Page 1 of 2
Posted: Mon May 24, 2004 1:03 pm
by mbilderback
I know, I know...it's a kid's movie.
Well, if any of you have seen the previous Harry Potter movies, then you know that they're good enough in their own right. Not the best, but good movies to see.
Well, with my wife working at the local paper, she got 2 tickets to a showing last Sunday, 12 days before the movie releases. Sweet!
The plot in this one was signifigantly better than previous Harrys. Also, the person they got to play Dumbledor was a great choice, although no one could replace the late actor. (what was his name?)
Graphics were spot-on, acting was just as good as the first two, and there was a sufficient enough twist to keep you guessing.
And for once, the characters actually completed the plot and saved the day on their OWN, not by some damn deus-ex-machina!
EDIT: 4/5 stars:still somewhat for kids, but a great movie that parents and the kids at heart can enjoy. Good family film.
Posted: Mon May 24, 2004 5:15 pm
by TheCatt
mbilderback wrote:Well, if any of you have seen the previous Harry Potter movies, then you know that they're good enough in their own right. Not the best, but good movies to see.
Personally, I thought #2 was a major pile of #2.
But was happy to hear them get a new director, the previews looked promising. Cuaron no doubt is better than Columbus.
Edited By TheCatt on 1085433356
Posted: Mon May 24, 2004 5:21 pm
by 71-1085092892
They are kids movies, but a praise I can give them is that they're "pure." They are what they are, faithfully. I can appreciate that.
Posted: Tue May 25, 2004 6:07 pm
by mbilderback
GORDON wrote:They are kids movies, but a praise I can give them is that they're "pure." They are what they are, faithfully. I can appreciate that.
They are, however, entertaining as well.
Posted: Wed May 26, 2004 4:44 pm
by unkbill
I read the books. Enjoyed movie #1. Would like to see #3 but we must be a late release date. I don't believe it is here until next week.
Posted: Wed May 26, 2004 4:45 pm
by mbilderback
unkbill wrote:I read the books. Enjoyed movie #1. Would like to see #3 but we must be a late release date. I don't believe it is here until next week.
It's not. :p My wife got tickets 12 days before release date.
Posted: Wed May 26, 2004 6:35 pm
by TheCatt
Well, the wife says #3 was her favorite book, and with Cuaron directing, I can't imagine it would be worse.
#2 was so bad (I saw it with the in-laws cuz the ice storm knocked out power to 90% of our metro area, and the movie theatre had power) that my father-in-law said he'd only see another one "if we lost the roof."
Posted: Wed May 26, 2004 6:54 pm
by TPRJones
It was no surprise that #2 wasn't very good. It wasn't a very good book.
I was hopping they would have skipped it, but I guess they couldn't, really.
Posted: Wed May 26, 2004 8:00 pm
by unkbill
Well according to todays Toledo Blade it isn't playing anywhere in the city.
Posted: Thu May 27, 2004 8:44 am
by Vince
I found the first two entertaining. Even though there wasn't an original idea in any of them (save maybe the "broom-stick game"), I found myself enjoying the movies, while I was completely ready to hate them.
Posted: Thu May 27, 2004 3:01 pm
by TheCatt
Vince wrote:I found myself enjoying the movies, while I was completely ready to hate them.
I think that's the difference. I approached them ready to enjoy them.
Preconceived opinions can be deadly.
Posted: Thu May 27, 2004 3:02 pm
by TheCatt
unkbill wrote:Well according to todays Toledo Blade it isn't playing anywhere in the city.
It opens June 4th. (Happy Birthday M-Dearest!)
Right now it's just have some selected showings/premieres/previews/whatever.
Posted: Thu May 27, 2004 3:09 pm
by Vince
TheCatt wrote:Vince wrote:I found myself enjoying the movies, while I was completely ready to hate them.
I think that's the difference. I approached them ready to enjoy them.
Preconceived opinions can be deadly.
Well, they can be if you're not open minded 
Posted: Thu May 27, 2004 3:25 pm
by Cakedaddy
We saw #2 at the theaters early. So it was crowded. 3 girls sat behind us, with no parents. They talked the entire movie, even with me telling them to please be quiet, and then to shut up. They had read the book, and would tell each other the whole story, just before it happened on the screen. "Oh, this is where. . . .". At the end of the movie, they were informed that there is no Santa Claus.
I have yet to be impressed by any of the movies. I take my kid, but I don't really enjoy them. I find them highly annoying in fact.
Posted: Mon Jun 07, 2004 10:02 pm
by 71-1085092892
Good flick. Interesting to see Harry Potter show signs of teenage temper.
