Jump to content


Photo

Harry Potter


  • Please log in to reply
2 replies to this topic

#1 Robert Hughes

Robert Hughes
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 873 posts
  • Sound Department
  • Minneapolis

Posted 19 November 2005 - 04:51 PM

Saw it with my 9-year old daughter & friend last night. Cinematography is pretty straightforward, story changes are of questionable merit and my wife thinks they spent too much time on the dragon scene. But it's a triumph of editing for pace. They cut the first 50 pages of the book down to 10 minutes max and kept the important points. Sorry to lose Dobby & Winky, and Rita Skeeter's downfall was lost on the cutting room floor. But what could they do? Make a 9 hour Potter? Maybe for the Director's cut...
  • 0

#2 McKenzie Moore

McKenzie Moore

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 3 posts
  • Student

Posted 24 December 2005 - 05:10 AM

I agree. . . with all of that, pretty much.

Straightforward, yes, but I thought it was the best cinematography of all of them thus far. Frankly, as compared to the other three, Newall is the best man to direct the films. (My opinion, of course). When they are walking through the tent area at the Quidditch World Cup and they cut to a close up of Hermione's face, I fell in love with the shot. The colors, the focus, everything.

What really struck me about Goblet of Fire, however, was the music. This is the first one to have a different composer, and I was thrilled with it.

And they did spend too long with the dragon scene, but I think that's only because the rest of the film seemed much more fast paced. Any less time with the dragon, and I think we would have been cheated.
  • 0

#3 Craig Knowles

Craig Knowles
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 182 posts
  • Director
  • Cleveland

Posted 31 December 2005 - 12:51 AM

The book is so dense, I was concerned that the film version would seem terribly lacking, but I felt they did a very commendable job. There were lots of things left out, storylines have been cross-pollinated, and I did worry that those who had never read the book would get lost in the hustle, but overall I was pleasantly surprised.

That being said, my problem with the series is that Dumbledore, whose role has to be re-cast and re-envisioned immediately. Dumbledore's "bookself" is the innocent, childlike center of power in the world of Magic - not the bumbling old fool he'd become in the last two films.

I know Richard Harris has passed on, but the direction they've taken Dumbledore's character looks more like "Mama Fratelli" from The Goonies than any aspect of Dumbledore's character in the books. I shudder to think about upcoming books where Dumbledore becomes a crucial element to the story, a confidante to Harry, and the pillar of strength to which all others turn.

mama.jpg
  • 0


The Slider

CineLab

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

rebotnix Technologies

Metropolis Post

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Tai Audio

Aerial Filmworks

Technodolly

Abel Cine

Willys Widgets

Visual Products

Rig Wheels Passport

FJS International, LLC

CineTape

Wooden Camera

Paralinx LLC

Ritter Battery

Glidecam

Rig Wheels Passport

Aerial Filmworks

Paralinx LLC

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

Broadcast Solutions Inc

CineLab

Visual Products

Technodolly

Ritter Battery

Glidecam

Tai Audio

Wooden Camera

CineTape

FJS International, LLC

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

rebotnix Technologies

Metropolis Post

Willys Widgets

Abel Cine

The Slider