Not much buzz here over the weekend for this...has anyone else check out the new Potter yet?

I liked it...more than Azkaban...but it's nowhere near as magical or entracing as the first two movies. Solid performances but I had a harder time getting into the beginning of this movie than its predecessors -- my friend (an avid reader of the books) filled me in on some plot details that helped, but I thought they didn't do as good a job this time making the narrative as accessible to non-readers.

Mike Newell's direction was sturdy. The ball was well shot, the underwater sequences interesting, and I loved the last shot of the movie....restrained and lovely.

Doyle's music isn't BATMAN BEGINS but it really shows the dimension and thematic depth that Williams brought to the previous films, and how much that's missed here. There aren't any noteworthy new themes, and the score is -- frankly -- just kind of flat and uninvolving in the film...it's serviceable but it never RAISES the movie the way Williams' music did. In fact, I'd go so far as to say the movie might have approximated the first two films had Williams returned to score it.

Overall, I realize there are fans who love Azkaban but it didn't do much for me. This movie is an improvement, but it has a more "workmanlike" feel to it...not as much magic or inspiration from a filmmaking standpoint, and little sense of wonder...it's entertaining for what it is and fun for its target audience, but never goes beyond that point for me at least.

yeah... was the first time where I had the feeling that I needed to know the book to fully understand the story... it's very obvious that very much ended on the cutting floor (or was left out before shooting).

I thought it was weaker than Azkaban, which didnt do much for me either. So far I liked the 2nd the most. But overall none of the HP movies really got me.

The acting was pretty weak this time I thought and a couple things which didn't make much sense... like why is the dragn crawling on the roof after Harry? Why doesn't he just fly over and grabhim? I mean great fx and fairly exciting, but that a dragon holds onto a wall instead of flying up doesn't make any sense.

Or why the french girl participated in the game was beyond me.. not only didn't she finish any of the tasks, but also was just hysterical, stupid and crying all the time. Come on... onyl the best and toughest wizards join the game? That was a joke...

I liked the score, mainly for its actual spotting. Whereas the last 3 movies had wall to wall music with many many scenes, which didnt need any score at all, Doyle actually took his time and only provided score for scenes which actually needed some. I thought that helped a lot.
Still there was some horrible music editing and the mix was very low again.

So far none of the HP movies had any music as enhancing as the LOTR movies.

Overall an ok movie, will watch the next one of course, but won't buy the dvd of this one (nor did I ever buy any of the others).

I agree with you Roman on the book aspect -- this movie felt like most movie sequels where they don't really bother to develop the characters and subplots and rely on the previous films (and the audiences' knowledge of them) to fill you in. That sequence with Nigel crying made my head shrug, but thankfully my pal J-Man filled me in on what it's supposed to mean (or will mean).

That's also an issue I have -- what exactly is the point of these stories? I realize it's a children's tale but unlike something like STAR WARS or LORD OF THE RINGS (where there's a clear central quest/plot), what's the clear plot in the HP films? That Harry and his friends are growing up, trying to ward off evil from returning? That each year something crazy happens, a new teacher shows up, and shenanigans ensue? I just don't find there to be a clear, distinct narrative line through the films -- as a collective whole, at least -- that makes for a compelling story I really care about.

One other problem with the movie, that apparently has been echoed a lot by HP fans, is Michael Gambon. This is a big part, a magical character, and Gambon just doesn't come off with the charisma and majesty to make it work. Richard Harris' health might have been failing but you had the real sense that this was a sage, wise old wizard. Gambon -- especially in this movie -- plays the role like he's a bank executive.

All that being said I did enjoy the film. Like the last one, I didn't love it, and Doyle's music really failed to deliver for my tastes: his non-thematic approach was a big disappointment, and I would disagree with you on the spotting. How many establishing shots did we need to have with Doyle's "menacing" music playing? Williams wrote specific, individual themes while Doyle came to this film and scored it like it was a '50s Universal monster movie, complete with those scherzo-like strings he brought to his uber-bombastic MARY SHELLEY'S FRANKENSTEIN score. I just found it hugely unsatisfying -- though you're right, Roman, that the music mix/editing did no favors for his score, just as it didn't for Williams on AZKABAN.

