Harry Potter and the Goblet of HOLY SMOKES, HOW COULD THIS MOVIE HAVE BEEN SO BAD?
It seems as though commentary on the fourth Harry Potter movie may be a bit outdated, especially considering I witnessed the complete let down at midnight the day it was released. The fact of the matter is, I was so angered by what I had seen I was in no mood to sit down and write about it for fear I may suffer from some emotional breakdown or brain aneurysm. Now, a good month or so after the fact, I can finally express my thoughts with a pseudo-clear mind.
I am a large fan of the series. I have read every book at least twelve times and have Harry Potter footy pajamas that go dazzlingly well with my Hedwig slippers. I am also a large fan of film in general, though, and realize that when adapting a series of novels to fit the silver screen some cuts and changes will have to be made. I never had a huge problem with the first two films. Though they didn't exactly hold their own in the film department they were a quaint little illustrated homage to the books, creating a picture perfect world that correlated fairly accurately with what I had conjured up in my mind's eye. And though the child actors always seem to fall just short of what is expected of them, the adult cast is nothing less than brilliant. The death of Richard Harris was an absolute tragedy and replacing Dumbledore was a massive obstacle for the third movie, but it still pulled through and was, in my opinion, the best out of the three. It made several more cuts than its predecessors, yes, and made some changes to the visual depiction of Hogwarts and surrounding country side, but The Prison of Azkaban moved the Harry Potter film series a few steps closer to actually taking off as a movie franchise. The film finally broke away from simply putting images from the novel onto the screen and actually told the story with heart and feeling.
After such a promising new begining, I figured the only direction we could go was up. The fourth being my favorite book in the series, I figured the movie adaptation could only make me pee myself with joy. I purchased a ticket in advance, borrowed the neighbor's Harry Potter halloween costume, and set off to have the time of my life.
Alas, I found myself the next day dragging myself to school, running on one half hour of sleep and depressed out of my mind.
The movie sucked. I will not settle for "it was cool" and "it all looked so sweet!" That will not suffice. That was fine for the first two movies because, let's face it, the first three Harry Potter books, entertaining as they are, really are nothing but Hardy Boy novels with magical powers. The fourth book however was the first to really reference events in previous books, to really start to bring everything together in one big epic tale, to bring a solid, threatening, and terrifying villain to the table, to actually become real, and to actually carry some emotional depth. Being "cool" and lookin' "so sweet" is not good enough for this story. There is a depth of mystery, speculation, and tension that is essential to the plot that was completely lost in the movie. It wasn't emotionally engaging one bit and frankly, I don't see why anyone should give a ::expletive deleted:: about a thing that happened on that screen.
What chorgles my organs even more is when people complain that the movie was bad because it cut so much out of the text. Helloooo, silly boys and girls. It wasn't bad because it cut stuff out of the book. With over 700 pages of content, they are expected to cut. What made it bad was they cut everythingthat provided any humanity; anything interesting, moving, or meaningful.
They completely hashed the beginning, neglecting to set the scene, relying too heavily on the audience being already aware of what was to come.
The pacing was non-existent, flying through everything as though it didn't matter.
They dwelled on parts that didn't matter in the least (The Yule Ball).
Speculated only on trile things that had barely any bearing on the future development of the plot (Hermione and Ron's awkward teen crush) while completely screwing over two of the finest actors in the film whose characters, believe it or not, have immensly pivatel roles in the two following installments (Alan Rickman-Snape and Gary Oldman-Sirius).
Added (for goodness' sakes! they added material, when they already had to cut over half of the book) silly "action sequences" that only muddled with the pacing more and took time away from anything that mattered (5 minute chase scene with dragon) (McGonagall teaching the students to dance).
(and... before I continue, let's quickly discuss that dragon sequence. As I'm sure most of you know, the first task Harry Potter faces in this movie is to collect a golden egg being protected by a fierce Hungarian Horntail dragon. How he solves this problem is the book is he summons his broom stick, flies around, dodges the dragons lunges and fire (but the dragon is chained down, you see, no big deal) and he eventually gets the egg, no harm done, really. What happens in the film? Well, you see, the dragon breaks free of his chains and chases Harry on his broom stick around Hogwarts, in a very suspensful chase scene until finally falling to his death, and a rather weakened and tired Harry recovers the golden egg. I don't know about the rest of you, but when I was reading the book I wasn't thinking to myself "Man, I sure wish Rowling could have embellished this part more!" and I don't know if the film makers realized they really added no more tension or suspense to the novel by doing so. In fact, over 96% of the audience has read the book and knows what is going to happen, I am sure. And the other 4%... I'm pretty sure will not fear for Harry's life.)
But, worst of all, They completely destroyed the character of Dumbledore, making him loud and bombastic with no compassion for the other characters. Especially Harry. I sat in the back of the theatre, watching Dumbledore run into a room, push Harry against a table, and scream at him asking if Harry had put his own name into the Goblet. I watched for the whole film as the old man quickly moved around the screen rubbing his hands as though Hagrid was late again delivering his daily dose of crack cocaine. What happened to the kind, wise, and comical old man that we still read about? I watched these scenes and I was sure, I was positive, that the screen writer and the director had never picked up a Harry Potter book in their lives, and didn't give a flying fried cake about these characters or what they meant to the hundreds of trillions of people who read about them and cared about them.
It doesn't matter that a lot was cut, that is expected. What matters was the emotion and humanity that was begining to come alive in the third movie was completely ripped from the screen and hurled into the garbage bin when the fourth came along.
The film was an abomination. Aside from Miranda Richardson's Rita Skeeter, Brendan Gleeson's Mad Eye Moody (who was only worth while on occasion), and the unbelievable Ralph Fiennes as Voldemort, the movie was a complete bomb.
