defense meetings. But either way, Harry and Cho broke up, so you didn't miss anything important.

[Nerd-o-rama]

I just wanted to add that the "magical holodeck" was in the first book and movie as well: it's where the Mirror of Plot Relevance was being kept, and why only people who knew what they were looking for could find it. Actually, I forget if it was brought up in the first movie or not, since it was kind of a throwaway in the book.

Luna had no real point other than being awesome in the book, either.

Everything else sounds like the reasons that I didn't like the first four films either. Too much adaptation decay; the major plot points get thrown out there with no context.

Oh, and Harry and Cho broke up after the gang was ratted out in the book as well. Cho didn't rat them out herself, but there was just way too much angst. Plus, they're not a Designated Couple.

[JadedDM]

Isn't Order of the Phoenix the thickest of the six books so far? It's like the books keep getting longer, but the movies don't. So more and more is cut out. I remember being pretty confused in the last movie, and I actually have read the books.

[Eldred]

I think that's probably the biggest problem with the HP movies. As the books are getting longer, the film is still being squeezed into a 3 hour slot. So much of the book is being cut out to try and fit this time slot that people are getting confused about what on earth is going on.

To be honest, the films should be like 7 hours long :smallwink:

We need a way to slow down time so our actors and actresses dont age too quickly though...

[dwaro]

Yeah, the Room of Requirement was never in the first book. The Mirror of Erised was simply kept in a classroom that Harry stumbled across while trying to hide. The room was mentioned, though, in passing by Dumbledore in book four when he mentioned that he found a room filled with chamber pots when on a walk one night.

[Jibar]

We need a way to slow down time so our actors and actresses dont age too quickly though...

Except let Emma Watson grow older.
She's the same age. Some day her celebrity status will slip.
Then I shall move in.

[Captain van der Decken]

Hey, that's only slightly creepy.

Movies over 3 hours, of course, tend to be a bad idea.

[zeratul]

Luna Lovegood was cool in the books, I'm not sure if the movie's been released yet here.

[Umbral_Arcanist]

Yeah, the Room of Requirement was never in the first book. The Mirror of Erised was simply kept in a classroom that Harry stumbled across while trying to hide. The room was mentioned, though, in passing by Dumbledore in book four when he mentioned that he found a room filled with chamber pots when on a walk one night.

I think it was one of those things the author comes up with and then retroactively says was already around, though i suppose she could have had the idea all along

[Ava]

I enjoyed the movie, though I also wished they had included more of the book.

Stuff I wished was in the movie:


Non-theoretical Owl testing
More Fred and George
More Tonks! (I need a good shot of her costume)
More Order of the Phoenix at the HQ, and explanation of how it's hidden
D.A. contact coins
More anticipation before cool scenes (like when they fly over London... it was just like "oh, now we're just going to fly over London" instead of "ZOMG WE GET TO FLY OVER LONDON!")
More realistic fighting in the Department of Mysteries... where are the brains?? Why do all of the death eaters and OotP people zip around in black and white smoke? I find the b&w coloring to be odd too, since Sirius just told Harry that the world isn't in black and white, everyone has both in them. Anyway, that fight scene was really confusing in 3-D. It was hard to tell what was going on.

I think having Cho be the snitch via Veritaserum was a good way to cut out an unnecessary character and have Harry break up with her without further explanation. It made sense to me, at least.

And I dunno about y'all, but I cracked up every time I saw the kitten plates.

[purple gelatinous cube o' Doom]

I just got back from the movie. I was originally going to see Transformers, but the times didn't work out, and I didn't want to wait another hour. Anywho, I have read all the books (albeit it's been a while since I've read this one). But I did feel that things were a bit rushed/not explained enough at points. The movie was 2 1/2 hours as it was, and it's really tough to get everything from the novels in the movies, especially when you take into account that the novels get longer and longer as the series goes on. I think they did an alright job at explaining most of the meat of the story. But, what I feel they really failed to do, was completely explain the prophecy at the end. For those of you who haven't read the books if you care to know. sybil trelawney, the Divination instructor, is the one who made said prophecy regarding Harry, and Dumbledore has a copy of it as well, and shows it to Harry at the end of the book As for the plot getting darker, They started that with The Prisoner of Azkaban in the movies. Personally, I feel it was a good move as the story does get quite a bit more serious. Overall, I thought the movie was decent. Not as good as some of the others, but not bad either.

[Vonriel]

Yeah, PGCoD's spoiler is actually why Dumbledore keeps her around, even though she's downright crazy. They never really explain that relationship, as far as I can tell, in the movies; they just portray her as a teacher that doesn't know a single thing about what she's teaching.

I think the worst part of the movie, for me, was that they didn't go into either Ginny's crush on Harry, or Luna. Like, we don't get told what Wizzardman's spoiler talks about, nor does the movie go into just how much I recall her being picked on. Hermione calling her Loony at the introduction, and her missing shoes toward the end, are all we get to see of it. As far as Ginny goes, she's just sorta there and sends a glance or two Harry's way. I'm almost positive more than that goes on, especially while Harry and Cho are going out.

