Easily the best movie. 3 was the worst.
Why does Chamber of Secrets never get any love? I think it blended how childish the early films and how dark the later ones got perfectly. Just the right amount without taking it over the top.
Agreed. Harry Potter was easily one of the dullest franchise in the history of movie franchises. Each episode following the boy wizard and his pals from Hogwarts Academy as they fight assorted villains has been indistinguishable from the others. Aside from the gloomy imagery, the seriesüf only consistency has been its lack of excitement and ineffective use of special effects, all to make magic unmagical, to make action seem inert.
Perhaps the die was cast when Rowling vetoed the idea of Spielberg directing the series; she made sure the series would never be mistaken for a work of art that meant anything to anybody?just ridiculously profitable cross-promotion for her books. The Harry Potter series might be anti-Christian (or not), but itüfs certainly the anti-James Bond series in its refusal of wonder, beauty and excitement. No one wants to face that fact. Now, thankfully, they no longer have to.
>a-at least the books are g-g-good though
The writing is dreadful; the book was terrible. As I read, I noticed that every time a character went for a walk, the author wrote instead that the character "stretched his legs."
I began marking on the back of an envelope every time that phrase was repeated. I stopped only after I had marked the envelope several dozen times. I was incredulous. Rowling's mind is so governed by cliches and dead metaphors that she has no other style of writing. Later I read a lavish, loving review of Harry Potter by the same Stephen King. He wrote something to the effect of, "If these kids are reading Harry Potter at 11 or 12, then when they get older they will go on to read Stephen King." And he was quite right. He was not being ironic. When you read "Harry Potter" you are, in fact, trained to read Stephen King
The Harry Potter films' ratings scale directly with Emma's fuckability; starting from mid at the beginning rising then hitting maximum at the second and third films and then a steady decline as the movies progress.
i dont like them very much but ive seen them all multiple times.
6>3>7 part 2>5>4>1>7 part 1>2
I like 6 best cause it was the only one to have a scene which actually had any impact on my at all which was snape killing dubledore, not that the death itself was so great but I liked the lead up and the was rickman said "avada kedavra" appealed to me
To be fair , it's a franchise for children , I Personally loved the books myself as I actually grew up with them being released and they were easy to read and compared to everything else for kids at the time actually had a proper plot and action , not much character building though , re-reading them recently i realise that it feels like a bad essay written by a teenager repeating the same terms such as the leg stretching, and not much setting the scene.
But it holds children's attention and is exciting much better than other options aimed at 8-10 year old kids (when the adults started hyping it, it was pretty pathetic though) though it gets a bit too dark too quick i think in the around the 3rd or 4th installments.
Plus final showdown in the movies was a massive disappointment in my mind , i prefer the climax of the last book a lot more then the shitty special effect display of the last movie.
there is basically nthing in the chamber and fighting the basilisk was the shittiest writing ever, with a sword appearing out of no whre and a phoenix flying from somewhere that was just blocked off. also its not very threatening to have an enmy that kills you when you look it in the eyes only to have it lose its eyes 10 seconds into the fight
The plot plays too much out as a detective drama "who is da chamber" for my liking. 1st's plot is kinda similar in that sense but at least it has a lot more memorable moments.
Why does Goblet of Fire get so much hate? The only issue I really have with it is the really visible overacting compared to the other films.
>Ron and Harry ignoring their brown qt dates at the ball
desu though those are really ugly sarees, what were they thinking?
The scene where the two rival schools show up was pants-on-head stupid, especially that fuck-irritating sigh the girls do
Death in the Potter-verse means getting reduced to being a baby with an adult's head
And you go from needing a special place like a fireplace to teleport to needing a portkey to just being able to turn into a white or black (depending on whether you're good or teh evil) cloud of energy to teleport. It's inconsistent.
And is this newcomer who was not in the other three movies gonna die? Count Fagula had "Star Trek red-shirt" written all over him
>Harry Potter was was easily one of the dullest franchise in the history of movie franchises. Each episode following the boy wizard and his pals from Hogwarts Academy as they fight assorted villains has been indistinguishable from the others. Aside from the gloomy imagery, the series’ only consistency has been its lack of excitement and ineffective use of special effects?all to make magic unmagical, to make action seem inert.Perhaps the die was cast when Rowling vetoed the idea of Spielberg directing the series; she made sure the series would never be mistaken for a work of art that meant anything to anybody?just ridiculously profitable cross-promotion for her books. The Harry Potter series might be anti-Christian (or not), but it’s certainly the anti-James Bond series in its refusal of wonder, beauty and excitement. No one wants to face that fact. Now, thankfully, they no longer have to.
this 2bh they're dogshit and the third one is the only one that tried to be something more. drones will tell you the first two are good, but its a tumblr meme by mongs trying to impress people on facebook.
Despite clocking in at over two solid hours, the movie fails to properly set up and develop its characters and their back-stories, there is almost no build up and, even worse still, chemistry between the actors here. - 0/5
Cramming in every "plot point" you can find in the book does not engaging storytelling make, and it's a wonder there ever was a third movie. - 0/5
Splendid. An entirely enjoyable pop fantasy adventure that never for a moment insults the intelligence. By very very very very far the best of the Potter movies, the only one that manages to capture the funky mad energy of J.K. Rowling's hogwash. - 2/5
Easy come, easy go. - 0/5
Didn't see them
I liked the second the most. It's the only time i felt like it managed to properly convey the passage of time. it almost felt like a season of a Harry Potter TV show that was condensed into a movie.