Harry Potter: Order of the Pah-hoe-nix [Archive]

GottaHavePride

7/14/2007, 11:19 PM

No one's started a thread on this one yet? Note: I'm not using spoiler tags; the book has been out for years. If you don't know what happens it's your own damn fault.

Anyway, I just saw it. Freakin' awesome. That was one hell of a wizzard battle. And Dean is totally right: Dumbledore would wipe the floor with Gandalf.

Frozen Sooner

7/14/2007, 11:19 PM

Goin' to see it in 30 minutes.

GottaHavePride

7/14/2007, 11:22 PM

I'll read your opinion tomorrow, then; I'm not staying up till 3 am here. ;)

Ike

7/14/2007, 11:40 PM

A few observations:

Much like the last HP movie, this one felt as though the first 2/3rds of the existed just to rush you through the major plot elements so you knew why the big battle happened at the end. It wasn't bad mind you, but the flow of the story seemed a bit forced.

Emma Watson seems to have gotten worse at acting. She reminded me of the kid in Episode 1 in this movie.

The cinematography was awesome.

The chick that played Luna did a great job, although, IMO, she was too easy on the eyes for what I had imagined for Luna. Not that thats a bad thing.

Umbridge was too much Betty Crocker and not enough Martha Stewart.

The final battle was pretty awesome though.

Suerreal

7/14/2007, 11:40 PM

Just saw it tonight - excellent. Best movie of them all. I thought Luna Lovegood was perfect. Delores Umbridge didn't look very much like a toad, but the portrayal was very very convincing. The incongruity of the pink and the giggle and all the kittens with someone so heartless and destructive.

But there was another thread about this movie:
http://www.soonerfans.com/forums/showthread.php?t=96050

silverwheels

7/14/2007, 11:46 PM

Emma Watson seems to have gotten worse at acting.

I didn't think that was possible. I guess I'll just have to not pay attention when she's speaking when I go see it tomorrow.

Frozen Sooner

7/15/2007, 02:58 AM

Awesome. Sauce.

SoonerAtKU

7/15/2007, 06:59 AM

I just have no idea why anyone would complain about this movie.

1stTimeCaller

7/15/2007, 07:26 AM

I thought HP books and movies were for kids.

reevie

7/15/2007, 08:20 AM

They're good for both kids and adults

Tailwind

7/15/2007, 12:02 PM

I'm old and I love them. So there! :P

proud gonzo

7/15/2007, 01:18 PM

it. was. AWESOME!

LosAngelesSooner

7/15/2007, 01:51 PM

I was let down, I must admit. It was my favorite of all of the books, but I felt like the writers/director and studio kept saying "Plot, Plot, Plot!" and neglected much character development and important scenes which would have allowed the audience to "sink in" a bit more. It just felt very rushed and a bit forced.

It also angered me a bit (damn you, WB) that the longest of the books ended up being only 2:19 long when the movie prior lasted 3 hours and was a shorter book. Trust me Warner's, we'll sit for 3 hours if it's a GOOD 3 hours.

I guess I really felt that this, and the last movie, should have been split into two movies, each 2:15 long, and done very thoroughly. But at this point, WB is just trying to maximize profits by cutting budgets. (this one was VERY cheap for a HP high FX tentpole).

Last word, though: I thought it had some good moments, they had the mood and the feel of the movie right and they're starting to get scarier (where they should be). I can only imagine how dark the next one will be. And I can't freakin' wait for next Saturday when I get my copy of the book!

soonerscuba

7/15/2007, 03:55 PM

The statues not playing a role in the Dumbledore v. Voldemort fight was gay, gay, gay.

That is a slight criticism, I thought the rest was pretty dang good, and I was impressed with how Umbridge turned out as I had grave doubts based on the previews.

silverwheels

7/15/2007, 04:11 PM

My one word review: meh. I'd elaborate, but then it would seem like I hated the movie, when it was probably the best out of all of them. I was just disappointed at how different it was from the book.

bri

7/15/2007, 07:01 PM

That movie was made of win, awesome, and English jailbait.

crawfish

7/15/2007, 08:36 PM

I thought HP books and movies were for kids.

So are high school girls.

I enjoyed it, for the most part. Great battle at the end. I feel like Ike - it was a bit rushed and I wouldn't have understood a thing if I hadn't read the book. Not that that's a bad thing, since nearly everybody has read it. The end made up for any shortcomings, though (not that I'm complaining at all).

Yes, Dumbledore could beat Gandalf with his toy magic. He'd be toast with the magical limitations of Middle Earth, tho. ;)

proud gonzo

7/15/2007, 11:04 PM

So are high school girls.

ZANG!

soonerboomer93

7/15/2007, 11:22 PM

I did enjoy it, but yeah, it did feel a little rushed. It definitely could have been longer and I would have been fine with that...

oumartin

7/15/2007, 11:49 PM

I am amazed you people waste money on that crap.

