The Official Goblet of Fire Movie Thread

[DisneyFreak529]

I also missed Winky. To my recollection, that's the first major character to be completely cut.

I know right, I was a little upset there were no house elfves? I thought they were importand to the story. I still enjoyed the movie!

The movie was 2 hours 30 minutes, so it's not like they tried to keep as much as they can. I think that if they kept everything it would be at least a 4 hour movie.

 

[Kwit35]

I have a feeling that it is the director and not the actor that is changing Dumbledore's personality on the screen. They are making him toooo emotional, toooo flawed, to easy to read.
Also, I realllllly missed Mrs. Weasly. She is such an important person in Harry's life. She IS his mother figure and he needs that. To cut her out completely is just a crime. Although her presence is implied, it just isn't the same.
One bonus, the Hogwarts School song made it in the film. Or at least part of it.
"Hogwarts, Hogwarts, Hoggy Warty Hogwarts,
Teach us something, please,
Whether we be old and bald
Or young with scabby knees,
Our heads could do with filling
With some interesting stuff,
For now they're bare and full of air,
Dead flies and bits of fluff,
So teach us things worth knowing,
Bring back what we've forgot,
Just do your best, we'll do the rest,
And learn until our brains all rot."

 

[nibblesandbits]

Random reactions:

Voldemort wasn't as sinister as I picture him when I read. I always imagine him moving deliberately and gracefully, and speaking in something just above a whisper. He was basically an ugly bald guy in the movie.


What was up with that scene where Karkaroff goes into the room where the goblet is held, and then dramatically shuts the door? I don't recall him playing any role in fixing the tourney in the book, and that was never addressed in the movie.

Two points based on this review:

1. I think that Voldemort was just as sinister as they could make him with it being a real human actor in the part. There's not too much else they could do unless they made voldemort a computer generated character (in my opinion.)

2. I think that Karkoroff was putting Harry's name into the cup...even though that wasn't a part of the book (in the book it was Moody).

 

[Wilt Dasney]

I have a feeling that it is the director and not the actor that is changing Dumbledore's personality on the screen.

Could be. As much as I think the last two directors have vastly improved on the "forest" of Harry's world, Columbus's movies had the "tree" of Dumbledore nailed.

 

[CaptainMichael]

2. I think that Karkoroff was putting Harry's name into the cup...even though that wasn't a part of the book (in the book it was Moody).

It was just made to look like it was Karkoroff. It was something meant to throw the audience off.

 

[CaptainMichael]

I did think more time should have been given to explaining the presence of the other schools and the significance of the Triwizard Tourney. I don't recall any mention that this is a once every (thousand?) years event, which is a pretty big background detail.

The Triwizard Tournament happens every 5 years, but it had been discontinued.

Here is a brief history from Mugglenet:

History - the Triwizard Tournament began some 700 years ago as a friendly competition between three magical schools in Europe, Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry in Scotland, Beauxbatons Academy of Magic in France, and Durmstrang Institute in Northern Europe. The goal was create to create bonds of friendships between the European students. Every five years, the schools took turns hosting the Tournament, and the judges included the heads of the three schools. As the name suggests, there were only three champions who competed, one from each school.

The Triwizard Tournament consisted of several tasks designed to test the Champion's magical prowess, daring, powers of deduction, and ability to cope with danger (however, cheating was considered a normal, traditional part of the Tournament). Eventually the contests became extremely dangerous, and in 1792 "a cockatrice the champions were supposed to be catching went on the rampage" and injured all three school heads. As the death toll mounted, the Tournament was discontinued.

 

[Wilt Dasney]

Two points based on this review:

1. I think that Voldemort was just as sinister as they could make him with it being a real human actor in the part. There's not too much else they could do unless they made voldemort a computer generated character (in my opinion.)

I wasn't so much disappointed by his appearance (although some red eyes would have been nice) as his speech and mannerisms.

2. I think that Karkoroff was putting Harry's name into the cup...even though that wasn't a part of the book (in the book it was Moody).

IIRC, Harry says "You put my name in the cup" to the-Moody-who-is-not-a-Moody at the end.

 

[Wilt Dasney]

The Triwizard Tournament happens every 5 years, but it had been discontinued.

Here is a brief history from Mugglenet:

Thanks for the clarification. It's been a while since I read the book. :wave:

 

[CaptainMichael]

Thanks for the clarification. It's been a while since I read the book. :wave:

No problem.

 

[nibblesandbits]

It was just made to look like it was Karkoroff. It was something meant to throw the audience off.

Guess it worked on me! :lol:

 

[nibblesandbits]

I wasn't so much disappointed by his appearance (although some red eyes would have been nice) as his speech and mannerisms.

