Not sure how I'd feel about that. His films made from whole cloth I find very impressive.
His films adapting previously established properties? Not so much.
Still, it would be interesting!
(I also see that someone's interested in adapting Arthur C. Clarke's Childhood's End to the big screen. Wow. It's like every book I read as a kid is becoming a movie!)
Posts: 6689 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Same guy who did Order, David Yates. Warner Bros. first move will probably be to ask him if he wants to keep directing the last movie, and I'm sure he'll say yes, so this might not even matter.
I'm not afraid to voice my opinion that the movies have cut too much out to make any sense anymore. Just find it interesting that Rowling was alive and available from time to time to give advice on them, and they still turned out lacking very important things. Also, I hate Dumbledore's actor. He refuses to read any of the books, or even watch the movies. Guess he just assumes he's doing a good job Posts: 349 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I just watched the 5th movie on Monday and I was amazed at how incoherent the plot was. I can't imagine how anyone who hasn't read the book could get much out of it. I'd compare it to watching the highlight reel for an NHL game. You see a bunch of exciting moments but you miss all the subtleties. Actually, that's being too generous to the movie.
Posts: 1336 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Does anyone know what happened to Chris Columbus? I mean, why didn't he continue directing after the first two?
Posts: 155 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Last I heard he was still looking for a new oceangoing route to India. That might tie him up for awhile.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
A lot of people hated the first two movies and I understand a lot of the complaints I have heard but they have one pretty important point going for them: They follow the plot of the books and don't cut out huge swaths of what made the story fun and interesting. A person who hadn't read the books wouldn't be totally lost watching them but I think would be watching the rest (especially 5 and 3).
Now, I know that the first two books were shorter and more straightforward but Azkaban wasn't that much longer and a ton of stuff was missing from it (it's been too long since I've watched it so don't ask me to detail my complaints).
I personally think that it was a mistake to have shorter and shorter movies for the longer books. I think that each movie has been shorter than the one that preceded it even though each book up until 5 was longer than the previous one.
What really bugs me about the more recent films isn't so much that they left things out but that they left them out to spend time adding new things or spending too much time focusing on something unimportant (like Harry going flying around all over on the Hippogriff).
I really hope they do a better job on the next couple of movies. I really want to like them and from a purely visual standpoint I do. I also really love some of the actors performances.
Posts: 1336 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
OK, so I'm not completely off my rocker then. Solo, it seems like you and I share the same opinion regarding the missing chunks and length of the movies. Most people I know love "Prisoner of Azkaban", but it isn't my favorite at all. In fact, I felt such a huge difference in directing and kept wishing that Columbus hadn't left as director. Personally I loved the first two films BECAUSE of how true to the books they were. And I agree with you that they should NOT have shortened the films as the books got longer. I understand the cinematographic challenges of making a long movie, but like you said, they've cut out too much important stuff and made room for things I could have lived without.
The "Goblet of Fire" was difficult for me to watch because of the new Dumbledore, but Moody made up for it. The "Order of the Phoenix" is probably my least favorite for multiple reasons. The whole film felt fragmented to me. It seems like they literally chopped out chunks of footage and replaced them with nothing. And honestly, those people who haven't read the books, I don't know how they manage to keep up.
But of course, no matter what happens, I still love them. Like you, I love some of the actors: Snape, Luna Lovegood, Lucius Malfoy, Voldemort are definitely exactly as I had imagined them.
Posts: 155 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
P of A was OK, but after GoF I don't think I will watch them anymore. They drive me crazy. The third one was good in terms of visuals, but it was dippy to have Harry do magic in the beginning of the movie and to have Peter Pettigrew running around the castle. I hate tacked on scenes.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Say what you will about the flaws of the LotR films; they are far and away better than the Harry Potter ones. Maybe what we need is a Potter fanatic to direct the last movie, someone as crazy as Jackson.
Posts: 349 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Saephon: Say what you will about the flaws of the LotR films; they are far and away better than the Harry Potter ones. Maybe what we need is a Potter fanatic to direct the last movie, someone as crazy as Jackson.
I agree. I should continue to watch The Two Towers tomorrow. I think I might just do that after I buy soft food.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Puffy Treat: The "Goblet of Fire" was difficult for me to watch because of the new Dumbledore
The actor also played Dumbledore in the previous film.
Goblet of Fire I thought was somewhat painful because Dumble I think acted out of character several times, and it was jarring.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Synesthesia: Also, the actor won't read the books which is annoying as they are so good.
Which bothers me, as I think any actor worth his salt should be interested in whom he is portraying, not just himself.
Posts: 349 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Puffy, I know that Michael Gambon played Dumbledore in the 3rd movie, however, he didn't bother me as much as he did in the 4th. As was already said above, he was so out of character in the Goblet scene, yelling at Harry and "manhandling" him, that it was painful to watch.
What bothers me even more, is that Dumbledore's character will be impossible for him to play in 6th and 7th movies unless he reads the books. So much will depend on his ability to portray Dumbledore's emotions and events from his younger life. That is very disappointing, in my opinion.
Posts: 155 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
On a more positive note, there's still a good reason to see the next two movies: Alan Rickman's gonna do a great job Posts: 349 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes, Dumbledore is very subtle, calm, cool, crazy, all at the same time. They never seem to be able to get that right on film among other things. It's why the movies have ceased to be entertaining to me, but perhaps because I don't like most movie versions of books I love.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
You can always count on him, that's for sure. I wonder who they're going to cast to play the young Severus. Remember the kid that played Murtagh in "Eragon"? He did a pretty good job of looking "sallow", plus he had long black greasy hair. Posts: 155 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
They better at least give Snape enough scenes. He's interesting. But I'm still not watching the movies unless I get paid to or if I'm forced to watch them.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
If the next movies are directed by the same guy who directed the fifth movie, and if they don't get a new Dumbledore or Michael Gambon continues to not read the books, I'm NOT seeing the next movies.
quote:Originally posted by aspectre: The next three movies. Deathly Hallows will be directed to be split into two parts.
