PDA

View Full Version : Harry Potter / The films



ATP
01-01-2006, 11:48 PM
I have just seen the first 2 of the 4 HP films. Very good, very enjoyable, if a little mawkish in some places. I guess I am a little behind the times. I haven't read the books, but going by the films, I can now see why JK Rowling has had the success she's had.

The special effects combined with quality story make for easy watching,more-than-two-hour films. See them if you can.

I am looking forward to #s 3 & 4.

ATP

blisswriter
01-02-2006, 12:22 AM
I've seen them all with my daughter. We got her 1-3 on DVD and there was a Harry Potter fest in here for the longest time...

Thank God for Bend It Like Beckham. Otherwise we would still be watching Griffendor versus Slitheren.

Puddle Jumper
01-02-2006, 07:32 AM
I thought movie 3 was the worst film so far, but then it was so drastically different from the first two films because of the change in director's and I felt the third drifted far more away from the book than the first two did, and the third book is my favorite in the series, that I ended up feeling extremely disappointed with the third film.

I thought the fourth was done very well though. I think the first is my favorite though, as far as the films are concerned. Lots of people like to bash Chris Columbus for how he directed the first two films, but he kept it very true to the books and I love the feel of the world he created in them.

And I just think Richard Harris made a way better Dumbledore.

Shadow_Ferret
01-02-2006, 11:43 AM
I don't know how many times it took me to read the first book, it just didn't make me care about Harry. Might have been the fact that the writing was just too British. But I finally made it through the book last year. But then when I tried to watch the first movie, same thing. I just couldnt' get into it. I mean it's not bad stuff, but it just doesn't grab me. I'm so thankful my 10-year-old doesn't give a hoot about Harry.

He's got his own book series he enjoys and doesn't follow the masses. Kind of like me. ;)

mkcbunny
01-02-2006, 01:08 PM
And I just think Richard Harris made a way better Dumbledore.
I agree, although what can you do. Sniff. Generally, speaking, the casting has been good, and they did a great job picking the kids.

I have the opposite opinion of the films, though. Number 3 is the one I like the best. Book 4 is my favorite, but I wanted to like the movie a bit better than I did. That said, I think the condensation was very good. It's a long book, and I think the right plot threads were cut. I would rate them: #3, #4, #2, and #1.

Puddle Jumper
01-02-2006, 09:32 PM
I agree, although what can you do. Sniff. Generally, speaking, the casting has been good, and they did a great job picking the kids.

I have the opposite opinion of the films, though. Number 3 is the one I like the best. Book 4 is my favorite, but I wanted to like the movie a bit better than I did. That said, I think the condensation was very good. It's a long book, and I think the right plot threads were cut. I would rate them: #3, #4, #2, and #1.
They could have hired an actor whose performance could be a little more like Richard Harris's. They could also have him wearing the kinds of robes Richard Harris wore instead of purple pajamas.

Overall I do like the cast, well, except for movie 3. Gary Oldman is not at all what I imagined Sirius Black to look like when I read the book and David Thewlis is no at all what I imagined Remus Lupin to look like. I think the actor who played Voldemort in movie 4 is more what I imagined Lupin looking like - without the Voldemort make-up of course. But their performances were good. I really like the actors they got for Lucius Malfoy and Gilderoy Lockhart - especially Lucius Malfoy. I don't usually like villans but I like him. I think perhaps because as a villan, Lucius is highly intelligent, sophisticated, and calculative. I think perhaps because a villan with those qualities seems more dangerous to me. Plus it doesn't hurt that Jason Isaacs is a hottie.

In order, these are how I rank the books from favorite to least favorite...

1. Prisoner of Azkaban
2. Order of the Phoenix
3. Sorcerer's Stone
4. Half-Blood Prince
5. Chamber of Secrets
6. Goblet of Fire

In order, these are how I rank the movies from favorite to least favorite...

