1. Join Now

    AVForums.com uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Just seen: Harry Potter

Discussion in 'TV Show Forum' started by Reiner, Nov 29, 2001.

  1. Reiner

    Reiner
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2000
    Messages:
    3,315
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    61
    Location:
    Germany
    Ratings:
    +13
    Watched Harry Potter and the Sorcere's Stone on the weekend and must say it's a highly enjoyable movie with some good laughs in it.
    Haven't read any of the books so I can't comment on how close it is to those but I did like the story and acting ... well worth the money spend on the ticket though the print was actually not that good.

    Rating: * * * * 1/2 out of 5
     
  2. Beek1

    Beek1
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    I thought I'd give a little bit of a different spin on this Harry Potter thing. I've actually read all four books in the series and think that they're progressing quite nicely as a series of quick page turners. As for the film though... well it was average. In fact it was quite possibly the most unremittingly average movie I've seen in my entire life. There was nothing to really fault about the performances (the kids were certainly better than that muppet Lucas put in as Anakin in Episode One) and the script managed to keep fans by including references to pretty much everything in the book without losing casual viewers (although a couple of sub-plots were completely ruined). However, some of the CGI effects looked woefully unfinished (esp. the entrance to Diagon Alley) and the direction... well where was it. Was Chris Columbus chosen simply because he is incapable of adding any style to a movie? For as visually exciting as this movie was, they might have well just got the author to sit infront of the camera reading the damn book. Just check out the trailers and clips from The Lord of the Rings to see how a gifted director can add visual style and flair to a film in order to enhance rather than detract from its atmosphere on the big screen.
    Anyway, if you like it enough, Potter's apparently hitting R2 DVD around May.
     
  3. Ian Cox

    Ian Cox
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    I would give Harry Potter 4 out of 5. I thought the film was well acted and a very enjoyable as a film, much better than most that have come out this year. The only problem I had with it was it had no real "wow" factor. Even now 2 weeks after seeing the film I can not remember anything outstanding about the film, it is just fading from memory. I know plenty of people will disagree with this point and say the Quiditch (is that how you spell it) match was outstanding but for me I just sat there thinking this kind of CGI sequence has been done before.

    Hopefully the second film, which has a much stronger story line, will be much better. For me it was a good start to a movie franchise that should get better and better.
     
  4. Mr.D

    Mr.D
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2000
    Messages:
    11,041
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    133
    Ratings:
    +1,113
    Well speaking as someone who did a fair amount of work on the visual effects I thought the rotating brick entrance to diagon ally was the best effect in there: pretty much all my colleagues agreed with this too.

    I admit to being a bit surprised by the quality of some of the effects though. There is some compositing in there that I can only assume was last minute emergency type work: I found the centaur particularly poor on the CG front.

    I liked the hat though but suspect this is more down to the voice talents of leslie philips: and I laughed aloud at the chocolate frog animation but its a shame the rest of that scene wasn't particularly well composited.

    I did enjoy the film a lot though: despite having little in the way of expectation. I must say I thought Chris Columbus did a really impressive job introducing so many characters and ideas without it feeling boring or obviously hurried: not an easy thing to do.
     
  5. Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    I think the film was PANTS!!!

    Overhyped,overacted,boring,crap effects,crap kids(especially Hermoine and that ginger ****..)
    The kid who played Harry had this wierd expression on his face like he had a feather up his arse.
    And where was the finale?..that twaddle final battle..Harry touches him and he crumbles-thats it!!!????
    This film looked like a refugee from the Lion the witch and wardrobe...
    I cant believe anyone over eight with a brain would like this drivel.
    My niece`s comment after seeing it was;-its alright...

    I would suggest alright is too high a compliment,but then there are people who actually liked The phantom menace-go figure...

    doug
     
  6. Arthur.S

    Arthur.S
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Dunno about Harry Potter, but I'm really looking forward to seeing the Lord of the rings. Haven't read the book for over 20 years! I'm resisting reading it before seeing the movie, in case I'm disappointed. Though by all accounts the film is a stunner.
     
  7. Phil Hinton

    Phil Hinton
    Editor Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2001
    Messages:
    9,717
    Products Owned:
    2
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    AVForums
    Ratings:
    +6,987
    Finally saw this at the weekend and will agree with Keith, i had not read the books and went in with low expectations, and was pleasantly surprised.

    Not mindblowing or anything out of the ordinary, but rather enjoyable, and to keep a cinema full of kids quiet for 2.5hrs is a rare feat.

    Recommended. 3 out of 5
     
  8. Garrett

    Garrett
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2001
    Messages:
    31,496
    Products Owned:
    2
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    The best thief you’ll never see.
    Ratings:
    +4,045
    I haven’t seen the film, but wasn’t the English version called "Harry Potter and the Philosophers Stone". I know they changed the title for the Americans as the don’t know what a Philosopher is! don’t say they’ve changed the title of ours as well. They did this with the James Bond film "License To Kill" it was to be called "License Revoked" but it was thought they would not know what revoked ment.
    The above means the them in authority who underestimate the publics intelligence, in fact I have seen the same the other way round with brilliant posters in the US, but this time duming them down for us.

    :cool: Ruby quartz shades.
     
  9. spenceruk

    spenceruk
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Went to see Harry Potter today and after all the hype I was disappointed. The special effects were good, the adult actors were excellent (especially Richard Harris and Robbie Coltrane), but I thought the acting of the children was poor. In a film like this the children have a lot of screen time and I didn't think they "carried" the film at all. They seemed to deliver their lines in a very artificial way and were not really very believable. Just compare the acting in this film with, for example, Haley Joel Osment in The Sixth Sense - now that kid I really did believe was "seeing dead people"!
    As another reviewer said earlier the film didn't really have a "wow" factor either - I expect that though has more to do with the fact that the film tried to stay very true to the book. Being an author doesn't necessarily make one a good screenwriter!
    Don't get me wrong - I'm not really knocking the film as such, but it didn't really grip me as I thought it would. Perhaps I'm in a minority?
     

Share This Page

Loading...