It will? Now why in hell's bloody bells didn't they do this with 4 and 5? Are they pulling my chokechain? Teasing me? Trying to get me to forgive them for the travesty that was 4?
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I really did like GoF and SS, but that's all. CoS felt like a repeat of SS, trying to enchant us with that world again without giving us reason. PoA was just so terribly unmemorable. GoF still maintained a lot of the fun of the series, especially with Ron and Harry's little spat.
OotP stunk to high heaven, which was awful 'cause it was my favorite book. It was all plot, and any character relationships or development (Neville's moping over his parents)felt tacked on and sloppy. They cut out anything that didn't specifically advance the plot or give us something flashy and exciting (Ron? Who's Ron? I've not heard or seen of this "Ron" guy.)
Here's hoping for Guillermo del Toro. I've always enjoyed him.
Posts: 1735 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
GoF onward should have been split into two parts, well, I guess GoF was fine as a single movie, but AT LEAST OotP onward should have been two movies each.
It's one case where I won't complain about double dipping, they NEED to tell more story than 2 and a half hours can possibly tell.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think even one three hour film is enough to get MOST of the important parts in. Why is it they keep making the films shorter and shorter, and replacing key plot points with filler? I'm sorry, but these are not good film-making decisions, and the sad thing is that you don't need a degree in directing to see that, just some common sense.
P.S. This isn't said enough, but the movies do have some of the most phenomenal adult actors in the business. I wish McGonnogal and Snape had more screentime. Also, I'm actually a fan of the film versions of Moody and Lupin. I was sorely disappointed that they could barely be seen in OotP. Here's hoping David Thewlis nails that one scene between Lupin and Harry in Deathly Hallows. There's a lot of potential there.
Posts: 349 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't know if I want Spielberg to take on Harry Potter. I like Cuaron, I like del Toro. I'd be interested in seeing Tim Burton do no more than one Harry Potter film, though after seeing Sweeney Todd, I think he might be even TOO dark for Harry Potter.
But I also think that Deathly Hallows should be done by someone who knows and loves the series, a la Jackson/LOTR.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Maybe Chris Columbus was able to stick close to the book in the first couple of movies, but the latter Harry Potter novels kept getting longer and longer. They may very well have to divide Deathly Hallows into two parts. Except there is the problem of the tradition that each movie begins with the kids getting ready for the start of school at Hogwarts, and ends with the kids going home for summer break. If they can't divide the last movie into two parts, then they need to make it 3 1/2 hours long, like all the "Lord of the Rings" movies. It wouldn't hurt to do that with Half-Blood Prince, too. Maybe they should have done so with Order of the Phoenix, too. I keep being disappointed that they don't come out with extended release editions on DVD. Think of all the extra money they could make if they did that!
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm interested in what they'll do with Half Blood Prince. It doesn't seem as much of a major blockbuster content novel as the previous ones; it functions as a setup for the grand finale. In and of itself, there's going to be a lot more deliberating over Tom Riddle's history than much else.
Not that I have doubt that it can be a good movie.
Posts: 1029 | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Whatever they do with the next two movies, split them or not, they need to get a move on, or the kids will grow up.
Posts: 155 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by C3PO the Dragon Slayer: I'm interested in what they'll do with Half Blood Prince. It doesn't seem as much of a major blockbuster content novel as the previous ones; it functions as a setup for the grand finale. In and of itself, there's going to be a lot more deliberating over Tom Riddle's history than much else.
Well, judging by some previous disasters, they'll probably just cut all that fascinating "non-blockbuster content" out and abbreviate Riddle's story into a 30 second synopsis. Ugh.
Posts: 155 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: But I also think that Deathly Hallows should be done by someone who knows and loves the series, a la Jackson/LOTR.
So do I.
There was a 49 year hiatus between the books and Jackson's films though. Maybe in another 50 years somebody will redo Harry Potter. Posts: 155 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
See, as a novel, Half-Blood Prince is actually one of my favorites. It's such an intense build-up that there was no way I could finish reading and say to myself "who cares what happens after this?"
Some might argue that as a film or novel whose finale is a year off, it fails to stand alone and may disappoint. That's perfectly understandable to me, but I still think that with the right director and writers, it can be pulled off so well that it would draw people in further, rather than piss them off. If you think about it, nearly all of the books/films have a lack of direct action until the end of the story. There is conflict throughout, but it's not epic wand battles and lasers shooting everywhere. HBP is no different; I think the suspense before and consequences as a result of Draco's plotting have enormous potential. What I especially like is how we're led to believe that Harry's an idiot because he always suspects people he begrudges. And then bam: both Draco and Snape were indeed plotting. I like that a lot. At the very end of the story it challenges your preconceptions of whether an obvious bad guy and/or a redeemed bad guy is too cliche. I at least know that upon finishing the book I wasn't entirely sure what to make of Snape (of course a couple rereads later and I figured it out). Filmed properly, I believe an audience can be just as involved with this upcoming movie. Now whether the staff working on the film right now is capable of that is a different matter altogether.
Edited for more thoughts.
Posts: 349 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
