What is Digg?73 Comments
- gcnaddict, on 10/11/2007, -0/+17The movie was great. The problem was that they skipped half of the book. This is (if I'm not mistaken) the *shortest* Harry Potter movie. Ironically, it was based off of the *longest* book in the series. Example: most of the crap that happens between Harry and Cho got slashed.
- Halaster, on 10/11/2007, -0/+13I enjoyed it quite a bit, but it was way too short and left out an exorbitantly large amount of content from the book. It dropped entire plot lines, changed one section in relation to Dumbledor's Army, left out any character development for the members of the Order of the Phoenix, which is the NAME of the movie.
The best way to describe it is that instead of a good book to movie conversion it was a good book summary to movie conversion. It was like someone summarized the book, leaving out large amounts of details and character development, and then made a movie based on the key points. The movie should have ran 3 hours. That would have gave ample time to put in significantly more content. I feel they short changed everyone especially since this is a movie that is part of a 7 story arc. Leaving out the character development and plot points for things that are going to lead into the next two movies was a large mistake. - arbulus, on 10/11/2007, -0/+10Have you met my block list? No? Well, let me introduce you...
- HeatherH88, on 10/11/2007, -0/+9*SPOILER*
And I really wanted to see Fred and George's swamp... - empressofmetal, on 10/11/2007, -0/+9I'm on my way to see it now! I know with the previous two movies, the people who went to see it with me with did NOT read the book were a bit confused. I read that they left out a major subplot, I won't say which one, but I didn't really think it was that important to the story, perhaps only to character development. I can't imagine that it's the only subplot or item from the book that was omitted, considering that the book is over 800 pages (the longest book) and the film is just over two hours (shortest film?). Either way, I'm sure it will be enjoyable.
- capstinence, on 10/11/2007, -1/+9Wow, did this guy even READ the books?
SLIGHT SPOILER
I understand that it needed to be digestible, but they ***** rewrote parts of the story for God's sakes. For instance, Cho does NOT give up the location of the room of requirement. And although they try to redeem her character with the truth serum bit, that whole problem is never resolved. In fact, you never see Cho again. If you're going to screw with the plot, have the decency to wrap up the points you're manipulating.
END SPOILER
Shrug, I could've easily sat through 3.5 hours to get even a hint of the things they left out. If they don't A) start splitting the movies into two parts, or B) start making longer movies... then I'm afraid the movie series is over. The next two books only get longer from here.
The only thing they could have done to prevent the movie from being so catastrophically terrible would have been to adapt the book to screenplay in its entirety... and then cut down from there... as opposed to just rewriting the story from scratch. - consonance, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7There is a word that I want you to look up in the closest dictionary you can find. That word is "allegory." Also, the movie is tackling Stalinism (as in Uncle Joe), not Satanism (as in The Devil).
- PoeticExplosion, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7Luna was played by Evanna Lynch. She's a huge fan of the books. I haven't seen the movie yet, but I think she'll be one of the highlights.
- SLYK, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6I agree, they left out some really serious bits. Parts that play into the sixth year and maybe seventh. It's really ridiculous.
Tonks was great, as was Luna Lovegood. Whoever played luna was perfect for the role. Very ethereal and a little nutty. - kendra82, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5Nice article! This movie looks to be good...my friend said it was great! I ran across this article about Harry... funny! http://www.thegamegods.net/2007/07/11/8-reasons-why-harry-potter-is-better-than-you/
- geeklibrary, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5I saw it last night and I thought they did a pretty good job of adapting it. It's unfortunate that they left a few story-lines that I thought were integral when I read the book out (one of which started with the last book, so I guess they couldn't just shoehorn it it), but it still worked on its own as a film. So I guess that's more important in the end.
- joshf52, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5I thought it was just good, not great. Cuaron's take on the series is still my favorite.
- Scagli3tti, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5You won't be disappointed.
- Drahkar, on 10/11/2007, -2/+7They did a total hatchet job to the underlying plot of this book and took out huge portions of things that were rather important in a lot of ways. While my brother (Who has never read the books) liked this one more than the others, I personally think its one of the worst. The amount of content ripped out of the storyline makes the whole movie jump around and over tons of things. TONS of them.
- sofaKing812, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4I have not expected the movies to include everything from the books. The movies are more like fun supplements to the books. But I have one major grievance with the last two movies...
WHY THE ***** ARE VOLDEMORT'S EYES NOT RED?
