« Nemo Maximus??? | Main | Short History of a Long War »

November 19, 2005

Goblet of Fire

Just got back from seeing Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire.

I suppose the best description of this film is "compressed". There's just too much story to go around. It really makes me wonder how they are going to get Order of the Phoenix done.

Still, they did a good job with the film overall. A few parts (like how Krum was bewitched) were glossed over, and required knowledge of the book to realize what was happening. However, the young leads did an admirable job. They played a real range in this movie - from general teenage confusion to fear and then grief. I truly felt for Harry after he returns to Hogwarts through the portkey.

Michael Gambon is much better as Dumbledore in this movie as well. In Azkaban he just seemed out of place. I really was worried that such an important character was getting left behind. However, while still not Richard Harris, at least now Gambon seems to be playing the part more naturally.

The first two movies suffered by focusing too much on action and not enough on character. Azkaban and this movie have been changing that. Since they don't have to redevelop the wizarding world over and over they have the time to focus on the people. It's a welcome change to say the least. It doesn't take more than a few scenes to do it right - Neville dancing (and perhaps more importantly watching the Cruciatus curse), Hermione coming nervously down the stairs, Ron and Harry arguing, etc.

I suppose my only complaint about the rushed feeling of the film is the resurrection scene. While adequate, the scene didn't really build to the rebirth - it just came about quickly. A little anticipatory fear would have helped the scene quite a bit.

As for the PG-13, I think it's probably about as graphic and tense as Fellowship of the Ring. Not too much, but perhaps enough for the really young ones who might be frightened by snakes, blood or transformations.

Next movie up: The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe

Posted by Nemo at November 19, 2005 12:06 AM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.caerdroia.org/MT/mt-tb.cgi/633

Comments

Order of the Phoenix will be easier, because the book itself needed to be compressed. The lack of editing to tighten the story places it behind books four and six, in my opinion, despite many outstanding moments, especially at the end.

As for Goblet of Fire, I think it is clearly the best of the movies so far. There are a few changes to the story and a lot left out or not given enough time to, but I think it was done about as well as can be expected for trying to cram that book into two and a half hours.

All in all though, the movies are simply never going to compare to the books.

Posted by: Brian Medcalf at November 19, 2005 2:21 AM

I think that the movies have a fantastic visual impact; they really do get a lot of things right (although Mad Eye Moody, from the previews, doesn't look right to me). But the story development is always cut short, and in a lot of ways. I think, for example, that Peeves' absence really messes up the fun aspect, as he was there to provide a lot of comic relief in the books. I also wish that Ron wasn't as whiny as he developed after the first movie. I still, though, am really looking forward to seeing Goblet of Fire.

All of that said, series fiction does not translate well to movies. Lord of the Rings worked because it was written as one book and shot as one movie. But Master and Commander, while decent, does not bring out the books any better than do the Harry Potter films. On the other hand, A&E's treatment of Hornblower was able to stick quite closely to the books (as far as the series went, anyway) because they had the time to develop it correctly.

I think that Harry Potter, done as a series rather than as movies, could be really, really good.

Posted by: Jeff Medcalf [TypeKey Profile Page] at November 19, 2005 11:26 AM