This is topic Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire in forum Film Handlers' Movie Reviews at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=4;t=001029

---

Posted by Brian Michael Weidemann (Member # 2243) on 11-15-2005, 06:52 AM:
 
Quickly paced, fun, and dark.

More of the same. Despite different directors, each film does a good job of maintaining the look and feel of the world throughout the movies. The sets and locations of and around the castle are all recognizable. Nothing particularly new this time around; except, of course, for filling in plot points and extending the story.

I know they must have cut a ton out of the book, which was much longer than the books the three previous movies were based on. However, I really got the feeling that they probably actually shot a few scenes that were cut out for time. For instance (spoiler!), when Ron and Harry are at the dance and all pissy, Ron says something snide to Hermione. It cuts to a scene of Ron and Hermione storming out, her all crying about him "ruining everything". Obviously something MUST have been cut that was clearly in the screenplay. Nothing we couldn't, in context, extrapolate, but it just seems like it jumped over something.

Effects were mostly good, and were used appropriately. One of the best CG dragon sequences I've seen in a film.

Even on our DLP, where many scenes are bright and colorful, the dark scenes are REALLY dark. Dreary, thick fog, and muddy greens make many scenes (important, key scenes) very dull, visually. I think they really overused the fog effects (spoiler!) in the maze and subsequent graveyard scene.

Not sure there's much else to say. I liked it. After I build and screen the IMAX DMR version in the next two days, I'm sure I'll have another note or two to add.
 

---

Posted by Jeremy Jorgenson (Member # 2989) on 11-17-2005, 05:38 AM:
 
Agreed that a lot has been cut, but I tried to watch this film on it own right, and compare it to the book as seldom as possible (and, as I haven't read the book since it came out in 2000, that wasn't too difficult).

I enjoyed the film quite a bit. I found the Quiddich World Cup scene in the beginning to be rather awe inspiring.
 

---

Posted by Bruce McGee (Member # 131) on 11-17-2005, 07:00 AM:
 
Today is Thursday. I'm getting 3 prints of this title. I wish they had arrived yesterday. Oh well, I'll see it tonight.
 

---

Posted by Brian Michael Weidemann (Member # 2243) on 11-17-2005, 08:20 AM:
 
I haven't read any of the books either, so I can't help but take the movies on their own. My friends, who have read them, tell me bits that have been left out of the other movies, and it just seems to me that it was useless stuff anyway, since the movies' stories work.

The IMAX DMR version doesn't appear to have had anything cut out. However, the end credits have been condensed from 18 minutes to 9, it seems.

The only really noteworthy thing I'll add is that the IMAX version, to me, was MORE bright and colorful than the DLP presentation I saw. The dark, muddy scenes were a bit richer. I was more struck by subtle differences in greens and such in the DMR. So there ya go.

IMAX is definitely the way to see it. Or, at least, at OUR theatre it is.
 

---

Posted by Michael Gonzalez (Member # 593) on 11-17-2005, 02:43 PM:
 
Yep, it looks like they took a three and a half hour movie and cut it down to two forty. I have to disagree as I didn't like the pacing of the film and a lot of it did have to do with the editing. Though overall I thought the movie was decent though not as good as the last one.

Did anyone else notice how Harry's hair would dramatically change lenghts from scene to scene? At times it looked like he had the Frodo thing going.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 11-17-2005, 02:51 PM:
 

quote: Brian Michael Weidemann

---

However, the end credits have been condensed from 18 minutes to 9, it seems.

---

The end credits on the 35mm prints is 9 minutes long.
 

---

Posted by Joseph L. Kleiman (Member # 3097) on 11-17-2005, 04:20 PM:
 
Brian,

Did you see the DLP version on a 1.3 or on a 2K projector?
 

---

Posted by Brian Michael Weidemann (Member # 2243) on 11-18-2005, 12:32 AM:
 
Sorry, then it seems I was misinformed about the end credits. I didn't sit through them on the digital screening at 4:00 in the morning to see first hand, so I took someone else's word on that. Something about them filling all of a full last reel.

