Harry Potter 3

BlitzKrieg

Just saw Harry Potter 3.


not afraid to admit i enjoyed the books and this one is my fav of the books so i had high hopes for the film...well below is how i felt about it, hope to hear your comments...



Entertaining film, yet is beginning to show cracks in the film series formula. The difficulty in dividing between the fans and the general public is much more apparant in this.


Firstly the actors wont disapoint eps. Gary Oldman playing Sirius black, who despite

not showing up for most of the film

gives an electric first impression and cleverly balances between the madness of his character and

the appeal he generates as the truth is known

The actor playing Lupin (name escapes me) does a brilliant performance, as does the general mise en scene which portrays his character very clearly. As usual with the Harry Potter films the actor to character representation is spot on with all the new characters (Cornelius fudge is another worthy mention as is Harry's aunt)

But the development of characters is also impressive, Malfoy gains a larger more sinister role with his new look he with his gang give the impression of you dublin knackers

esp the scene where Hermione punches him.

There has been alot of media hype for Hermoine, which i feel is mostly unfounded because the central 3 characters tend to stay in familer territory (Harry to the story, Ron as humour and Hermoine to explain) The change of actor for dumpeldore affects the character immeansly as he changes from the warm character he was in the first 2 films to a more crafty and clever character in this one, and noticable does not play a large role in this film, instead alot of the story is left to progress through Harry and Lupin, which taking in the book is probably a better policy this time around.


The actual plot and film technicalities is a bit of hit and miss.


Hit, the new director does wonders for the general atmosphere and presents many of the scenes very effectivly (The Night Bus, Domentors and Hogwarts outside are all amazing) But alot of the scenes seemed rushed, primarily the opening and endings which leave the viewer unsatisfied with the lack of setting to the scene. This can either be put down to the audiance should allready be comfortable with the characters and settings or down to the adaptation problem (See later) I feel to long towards adaptation problems rather then assumptions.

Hit, the effects visually are mostly average, most obvious in the special effects include buckbeak who can be painfull sometimes to watch when flying. Hogwarts and the Quidditch scenes have been perfected to a high standard while the werewolf is at times pretty poor, yet the Dog and Domentors are very impressive but i feel this has more to do with the the scenes themselves then with the special effects as the domentors give an amazing screen performance and can send a chill down your spine at times, though i do feel that similarities between them and the Ringwraiths is too much as i pictured them wider and with a more rags soaked in sweat appearance then the sleek ringwraith appearance presented in the film.

Miss. The soundtrack like in the previous films is ignorable and is unnoticable except at two points in the film.

first being lupens record player which helps set his character

and secondly

the entire scene where Harry and Hermoine go back in time is set by a constant ticking sound in the background which is great and really adds to the scene

one little thing that made me laugh...because its bad to have kids in a pub they changed a scene in the film to something which doesnt feel right...you'll see...

now my one really big fault with the film is in fact with the adaptation so i'll have to make this totally spoiler so unless you have READ the book AND SEEN THE FILM the following critisim should be avoided

the main problem is that the first two books were very easy to translate to film as their size and complexity was alot smaller then this book and the next two. The size of this book makes this a difficult adaptation (not as difficult as lotr obviously) but the book had the main plot and then numerous side plots, the film doesnt succeed filling in all the side plots. for fans of the book they will be disapointed, gone will be the scooby doo style plot hints and character investigation that the first two films pulled off so well, instead they seem to stumble onto each plot development, alot of attention is given to Hermoine's time travel which is obviously crucial to the plot little or no plot is given to the past between Lupen and Sirius, nor Snape for that matter, which makes the cronfrontation between the 3 confusing to people who havnt read the book and less appealling for fans of the book as the elements that i found most enjoyable was the background to sirius etc. The link between the map and lupen etc is hinted but never explained which is annoying, niether is the link between the four names on the map and Harry's dad. Alot of scenes have been cut or moved in the film. The ending is completely different, As they cut the second quidditch match to have the firebolt not enter until the end of the film and so they cut the new pet for Ron and Harry's great last line. the entire hinting at Lupins secret (warewolf) is completely lost in the film (no subtilty at all) and Sirius's fondness of Harry is not hinted until right at the end where he just blurts it all out. The Knight in the painting does not become the humour character as he did in the book, you only see him running around the background. While these did not ruin the film for me, they did make me feel that fans of the books were loosing some of the appeal that made this there favourite book in the series. And if they had this much trouble organizing this book they will need to split up the next books into more films then books, its gonna be very difficult to appease fans with the next installment