1. Sorcerer's Stone
2. Goblet of Fire
3. Chamber of Secrets
4. Prisoner of Azkaban

I hope Alfonso Cuaron never directs another HP movie. I liked Chris Columbus the best, but Newell who directed Goblet I thought did pretty good.

mkcbunny
01-02-2006, 10:45 PM
Gary Oldmand and David Thewlis aren't what I had pictured, either, but I really liked Thewlis as Lupin. I think Gary Oldman conveys the right qualities for Sirius; he just looks different. Jason Isaacs is a good choice as well. Love Alan Rickman. It took me a bit to get over the hair, since it looks so fake on him. But he's so great as Snape. When I read the books now, I hear his voice as Snape in my head.

Puddle Jumper
01-03-2006, 02:30 AM
I imagined Sirius Black being taller and his hair a lot longer, straighter, and matted. I imagined seeing his long, stringy, greasy dark hair matted to his face. Not looking much different from how Leonardo DiCaprio's character looked when the iron mask was taken off his face in "The Man in the Iron Mask." Though looking nothing like Leo himself. And I never imagined him with tattoos and prison stripes.

Because I saw the first two movies before reading any of the books, the characteres from the first two movies are what I imagine when reading the books.

However, I do think perhaps the new Dumbledore might slightly more embody the book character. He still doesn't have to wear purple pajamas though.

The actor who plays Snape is actually quite a bit older than the character should be. The actor was 55 years old when the first movie came out, however, the character is the same age as Harry's parents would have been and they were around 20 when Harry was born, thus the character of Snape should have been about 31 in that movie. Likewise Sirius and Snape were cast being older than the characters listed in the books.

It is possible, though, for the movies that they've simply decided to say that his parents were a little older when they gave birth. If I was casting it though, I'd have stayed true to the book and cast a younger actor. I imagine the character as described in the book to also have more of a pointed face. So I think if I initially cast the first film, I would have chosen a younger actor for Snape and perhaps a Dumbledore who was a little more lively. I'd have also done different casting in the third for Sirius Black and Remus Lupin.

I think everyone else looks great for their part. I'm fine with Petunia and Dudley having brown hair instead of blond, I think Maggie Smith is perfect for McGonagall, and the only thing I would have done different with Mad-Eye was make him not look so much like a pirate. I didn't get the impression that his magic eye looked like an eye-patch in the book.

Lisa Y
01-03-2006, 02:59 AM
I love the books and the movies (to be completely truthful, I'm obsessed). I've only seen #4 twice so it's too soon to tell if that will overtake the 3rd as my favorite. Loved Lupin. I actually saw the first 3 movies before I read any of the books (those I read backwards!) I can't wait to see how they do #5 because I felt the book was the worst of the series. They'll have to cut a lot.

JK Rowling is not so much an extremely talented writer as she is an extremely talented storyteller. Snape's the best. Although he doesn't come off as exactly warm and cuddly (especially after books 6), I can't wait to see which way his true loyalties lean.

Sage
01-03-2006, 06:11 AM
I agree about the third movie being the worst (especially since Prisoner was my favorite book). Half the things I love about that book are missing from the movie, & then when they start ADDING things, instead of using that time to explain things that need explaining...?!

I really liked the Goblet of Fire, even w/ those things that got changed. & you have to like the first one of each, just because of the magic of being the first. Chambers isn't my favorite of either, but not my least favorite either. (Order of the Phoenix is my least favorite books. I know it makes sense for Harry to be so angry & bratty there, but I just hate reading it).

PrettySpecialGal
01-03-2006, 06:22 AM
Really don't want to rain on any parades, but here I go.
I thought #4 blew dog. Too much was left out- important stuff- (too much to even start a list) and too much was added in the wrong places (do you really think Dumbledore would have lost his cool like that?) IMO, the books should have been split into 2 movies- but, as my husband so frequently points out, I am too picky, I want all the important details in the movie, and directors and movie making people are out there to make a good movie, not just make the movie the same as the book. Unfortunately, I read the books, so I can't have a true perspective on whether the movie is good or not. I just know what should have been there, and the movie doesn't make sense to me, because the details are missing.

Nevertheless, I still think #4 blew dog.

Lookng forward to a better #5- different director and screenwriter- so there is hope.