For those of you picking on the room of requirement, well, it's like any other plot item that no one mentions until the book it's introduced in. Things like this seem to happen a lot, and are annoying plot holes, except this one is filled in quite nicely with the overarching "Hogwarts has many secrets" thing she's been trying to get across. Chamber of secrets, that third floor hall which amazingly doesn't go into any second floor halls, even though the characters go down below it to get to the Sorceror's stone, where all the space for the Triwizard tournament came from, etc. (that final maze was huge)

I will say, all things aside, I liked the movie. Mostly because a lot of what was missing from it I already knew, because I read the books. I can see how people who didn't read the books at all would've been lost, though. *shrug*

[Skippy]

I hated it from the first (and last) sent owl. They don't explain anything and everything seems to be a bit far-fetched. Kreacher was there for no reason (and he is vital to the plot...) and lots of things were cut out...

I just wanted to get my money back... It was lousy...

[TheLogman]

Whoa whoa whoa whoa. They didn't put the Brains in? That was one of my favorite parts in the whole book. Although I usually go to see the movies, I doubt I'll see this one, simply because the movies aren't as good as the books, and in the end, I just end up I just feel disappointed, because events a, b, and c did not happen, events d and e happened differently, and characters j, l, and o either have different personalities, or are cut from the movie.

7th Book comes out 21st! 9 MORE DAYS!

[Umbral_Arcanist]

Honestly, i think the mess they seem to be forced to make the movies into makes me think they should have waited for all 7 books before starting on the movies and then altering the story and tweaking/removing minor characters so that the movies could stay true to the books w/o being enslaved and feeling rushed. IE the approach taken with the third movie by the director (forget his name) in contrast with the first two movies.

[Justin_Bacon]

Interesting. I had a complete, 180-degree different impression from the movie: This was the Harry Potter movie I've been waiting for.

Sorcerer's Stone and Chamber of Secrets? Beautiful visual Cliff Notes versions of the books, but somewhat failing insofar as they fail to capture the true plot of the novel (instead giving us a simplistic "A happens, then B happens, then C happens" with little connective structure).

Prisoner of Azkaban? Not a bad film in its own right, but Cuaron brought a vision to the film which was evocative in its own right but not particularly true to Rowling's vision.

Goblet of Fire? A complete travesty. Completely disjointed and essentially incomprehensible to anyone who hadn't already read the book, yet so blatantly unfaithful (and bad) that it can't even be appreciated as a visual realization. Directorially ham-fisted and filled with the worst sorts of second-rate, hack writing. I have absolutely no idea how anyone actually liked this complete piece of crap.

Order of the Phoenix? Brilliantly done. They were true to the story and faithful to the story, even as they pared it down and adjusted it in all the ways that make the film work as a film. There are so many brilliant visual moments and pieces of dialogue which have been crafted to perfectly capture and evoke a given moment. And, despite paring the plot down to its most essential elements, the movie is more than willing to takes its time and linger on a moment when lingering is required.

It was the first movie to actually raise meaningful emotional reactions from me. And not just emotional reactions of "I remember this being very emotional in the books", but true reactions to the film itself. (With the minor exception of the found moment between Ginny and Harry in the Chamber of Secrets, which was previously the highlight of the films as it fixed a major narrative fumble by Rowling.)

Note only that, but I was impressed by how much David Yates was able to repair some of the damage down to the continuity of the films by the third and fourth films. The third and, particularly, the fourth films had so thoroughly dropped the ball in establishing certain points of factual and character continuity -- and even the second film's abject failure to establish Ginny as a notable character can be counted among these problems -- that matters had reached a critical point where essential foundation material had not been laid for later films. Yates managed to repair a lot of the damage done, allowing him to not only succeed with this film, but to lay the groundwork for the sixth.

I am somewhat disappointed to learn that Steve Kloves, who adapted the first four books, will be returning for the sixth film. Given Michael Goldenberg's success with OotP, I would much rather see him return for the sixth and seventh films. (Goldenberg's previous film work is, primarily, the adaptations of Peter Pan and Contact.)


I mean, whats with the Lovegood kid they bring in? She adds practically nothing besides some adorable weirdness but they treat her as someone who's actually part of the plot or is going to be useful.

Really? I thought her role in being able to relate to Harry on a level that Ron and Hermione couldn't -- to be someone that could share the experience of having seen death -- was well done. I also thought she was an important touchstone for the broader theme in the film of solidarity and unity and optimism in the face of oppression.


What was the use in Harry taking lessons to shield his mind when he never seemed to learn a thing?