ArthurG

Hmm, I can't put my finger on what it was exactly (some of the points in the spolier paragraph above are definately relevant), but this one just didn't do it for me. Book 3 was my favourite of all the HPs, and I hade huge expectations for this film, especially after seeing the excellent trailers. Unfortunately, I left the cinema feeling very deflated, the film as a whole just didn't appeal to me. Whether it was the lack of explanation as to who all the new and very important characters were, the rather annoying changes to the layout of the school/grounds, the changes from the book, and all the extra material left out, or perhaps as combination of all these things.

On the positive side..... well, some nice SFX, and the Dementors are well realised.

Oh well, maybe I'm just getting too grown up for this kind of thing....

neokenzo

I thought it was okay. Sure it has some quirk but they were never going to fit the whole book into the movie. I too went to see it in high hopes for the film. I think we are spoiled by the book. I think if you havent read the book, you'll enjoy the film more.
I too think the new Dumbledore doesnt seem to fit the character well. I prefer the old Dumbledore. He has the cool personality that the new one seem to miss.
I agree that the cut too much important stuff in the movie. It did last like 2 1/2 hours though. I cant imagine how they are going to fit the fifth book in a movie.
This one for me defitenitely not the best of the HP's so far. Nevertheless, I'm still looking forward the next Harry Potter movie.

monkeyfudge

Now.. I've never read the book, or any of the books...

And I only saw the other 2 films recently.

But I also found this installment a bit lacking

The other films kept you guessing as the clues were all pieced together... bu that doesn't really happen here.

I was very happy with Gambon's Dumbldore though and had no problem with it other than he wasn't given much to do in the foreground.

I also felt the ending was fairly inconclusive, which was a bit of a let down.

David Thewlis is great as Lupin, we simply don't see enough of this man on screen. I can only really remember two other things I've seen him in, and they are Dragonheart and Naked, both of which were really stand out performances.

banquo

im dying to see it. i dont understand you people who like the third book the most; i thought the Goblet of Fire was by far the best, especially the ending.

i really really did not like the first two films, so maybe ill like this one.

Nike_Dude

It was ok but I was expecting better The third book was a defining book in the series, but the film didnt capture the same feeling as the book. I agree with a lot of the point made by BlitzKrieg in his final paragraph.

That said it was a good effort from the new director, He had an awful lot more material to fit into this film than Chris Columbus had in the first two films. It was definatly my favourite of the three films, but then again none of them have come near the quality of their paper counterparts:(

Karl Hungus

I just went to see the film, and I really enjoyed it, but I do have a few criticisms...

First of all, it did seem like the film was VERY condensed altogether, and could have done with being considerably longer. I've not read the books, admittedly, but I still felt that the plot lacked quite a bit of story. I don't see how lenth is an issue with films anymore after LOTR proving that audiences have no problem sitting down for 3 or more hours, so there's no excuse for a film's plot to suffer for the sake of lenth.

Secondly, I'm seriously beggining to hate Draco Malfoy with a passion. The character has absolutely nothing to add to the film whatsoever, just being there as the ultra-cliched "Bully who gets what's coming to him" role, which got tired after the first film. I don't know if he had more of a role in book and had more to do with the plot, but he just didn't have any reason to be in the film as it stands.

Sirius Black didn't seem to have half enough screen time considering he's supposedly the main 'Baddie' for half the film, then turns out to be a good guy who seems rather crucial to Harry's character and future, but that niggle could be included with the first point.

While I couldn't find fault with Micheal Gambon's Dumbledore, I felt he too wasn't given enough screen time, almost as if he was elbowed into the background because he's replaced the brilliant Richard Harris.

Though with all that said, I still enjoyed the film immensly. And who knows? Maybe a director's cut, or extended edition could be in the works?