Tailwind

7/15/2007, 11:51 PM

Have you seen any of the movies, or read any of the books? N0? Then shut up. ;) Wiseguy. lol

oumartin

7/15/2007, 11:54 PM

that voodoo magic doesn't appeal to me so NO! :D

Tailwind

7/16/2007, 12:00 AM

Yeah, I thought the same thing until I saw the first one....then I was hooked.

oumartin

7/16/2007, 02:14 AM

sounds like a personal problem! ;)

Tailwind

7/16/2007, 06:05 AM

You could givie it a chance, you know. Take the boys to see them.

C&CDean

7/16/2007, 10:04 AM

NormanPride

7/16/2007, 10:19 AM

I thought it was interesting trying to pick out details to predict the upcoming book. Snape knows the ending, so he was acting accordingly. Unfortunately, his part was so small that he didn't give much away. Also, Kreacher was in it even though the producer wanted to take him out. Interesting...

proud gonzo

7/16/2007, 03:10 PM

when you say "Snape" are you referring to Snape or Alan Rickman?

C&CDean

7/16/2007, 03:17 PM

when you say "Snape" are you referring to Snape or Alan Rickman?

Alan Rickman is a perfect Snape. Just like he was a perfect Sheriff of Nottingham in the Robin Hood flick. And I'd have to assume he meant Snape cause afterall, only Snape knows if he's good or bad...

Frozen Sooner

7/16/2007, 03:22 PM

They gave VERY short shrift (like none) to the idea that Snape was actually opening Harry's mind up to Legilimancy. Since any changes to the plot from the book to the movie have to be approved by Rowling, this could be a clue to Snape being good.

They did a great job of foreshadowing the Ginny/Harry relationship, by the way.

Frozen Sooner

7/16/2007, 03:24 PM

Alan Rickman is a perfect Snape. Just like he was a perfect Sheriff of Nottingham in the Robin Hood flick. And I'd have to assume he meant Snape cause afterall, only Snape knows if he's good or bad...

Agreed on Rickman. His portrayal of Snape is masterful.

Helena Bonham Carter was outstanding casting for Bellatrix Lestrange-she went from a kind of flat, uninteresting character (to me) in the books to a full-blown insane villainess in the movie-and I really think that's what Rowling intended in the books.

Tonks was hot. That bugged me a bit-Tonks is not supposed to be hot.

NormanPride

7/16/2007, 03:39 PM

Agreed on Rickman. His portrayal of Snape is masterful.

Helena Bonham Carter was outstanding casting for Bellatrix Lestrange-she went from a kind of flat, uninteresting character (to me) in the books to a full-blown insane villainess in the movie-and I really think that's what Rowling intended in the books.

Tonks was hot. That bugged me a bit-Tonks is not supposed to be hot.

Agreed. I was put off by thinking that a girl could still be attractive with a beak.

Ike

7/16/2007, 03:47 PM

Went and saw it Saturday. Yes, it was a bit rushed, but overall, the American judge gives it a solid 9. I think it was the best of the flicks so far. I too wished it went another hour or so. I was disappointed in the amount of time given to Grimmauld Place. We got a little bit of Kreacher, but no shrieking tapestry, etc. And yes, you need to read the book to get everything this movie has to offer.
I too was just a bit disappointed in the lack of a shrieking tapestry.

I also wanted to see the swamp Fred and George created out of one floor of Hogwarts. Not to mention Peeves giving Umbridge hell.

Come to think of it, I don't think the ghosties were anywhere to be seen in this movie.

Frozen Sooner

7/16/2007, 03:55 PM

You're right, the ghosts were absent.

No quiddich, either. Not surprising-Rowling apparently hates quiddich.

They left out the whole Hermione and Ron being prefects storyline as well.

Ike

7/16/2007, 04:07 PM

You're right, the ghosts were absent.

No quiddich, either. Not surprising-Rowling apparently hates quiddich.

They left out the whole Hermione and Ron being prefects storyline as well.

Well, I don't blame her for hating quiddich. I mean, the smart strategy in that game would be to just make everyone a seeker.

Didn't they become prefects in the 6th book? I can't remember, but I thought it happened when they got the results of the OWLs.

crawfish

7/16/2007, 04:17 PM

C&CDean

7/16/2007, 04:24 PM

I can tell your taste in movies sucks because you didn't say 'Hans Gruber".
Was he in Young Frankenstein?

Frozen Sooner

7/16/2007, 05:15 PM

Well, I don't blame her for hating quiddich. I mean, the smart strategy in that game would be to just make everyone a seeker.

Didn't they become prefects in the 6th book? I can't remember, but I thought it happened when they got the results of the OWLs.

