Thread: Harry Potter: Scrap the movies?

Actually, I thought the first two were awful. It seemed as if the only picked the three protagonists for not their acting skill, but how they looked like the characters. Their acting skill grows with each movie. That is what should make the movie, right? The skill of the main characters?

You're right about Dumbledore though. He no longer seems compassionate and friendly. (fourth one especially) He is now this angry old man who is vastly worse than Richard Harris.

I think dumbledore was supposed to come off angry in parts of the fourth movie, as thats what came across to me when I read the books, though the fourth was my least favorite anyway.

Anyway, the only reason the more recent movies (third and fourth especially) failed to better capture the scope of their respective books is because the writers intentionally left out essential plot details that have taken just a few minutes to add in and replaced them with totally pointless but "exciting" action sequences.

To be fair, the movie was really long anyway. I enjoyed it immensely, but since half of the audience was little kids with their parents, they probably didn't include too much of the plot because the parents probably wouldn't understand it anyway and it's nonessential to the children.

Michael Gambon is an appalling actor. He openly admits to having never read the books (surely the hundreds of thousands of pounds he is paid should at least require that effort to be made), and I once heard him ramble on about he had such a clear picture in his head of what Dumbledore should be like.

What the fuck? You've never read the books, you've got no goddamn idea who Dumbledore is, and consequently you play him completely wrong.

Seriously, what a waste of an actor. You're not being paid to 'interpret' a character and give it your own personal spin when you don't even know what the hell's going on, you're being paid to act out the character that is in the books.

The only movie I enjoyed quite a lot was the third, Alfonso is a very good director and he captured the tone of that book pretty well and the subtle vibe of the books were there too, unlike in any of the other movies so far. The lows were obviously the bits with Gambon in, particularly as it was his first movie and so there was the shock factor too.

Unfortunately the same director is doing number 6. I really really hope they make something of the death scene. If he and Gambon screw that one up, I'll be pretty pissed off.

M Night Shyamalan is a candidate for the seventh movie though, that could be fun.

Don't worry; he dies!



























Edit: I have never read any Harry Potter book.
~

SPOILER ALERTZ!!!!!!1111111!!!!!!!

I'd disagree. First two films were shockingly bad, now I feel they are clawing their way into being respectable. New Dumbledore better in my mind, though only marginally. Gambon is a very able actor, though I'll agree it's ridiculous that he hasn't read the books, and I think he does well enough in the films.

I wouldn't say any of the Harry Potter films are incredible, but I think they're getting better, so hopefully by the last they'll have got it right.

I don't know, maybe I'm overreacting, but really...Dumbledore is such a key part of the series that the way he's played in the latest movies ruins a large chunk of the experience. His very voice and pronunciation makes me cringe. Nothing like the cool, wise and patient voice of the Dumbledore from the first two movies, and incidentally, the books.

Enormous amounts of inconsistencies too. Sure, the fifth movie is harshly contracted to fit such a large story but even those parts that are practically mirrored end up distorted.
Not to mention the dementors in the fifth movie looking nothing like they are supposed to. They were better in the 3rd movie, pretty much how they are described in the books. Where as in the fifth they're quite different.
So if anything, I'd say they are getting worse, not better.

All in all, I'd much prefer watching...

Originally Posted by Grod

Actually, I thought the first two were awful. It seemed as if the only picked the three protagonists for not their acting skill, but how they looked like the characters. Their acting skill grows with each movie. That is what should make the movie, right? The skill of the main characters?

I agree, Grod. I think the main characters were cast initially based on looks, and have grown a lot in their acting ability since then. I thought the first two movies were awful - too cutsy, even compared to the books. Chris Columbus did a horrible job with them.

POA was MUCH better directed and was a great movie, though they needed to put in more of the actual storyline with the Maurauder's and the connection with Sirius and James, and not so much wasting time showing the stupid Whomping Willow killing birds and shit. The end scene with Sirius, Lupin and Pettigrew in the Shrieking Shack was poorly done - I thought the acting was bad. Didn't seem natural at all.

The 4th movie I thought was decent just because of the epicness that the book had with the 3 different schools and the Triwizard. However I could not get over how bad all the characters hair was... I know, stupid thing to ruin a movie, right? But for goddsake, the guys with their long hair was nauseating and that ruined a lot of the effect for me.

I just bought the 5th movie yesterday and haven't watched it again since seeing it at the theater so I haven't seen it as many times as I have the other 4, but I liked it overall. I thought the MOM battle at the end was really good, and Harry's acting ability has come a LONG way since his pathetic fake crying scene in POA. I agree that whoever cast and trained Mrs. Figg should be fired - I could act better than her without ever seeing the script before. But I wouldn't judge the whole movie based on that one flop character, Merlock. I thought the same exact thing when I saw it for the first time.

And about the Dumbledore thing - I think we can all agree that Richard Harris was THE Dumbledore that we imagined from the books. But as we can't have him, I think anyone they cast in that role will look bad compared to him. It does infuriate me though that Michael Gambon hasn't even read the books! I mean, WTF is he being paid to do?? That should be a prerequisite for being in the movies - you MUST have read the series at least X amount of times and be able to portray the charcter as JKR wrote them. Period. I agree that he is a terrible Dumbledore and the casting director made a huge mistake casting him in such an important role. I think only the people who have read the books can fully appreciate what a tragedy that is.

Come to think of it I didn't even like the books that much either..

Originally Posted by Carôusoul

Come to think of it I didn't even like the books that much either..

Blasphemy!

I agree with everything you said, Merlock. I think the biggest tragedy was their terrible casting of the second Dumbledore, but perhaps it's not the actor who is to blame. I also desperately want Harry Potter to be taller, just so he could be at least a little bit physically threatening during battles.

Out of the regular cast, who do you think is the worst and who is the best? Unfortunately, I think Harry might be in the worst group for me. The way he portrays anger is just dumb. There's something about his voice that makes it seem like he's really straining to get the emotions across.

Heh, I would puke if Shamalan did the 7th movie. That dude started off awesome but now has a string of flops at the box office. At the end of the book he might be like, "And then they all realized that none of it was real..."

Interesting Mes....

Best: I'd have to say Professor McGonagall... she not only looks exactly how I pictured her but she's a great actress too. Really carries the role well

Worst: Sirius Black. He looks nothing(what were they thinking?)like how he should look, and his acting is poor, and seems a bit forced, to say the least.

Originally Posted by Grod

Interesting Mes....

Best: I'd have to say Professor McGonagall... she not only looks exactly how I pictured her but she's a great actress too. Really carries the role well

Worst: Sirius Black. He looks nothing(what were they thinking?)like how he should look, and his acting is poor, and seems a bit forced, to say the least.

Ooh, I definitely agree with you there! Thank goodness for McGonagall. I hope she has more scenes in the next one.