Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

I just saw Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban and it rocks.
oh, man.
It was great.
Having just finished re-reading the book yesterday, I corrected every digression from the text in the film, but it was still good.
They took out a lot for the movie. I knew they would, because I read in Newsweek that the director chose to take out everything that didn't keep the plot moving. And so it did move incredibly fast. Sometimes it seemed rushed, but there's a heck of a lot of story to tell and apparantly noone wants to sit through a six-hour Harry Potter movie (Though I certainly don't know why). I would have liked a three hour movie myself. Or at least a couple scenes could have used lengthening and more stuff in there.
When I was reading I imagined a very Richard Harris-y Dumblebore, which is sad, but Michael Gambon did a great job. They gave him some weird lines that were not in the book that kinda sucked, but overall I liked him a lot.
The new vision of Hogwarts is interesting. I think I liked the other one, or at least it was closer to how I see it. meh. interesting view, I liked it a lot.
Can you believe Neville? He looks great! I didn't recognize him at first!
What happened to Goyle? He was only in like one scene and now Malfoy has a different, scrawnier goon. odd.

Oh no! I see a grim! oh, wait... it's just the black cat.
Professor Trelawney was good. I thought it sucked that they cut off her accurate statements, but she's supposed to come off fraud-y anyway. And how they re-worked Harry hearing her second real prophecy without spending precious screen time on their exam schedules was really good. I would even say brilliant. My favorite of the reworkings, which I have to say were good.
It was worth it to cut what they did for time and generally they managed to work the important stuff back in... though not always.
I was all like "they have to introduce the firebolt! that's important!" and they did at the end, which worked well enough.
I am seriously pissed on how much they shortchanged Crookshanks. They completely removed his important role. I can't believe they replaced him showing them how they need to touch the knot on the womping willow with the immobiulus charm, which doesn't exist in the books! I'm pissed about that because it doesn't exist! and I wish it did because it would really useful! there is Petrificus Totalus, the full Body-Bind, however.
So, yeah, Crookshanks incredibly important role was just deleted. rarg to that.
other things were very good.
Personally, I would like to have seen more of Stan, the Knight Bus conductor. But I'm weird.
Some bits were cut short to their own detriment. like Aunt Marge's horribleness and Hagrid's bit before the execution. Hagrid was much more together than he was in the book. but the scene would be slower if he was falling to bits over it. I loved how they had him wearing his terrible suit which is described as it was scene hanging in his cabin. that was great.
there's lots more for people who already know, but if you didn't read the book, you'd be left without the info.
I liked their depiction of the dementors a lot, but I didn't like how they flew. They don't fly, they glide on the ground. but whatever, ok. It was still well done.
I did not like their depiction of the Patronus Charm. That's really important and they made it this weird white pulse thing. no!
but a lot of stuff was really good, I repeat. I liked it a lot. I liked least it's sometimes rushed feel. Just make it three hours long! or at least a little longer.
I really didn't like how they left out the explanation of Moony, Wormtail, Padfoot & Prongs!! I was sure Lupin was gonna explain in his last scene, but nope. I thought maybe Dumbledore would explain why his Patronus looked like it did at least, but nope. Dumbledore isn't supposed to know about James Potter being an animagus anyway.
speaking there of, they pronounced some things different than I thought, like "animagus" and "boggart," the latter I had been saying like Humphey Bogart's last name.
There was stuff I liked a lot too.
I think the reworking to get important info without spending the time worked pretty well.
I liked a lot how they had them play with time when they went back three hours, where Hermione interfered in the past while remaining unseen, where in the book, they just did nothing and made careful to not interfere. Frankly, that's a bit boring, isn't it?
Anyway, I really liked it.
and the next movie better be at least three hours long.


( 8 comments — Leave a comment )
Jun. 6th, 2004 10:08 pm (UTC)
They're thinking of splitting GoF into two movies (and they're already filming it now, I think).
Jun. 7th, 2004 07:28 am (UTC)
ok. I hope that makes it six hours long! That would be awesome!
Jun. 7th, 2004 07:34 am (UTC)
Oh, and thanks for the info.
GoF is my favorite, so I am extremely excited for that movie.
Frankly, it's not a bad idea to make it two movies. I'd prefer a six hour long epic with an intermission or something.
Jun. 10th, 2004 07:34 pm (UTC)
I'm sorry.
I JUST read in Entertainment Weekly they are not splitting the book up. So they'll probably cut alot out...it will be interesting. (It's my second favorite book to PoA. They better not screw it up. I wish they could do like a TV mini-series or something to get everything in).
Jun. 11th, 2004 08:28 am (UTC)
Re: I'm sorry.
oh. :(
It better be at least 3 hours long. That'll still cut a lot out. hmm. (What's wrong with 4 hours with an intermission, really?)
GoF is my favorite, so I hope it's good. I bet it will be good even if they cut a lot out. I mean, PoA was a really good movie, and all I can complain about it the atrocious choice to cut the marauder's info out.
And that TV mini-series idea is really good. I really think that would be an awesome idea.
except, it wouldn't be the same with out Daniel Radcliffe's hotness.
Jun. 13th, 2004 10:08 am (UTC)
i was sure you were mistaken about goyle...but you were right! i'm sorry i doubted you. :(

maybe goyle started to be too good looking? which is a little simplistic, actually, making the bad guys ugly. hmmm.
Jun. 13th, 2004 12:57 pm (UTC)
hmm. I wonder.
If we were plucky 13-year-olds, we'd be investigating this, but as we are not, I'm guessing that we're not going to find out.

Oh, and you see? Never doubt me. I never make mistakes.
Jun. 13th, 2004 03:55 pm (UTC)
i bow down to your great perceptive abilities.


( 8 comments — Leave a comment )


Andrew Like-Slettuce

Latest Month

January 2014
Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Tiffany Chow