Seriously?!?!?!?! Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban was a good book, but as a movie, well, the Wife and I could devote an entire show as to why the third movie was an affront to G-d!!! The fourth was good, it was closer to following the book then any before it, but the fifth was hands down the best translation. My advise , read the damned book, learn things, then come back here and spout your filth! Until then, shut your noise hole
What Aaron said!!!!!!! The fifth movie was awesome! If you went into it thinking it was supposed to be funny then yeah, you probably thought it sucked. I think they did a damn good job following the book with this one.
yep.. the fifth movie was awesome. maybe for potter movies there should be two sets of reviews. one for people who have read the books and another for people who haven’t. it makes a big difference in how you rate the movie i think.
as a side note. i was thinking about the futurama episode that shows how star trek becomes a religion in the future and i was just thinking to myself how it would be if potter became a religion.
I just saw the movie today...have to say not too bad… I will have to say though I paid the extra and saw the I-Max 3D version and was slightly pissed that there wasnt more 3D Action then just the fight scene… could have had the same effect on me without having to shell out the 15 bucks a person.
that movie bored me to death and don’t even get me started on how easy it was for Harry to teach all those kids the spells. He should be teaching at the damn school if he’s that good. I know they don’t have the time to show everything in the movies, but hell, an 80’s movie montage would have been perfect.
I’ve really enjoyed the movies except for the first and fifth ones. Easily the weakest of the series. Parts 2-4 pure gold. The last two especially.
I read book three before the movie came out because I was hoping to get in on all the excitement. Talk about simplistic crap. I can understand why the masses gobble this up. It’s the McDonald’s of literature. I’m using the word literature very liberally here as Harry Potter will never been held to such high esteem.
But if it gets peoples fat asses to turn off the TV for just a few hours to focus on reading, I can’t complain too much. I just wish they would pick up another book afterwards.
Just so you know...my wife has read all the books and even she was bored.
All the other movies have had some humor to them. Unless the books completely removed all humor from the stories, I think she was saying she expected the movie to not be as dry as it was.
she didn’t. I don’t think anyone thought it was going to be a comedy
Go back and listen to your review, Maria Woods and Mike Woods said they expected it to be funny, I re-listened to the review
All the other movies have had some humor to them. Unless the books completely removed all humor from the stories, I think she was saying she expected the movie to not be as dry as it was.
Book 5 is not a funny book, not a whole lot of humor in it. It’s not supposed to be humorous (sp?) Each book represents one year of these kid’s lives. Book 1 is filled with child-like wonder and whimsy because it’s an 11 year old kids story, book 5 is whiny, and broodish because it’s the story of a 15 year old Emo Wizard
I read book three before the movie came out because I was hoping to get in on all the excitement. Talk about simplistic crap. I can understand why the masses gobble this up. It’s the McDonald’s of literature. I’m using the word literature very liberally here as Harry Potter will never been held to such high esteem.
I’m not sure who’s claiming this is supposed to be the “Great Gatsby”. . . I know myself, the Wife, Dana, and Marla all understand these are CHILDREN’S BOOKS. Dr. Suess is a great author, but if you take the time to sit down and actually read what he wrote, it’s rhyming nonsense, but it’s classic! Harry Potter is a classic for the same reason. The fact that it’s appealled to multiple generations at one time, that it’s spawned this HUGE marketing behemoth, and the fact that it’s a pretty damn good story, well, name me another book series that has managed to do what the Harry Potter books have done. Well, there’s the Bible. . . seems pretty good to me. Despite what you may think of the writing itself, there’s no denying that these books will in fact be considered great “literature”, and will someday be held in such high esteem.
If you want to read my review, go to the review here on the site. An off the cuff comment isn’t exactly a well thought out moment.
I think you just proved my McDonald’s statement. I’m happy that something makes people read. I just wish all these people that jumped on Potter would go out and discover something else to read.
As far as the off the cuff comment, I’ll let it go, I’ve read the review as well, so I’m gonna give the point to you, however, the McDonalds comparison still peeves me. Look, this is a “Children’s Book”. Does the fact that people of all ages are reading a Kid’s Book upset you, are you reading the books forgetting it’s true intent is for children, or are you one of the people out there that just wants to Nay Say Harrpy Potter becuase it makes you feel cool? Read “Where the Red Fern Grows”, read “Alice in Wonderland”, read “The Chronicles of Narnia”. These are all just as, if not more simplistic then the Harry Potter series. I’d be interested in if you think these are McDonalds Literature as well, or if you’re able to differentiate the fact that these are Children’s Books, and the definition of “Literature” is different when in reference to KIDS. Maybe once these books are studied in literature courses at universities (done), or these books are studied in philosophy courses (done), or childrens literature courses (done), or english composition courses (done), will you finally accept that there may be something to these books?
[Edit]
If you wanna scoreboard, at least name what you’d consider to be modern Literature (you know what, it doesn’t even need to be modern), and we can let you know if/when we’ve read it.
There are lots of great modern classics...how about The Shining, Peter Pan, Brave New World, Alice in Wonderland, Treasure Island, For Whom the Bell Tolls, The Road, The Black Dahlia, Good Omens, The Satanic Verses, The Handmaid’s Tale, Less Than Zero, A Prayer for Owen Meany, Empire of the Sun, Crash, American Psycho, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, In Cold Blood , Catch-22, Waiting for Godot, The Third Man, etc.
There have been classes on Keanu Reeves but that doesn’t make him Laurence Olivier.
All these books you just listed are just as simplistic in their writing as Harry Potter, and each one I love (except for Brave New World, I hate that book). What makes these books more valid as literature than Harry Potter? It can’t be complexity of story, Harry Potter is an incredibly complex story, it can’t be character develepement, Harry Potter has 7 books worth of character developement. Is it just the writing style itself? Stephen King is one of the worst writers (but one of my favorite authors) I’ve ever read, and Lewis Carolle. . . he didn’t even WRITE Alice in Wonderland. . . as far as the book goes itself, name me anything else that rates a 10 on the pure “nonsense-o-meter”. Treasure Island I’ll grant you, is a great story. In fact, all of these are fantastic (except a Brave New World), I just wonder though, do you hate on Potter simply because it’s as popular as it is, and anything this popular must be garbage? I officially call an end to this thread, or at least any of my responses to you in particular, until you read the entire series and can form an educated opinion. Until such time, I’ll ignore all your Harry Potter posts, and you can ignore all my Astro-Physics posts