Both Gary Oldman, and David Thewlis were both fantastic in their roles. The Dementors, I was actually expecting them to be considerably more ringwraith-esque than they appeared in the film, but they definetly had great character and were really rather creepy altogether.

Rew

Im not bothering with spoilers so dont read if u dont want to.

Most of the things i was disapointed with have been mentioned already but showing the stag poternums (sp?) then not showing it in the time travel section really really bugged me. The stag was supposed to charge through the dementors but instead the chose the wave thing. They could have done both and explaned the stag, maybe in the next movie?

Def not enough back story of the freindship and about the death of harry parents. They left out the magical element of wormtails giving away the secret.

Not enough sightings of the dog like there was in the book that would have been more creepy.

Leaving out all the things about Hogsmead like the joke shop (i know its mentioned) and the butterbear coz its not PC to have kids in the pub is a load of ****....

BlitzKrieg

*surprised* most people agree with me, after most people disagreeing over my view on day after tomarrow...



Most people i have met who have not read the book seem to love the film and find no fault. But those who have read it come out uneasy...quite interesting...



did anyone else really miss the original ending. I just love the last line of the book...

segadreamcast

I think that's probably the best mix you'll find Blitzkrieg...

Personally, despite its flaws - it tried something different and it worked on many levels. For that, I have to commend the director for not being lazy and simply bashing out a true-to-the-word version like Colombus.

Art_Wolf

Well I havent read the books in awhile and that may then have contributed to me finding this film very good - certianly I thought the best so far! I really liked the dark feeling and ofcourse thought Thewlis was class

Rew

Originally posted by BlitzKrieg
*surprised* most people agree with me, after most people disagreeing over my view on day after tomarrow...



Most people i have met who have not read the book seem to love the film and find no fault. But those who have read it come out uneasy...quite interesting...



did anyone else really miss the original ending. I just love the last line of the book...

How did they change the end (appart from wormtail meeting Voldermort)?

BlitzKrieg

they didnt change it in a major way like how the storyline went, but in the book it ends with Harry etc on a the train back and that little owl arrives and gives harry a letter from Sirius. Ron gets to keep the owl and when they arrive at the station harry turns to his uncle who still P*ssed from the blowing the aunt up incident and tells him he has a mass murderer for a godfather...so dont mess with me. Which i thought was really funny. Also you have the little bit with wormtail returning to voldemort (which the film didnt build up enough). In the film, they cut the whole bit with the firebolt at christmas and move it to the end...and have the crappy fly into the sky and freeze frame ending...which as you can guess i didnt really like. But i liked the film overall enough...just was wishing for more.

Zoton

It did feel very rushed together. The blame i think really lies with the script writer, the dialgoue just doesn't seem to flow in these adaptations. Radcliffe is pretty awful as usual, Gambon didn't make a very good dumbledore, his beard wasn't white enough at all. The dementors weren't creepy enough i felt, i know its meant for kids, but

the train scene was very creepy and eerie, yet later they just seemed to be floating shrowds without any real menace

. It was definitely lacking i felt and the extra six months production time wasn't used well. That said it was still streets ahead of the woeful Philosophers stone.

Karl Hungus

Originally posted by Rew
How did they change the end (appart from wormtail meeting Voldermort)?

...?

Who was Mormtail?

super_furry

As someone who has never read the books, I thought it was really great. Couldn't see the twist coming at all, and I already want to see it again.

neokenzo

Originally posted by Karl Hungus
...?

Who was Mormtail?

Ron's rat a.k.a. Peter Petergrew

Even as it is, I still would want to see it again. Like the last 2 HP, the more I watched them, the more I like it.

Karl Hungus

Originally posted by neokenzo

Ron's rat a.k.a. Peter Petergrew

Out of curiosity,

was he called Wormtail in the film at all, or did that slip past my attention?

Block (8

Read the books looking forward to seeing this but if it's a case of being rushed through again like the first two (especially the first one) I think I'll wait for the DVD.

What was the children like in the theatre?