Shai
01-03-2006, 07:30 AM
I liked the fourth movie but I also felt somewhat let down by certain things they left out and changed (although, not seeing a smidgen of SPEW was a relief; I hope they aren't saving that for the next movie). I don't know about anyone else, but I was actually looking forward to seeing the Quidditch match (so were my friends; we let out a collective groan of disappointment when the scene flipped to post-game!). But I also think too that they had so much material to work with that it must have been hard to cram it down into an appropriate movie length, so I try not to be too bitter as a HP devotee. : )

Some people mentioned they liked Richard Harris's Dumbledore better than the replacement actor and I agree. Richard Harris (to me) played him with much more...mystery. His Dumbledore felt very much "old world" and the quiet disposition, the quiet voice, hinted that much more at just how much of a powerful wizard Dumbledore is. Now...the character is just loud. When I read the books I hear Harris's voice in my head, and no purple pyjamas. ; )

I find myself liking movie Snape better than book Snape, but I suppose I'm biased because it's Alan Rickman. :3 I think it's obvious Snape is a "Darth Vader" character, and if he doesn't end up dead in the final book, then All Will Be Revealed and he'll have redeemed himself somehow, even to Harry.

What has always bothered me is the bitterness/vengefulness that Snape and Sirius carry around about each other as well as Snape's feelings towards Harry's father and Harry. I feel that Rowling did not write this as believably/realistically as she could have; as adults, Snape and Sirius should be able to realize their "playground immaturies/antics" of the past were just that, grow up, and get over it. In the chapter called "Snape's Worst Memory" I identified a lot with the treatment he received as a young student because I was bullied just as badly in school, was a loner, etc etc etc. But, I wouldn't take it upon myself to be vindictive about it now if I met those people on the street and definitely I would not hold the children of those people in poor opinion because of that. I don't think most adults would, either (or am I being optimistic?). Even if Snape has a mean streak in him it seems a bit much for him (and Sirius) to be carrying those feelings around so long over that kind of thing. Would Snape be allowed to get away with treating Harry like that in the real world? I seriously doubt it. Lupin's attitude towards Snape ("I neither like nor dislike him") is much more realistic.

Nevertheless, Snape is still one of my favorite characters. Lupin and Lucius are the others.

I don't really see why people complain so much about Harry's attitude/angst/whatever in Order of the Phoenix and Half-Blood Prince. If he hadn't acted that way, people everywhere would have cried foul and for good reason. People can't expect him to be all "Oh, well okay then, that's cool" with everything that's going on around him, aimed at him, etc. He needs to be that way because it wouldn't be realistic otherwise. I thought Rowling did a good job with Harry's character development in the face of such dreadful events and don't believe the writing was annoying or anything like that. I would have found it annoying if she hadn't written it that way.

Lisa Y
01-03-2006, 02:54 PM
I was disappointed in the lack of the Quiddich match too. It almost didn't seem worth it for them to have built/computerized (whatever they did) that whole scene except to introduce Victor Krum.

I was surprised by the appearance of Barty Crouch Jr. the first scene (book only had Wormtail and Voldemort). I recall whispering "Who the hell is that?" I know they had to do it this way because they had to cut so much, but it was such a shock to see him next to Wormtail.

I agree that in Prisoner of Azkaban, movie Snape was much nicer than book Snape (I actually saw the movie before reading the book and was so surprised by the book version). I wonder why Rowling "allowed" it. Hmmm.

Puddle Jumper
01-04-2006, 04:50 AM
Really don't want to rain on any parades, but here I go.
I thought #4 blew dog. Too much was left out- important stuff-
I remember being so bored with the book up until the graveyard scene that I don't notice what all got left out. But was glad for it since I thought the book so boring.


(too much to even start a list) and too much was added in the wrong places (do you really think Dumbledore would have lost his cool like that?)
No I don't and that scene made me mad when I saw it. Richard Harris would have never done that as Dumbledore. I don't like Michael Gambon in the role.


