IMDB announced it will be made in 2007. I will be 22 then. Nutty.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0373889/
aww c'mon, you're just trying to make this thread before me arent you? i'll be 22 in 11 days.
Quote from: themodernage02aww c'mon, you're just trying to make this thread before me arent you? i'll be 22 in 11 days.
?
uhh, i just meant i made the other harry potter thread. and since there isnt any real 'news' on order of the phoenix and it wont be out for 3 1/2 years......... oh nevermind. the 22 comment was just a response to your 22 comment. i give up.
Sorry. I'll refrain from posting movie announcements in the future. I'll leave that up to MacGuffin.
Quote from: Lucinda BryteSorry. I'll refrain from posting movie announcements in the future. I'll leave that up to MacGuffin.
Don't get discouraged. It was just a joke that went awry. mod-age meant no harm and wasn't poking fun at you. Please feel free to post any announcements you want.
Quote from: MacGuffinQuote from: Lucinda BryteSorry. I'll refrain from posting movie announcements in the future. I'll leave that up to MacGuffin.
Don't get discouraged. It was just a joke that went awry. mod-age meant no harm and wasn't poking fun at you. Please feel free to post any announcements you want.
Nah I was joking back with him and poking fun at you. It's fine. :-D
Goldenberg to script fifth 'Potter' film
Michael Goldenberg has signed on to adapt the fifth installment of the "Harry Potter" series, "Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix," for producer David Heyman and Warner Bros. Pictures. The project is expected to begin principal photography in late 2005 or early 2006 for release in summer 2007. Steve Kloves, who wrote the screenplays for the first four "Harry Potter" films, has opted to step away from the series to adapt and direct another Warner Bros. project, "The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time," based on the best-selling novel by Mark Haddon. Brad Grey, Brad Pitt and Jennifer Aniston's Plan B Entertainment is producing "Curious" with Heyman. Goldenberg most recently adapted "Where the Wild Things Are" and also wrote "Peter Pan" and "Contact." He also wrote and directed "Bed of Roses." In addition to writing the four "Harry Potter" screenplays, Kloves also has written "Racing With the Moon," "The Fabulous Baker Boys," "Flesh and Bone" and "Wonder Boys." He also directed "Flesh" and "Boys."
Thank Jebus, Kloves' scripts were getting on my nerves.
Maybe this guy will know how to adapt a book.
Yates Rises for PHOENIX
British helmer David Yates will take the director's chair for the fifth installment of the Harry Potter franchise.
Not only will Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix have a new writer (Michael Goldenberg), but a new director is coming on as well. British helmer David Yates is in final negotiations with Warner Bros. to direct the fifth Harry Potter installment.
The news came as a bit of a surprise, as Yates has only directed one feature, 1998's The Tichborne Claimant. But his television work on prize-winning dramas that include The Way We Live Now and the miniseries State of Play are what impressed Warner Bros. Yates is currently attached to helm Jennifer Connelly and Paul Bettany in Warner Independent's Brideshead Revisited.
The Yates/WB directing deal is likely to be sealed by next week. Order of the Phoenix is scheduled to go into production late in 2005 for a summer 2007 release.
Filming to Start on New Harry Potter Movie
A veteran Academy Award nominee and a 14-year-old unknown will join the cast of J.K. Rowling's epic Harry Potter series as filming begins next week on the latest movie, producers said Thursday.
Millions of fans across the world are eagerly awaiting the adaptation of Rowling's fifth book "Harry Potter and The Order of the Phoenix" which sees the return of young actor Daniel Radcliffe in the title role.
Filming will begin Monday in Hertfordshire, a county in southern England. The movie is not slated for release until next year.
The plot centers on the arrival of Dolores Umbridge, an unpopular new professor at wizard academy Hogwarts. She will be played by actress Imelda Staunton, nominated for a 2005 Oscar for her performance in the bleak period drama "Vera Drake."
Potter also wrestles with his attraction to new character Luna Lovegood, a role taken by 14-year-old newcomer Evanna Lynch.
Lynch beat out 15,000 young rivals in an open casting for the part in Britain.
The last film in the series, an adaptation of the fourth book, "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire," was 2005's top earner at British cinemas.
Sirius Back
Oldman confirmed for next Potter.