Heard Dave Fanning interviewing a ten year old who said he didn't quite understand the movie, hope that will kept them quiet

BlitzKrieg

Originally posted by Karl Hungus
Out of curiosity,

was he called Wormtail in the film at all, or did that slip past my attention?

no cause they

skipped the entire nick names bit for harry's dad sirius etc. hence wormtail was never mentioned niether was why snape really hate sirius or lupin. Which i think was one of the films main faults. It was crucial for the books finale that you knew why snape hated sirius. But the film cut it completely...which was really stupid.

neokenzo

I agree with BliztKrieg. I guess they intend to leave all that all throughout the HP sequels. It seems more and more are left out as the series goes but this one has left out the most among the other 2. What a pity.

Art_Wolf

Yeah - exactly why they want to keep the films the same length I have no idea :mad:

But that gives a 'reason' to cut the most out of HP3 cause its simply longer then the previous two :dunno:

Karl Hungus

Originally posted by BlitzKrieg
no cause they

skipped the entire nick names bit for harry's dad sirius etc. hence wormtail was never mentioned niether was why snape really hate sirius or lupin. Which i think was one of the films main faults. It was crucial for the books finale that you knew why snape hated sirius. But the film cut it completely...which was really stupid.

I noticed there seemed to be a lot missing, and a lot of backstory.

Pity.

Conorisco

I dunno what all the fuss is about! all these little things.
I'm a huge fan of the books and read third book again recently so as to measure it up. I thought this film was truly excellent, i've never seen a better page to screen adaptation in my life.
You have to give allounces, there's no possible way include the whole book, trying to do that to satisfy us fans would be suicide. Sure they left out some cool things like sirius' backstory, and the dementors were terrible (why the hell were they flying? there suppoed to float thats so much more evil.)

I agree that the film would benifit from a longer cut, but i loved it anyway. Did anyone else love the way they totaly changed the look of the castle and its grounds spot on! It feels like not like a sequel to 1&2, but just it's own film. I think the writing was spot on a perfect mix or humour and horror.

The best thing about this film? I think now don't kill me---the acting, of course the british cast in the supporting roles sirius and lupin excellent. But i think the three main characters even Radcliffe ( and my god i did hate his previous attemps ruined the other two films. the improvement in acting prob was more down to direction than talent admittely.) Harry/Ron and Hermione just seemed natural, like real teenagers i really liked it. Gone is the stupid cartoony feel of the acting being replaced by a grittier more natural form. I could go on about the little things but i won't, anyone else feel the same?

Kain

As i expected the film was ****e. There was to much missing from the book, like were was Harry's love interest, Cho? And the guy who plays Harry is crap, when ever he supposed to be angry you can see him smile. Avoid the film and read the book.

sceptre

Originally posted by Kain
As i expected the film was ****e. There was to much missing from the book, like were was Harry's love interest, Cho?

She's not really all that important until the fourth book in any case. I suppose she's not actually all that important in the fourth one either.

Crookshanks is in the movie yeah?

BlitzKrieg

sceptre

seen...but not named or explained...

darraghmac

i'm setting up for a beating here but

the source novels aren't that good when taken as individual novels. they are great kids books, but the plot machinations are as subtle as a brick. this was a fair representation of the novel, it's just that the stories in the harry potter series aren't generally that great- it's the progression of the plots and the revelations of more and more backstory that make the series such a winner.

for anyone who hasn't seen it yet- the direction, IMO, is a different class to columbus's tired efforts. getting an american to direct harry potter was sacrilege to begin with. but they still need kenneth branagh to direct the rest. there isn't enough of 'ye olde english castle' feel to the wizard environments like hogwarts and diagon ally just yet. but it's definitely a big improvement.

and i agree that the acting has improved immeasurably- ron and hermione are good, and harry is not totally unbearable (although he is still the most awfully wooden actor outside of the matrix)

all in all, a pleasant surprise for me, i enjoyed it more than i thought, and look forward to the goblet of fire (which has the best story by far in the series anyway)

sceptre

Originally posted by BlitzKrieg
sceptre

seen...but not named or explained...

Ah. I was convinced after reading the third book that the cat was going to be in some way significant later on. It gets the Sirius Black Seal of Approval and all that. Rowling has this habit of introducing things that seem insignificant but become reasonably significant later on (like the Room of Requirement in the second book and so on). Plot progression like darraghmac said. I suppose I tend to notice possible significance in small things in general so there's no reason I wouldn't do it with this as well.