His failure is pretty much the whole point. It's what sets up the end of the movie. They had Lucius Malfoy do everything except say, "And this was all possible because you failed in your lessons with Snape!" (since he presumably didn't know about those lessons, after all)


Isn't it just a little convenient that their own personal magical-version of a holodeck has been built into the castle?

This is an example of where the piss-poor quality of the fourth film pretty much crippled the fifth film. The presence of this room was hinted at in Goblet of Fire, but this was hacked out of the film. As a result of failing to lay that necessary groundwork, the deus ex machina nature of the Room of Requirement was pretty much unavoidable.


Did Harry apologize to his girlfriend for giving her the snub after finding out she ratted them out under the influence of a truth serum?

Maybe. Maybe not. Relatively irrelevant, though, at that point.


How was Hagrid related to the retarded giant and how does it catch food if it is tied up?

Hagrid tells you that in the film: He went to see the giants. This is his half-brother. He brought him back because the giants were going to kill him.

I wonder how many of your problems with following the film -- even when the answers you were looking for were to be found right in the dialogue -- has to do with the late hour at which you saw the film?

Justin Alexander
http://www.thealexandrian.net

[Umbral_Arcanist]

I suspect that if you haven't read the books then the hints and clues you mention might not be as obvious

[Hallavast]

I really really didn't like this movie for a number of reasons that I don't even have the energy to enumerate. So I will give you the main reason for this film's failure in my opionion. In the book, Rowling establishes Harry as an angry, frustrated jerk who yells quite a bit at pretty much everyone.

In the movie, there was no yelling or throwing things or anything of the sort. Harry was just a sullen, depressed emo guy person thing in a tight shirt and blue jeans. Where are the baggy, hand-me-down clothes that are his trademark throughout the story? They got tossed out in order to make harry look good on screen. It's a pathetic attempt to play up to the world wide crush on Harry Potter as a smokescreen for horrible acting and even worse directing. They change so much to make harry come off looking better that they've disgraced Rowling's original idea. I feel very sad that I will probably never see a good version of this part of her story on film.

Now, with that being said, there are certain points that I did like about the movie.

Snape's performance was, of course, superb. It was everything I expected even though his time on screen was cut pitifully short and is served piece-meal and arbitrarily.

Kreacher was done masterfully. I love the movie's portrayal of the creepy little guy. Too bad his betrayal of Sirius to Voldemort was never mentioned in the book. And we never got to see the locket he was supposedly keeping (that's important, folks).

Lucious Malfoy's outfit was freakin awesome. Very Dark Emporeresque. I liked it.

Pretty much the entire fight at the Ministry was excellent. The prophecies crashing down from the huge shelves like tidal waves was kinda cool, and the whole wooshy, shadowy form things that the death eaters were using were awesome. I kinda wanted the fight between Voldy and Dumby to last longer, because there's awesome potential there. Two archwizards having a full-blown duel with today's special effects has astronomical potential.

In general however, the movie was ruined by the director changing the character of Harry, Dumbledore, Tonks, and a few others compounded with the fact that he simply left out key parts from the book that I wanted to see (like Ron becoming Gryffindor keeper - or any mention of quidditch whatsoever). If Yates is in charge of the next movie, then I won't be going to see it.

[Justin_Bacon]

In general however, the movie was ruined by the director changing the character of Harry, Dumbledore, Tonks, and a few others compounded with the fact that he simply left out key parts from the book that I wanted to see (like Ron becoming Gryffindor keeper - or any mention of quidditch whatsoever). If Yates is in charge of the next movie, then I won't be going to see it.

This seems to be the most prevalent complaint people have: "I've read the books, and it didn't include X, Y, or Z."

It's a 2 hour movie adapting a 900 page book. That works out to something like 7 or 8 pages per minute. If you went into the movie without the expectation that the novel was going to be trimmed down in order to make the film work as a film, then you were kidding yourself before you ever stepped into the theater.

I missed seeing Ron and Hermione as prefects. But that doesn't mean this wasn't a good movie.

Justin Alexander
http://www.thealexandrian.net

[Hallavast]

This seems to be the most prevalent complaint people have: "I've read the books, and it didn't include X, Y, or Z."

It's a 2 hour movie adapting a 900 page book. That works out to something like 7 or 8 pages per minute. If you went into the movie without the expectation that the novel was going to be trimmed down in order to make the film work as a film, then you were kidding yourself before you ever stepped into the theater.

I missed seeing Ron and Hermione as prefects. But that doesn't mean this wasn't a good movie.

Justin Alexander
http://www.thealexandrian.net

Yes. It is the longest book in the series. But it's also the shortest movie in the series. It could have been longer, and I think it would have been understandable considering the length of the book version. I don't mind some of the trimming. Like Mundugus was cut out. I thought that was reasonable. But some things that are missing are just too important later on to leave out. Like Harry's discussion with Dumbledore at the end of the book. That should have been the single most defining moment of the series so far... but it was like... 3 or 4 sentences long and cut out all the emotion. Why? I could have sat there for another 20 or 30 minutes to listen to Harry scream at Dumbledore and hear Dumbledore, you know... explain everything. And because they didn't go into Kreacher's duplicity against Sirius... or the fact that Dumbledore is secret keeper for the Order of the Phoenix, I feel the next movie will be somewhat similarly diminished as a result (especially because Yates will be directing it).