They were red in the first movie. Rowling repeatedly uses the red eyes in her description of Voldemort throughout the books. I know this is a nit-picky detail of the newer movies; but honestly, how ***** hard would it be make Voldemort's eyes red like are in the first movie and throughout the books? - HeatherH88, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5I won't spoil anything... I really liked this move a lottttt better than the last 2 or 3, but they left out a lot of important back-story. Not the action packed bits but the ideas that govern Harry's lifestyle. I also thought that we got completely screwed on the ending scene. They could have easily added 5 more minutes in there that would really have cleared things up for people who have never read the books.
On the other hand... I have different fingers.
Well, really, I thought the casting was GREAT. The lady playing Umbridge was perfect in manner - exactly how I thought of her when I was reading about her. I really enjoyed Tonks too, though they did VERY little in the way of character development with her. Poor Ron, too, was denied EVERY decent thing he did or that happened to him in this book.. /sigh
I hope that that was vague enough not to ruin things for those that haven't seen it, but clear enough so that those who have can elaborate. - Scagli3tti, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4**spoilers below**
I didn't mind the Harry/Cho drama being mostly passed over, but I found it really disappointing that they entirely left out quidditch and kind of adulterated the O.W.L. process. Still the best of the 5 so far in my opinion, however. - Nickbc87, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3I've only read the first three books, and have seen all of the movies, I think that helped me in this case, as nothing seemed too out of order for me.
- Zuggy, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Actually the books get shorter from Order of the Phoenix (not much but shorter). I agree if they had made it 3 hours it would have been so much better
- Toast1185, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3As someone that has not read the book (the only one I've read is the first), I can say it was still a great movie. My friend that had read the book definitely got more out of it, but I would still call it one of the best Harry Potter movies.
- reddfox321, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Thats probably the lamest example and yes I've read all of the books. Introducing yet ANOTHER character at that point of the FILM would have been ineffective and nobody would've cared if it was Cho's best friend's sister's mother in law who did the betraying. It may have worked in the book because there was time to flesh out the characters but not in a movie just over 2hrs.
- feebie, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3I was looking forward to seeing Neville Longbottom's story! They didn't even go to the hospital!!
- Jmuduke, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3I was amazed at the parallels between this movie and our current political/media situation. I saw it last night, very cool.
- xxshakenheart, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Hopefully the movie is as good as the book.
- feebie, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Yeah, that was complete bullcrap!!!
- feebie, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3I agree as well. I've also always thought it was a HUGE mistake for all the movies to leave out S.P.E.W. and all the elf subplots. I have a feeling the freedom of the elves is going to be an important point in the last book.
- arbulus, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4If you'd read book 5, you'd realize that everything was out of order.
- creoderiot, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3what the hell are you talking about? Please continue discussing the movie (like I had to mention that)
- Scagli3tti, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3I completely agree with you. It seemed to me that they made the movie with the expectation that the people watching it would have previously read the book.
- feebie, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3I agree. I was thinking about that the whole time!
- icenineiv, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Wait, what the hell do you mean that "The next two books only get longer from here" that makes no sense considering the next two book (Half-Blood Prince, Deathly Hallows) are in page length much shorter than Order.
- riggs32, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3ok i get that they had to cut some things, but they never even mentioned that hermione and ron were prefects now, or the fact that ron became keeper for the quiditch team. Now either next movie they have to just kind of be like "Well suddenly ron can play," or just never show quiditch again which would be totally lame.
- arbulus, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3*MAYBE A SPOILER OF SORTS*
That pissed me off. And then they have the ***** gall to insult you by having Neville tell harry and then say "I'm not ready for others to know just yet". - Fullvinyl, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2I saw it the other night, and the phrase "stopped ***** around with being cute" is apt. I think it's the best one so far, and yes, I wanted to strangle Dolores Umbridge just as much here as in the book.
- arbulus, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2*SPOILERS FASHIZZLE*
When I read the book, I cried when Sirius died. It was ***** heart wrenching. And I was expecting the same effect in the movie. That was far from what happened. Bellatrix didn't cast Avada Kedavra on him and then he just happened to fall into the veil when he died, he was just knocked over and stumbled into the damned thing. It wasn't at all clear right at first in the book that he was dead. The whole scene in the film was rushed and patronizing. Infact, the entire Ministry battle was just blah in the movie. It's like they put no effort into it at all. - thorvath, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2I was disappointed. While I acknowledge that it is the fifth of seven, and as an adaptation there is only so much wiggle room, the whole movie just felt like filler. Two hours of a wacky lady takes over the school with a bit of fan service here and there to remind you that "Harry Potter will return in 'The Half Blood Prince'" I feel that Sirius Black is the character who suffers the most in translation from book to film, stemming from a dramatic underuse of the talented Gary Oldman. After Prisoner of Azkaban, where the narrative portrays him as a crazed villain until the ending, and a cameo in Goblet of Fire, his scenes in Order of the Phoenix don't really add enough characterization. His death was tragic in the book, but in the theater myself and most of the audience were pretty indifferent. Order was the last Potter book I have read as I overall didn't really enjoy it and the direction the series was heading. I suppose I went into the film hoping it would revitalize my interest, but as I said it was disappointing for me.