I am a large fan of the series. I have read every book at least twelve times and have Harry Potter footy pajamas that go dazzlingly well with my Hedwig slippers. I am also a large fan of film in general, though, and realize that when adapting a series of novels to fit the silver screen some cuts and changes will have to be made. I never had a huge problem with the first two films. Though they didn't exactly hold their own in the film department they were a quaint little illustrated homage to the books, creating a picture perfect world that correlated fairly accurately with what I had conjured up in my mind's eye. And though the child actors always seem to fall just short of what is expected of them, the adult cast is nothing less than brilliant. The death of Richard Harris was an absolute tragedy and replacing Dumbledore was a massive obstacle for the third movie, but it still pulled through and was, in my opinion, the best out of the three. It made several more cuts than its predecessors, yes, and made some changes to the visual depiction of Hogwarts and surrounding country side, but The Prison of Azkaban moved the Harry Potter film series a few steps closer to actually taking off as a movie franchise. The film finally broke away from simply putting images from the novel onto the screen and actually told the story with heart and feeling.
After such a promising new begining, I figured the only direction we could go was up. The fourth being my favorite book in the series, I figured the movie adaptation could only make me pee myself with joy. I purchased a ticket in advance, borrowed the neighbor's Harry Potter halloween costume, and set off to have the time of my life.
Alas, I found myself the next day dragging myself to school, running on one half hour of sleep and depressed out of my mind.
The movie sucked. I will not settle for "it was cool" and "it all looked so sweet!" That will not suffice. That was fine for the first two movies because, let's face it, the first three Harry Potter books, entertaining as they are, really are nothing but Hardy Boy novels with magical powers. The fourth book however was the first to really reference events in previous books, to really start to bring everything together in one big epic tale, to bring a solid, threatening, and terrifying villain to the table, to actually become real, and to actually carry some emotional depth. Being "cool" and lookin' "so sweet" is not good enough for this story. There is a depth of mystery, speculation, and tension that is essential to the plot that was completely lost in the movie. It wasn't emotionally engaging one bit and frankly, I don't see why anyone should give a ::expletive deleted:: about a thing that happened on that screen.
What chorgles my organs even more is when people complain that the movie was bad because it cut so much out of the text. Helloooo, silly boys and girls. It wasn't bad because it cut stuff out of the book. With over 700 pages of content, they are expected to cut. What made it bad was they cut everythingthat provided any humanity; anything interesting, moving, or meaningful.
They completely hashed the beginning, neglecting to set the scene, relying too heavily on the audience being already aware of what was to come.
The pacing was non-existent, flying through everything as though it didn't matter.
They dwelled on parts that didn't matter in the least (The Yule Ball).
Speculated only on trile things that had barely any bearing on the future development of the plot (Hermione and Ron's awkward teen crush) while completely screwing over two of the finest actors in the film whose characters, believe it or not, have immensly pivatel roles in the two following installments (Alan Rickman-Snape and Gary Oldman-Sirius).
Added (for goodness' sakes! they added material, when they already had to cut over half of the book) silly "action sequences" that only muddled with the pacing more and took time away from anything that mattered (5 minute chase scene with dragon) (McGonagall teaching the students to dance).
(and... before I continue, let's quickly discuss that dragon sequence. As I'm sure most of you know, the first task Harry Potter faces in this movie is to collect a golden egg being protected by a fierce Hungarian Horntail dragon. How he solves this problem is the book is he summons his broom stick, flies around, dodges the dragons lunges and fire (but the dragon is chained down, you see, no big deal) and he eventually gets the egg, no harm done, really. What happens in the film? Well, you see, the dragon breaks free of his chains and chases Harry on his broom stick around Hogwarts, in a very suspensful chase scene until finally falling to his death, and a rather weakened and tired Harry recovers the golden egg. I don't know about the rest of you, but when I was reading the book I wasn't thinking to myself "Man, I sure wish Rowling could have embellished this part more!" and I don't know if the film makers realized they really added no more tension or suspense to the novel by doing so. In fact, over 96% of the audience has read the book and knows what is going to happen, I am sure. And the other 4%... I'm pretty sure will not fear for Harry's life.)
But, worst of all, They completely destroyed the character of Dumbledore, making him loud and bombastic with no compassion for the other characters. Especially Harry. I sat in the back of the theatre, watching Dumbledore run into a room, push Harry against a table, and scream at him asking if Harry had put his own name into the Goblet. I watched for the whole film as the old man quickly moved around the screen rubbing his hands as though Hagrid was late again delivering his daily dose of crack cocaine. What happened to the kind, wise, and comical old man that we still read about? I watched these scenes and I was sure, I was positive, that the screen writer and the director had never picked up a Harry Potter book in their lives, and didn't give a flying fried cake about these characters or what they meant to the hundreds of trillions of people who read about them and cared about them.
It doesn't matter that a lot was cut, that is expected. What matters was the emotion and humanity that was begining to come alive in the third movie was completely ripped from the screen and hurled into the garbage bin when the fourth came along.
The film was an abomination. Aside from Miranda Richardson's Rita Skeeter, Brendan Gleeson's Mad Eye Moody (who was only worth while on occasion), and the unbelievable Ralph Fiennes as Voldemort, the movie was a complete bomb.
posted by AHaynes at 12:38 PM
1 Comments:
I didn't so vehemently dislike it, as much as I was underwhelmed by it. I agree especially about Dumbledore and the dragon chase scene, though. I thought it was easily better than the first two (but not quite good).
Post a Comment
<< Home