Do you have a favorite? Do you love them? Do you think they're horrible?
I'll admit I didn't like some of the casting decisions (Remus, Tonks, Sirius, Narcissa, Lily, James, Bill and maybe some others). And the fact that Harry had blue eyes and young Lily had brown ones- ever hear of contacts?- still irritates me.
But other things were just amazing. Everything about Bellatrix, Ralph Fiennes as Voldemort, all of the effects, Alan Rickman, the second Dumbledore, the sets and more were awesome.
My favorite is probably the last one, just because it was so emotional for me and I thought it stayed very true to the book. My only complaint was that I just wanted more of everything (and the lack of a Dramione ending but that's just a lost cause lol).
Danielle radcliffe was allergic to contacts. The brown would bleed through on Lily. I don't see why they couldn't use CGI on Lily to make her eyes blue to match Harry's; she was barely in the films so it wouldn't have been as expensive as it would have been for Harry to change his eyes green.
I preferred the first Dumbledore. I couldn't stand Gambon's portrayal; to me he made Dumbledore seem impossibly out of character.
I love Philosopher's Stone, Chamber of Secrets and Deathly Hallows Parts 1 and 2; they were the best adaptions out of all of them.
Dang it Daniel Radcliffe. But seriously it was the most successful movie franchise ever, you'd think they could suck it up and make his eyes green. But it would've been better if Lily's eyes were blue just for continuity's sake.
I liked both Dumbledores but the first one just seemed so fragile (which I guess he was since the poor man died).
I also really liked Half-Blood Prince, which is odd because it was one of my least favorite books (right next to Order of the Phoenix), but I think I liked it so much because of Tom Felton's performance.
My least favorite movie is Prisoner of Azkaban- which is my favorite book- because I though the casting was all wrong and they changed quite a bit from book to movie, which always irritates me. (Edit: And also they had Hermione punch Draco instead of slap him. Either that or the other way around- it's been awhile since I've seen the movie- but I remember that irritating me.)
Oh, I thought PoA was horrible. They got some "Artistic" director who was all "let me show off my glorious vision!" instead of telling the story.
Sure, the Whomping Willow was pretty, but did we need a shot of it every other scene change? And at the expense of, I don't know...the actual plot, which was entirely neglected? I don't think the movie would even have made sense to someone who hadn't read the book, and it left out so many crucial details that then couldn't be referenced later (Marauders, anyone?)...
Plus he completely missed the point. Alfonso or whatever his name was, he was all "ooh magic is creepy and weird, so I will make walls crooked and put in spooky shrunken heads and scary weirdness." That is not the point of Harry Potter. In HP, magic is home. The Leaky Cauldron should have been warm and comforting, not warped and dark. The whole movie was so "dark" because magic is "scary." You missed the point, dude.
(Also, no one cares how "awesome" you are, and putting in your little threesome-movie-poster shot as this big indulgent "The Trio Watches as Buckbeak Dies" shot was just dumb and self-important. I can't believe anyone would be so egotistical as to do that in someone else's story. This was not Alfonso's movie, this was JKR's movie. He was supposed to be adapting it, not showing off how "artistic" and "clever" he is.)
I will say that it was a very pretty movie. Because it was. And that was all it was. And I know a lot of people liked it, because it was so "artistic" and a big thematic change-up from Chris Columbus's straightforward first two...but I think those were people who read the book, and had the real story playing in their head the whole time the stuff on screen was happening, and just appreciated the pretty without realizing how much the movie actually missed the mark.
And yes, the acting is much deeper and more intense...because the kids are older. Alfonso gets all this credit for that, and I don't think he should. That was a matter of the kids learning their craft, and growing up a little -- and, for that matter, having a story that has a deeper emotional range (or should have had). Don't get me wrong, Stone and Chamber were great stories, but it's in PoA that things get complicated and ambiguous. (One of the reasons why it was such a good book.) But instead of actually showing any of that, we get a three-hour Knight Bus chase scene, lingering shots of the Whomping Willow and a really stupid bird, and a magical world that suddenly looks scary and dangerous and, oh yeah, no one can use a ruler or a T-square and everything is crooked. Thank goodness the castle was already established, and he couldn't make all the walls lean or plaster shrunken heads up instead of tapestries. Seriously, what the hell?
Also, Lupin seemed like a creeper. I'm just saying, I felt like Harry needed to find an adult (a different adult) every time they were alone together. But I have to give David Thewlis credit, because apparently that wasn't him being a bad actor: that was the director telling him to portray Lupin as "a gay drug addict." Whatever the hell that has to do with Remus Lupin, I do not know, but it made him seem smary and creeped me out. (Also, Tonks. So not gay. Maybe bi, if you like Sirius/Remus school era stuff, but not gay. That would be Dumbledore. Get it straight...or not, as the situation dictates. Thanks.)
I just hate when artistry overpowers substance. I'm a comic book girl, I know that in sequential storytelling (whether it's movies or comics or whatever) the purpose of art is to tell the story. If you're not doing that, I don't care how pretty it is, you're failing. Good art is important, yes, and I appreciate it -- but it's not good if it's not doing what it's meant to. If you just want to make pretty art, stick to the fine arts, don't do storytelling. You can make an artistry-focused movie, I'm not saying you can't; but not when you're adapting a book, and trying to tell a story. Especially when it's someone else's story, and no one cares how fancy-pants-artistic you are, Mr. Director-with-your-head-up-your-bum. . . . .
Wow that turned into quite the rant. My apologies. I just loved the book so much, and this travesty of a movie never fails to disgust me.
Nah, he creeped me out. I loved pretty much all the rest of the movie casting (except for Narcissa, and Barty Crouch Sr.), and I admit he did grow on me in the later movies; I think he's okay by the time DH rolls around. He just, in my eyes, had a lot to overcome to become a proper Remus. I'm okay with him now, so long as I don't watch PoA and remind myself of the creep-factor.