# Harry Potter Ate my Balls



## Skanky (Nov 19, 2010)

Seriously, 2.5 hours?

Yeah, I went to the midnight show because my daughters wanted to go (damn them!).

Admittedly, I'm not a HP fan - haven't read a single word of any of the books, but I thought the movies were fairly entertaining. Childish of course, but entertaining. 

However, this last film was just rubbish. 2.5 hours of a twisted story line, mediocre acting, and WAY too much time spent on things that could have easily been left on the cutting room floor. 

Maybe I'm just cranky after only 3 hours of sleep, but damn. I've seen better films on soup.


----------



## Cabinet (Nov 19, 2010)

Weird, I heard it was really good, I'll be seeing it tonight.


----------



## jymellis (Nov 19, 2010)

my wife won advanced screening tickets and saw it tuesday. she and my 14 year old son are avid harry potter fans. they said they loved the movie. now how would you feel if they made a movie of your favorite book and left alot of it on the cutting room floor? i know they wherestoked that nothing got left out


----------



## JJ Rodriguez (Nov 19, 2010)

I'm a fan of HP but I haven't enjoyed one of the movies since the second one. After they switched directors the whole series went to shit. The books are great however.


----------



## Skanky (Nov 19, 2010)

jymellis said:


> my wife won advanced screening tickets and saw it tuesday. she and my 14 year old son are avid harry potter fans. they said they loved the movie. now how would you feel if they made a movie of your favorite book and left alot of it on the cutting room floor? i know they wherestoked that nothing got left out





I'm sure HP fans will be happy to see a better adaptation of the books - who wouldn't? This is the problem though - (assuming here...) the book is probably very rich in story/character development (which is fine), but haven't they covered this in the LAST 6 FILMS already? 

I don't know what's coming up in the last film, and yeah, maybe they're saving the best for last, but it just seems that even if this film was necessary, there's no way you can convince me that ALL of the scenes in this film were critical in the telling of this story.


----------



## synrgy (Nov 19, 2010)

I'm really excited for this. Bought my tickets for IMAX on Sunday. (Yes, I am a complete nerd. I've read all 7 books, some of them twice.)

I'm glad to hear it's long, and that there were parts people who didn't read the books thought should have been left out. That gives me hope that maybe they're finally getting it right. The last few films were getting increasingly further away from the books, and it was starting to get really frustrating. The last one in particular took more liberties than it did portray anything that actually happened in the book. I was kinda pissed off about it.

I mean, I can understand that as a film maker/studio/etc they're perpetually trying to expand their audience, but I don't feel that it's acceptable to do so at the expense of those already invested in the canon. 

Example: I get that Peter Jackson opted to not include Tom Bombadil in the Lord of the Rings movies and I'm thankful as hell he skipped all the singing, but I would have been *really* pissed off if at the end of the Two Towers he decided that Saruman's forces actually win the battle at Helm's Deep 'because it made it a more interesting end of act 2' or some shit. Tolkien fans would have crucified him if he tried.

That's what they did in HP6, basically. Amongst other glaring liberties, they up and decided to burn down the Weasley's house towards the end of the film for dramatic effect, apparently forgetting that A) that never happened and B) it's one of the primary set pieces for the next book/film.

I totally didn't intend for this to be such a long post.  

TL;DR = I AM EXCITE.


----------



## Skyblue (Nov 19, 2010)

Haven't seen it yet, but I know for sure that it won't be that great... most of the films were fun, but not really great, since they haven't been following the books as much as I'd like them too, and the acting isn't that great usually, but I go see them anyway~ 

I'm an HP fan, always loved the books. the 7th is actually quite good, except for some really idiotic things she did.


----------



## Randy (Nov 19, 2010)

Jeez, I haven't thought of "ate my balls" since, like, 1997.


----------



## Herb Dorklift (Nov 19, 2010)

Skanky said:


> Seriously, 2.5 hours?
> 
> Yeah, I went to the midnight show because my daughters wanted to go (damn them!).
> 
> ...


 
How could you possibly know what could be left out if you haven't read a single word of any of the books?


----------



## Goatchrist (Nov 19, 2010)

Haven't seen it yet, but the critics I've read were pretty bad. I like HP, also read all 7 books, but the last book wasn't good at all, so I'm not surprised about the "2.5 hours twisted story line".


