|
||||||
| FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
Topic Review (Newest First)
|
| Jun 11th, 2004 10:41 AM | ||
| Matt Harty |
That was the one I wanted to see the most too. 4 is my favorites book. 
|
|
| Jun 10th, 2004 10:04 PM | ||
| Daphne |
haha, or the island of dr moreau  yeah I am so glad he was good. I am getting angrier about this movie. The more I think about it I don't like how much they cut out. I don't care that it's not longer, but the scene in (spoilers)the shrieking shack should have been longer (and made sense without reading the book). And I just read that they are making the fourth book into ONE movie instead of 2. It's gonna be shit. |
|
| Jun 8th, 2004 01:23 AM | ||
| Immortal Goat | I had a feeling Daphne would post in this thread. So you thought Lupin was cast well? Same here. Glad it didn't turn out to be like Dragonheart, which is the only other movie I can think of with him in it. | |
| Jun 7th, 2004 09:49 PM | ||
| ArrowX |
Everyone says i look like harry potter
|
|
| Jun 7th, 2004 03:46 PM | ||
| pjalne |
From what I hear about this movie, it smells an awful lot like an extended DVD edition is coming. It opens in a couple of days here, hopefully I can convince my friends to see it. |
|
| Jun 7th, 2004 03:42 PM | ||
| Daphne |
I saw it last night and I thought it was pretty good. The ending felt really rushed though, and if you hadn't read the book, I have a feeling you'd be really confused. I also didn't like that it ended like a mentos commercial. But I'm picky, it's my favourite of the books, and I think it should have been longer than the first two movies, or at least as long but it was shorter and I think it suffered for it. Spoilers: I loved the scenes with the whomping willow, Lupin (whom I adore) was brilliant, I didn't like the scene where Harry saw Pettigrew on the map, I thought that gave too much away, and I wish that they had explained the Patronus at the end of the movie. Gary Oldman was a perfect Sirius, and I much prefer Gambon's Dumbledore to Richard Harris. At least Gambon LIKES the books and plays him funny like he should be. |
|
| Jun 6th, 2004 04:40 PM | ||
| punkgrrrlie10 | I'd have gotten my money back. Sitting in the very front makes me nauseated. | |
| Jun 6th, 2004 12:16 AM | ||
| HickMan |
The two people that were behind me were making out through the whole thing . I was also in the VERY front of a stadium-seat theatre
|
|
| Jun 5th, 2004 08:02 PM | ||
| punkgrrrlie10 |
Quote:
|
|
| Jun 5th, 2004 06:57 PM | ||
| Comrade Rocket | Well i read in a local paper that Chris Columbus (who directed the first two) wanted to put the entirety of the books into the movies. But soon someone would look down at a watch and realize that they were going way too long so they would have to rush to finish. In this one Alfonso Cuaron read through the book and carefully selected scenes to place into the movie. | |
| Jun 5th, 2004 06:06 PM | ||
| tenno |
my one complaint is the complete change in location...different castle, different effects, etc. I know the new director has the option to have a different vision than his predecessor, but it's so jarring to have the pre conceived images of the 1st 2 movies, ruined and offset by the third movies more gothic premise. Great effects though, and better acting. 3.5/5 |
|
| Jun 5th, 2004 02:49 PM | ||
| AChimp |
They cut it too short, though! Book 3 is longer than both of the first two books, but the movie is 20 minutes shorter.
|
|
| Jun 5th, 2004 02:24 PM | ||
| Snatchtastic |
. Tru :/ |
|
| Jun 5th, 2004 01:49 PM | ||
| Emu | Well, they were trying to squeeze a relatively long book into a few-hours time frame, and the thing still ended up being what, two hours long? It's forgivable. :/ Imagine what the fourth one's gonna be like. It's nearly 750 pages long. | |
| Jun 5th, 2004 01:18 PM | ||
| Snatchtastic |
. The story was way too rushed and fast paced. But I enjoyed it. :/ |
|
| Jun 5th, 2004 10:59 AM | ||
| Drev |
Harry Palmer and the Sex Prisoners of the Ass Cabin I'll probably go see it on Tuesday.
|
|
| Jun 5th, 2004 10:46 AM | ||
| AChimp | I thought the CG was really awesome, too. Buckbeak was especially well done. I want a talking Jamaican shrunken head, too. | |
| Jun 5th, 2004 04:52 AM | ||
| Dole |
It was quite entertaining. did anyone notice Ian Brown from the stone roses sat in the pub? bizarre. They had a shot of him close up for about 5 secs. |
|
| Jun 5th, 2004 12:03 AM | ||
| Immortal Goat |
I must say I really liked the CG in the movie. Buckbeak and Lupin were really cool looking. Pettigrew had a mullet.
|
|
| Jun 4th, 2004 11:23 PM | ||
| Cap'n Crunch |
 @ Harry Potter
|
|
| Jun 4th, 2004 10:57 PM | ||
| Esuohlim |
I liked it. I wouldn't want to see it again anytime soon, but I'm finally glad I went to see a movie that was good for once. I noticed that the camera movements were really cool, but only nerds think stuff like that. The whole back-in-time part was cool too.
|
|
| Jun 4th, 2004 10:28 PM | ||
| AChimp |
Yeah, I saw it today. I can't really say that it was better than the other two, though. The acting was definitely better, but they cut so much out from the story, many parts of the movie don't really make sense. :/ Doesn't really matter, though, since everyone who sees it will have probably read the books anyways. These movies really deserve the LoTR treatment, though. Hopefully there will be a lot of deleted scenes on the DVD. 
|
|
| Jun 4th, 2004 08:29 PM | ||
| Emu |
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban I saw it today. It was pretty good, a lot better than the last two, I think. I probably would have liked it better if the fuckhole theater hadn't have fucked up the movie and skipped 20+ minutes of footage in the middle of the movie. 
|
|
