ITT: Recasts done right

>>81686221
He was great. Thread over.

In 3 he was eclectic and yet humble
In 4 and 5 he was on edge with the ministry
In 6 and 8 he's mellow and very close to how Harris was. Best in 3 and 6

>>81686277
who the fuck is harris?

File: 24-marty-mcfly.w750.h560.2x.jpg (148KB, 1071x800px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 1071x800px

Imagine how different BTTF would've been with Eric Stoltz as was originally intended.

DID YA PUT YOUR NAME IN DA GOBLET OF FIRE YA CUNT

>>81686288
Richard Harris.....

>>81686359
he asked, calmly.

>>81686359
Directing of the director who only did goblet of fire, remember when barty crouch JUNIOR was licking himself. It was all sense-hightened on purpose.

>>81686365
Pretty sure he's called Harry

File: 204.png (246KB, 512x384px) Image search: [Google]

246KB, 512x384px

>>81686221
Yes, yes well done anon, well done, HOWEVER

File: 1455922493025.jpg (9KB, 299x293px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 299x293px

>>81686409

File: IMG_1635.jpg (1MB, 1623x2886px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1623x2886px

The recast may have been one that worked in for it's plebian fanbase, but it doesn't stop it being one of the dullest franchise in the history of movie franchises. Seriously 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.

>a-at least the books were good though
"No!"
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.

>>81686437
Harris was absolutely perfect for the role. Gambon's hippy interpretation was laughable and shat all over any authority and dignity the character should've had.

>>81687443
Shit tier taste desu its just the opposite Harris was dying Gambon made him feel powerful.

>>81686359
>what is direction

I'm sure if he wanted it done differently, he'd get a retake of it

>>81687768
>power comes from shouting emotionally, manhandling children and cowering away from fire
you've got some beta opinions about what's powerful kid

The Chad in GoT

>>81687907
See
>>81686277
You dumb fuck memer.

>>81687907
Goblet of Fire isn't an argument, >>81686407 try watching them again.

>>81686221
You first

>>81687950
>>81688001
Stop agreeing with yourself faggot