harry potter by kayleesthegreatest

OTHER SCIENCE FICTION SERIES

harry potter

POSTED BY: KAYLEESTHEGREATEST
UPDATED: Tuesday, September 11, 2007 10:39
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 6611
PAGE 1 of 1

Sunday, July 15, 2007 10:24 AM

Is freaking amazing and a half times two plus one squared
i went and saw the new one
if u like the series at all who is ur favorite witch or wizard in the series

Someday the verse will spit in your soup but at least they gave you soup.
one day
one plan
one mission
one army of browncoats
june 23rd serenity day

-Our mission as browncoats is to make us known.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, July 15, 2007 10:38 AM

SHINY

Meh. I thought it felt too rushed, since the books are getting longer and longer at the movies still have to fit within ~2 hours. It was like a series of highlights, instead of well-paced plot and character development

---

I don't need a gorram back-spaceship driver!!!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, July 15, 2007 10:40 AM

KAYLEESTHEGREATEST

*GASP*
*GASP* again since i was still thinking
NO WAY i think it coevered a great many parts of the bbok well enough to keep the plot but i will agree that they demolished luna lovegoods character in the new one

Someday the verse will spit in your soup but at least they gave you soup.
one day
one plan
one mission
one army of browncoats
june 23rd serenity day

-Our mission as browncoats is to make us known.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, July 15, 2007 11:16 AM

PHOENIXROSE

You think you know--what's to come, what you are. You haven't even begun.

I think all the movies are an abomination, and I stopped bothering with them. Even the first one left out a good deal, and the problem has only spiralled since. Plus the casting has been, in many cases, completely wrong. Hermione (though they could have given her false teeth, which would have worked well since they get shrunk) McGonagal (though they could have died her hair black) Dumbledoore (completely miscast in both cases) the list goes on. And on. And on. And if the casting was right for how the character looked, the acting/directing was subpar, and barely managed to give an impression of the character, let alone capture them. Sometimes, as in the case of Dumbledoore, neither look nor character was properly captured.
I'd liken it to new Star Wars; using special effects to cover a butchered story and horrid acting and directing, but the effects aren't even that good. I can't take it.
The books, on the other hand, are some of my favorite things ever. Favorite? Probably Ginny. (Who I'm just sure they messed up in the movies like everything else.)

Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so.
A troll's hair is still pointy, even when it's wearing a hat.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, July 15, 2007 12:37 PM

DRU

The movie was ok, I thought Goblet of Fire was the best of the bunch.

I agree with your comment that the movie seemed liked a bunch of highlights strung together. The end a the Ministry of Magic was very good.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, July 15, 2007 12:38 PM

KAYLEESTHEGREATEST

YES I LOVED THE END
GINNY WAS FREAKING EPIC!!!!!!!! haha i love that girl :)

Someday the verse will spit in your soup but at least they gave you soup.
one day
one plan
one mission
one army of browncoats
june 23rd serenity day

-Our mission as browncoats is to make us known.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, July 15, 2007 1:17 PM

CYBERSNARK

Having not read the books, I really enjoyed this movie (as in, best one yet). I've had the differences from the books explained to me, and I honestly think most of them are cosmetic.

-----
We applied the cortical electrodes but were unable to get a neural reaction from either patient.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, July 15, 2007 2:02 PM

KAYLEESTHEGREATEST

YAY

Someday the verse will spit in your soup but at least they gave you soup.
one day
one plan
one mission
one army of browncoats
june 23rd serenity day

-Our mission as browncoats is to make us known.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, July 15, 2007 7:28 PM

FINN MAC CUMHAL

I gave up on Harry Potter after the last one before the one before this new one

(I don’t remember the title). I thought the first one was great, but it seemed to go down hill as the kids got older and finally, it got very dark, and started to seem out of sorts.

I never read any of the books, so I don’t have any context to miss content or casting problems. In fact, I loved the kids back when they were snotty and cute, but as they got older and became just snotty I lost interest.

But if this new Harry Potter is as good as some are telling me, perhaps I should give it chance?

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, July 16, 2007 3:34 AM

KAYLEESTHEGREATEST

YES u should haha its amazing

Someday the verse will spit in your soup but at least they gave you soup.
one day
one plan
one mission
one army of browncoats
june 23rd serenity day

-Our mission as browncoats is to make us known.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, July 16, 2007 6:03 AM

BLUESUNCOMPANYMAN

I felt that the film was a visual treat but they chopped and slashed plot to make things fit into 2 hours.