Lookng forward to a better #5- different director and screenwriter- so there is hope.
I thought the screenwrite did great in the first two movies. I heard that the reason Chris Columbus is no longer directing and why the the third and fourth movies were not as true to the books due to the screenwriter changing focus, was because whoever receives the profits from the movie was displeased that the first two movies didn't bring in more money. So from what I understand, Columbus was let go to bring in new directors and the screenwriter Kloves was told to not try and cram so much book in. Which may explain why so much was left out of the third movie. They thought it would attract more of an audience.

Kloves said that he decided to quit after the fourth movie because he hated cutting so much out of the fourth book to make a screenplay that he didn't have the heart to do it again for the fifth. However, when he read the sixth book he regretted it - wished to write the sixth screenplay - so they've added him onto the screenwriting team for the sixth. But I imagine he hasn't enjoyed writing the screenplays since the third because he had to take so much out to please those wanting to make a huge profit off the movies.

Seriously, if I ever write a book series that attracts so much attention, I'm not going to sell the rights to Hollywood until after the books are completed and only when I know there's a filmmaker with a passion for the series similar to Peter Jackson's passion for Lord of the Rings, who I feel confident would do a spectacular job.


I can't wait to see how they do #5 because I felt the book was the worst of the series. They'll have to cut a lot.

(Order of the Phoenix is my least favorite books. I know it makes sense for Harry to be so angry & bratty there, but I just hate reading it).
I thought the book was excellent. Harry was totally annoying and yet I found myself for the first time thinking of him as a real person. I could tolerate his brattiness because I've been a brat before so I could relate. And it was the first book his character moved me to tears, at the end when he unwrapped the gift Sirius had given to him.

I wouldn't have minded, however, if Umbridge never existed. Now, how cool would it have been if Umbridge had been replaced by Lucius Malfoy? Oooh, I would have written the story that way, that would have been so cool.


His Dumbledore felt very much "old world" and the quiet disposition, the quiet voice, hinted that much more at just how much of a powerful wizard Dumbledore is. Now...the character is just loud. When I read the books I hear Harris's voice in my head, and no purple pyjamas. ; )
Gambon's Dumbledore is much more louder, and much more obnoxious, and he certainly plays the character as though he's not nearly as powerful as he really is. He doesn't know everything, but he knows a lot more than Gambon plays him as, but being loud and obnoxious makes him sound dumb rather than intelligent.

I saw a behind the scenes show on tv awhile back and they kept saying how this movie was pivotal because for the first time Harry starts to see a glimpse that adults, Dumbledore in particular, don't know everything and aren't as strong as he once thought.

My thought is - in the books, Dumbledore really doesn't start to appear weak until the sixth book - this is pushing it too early for Harry.


I find myself liking movie Snape better than book Snape, but I suppose I'm biased because it's Alan Rickman.
I totally agree. I like the movie Snape better, he's not nearly as mean and nasty as the character is in the book. I read awhile back that the author J.K. Rowling says that too many people seem to like Snape more than they should. I think she has the movies to blame for that because Snape in the movies is a lot nicer than he is in the books.


What has always bothered me is the bitterness/vengefulness that Snape and Sirius carry around about each other as well as Snape's feelings towards Harry's father and Harry. I feel that Rowling did not write this as believably/realistically as she could have; as adults, Snape and Sirius should be able to realize their "playground immaturies/antics" of the past were just that, grow up, and get over it.
I found it believable. I guess because I've seen such immaturity in adults to believe it. And have you ever seen that one movie with John Arnold (I think that's his name) and the geeky guy who ended up being teachers at the same school and suddenly realized they had been kids together and one had always bullied the other? They suddenly began acting towards each other as they had when they were kids.


if I met those people on the street and definitely I would not hold the children of those people in poor opinion because of that.
I wouldn't either, however, if the sixth book is any indication, Snape's treatment of Harry has nothing to do with who his father is and everything to do with his involvement with Voldemort.