Posted: Sun Jun 13, 2004 10:42 am
by Paul
mbilderback wrote:IThe plot in this one was signifigantly better than previous Harrys. Also, the person they got to play Dumbledor was a great choice, although no one could replace the late actor. (what was his name?)
And for once, the characters actually completed the plot and saved the day on their OWN, not by some dizzamn deus-ex-machina!
I saw the movie yesterday. My wife has read all the books.
The new Dumbledor didn't seem as kind or gentle. That was fine with me. I never read the books so I have no preconcieved notion of what Dumbledor should be like.
The movie never explianed how Sirius Black escaped from jail. Does anybody know?
* * *SPOILER WARNING * * *
* * *SPOILER WARNING * * *
* * *SPOILER WARNING * * *
* * *SPOILER WARNING * * *
* * *SPOILER WARNING * * *
* * *SPOILER WARNING * * *
* * *SPOILER WARNING * * *
* * *SPOILER WARNING * * *
* * *SPOILER WARNING * * *
* * *SPOILER WARNING * * *
* * *SPOILER WARNING * * *
As for the alleged lack of some deus ex machina, I thought introducing a time machine at the end of the movie to go back and manipulate events was pretty clumsy plot manipulation device.
I can see the author now... "Hmm, I'm stuck. Lets' give Hermione a time machine so Harry can go back and fix things. I'll add a couple references to her being in two places at once in earlier chapters to give the time machine some legitimacy."
I did like how Sirius Black was really a good guy. That had me fooled. I was looking at Professor Lupin's hands because I figured that he'd only have 9 fingers (I thought me may be Peter Pettigrew). I counted all ten though. My theory during the movie was Black was evil, and Peter Pettigrew was still alive, but was really evil and in league with Sirius Black.
Posted: Sun Jun 13, 2004 1:01 pm
by 71-1085092892
Paul wrote:* * *SPOILER WARNING * * *
I was looking at Professor Lupin's hands because I figured that he'd only have 9 fingers (I thought me may be Peter Pettigrew).
* * *SPOILER WARNING * * *
* * *SPOILER WARNING * * *
* * *SPOILER WARNING * * *
* * *SPOILER WARNING * * *
* * *SPOILER WARNING * * *
* * *SPOILER WARNING * * *
* * *SPOILER WARNING * * *
* * *SPOILER WARNING * * *
* * *SPOILER WARNING * * *
* * *SPOILER WARNING * * *
* * *SPOILER WARNING * * *
* * *SPOILER WARNING * * *
Me too. What was interesting is that after we hear about 9 fingers, almost all the scenes with Lupin have only one hand visible... once, his fingers were hidden the way he was holding a book. This director is clever.
Edited By GORDON on 1087146099
Posted: Sun Jun 13, 2004 6:28 pm
by TPRJones
Paul wrote:* * *SPOILER WARNING * * *
* * *SPOILER WARNING * * *
* * *SPOILER WARNING * * *
* * *SPOILER WARNING * * *
As for the alleged lack of some deus ex machina, I thought introducing a time machine at the end of the movie to go back and manipulate events was pretty clumsy plot manipulation device.
I can see the author now... "Hmm, I'm stuck. Lets' give Hermione a time machine so Harry can go back and fix things. I'll add a couple references to her being in two places at once in earlier chapters to give the time machine some legitimacy."
* * *SPOILER WARNING * * *
* * *SPOILER WARNING * * *
* * *SPOILER WARNING * * *
* * *SPOILER WARNING * * *
In the book, Hermoine's bit with the time thingy was not something added in later, but a pretty integral part of the story throughout, and was an important tool in furthering the development of her character.
Sounds like they must have cut some stuff for the movie. Haven't seen it yet, myself.
Posted: Mon Jun 14, 2004 9:27 am
by Paul
* * *SPOILER WARNING * * *
* * *SPOILER WARNING * * *
* * *SPOILER WARNING * * *
* * *SPOILER WARNING * * *
* * *SPOILER WARNING * * *
In the movie Hermoine mentions that she's taking two certain classes this semester, and Weasley says that's impossible because the classes were at the same time (so she'd have to be in two places at once). This is justification #1.
Then later in the film Hermoine thinks she sees "something" that she doesn't explain while hiding at Hagrid's. (It ends up being herself.) This is justification #2.
I don't remember any more clues in the movie that would lead me to believe that Hermoine had time travel abilities.
Posted: Mon Jun 14, 2004 1:41 pm
by TPRJones
That is pretty weak, then.
Not the author's fault, though, as she wrote it into the book pretty well. Blame the screenplay adaptor for cutting all sorts of stuff that made that bit integral to the book rather than a deus ex machina.