You've all been waiting for it...my blog on Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. I know everyone is anxious to know what I thought. Hey, wipe that smirk off your face! I am only kidding.
I'll begin by stating that I thought the book was long and boring. The movie wasn't much better. It must have been a difficult task to try to adapt this book for the big screen. The poor screenwriter must have known that it was impossible. The book is so long that it could never have fit into a two hour - or 2.5 hour or 3.5 hour - time frame. But I wonder why they left out some things, such as the Quidditch World Cup, and then included others, such as that silly scene where the dragon climbs all over the roof of Hogwarts. Why did they leave out the details of how Harry learned all the spells for the Tri-Wizard Tournament? And how did Barty Crouch escape Azkaban? I guess it really isn't all that secure of a prison if he can just walk right out. Too many plot details were left out that helped to make the story more complete and make sense.
The movie wasn't a complete failure. I enjoyed watching Harry squirm when he asked out Cho or when Moaning Myrtle paid him a visit in the bath. Both scenes captured well the anxiety that most boys must experience when they start to get interested in girls (and when the girls are anywhere in the same room with them). The Yule Ball with the rock band was a hoot, although Hagrid grabbing Madame Maxime's bum was really uncalled for. Brendan Gleeson as Mad-Eye Moode was wonderful during the screen time they gave him.
And finally, Voldemort was not scary. I read some review that said what a wonderful job Ralph Fiennes did in the film. Um, okay, maybe we didn't watch the same movie since all I kept thinking was, "How did they scrunch his nose down like that?" He wasn't nearly as scary as the Voldemort from the first film.
at December 5, 2005 9:00 PMhope already knows my opinion, but i'll voice it here again. this was not one of my favorite HP movies for several reasons: 1. no quiddich. i mean, what do we see these movies for if not quiddich - it's certainly not for the oscar winning performances given by hermoinie or moaning myrtle. 2. no sense of a passage of time. i realize that england is drab and gray alot of the year, but every scene was drab and gray. the whole tournament could have taken place in 2 days according to the lack of seasons presented. 3. the music was boaring until the 'rock band'. that was a nice reminder that this movie is about and for teenagers.
so, it really sounds like i hated this movie...but that's not entirely true. i liked ron and the whole high school dating scene. the yule ball was interesting. the special effects were far better than king kong. and i enjoyed getting to know some of the other characters (especially the rest of the weasley family). ok, if i keep posting like this, i may as well have my own blog site!
Posted by: Cathie at January 9, 2006 4:55 PMI liked the book. But I'm a sucker for any HP book, and I don't really mind the length. However, the thing I enjoy most about HP books is how Rowling captures her characters. They seem like real kids, dealing with extraordinary situations, yes, but still real kids. This was the big problem for me with the movie. I thought they did some smart stuff to make it shorter - I really could care less if they showed the Quidditch tournament, leaving Dobby and Winky out was probably a smart move as well, though I was seriously bummed that there was no Charlie or Bill Weasley (I know it would be cradle-robbing, but I always expected Charlie to be a real hottie, and they cut him out entirely!). But except for the Yule Ball and a few other moments, it was all one plot point after another. #3 did a great job in capturing some wonderful moments between the students, but for the most part this was absent in #4. Like you said, Hope, all that time with the Dragon scrabbling over the castle, yet no time spent on the more interesting part of Harry trying to learn the Accio spell in the first place. We already knew he could fly - his triumph with the dragon was in mastering that spell.
Ah, I could go on, but probably should stop here.
Posted by: Susan at January 28, 2006 8:57 PMLike Susan, I also loved this book. I like each HP book better than the last. I just saw this movie last weekend. Had I seen it closer to the time I read the book, I probably would have like the movie less. On the other hand, had I not read the book at all, I think I would have been confused by some of the plot. It did seem like they tried to cram as much plot in as possible. I almost think they would be better doing a Kill Bill-type thing where from now on, each book is split up into a Volume I and Volume II.
Then again, I'm the type of person who would probably end up making a 14-hour movie out of the book because I wouldn't want to leave anything out!
Posted by: Jill at March 14, 2006 1:06 PM