I just got back from the theater and saw HP- the one thing that stuck in my mind on the way back was simply this: these movies are nothing but coming-of-age stories where the main character takes seven films to have THE final confrontation with the monster and destroy him forever. That's it- it's just a special effects movie.

I thought it was darker and more compelling than POA, and I think the whole adolescent onset subplot provided enough laughs to make it enjoyable. But ultimately all these films are just set ups for that seventh film and the final confrontation between Harry and Voldemort, so I suppose the next two films will be the same with other things to CGI and older characters.

I'm not sure which film in the series I like more- probably either the first or second one. Doyle's score was not as leitmotivic as I had hoped it would be in the film (the score seems represented well on the CD), nut that's my preference. I thought Williams did an excellent job on all three scores and to hear only Hedwig's theme three times (to the best of my memory) was kind of disappointing. I guess things change- but Doyle's score just kind of laid there flat whereas Williams' efforts seemed to have a life and weaved through the films much more poetically than Doyle's effort. That being said, I STILL like the score of GOF over most of the stuff that passes for film music nowadays.

One thing is for sure -- audiences are definitely taking to this movie a LOT more than AZKABAN. In 10 days it's taken in (domestically) over $200 million -- nearly what AZKABAN did total in its entire U.S. run last year!

I pretty much had the exact same reaction as you Michael. Doyle's music IS better than Media Ventures, but I'm afraid that's faint praise.

Ultimately I think this film is more compelling because the trio are experiencing adolescence (or something near that) and the target audiences (in general) are going through the same thing or just a year or two on either side. The cool thing about the movie is that the magic isn't "magical wonderment" anymore- it's "magical reality"- the danger is heightened and the magic is darker and the stakes are much higher. Think of turning that corner towards adolescence and all the responsibilities of high school, getting that first job/paycheck, dating, driving a car, looking towards college, peer groups/pressure, alcohol/drugs/partying, choices, etc......the magic of childhood starts disappearing real quick. I think that's one of the reasons why this film is more appealing than POA. So I'll give the film props for that.

mkaroly wrote:Ultimately I think this film is more compelling because the trio are experiencing adolescence (or something near that) and the target audiences (in general) are going through the same thing or just a year or two on either side. The cool thing about the movie is that the magic isn't "magical wonderment" anymore- it's "magical reality"- the danger is heightened and the magic is darker and the stakes are much higher. Think of turning that corner towards adolescence and all the responsibilities of high school, getting that first job/paycheck, dating, driving a car, looking towards college, peer groups/pressure, alcohol/drugs/partying, choices, etc......the magic of childhood starts disappearing real quick. I think that's one of the reasons why this film is more appealing than POA. So I'll give the film props for that.

I think these movies play better at Christmas time (AZKABAN was the only summer release) with the kids out of school and such, which would explain (at least somewhat) the improved business.

Still, though I hear the usual buzz words bandied about as to why this one is doing better -- i.e. it's "Darker" and "Edgier" (and isn't that what they always say about sequels?) -- I honestly didn't find the subject matter any more compelling, or suspenseful, or dramatically rich. It is what it is, which is entertaining and all, but I didn't feel the stakes WERE higher in this movie. I was left cold, and though I agree with you Michael about the parallels to actual adolesence, I didn't sense enough connection with "the real world" or kids growing up...don't get me wrong I was entertained and impressed by the young actors' performances, but I was never really engaged in the story. Nor was I left on the edge of my seat, wondering about what would happen next.

Maybe someone who has read the books can explain this to me: I don't quite understand the point of why they practice magic in the first place. If you can't use it in the "real world", and have to go off to some magical part of the globe to learn it but then can't apply it anywhere, why bother?