Potter 4 (GOF) Wow!

I just got back from "Goblet of Fire", and I have to say, I feel I was correct in my predicition that this would be the most visually amazing Potter film to date.

I don't think it would stand on its own, however. Normally I've read the books before watching the movies, so I know what I'm missing. This time however, having only the first 3 under my belt before seeing the fourth movie, I was still able to fill in the gaps.

However, someone watching the movie without having seen any of the others would be completely lost.

All in all, what an amazing film in the series!



- Josh

I don't know my friend, they cut a lot of fat out from the book. I liked the movie but just felt something wasn't right.

Tim,

I'm sure you're right. I mean, after all, they cut 23-27 hours of reading into 2 hours of film. However, that said, I think considering the difference there, it wasn't too shabby. Though, none of the movies vs. the book are that close. "Uncle Vernon" for example, was someone I felt was almost pure evil in the first book, but in the movie, he was just really mean. You'll never see a direct correlation from book to movie, though I think Peter Jackson tried his darndest with LOTR!

I plan on reading book 4 VERY soon, probably over the Christmas break. Can't wait!



- Josh

The Wife-O-Meter liked the dark look of the film, continued from the previous movie, but she didn't care for the episodic nature of the action and all that was left out of the book.

I, on the other hand, thought it was the best "Potter" so far, mainly because it seemed the most mature, which is only fitting considering that Harry is growing up. Obviously, the movies are growing up with him. And while I enjoyed the dark nature of the previous film, I thought this one had more plot going for it, something that the the more transitional-feeling third movie lacked.

Still, I agree with Tim, that the feeling of pure "magic" that the first two, more juvenile "Potters" had in abundance, seemed missing this time. Maybe it's because there was less time for fun and games and sweet magical creatures. I dunno.

John

I really enjoyed the film, but the general feel of it just didn't sit well with me.

"Still, I agree with Tim, that the feeling of pure "magic" that the first two, more juvenile "Potters" had in abundance, seemed missing this time."

Agreed. I really wasn't drawn in to the world as I was with the first two. It didn't really seem like a Harry Potter movie to me.

I thought it was easily the best Potter film, but honestly, considering how abysmal the first two were, it doesn't have a lot of competition.

I didn't mind the "episodic" nature of the narrative because there was a definate crescendo toward the last task and the return of an old enemy at the film's conclusion.

A good film, to be sure.

I was surprised with all the innuendo put into the movie-->the scene with Moaning Myrtle and Harry was a little..creepy..to say the least.

I thought they handled the ending very well. Very emotional.

I as well think this is the best of the 4.

dude, considering that the character's name is "moaning myrtle", you'd have to be extra thick NOT to have thunk of the "implications". :x

Alexander,

There has to be something implicit to be innuendo... and there was nothing implicit about that scene. My goodness, it was dirty!