Harry Potter IV - Spoilers welcome!

[Broccli_Head]

i like dark tones

I liked GoF better than the rest of the others. After the first movie I made a crack at reading the first book, and couldn't get into it. Now that its taken a more sinister tone, I think I might try again to fill in the details.

To me this movie was the end of the innocence that was prevelant in the first three. BBEG is back and much more violence and death. Also, seemed a shifting of pre-teens to teens with more boy/girl interaction.

 

[Rykion]

I take kids to Harry Potter movies and wouldn't have a problem with a 3 hour plus movie. I understand some cuts/simplification were needed, but I believe the next director has inherited a harder job because of too many cuts. Dumbledore should have explained more of what happend at the end and mentioned the fate of Barty Crouch jr. The Priori Incantatum scene is still confusing to those who haven't read the books, and Crouch being alive complicates the Ministry's lack of belief in Harry. There needed to be more about the stories Rita Skeeter published, so the audience will understand that much of the wizarding world has begun to see Harry as a lying attention seeker. Hermione did a lot to help Harry get ready for the challenges, but you really didn't see that. All of the important things could have been added at the cost of maybe 10 more minutes. An extra half hour could have also given more time to some of the background and background characters that add depth to the series.

I generally liked the acting better, but felt the story was too weak, especially for an audience that can't fill in the gaps from having read the book. The scene where Dumbledore grabs Harry and is very angry about his name coming out of the goblet is completely out of character. Dumbledore does not easily lose his cool, and when he does it should appear in his eyes, not his voice or physical actions. It was the single most disappointing scene of any of the movies IMO. I rate Goblet of Fire 3rd of the 4 movies, only being ahead of PoA.

 

[WizarDru]

Yes, it should have been 3 hours...or longer

Why?

 

[Crothian]

Why?

Because the movie needed to be longer. There was so much cut out that the movie isn't complete for some people that haven't read the book.

 

[Desdichado]

Because the movie needed to be longer. There was so much cut out that the movie isn't complete for some people that haven't read the book.

That doesn't mean the movie needed to be longer, though. A better-written screenplay could have done the same thing.

Still, I thought it actually didn't need to be longer and the screenplay was great; it rushed through the novel without ever really feeling rushed. The only thing that I thought needed a little more time was the priori incantatum business, which in the movie doesn't get any explanation at all.

 

[WizarDru]

That doesn't mean the movie needed to be longer, though. A better-written screenplay could have done the same thing.

Still, I thought it actually didn't need to be longer and the screenplay was great; it rushed through the novel without ever really feeling rushed. The only thing that I thought needed a little more time was the priori incantatum business, which in the movie doesn't get any explanation at all.

I agree about the Priori Incantatum...although my memory of the explanation for that from the book is sketchy, as well. I do think they could have spent a few more lines there, though.

As it is, the film is 157 minutes, roughly 13 of which are CREDITS (is that a record)? Clearly, most critics don't seem to think the film had script problems or was too short.

 

[Desdichado]

To be clear; I don't think that either. I'm saying that things being unclear or missing is not necessarily an indicator that the movie needed to be longer. Frankly, a movie that's already 2.5 hours, roughly, very seldom needs to be longer. Especially one based on a book who's primary audience is pretty young.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

The non-geek friends I went to see the movie with, and thier kids especially, were all squirming by the time the end got there so I don't know if longer would appeal to anyone who didn't read the books.

 

[Phaedrus]

I have a plot question...

The TriWizard tournament is for "eternal glory." They play up what a big deal it is.
Then at the end of the movie it just whimpers away.

Did Harry win? Did they cancel it b/c what's-his-name was killed?
Where's the eternal glory?

The whole ending of the movie was a fizzle for me. Momentous events with Voldemort that are glossed over into end of the schoolyear goodbyes. It didn't work for me... it didn't make sense. If the prime evil is back, why is everyone smiling?

And I agree with the post from much earlier:

I've always felt a little like Harry was never the hero - just a lucky guy with friends in high places, but this film definitely took the cake. I'm just not interested in what Harry does... I realize he's young and needs the instruction of the older, more experienced magic users, but - alas - I feel like the story is just Harry as a pin-ball being bounced around by various friends.

If Harry is such a powerful prodigy... why is he always so passive and clueless?

(Guess you can tell I haven't read any of the books)

 

[WizarDru]

If Harry is such a powerful prodigy... why is he always so passive and clueless?

Because all of the people around him treat him like an idiot and keep him in the dark, mostly. Expect to see a perenially ticked-off Harry in the next movie, as No One Belives Him. There are a lot of reasons why Harry spends a good chunk of his time just trying to get through the day, which are visible in the movie but reinforced heavily in books.

Mind you, I wouldn't say movie-Harry is passive. He spends a good chunk of all four movies acting on his own, sometimes in open defiance of his authority figures. Voldemort would have succeeded in the first two movies without Harry's interference. In the third movie, Sirius Black would have been killed without Harry's help. If you mean, why isn't Harry the smartest, the most powerful or the most noble....he's not. That's kind of the point, really. That's one reason so many younger readers can relate to him and his friends. Each one has different traits that appeal to different readers/viewers.