GaryOldman.info first reported, and HPANA later confirmed, that Gary Oldman will reprise his role as Sirius Black in Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. Both sites were informed by Oldman's manager, Doug Urbanski, that the highly publicized casting issue had been resolved.
"Gary Oldman is now set to play Sirius Black in The Order of the Phoenix. A deal was concluded this morning," Urbanski advised GaryOldman.info.
"I'm so relieved and happy," he later told HPANA. "I can't put my mind in the place of the producers, but I would've thought that when they read the book, a call to us would've been very high on their list. Obviously, the character of Sirius Black is key."
"It's a wonderful role. Gary read the script last night, and he read part of it to me on the phone this morning. The end of the story is: Gary's in it. It's a terrific script, and he's so happy to be back."
http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/#article:8630
Terry Gilliam for harry potter?
That was like a three-minute rumor not even worth posting.
I kind of doubt he would do it since he was up for directing the first one and got very attached to the idea until he had his spirits crushed and feels like the entire franchise was ruined because of the direction they started with.
Jeunet has also been an off and on rumor for the past two films.
Quote from: RegularKarate on May 04, 2006, 02:02:38 PMthe direction they started with.
Yeah, but the direction has changed hasn't it? The franchise wasn't ruined at all. Can't see why he wouldn't be interested now, Goblet was pretty good. It seems each installment of the series from here on out will have someone new behind the wheel (I hope). If we're lucky both Gilliam and Jeunet will get their chances. Maybe even Spielberg, and one from Burton would be cool.
Quote from: Just Withnail on May 05, 2006, 09:11:40 AM
If we're lucky both Gilliam and Jeunet will get their chances. Maybe even Spielberg, and one from Burton would be cool.
hell, throw in mallick while you're at it. i think bergman expressed interest in it as his umpteenth swan song.
Keep your fingers crossed for McG.
Personally I'm keeping my fingers crossed for PTA. That would be AWESOME.
hell, why doesn't squints take a stab while you guys are at it. i think RK expressed interest in this attempted owning as well.
Carter Joins Potter Cast
New actors are in Order.
Helena Bonham Carter (Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, Planet of the Apes) has joined the cast of Warners' Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix.
CBBC Newsround reports that Carter is replacing the pregnant Helen McCrory, who had been cast as Death Eater Bellatrix Lestrange in the David Yates-directed film. The screenplay adaptation was penned by Michael Goldenberg (Where the Wild Things Are, Peter Pan).
Helena Bonham Carter's credits include Corpse Bride, Big Fish, Fight Club, Mary Shelley's Frankenstein and Wallace & Gromit: The Curse of the Were-Rabbit.
In other Potter casting news, the CBBC also claims that actress Apple Brook has been cast as Professor Grubbly-Plank.
Potter's "Phoenix" Rising Next Summer
Muggles are going to have to crane their necks to catch this Phoenix.
Warner Bros. announced Wednesday plans to unspool Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, the highly anticipated fifth film from J.K. Rowling's epic fantasy saga, simultaneously in theaters and on Imax screens nationwide July 13, 2007.
The studio followed a similar strategy for the last two entries in the billion-dollar franchise, last November's Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire and 2004's Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkabhan.
"We're delighted to be working with Warner Bros. Pictures," Imax coheads Richard L. Gelfond and Bradley Wechsler said in a statement. "The last two Harry Potter films we released to Imax theaters grossed a combined $34 million...This new title gives us a powerful kick-start to next year's film slate."
The last installment, Goblet of Fire, broke the record for Imax ticket sales, conjuring up more than $20 million.
No word yet whether Harry's latest supersize adventure will be digitally converted to Imax 3-D, as Warner Bros. is doing for several of this summer's would-be blockbusters, including Superman Returns and the animated Ant Bully, and as Sony Pictures Animation has agreed to do with its computer-animated debut, Open Season, out in September.
"Obviously, the entire industry is thinking about 3-D, but each film is looked at and negotiated one at a time," Imax spokeswoman Sarah Gormley told E! Online, noting that a decision on the eye-popping format will come once principal photography is complete.