Nope, because that was part of Harry feeling left out of everything-Hermione and Ron were prefects, and he wasn't. Dumbledore explained at the end that he didn't make him a prefect because he thought he had quite enough on his plate already.

Also, Hermione and Ron get their prefect badges while the Weasley twins were still in school.

josh09

7/16/2007, 06:12 PM

Wow, i cant wait to see this movie

soonerscuba

7/16/2007, 06:45 PM

when you say "Snape" are you referring to Snape or Alan Rickman?

Rickman and Coltrane were filled in with most of the details as to the future of their characters by Rowling so they could avoid making plot errors. Pretty neat to have knowledge that millions want to know.

LosAngelesSooner

7/16/2007, 07:19 PM

And millions of fans are going to discover around midnight this Saturday.

(oh, and can we have a general SPOILER ban regarding this book on the S.O. from the Mods? TIA)

GottaHavePride

7/16/2007, 07:45 PM

(oh, and can we have a general SPOILER ban regarding this book on the S.O. from the Mods? TIA)

You mean like post a sticky saying "Any biznachos posting Harry Potter: Deathly Hallows spoilers will ****ing die as soon as Dean gets his hands on them"? Yeah, I think we can manage that. ;)

GottaHavePride

7/16/2007, 07:50 PM

Oh, and I forgot to continue my discussion.

Yeah, I thought it was a bit rushed, but they're doing a good job of working in most of the side stories in very subtle ways. Such as setting up Harry/Ginny and letting people know that Ginny is extremely powerful. (That was one hell of a reducto on the Room of Prophecies there...)

I liked cutting the statues out of the Dumbledore/Voldemort showdown. The statues always seemed cartoony to me. I also liked changing it so Cho was the one that turned in the DA by means of veritaserum. It tightens up the plot and eliminates an unnecessary character - they can still continue Cho/Harry tension at the beginning of the next movie, but now instead of her flipping out for a pretty shaky reason she can get mad and leave because he didn't trust enough to stop and listen to her explanation.

I thought the aspects of the story they actually changed were changes I'm surprised an editor didn't suggest to Rowling during initial drafts. The parts they cut, well... I like 7 hour movies as much as the next person, but they weren't trying to make Roots: The Harry Potter Generation.

the_ouskull

7/16/2007, 09:55 PM

First of all, I'm pretty sure I'd shell out $20 a pop for a 5-6 hour long Harry Potter movie. Especially if it was this past one, or either of the next two. Man, it'd be like, I could just be a dork forever...

...and I'm not making fun of the series when I say that. I'm a big fan. I'm making fun of myself more than anything...

Agreed. I was put off by thinking that a girl could still be attractive with a beak.

The girl that played her is Natalia Tena, and she I'm not sure what you meant when you said "beak," but I know that I'm awfully fond of her two breasts, and her thighs aren't too shabby. Wow.

I don't care if she was supposed to be all frumpy and older... I don't care one tiny bit. When I go to the movies, I want to be entertained... I wouldn't give a sh*t if they replaced Maggie Smith with Charlize Theron in the next movie, as long as there's a nude scene. She could at LEAST play Narcissa, right?

"For this performance, the role of Ms. Granger will be played Scarlett Johannson. And I am down." :D

the_ouskull

KC//CRIMSON

7/16/2007, 10:41 PM

Jeebus Christ! You nerds have shelled out 330 million so far.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=harrypotter5.htm

GottaHavePride

7/16/2007, 11:05 PM

First of all, I'm pretty sure I'd shell out $20 a pop for a 5-6 hour long Harry Potter movie. Especially if it was this past one, or either of the next two. Man, it'd be like, I could just be a dork forever...

Oh, I'm not saying I wouldn't. I'm just saying most people wouldn't. ;)

And who was complaining about Emma Watson's acting earlier? I'd say it's a toss up as to whether she or Daniel Radcliffe is the best actor out of the three main characters.

The only thing I thought was weird was that it looked like the director was almost trying to set up a Harry/Loony thing for the next movie, and that just doesn't compute.

Frozen Sooner

7/16/2007, 11:12 PM

Nah, it was pretty obvious that Luna was just trying to give Harry advice. They foreshadowed Neville/Luna much more.

And Emma Watson is awful. I'm sorry, man, but she's VERY stagey in her acting.

Ike

7/17/2007, 12:31 AM

Oh, I'm not saying I wouldn't. I'm just saying most people wouldn't. ;)

And who was complaining about Emma Watson's acting earlier? I'd say it's a toss up as to whether she or Daniel Radcliffe is the best actor out of the three main characters.

The only thing I thought was weird was that it looked like the director was almost trying to set up a Harry/Loony thing for the next movie, and that just doesn't compute.
Sorry, but Emma came across as an SNL actor in this one. Personally, I thought the guy that played Runil Waslib (oh wait, thats book 6) did the best acting job of the three of them. But then again, he only had like 7 lines.