But all this is only half the problem. The other part is the changing of Harry's and Dumbledore's character. Harry was an ******* in the book. He picked on Dudley (not the other way around) and he yelled at his friends at every turn. He threw things at Dumbledore. He was insensitive with a crying Cho Chang. None of this was mentioned in the movie.

Then we get to Dumbledore. Dumbledore was the epitome of calm and politeness in the books. It was the kind of serene well mannered civility that drove those around him to madness as they tried to come ti grips with the chaos surrounding them. This Dumbledore is nonexistent in the movie. The movie's dumbledore is too grumpy, too frank, and too reprovingly impatient of those around him. I'm afraid Harris was a much better Dumbledore than Gambon has turned out to be.

You mentioned one thing that you'd liked to have seen in the Movie that wasn't there. Well I can think of about 30 of them. And it's like Yates doesn't care. The only thing he cared about was darkening the mood of the story and making it more grown up. He was afraid of being involved in a kid's movie, so he spent his energies trying to make it more adult-themed (he failed by the way - the actors' reactions, barring a few exceptions, were just too fake to resemble anything found in the real world). What he didn't realize is that the book is a timeless classic. He tried to dumb it down so that people who don't know Potter would enjoy it, but he only succeeded in making it more jumbled and confusing. Who goes to the fifth installment of a series without reading or seeing the first 4 anyway?

I doubt he ever actually read the book. More like someone just told him the story piece-meal. I can see it now....

Assistant: Here's your copy of the book, Mr. Yates

Yates: My what? <looks confusedly at the book>

Assistant: You know, the original story that this movie is based on?

Yates: Psh! What do I need that for? <throws it out the window>

[Dean Fellithor]

the past 2 movies put me off Potter for good, but I need to read the last book and see the last couple of movies. I WANNA SEE THE SCAR HEADED BRAT DIE!

[Eldred]

Then we get to Dumbledore. Dumbledore was the epitome of calm and politeness in the books. It was the kind of serene well mannered civility that drove those around him to madness as they tried to come ti grips with the chaos surrounding them. This Dumbledore is nonexistent in the movie. The movie's dumbledore is too grumpy, too frank, and too reprovingly impatient of those around him. I'm afraid Harris was a much better Dumbledore than Gambon has turned out to be.

I second this - especially in the Goblet of Fire film. I mean, in the film Dumbledore pretty much grabs Harry and pushes him into a load of trophies, shouting at him whether he'd put his name in the Goblet or not. That is not the Dumbledore I imagined!

In fact, in the book, I quote (pg.242):


'Did you put your name into the Goblet of Fire, Harry?' Dumbledore asked calmly.'

It's just such a big contrast. And I did prefer Harris over Gambon - he looked just like how I had imagined Dumbledore. :smallsmile:

[Ronsian]

Note: I haven't seen the fifth movie yet.

I think the changing of Dumbledore was a good thing. In the first two books, it's supposed to have a calm, light feel. As the books go darker, Dumbledore becomes more angry as such, I like the actor however.

[The J Pizzel]

Here's my viewpoint. First off let me say this I HAVE NOT READ ANY BOOKS. I downright love the story of Harry Potter. The plots portrayed in the movies are beautiful and although I find a few dissapointments in the quality of the films every now an then, the movies are still all the Harry Potter I know and I think the story of Harry Potter is a great story and is told well within the movies. So, please keep in mind that for someone who knows nothing of the books, the movies are perfectly fine.

Now, my wife on the other hand has read every book thrice and I've already ordered the 7th for her. We've mid-nighted every movie and evertime I leave the theatre it's "I can't believe they didn't go to the hospital and see Nevilles parents", "I can't believe they didn't show Peeves the Poltergeist making life hell for Umbridge", "I can't believe they didn't go into Crouch Jr. and his mom". I can't stand this mode of thought.

Now, if you think J.K. is "OKing" these movies for her readers, I sincerely disagree. These movies are not made for the reader, they are made for the non-readers. Cause people like me are thinking (after watching the movies), "damn, that's a cool story. I might have to read that sometime." Someone else may say, "I can't get into a 900 page book about little kids and wands, I'd rather read Dragonlance or Tolkein or Pratchett...but what the hell, I'll go watch the 2-hour movie so at least I can see whats going on."