Phoenix, helmed by acclaimed British TV director David Yates, finds our bespectacled orphan hero facing off against dastardly bureaucrat Dolores Umbridge (Vera Drake's Imelda Staunton), who, at the behest of corrupt officials at the Ministry of Magic, schemes to take over Hogwarts and oust Professor Dumbledore, enabling the return to power of You Know Who.
Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson and Rupert Grint are once again returning as Harry, Hermione and Ron, respectively, backed by an all-star cast that includes Ralph Fiennes back as the evil Lord Voldemort.
Warner Bros. has already begun development on the sixth installment, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince.
As for the seventh and final chapter in Harry's increasingly dark odyssey, Britain's most famous (and wealthiest) author has confirmed she has started writing the story. But according to U.K. publisher Bloomsbury, the currently untitled tome won't hit bookstores until 2007 at the earliest. Our guess is it will be on shelves just in time for a certain movie opening.
Quote from: MacGuffin on November 17, 2004, 01:12:20 AM
Goldenberg to script fifth 'Potter' film
Michael Goldenberg has signed on to adapt the fifth installment of the "Harry Potter" series, "Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix," for producer David Heyman and Warner Bros. Pictures. The project is expected to begin principal photography in late 2005 or early 2006 for release in summer 2007. Steve Kloves, who wrote the screenplays for the first four "Harry Potter" films, has opted to step away from the series to adapt and direct another Warner Bros. project, "The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time," based on the best-selling novel by Mark Haddon. Brad Grey, Brad Pitt and Jennifer Aniston's Plan B Entertainment is producing "Curious" with Heyman. Goldenberg most recently adapted "Where the Wild Things Are" and also wrote "Peter Pan" and "Contact." He also wrote and directed "Bed of Roses." In addition to writing the four "Harry Potter" screenplays, Kloves also has written "Racing With the Moon," "The Fabulous Baker Boys," "Flesh and Bone" and "Wonder Boys." He also directed "Flesh" and "Boys."
i know this is off topic, but is it just me or does practically every script with which this guy is involved have a name that wouldn't have to be changed for the softcore porn version?
Rowling: Two 'Potter' characters will die
Author J.K. Rowling said two characters will die in the last installment of her boy wizard series, and she hinted Harry Potter might not survive either.
"I have never been tempted to kill him off before the final because I've always planned seven books, and I want to finish on seven books," Rowling said Monday on TV here.
"I can completely understand, however, the mentality of an author who thinks, `Well, I'm gonna kill them off because that means there can be no non-author-written sequels. So it will end with me, and after I'm dead and gone they won't be able to bring back the character'."
Rowling declined to commit herself about Harry, saying she doesn't want to receive hate mail.
"The last book is not finished. But I'm well into it now. I wrote the final chapter in something like 1990, so I've known exactly how the series is going to end," she said.
Some characters might die, but the blockbuster movie franchise lives on. Warner Bros. Pictures has announced that the fifth installment will be released in U.S. theaters, including Imax screens, on July 13, 2007.
In "Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix," directed by David Yates, the teenage Harry continues to battle the evil Lord Voldemort (again played by Ralph Fiennes) and his followers. Daniel Radcliffe is returning as the title character, and Emma Watson and Rupert Grint reprise their roles as Hermione and Ron. Oscar-nominated actress Imelda Staunton plays the malicious, frumpy Professor Dolores Umbridge, who tortures Harry.
In her Monday interview on the "Richard and Judy" show, Rowling said people are sometimes shocked to hear that she wrote the end of book seven before she had a publisher for the first book in the series.
"The final chapter is hidden away, although it's now changed very slightly. One character got a reprieve. But I have to say two die that I didn't intend to die," she said. "A price has to be paid. We are dealing with pure evil here. They don't target extras do they? They go for the main characters. Well, I do."
Rowling is the richest woman in Britain — wealthier than even the queen — with a fortune estimated by Forbes magazine last year at more than $1 billion.
Whatever she writes next, Rowling is sure of one thing: It won't be as successful as Harry Potter.
"I don't think I'm ever going to have anything like Harry again. You just get one like Harry."
