I am surprised no one has posted a review! Don't look at me, it's torture getting me to go to the movies! Too many annoying people! I've heard pretty good things about it. Anyone else?
If you like a really edited version, it's good. I, however, got spoiled by the 3 hour installments of the first two so a 2 hour 15 minute story made me feel a little jipped. Lots of stuff just cut out. I guess there's always the directors cut DVD right? Loved the Harry Morgan crack! I was a HUGE M*A*S*H fan.
Col. Sherman Potter, Harry Potter... I liked the new movie, but was expecting a bigger payoff at the end. No big battle scene this time around. It deals more with secrets about Harry's past. Throws in some time travel, which left us wondering "Well, if they could go back and change that, why not change some other things too?"...best not to think about it too hard. I love Emma Thompson, she's quite funny in this one...one of the cool things about the Potter movies is getting to watch all these great British actors hamming it up. I didn't even recognize Gary Oldman under his make-up. This one looked more realistic to me, less digitized, maybe it's because of a new director. Nice popcorn summer movie.
IMHO...the best Harry Potter film yet. I am glad the film makers got over having to take the book literally and have started doing some editing of the stories. The first films could have used some editing. Adding the clock tower and the bridge were a nice touch not in the books. Curious if they will be added to the next book. It was nice that they took the story outside. The location shots were done in Scotland.
I was greatly impressed, I haven't read the book (or any of them!) but I like the movie versions quite well. This one is the best, IMO. I have a friend, though, who *has* read the books devotedly, and she is really pissed off at the liberties the filmmakers took. That didn't stop her from seeing it twice.
Thank god they didn't put everything in it! My biggest gripes about the first two (especially the second one) was that they were too long. Why is it that the Harry Potter books are the only books H'wood feels are so sacred that they need to film each and every scene? Heck, even "The Greatest Story Ever Told" left some bits out...
Actually it was Col. Sherman T. Potter. I remember Klinger writing it over and over to try and forge a weekend pass. But there aren't too many "Potter" characters on TV so I thought you were making a pun. I still thought it was cute.
Saw Harry Potter 3 for a second time yesterday. While I was in NYC I saw the Imax edition. The filmed held up for a second viewing. The film looked and sounded great in Imax. The picture was clear and sharp and the sound at the Imax Theater at Lincoln Scare in NYC is impressive. If anyone gets a chance to see this go. The film is letter boxed (as they did with The Matrix Imax versions) and was the complete 2 hrs 20 minutes, not edited like Apollo 13 or the Star Wars film. In this day of the multiplex, Imax is the only was to see films on a "big screen". 'Catwoman' is next to get the Imax treatment.
It seemed a bit strange to see the kids walking around in street clothes so often on the Hogwarts grounds, but that's a minor complaint at best. There did seem to be a lot more set-up than pay-off. I could understand them editing the story down from the book for a more streamlined film, but they inserted a lot of details that they never bothered to explain or expound on. People who are familiar with the book might go "ahhh!" and make the connection, but folks who are not will never have a chance to do so. In terms of adaptation from book to film, I think this is a worse "have your cake and eat it too" approach than just throwing the whole kit and caboodle in like the first two films. If they are cutting stuff out, then they should adapt it so that no one would ever know it is missing. It was still a pretty breezy, entertaining film, but I don't think it was substantially better than the earlier two. Regards,
A friend and I saw this opening night (or morning, if you prefer, as the theatre we went to stays open past midnight on Thursday nights to show new releases), and my only complaint is that it was too short. As was noted earlier here, the film left a lot out, unlike the other two movies. I've actually read all the books, too, and they're all really good... in fact, I kinda wish they did film every scene for the movies, as they'd still probably fly by. So basically, yeah, I'm pluggin' the movie and especially the books. If you haven't read them, you should! Don't let anybody tell ya they're "kids' books"
We caught the IMAX showing at United Artists on Colo. Blvd in Denver. Pretty incredible presentation, that was. I enjoyed the movie as well. Not sure if I prefer it to the last two or not, I'm on the fence. But still great family entertainment. Dan C