Well, then I guess i can't help you! :lol: :hammer:

 

[Wilt Dasney]

Well, then I guess i can't help you! :lol: :hammer:

It's the thought that counts. :kiss:

 

[TheOneVader]

I saw it today, and while it wasn't true to the book, I really enjoyed it. The only thing that got me annoyed was the things they changed, more so than what they cut out.

 

[CaptainMichael]

The only thing that got me annoyed was the things they changed, more so than what they cut out.

Like that ridiculous Third Task??? I'm still confused about what makes the maze difficult...

 

[MKCustodial]

What was up with that scene where Karkaroff goes into the room where the goblet is held, and then dramatically shuts the door? I don't recall him playing any role in fixing the tourney in the book, and that was never addressed in the movie.

In the book, he's one of the suspects. One of the first things Sirius tells Harry is for him to watch out for Karkaroff, he was a Death Eater, all that. So maybe that scene in the movie was their way to tell audiences that maybe he was guilty. In the book, there were tons of little scenes like that for Karkaroff, Bagman, the twins...

 

[TheOneVader]

Like that ridiculous Third Task??? I'm still confused about what makes the maze difficult...

Yea, really. In the movie, the only thing stopping him were some bush sticks. No Sphinx, no spiders, no Blast-Ended Skrewts.

 

[MKCustodial]

Really? Wow, that's lame...


I still blame Cuarón. Newell wanted to make 2 movies, like Kill Bill, and Cuarón convinced him otherwise. The guy had already ruined one movie, and had to go ahead and ruin another...

 

[imagineer99]

HERE IT COMES...IMAGINEER99's review...

I want to preface this by saying one simple thing--converting the Harry Potter books into movies is hard. Really hard. So, I have a lot of respect for the film-makers. Really it's a lose-lose situation. Stay too close to the book and you make a stringent and boring film (Columbus' creations). Stray too far and you risk the petty comments from thousands of Harry Potter fans, each disappointed that it didn't follow the books word for word (the outlash against Cuaron).

With Goblet of Fire, I think that a nice balance was reached. Things just had to be cut (and creating two films would have been a HUGE mistake. Cuaron was absolutely right). That's not to say that it didn't have problems. First and foremost, is Kloves' screenplay. For some reason, Kloves' dialogue doesn't flow well--it feels forced, despite the great thespians reading it. This problem is further exposed by the flow of the film. Since the creators were trying to "fit" in everything, scenes are too short. Characters aren't developed. The whole process feels rushed. A rushed 2.5 hour movie? Sounds like an oxymoron, don't it? But it's true.

Personally, I would much rather simplify things even more and give some of the dialogues actual meaning. Towards the end, I wanted MORE from Harry's conversation with Dumbledore. I wanted MORE from Harry's encounter with Voldemort. I doubt any single scene lasted longer than five minutes, and so it becomes difficult to empathize with the characters. Newell's pacing feels like an out of control locomotive trying desperately to reach shipment on time. He plows through any obstacles that might slow him down, just trying to get there in one piece. As a result, the film suffers.

What did I like? As Wilt Dasney said, I think Rita Skeeter's character was hilarious (and far less vicious as she was in the books). I think the kids are becoming better actors, although Emma Watson still has a propensity to over deliver at times ("IT'S AN AGE LINE!!!!!!!!!!!!!"). I think Cedric was great (for what little time he had on screen). I thought the dance montage was the best part of the whole film. Funny and smart! Fleur was hot! Ron's robes? Hilarious! I love Gambon's Dumbledore. He nails the role. Dumbledore SHOULD be animated. He should be silly. He should be eccentric. Harris (partly because he was sick) was too subdued. He had the warmth, but lacked the spunk.

All in all, a fun movie. For all its problems, its hard not to smile as you see things you envisioned for so long pop onto screen. But, to be a condescending jerk, the book was much better.

MY GRADE: B-

 

[MKCustodial]

From what I've been reading so far, it seems to me they went too much for the action stuff (like the first trial) and forgot to actually develop the characters... They could've done the trials as they were described in the book, and then work on what's really important in book 4: the return of Voldemort and the last 3 chapters, which on themselves are totally intense.

 

[Gucci65]

I saw the movie last Sunday and loved it. Like everyone else, I wish a few things could have been added - I would have gladly sat and watched a butt-numbing 3 - 4 hour movie (how long was Titanic??).

My daughter has not read the books, but has watched every movie and only had a few questions. So I don't think you have to read the books to watch these movies, although I was glad I had.

I'll probably go see it again this long weekend.