Which brings me to my next point. When will people understand (LOTR fans I'm talking to you) that a movie adaptation of a book doens't need to be word for word, scene for scene. As long as the viewer can keep up with the CURRENT story in the movie it doen'st matter. So Kreacher doesn't do all the things he's supposed to do. I doens't matter, from watching the movie I could tell that Kreacher is a jerk and does not like Harry or Sirius. So they didn't go visit Nevills parents. Who cares, from watching the movie I can tell you that Nevills parents aren't dead and that they're pretty much vegetables. So they didn't put the swamp in front of Umbridges office and didn't have Peeve's the Poltergiest making life miserable for Umbridge. I doesn't matter, from the movie I gathered that no one likes her and the Weasleys picked on her. Good enough. So Harry didn't throw anything at Dumbledore and cuss out his friends. This movie protrayed him as a jerk for first 30 minutes of the film. He was rude to everyone untill he went and asked Hermoine (spelling?) if he could sit with them. I could have told you he was a jerk without anyone mentioning it. (last one I promise) So they didn't elaborate on Ginny and her crush on Harry. They did a pretty good job in the earlier movies showing that Ginney likes Harry and this movie shows us a couple of little scenes where she gives him that "crush" grin. It's still there, I can tell from wathing the movie.

I could go on and on but I think yall get the point. The movies don't need to be just like the book. They need to tell a story that will get people interested in the awesome tale of Harry Potter. The same goes for LOTR. My wife doen'st give a damn about the books but she loves the movies and now we have more people in the rank of Tolkien fans.

Now.....

All that being said, I do have some major complaints with this film. It was rushed as all hell. I blinked and it was over. Next, way too many montages. Although the newspaper effect was pretty cool, there just seemed to be alot of montages and I don't personally like that. Oh, and I hate the new Dumbledore more and more. For all the reasons mentioned above. He was completely out of character in Goblet of Fire and he's not much better in this one.

One thing I friggin loved. Every wizard battle we've seen so far has pretty much dissapointed me. Why, because it's always Harry and some pathetic low level charm against a more powerful wizard and a more powerful charm...and he always manages to somehow survive (he actually talks about that in the film). Example - Harry versus Voldemort in the graveyard at the end of Goblet of Fire. Voldemart is a vastly superior wizard casting a much more powerful charm (Avada Cadabra, Sp?) and a lowly little Harry casting a rudimentary charm (Expeliarmus, Sp?) and what happens, they catch each other and hold each other. Don't like it. I dont' care what happens in book, I'm watching the movie. This movie has what I've been waiting for for five movies. Equally powerful wizards battleing each other. The Death Dealers vs. the Order of the Phoenix was beautiful. As was Sirius out dueling Lucius. But the Voldemort/Dumbledore battle was fudrucking sexy. I haven't read the books, so I didn't know the outcome and I was sitting on the edge of my seat, opem mouthed, waiting for that damn Avada curse to hit Dumbledore. Thank god it didn't and when the fight was over I turned my wife and was like "yeah...Dumbledore just smoked his @$$, that's what I'm talking about."

So, in a nutshell, I think people need to quit worrying about wether they left this out or didn't elaborate on this, etc. If the story is good and the movie is good, let it go. One thing I've come to realize is that all the things I hear people complain about is usually touchd in the movie so at least we know about it.

Oh, and my opinion on the movie is......well...I'm not sure yet. Uh, I like the wizard dueling and all that. I'll say it was pretty good. I'd watch it again.

Whew, done.
Please go easy on me.

[Justin_Bacon]

You mentioned one thing that you'd liked to have seen in the Movie that wasn't there. Well I can think of about 30 of them.

I snipped the rest of your post, since as it was just a lengthy extrapolation of the same basic point you made before: You wanted to see X, Y, or Z and the movie didn't have them or as much of them as you thought it should.

I'd recommend not seeing any movies adapted from books in the future. You will always be disappointed. And you will always come off sounding hopelessly naive as your voice your disappointment.

And as I said before: There are things it would have been fun to see (like Ron and Hermione becoming prefects; Ron and Ginny getting on the Quidditch team; and so forth) -- but if I wanted to read the book again, I'd read the book again. When I go to see the movie, I want the movie to work as a movie, not as a highlight reel of my favorite bits from the book.

Order of the Phoenix worked as a movie and captured the essential elements, character development, and plot of the novel without slavishly (and foolishly) attempting to follow it word-for-word.

Justin Alexander
http://www.thealexandrian.net

[TheLogman]

Just saw the movie then, excellent excellent job, much better than you lot on the internet made it out to seem.

I was a tiny tiny bit disappointed that Dumbledore didn't animate the statues, but because of the awesome Glass Shard Storm, the water ball, and the Fire Dragon thing, I really didn't care.

Oh, and the woman that played Umbridge was FANTASTIC. When I read the books, I imagined this cold, evil, dark woman, but when I saw the movie, her calm, almost giddy exterior made what she was doing even more creepy and even more wrong.

Oh, and the Kitten Plates and Pink Sweater were excellent touches, just amazing.