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmoviesmedia.ign.com%2Fmovies%2Fimage%2Farticle%2F746%2F746225%2Fharry-potter-and-the-order-of-the-phoenix-20061115011416620.jpg&hash=183e3eeb364a286000d65ff01dee9097f0e63c97)
nifty
orky
Teaser Trailer here. (http://pdl.warnerbros.com/wbmovies/orderofthephoenix/teaser/teaser_500.mov)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi3.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fy74%2Fregularkarate%2Feyes1.jpg&hash=eaf19695f2ec6375d285b75d77a1d1f6d1893474)
+
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi3.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fy74%2Fregularkarate%2Fll71.jpg&hash=fc844080bb10af58ea56ab00829be425d76de18b)
=
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi3.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fy74%2Fregularkarate%2FDEinHP.jpg&hash=f868b7654ae1012d52334ca4b640bd3095529371)
Emma Watson quits 'Harry Potter'?
Source: Digital Spy
Emma Watson has decided not to sign up for the final two Harry Potter movies, according to a report in the News of the World today.
The actress, who plays Hermione Granger in the films, has told producers that she wants to try other roles and turned down a new £2 million-per-movie offer.
Watson's co-star Rupert Grint, better known as Ron Weasley, admitted that he and Daniel Radcliffe (Harry) no longer speak to the 16-year-old.
"Emma doesn't want to do it any more," Rupert explained. "She's tired of being known as 'that girl from Harry Potter'. Daniel and I are distant from her now. We don't text or talk to her when we are not filming."
The newspaper claims that it has received confirmation from Warner Brothers that Emma has not signed up for the final films.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/6465875.stm
Watson 'will finish' Potter films
Actress Emma Watson is likely to return as Hermione in the last two Harry Potter movies despite reports she may quit, producers Warner Bros have said.
"We're extremely confident that Emma will be back for films six and seven," a spokesperson for the Hollywood studio told CBBC's Newsround.
The statement comes amid speculation that the 16-year-old told the company she did not want to continue.
Daniel Radcliffe has already agreed to take the lead role in both productions.
There have been four films based on JK Rowling's books so far, with the fifth - Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix - due for release in July.
Filming for Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince is scheduled to begin this year, with a release date at some point in 2008.
A release date in 2010 has been mooted for the seventh and final movie, The Deathly Hallows - the year Watson will turn 20.
International Trailer here. (http://youtube.com/watch?v=nmxBmJPAqjM)
Yay! Now I'm finally excited about a big summer movie!
Quote from: MacGuffin on April 23, 2007, 12:43:31 AM
International Trailer here. (http://youtube.com/watch?v=nmxBmJPAqjM)
Quicktime US Trailer here. (http://movies.yahoo.com/feature/harrypotterandtheorderofthephoenix.html)
so i've never read the books.
i thought the first two films were kind of targeted at kids mainly.
i really liked azkaban (bought it) and enjoyed goblet (but hav forgotten it).
so this felt like the thing to do at 9:30am.
i went to the biggest screen in brisbane and got the best seat.
i knew it was rated M (which is like a hard PG-13) and conan called it dull (in the monologue).
i expected nothing more than 138mins of wholesome entertainment.
i can't believe i made another horrible decision.
so fucking boring.
i'm sure some might find the endless expositional dialogue and repetition riveting.
i don't think i stayed awake for a single whole scene from beginning to end.
so it felt like Russian Ark, with brief moments of interest in that one room.
oh and the one thing i thought would be good based on the previous film was that asian chick with a scottish accent which i thought was a genius find on the part of the casting douche (or was it in the book that harry's love interest would be so cute?) but she wasn't even cute in this and i don't understand what happened to her character nor should anyone bother explaining or you will give me narcolepsy and i also don't know who half the ppl were who fought behind harry in his new clan and furthermore the real problem is that no other character besides harry has any dimensions to speak of, in the movies at least.
*sigh*
so i spent the rest of the day reading eric brighteyes and thinking about kubrick.
*i suppose there's slight structure spoilage..
i thought it had a couple of good moments but structurally it was terrible. 95% preparation for 10 minutes at the end. it was as though the whole movie was a teaser for the next movie. and preparing to do battle using magic is really really hard to make interesting partly because know one actually knows how to do it. so it's a lot of "just FOCUS! people! FOCUS HARDER! NO! REALLY REALLY FOCUS! ... Good."
Yeah, with the exception of Imelda Staunton, it was terrible.
Easily the worst Harry Potter film yet. But a truly terrible film even as a stand alone effort.