Lupin's attitude towards Snape ("I neither like nor dislike him") is much more realistic.
But Lupin and Sirius have extremely different personalities and Lupin and Snape can identify with one another. Both felt like outcasts, so I think Lupin can offer Snape a little more sympahty - he never picked on Snape whereas Sirius, who seemed to have a lot stronger, bolder personality, did. Also, whereas Lupin's been out in the real world since Hogwarts and thus was able to improve upon his social skills, Sirius has been trapped in a tiny prison cell with Dementors to come and torture him and nothing but bitter memories to dwell upon.

Sirius may have put it past him if he had been out in the real world and led a normal life. But not only did he come from a dysfunctional family who could not teach him those skills, he had no one through most of his adult life to do so either.


I don't really see why people complain so much about Harry's attitude/angst/whatever in Order of the Phoenix and Half-Blood Prince. If he hadn't acted that way, people everywhere would have cried foul and for good reason. People can't expect him to be all "Oh, well okay then, that's cool" with everything that's going on around him, aimed at him, etc. He needs to be that way because it wouldn't be realistic otherwise. I thought Rowling did a good job with Harry's character development in the face of such dreadful events and don't believe the writing was annoying or anything like that. I would have found it annoying if she hadn't written it that way.
And his attitude wasn't completely his fault either. The fifth book revealed that his behavior and attitude were so degenerative because of his mental link with Voldemort. It's also why he wasn't as emotional and dark in the sixth book.

BTW, my biggest complaint about the sixth book is that it read more like a teenager wrote it for a fan fiction and didn't not have the same literary feel as the previous five books.


I was disappointed in the lack of the Quiddich match too. It almost didn't seem worth it for them to have built/computerized (whatever they did) that whole scene except to introduce Victor Krum.
I agree that it seemed like too much of a build-up for them not to show any part of it.

I also didn't understand why they were climbing up to the very top when you could see the very top was level with the ground. Shouldn't people have been climbing down to the lower seats? That made no sense to me.

Also, I was highly disappointed that they took the Dursley's completely out. I wanted to see the scene take place with Dudley eating Fred and George's candy.

Sage
01-04-2006, 05:04 AM
All I hope for movie five is that they let the Weasley twins have the attention they deserve. The revenge on Umbridge was my favorite part of the book, especially with the teachers joining in. I can just see that as the type of thing that would get cut out due to time, though.... (The twins got gypped in their reaction to the age line in the fourth movie, sabotaging their characters a tiny bit. But overall, I still liked that movie, even with the changes).

mkcbunny
01-04-2006, 05:46 AM
All I hope for movie five is that they let the Weasley twins have the attention they deserve.
Oy my. I wasn't the only adult I know who saw #4 and found themselves thinking, "Those Weasleys are cute!" lol. A bit scary. They did some excellent casting with the Weasley Twins. My one kid-casting gripe is Draco. I didn't quite believe him in the first movie, and although his acting has improved, the character seems more like a brat than he does truly dangerous. Some of this has to do with how certain scenes play on film vs. in the books. For example, the ferret scene has to be included, but it gives an overall silly impression of the character that carries more weight than it does over the book series.

Lisa Y
01-04-2006, 05:34 PM
I didn't dislike the 5th book because Harry was so angry. I think he has the right to be angry, especially with Voldemort scrambling around inside his head all the time and giving him scar-aches. It just didn't seem to go anywhere. They spent the whole book fretting over a "weapon" that Voldemort was supposedly getting only to find out it was a prophecy that Voldmort didn't get to hear and Dumbledore already knew.

I did like getting into Snape's head and really liked seeing Umbridge getting her due (especially the Weasleys "accioing" their brooms and saying "give her hell, Peeves" before they flew off. There was also quite a funny scene where Peeves was loosening a light fixture so it would fall on Umbridge's head and McGonagall (sp) helped Peeves out by muttering something like "turn it the other way."

But the book felt so long and I thought the dual at the end was silly. There was something different about books 4 and 6, some formula that she didn't stick to that really appealed to me.

blisswriter
01-05-2006, 05:55 AM
Sigh.

We're back to watching Harry Potter again.

The Prisoner of Azkaban was first. Now it's The Sorceror's Stone.

They just killed the troll in the girls' bathroom.