[Ronsian]

Just saw the movie, Very good. Sure, it left out some stuff. Luna was a good actor, but talked like she was high on helium. Also, at various times it was VERY antilclimatic. "We'll fly!", and they simply get to the ministry. Then, when Sirius dies, it was different from all the other death curse deaths. And it was very much like (Sirius to Lucius) "Haha, I got you now!". Then Bellix runs up and in a REALLY weird accent goes "Avida Kidiveria!" (as spelled). Other then that, a very good movie all around and condensing some parts.

[Bookman]

Just saw the movie, Very good. Sure, it left out some stuff. Luna was a good actor, but talked like she was high on helium. Also, at various times it was VERY antilclimatic. "We'll fly!", and they simply get to the ministry. Then, when Sirius dies, it was different from all the other death curse deaths. And it was very much like (Sirius to Lucius) "Haha, I got you now!". Then Bellix runs up and in a REALLY weird accent goes "Avida Kidiveria!" (as spelled). Other then that, a very good movie all around and condensing some parts.

There.....There.........There WAS NO VEIL?! :eek:

[TheLogman]

Do you mean the kinda portal-like thingie like in the book?

Ya, there was one of those, apparently the fact that Sirius falls into the portal is important to the plot of book #7, so ya, it was there.

[Bookman]

Do you mean the kinda portal-like thingie like in the book?

Ya, there was one of those, apparently the fact that Sirius falls into the portal is important to the plot of book #7, so ya, it was there.

Well I was worried when he said that Sirius was killed via "Avada Kedavra"

[Hallavast]

I snipped the rest of your post, since as it was just a lengthy extrapolation of the same basic point you made before: You wanted to see X, Y, or Z and the movie didn't have them or as much of them as you thought it should.
Well, I actually mentioned (twice) that the Movie altered certain characterizations that I found unfavorable. And, like I said, I can see some things that I agree with that they changed or cut out, but I think some of the parts that they did cut out were too important, and some stuff that they put in to replace it was arbitrary and distasteful (the world needs to know that Harry is a Douchebag!!).


I'd recommend not seeing any movies adapted from books in the future. You will always be disappointed. And you will always come off sounding hopelessly naive as your voice your disappointment.
As it happens, I have found several movies based on books to be quite enjoyable to my palette. These include several movies in this line and the LOTR trilogy. But thanks for the advice. I see now that people who aren't hell bent on enjoying a movie regardless of its quality are doomed to misery and ridicule and have no place in a movie theatre. In fact... we should just get rid of movie critics who don't give rave reviews since they are obviously "hopelessly naive".


And as I said before: There are things it would have been fun to see (like Ron and Hermione becoming prefects; Ron and Ginny getting on the Quidditch team; and so forth) -- but if I wanted to read the book again, I'd read the book again. When I go to see the movie, I want the movie to work as a movie, not as a highlight reel of my favorite bits from the book.

Order of the Phoenix worked as a movie and captured the essential elements, character development, and plot of the novel without slavishly (and foolishly) attempting to follow it word-for-word.

Justin Alexander
http://www.thealexandrian.net

Glad you liked it. But for me, it took out too much of what made the book enjoyable for me in the first place, mangled the presentation of the story by rushing through everything with nonsensical montages, and altered the main characters' personalities too absurdly for me to enjoy the movie "as a movie".

[Jibar]

I saw the movie last night, and can now offer proper criticisms.

As a movie, it was excellant.
There's not really much I can say there.

Noting it's based on a book is where this movie falls apart.
There really was no breathing space like there was in the book. It really is just one thing after another and another.
There were also some scenes I felt really should have been left in, in particular, Hagrid being assaulted by Umbridge.

That was something. Umbridge. I have never been so scared of a person in my life. With that little smile, all the pink and those kittens, those freaky little kittens.
If I met her in real life, I'd really expect her to snap one day and start killing everybody.

There were some scenes that felt rushed, as a scene. Like the duels in the Department of Mysterys. There was a lot of potential for that, and yet all we got was a couple flashy scenes with minor characters and watching Sirius, Harry and Lucious have a sword fight with guns and explosions.

I'm not sure if I actually heard it or not, but somebody said something about the Veil... something I'm sure was a hint towards the seventh book. And if it was J.K. And if you're doing what I think you're doing, I am going to hate you.

And in the end, as amazingly cute as Hermoine and Tonks (who deserved much more screen time) were, it's official. I've fallen in love with Luna Lovegood.

[dehro]

I've fallen in love with Luna Lovegood.

am I the only one who thought of "shining" when Luna went looking for some...I can't remember..tea or lemonade or sweets... and started to skip away?
freaky, if you ask me..

[Jibar]

Yes she's freaky, but that's just one of the things that makes her so wonderful.

[Jerthanis]

Interesting. I had a complete, 180-degree different impression from the movie: This was the Harry Potter movie I've been waiting for.


