One of the worst movies i have seen in 2009. The fact that they left out around 3 crucial parts from the book automatically deducts 5 stars. On the other hand it did have superb effects, and great acting as always, and a little humor.

 

2/5

 

The humor failed most of the time, though.

One of the worst movies i have seen in 2009. The fact that they left out around 3 crucial parts from the book automatically deducts 5 stars. On the other hand it did have superb effects, and great acting as always, and a little humor.

 

2/5

 

The humor failed most of the time, though.

 

That's true =/

 

 

 

I liked Fred and George though.

I personally thought it should have been PG-13 (Draco/Harry duel in the bathroom? yeah kind of creepy if you were a kid) and there should have been more violence, especially in the end where the DA was supposed to fight the death eaters. Otherwise I thought it was a good movie, they messed up when they brought Bella/Grayback/Narcissa to the Burrow though. That was just dumb. I did enjoy Bella's obsession with lighting things on fire though. The romantic bits I think were well done, it seemed a lot like it did in the book.

 

 

 

They missed the whole 'wizards are involved in the muggle world' scene with scrimegour and Kingsley (would have been epic. 'he's the most efficient secretary I've had!') and the whole Tonks (you couldn't recognize her either!)/Lupin thing (plus that they aren't exactly in a relationship) and the Bill is now a werewolf/he and Fleur are together and Harry-inherited-all-of-Sirius'-stuff.

 

 

 

I enjoyed the excessive amount of drunken/stoned acting though. (Harry with the lucky potion, Ron with the love potion, Slughorn/Hagrid after Aragog's funeral)

I saw it today, and I loved it. I read the book casually a few years back, so I didn't remember terribly much.

 

 

 

I did have once question though...

 

 

 

[hide=spoilers possibly.]When Hermione was talking with Harry at the end of the movie at Hogwarts looking out of the castle, I believe she said about the necklace thing was a fake? What was the necklace thing with the note in it exactly, and why was it a fake? Perhaps I misheard.[/hide]

I saw it today, and I loved it. I read the book casually a few years back, so I didn't remember terribly much.

 

 

 

I did have once question though...

 

 

 

[hide=spoilers possibly.]When Hermione was talking with Harry at the end of the movie at Hogwarts looking out of the castle, I believe she said about the necklace thing was a fake? What was the necklace thing with the note in it exactly, and why was it a fake? Perhaps I misheard.[/hide]

 

 

 

[hide=]It was supposed to be a Horcrux, but the one Harry and Dumbledore got from the lake was a fake because someone else got there first and switched it. That's what the note was saying, it was from the person who did it.[/hide]

 

 

 

EDIT: loltags

Oh, alright that makes sense. Thanks.

I thought the humour in this one was great, especially the "Pincers" bit with Harry.

I thought the humour in this one was great, especially the "Pincers" bit with Harry.

 

Ahaha I loved that bit :twss:

Did anyone else squirm awkwardly when that guy that liked Hermione had the Quidditch broom between his legs... :? :lol:

I thought the humour in this one was great, especially the "Pincers" bit with Harry.

 

Ahaha I loved that bit :twss:

 

 

 

The was the only enjoyable part of the movie.

I thought the humour in this one was great, especially the "Pincers" bit with Harry.

 

Ahaha I loved that bit :twss:

 

 

 

The was the only enjoyable part of the movie.

 

 

 

Maybe for you.

 

 

 

The entire theatre I was in was laughing the whole way through. All the jokes and humor were executed wonderfully. You probably just went into it with a bad attitude like a lot of the people, considering your only argument was about the plot points, like most of the crazed complainers...which in the end aren't crucial at all. The story is still being told in the films and that is what matters. Just because you think something is important to the plot doesn't make it important to the plot. What makes something important is "Will we be able to tell and finish the story without this?" If you answer no to that question then it is important. If not, it's not necessary and can be dumped, whether the crazed fans like it or not.

 

 

 

If the people who pointlessly defend the books to the grave had their way, each movie would be 10 hours long and most audiences would hate them. Books are different than films, as I've said a million times already, and changes HAVE to be made when making the transition from one to the other. A great portion of the things people have said they wanted kept in just would not have worked if done exactly the way they were in the book.

 

 

 

Remember, films are adaptations, not carbon copies, of books.

I thought the humour in this one was great, especially the "Pincers" bit with Harry.

 

Ahaha I loved that bit :twss:

 

 

 

The was the only enjoyable part of the movie.

 

 

 

Maybe for you.

