The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
‘Abomination of Cinema’.
What I am referring to is the ludicrous Harry Potter. NO, I have not read the books nor do I now intend to, but I can honestly say this film is distressing…for all concerned. Rent out Pearl Harbour than make a trip to see this one. This is not a review but a subjective realisation of where the film failed, and why.
While expectations seem to exceed its reputation what is clear is that this movie is more Final Fantasy than Shrek. The link is evident, it relies too heavily on visual effects, blatantly out to stun rather than stimulate the audience. But the book I am told, is very good. Which leads us on to the problem of condensing 500+ page book, into two an a half hours of cinema. Which is not to say it can not be done, look at the sheer size of L.A Confidential and its compression into one of the best crime movies of the last decade. So who’s to say it can not be accomplished, although Harry Potter may be very different material, with the right ingredients it could have been good. The characters lack motivation, are caricatured and not to J.K Rowling’s original vision. You can not throw in some of the finest British actors along side three newbies and expect them to deliver. It has been done but not today. Point 2, Haley Joel Osmont would have been ideal for the role, at least Americans could have taken some of the blame (who’s going to remember Chris Columbus). In comparison to The Others, Nicole Kidman in what may be her finest role was paired alongside some great British talent culminating in an amazing film.
‘Join us’. ‘I will not Join you’. Expect Star Wars influenced clichéd dialogue in the film, and I mean clichéd. It runs throughout the film and only takes a break when (ooh…wow) a great big monster thingy with three heads enters. Ok, im missing the point…the film is catered toward a Childs taste (2 ½ f****** hours) but wasn’t the book universal in its appeal.
Nobody can escape the publicity, my advice take a trip to the South of France and return on December 10th. That is when Lord Of the Rings will be premiering (here in London) and you will have a genuine excusable opportunity to spend your weekend at the cinema come the 19th. So the war has now begun…
Official publishing figures show an increase of 400% sales of Lord Of the Rings, and without a marketing campaign. Experts predict Harry Potter to over shadow Titanic and Lord of the Rings, but after seeing the film I can not see it happening. At the preview I was treated to the Lord of the Rings extended trailer, and was almost caught drooling. Titanic success was due partly to eager fans returning, some thing which will not be happening for Harry Potter. The fanbase J.K Rowling has created will incredibly disgruntled while Lord Of the Rings fan will be lapping it up. I have not read Lord Of The Rings either, (I am illiterate), but to those who have I salute you, the hardcore fan will return several times if it is to the standards we expect and hopefully, make a mockery of Harry Potter.
What I am referring to is the ludicrous Harry Potter. NO, I have not read the books nor do I now intend to, but I can honestly say this film is distressing…for all concerned. Rent out Pearl Harbour than make a trip to see this one. This is not a review but a subjective realisation of where the film failed, and why.
While expectations seem to exceed its reputation what is clear is that this movie is more Final Fantasy than Shrek. The link is evident, it relies too heavily on visual effects, blatantly out to stun rather than stimulate the audience. But the book I am told, is very good. Which leads us on to the problem of condensing 500+ page book, into two an a half hours of cinema. Which is not to say it can not be done, look at the sheer size of L.A Confidential and its compression into one of the best crime movies of the last decade. So who’s to say it can not be accomplished, although Harry Potter may be very different material, with the right ingredients it could have been good. The characters lack motivation, are caricatured and not to J.K Rowling’s original vision. You can not throw in some of the finest British actors along side three newbies and expect them to deliver. It has been done but not today. Point 2, Haley Joel Osmont would have been ideal for the role, at least Americans could have taken some of the blame (who’s going to remember Chris Columbus). In comparison to The Others, Nicole Kidman in what may be her finest role was paired alongside some great British talent culminating in an amazing film.
‘Join us’. ‘I will not Join you’. Expect Star Wars influenced clichéd dialogue in the film, and I mean clichéd. It runs throughout the film and only takes a break when (ooh…wow) a great big monster thingy with three heads enters. Ok, im missing the point…the film is catered toward a Childs taste (2 ½ f****** hours) but wasn’t the book universal in its appeal.
Nobody can escape the publicity, my advice take a trip to the South of France and return on December 10th. That is when Lord Of the Rings will be premiering (here in London) and you will have a genuine excusable opportunity to spend your weekend at the cinema come the 19th. So the war has now begun…
Official publishing figures show an increase of 400% sales of Lord Of the Rings, and without a marketing campaign. Experts predict Harry Potter to over shadow Titanic and Lord of the Rings, but after seeing the film I can not see it happening. At the preview I was treated to the Lord of the Rings extended trailer, and was almost caught drooling. Titanic success was due partly to eager fans returning, some thing which will not be happening for Harry Potter. The fanbase J.K Rowling has created will incredibly disgruntled while Lord Of the Rings fan will be lapping it up. I have not read Lord Of The Rings either, (I am illiterate), but to those who have I salute you, the hardcore fan will return several times if it is to the standards we expect and hopefully, make a mockery of Harry Potter.
Page:
Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone summed up in a nutshell: great film, not in the same league as the book, every actor/actress was superb, although in my opinion the director bit of more than he could chew trying to compete with JK, and I think she went along with it to make more MONEY!
