If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above.
You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.
To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
This thread is dedicated to Harry Potter and all it's sequels
I'm sorry if one's been made already
I've seen each of movies a million times, mostly the first, second, fourth
My favorite has gotta be 'Goblet of Fire'
I wish Emma had won the 'Best Female Performance' over Kristen Stewart at the MTV movie awards and Daniel Radcliffe over Robert Pattison for 'Best Male Performance' -_-
Well, at least Tom Felton got the award for Best Villain
I was surprised at how well these movies were made. Usually adapting books like these turns into countless bad movies. My favorite was the third one. I wish they hired Cuarón to direct the rest of them. I definitely thought he did the best job.
^ I know... I'm gonna be so sad when it's all over. :(
I agree that they did a great job with the movies, though. A lot of people who love the books completely hate them, but I love the books and thought they did a pretty good job. Maybe they weren't 100% accurate, but they were good as far as movies go. And a lot of the fans grew up with the movies and the books, so it's kind of a nostalgia thing, too.
_______________________________
"There's no Hitler and no Holocaust, no winter and no Santa Claus
The books were better then the movies, no offense to any of the movie lovers. Gosh, the fourth book is my favorite, an that translates to the movie. I have loved watching them age with me through my childhood..
"A toothache, or a violent passion, is not necessarily diminished by our knowledge of its causes, its character, its importance or insignificance".- T.S. Eliot
The books were better then the movies, no offense to any of the movie lovers. Gosh, the fourth book is my favorite, an that translates to the movie. I have loved watching them age with me through my childhood..
Personally, I think movies should be considered separate from their source material. Critique of the movie should not be affected by the one's knowledge/critique/opinions of the book. Both are their own works of art and should be considered so. Plus, A comparison of the two is like comparing apples and oranges. Movies and books have inherently different focuses and really neither is better than the other.
Personally, I think movies should be considered separate from their source material. Critique of the movie should not be affected by the one's knowledge/critique/opinions of the book. Both are their own works of art and should be considered so. Plus, A comparison of the two is like comparing apples and oranges. Movies and books have inherently different focuses and really neither is better than the other.
I agree.. However, the movies, in my humble opinion, are subpar til about 4.. While the books are all great.
"A toothache, or a violent passion, is not necessarily diminished by our knowledge of its causes, its character, its importance or insignificance".- T.S. Eliot
I agree.. However, the movies, in my humble opinion, are subpar til about 4.. While the books are all great.
I personally thought the 3rd movie was the best, in technical terms (I'm talking about nerdy stuff like lighting, camera placement, mis en scene, etc.). I kind of wish the producers retained that director. The only thing I think that holds it back is the story isn't as spectacular in my opinion (I also thought the third book was the least enjoyable out of the series).
On another note, I was annoyed that they decided to split the last book into two movies. It's an obvious money making scheme.
Today's Toppers
2Likes
The 'Harry Potter' thread