 

 

 

The entire theatre I was in was laughing the whole way through. All the jokes and humor were executed wonderfully. You probably just went into it with a bad attitude like a lot of the people, considering your only argument was about the plot points, like most of the crazed complainers...which in the end aren't crucial at all. The story is still being told in the films and that is what matters. Just because you think something is important to the plot doesn't make it important to the plot. What makes something important is "Will we be able to tell and finish the story without this?" If you answer no to that question then it is important. If not, it's not necessary and can be dumped, whether the crazed fans like it or not.

 

 

 

If the people who pointlessly defend the books to the grave had their way, each movie would be 10 hours long and most audiences would hate them. Books are different than films, as I've said a million times already, and changes HAVE to be made when making the transition from one to the other. A great portion of the things people have said they wanted kept in just would not have worked if done exactly the way they were in the book.

 

 

 

Remember, films are adaptations, not carbon copies, of books.

 

 

 

Novel? :thumbsup:

 

 

 

I don't really care that much about rather or not it followed the book, but all in all it was a slow movie. It was by far the worst one out of all the Harry Potters...

 

And everyone in the theater that i was in laughed at moments too, taken in the fact that half the audience was dressed up as harry potter or hermione, a fourth were part of my high school chess team, and the rest were the people i was with. I admit i did chuckle at times, but it still was BY FAR the worst out of the HArry Potter films.

I thought the humour in this one was great, especially the "Pincers" bit with Harry.

 

Ahaha I loved that bit :twss:

 

 

 

The was the only enjoyable part of the movie.

 

 

 

Maybe for you.

 

 

 

The entire theatre I was in was laughing the whole way through. All the jokes and humor were executed wonderfully. You probably just went into it with a bad attitude like a lot of the people, considering your only argument was about the plot points, like most of the crazed complainers...which in the end aren't crucial at all. The story is still being told in the films and that is what matters. Just because you think something is important to the plot doesn't make it important to the plot. What makes something important is "Will we be able to tell and finish the story without this?" If you answer no to that question then it is important. If not, it's not necessary and can be dumped, whether the crazed fans like it or not.

 

 

 

If the people who pointlessly defend the books to the grave had their way, each movie would be 10 hours long and most audiences would hate them. Books are different than films, as I've said a million times already, and changes HAVE to be made when making the transition from one to the other. A great portion of the things people have said they wanted kept in just would not have worked if done exactly the way they were in the book.

 

 

 

Remember, films are adaptations, not carbon copies, of books.

 

 

 

Novel? :thumbsup:

 

 

 

I don't really care that much about rather or not it followed the book, but all in all it was a slow movie. It was by far the worst one out of all the Harry Potters...

 

And everyone in the theater that i was in laughed at moments too, taken in the fact that half the audience was dressed up as harry potter or hermione, a fourth were part of my high school chess team, and the rest were the people i was with. I admit i did chuckle at times, but it still was BY FAR the worst out of the HArry Potter films.

 

 

 

But see, that is just your own personal opinion. I don't mind that you feel that way, but the problem is people always state things like facts when really they are opinions. Myself and many people I know, included, believe this to be the best film out of the 6 by far, but that is our opinion.

 

 

 

And every audience is going to be different with different background and different tastes. I know this first hand being a stage actor. Live shows with audiences are even tougher. Different people react differently. Just because someone isn't laughing their face off doesn't mean they don't find something amazingly halarious. Maybe it just means they show their amusement in different ways.

 

 

 

Either way, the theatre I was in was a mix bag. People I know who are athetes, I had some friends from my old high school who I was in theatre with saw it. There were parents, children, teenagers, elderly people...and within all this diversity, there was an immense amount of laughter from a great majority of the theatre. People seemed to appreciate the jokes and the comedy of the film, myself included. If you didn't, then I guess you just didn't and that is ok.

 

 

 

Just don't make such large statements like "This is the worst harry potter film by far." Say it more like, "In my opinion, this was the worst of the movies." Because the way you feel about something doesn't make it universally what the movie is or isn't to everyone. There are some facts though, and those are all technical aspects about what drives a movie and what key points are needed to successfully tell the intended story, and if something is following those guidelines, then it has some face value.

 

 

 

Oh, I was also just on Mugglenet. This is David Yates' answer to being asked about having to please millions of fans:

 

 

 

"Its a very difficult juggling act but you just do your very best to make the film as in-the-moment as possible and you have to make certain choices, which are difficult at times, which just make that adaptation fit more into that cinematic experience in the theater."

 

 

 

So, you see, David Yates is doing his job as a director. Making a film, as even he agrees, is much different than writing a novel. Things have to be changed and adapted to be able to work in a theatrical setting, and just because Harry Potter is so near and dear to our hearts, it does not change this fact.

