?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

The non-spoiler Harry Potter review...

...k, the book has been out for 3 years, so spoiling is relative.

But no, no spoilers.

Still, you should have read the book already.

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire is an unwieldy book, and they had to skin it, tan it, and make a stole out of it to get it down to a size that would fit in a 2 hour movie. There are great heaping chunks of the book that are just gone.

The pacing, on the other hand, is fabulous. If you're going to slice the book that much, you might as well give a lot of thought to pacing, and get it right. The cut from the Quidditch World Cup game to the victory celebration was really abrupt (What? Are these folks who just didn't get to the stadium yet? Nope, the game is over...) but that was the worst.

Special effects were smooth as glass, but that's to be expected.

Viktor Krum and the boys of Durmstrang look like the next crop of auditions for Bel Ami Films (if you don't get that reference, don't ask).

Comments

( 13 comments — Leave a comment )
karisu_sama
Nov. 17th, 2005 11:00 pm (UTC)
With the kind of "pay by the word" writing Ms. Rowling's been doing in the last several bloated books, I've noticed they could indeed stand for a healthy cropping without suffering losses in the way of relevant storyline.
bovil
Nov. 17th, 2005 11:06 pm (UTC)
Goblet of Fire was the heaviest. Both Order of the Phoenix and The Half-Blood Prince are a bit more trim.

She had to get the big bloated one out, though, before her publishers would work up the courage to tell her "Edit! Damn it! Edit!"
tiferet
Nov. 17th, 2005 11:55 pm (UTC)
No, Order of the Phoenix is the fattest, I'm sitting right here looking at them.

And Half-Blood Prince was much tighter, it's just that it sucked :)
karisu_sama
Nov. 17th, 2005 11:01 pm (UTC)
...And am I a bad person if I DO get the reference? XD
didjiman
Nov. 17th, 2005 11:10 pm (UTC)
I don't know the reference, but seeing Bovil's other interests, it's not hard to guess :-)

How did you know the reference?
kproche
Nov. 17th, 2005 11:14 pm (UTC)
He probably gets the same catalogues bovil gets.

Dirty-minded men!
tiferet
Nov. 17th, 2005 11:56 pm (UTC)
Karisu is a woman (like me, who also gets the reference, and has got the catalogues); and she is married to Didjiman. So that's why he is wondering how she knows.
kproche
Nov. 18th, 2005 06:40 am (UTC)
Sorry, my post was a victim of its own conciseness. The he in my comment was in reference to esprix.

I know karisu_sama and didjiman quite well. And I'm married to bovil, so I ought to know if he has a dirty mind! :-)
esprix
Nov. 18th, 2005 12:11 pm (UTC)
How dare you know me so well! :P
britgeekgrrl
Nov. 18th, 2005 09:06 am (UTC)
I've always agreed with the sentiment that, when adapating a long book for screen, you've got two options.

1) A loving, faithful, every dam' detail recreation and a four-hour final production.

2) Take a well-honed hatchet to it and pray to god the purists don't lynch you, and have an end result that won't make your audience's collective butt go numb.

When #2 is done *well* (hence a well-honed hatchet) it can produce a perfectly acceptable, entertaining movie. I'm glad to hear it sounds like they got it right for GoF.
jorhett
Nov. 18th, 2005 06:52 pm (UTC)
Yes, and no.
Yes, the special effects are incredible. It's kindof sad how much they took any suspense out of the movie by giving straight up everything that you have to guess at in the book, or that you didn't learn until the very end.
britgeekgrrl
Nov. 18th, 2005 07:26 pm (UTC)
Re: Yes, and no.
Meh. Audiences are, in general, morons - said the slightly bitter ex-film student.

Us ten percent who DO see it coming have to grit our teeth and enjoy what we can...
lysana
Nov. 18th, 2005 07:35 pm (UTC)
Now that I've seen the movie, I can guess what Bel Ami Films' metier is. Dang, those Bulgarian men were shining examples of, er, youth, weren't they?
( 13 comments — Leave a comment )