So worth going to see? Or better off waiting for the DVD if there's something in the cinema I want to see?

DapperGent

Originally posted by Conorisco
I thought this film was truly excellent, i've never seen a better page to screen adaptation in my life.

Agreed I thought it was absolutely fantastic, far and away the best of the three films.

I'm an avid fan of the books but I didn't find it necessary for them to put in all that detail I thought the film captured the spirit and humour of the book magnificently. I can't speak highly enough of it to be honest, I thought the script was perfect - balancing the need to make a coherant sub-three hour movie with the brilliance of book and characters. Blew me away, and I don't say that often.

The only drawback was Daniel Radcliffe, he is a poorer actor than Rupert Grint or Emma Watson but it mattered not in the end, though I thought the climatic Expecto Patrorum bit was cringe worthy.

Five Stars. Three thumbs up etc.

Buck Owens

I enjoyed it but I've read the books, you'd be really screwed If you have'nt as mentioned, that happed with the other 2 as well I thought,especially the first 1.

I do think it's a good thing to bring in a different director for each part. This one was defently the best.

BEAT

Without reading all of the replies here...I have read and re-read all of the books and the third is my favorite as well so I was anxiously awaitng this release.

To sum it up, it was a good movie that could have been sooo much better. I understand they cant leave everything in but there were so many "little" things that could have been worked in that werent and they were so important!!!!

I felt as though the director was rushing through, each scene cut out something important and added things that were not in the book...now that I dont like. Leaving stuff out is one thing but adding new things... I dont like that at all.

I feel the other director Chris Columbus did a better job of keeping the story in line with the books and should bring him back on the next movies.

If you didnt read the book I imagine you will like the film just fine, but I read the book again before seeing the movie and couldnt help but notice everything wrong with the movie...instead of enjoying it for its cinema qualities.

I will still buy it and and it to my collection and only hope he does a better job on the next movie which they are already filming.

I was very happy with the performances of the new actors as well, very well done.
I was most happy that they chose my favorite actor to play my favorite character in the HP books! Gary Oldman! oh how I would love to meet this artistic genious!

Kain

Originally posted by BlitzKrieg
sceptre

seen...but not named or explained...

Actually Crookshanks was named, but only once in the whole thing.

ixoy

Saw it and, as a movie, it's easily the best of the three so far. Maybe that's down to Cuaron or the source material I don't know (I haven't read the books nor am I pushed to do so). Radcliffe is a still weak actor but the other kid co-stars can at least acquit themselves, even if Hermione continues to grate.

Certainly, from viewing, the darker aspect to Hogwarts, and its environs, made me enjoy it and see it not quite so much as a kids movie (which, ultimately, it still is of course). Pacing was generally grand, although a few scenes seemed there merely to appease the fans of the book.

What amuses me are all the people getting worked up that he let out Detail Y or Z or somesuch. You'd think this was the first movie ever adapted for the big screen. You'd almost forget the words "Based On" that appear on screen or the notion of artistic license. You'd think that other ideas might also have come into play that should be respected: directorial concepts, such as pacing. Producing problems, such as ensuring a film is not too long to bore its target audience and, simultaneoulsy, allow a certain number of showings to increase profit margins. And in the end it boils down to the fact that it is extremely, extremely, rare for a movie to surpass a book because no director can ever fully encompass the vividness of an imagination.

BlitzKrieg

Ixoy i understand completly that material will be cut from a film if adapted from a book..what i was disapointed with was what was chosen to be cut from the film, alot of the details they cut i felt were crucial to understanding the film and the characters better. Without these details alot of the events that occured in the film seemed very messy...unlike in the second harry potter film where the details all came together nicely at the end.


Ixoy you said you didnt read the books so can you answer just these questions for me:

Why do you think Snape specificly hated Sirius and vice versa at the scene in the howling shack

how did lupin know about the tunnel under the tree? How did snape know? Was the howling shack really haunted? Why did Ron hate Hermione's cat? Who made the marauders map?