The biggest mistake was hiring David Yates as director (and unfortunately he's doing the next one). His vision doesn't have the charm or sophistication that earlier filmmakers Chris Columbus and Alfonso Cuaron brought to the series. Instead it's too stern and tedious in it's pacing, ideas, and style. The opening sequence in particular seemed really off.
Daniel Radcliffe...I just don't think the kid can act. Particularly when he's playing an angst-ridden teen.
The only sign of life in this film is Emma Watson and Imelda Staunton.
Spoilers....
Yea, this was bad. It's a shame because the series has been so good all the way through.
For me, this film felt bogged down by plot points that would set up the next parts of the series. The characters and story were less defined. I always admired the quality of the characters in the series. Most fantasy stuff bores me because they are more about bullshit worlds than they are about characters. but Harry Potter had the right focus on characters with a good enough mix of everything else to make the stories charming. There were themes under this film, but they were given lip service only. The closeness of Sirius and Potter was only given a few scenes before his untimely death.
Also the story felt short. The conflict at the beginning is everyone's insistence that Potter is making up everything up. Eventually the fellow classmates believe in Harry (with little coaxing) and then a minor battle and revelation gets everyone else to as well. The end is dissapointing considering there is a build up to really nothing much at all. The worst part is that the film focuses on Harry's darker side but with little involvement from the secondary characters who could have given the story more and made it more enjoyable. The film is suppose to be about a darker subject, but the series is an entertainment vehicle and still needs to be entertaining.
I think the series felt the need to change it up. Fans of the book were complaining about the films (which I think is dumb anyways) so a change was made. I know some fans of the book that consider this the best adaptation and I know some who consider this the worst because it is most unlike the novel. It's unfair to compare novels and films anyways. The film needs to hire the first writer.
Quote from: The Red Vine on July 14, 2007, 06:28:11 PM
The only sign of life in this film is Emma Watson
no. she's disgraceful. that was easily the worst performance in the movie. and every single delivery involved extraneous eyebrow movement.
The harry potter movies in general are very, very bad. They all suck (azkaban excluded). It's like they're so bad to the point where i can't enjoy the books anymore. But i still woudln't mind tastin' that hermione!
EXPECTO PETRONUM.
So how many Mike Leigh vets are we up to now?
SAME SPOILERS AS GTI sort of have to disagree with most of you. Sort of.
Azkaban is the only one that completely worked for me but this one comes closer than any of the others to that, but I think that's only because I've read the book. I can completely see, as I did with Goblet of Fire, anyone who didn't read the book wondering what the fuck they were watching. This is the worst of the problems I had with this movie, besides Emma Watson and her long... pauses between each sentence... as if every line she delivers without enunciating properly will result in her death. I chalked her shitty performance in Goblet up to her adjusting to puberty but she's had plenty of time to get used to cramps and mood swings by now... she's actually gotten continually worse since the first one.
Squeezing the longest (and relatively speaking, draggiest) book of the series into the shortest running time and still making it work for the uninitiated is probably impossible, so it wasn't a bad bet for them to just make the movie for the book fans (since there's obviously enough to guarantee some decent money) and assume that everyone else will ask someone who's read the book to clear things up.
I'll give this one a pass because the feel of the movie was right, Imelda Staunton didn't disappoint, and I like that Yates takes the story (maybe a little too) seriously. I know that's pissed off a lot of people, claiming the magic is gone from the movies, but I only ever found magic in Azkaban so... if I can't have
Gilliam Cuaron back, this guy will do. Certainly moreso than Mike Newell (not even mentioning the other one).
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on July 14, 2007, 07:03:56 PM
There were themes under this film, but they were given lip service only. The closeness of Sirius and Potter was only given a few scenes before his untimely death.
This isn't entirely this film's fault. As I recall, there was more of Sirius in the Goblet book than just the one scene in the Goblet movie. So if you go solely by the movies, we only really have this movie to draw on his relationship with Harry, and I think it would have eased the burden on this one if they had managed to work him into the Goblet movie more.
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on July 14, 2007, 07:03:56 PM
The film needs to hire the first writer.