----------



## Herb Dorklift (Nov 19, 2010)

Skanky said:


> the book is probably very rich in story/character development (which is fine), but haven't they covered this in the LAST 6 FILMS already?


 
The characters are still growing up remember. Harry Potter in the first book/film is very different from the newest


----------



## Skanky (Nov 19, 2010)

Herb Dorklift said:


> How could you possibly know what could be left out if you haven't read a single word of any of the books?




Because I'm writing this from the standpoint of a person who *admittedly* hasn't read the books. I'm a movie fanatic, and I know when some scenes should have been made shorter or simply been left out altogether.

Again, if you're a HP fan, I'm sure you'll appreciate the additional material included (as a previous poster stated), but the movie on its own is simply WAY too drawn out.

Of course, this is just my opinion.


----------



## Xaios (Nov 19, 2010)

JJ Rodriguez said:


> I'm a fan of HP but I haven't enjoyed one of the movies since the second one. After they switched directors the whole series went to shit. The books are great however.



Funny that you think so. Most people, myself included, actually think the 3rd movie, Prisoner of Azkaban, is the best of all of them. It was directed by Alfonso Cuaron, who also directed Children of Men.


----------



## aslsmm (Nov 19, 2010)

i hate harry pooter.


----------



## synrgy (Nov 19, 2010)

Xaios said:


> Funny that you think so. Most people, myself included, actually think the 3rd movie, Prisoner of Azkaban, is the best of all of them. It was directed by Alfonso Cuaron, who also directed Children of Men.



I'm in full agreement here.

I think 1+2 are great -- particularly in terms of capturing the essence of the books -- 3 is even better, but then 4 starts to slip, 5 slips further (we have to make Cho the traitor WHY, exactly?) and 6 just kinda makes me throw my hands up in full-on 'Seriously, WTF?' mode, which was really disappointing for me because 6 was my second favorite book in the series.

I'm just praying they return to form for these last films. I'll know in 2 days!


----------



## Xaios (Nov 19, 2010)

synrgy said:


> I'm in full agreement here.
> 
> I think 1+2 are great -- particularly in terms of capturing the essence of the books -- 3 is even better, but then 4 starts to slip, 5 slips further (we have to make Cho the traitor WHY, exactly?) and 6 just kinda makes me throw my hands up in full-on 'Seriously, WTF?' mode, which was really disappointing for me because 6 was my second favorite book in the series.
> 
> I'm just praying they return to form for these last films. I'll know in 2 days!



Overall, I agree. David Yates, who directed 5 & 6 and also both parts of 7 is the wrong director for the series from an overall perspective, he's too inconsistent. Having said that, some of the scenes from 5 and 6 still rank among the best in the series, such as the battle between Voldemort and Dumbledore in Order of the Phoenix and the scene in which Harry chases Malfoy through the school and curses him in 6, causing him to bleed out, as well as the scene in 6 where Bellatrix Lestrange shows up and beats the crap out of the Weasley's house, which was created especially for the movie.


----------



## synrgy (Nov 19, 2010)

Xaios said:


> as the scene in 6 where Bellatrix Lestrange shows up and beats the crap out of the Weasley's house, which was created especially for the movie.





That's *exactly* the scene I was talking about in my first post that had me in 'Seriously, WTF?!' mode. That NEVER happened in the book, and more importantly a very large portion of book 7 happens in that house, which will be pretty difficult to explain considering they decided to burn it down for no good reason.


----------



## JJ Rodriguez (Nov 19, 2010)

I think I actually walked out of the theatre during the third movie, or wanted to anyways, was awhile ago so I can't remember exactly


----------



## splinter8451 (Nov 19, 2010)

Saw the midnight showing last night and it was my favorite HP movie yet 

You aren't supposed to know EXACTLY what is happening the whole way through it because the characters themselves don't, it will all be resolved in Part 2  Just like when you read a book you don't know every single twist and turn from reading just the first half.


----------



## ittoa666 (Nov 19, 2010)

Might go see it just to see cool special effects and that hot redhead girl.


----------



## Xaios (Nov 19, 2010)

synrgy said:


> That's *exactly* the scene I was talking about in my first post that had me in 'Seriously, WTF?!' mode. That NEVER happened in the book, and more importantly a very large portion of book 7 happens in that house, which will be pretty difficult to explain considering they decided to burn it down for no good reason.



Understandable, but it can't be too difficult for a wizard to rebuild a house. 