The Book is far superior....but then each film has demonstrated how they cannot acurately duplicate any of the books upon which they are based. The only film that I felt got close was the first one, but that happened because it was an orgin tale which translated well into a first film. The only other element I liked in the films came in the third installment with the showdown in the shreaking shack. The visual artistry was wonderful and the crossing of character personalities was a bullseye with the book.

As far as this 5th installment goes, there was too much left out. I felt that the nature of the Order wasn't adequately explained, Kreacher wasn't given any development whatsoever, the trouble caused by the Weasely twins in their runnup to their finale sequence was entirely ingnored, the awsome binding spell Hermonie placed on the "Dumbledore's Army" contract was deleted entirely..leading to Cho's betrayal instead of the Hufflepuff girl...

The list goes on forever.

For many viewers though, I think the differences are irrelevant because they just want to see cool magical stuff on screen. And if that's you, great, I'm glad you liked it. I need more character development though, and I get so annoyed at filmmakers who are too lazy to write a more acurate screenplay in order to get a film to the box office ASAP.

In a nutshell, that's exactly what's going on with the Harry Potter films.

Do not fear me. Our's is a peaceful race and we must live in harmony.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, July 16, 2007 7:30 AM

KAYLEESTHEGREATEST

wwell my take on it is that if the movies are fun to watch it doesnt matter how well it goes with the book because u can just read the book haha

Someday the verse will spit in your soup but at least they gave you soup.
one day
one plan
one mission
one army of browncoats
june 23rd serenity day

-Our mission as browncoats is to make us known.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, July 16, 2007 8:09 AM

HIXIE129

I disagree with Phoenix Rose.. The acting is super, the cast in ALL of the movies is really top notch (except for Mike Gambon, he is terrible...)
I loved all the movie, but the books are so good, I can't wait to get my copy of this last book on Friday at midnight.

The Order of the Phoenix book is over 900 pages long so its hard to make a movie to cover everthing and there were somethings that were not in the book..

Here are some parts of the movie that was actually story line deviations and untruths:
1) Neville did not find the Room of Requirement – Dobby did
2) Cho was not the sneak it was Marietta
3) Beatrix did not use avada kadavara curse to kill Sirius
4) Luna and Harry thestrles scene

I personnally would have liked to see these scenes in the movie...

1) The real reason as to why Harry and Cho had a falling out, The scene at hogsmeade at "madame puddifoots"
2) The scene with fred and george getting back at Umbridge could have been better, they made a huge swamp, it would have been nice to see her asking the teachers for help and have all of them refuse.

3) The part when the students were taking astronomy OWLS and down below they could see hagrid being attacked by Umbridge and Professor McGonagal being shot in the chest by Umbridges wand.

4) QUIDDITCH was NOT even mentioned in the Movie. RON was suppose to be keeper for the griffindors!

5) Ron and Hermione were Prefects!

6) When Arther Weasly got bitten by the snake , they didnt mention or show St. Mungos hospital. It would have been awesome to see, also neville's parents and gilderoy lockhart where all in the hospital. That is when every knows what happened to nevilles parents.

Still, I liked the movie, I do wish it was longer. At least we have had 5 movies and 7 novels with 2 more movies that will be made in the next couple of years. I think the Harry Potter series is one of the best written, and acted stories of all time. JK Rowlings is so talented. I hope she can do another.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, July 16, 2007 8:28 AM

GRIZWALD

A note to all out there who have not read the books:

** Please stop watching the movies. **

Go check out the books from the library and read them in order.

The movies are tributes to the books but just cannot compare to the books, which are loads and loads of fun to read. The books are just screamingly funny and imaginative, and a lot of that humor would not translate to the screen no matter how gifted the filmmakers. There's just so much more there.

You will just have a blast reading these books. Even if reading tends to be difficult for you, you'll have fun with these.

___________________________________________________
High Priestess of Pork and Ag-Related Activities of the MYTHICAL LAND OF IOWA

Click on my profile for my Annoyingly Long List of Firefly Links.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, July 16, 2007 9:43 AM

LWAVES

I really enjoyed this film and thought it was the best of the bunch, followed by POA as second.
I liked the fact that it wasn't really centered on anything, all the others had something that ended by the end of the movie (i.e. what the stone really does, finding the chamber, Sirius's true purpose, the tournament). This one didn't have any of that and just seemed to set up future events.