Definitely. Steve Kloves finally got it right with Azkaban and then he left. I just re-read that book this week for the first time since 1999, so it was a shock to me how many changes were made for the movie, but some of those changes worked better than how they played in the book; whether that was Cuaron's influence or Kloves', I don't know but this new screenwriter seems to want to just cut things out as opposed to condensing them. Apparently, he wanted to exclude a specific character from this movie but Rowling said no because said character would figure heavily in book 7.
More spoilers...
Quote from: SPARR•O on July 15, 2007, 12:29:06 AM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on July 14, 2007, 07:03:56 PM
There were themes under this film, but they were given lip service only. The closeness of Sirius and Potter was only given a few scenes before his untimely death.
This isn't entirely this film's fault. As I recall, there was more of Sirius in the Goblet book than just the one scene in the Goblet movie. So if you go solely by the movies, we only really have this movie to draw on his relationship with Harry, and I think it would have eased the burden on this one if they had managed to work him into the Goblet movie more.
Good insight, but if a new director entered this film knowing that an earlier film had skimped on showing the relationship between Potter and Sirius, his responsibility would be to promote the bond between them in the film where Sirius actually dies. Maybe the novel didn't have much between them but the filmmakers should have added more to the screenplay.
Granted, it was still a Harry Potter film, so adjust all expectations accordingly (which is to say, down), but compared to the incomprehensible, style-less mess that was "Goblet of Fire", at least this one was comprehensible and stylish.
Here's a question, though: is it something inherent in the material that mandates all climactic scenes have to be awkwardly staged in bland settings, or was that a stylistic choice by each director? Last time, we got people glaring magically at each other in a vacant lot, this time, we got people pointing colorfully at each other in an empty room. The final acts of these movies tend to be about as cinematic as a game of bingo, minus the dramatic intensity.
BOOK 5 AND MOVIE 5 SPOILERSQuote from: The Gold Trumpet on July 15, 2007, 05:37:04 AM
More spoilers...
Quote from: SPARR•O on July 15, 2007, 12:29:06 AM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on July 14, 2007, 07:03:56 PM
There were themes under this film, but they were given lip service only. The closeness of Sirius and Potter was only given a few scenes before his untimely death.
This isn't entirely this film's fault. As I recall, there was more of Sirius in the Goblet book than just the one scene in the Goblet movie. So if you go solely by the movies, we only really have this movie to draw on his relationship with Harry, and I think it would have eased the burden on this one if they had managed to work him into the Goblet movie more.
Good insight, but if a new director entered this film knowing that an earlier film had skimped on showing the relationship between Potter and Sirius, his responsibility would be to promote the bond between them in the film where Sirius actually dies. Maybe the novel didn't have much between them but the filmmakers should have added more to the screenplay.
Very fair point but I have a feeling it might not have been the director's choice. There have been a lot of movies longer than 2:30 that have been "underperforming" and since the last Potter movie to be released in the summer was also the lowest grossing one, there was probably pressure from Warner Bros. to make it short and sweet. I have a feeling they were intending to have a 2:30-2:45 movie most of the others, in which case there could, or at least should, have been more written in with Sirius. There was more in the book than made it on screen, including Sirius treating Harry as Harry's father instead of a child he is guardian to (which would have come in handy when Sirius mistakenly says, "Good one, James!" in the final battle). But I think the director might have been under orders to "cut out the talky stuff and focus on the action." Of course, this is all speculation but it wouldn't surprise me.
And they changed the nature of Sirius' death for the movie, simply to cut down on explanations. That archway that they fought next to was an archway to, presumably, the world of the dead. Bellatrix simply hit him with something that knocked him into the archway. Making her use the Death Curse on him kind of defeats the purpose of the archway being there in the movie. It now just becomes something to keep the room from being just a wide open space as polka pointed out every climactic battle takes place in. But this is the problem with how this writer is condensing the story.
Harry Potter and the Four Directors
By MANOHLA DARGIS and A. O. SCOTT; New York Times
IN "Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix," which started sneaking into theaters Tuesday night, Harry enters his fifth and most tumultuous year at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry.
In the six years since the release of the first movie, "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone," J. K. Rowling's schoolboy wizard, his classmates, teachers and enemies have passed through the hands of four directors — Chris Columbus, Alfonso Cuarón, Mike Newell and David Yates — each of whom has brought a distinctive style and sensibility. The stories have become darker and more thematically complex, and the young actors playing Harry, Ron and Hermione — Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint and Emma Watson — have matured along with their characters. In the previous film, "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire," Harry confronted death when one of his schoolmates was killed. And now, in "Order of the Phoenix," Harry finally discovers that girls are an altogether different kind of chamber of secrets.
The technologies that help create fantasy-action filmmaking have also developed with astonishing rapidity, opening up new possibilities for broomstick-assisted flight and computer-generated monsters. From the candles that float above the Hogwarts dining room to the foreboding winged horses called Thestrals that soar through "Order of the Phoenix," the verisimilitude of the magical worlds in "Harry Potter" justify special-effects innovations in a way that few big-budgeted film fantasies do.
All of which makes the series a fascinating case study. Looking at the five movies side by side, you can see how the material lends itself to diverse film genres and styles, from breezy children's movie to ominous political thriller, and how very dissimilar directors approach, sidestep and conquer similar material. You can also relish young actors learning to master their craft alongside veterans like Michael Gambon and Maggie Smith making mischievous use of their mastery. Somewhere in Britain there might still be a lord or a dame looking for work, but with two more Harry Potter films on the way, not for long.
Shape-Shifting: High Jinks to Horror to Political Intrigue
Just as the "Harry Potter" books may have spurred children to reach for more adult fare, the films may be accomplishing much the same in the cinematic realm, initiating them into the pleasures of more genres. The first two movies, directed by Chris Columbus ("Mrs. Doubtfire," "Home Alone"), played much like kiddie comedies, with plenty of mild gross-out humor and schoolboy antics (like the mishap-strewn joy ride taken by Ron and Harry in "Chamber of Secrets"). But by the third film, "The Prisoner of Azkaban," directed by Alfonso Cuarón, the tone and color palette have shifted, the bright, flat lighting giving way to a somber and dangerous feel, evocative of horror films.
With the latest film, David Yates — who directed the British mini-series "State of Play" — introduces elements of the political thriller. A political crisis has enveloped the wizarding world in "Order of the Phoenix," as officials refuse to believe that the Dark Lord has returned. Portrayed in the wizard-world tabloids as a liar, perhaps even deranged, Harry finds himself confronting a shadowy conspiracy.
Time's Arrow, With a Wave of the Wand
Looking back on the early films, the most striking thing about the actors playing Harry, Ron and Hermione is how young they look. But over the years, their talents have blossomed as their roles have become increasingly complex.
Emma Watson's Hermione, who has evolved from nerdy know-it-all into a smart, sophisticated young woman (albeit with an angry streak, as seen above left), is one of the few role models for girls (and women) in the boy-dominated fantasy movie genre. Rupert Grint's Ron, Harry's faithful sidekick, is a little more static, but this actor's range has filled out even if his character hasn't changed as much as the others. And Daniel Radcliffe's Harry has had to confront difficult emotions, even as the moral and physical challenges he faces become more perilous.
The relationships among the three friends are not always easy or harmonious. Yet despite the tribulations of adolescence, Harry, Ron and Hermione have thus far remained inseparable.
I can only speak as a big fan of the books, but I loved this movie almost as much as Azkaban. I can TOTALLY understand people who aren't fans not getting into this one... which is definitely a weakness, but I really got into it.
I agree with almost everything SPARR dot O said except about Kloves, who I think was one of the main reasons the first two movies sucked. He wanted to cram every little detail of the books that he could and it hurt the film. I think they did a good job of trimming in this one (though there were some obvious issues)
Quote from: SPARR•O on July 15, 2007, 12:29:06 AM
Apparently, he wanted to exclude a specific character from this movie but Rowling said no because said character would figure heavily in book 7.
No doubt it's Longbottom. I was upset that they cut so much of his story from this... he's going to be a big part of the last book, I can tell.
Quote from: RegularKarate link=topic=4514.msg246898#msg246898 date=1184556368
quote author=SPARR•O link=topic=4514.msg246861#msg246861 date=1184477346]
Apparently, he wanted to exclude a specific character from this movie but Rowling said no because said character would figure heavily in book 7.
No doubt it's Longbottom. I was upset that they cut so much of his story from this... he's going to be a big part of the last book, I can tell.
[/quote]
I read somewhere that that was the house elf kreacher.
okay now you're just making up words.
I suppose it's difficult to be objective about a movie that's so completely based on a book, but as a long-time appreciator of the series, I have to say that on that basis, there were some huge problems with the movie. It could be nitpicking, but there were some things that were focused far too heavily on to be entertaining at all, and other things, stylistic flourishes, that could have been included to make it a bit more interesting. For one, Neville and the prophesy are really quite important, and that was just completely blown off in favor of spending a million years on the Cho Chang story line, and Grawp, who was just dumb.
I know a lot of kids and parents complained about how sprawling and "long" the previous movies were, but I think that since the Lord of the Rings movies (to which the series cannot help being compared) were each 3ish hours pre-extended editions, it wouldn't have killed anyone to tack an additional 30 minutes to the movie to flesh some people out (coughTONKSSIRIUSDUMBLEDORESNAPEEVERYONEEXCEPTHARRYcough) and to stop monkeying around with the pivotal plot points. Had I not read this book, I would have no effin clue who anyone new was, what anyone was supposed to be doing, and why anything happened.
Furthermore, it was supposed to be this "dark and moody" film that had all the style that the previous one lacked, but black-tiled room does not make a moody film. Lowering the lighting sometimes and having scenes in the forest at night didn't make give this director artistic. I have no idea why they sign on these cheeseball directors. The first scene was kind of cool; it was so contrasty and felt essentially like a sunny day, but then it just turned into blah blah clouds and blah blah dementors (of which they changed the appearance for some unknown reason). And, of course, nobody except the adults can act. Tilda Swinton IS great. The faculty were fabulously cast, but then again, hiring OBE British actors is a pretty safe bet anyway.
dude for some reason I could not comprehend what you've written. this could be on you or on me.
Oops. I meant Imelda Staunton. Also, it's late. Oh well.
ilikedthisalot andthoughttheopening wasfantastic...
whew... that felt good to get off my chest...
I don't understand all the hate either. There were problems sure, but i wasn't forcing myself to enjoy it like i did with spiderman and pirates. Everyone's making this out to be a huge disaster but i enjoyed it quite a bit.
I liked the opening because for the first few seconds I didn't realize I was watching a Harry Potter.
I have never read the books, and when we came out of the theater, I had to ask my friends what the Order of the Phoenix was. That's not a good thing.
This was the first movie I saw at the Fox Theater in Westwood and man is that a great big theater.
Quote from: elpablo on July 18, 2007, 11:53:30 PM
I liked the opening because for the first few seconds I didn't realize I was watching a Harry Potter.
I have never read the books, and when we came out of the theater, I had to ask my friends what the Order of the Phoenix was. That's not a good thing.
I agree...Only after a couple of hours did I realize what the Order was...
I guess is no disaster, but it's still pretty bad. The first hour was almost excruciating. I kept checking my watch waiting for SOMETHING to happen.
The kids can act but of course you could act too if you had to get it on with Michael Gambon, Imelda Staunton, David Thewlis and all those folks. It's a shame Yates is coming back cause the whole thing felt uninspired and by the book.
To this point, I had an impeccable memoir of the Harry Potter movies. Never really saw them more than once, but each time I went to see one I felt that one was the best of the series. Not this time. The prospect of sitting for two more of these makes me quietly groan.
Quote from: ddiggler6280 on July 16, 2007, 01:50:35 PM
I don't understand all the hate either. There were problems sure, but i wasn't forcing myself to enjoy it like i did with spiderman and pirates. Everyone's making this out to be a huge disaster but i enjoyed it quite a bit.
I agree, it was nice to leave a film this summer without feeling desperate>conflicted>let-down.
I'm a bit late to watch these last three films as I found the first two to be very uninspiring. However I agree with the general consensus that
Azkaban got the films on the right track (whether that was the book or Cuaron I can't say).
Order of the Phoenix seems to have recovered a bit from
Goblet but hasn't quite recaptured the sense of momentum in
Azkaban. Particularly now that the Voldemort stand-offs are starting to feel so purposefully staggered.
I'm hoping to see some more of David Thewlis' character in the final installment. He has been the most interesting secondary charcter and one of a few that doesn't seem as superfluous as the villains in the Star Wars prequels.