- HeatherH88, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2I also really got annoyed with Harry reading book 5. He was kind of a whiny bitch... He's like that in the movie, but it's not NEARLY as bad as the way he acts in the book. I think that if you enjoy the plot line, you'll like the movie. I always have a little movie going in my head when I read, so it's always fun to see if things you imagined are anything like what they put on screen. All in all, I thought it was very much worth seeing. I just love watching it "come to life" - excuse the corny phrase.
- reddfox321, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Dude, like he said its an 800 page book. Unfortunately a great book doesn't always translate into a great movie so they've got to change things especially when said book takes place over an entire year. For example: Jurassic Park. Great book and a great movie that didn't stay completely faithful to the book.
- HeatherH88, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Yeah, you're right - I accidentally left her out, but they did a great job casting her too. I also wish they'd gone a bit further into all of the business with "The Quibbler". I guess they screwed themselves over by not starting that story line in the last movie...
- opticsnake, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Yeah, I knew they were going to hack the hell out of the storyline. There were too many things going on in the book to fit into one movie, even a long one. That being said, I'm still going to see it tomorrow.
- directsun, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3This review is really entertaining. Funny as hell. Must read.
- hughesj919, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3What pisses me off about your review:
1. You haven't read any of the books, but expect the movies to answer all of your questions.
2. You sound like you're 14 years old.
3. None of it is funny.
I give it a 2.2 out of 10. 1 because you saw the movie, 1 because at least you admitted you never read the books, and .2 for spelling a few words right. - PoeticExplosion, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Oh, and I forgot to mention that she's not a professional actress. She just showed up for open casting.
- hughesj919, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2I guess I don't understand why people complain about stuff being left out of the movie. They're trying to cram 900 pages worth of book into 2 and a half hours of movie, and I think they've done an excellent job. That's not an easy task by any means.
If you want character nuances, subtle plot details, and an even more exciting experience...then I urge you to read the books. There are none better. - feebie, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2In my opinion, this was the best movie of the bunch. However, I can never forgive ANY of the movies for simply being condensed summaries of the books. They always leave out really important subplots and character arcs. But this movie left out the most. I was disappointed with that aspect. But when I think about it, I guess I can't really blame them too much. They only have 2.5 hours to squeeze it all in, and to make the story consistent they had to change the way some things happened (The Cho Chang stuff for intance). Though I wouldn't have minded AT all if they could've made a much longer movie, or a two or three parter....logically speaking I don't think there would be any way the filmmakers could do that with the amount of time it takes to film a movie. All the kids would be in their late 20's by the time they were finished with the series.
That said, the amount of things they DO leave out is definitely going to bite them in the butt when it comes to making the last two films. The last film could be very disappointing because of that. - feebie, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3You definitely need to read the rest of the books.
- roberthead, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Order of the Phoenix was quite a good episode. However, the directing (blocking, acting direction) and the editing were both noticeably and consistently weak.
However, let's give credit where credit is due and acknowledge that Alfonso Cuaron's Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban was, by a wide margin, the best of the movies so far. Darkly human and beautifully directed. - j4nj1m3n3z, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2i might be wrong since its been a while since i read 5 and 6, but i think they become prefects and ron makes the quidditch team in the 6th book because ron makes it because harry helped him and ginny is like somehow amazing at quidditch
- bjs3171, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2haven't any of these directors heard of "director's cut"? why don't the DVDs have longer cuts of the movies with more information. anyone seen Dune? Theaters version was non-sensical, while the director's cut was great, if not over explained.
- PaulLev, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Actually, Order of the Phoenix is my faqvorite Harry Potter movie, so far - though, then again, it's my favorite Harry Potter novel so far, too ... http://paullevinson.blogspot.com/2007/07/harry-potter-and-3-d-phoenix.html
-
Show 51 - 73 of 73 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is