Perks
01-05-2006, 06:26 AM
And I just think Richard Harris made a way better Dumbledore.

Waaaahh! King Arthur from Camelot! My heart is broken. I loved Richard Harris.

PattiTheWicked
01-05-2006, 07:17 AM
Oy my. I wasn't the only adult I know who saw #4 and found themselves thinking, "Those Weasleys are cute!" lol. A bit scary. They did some excellent casting with the Weasley Twins. My one kid-casting gripe is Draco. I didn't quite believe him in the first movie, and although his acting has improved, the character seems more like a brat than he does truly dangerous. Some of this has to do with how certain scenes play on film vs. in the books. For example, the ferret scene has to be included, but it gives an overall silly impression of the character that carries more weight than it does over the book series.

I agree on both counts. The Weasley twins are adorable. Makes me wish I was seventeen again.

My daughter is a big Draco fan, which works nicely because I'm in a great deal of lust with Jason Isaacs, who of course plays Lucius. We both wanted more Malfoy scenes in the GOF movie, and felt kind of let down. The last two movies, Draco has turned into a whiny wimpy boy, instead of the treacherous young man he becomes in the books. I absolutely hated the POA movie when Hermione slugs Draco and he runs off crying like a girl. Should have been filmed way differently. The bouncing ferret scene in GOF was mildly amusing, but shouldn't have been the character's one memorable scene in the film, which (unfortunately) it was.

Lisa Y
01-05-2006, 03:28 PM
Thank God I am not alone! I thought I was the only one who thought Lucius was disgustingly sexy. ;) ;)

PattiTheWicked
01-05-2006, 05:32 PM
Thank God I am not alone! I thought I was the only one who thought Lucius was disgustingly sexy. ;) ;)

Ohhhhhhhhhhhh yeah.

I fell in love with Jason Isaacs in The Patriot, particularly the scene where he gets interuppted shaving and hops up and skewers Heath Ledger.

I've always liked the Lucius character in the books, and when I saw Isaacs playing him in COS, I just about died. He doesnt' even have to talk, he can just stand there and glower, and I melt.

Lisa Y
01-06-2006, 03:59 PM
I know! And I love that thing he does with his cane. He almost uses it like another hand. I saw him interviewed (one of the movie DVDs) and he said he wanted to wear his hair long so the audience could tell him apart from Draco!

I don't know what is wrong with me. I seem to have this "thing" for the bad boys. I notice it my own writing, and I thought it was bad enough when I started developing a soft spot for Snape, but when I saw Lucius on screen, I was actually embarrassed and hoped no one around me would notice that I was drooling. I mean, there he was, sneering down out our hero, Harry, beating his snotty-clothed elf, and all I could think of was...well, I won't write that here!

Shai
01-07-2006, 07:37 AM
if the sixth book is any indication, Snape's treatment of Harry has nothing to do with who his father is and everything to do with his involvement with Voldemort.Yes, I suppose that's true. I guess I'm just hoping he turns out all right in the end. :p


Sirius has been trapped in a tiny prison cell with Dementors to come and torture him and nothing but bitter memories to dwell upon.This is a good point but I don't completely agree with it, because Sirius seems to be able to interact just fine, or at the very least, much better, with everyone else.


Shouldn't people have been climbing down to the lower seats? That made no sense to me.There was a very brief glimpse of tunnel openings in the hillside leading up to where the pitch was. But why didn't they just let everyone fly in on brooms, and then have something like, I dunno, broom lockers to prevent people from flying into the game after it started?


I mean, there he was, sneering down out our hero, Harry, beating his snotty-clothed elf, and all I could think of was...well, I won't write that here!And yet, Lisa, your location says "Snape's Dungeon"! Lucius will feel so left out. : ( Poor Lucius.

Goodness, we're terrible. >D

Puddle Jumper
01-07-2006, 07:50 AM
Ohhhhhhhhhhhh yeah.