I agree with 100% of your post and second every opinion of yours, truly it's like I went back in time and became you... or something. Even your opinions on movies 1-4, I 100% am with you, though I also say that #1 was a really strong movie to introduce new people to the story... such that when I showed it to my friend who previously had been refusing to read the books, he changed his mind completely on the story, and began reading them. Now he's as into the series as I am.


But the Voldemort/Dumbledore battle was fudrucking sexy.

AGREED! Fantasy movies for some reason think that it's totally badass if wizard duels just involve repeated telekinesis affects and old men flying around grunting in pain. Willow? Lord of the Rings? Even some Star Wars prequel fights... It's like a shoving match that happens from across the room and it just makes for terribly uninteresting scenes. Meanwhile, HP5 movie was like, "How about we blow loads of special effects money on this and make it pyrotechnic and boop?" and we get FLAMING SNAKES and water prisons and giant explosions, and spontaneous conversion of matter and... god that was cool.

And I want Luna Lovegood's babies... I didn't have that reaction after the books, more of a "she's neat, but I don't like her any more than any other wacky character in this book series." but I felt like she really shined in the movie.

It is a shame that Ginny gets so little development in the movies, because I felt she didn't get enough development pre-OotP in the book series, and she gets even less in the movies, and then her scene from OotP that actually made it into the movie was given to Ron instead (where Ginny had been responsible for them getting away from the Inquisitorial squad near the end, and Ron did that instead)

If I had to pick a favorite scene, it'd be Ron and Hermione's argument where she was like, "Well, you have the emotional capacity of a teaspoon" and Ron just sorta grins and says, "Yeah..." (or something like that, I don't have perfect memory)

[Rama_Lei]

I thought the movie was quite good, but I think that they could have made it longer, since I'm fairly certain this was the shortest yet.

Anyway
1. Umbridge was INCREDIBLE! She is great from her first line, to all the changes she makes, including blasting apart snogging couples.

2. Even better then Umbridge is Luna, who stole the show, and should have been given more screen time. She was cast perfectly and her voice and behavior was spot on. She definitely was perfect in relating to Harry in a way the others weren't able to. Also, Luna feeding the baby thestral raw meat is adorable.
Also, a slight spoiler
When in the department of mysteries, A Death eater essentially, slug Luna. She lands on the floor, then casts Levicorpous calmly. She then stares dreamily at the helpless Death Eater, with a splotch of blood on her lower lip, untill Neville whips by, and grabs her.

[SpoonlessJedi]

I personally felt that the movie was absolutely dreadful. The acting (from the child actors, at least) was sub par and forced. It felt almost as if they were all reading cue cards off screen. The only child actor who really nailed her part was Luna, but only because her character is so flaky to start with. Yes, many of the adult actors were superb, as usual, but three minutes of Alan Rickman's dead-on portrayal of Snape cannot make up for nearly three hours of Daniel Radcliffe's apparent boredom with Harry's lines.

Yes, I understand the difficulties of condensing a two hundred fifty-seven thousand word book into two and a half hours, but they seriously could have done a better job with scene transitions and progressing through what little plot they covered. The movie, to me, felt like a poorly edited montage of disjointed, irrelevant scenes. How can Umbridge be so terrifying if her entire reign is distilled into a montage of newspaper clippings accompanied by a jaunty soundtrack? How are we to fully comprehend the significance of Harry's ostracism when we see only one student stand up to him- and then apologize shortly thereafter? And how are we ever to really question our true feelings about Snape (and understand Harry's internal torment) without really diving into his past with James Potter?

And I know emo-Harry is not the most rational character ever to grace the screen, but he did have some witty dialog in the book that was tragically cut out of the movie. Who can forget the "Well, you see [the news] changes every day," comment? Or perhaps "There's no need to call me 'sir,' Professor." We also miss out on gems such as "May I offer you a cough drop, Delores?" from Professor McGonagall and "I could have got rid of the sparklers myself, of course, but I wasn't sure whether I had the authority..." from Flitwick.

And they left out Lockhart. Enough said.

[The Demented One]

I'm going to also hop on the Luna bandwagon. Major pedocrush on her.

[Wizzardman]

I personally felt that the movie was absolutely dreadful. The acting (from the child actors, at least) was sub par and forced. It felt almost as if they were all reading cue cards off screen. The only child actor who really nailed her part was Luna, but only because her character is so flaky to start with. Yes, many of the adult actors were superb, as usual, but three minutes of Alan Rickman's dead-on portrayal of Snape cannot make up for nearly three hours of Daniel Radcliffe's apparent boredom with Harry's lines.


I hate to say it, but I felt the acting quality and disjointed actions were pretty much inherent in all the other movies thusfar, and thus, as this movie was significantly less disjointed [than, say, Movie 4] and as they had a near perfect Luna to balance out a bunch of crummy actors who they can't get rid of at this point, this movie was really the best of the lot.

Also, the directing was great, the actual professional actors performed better than they had ever before with their characters, and the cinematography was mind-blowing, especially at the beginning of the movie.


