There are some movies that are best seen at a cinema and the films in this series fall into that category, as indeed did the Lord of the Rings movies, so off I went to spend an enjoyable afternoon. There is no denying that this entry is far too long, but it did hold my attention despite its running time. As you have probably heard, Harry and Co. are now teenagers with raging hormones, but fortunately this is only part of the background to the adventures here. Harry is mysteriously entered in the Triwizard Tournament and must fight dragons, battle sea monsters, and even face Lord V. in the scarifying form of a no-nose Ralph Fiennes. There's a terrific new character in Mad-Eye Moody and good old Hagrid is also lovesick for a visiting giantess who makes him look petite. For fans of the series, how good or bad this film is is almost superfluous, but they will not be disappointed. And even those viewers who are indifferent to the novels will have a ripping good time here, but it is the darkest of the series so far and definitely not for very young kiddies.
In reply to Tommy, I've read the book too and agree that great chunks of the story have gone by the wayside -- but I don't approve of 2-parters a la Tarantino and it is up to the director to include the most important bits. It's hard for a movie to follow its source material completely and half the pleasure is seeing which parts the makers have managed to include.And we will always have Paris -- sorry, I mean the book!
3 comments:
Mad-eye *Moody*
Far too long????? Don't you mean far too short???? OK well I'm biased. I was an HP fan before the whole phenomenon kicked off. I was totally shocked, almost to the point of wanting to walk out in the opening few minutes. Errrr hello what happened to the Quidditch world cup and the whole mystery and intrigue surrounding Winky and Barty Crouch Junior in the stands at the World Cup. And the whole point of the character of Rita Skeeter was lost. The directors had ve a thing about not getting accross the whole animagus thing - they never mentioned in the last film the significance of the whole Moony, Wormtail, Padfoot and Prongs friendship, and what the names stand for, just as in this one they missed out on the whole fly on the wall episode with Rita - that's how she was getting the information for her articles really. But I'm sounding like too much of a fan here..... lol.
Ralph Fiennes was really good as Voldie actually, I was kinda worried about who could do that role justice. But as in all his other films, he proves once again he is that character actor extraordinaire. Love the nose too.....
And of course, they miss out on Hermione's star role in the SPEW subplot - the way the house elves (you didn't actually see a single one, though they do really play an important background role) are treated. Some people suggested a two part Goblet Of Fire film to do the thing justice. But then the actors would all be too old by the time it was over, and really the younger audience would possibly lose interest (as if that were possible).
Oh, Moaning Myrtle had quite a good role this time round! <titters>
What about a journal entry where you tell us what started you in this film-viewing frenzy?
I have to agree with alot of your comments on this film, its a shame when parts of the book are left by the wayside, but I went with my children to see it, and they like me enjoyed the film a great deal.
Infact it encouraged us all to read the book again to fit in all the missed out bits, and my children could really let their imagination let rip.
Post a Comment