I fell in love with Jason Isaacs in The Patriot, particularly the scene where he gets interuppted shaving and hops up and skewers Heath Ledger.
I had the complete opposite reaction to him in "The Patriot" which was the first movie I saw him in. There's something extremely un-sexy about a guy who would shoot and murder a kid. He was too beastly. But as Lucius Malfoy, I've never liked a bad guy before that I can recall.

Lisa Y
01-08-2006, 03:24 AM
Weellll, I don't look at Snape the same way I look at Lucius. Lucius is evil, beyond redemption (not even a roll in the hay with me would save him. ) I don't think Snape is. I think of him as that little Charlie Brown Christmas tree that is slumping and has needles falling off. All he needs is a little love (although I'm sure he'd prefer Lilly to me!)

Puddle Jumper
01-08-2006, 03:42 AM
Weellll, I don't look at Snape the same way I look at Lucius. Lucius is evil, beyond redemption (not even a roll in the hay with me would save him. ) I don't think Snape is. I think of him as that little Charlie Brown Christmas tree that is slumping and has needles falling off. All he needs is a little love (although I'm sure he'd prefer Lilly to me!)
But wouldn't it be so cool to see Lucius redeem himself, to turn away from Voldemort and choose not to be a dark wizard anymore?

I think there's a slim possibility for him too. I think his weakness is Draco and I could see him turning from the dark side because of his son. Wouldn't it be really cool to see a tender father-son moment between Draco and Lucius? I would sooooo love to see that.

Lisa Y
01-08-2006, 06:04 AM
I guess, I'm just not counting on it. I'm not even counting on Snape being a "good" guy after book 6 (although I'm sure that whole thing was planned by Dumbledore). I just still can't get over how hot Lucius is. I mean, don't you just want to...

bluejester12
01-08-2006, 06:47 AM
I thought movie 3 was the worst film so far, but then it was so drastically different from the first two films because of the change in director's and I felt the third drifted far more away from the book than the first two did, and the third book is my favorite in the series, that I ended up feeling extremely disappointed with the third film.

I thought the fourth was done very well though. I think the first is my favorite though, as far as the films are concerned. Lots of people like to bash Chris Columbus for how he directed the first two films, but he kept it very true to the books and I love the feel of the world he created in them.

And I just think Richard Harris made a way better Dumbledore.



http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b383/bluejester12/double.gif

PattiTheWicked
01-08-2006, 08:24 AM
I think there's a slim possibility for him too. I think his weakness is Draco and I could see him turning from the dark side because of his son. Wouldn't it be really cool to see a tender father-son moment between Draco and Lucius? I would sooooo love to see that.

I don't see it ever happening. I betcha Lucius would sell out Draco in a heartbeat to make points with Voldemort if he had to. Draco would just be collateral damage.


I guess, I'm just not counting on it. I'm not even counting on Snape being a "good" guy after book 6 (although I'm sure that whole thing was planned by Dumbledore). I just still can't get over how hot Lucius is. I mean, don't you just want to...

Why, yes.

Yes, I do. Very much so.

Shai
01-08-2006, 11:18 AM
I'm not even counting on Snape being a "good" guy after book 6 (although I'm sure that whole thing was planned by Dumbledore).Oh, ye of little faith! There was so much left open to interpretation, such as what Dumbledore was really asking Snape to do before Snape offed him. But I guess we'll just have to see!

I have the sneaking suspicion he'll get redeemed but somebody'll splatter him in the meantime. : (



I just still can't get over how hot Lucius is. I mean, don't you just want to...Why, yes.

Yes, I do. Very much so.
>.>

Don't we all though? Wee... :D

Lisa Y
01-08-2006, 11:08 PM
I want to know what all that stuff Dumbledor was mumbling when he drank that potion was about. I think it was significant. Also, if RAB took the locket, and replaced it with the fake, where did the new batch of potion come from (Volde didn't know it was gone). And what of Aragog's venom?

I think Snape will end up saving Harry but die in the process, but I don't think there is any chance of hot Lucius coming around. I agree that he would sell out Draco in a heartbeat. I'm glad he's not dead, at least until book 7 anyway. I hope they include him in movies 5 and 6 just so I can see him.