What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
76 Comments
- Nomad83, on 10/11/2007, -1/+35'Expecto Profitum!'
JK Rowling's and Warner Brothers' Money Printing Spell...Warning may cause deletion of several plot elements and revisement of young wizard's development from original story... - Morphinity, on 10/11/2007, -4/+20I saw it for Emma Watson.
- Anrkist, on 10/11/2007, -2/+18Tack on another $14 to that, good movie.
- skilskilskil, on 10/11/2007, -0/+15This just in: The MPAA blames the low opening week ticket sales on internet piracy.
- TomFrost, on 10/11/2007, -2/+15This just in, different people like different things, and how you feel about it will never change that.
- br0ck, on 10/11/2007, -0/+11Actually, if you adjust for inflation 'Gone With the Wind' is the highest grossing movie of all time and Titanic is sixth: http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/adjusted.htm
- malfourmed, on 10/11/2007, -2/+11Inflation will.
- Yousty, on 10/11/2007, -0/+8no, actually it isn't...read the article next time
"weekend ticket sales of $77.4 million and a five-day total of just over $140 million" - seanthebond, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7God.. at this rate nothing is ever going to knock Titantic out as the 'Highest Grossing Movie World-Wide of all Time'.
- danswayuk, on 10/11/2007, -8/+15Lots of people are saying Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix was the biggest disappointment this year:
http://www.product-reviews.net/2007/07/11/harry-potter-and-the-order-of-the-phoenix-reviews-and-ratings/ - MrSprout, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6Professor Trelawny, duh!
- MOJIRA, on 05/17/2008, -1/+7What if the federal legal age of consent was 19, or 20, or 21? They're just arbitrary numbers. There's a difference between sick and illegal.
- mabba18, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7I think you'd be surprised as to how many people would want a 4 hour film, or, better yet 2 2 hour films
- lilbitmoreslyk, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5Buddy, this novel is for all ages really. Besides, if its such a childish movie why is it making so damn much money? Because kids can afford to go twice or three times? yea....
- dragongrrl, on 10/11/2007, -5/+10i don't read the books but since i have a kid, i see all the movies.
i've read reviews saying that this HP film was one of the best. i disagree. i found it to be one of the more boring movies of the lot and was squirming through much of the film. i thought the scenes were badly lit and the darkness to be gratuitous rather than serving to emphasize the mood of the film. sadly, even the payoff scenes were disappointing as i had a hard time following the action amidst the overly plentiful amount of characters in those scenes.
maybe they try to cram too much into each movie? maybe some of the books warrant two films instead of one. yet that solution is problematic as well because all the dialogue calling Harry Potter "a child" was stupefying after a while given how the actor playing him now appears to be a full adult.
oh well, Voldemort was great and the villainess put my teeth on edge as she is supposed to do. finally, the kiddies get to see a type of villain they'll be likely to encounter in the real world! - The1337Dude, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4And who could have predicted this?
- Gryffydd, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Transformers was a feature length commercial for toys that was filled with blatant and distracting product placements with ridiculous dialog and a predictable plot....but it sure was fun to watch.
- ExSlashdotter, on 10/11/2007, -2/+6adjust for inflation? maybe some, but try 'adjust for *IAA making more money off of you'...
- chazzbro, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5Join the crowd. She's growing up very nicely. And last I knew, there were no age limits on looking.
- returnofajedi, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5Try MPAA making money off of you.
- robuk24, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3I agree, best one of the franchise yet.
- Exstatica, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3What i don't agree with is numbers now a days. Everyone is like 77 million holy crap. But in reality at least here in the us it costs us 10.50 average to go see a movie. When back along time ago it was like 3.75 or 4.25 for a movie. for example Jurassic Park. Grossed 50 million on opening weekend.
http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/1993/0JRSS.php
So in theory if ticket prices were around 10 dollars in 1993 jurassic park would have beat out harry potter.
But i did see the movie this last weekend. It definitely got a little more on the serious side and less of a kids movie which i'm happier about. - schlongmeister, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Professor Treelawney?
- brufleth, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2I agree. It was the first book in the series that seemed to just be dragging its feet. I can only assume someone was lazy with the editing and didn't want to cut out all the crap that didn't need to be in there. It could have been a size similar to the other books in the series and covered just as much ground.
- 500fthigh, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2i enjoy the books, but this movie was tooooo slooooowwww and boring. thumbs down for this one
- doctechnical, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2The book clocked in at 800 pages, and frankly I thought JKR could have dropped about 300 of those and had a much better read.
Given my opinion of the book, I'm in no hurry to see the movie. Unless the last book is a real humdinger, this is where the series jumped the shark IMHO. - br0ck, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Robyn - the chart is domestic gross, but still Gone with the Wind made about 2.6 Billion '2007 dollars' worldwide and Titanic made $1.8 Billion.
- Th3_anOmoLy, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3I don't care how much I like movies I see this summer I think the phrase "Transformers was better" will be applied to all of them.....
- ZigVicious, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3the blonde girl was hotter.
- CrimsonBlur, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Sorry, but this HP film sucked. It was completely boring. There is one good fight at the end, and that's it. I've enjoyed the other films, especially the last two, but this one just fell completely flat to me. The part where Harry was teaching all of the other kids was pretty good. The director, David Yates, added absolutely no style or emotion to the film whatsoever. The pacing was all over the place. Sometimes the pacing would change mid-scene, multiple times! This really worries me because he is also at least directing the next movie.
- texnofobix, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1I thought it was ok, but I'm not into sorcery. I only went b/c my fiance wanted to go see it. I would have rather watched Die Hard or Transformers really.
- KingGoonie, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1This just in: The opening week ticket sales were phenomenal. Don't forget the damn movie made 70 million on Wednesday and Thursday alone... then ANOTHER 70 million over the weekend... It beat out spiderman 2 to have the biggest Wednesday opening of a film ever. Its 5 day take is the 6th highest 5 day take of all time... and is actually 20 million higher then Goblet of Fire made in 5 days (Though that opened on a Friday)... so someone needs to do a bit or research before they say things... The movie is a huge success... Personally it was my least favorite, they rushed it... should have been another 45 minutes longer. That being said... now looking back on it I think it was probably alot better then I thought (I would give it 7 out of 10... but now I think maybe it was a 8.5 or a 9 out of 10... have to see it again to know for sure)
I do that alot with movies... I look forward certain movies so much and have an idea in my head of what they will be, that when I finally see them I am a little disappointed... only to think they are amazing the second go round when that hype isn't there and I can take the movie as it is. Goblet of Fire I wasnt too crazy about when I first saw it either... now I love it. I think that has alot to do with movies like this... it can be the citizen kane and we still won't think its great because we have this idea in our head... so that upon watching it again without that idea we realize just how good it is. - 98acura, on 10/11/2007, -4/+5The movie sucked, really bad. You could walk into the movie an hour and 55 minutes late, and still catch the only reason for watching it. There is no build up, no story, just holes. The screenplay must've been written by some idiot with a cliffs notes version of the book. Horrible Horrible Horrible!
- ssboisen, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1so you actually think that the hype created by the media is less significant in regards to record-sales/movies-ticket sales in our time than in the 1960s?
I don't agree. - foolfromhell, on 10/11/2007, -3/+4They tried to cram too much into a short period. That just means taht the 6th and 7th movie will suck too.
- RobynG7, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1That chart is probably not world-wide gross, since Titanic made over $1 billion world-wide.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3it's good that there aren't "mega super hits" anymore. it shows that we don't have anymore one or two channels and a radio to hear the big brother telling us what to do. look at the beatles. a great band and all, but they also had 2 or 3 media outlets playing them 24/7. nowadays they'd be a good band but they'd never reach that success because simply we know better with many media outlets and the internet that there aren't 1 or 2 "best" only. there's variety.
- in2deep, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Not this dude again....never seen any are they pretty good!?
- Lassan, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3on the other hand, I thought the movie was great (and being a potter book head, i've hated all the previous movies)
- elitexero, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1It sucked. Hard.
- Respec7, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1agreed...even though i've read all the books a few time, this movie was bad and the truly on good part was the end fight...which i loved the effects from.
- sowdog, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3By the next movie she's legal so here's hoping for an extended shower scene...
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1In the same way Spiderman 3 did.
- brufleth, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1The books really are better. I'm not saying that as a literature snob but to emphasize that the books are what makes these stories. The movies are just a cherry on the sundae. The fans of the books all go see them because they love the stories even though they know the books were better. Had the movies been released without the books having existed they would probably have flopped and there certainly would not be seven of them.
- Senseless, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1special effects .. awesome .. plot holes.. too big ... seemed to lack much of the magic and wonderment that the previous movies had. They never really explained why anyone was concerned about the main item in the plot, yadaydadyada. Yep, and count me in for my money for the next and last 2 movies, also, while you're at it JK..
- thekronz, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1In this world, Making Money > Making Sense. Which is sad because I walked out of the theater saying "Even though a lot of ***** was cut out of this.... did you see that battle between Voldemort and Dumbledore?"
- KingGoonie, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1The reviews I read said that he should be awesome in next film, because the subject matter of next book is more his style or something... well that plus the next book isn't as long. I can understand he had alot to fit in... but damn it Yates frigging make the movie at least as long as the shortest of the previous 4.... Making it the shortest one by far, even though its the longest book by far... I dunno, it strikes me as being kinda arrogant. Like oh I can sum this up right quick because of my awesome directing style... But you gotta wonder, is that the screenplay or the director... were there scenes he took out... or scenes that were never in the screenplay from the book?
SPOILER....
To leave how Neville factors into the prophecy out... well thats just insanity. That was my favorite part of the book... that it was Voldemort who chose Harry.. that it could have just as easily been Neville... - Cerialthriller, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1what the 80's cartoon that i used to watch when i was 5?
- brufleth, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1In fairness that's sort of how I felt about that book. It just went on and on without much happening until the very end. It is my least favorite book in the series.
- brufleth, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1I think fans would have been annoyed and the studio would have blocked any attempt to split this in to two movies. They probably should have. It was a long book (although I felt it dragged at points and could have been slimmed down) so it is unreasonable to expect every scene or sub plot to make it.
-
Show 51 - 76 of 76 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is