I think I'll wait a couple nights before I go see it. The throngs of people are bound to be ridiculous.


----------



## MFB (Nov 19, 2010)

I really enjoyed it and found it to do a damn good job of making me feel like I had read the 7th book  I read the first 4 then got out of them cause when I DID read 4, I just sat on my couch for several hours and realized I had just wasted $X and had to wait for the 5th. I don't really feel like there was anything that needed to be left out, and if you can point out any scenes then be my guest.


----------



## s_k_mullins (Nov 19, 2010)

I'm definitely gonna see it, but I'll be waiting a couple of weeks to avoid the huge lines and overcrowded theaters that accompany these movie releases.


----------



## technomancer (Nov 19, 2010)

Went to a midnight show with the wife. Overall I liked it, but it did suffer from "first part of a 2 part movie" syndrome (felt a little slow as it's basically a buildup to the events in the next movie). It's also been long enough since I read the book that I don't remember everything from it.

Also, terribly sorry for those with short attention spans that wanted an action flick


----------



## pink freud (Nov 19, 2010)

Why the hell did they split the seventh book in half. The first half of the book is a GIANT FUCKING ANGSTY CAMPING TRIP.


----------



## splinter8451 (Nov 19, 2010)

technomancer said:


> Also, terribly sorry for those with short attention spans that wanted an action flick



 this.


----------



## GuitaristOfHell (Nov 19, 2010)

pink freud said:


> Why the hell did they split the seventh book in half. The first half of the book is a GIANT FUCKING ANGSTY CAMPING TRIP.


 I'm not a huge HP fan, although I find the movies somewhat entertaining. The books however were excellent, but in my view no book or movie shall ever top Lord Of The Rings... well Pirates Of the Caribbean rivals it but still.

My friends want to go see it so once they see it I suppose I will report how they think it is, unless I see it in a few weeks to avoid a crowded theater.


----------



## Daemoniac (Nov 19, 2010)

synrgy said:


> I'm really excited for this. Bought my tickets for IMAX on Sunday. (Yes, I am a complete nerd. I've read all 7 books, some of them twice.)
> 
> I'm glad to hear it's long, and that there were parts people who didn't read the books thought should have been left out. That gives me hope that maybe they're finally getting it right. The last few films were getting increasingly further away from the books, and it was starting to get really frustrating. The last one in particular took more liberties than it did portray anything that actually happened in the book. I was kinda pissed off about it.
> 
> ...



Agreed on all points except for Bombadil


----------



## Bobo (Nov 19, 2010)

I'm a bit of an HP fan, and my lil $0.02 is that this is one of the better movies of the series. A bit slow some in the scenes in the woods, but not a problem for me.

My fav movie is still the 3rd. That director brought the quirkiness. Loved it.


----------



## Spinedriver (Nov 25, 2010)

The wife is a big fan of the series (books & movies) so we'll probably be going this weekend. I'd say the reason why they split the book into 2 movies is so that they can fit as much of the material in as possible. If they had made it a single 2 1/2 hr movie, fans of the books (not the movie critics) would blow a gasket over how much content was dropped in order to make it under 3 hrs. So even though we haven't seen it yet, I have to agree that it was a good decision to make it in 2 parts. 

I'm quite certain that people that are being confused by the 'twists & turns' will be properly straightened out if they check out part 2.


----------



## leftyguitarjoe (Nov 25, 2010)

I hate Harry Potter, but I heard you see Emma Watson's boobs. Thats worth seeing.


----------



## johnythehero (Nov 25, 2010)

if it hasnt been said already the last movie is slightly covering things that where important in the last movies that where dropped because of time AND the fact that pretty much if they left anything out of this one it would be like watching the matrix but they decide to leave out the part where neo found out what year it really was youd be like WTF IS GOING ON!


----------



## MFB (Nov 25, 2010)

leftyguitarjoe said:


> I hate Harry Potter, but I heard you see Emma Watson's boobs. Thats worth seeing.



I can certainly say it was NOT in Part 1, but if it's in part 2? Then


----------



## Daemoniac (Nov 25, 2010)

Saw it the other day  It was really good


----------



## sol niger 333 (Nov 26, 2010)

Found it AMAZING. Favourite yet. Attention span.. you need one


----------



## Daemoniac (Nov 26, 2010)

^ 

It's easily one of the best of the series, and a huge step up frm the last one (which is a shame really, the 6th book is one of my favorites  )


----------



## ralphy1976 (Nov 26, 2010)

my wife went to see it and loved, she is now eagerly waiting for part 2...as for me, well, i had to wash my hair so i couldn't really make it!!!