The final scenes did seem a bit rushed, and it was hard to tell what was going on and who was fighting who, but it sure looked mighty pretty.

Ginny ROCKED!!! One to watch out for.
Luna was excellent, suitably oddball (I like oddball, offbeat characters), and I think she'll have an important part to play later.

I am actually glad that I haven't read the books. It's a given that books are pretty much always better than the movies. There is NO way you can put the whole book out there on screen and make it interesting or even filmable.
It actually bugs me when people say they don't like the films because of the differences (but they keep watching them anyway).
Take the books as one version of the story (the genuine, authentic version), and if you do watch the films take that as another version.
When I've seen the last movie I'll probably listen to the audiobooks, don't really have time to read novels these days.

Looking forward to the next two, and seeing this one again on DVD.

'I think I'll go and have some pudding.'

"If I hear voices and someone is really there, does that mean I'm going REALLY crazy?"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, July 16, 2007 10:08 AM

BLUESUNCOMPANYMAN

Quote:
Originally posted by Hixie129:

5) Ron and Hermione were Prefects!

YES!!!

Thank you. You're totally right. Why did they not at least note that Ron and Hermonine were prefects? It would have taken no time at all to illustrate this little thing and it would have added more to the film.

And your notation regarding leaving out the character development of Harry and Cho's breakup in the cafe is also spot on. That should have been included. This movie really cast Cho in a bad light and that wasn't nessessary. She's human too with extremely compicated feelings.

Do not fear me. Our's is a peaceful race and we must live in harmony.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, July 16, 2007 12:59 PM

CYBERSNARK

Quote:
Originally posted by bluesuncompanyman:
This movie really cast Cho in a bad light and that wasn't nessessary. She's human too with extremely compicated feelings.

As was helpfully pointed out by both Hermione and (unexpectedly) Snape himself.

If anything, I wanted Harry to apologize for treating Cho like dirt.

(Did anyone else want to think that Hermione's quip about Ron having the emotional range of a teaspoon was a reference to Giles' line to Wesley about having "the emotional maturity of a blueberry scone?"

)

Dobby would've added nothing to the film except for tokenism, whereas Neville had a more important role to play in introducing Belatrix (who looks poised to be the next Big Bad) and stealing the spotlight throughout. Dobby's appearance would've just been a brief cameo, but Neville was present throughout the movie anyway.

And having Belatrix deliberately kill Sirius (as opposed to him being mildly stunned and tripping through the veil) added to her villainy, and gave Sirius a more dignified (and less-likely to be "faked") exit.

Same for Ron & Hermione being Prefects. Just not necessary. Neither was Quidditch, since it has nothing whatsoever to do with the plot.

As much as I'm sure dedicated Potterfans would've wanted a 9-hour movie, Rowling herself gave her approval to this (demanding only the inclusion of Kreacher, who apparently plays a major role in future stories).

-----
We applied the cortical electrodes but were unable to get a neural reaction from either patient.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, July 16, 2007 7:45 PM

FINN MAC CUMHAL

It seemed a little disjointed, but kind of fun. I’m not sure it was better then the first, but it was a lot better then the last two.

There were some problems with it. What was the point of Ministry of Magic going mental? I guess we’re supposed to believe that the Ministry of Magic is full of idiots, but that is really insulting. And the little love affair between Harry and whats-her-name just suddenly ended. I could see that if she was never vindicated, but she was and then nothing. And the truth is that this movie, despite being over 2 hours was shorter then the others so there was obviously room to add some simple resolution and some explanation, even the special effects seemed toned down until the very end. The Harry Potter directors are really getting lazy.

The final battle scenes were impressive and quite entertaining, but they also raise a few questions. If Voldemort is no match for Dumbledore, then what’s has been all this big frakking deal for five movies? Clearly Dumbledore and his posse of wizard teachers can handle this Big Bad. They made it seem as if Voldemort’s return is/was the worst thing to hit the world since God sent the Flood.

Throughout the film I couldn’t help but notice the theme of fear paralysis leading to actively ignoring serious threats. At a time when it has become mind-numbingly vogue to pander to themes of government overreaching through fear-mongering, I didn’t think it would be Harry Potter to be the trendsetter. So kudos for an independent theme.

