That's the thing - it's incredibly enjoyable, but is it a good film? Is it a good adaption? It may be decent - decent enough to enthrall us fans, if we're the type to be enthralled - but I don't think the film series (or this film) screams "I'M AN AMAZING MOVIE!". It more or less has the illusion of being an amazing movie without being one... if that makes any sense.

That does not mean that it's not fun. I loved it - for the fun. And for a few really outstanding moments (Neville = ). And I suppose as a piece of pure entertainment, it scores high on that card.

 

In regard to Neville, are you referring to the scene in which he killed the snake? Because the whole thing about killing Nagini irritated me to no end.

I don't know. I'm hearing a lot about how wonderful this movie was. And yet . . . it got under my skin. I guess it annoyed me.

 

I dunno. To me, there seemed to be something this film was able to accomplish that the others never..quite...reached. Despite all the bombtasticness, pyrotechnics, and CGI shiny, I felt like there was a level of emotional purity in this film which echoed the tone of the books. Because it's a very complex story disguised as an extremely simple one. This film seemed to mirror that feeling, at least in my eyes. But I could be wrong. I've admitted, many times in the past, that I have no taste in film.

 

I love Harry potter and have enjoyed it's all movies now. I also gonna enjoy it's recently release Harry potter movie 7 part 2 after it's telecast. Although it was good, but it was not too good, as last release movie was and i don't think they should finish air Harry potter movie after it. Something was miss. I don't know, but i don't want kinda end of Harry potter series.


Don't link to these.

 

No, actually that whole snake-chase thing irritated me. What I did like was Neville meeting up with the trio again and, to some extent, the speech they gave him. If he had killed Nagini right after standing up to Voldemort, I would have been happier. The snake-chase thing was... odd, for lack of a better word. Mostly it felt like they were killing time with that set of characters in order to give Harry and Voldemort more time to chase each other around the castle for the purpose of chasing each other around the castle.

QGR - Nothing wrong with your opinion; it's yours after all. I am inclined to strongly disagree with you, but that's me being a cynical theatre critic who has difficulties with film.

 

We agree that Neville = though.

 

Indeed.

(PS. You still owe me a PM, missy).

 

(I haven't forgotten, don't worry. )

 

Yup. He's mentioned in the early movies by Ron, but that's it. Unless that brief blink and you miss it picture of the Weasleys on vacation shown in Prisoner of Azkaban counts, we never see him either.

The films really did a poor job with the family. Percy disappears by movie 3 I think. Fred and George are not really used to their full potential until much later on. Bill gets introduced as getting married and mauled by Greyback. Ginny doesn't become prominent until halfway into movie 5 and then suddenly she's a main character for movie 6 because the plot demands it.

 

One of the things that really irritated me throughout the movies, is that they completely left out Peeves. I mean, he was an annoying character, but I was still disappointed they didn't include him.

 

I know it's not the same, but if I remember correctly, there is a deleted scene from the Philosopher's Stone which includes Peeves.