Harry Potter - Goblet of Fire

breeze · Post by **breeze** » Sat Mar 18, 2006 9:34 pm

I dont think it is as good a movie as some of the previous ones. But yes, there are good bits here and there. I think that this new director is not as good as previous ones.

gemini181 · Post by **gemini181** » Mon Mar 20, 2006 10:29 pm

I expected very little from the first movie because I (mistakenly) thought the whole thing was a 'dumb fad for little kids'. I was wrong and have liked all the movies

silent_slaughters · Post by **silent_slaughters** » Thu Apr 13, 2006 9:05 pm

i use to read the books but ever scince the movies started coming out i've only been watching them. they are very good movies.

BigBlueGuy · Post by **BigBlueGuy** » Tue Apr 18, 2006 7:07 am

I love Harry Potter i even have the dvd it is the best movie i ever SEEN!! And finaly i get to see he who must not be named :lol:

desmondkok · Post by **desmondkok** » Thu Apr 20, 2006 8:22 am

another piece of art from harry potters movie lo..

fear_fucks · Post by **fear_fucks** » Tue Apr 25, 2006 1:56 am

excellt movie
and with verrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrryyy good effects i must say

harry has got excellt personality in this partttt

go on harryyyyyyyyy!!!!!!!!!!!!1

webexplode · Post by **webexplode** » Mon May 08, 2006 9:13 pm

It's unfortunate that so much of the book needed to be cut for time and the movie is still nearly 2 1/2 hours long. The rule of movie editing is when you must trim for time you remove the sub-plots. A lot of story and character development isn't there.

But what is there is a great visual treat. If the movie leaves you with questions just read the book or get the audio version on CD. It would have taken a minimum of another half hour to flesh the movie out and that simply wasn't going to be done by a studio whose primary target is a younger audience. (Note how no studio wants to release an animated film longer than 90 minutes for this reason.) Perhaps Alphonso Curon would have done a better job of cohesion but there really isn't much more that could have been done in the time and the script would have been essentially the same. This movie begs for an extended Lord of the Rings type DVD, another 30 to 60 minutes to give you what was left out for theatrical release.

See it and spend the bucks to see it on the big screen.

breeze · Post by **breeze** » Wed May 10, 2006 3:58 am

webexplode wrote:It's unfortunate that so much of the book needed to be cut for time and the movie is still nearly 2 1/2 hours long. The rule of movie editing is when you must trim for time you remove the sub-plots. A lot of story and character development isn't there.

But what is there is a great visual treat. If the movie leaves you with questions just read the book or get the audio version on CD. It would have taken a minimum of another half hour to flesh the movie out and that simply wasn't going to be done by a studio whose primary target is a younger audience. (Note how no studio wants to release an animated film longer than 90 minutes for this reason.) Perhaps Alphonso Curon would have done a better job of cohesion but there really isn't much more that could have been done in the time and the script would have been essentially the same. This movie begs for an extended Lord of the Rings type DVD, another 30 to 60 minutes to give you what was left out for theatrical release.

See it and spend the bucks to see it on the big screen.

Well said webexplode, well said.

Djrack · Post by **Djrack** » Fri May 12, 2006 8:26 am

I think this is the best of the 4 harry potter movies

.
One of the best things in this movie, is on the graveyard, and the yuleball!
I love Emmas dress

ddarude · Post by **ddarude** » Fri May 12, 2006 5:54 pm

I like this sequel, I even watched it twice

Will they make a new ones?

Harry Potter - Goblet of Fire

IT IS THE BEST

wow

harrrrr

See the movie for action, read the book for story

Re: See the movie for action, read the book for story