 

 

 

I also hope you know I'm not attacking you, I'm just trying to throw some points out there. I think opinions are great and we all should have them, but in order to have them you first should try to look at things from as many angles as possible.

I thought the humour in this one was great, especially the "Pincers" bit with Harry.

 

Ahaha I loved that bit :twss:

 

 

 

The was the only enjoyable part of the movie.

 

 

 

Maybe for you.

 

 

 

The entire theatre I was in was laughing the whole way through. All the jokes and humor were executed wonderfully. You probably just went into it with a bad attitude like a lot of the people, considering your only argument was about the plot points, like most of the crazed complainers...which in the end aren't crucial at all. The story is still being told in the films and that is what matters. Just because you think something is important to the plot doesn't make it important to the plot. What makes something important is "Will we be able to tell and finish the story without this?" If you answer no to that question then it is important. If not, it's not necessary and can be dumped, whether the crazed fans like it or not.

 

 

 

If the people who pointlessly defend the books to the grave had their way, each movie would be 10 hours long and most audiences would hate them. Books are different than films, as I've said a million times already, and changes HAVE to be made when making the transition from one to the other. A great portion of the things people have said they wanted kept in just would not have worked if done exactly the way they were in the book.

 

 

 

Remember, films are adaptations, not carbon copies, of books.

 

 

 

Novel? :thumbsup:

 

 

 

I don't really care that much about rather or not it followed the book, but all in all it was a slow movie. It was by far the worst one out of all the Harry Potters...

 

And everyone in the theater that i was in laughed at moments too, taken in the fact that half the audience was dressed up as harry potter or hermione, a fourth were part of my high school chess team, and the rest were the people i was with. I admit i did chuckle at times, but it still was BY FAR the worst out of the HArry Potter films.

 

 

 

But see, that is just your own personal opinion. I don't mind that you feel that way, but the problem is people always state things like facts when really they are opinions. Myself and many people I know, included, believe this to be the best film out of the 6 by far, but that is our opinion.

 

 

 

And every audience is going to be different with different background and different tastes. I know this first hand being a stage actor. Live shows with audiences are even tougher. Different people react differently. Just because someone isn't laughing their face off doesn't mean they don't find something amazingly halarious. Maybe it just means they show their amusement in different ways.

 

 

 

Either way, the theatre I was in was a mix bag. People I know who are athetes, I had some friends from my old high school who I was in theatre with saw it. There were parents, children, teenagers, elderly people...and within all this diversity, there was an immense amount of laughter from a great majority of the theatre. People seemed to appreciate the jokes and the comedy of the film, myself included. If you didn't, then I guess you just didn't and that is ok.

 

 

 

Just don't make such large statements like "This is the worst harry potter film by far." Say it more like, "In my opinion, this was the worst of the movies." Because the way you feel about something doesn't make it universally what the movie is or isn't to everyone. There are some facts though, and those are all technical aspects about what drives a movie and what key points are needed to successfully tell the intended story, and if something is following those guidelines, then it has some face value.

 

 

 

Oh, I was also just on Mugglenet. This is David Yates' answer to being asked about having to please millions of fans:

 

 

 

"Its a very difficult juggling act but you just do your very best to make the film as in-the-moment as possible and you have to make certain choices, which are difficult at times, which just make that adaptation fit more into that cinematic experience in the theater."

 

 

 

So, you see, David Yates is doing his job as a director. Making a film, as even he agrees, is much different than writing a novel. Things have to be changed and adapted to be able to work in a theatrical setting, and just because Harry Potter is so near and dear to our hearts, it does not change this fact.

 

 

 

I also hope you know I'm not attacking you, I'm just trying to throw some points out there. I think opinions are great and we all should have them, but in order to have them you first should try to look at things from as many angles as possible.

 

 

 

I definitely understand that a movie can easily be better than the novel without following the book step by step..i.e lord of the rings, but still in my opinion this was the worst out of the six.

 

And its cool haha i like being attacked for my own opinions, it allows me to argue..something i am very good at :)

I'd feel less hate spite towards this particular movie if they hadn't air-balled the start. That doesn't mean I would like it, but I would like it more.

 

 

 

As per the Yates quote "Its a very difficult juggling act but you just do your very best to make the film as in-the-moment as possible and you have to make certain choices, which are difficult at times, which just make that adaptation fit more into that cinematic experience in the theater." - I have to wonder which bright spark decide to start the movie how it did.

 

 

 

I could learn to overlook other.. issues if they didn't invent crap that didn't happen in place of something more worthwhile... *shrug*