I have to admit that I liked Hermione in this film, something I haven’t done sense at least the second film. And Luna Lovegood was charming even if her voice could shatter glass. Harry was pretty full of angst this time around. And overall, there seemed to be more character development in this film then in others, and that’s a good thing.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, July 16, 2007 10:13 PM

EMMARIGBY

Well I just thought I'd add a few of my thoughts on the movie. I'm going to come down on the side of the people who liked it.
It is true that the book is better but that was only to be expected. It is also true that the screenplay was not given as much emphasis as special effects but to a MUCH lesser extent than most Hollywood movies (*cough*Spiderman3*cough*)!
There were a few little bits that niggled-
The fight at the end, in order to put in some really extreme special effects they had the 'grown-up' wizard duels go a bit OTT. I felt that this undermined Harry and co's achievements. In the book they actually managed to take out a few death eaters and a lot more interesting setting (I guess lots of different rooms would have cost more).
I also think they downplayed Harry's anger. Yes, in the book it made me uncomfortable when he tore up Dumbledore's office but it was an important insight into the changes that he's going through. Sitting calmly whilst listening to the prophesy was, to me , akin to the saccharine hero building of the second film (did anyone else hate the lines "Let's hope that Hogarts will always have Harry Potter around to defend it" significant look "It will"!)?

As someone else has mentioned, I was also really sad they didn't include St Mungoes. The scene where Neville's mum gives him a sweet wrapper and he carefully keeps it is, in my opinion, the most touching moment out of any of the books and made me blub like a baby!

On the other hand I think there was some fantastic attention to detail. Bellatrix's crooked wand for example, and the broken stained glass of Hagrid's hut and the hundreds of kitten plates ... I could go on! It all added a depth of realism that many films would have skimped on!

Okay, I'm done now!

___________________

Hissssssssss!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, July 17, 2007 12:06 AM

MAGDALENA

"No power in the 'verse can stop me!"

They didn't include St Mungoes? Oh...

Never mind - I am looking forward to it immensely - though I am looking forward to the new book even more!! 4 more sleeps!! I cannot wait!!

I love Tonks - she reminds me of myself in some ways... kind of marches to the beat of her own drum and wears her heart on her sleeve... both things that are simply part of who she is, just as I have those attributes as part of who I am too...

I wish I had the courage to dye my hair pink!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.myspace.com/lady_magdalena
http:/www.crazypurplewombat.blogspot.com

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, July 17, 2007 12:26 AM

KAYLEESTHEGREATEST

i totaly agree cause i wanted to see hermione and luna helping all the house elves. I WOulDNT MIND A THREE HOUR HARRY POTTER MOVIE

Someday the verse will spit in your soup but at least they gave you soup.
one day
one plan
one mission
one army of browncoats
june 23rd serenity day

-Our mission as browncoats is to make us known.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, July 18, 2007 6:01 PM

GREYSTOKE

Kaylee is the greatest but Potter is not. There are so many better examples of Fantasy out there it amazes me that this B grade tripe makes it through. Read a David Gemmell book. They are a simple read but not as pussy as Potter. David Eddings is good also but my current favorite is Alistair Reynolds. It's more Sci-fi though. Stay Shiny!

It's All Gravy Baby!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, July 21, 2007 3:24 PM

DRU

I finished reading the seventh book. It is the best book out of the whole series.

I hope they do a better job with the last 2 movies than they did with The Order of the Phoenix.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, July 25, 2007 1:46 PM

GREYSTOKE

Thy should make Harry Potter toilet paper..... For obvious reasons.

It's All Gravy Baby!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, July 25, 2007 8:32 PM

REAVERINA1985RIVIERA

They need to do what Lord of the Rings did. A 2 hour theatrical release, and a 4 hour DVD.

---------------------------------------------
How many Jaynes does it take to change a light bulb?

Two. One to try to put it in and another to find a bigger hammer.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, August 26, 2007 2:43 PM

RIVERFLAN

You are absolutly right!

And for my take on the movie: It's my second fav one (my fav is the third) I don't really mind the differences. I just see the book as one story, and the movie as a diffrent story with the same setting and the same -sort of- plot. The book, obviously, is longer and more involved. The movie lends a visual element for those not equiped with a good imagination.

I really like how they wrote Luna in the movie. They made her weirdness more of a good thing rather than a laughable thing. And the casting for the Deloris part was perfect!

I don't like the Dumbledoor cast very much -the old Dumbledoor was much better!

All in all, though, I have to say I prefer the movie.

That's my stand on this topic.

And here's a cute pic:

By the way, I luv your joke!!