----------



## st2012 (Nov 26, 2010)

I saw it this morning and I liked it. I was really disappointed in the last one so I wasn't sure how this one would turn out but I was really impressed.


----------



## JJ Rodriguez (Nov 26, 2010)

Well, like I said, I was disappointed with every movie since the first 2...but I really dug this.


----------



## tacotiklah (Nov 26, 2010)

Demoniac said:


> Agreed on all points except for Bombadil



I was pissed that they didn't show the battle of the shire at the end of Return of the King. That was a great part of the book that got no love at all by being left out of the movie.


I haven't seen the movie yet, but I love the series. (the 7th book being my favorite)
What appeals to me is that from book 3 on, the writing gets progressively darker and sinister. It stops being a kid's book, and starts being a real classic.

I can't wait to see the battle of Hogwarts and when they break into Gringotts and ride out on the dragon. I really hope they do both of those justice on the big screen.


----------



## pink freud (Nov 26, 2010)

Just got back from seeing it. I agree that this was the most accurate movie since the first (and maybe the second and third).


Spoiler



The only mess-up they really did was not explaining the Taboo (they still included it, but I could suspect that people who didn't read the book (if they exist) might get confused as to why DEs showed up whenever somebody said Voldemort). I also noticed that Harry didn't snag Mad Eye's eye, but that's not really necessary to the plot, and I'm thinking they figured one funeral scene was enough.


----------



## Daemoniac (Nov 26, 2010)

ghstofperdition said:


> I was pissed that they didn't show the battle of the shire at the end of Return of the King. That was a great part of the book that got no love at all by being left out of the movie.
> 
> 
> I haven't seen the movie yet, but I love the series. (the 7th book being my favorite)
> ...





It's really good/lucky that Rowling actually grew her characters appropriately for her audience; we grew older, and she kept the books progressively appropriate for our age.

It's going to be weird as hell when there are no more Harry Potter movies to be release


----------



## MFB (Nov 26, 2010)

pink freud said:


> Just got back from seeing it. I agree that this was the most accurate movie since the first (and maybe the second and third).
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> ...





Spoiler



You're right, I don't think they explained the ban on the word Voldemort and so forth. I only discovered this by clicking on random links from the Wiki, and didn't find it to be too spoilerish but still, it should have been mentioned.


----------



## Cheesebuiscut (Nov 27, 2010)

This is why I'm avid about taking the stance "don't read the book before you watch the movie" 

because then you sit around comparing the two when books and movies are like apples and oranges, you can base one on the other but its never going to be the same. Especially since some things don't translate well to movie and they need to fib stuff here and there for entertainment purposes. 

I read all of half of the first harry potter book and it ruined the first half of the first movie for me because of all the little things that you can't get from a movie. If you go back and read the book AFTER watching the movie its so much better as it just explains things in greater detail.

After having not read anything after the first half I've enjoyed all the movies. This last one was a bit draggy (but that was ok because I was there with a fine female) but I enjoyed everything about it except for the fact that with the way they ended it it felt like they just plain chopped the movie in half instead of split the book into two movies. 

Felt like I payed to watch half a movie


----------



## Spinedriver (Nov 27, 2010)

leftyguitarjoe said:


> I hate Harry Potter, but I heard you see Emma Watson's boobs. Thats worth seeing.




There's a scene where a very 'cgi-ish' version of her is dancing with Harry and they're supposed to be naked but everything below her armpit is very smoky/foggy (it's an illusion Ron is seeing).


----------



## MikeH (Dec 5, 2010)

Well I've seen it twice within the past 3 days, so that should explain my stance on how I thought the film was.  I think it's a great look into the final chapter of the series.



Spoiler



And I damn near cried when Dobby died. No homo. I loved that fucker.


----------



## soundgardener75 (Dec 12, 2010)

I personally think that they should've done two part movies since _Goblet of Fire_. Talk about parts being left out. My wife was like '


Spoiler



what is that piece of mirror he's holding?


', and I'm like 'jeez, this was on the 5th', until I realized that this was not shown, and I only remembered it from the books.


----------