I'm going to also hop on the Luna bandwagon. Major pedocrush on her.

If it weren't creepy, I'd agree.

[Jibar]

I'm going to also hop on the Luna bandwagon. Major pedocrush on her.

Okay mines... mines nice.
She's born a couple months after me, she'd be in my year...
Yours... yours is creepy.

[The Demented One]

Okay mines... mines nice.
She's born a couple months after me, she'd be in my year...
Yours... yours is creepy.
Well granted, I'm just a year or so older than her. But still, some words are just too good to pass up.

[Dhavaer]

IOr perhaps "There's no need to call me 'sir,' Professor."

I think that line is actually from Half-Blood Prince. Unless he's said it twice.

[Kurald Galain]

#1. The movie felt so rushed. Everything in it felt like it should have been drawn out a bit more and, well, EXPLAINED.
Yes. I note it's the shortest HP movie to date, it's a good half hour shorter than most of them. Imho they should have taken some more time to explain things.


If you've read the books thats all well and good, but so many elements were just dropped in and you are left wondering where the boop that came from.
Indeed. I suspect that if you haven't read the books, parts of the movie are very hard to understand. Then again, who hasn't read those books by now? :smallamused:


#2. In the other movies at least the plot was moved along... this... didn't explain anything.
Going out on a limb here, but that's not all that different from the book. In terms of overarching plot, nothing much happens in book five. (in terms of atmosphere, however, it is terrific)


How was Hagrid related to the retarded giant and how does it catch food if it is tied up?
He does state in the movie that it's his half brother.

Nevertheless, great movie. And counting down to book #7...

[Yuki Akuma]

Had I seen the movie yet, I would probably be jumping on the Luna bandwagon, too. And I agree, pedocrush is such a fun word, even if a little creepy.

...Aw, hell, I loved her in the books so far, so I'm jumping on the bandwagon. All hail Lovegood!

(Also note that the film/book is set in the 1995/1996 school year, which would make Luna, were she a real person, around 27.)

[Dhavaer]

(Also note that the film/book is set in the 1995/1996 school year, which would make Luna, were she a real person, around 27.)

How do you get 27? The older students in the year seem to have ages about 11 + year after their birthday, so if Luna's older than average she's 15 in 1996. Add another 11 years, she's 26. So her age comes out as 25/26, depending on whether she's old or young for her year.

[Yuki Akuma]

How do you get 27? The older students in the year seem to have ages about 11 + year after their birthday, so if Luna's older than average she's 15 in 1996. Add another 11 years, she's 26. So her age comes out as 25/26, depending on whether she's old or young for her year.

Obviously, I failed math at school.

Actually, I just forgot she was the same age as Ginny!

[Dhavaer]

Obviously, I failed math at school.

Actually, I just forgot she was the same age as Ginny!

Don't worry, I keep failing letter-writing at TAFE. Got honours for Math at school, though.

[Indon]

FYI, I've never read any of the books (I find that reading book-movies after having read the book can dull my enjoyment of the movie).

I found the movie to be quite good. Potter was portrayed as an individual who desperately wants to play a larger part in things, but sees himself being excluded and is frustrated as a result.

I thought they (the other faculty with Dumbledore) were just being nice to Trelawney because she seemed completely clueless and incapable of making her way in the outside world. The fact that she said she was at the school for pretty much Harry's age was a tipoff I'd missed, though.

And I thought the Snape mind-lessons were quite well-employed when, at the end, Voldemort outright attacked Harry's mind and he fought him off.

[Jerthanis]

And I thought the Snape mind-lessons were quite well-employed when, at the end, Voldemort outright attacked Harry's mind and he fought him off.

There is some subtlety from the books which was lost in that scene, thought the important part got across.

When Voldemort possessed Harry, he didn't fight him off through Occulmency, but the fact that Voldemort was in horrible pain while in Harry's mind and it was because of Harry's ability to feel love.

I felt it was well enough included with Harry's "...and I feel sorry for you" line though.

[Nerzi]

I liked this film a lot. Course it's not as good as the book but they did a damn good job of adapting it to film really. Also I've met the guy who played young-Snape that is my claim to fame. Still, I'd rather have met the guy who plays older-Snape :smallwink: Much love for Alan Rickman. There wasn't enough of Snape, of course there can never be enough of Snape though.

I think I actually prefered Luna in the film, not that I actively disliked her in the book, she was just another slightly oddball character.

[Rama_Lei]

She's only a little older than me....Damn her and her wildly successful career...

[Fri]

Ah dang, that's exactly what I've been fearing. I've genuinely fallen in love with luna since the fifth book, and now, I have a LOT more rival.

[Castaras]

I quite liked it, actually.

And I'll have to agree, Luna stole the show. Best actress of the lot. And the battles at the end were pretty...

My mum who went to see it understood and followed it, and she hadn't read the book, which means it's pretty good.

Azkaban was better though.