What have you seen recently? 2
- Thread starter Tonyblack
- Start date
- Status
Er...? Interesting.
I've watched HP III recently. While I liked the book probably best of all the books, the movie was the worst (seen I and II before) I've seen so far. Yes, it was quite entertaining but compared to the book it was just bland.
And they seem to have redecorated the set. Looks quite unlike I imagined the Hogwarts grounds.
I've watched HP III recently. While I liked the book probably best of all the books, the movie was the worst (seen I and II before) I've seen so far. Yes, it was quite entertaining but compared to the book it was just bland.
And they seem to have redecorated the set. Looks quite unlike I imagined the Hogwarts grounds.
HP and the Prisoner of Azkaban is so creative and still holds it's ground as the best HP film. It's beautiful to watch, Alphonso Cuaron creates amazing atmosheres and marks the passage of time in the film in such original ways with the Whomping Willow and also in doing that setting it up for the finale the end.
Harry Potter Films: The Highs & Lows
ONE & TWO
Okay but a touch childish, having said that it works for the early years and make for great Christmas movies.
THREE
Fantastic, I don't know why the Director was changed. He captured the almost medievil/gothic environment of magic perfectly.
FOUR
Hollywood guff, less said about it the better.
FIVE
A bit focused on the Umbridge storyline, the book weaved many patterns into one but the film displayed a lot of tunnel vision. Over all a good film, but Dumbledore's talk with Harry at the end was sadly missed.
SIX
Both book and film in this instance were only a stop-gap to the conclusion, designed to set up the finale. The film did its job well and had some really sparkling moments of promise from the director.
SEVEN PARTS ONE AND TWO
Brilliant. The director really pushed the kids in this to deliver something beyond their usual average-at-best acting. The dancing scene in part one was masterful and Harry's 'final walk' was heartbreaking. If I had to be critical I'd say Ron & Hermione's kiss was a bit of a let down, it was far better and funnier in the book.
ONE & TWO
Okay but a touch childish, having said that it works for the early years and make for great Christmas movies.
THREE
Fantastic, I don't know why the Director was changed. He captured the almost medievil/gothic environment of magic perfectly.
FOUR
Hollywood guff, less said about it the better.
FIVE
A bit focused on the Umbridge storyline, the book weaved many patterns into one but the film displayed a lot of tunnel vision. Over all a good film, but Dumbledore's talk with Harry at the end was sadly missed.
SIX
Both book and film in this instance were only a stop-gap to the conclusion, designed to set up the finale. The film did its job well and had some really sparkling moments of promise from the director.
SEVEN PARTS ONE AND TWO
Brilliant. The director really pushed the kids in this to deliver something beyond their usual average-at-best acting. The dancing scene in part one was masterful and Harry's 'final walk' was heartbreaking. If I had to be critical I'd say Ron & Hermione's kiss was a bit of a let down, it was far better and funnier in the book.
I've recently finished watching the vast majority of the classic series of Doctor Who in order. It took me about three months, one month to watch the series from the beginning to the end of the Pertwee era, and another two months (after a two month break) to watch the rest. That's 111 stories watched, about a third of which I had never seen before.
DaveC said:
Congats! 
I can't wait to watch the special edition of Day of the Daleks!
DaveC said:
HP and the Prisoner of Azkaban is so creative and still holds it's ground as the best HP film. It's beautiful to watch, Alphonso Cuaron creates amazing atmosheres and marks the passage of time in the film in such original ways with the Whomping Willow and also in doing that setting it up for the finale the end.
No, not always. But I found that most films that I watched after having read the book left very much to be desired.
For example, I liked Harry Potter I and II - not as much as the book, but I wouldn't call them "viewable" but "nice and entertaining" (which is, on my scale, tantamount to high praise). But for some reason I found HP III only viewable while (or because(?)) I liked the book very much.
I also liked LotR I and III (while II was rather the "viewable" type) very much (even though I do like the books better) and would call them great movies.
There are even extreme cases where I like the film (is movie American English? Most people here seem to use "film" which suits me fine since in German it's "Film"). better. This extrame case being Michael Crichton's Timeline. The movie was entertaining, whereas the book didn't make it onto my "completely read" pile.
For example, I liked Harry Potter I and II - not as much as the book, but I wouldn't call them "viewable" but "nice and entertaining" (which is, on my scale, tantamount to high praise). But for some reason I found HP III only viewable while (or because(?)) I liked the book very much.
I also liked LotR I and III (while II was rather the "viewable" type) very much (even though I do like the books better) and would call them great movies.
There are even extreme cases where I like the film (is movie American English? Most people here seem to use "film" which suits me fine since in German it's "Film"). better. This extrame case being Michael Crichton's Timeline. The movie was entertaining, whereas the book didn't make it onto my "completely read" pile.
- Status