The original post in this thread is verging on the ludicrous.
No more, no less.
Oh, suppose I should say it's a cracking film, though lacks, most notably, enough magic or the dark bits from the books that make the series so great. It's all a little too sugary, just like the books (well, the first two at least) - but they have the contrasting sadness that is almost totally over looked in the film.
And there should have been more Hermonie - young lass who plays her is exceptionally good, as is Mr Coltraine.
Pity about the Quidditch match though, not quite as brilliant as it could have been. Can’t put my finger on what exactly was wrong with it, but there was something wrong about it.
Anyway, here's to the Chamber of Secrets!
No more, no less.
Oh, suppose I should say it's a cracking film, though lacks, most notably, enough magic or the dark bits from the books that make the series so great. It's all a little too sugary, just like the books (well, the first two at least) - but they have the contrasting sadness that is almost totally over looked in the film.
And there should have been more Hermonie - young lass who plays her is exceptionally good, as is Mr Coltraine.
Pity about the Quidditch match though, not quite as brilliant as it could have been. Can’t put my finger on what exactly was wrong with it, but there was something wrong about it.
Anyway, here's to the Chamber of Secrets!
I read the books and have seen the film. Althought I really enjoyed the film it didn't even come close to the books, the film missed tonnes of stuff out, the first chapter was done in about 2 mins.
I went with my mum and dad, they enjoyed it so it can't be all that bad!
I went with my mum and dad, they enjoyed it so it can't be all that bad!
It's Stryke. With a Y. And you've read LotR, so I graciously forgive you. But the film still ruled - watch the Quidditch sequence again.
Thanks for everyone's opinions, most appreciated. True i have not read the book (as i stated i am illiterate) but my discussion was focused around the film, not the book, and the film is my amigos, very, very bad. The secret in making a good conversion is (i think) is to capture the atmosphere (in what ever way) and making it enjoyable. True the book was a national phenomenon, but i will 'crawl back into the hole' i came out of and read the Harry Potter books. And by the way i am ending Lord Of The Rings and the book is simply great, and the film promises to be just as good!
Sorry for upsetting anybody (i will lend you my hanky Striker).
God save Frodo.
Sorry for upsetting anybody (i will lend you my hanky Striker).
God save Frodo.
Im going to see Harry Potter - I read the books and the film is exactly how you imagine it to be!! I think it looks pretty good!!
You are illiterate, as you confessed. This means you are no position to talk about anything. Go and crawl back into your hole. I know this won FAD, wd and all that, but you cannot judge Harry Potter until you've read it. You can't compare the movie to the book, because no way you could fit the entire thing into 2 and a half hours. I shall expect you to read LotR before even considering going to see the film. LotR looks better than HP. LotR must have had to cut more out - So it'll be crap, by this illiterate strokers opinion. Not reading books should be a crime. Gah.
*Stryke stalks off to fume*
*Stryke stalks off to fume*
"The characters lack motivation, are caricatured and not to J.K Rowling’s original vision. " B0||0cks. You haven't even read the books, how the hell would you know?
Like Tarrant said, you don't make any sense at all.
"Point 2, Haley Joel Osmont would have been ideal for the role," Yeah, I know, apart from one niggling fact: HE IS AMERICAN. Harry Potter was created as British, not American. Casting Haley Joel Osmont would of been the biggest mistake in filming history. It just goes to show how much sense you make. It would of caused an absolute uproar.
Oh, and the fact that Harry Potter received a standing ovation in America, and a long, load clapping applause at my cinema. That's another reason as to why it will be extremely successful.
SHOCKY
Like Tarrant said, you don't make any sense at all.
"Point 2, Haley Joel Osmont would have been ideal for the role," Yeah, I know, apart from one niggling fact: HE IS AMERICAN. Harry Potter was created as British, not American. Casting Haley Joel Osmont would of been the biggest mistake in filming history. It just goes to show how much sense you make. It would of caused an absolute uproar.
Oh, and the fact that Harry Potter received a standing ovation in America, and a long, load clapping applause at my cinema. That's another reason as to why it will be extremely successful.
SHOCKY
Slaveunit wrote:
> Hopefully the DVD will do better justice. The film was shot at a total of 4 1/2
> hours, before being edited to 2 1/2, so with any luch the DVD will be the
> complete version, which will tell the story much better.
Really?
Are you saying that they did actually film most of the scenes of the book onto the film, but cut it drastically for the cinema showing?
GREAT!
I'll be getting the DVD, then :D
SHOCKY
> Hopefully the DVD will do better justice. The film was shot at a total of 4 1/2
> hours, before being edited to 2 1/2, so with any luch the DVD will be the
> complete version, which will tell the story much better.
Really?
Are you saying that they did actually film most of the scenes of the book onto the film, but cut it drastically for the cinema showing?
GREAT!
I'll be getting the DVD, then :D
SHOCKY
Hopefully the DVD will do better justice. The film was shot at a total of 4 1/2 hours, before being edited to 2 1/2, so with any luch the DVD will be the complete version, which will tell the story much better.
Page: