What is Digg?37 Comments
- 1Less, on 10/11/2007, -3/+34I was a bit disappointed that so much of the book was left out of the movie. Not that I wanted every tiny detail to be there, but still. This movie was a lot different in feel than the previous movies. Dark, yes, which is good. But again, a lot of elements that make this franchise what it is are missing.
- RobertS44, on 10/11/2007, -1/+18*SPOILER ALERT*
For all the retards that think they are so intelligent for saying "Omg it was a big book to fit into a movie", please just shut the ***** up.
It is the fact that they discluded SO ***** MUCH of the book, even some VERY crutial parts to the story that may ***** up the 6th movie (Like how you can just ***** break into the room of requirement, I guess harry will beable to do the same when malfoy is building stuff in secret in their?)
The fact is that the movie came from the book, it is a smart move to atleast keep up with the very crutial parts of the plot in order to continue it. Or else it will become something entirely different. - maxabazillion, on 10/11/2007, -1/+14They try to keep the Potter movies around 2 hours in length, but this causes the movie to seem rushed. In order to create a satisfying cinematical representation of the book you would have to take the road of LOTR, and submit yourselves to around 3 hours or more. I myself love long movies, so long as they are good.
- dubloe7, on 10/11/2007, -0/+13the most crucial thing missing from the movie was a single phrase,
"Wotcher, Harry." - f4nt0m4s, on 10/11/2007, -3/+11the movie sucked, all the scenes felt cut short and there were literally tons of cuts. anyone who didn't read the book was probably lost during parts of the movie. what sucks even more is that all of the critics are backing the film up...it's a horrible book to movie translation. why not add an extra 40 minutes of content and go peter jackson on us. seriously, i hope the extended cut on DVD actually feels like a real film. read the book, avoid the movie, go see other summer blockbusters, and shut up about how long the books is...long book or not, from a cinematic perspective the movie sucked.
- empressofmetal, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7Who said "perfectly fit"? This movie was the shortest one, yet the book was the longest. That doesn't really make sense. And not EVERYTHING from the book had to be there, but to just leave out SO much? The battle was cool, but otherwise, I thought it lacked MAGIC. It almost felt like an ordinary world, not a magical one. Oh, and not everyone believes at "the book is better than the movie"; plenty of people could care less to read the book a movie was based on.
- AriaStar, on 10/11/2007, -5/+12Anyone who expects that the movies will perfectly match the books are insane. The studios have to balance having as much content as possible with how long of a movie theaters will allow. Theaters want as many showings per day as possible, and a longer movie means fewer showings, and fans want every time detail. Ain't gonna happen.
They get the general gist with some kick-ass dueling without changing anything vital to the plot. I think we've had as good as we can reasonably hope for. - arkmannj, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6I never expected the book and movie to line up perfectly, you would need like 3 movies to do that, and movie presentation is lots different than book. The two mediums just have two different paces, and people have different attention spans. But I would LOVE to see extended editions of all the Harry Potter movies released (like the Lord of The Rings Extended editions) I'd buy 'em and I know lots of friends/family that would do the same.
all-in-all I found the fifth movie enjoyable, yes it had differences from the book, but the ministry scenes were very enjoyable. - Niten, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5Obviously there's a limit to what can be done compressing this much material into a movie, but I really think they could have done a better job... the whole film seemed labored over visiting upon each element of the plot, without doing any individual part justice. I didn't feel that the relationship between Harry and Cho, nor the friendship between Harry and Luna, were adequately developed.
Maybe this book was simply more of a challenge than previous ones to transition to film. But whatever the reason, I think Goblet of Fire did much better in this regard. - maxabazillion, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5Agreed. The Lord of the Rings books are significantly longer, and those movies hold up very well on their own.
- g30ph, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3They can have Malfoy anywhere they want I guess, why limit themselves to the room of requirement? After all they made Cho Cheng the rat in the movie when it was her friend in the book.
I didn't like the movie because I knew every time I saw it that they left out scenes. Many of them didn't make any difference but I still missed them. Ron was supposed to get attacked by the brains in one of the mystery rooms. The girl who turned in everyone in DA is supposed to get permanent acne because the agreement they signed was charmed.
The movie felt like someone was skipping tracks on the dvd and we were to assume that such and such took place and we didn't need to see it. I know the book had a lot of pages but there is a lot of description of the scenery. - FilosopherStone, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3That's Hollywood for you man.
- RobertS44, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Some people have yet to read it, hence it may be a spoiler to some people.
- spiritpilot, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Sarcasm right? I get it.
- Gunsotsu, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4Not a spoiler if the book has been out for a couple of years before the movie.
- nipterink, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2considering it took me far longer to read the book, and my imagination is comprised of stick figures, i was pleased with what they managed to put into the movie. sure, numerous things were cut and condensed but i always seem to enjoy watching the hp story unfold before me.
- nabla, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Oh man I felt the same way about the movie. Non even comparing the movie to the book, it was just bad film making. The editing was horrible, the way the scenes flowed was annoying as hell and ridiculous to boot, I felt like I was watching a big trailer. Film was 2 hours and it felt like 3 minutes. Oh and not to mention chock full of plot holes. Like you I hope they have enough footage and can find somebody competent and re-edit this into a real film.
- FilosopherStone, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Didn't mean to come off as a jackass, I liked the article, and I understand they left out some pretty important stuff, BUT that's Hollywood. The movie is targeted at kids so they have to have splashy colors and ***** breaking all the time to keep them entertained. If you want to get the whole story, you read the book, if you want to get entertained for 2 hours, watch the movie.
- mos6507, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1I think the way it was staged in the film leaves the door open. The expression on Sirius' face and the way he throws his hands up it does kind of look like he's being pushed over rather than killed outright.
- crowbar77, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1That better not have been legit.
- debtman7, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0Overall I think they did a good job, but I agree they did leave out some surprising things. I mean, the relationship between percy and his family is a pretty big deal and becomes rather important later on, but it wasn't even mentioned.
On the other hand, though, I felt that the movie went pretty fast in a lot of parts and was trying to cram in a lot of things, so I guess adding more would have been probelmatic. Overall the movie really could have been 3 hours or a 2 parter to do it justice. - RobertS44, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1lol harry potter is the only book i read, i probally get out more then you too.
- clockpolitiks, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0I personally would be perfectly fine with each of the movies being 3 or 4 hours long AT LEAST! I like epic movies, and Harry Potter is an epic book series. The movies need to have more. I haven't even read the 4th, 5th, or 6th book and I still feel like The Order of the Phoenix was way too short. Most of the characters got shafted and when Sirius "died", there was no emotion. He wasn't in the last 2 movies enough to be cared about. That's the problem. Even Ron and Hermoine didn't have much to do in this movie.
- shariqueniazi, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Who has the sexiest lips among these hotties :
http://www.hollywoodtwo.blogspot.com - Nick7, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0I can't believed that it went into detail about the dumbest things but forgot to mention that in the book Sirius isn't hit with the killing curse and is just knocked into the weird archway/portal/mirror thing. This is important because it allows the possibility that Sirius is still alive.
- Dokument, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2Mirror
http://dugg.no-ip.org:6670/#24 - Rachmaninoff, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1Someone had a little too much time on their hands...
- PotterHater, on 10/11/2007, -2/+0Speaking of Phoenix spoilers.. Ha! Ok - here's the final case-by-case spoiler with pages n' everything. Hedwig (Harry’s owl) dies on Page 56 by several Death Eaters. George’s Ear gets ‘cursed’ off by Snape on Page 69 with a Sectumsempra curse. Dobby Dies on page 476 (Stabbed in the chest). Vincent Crabbe (Slytherin) is killed on page 634 by Fiendfyre (cursed fire) he learned from the Carrows and killed himself accidentally. Fred Weasely is killed on page 637 by the castle wall collapsing on him. Snape is killed by Voldemort’s snake on page 656 after Voldemort tells it to “Kill” Snape in Parseltongue. Remus Lupin Dies. Nymphadora Tonks Dies. Colin Creevey Dies. Molley Weasley kills Bellatrix on page 737 with a death curse. Then finally, Harry Potter Kills Voldemort (actually Voldemort kills himself with his own rebounding curse that bounced off Harry's at the exact same time since his wand had no effect on Harry since he stole it from Dumbledore and therefore the wand wasn't powerful) on Page 744. In the Epilogue 19 years later, Harry and Ginny live happily ever after and have gotten married, and have three children, Rose, Hugo and a boy named Albus Severus Potter (Named after the two headmasters of Hogwarts in which one was a Slytherin and the other was Gryffindor so Albus could choose as Harry did which house he went into when it came time). Draco lives happily ever after and marries Rosie, and they have a son named Scorpius. Scorpius Malfoy and Albus Potter (the oldest) both go to Hogwarts as the kin of Harry and Draco. Go ahead and comment all you want that this is made up information - but on 7/21 you'll see that this is right. Now go outside and play ya hosers.
- filmaddict, on 10/11/2007, -2/+0Mirror is broken... 7 years bad luck!
- mourne, on 10/11/2007, -7/+2woh.. some one needs to get outside or something.. it's just hairy ***** potter, man.
And yes.. I'm glad Jackson removed that faggy douche Tom Bombadil. Hah! - FilosopherStone, on 10/11/2007, -9/+3You mean to tell me that an 870 book doesn't fit perfectly into a 138 minutes movie? Shocker. The book, being better than the movie? Again, shocker. You can have this exact same "story" about every book made into a movie since the beginning of time.
- kendra82, on 10/11/2007, -9/+2http://www.thegamegods.net/2007/07/14/how-well-do-you-know-harry-potter-and-friends/
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is