River: "The human body can be drained of blood in 8.6 seconds, given adequate vaccuuming systems."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 27, 2007 8:41 PM

LEXAN

Quote:
A note to all out there who have not read the books:

** Please stop watching the movies. **

Go check out the books from the library and read them in order.

The movies are tributes to the books but just cannot compare to the books, which are loads and loads of fun to read. The books are just screamingly funny and imaginative, and a lot of that humor would not translate to the screen no matter how gifted the filmmakers. There's just so much more there.

Yes.

I consider the Harry Potter movies and books to be entirely different entities. If I watched the movies trying to conceive them as the film version of the books I would be bitterly disappointed but if I view them asa completely different series they are kind of okay, perhaps slightly above average.

They are, however, adaptions. For adaptions to succeed, they must stay true to the original material but also develop their own identity and attempt to provide something the original didn't. In this way, the movies did NOT succeed. Therefore, people are better off trying not to think about the books when watching the movies. The only reason I have really gone to see the movies is out of curiosity more than anything.

The casting is okay but the characters of the movies are not those of the books, sometimes they even tend to stray away from the characters actual personalities.

Mike Gambon needs to chill.

I heard Joss expressed interest in directing the last movie. This, I think would be excellent. Not only because it would probably vastly improve the movie franchise but also because I think Deathly Hallows is the most suited Harry Potter book to Joss. I could see him making a wicked adaption.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, September 8, 2007 9:34 AM

EMMAZULE

I must be a little weird, because I seem to have an opposite take on the movies than most of the people here!

I look at the first four movies this way (but not the fifth, because I haven't seen it yet):

First one: Not as bad as it could have been. I'd give it three out of five stars both as a movie on its own and as an adaptation of the book. I've seen better fantasy flicks by far, but it was cute, fun, kept the nice twisty plot in, and though it didn't move me much as a film, it was close to as faithful as they could have made it and still kept it under three hours long. An OK adaptation, but not nearly as good as the book, but really, the movie version of ANYTHING rarely are, and considering it was directed by the Home Alone guy, I say we count our blessings that it wasn't a lot more dumbed-down.

Second one: I thought this was an IMPROVEMENT. Maybe it was just the fact that there was less need to worldbuild in this one (as opposed to the first one, which is meant to be an introduction to the series), or maybe it was the newly-darkened lighting or whatever, or maybe Chris Columbus just got a little better at directing or something, but I liked this better. My only real complaint is a key scene - without which the accidental trip into Knockturn Alley was rather pointless - was inexplicably left out of the theatrical release, even though they clearly FILMED it, as it's on the DVD as a deleted scene. Weird. I'd give it about a half star higher in terms of film and in terms of adaptation.

Third one: My absolute favorite. The first movie in the ENTIRE SERIES that felt like a film to me as opposed to just The Movie of The Book. Fans who more nitpicky than I am complained about "muggle clothes" being too common, etc., by but honestly my only complaint is that Remus Lupin couldn't take ten seconds to explain the Marauders to Harry, yargh! All in all, felt like a 90-minute film instead of the two and half hours it (and the other films) actually were. It was well-paced and also beautifully-filmed, as well as the younger actors feeling a little more comfortable in their roles this time. I credit Alfonso Cuaron for that, as the screenwriter and cast were the same as the first two, but it's markedly different. As a film, I give it about 4.5 out of five stars, as an adaptation... 4. It has more ambience, but it still left out one or two details I felt should have been left in.

Fourth: It was nicely-filmed and all, but felt horribly, HORRIBLY like a chopped up, slapped-together, cliff's notes version of the book, which didn't even bother to include a number of important details, and only vaguely addressed a number of subplots - including the arguably REALLY important Rita Skeeter subplot (which subsequently seems to rob Hermione of one of her shining moments in figuring out how Skeeter got all that gossip and outsmarted her, grrrr!), even though it vaguely introduces and then abandons subplots like Skeeter jumping at the chance to portray Hermione's relationship with Harry as romantic. With no rhyme or reason. Annoyed the CRAP out of me. They cut SO MUCH, with no apparent reason behind it whatsoever. As a film, 2.5 out of five TOPS, and as an adaptation, a 1. Screw Mike whatshisface! Bring back Cuaron!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, September 11, 2007 10:39 AM

HIXIE129

I really loved all the movies except the OOTP. If you thought that the GOF was chopped up ( which I did't) then wait until you see the OOTP...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER

POST DATE