While some people would argue these are all pointless in the overall plot of the series but in this specific book these are the bits which built up the tension for the ending best. And also gave it the best closure...also with these bits cut it will be difficult to carry on some events that occur in the next two books (specificly the fifth one with Snape and Sirius)



tata

ixoy

Originally posted by BlitzKrieg
Ixoy you said you didnt read the books so can you answer just these questions for me:

Why do you think Snape specificly hated Sirius and vice versa at the scene in the howling shack

Well I'd have said:

Originally, I thought he was just defending Potter from the threat of Sirius. If there's more I'd expect it would be revealed at a later stage, given that we only just then discovered Sirius to be a good guy. Which is why it didn't concern me.

how did lupin know about the tunnel under the tree? How did snape know? Was the howling shack really haunted? Why did Ron hate Hermione's cat? Who made the marauders map?

Addressing them in order:

Forbidden lore? I mean I'd assume Dumbledore et al. know stuff that they don't teach to Hogwarts regulars or they saw some sign. Whether the howling shack was really haunted didn't seem too relavent at this juncture. Ron, I thought, hated Hermione's cat because it kept taunting Pettigrew mouse - that's what he said in the movie. Who made the marauder's map seemed quite irrelevant to any plot line in this movie.

While some people would argue these are all pointless in the overall plot of the series but in this specific book these are the bits which built up the tension for the ending best. And also gave it the best closure...also with these bits cut it will be difficult to carry on some events that occur in the next two books (specificly the fifth one with Snape and Sirius)

But the point remains that to add these bits of exposition could increase the movie's length by ten-twenty minutes which has financial reprecussions. As for setting up other books, the movies themselves need to remain separate and stand alone. Any necessary exposition should, for movies of this type, remain within the movie.

Fans of a book are so very rarely pleased with the adaptation. I don't recall that I ever have been either. I'm just saying that it's impossible to please all the fans without compromising the reality of making a movie for everyone...

Pigman II

One thing that annoyed me about the film was this....

Towards the end of the film Potter and Hermione have to go back in time in order to free the Hippogrif.

Thing is, they had already established by the earlier scene where 'somebody' in the woods was throwing rocks at the 'original' Potter/Ron/Hermione (who themselves were hiding behind some pumpkins) that the 'future' Potter+Hermione had ALREADY gone back in time! So why did THESE original time-traveler in the woods (throwing the snail-shaped-rocks) not free the Hippogrif also, considering that is presumably what they were there for?

Is this explained in the book because it seems to me at least that the film didn't cover itself?

segadreamcast

Originally posted by Pigman II
One thing that annoyed me about the film was this....

Thing is, they had already established by the earlier scene where 'somebody' in the woods was throwing rocks at the 'original' Potter/Ron/Hermione (who themselves were hiding behind some pumpkins) that the 'future' Potter+Hermione had ALREADY gone back in time! So why did THESE original time-traveler in the woods (throwing the snail-shaped-rocks) not free the Hippogrif also, considering that is presumably what they were there for?

The film does cover itself IIRC...I just need to explain it in a way that is possible to comprehend - ah the idiosyncracies of time travel...

OK, we have X - which is the Harry/Hermione/Ron of PRESENT

And we have Y - the Harry/Hermione team that go BACK in time/from the future.

Y threw the snails at X to warn them of the approaching Dumbledore/executioners/etc. and allow them to leave the area...

Meanwhile, Y go, free the Hippogriff etc, and escape. In the 'present' scene with Ron/Hermione/Harry, when we 'see' the Hippogriff die - we actually don't see it die - we hear the axe falling, see Hermione's reaction, see the birds flying away and cut to a new scene. This is because the Hippogriff has already been rescued by Hermione/Harry from the future and it is, infact, the executioner just throwing down his axe in disgust (as we see in the scenes following Harry/Hermione's adventure).

I think this may clarify things for you - as it seems that was your stumbling point...

Pigman II

Hmmm, yes that makes sense ... provided none of the three 'X' characters have looked down on the pumpkin patch any time subsequent to the two characters from 'Y'

coming out of the wooded area to free the Hippogriff.

. I obviously wasn't looking for it myself the first time so I can't be sure whether they did or didn't.

toxic_angel

as a sequel i taut it sucked...... if your gonna do a squel where the setting is the same then keep it the same.........BUT the new setting is better and more liked what i imagined when i read the book years ago

ps columbus was a producer so he still has huge involvement in the film. also his company paid for the filming