The digital projector we have running Harry is the 1.3, seeing as our 2K is booked for Chicken Little 3D for a while.
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 11-18-2005, 04:58 AM:
 
Awesome! Better than the third one! that 157min went by quickly!

the "Superman" feature that is coming up, by the looks of the trailer, is going to be probably as good or even better made than the "Batman Begins" - from DC comics and the production company that did "Batman Begins"

-Monte
 

---

Posted by Mitchell Dvoskin (Member # 751) on 11-18-2005, 08:48 AM:
 
It was good as the middle picture in the bigger story, but I'm not sure it stands as well as the others on it's own. Everyone who has seen the previous 3 films will certainly come out for this one, but I don't see it doing much repeat business, as it is not a "fun" film.

My only serious problem with the film is the actors are clearly too old for the ages they are supposed to be. I'm not sure what the producers could do about it, as replacing the leads with younger actors would not work either.

In spite of all I just said, I did like the film.
 

---

Posted by Olivia Coleman (Member # 3193) on 11-18-2005, 05:43 PM:
 
I really enjoyed this one. I like it better than POA! I didn't like how fast POA was but thought the pacing in this one was much better. Yes, there are a lot of things they took out of the book, the only regret I have about that is we didn't get to revisit the house elves... I was hoping to see Winky!

The story for this one does get darker. The next one is more of a filler then the newest is even darker. It's the way the story is progressing and as they get older they are more aware of certain things.

As for the kids looking older than the ages they are suppose to be playing, they are not that far off, two years. There have been many actors around with a bigger gap for the age they play... I still think it works.
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 11-18-2005, 07:32 PM:
 
I am interested in what Dwayne Caldwell thinks, since he is the one who plays Harry Potter in all these movies.
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 11-19-2005, 03:40 PM:
 

quote: Brad Miller

---

The end credits on the 35mm prints is 9 minutes long.

---

Actually, closer to 12.
 

---

Posted by Dwayne Caldwell (Member # 417) on 11-20-2005, 12:45 PM:
 
I just wish they'd let me cut my hair.
 

---

Posted by Dave Williams (Member # 299) on 11-20-2005, 04:56 PM:
 
I will agree that this film does not stand on its own in any way. As part of a series, it does much better, but it had not "reason" to exist as a motion picture.

The entire picture served as a plot device for a future story, instead of allowing the different aspects of this story to stand on thier own.

I actually went to see "walk the line", but the theater put the film I wanted to see in a small theater, and it was so packed that they either oversold the auditorium, or just didn't plan on it doing much business. People obviously were just getting a ticket to another show and going in. My wife and I ended up jumping over to this movie, and well, we were a bit dissapointed.

Ciao
 

---

Posted by Lyle Romer (Member # 1266) on 11-20-2005, 10:16 PM:
 
Very good film and BY FAR the best of the "Harry Potter" series of films. Good story, good pacing, right mix of comic relief. The effects didn't look cheesy like the first three.

One thing is that it definitely deserved the PG-13. This is not a film for very young children. Pretty grapic violence and scary effects (not for me but for young children). The bathtub scene was a little wierd and very sexually suggestive (and since Harry is 14, this isn't exactly the right message to be sending).

Overall, I highly recommend this to adults and children over 8 or so.



4 out of 5 stars
 

---

Posted by Richard Greco (Member # 2032) on 11-20-2005, 10:57 PM:
 
Very Cool Film....

No Greco Factor due to Emma Watson being only 15

Can't wait for Order Of The Phoenix

4/5
 

---

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 11-22-2005, 10:53 PM:
 
Great movie! I like how the story is progressing into darker themes with each book, and it's nice to see the movies sticking to that as well. This chapter is where the stakes really start to go up for Harry, and everyone else for that matter. They squeezed as much into the movie as they could, but as I expected there was a lot of stuff missing. For example, some customers came to our theater wearing "SPEW" buttons, and anyone who hasn't read the books probably has no clue what that's all about. There were also some key plot points that were left out that play a pretty significant roll in later chapters, and now I wonder how that will all work out. But it was a good movie on its own.

I did notice one line of dialogue that's missing from the IMAX version. Without giving anything away... near the end, Harry is standing next to a large trunk, and Dumbledore says, "Harry, get away from there," or something to that effect. That line is missing from the IMAX version. Not a big deal, but just an observation.
 

---

Posted by Jeremy Jorgenson (Member # 2989) on 11-27-2005, 01:30 PM:
 
I liked how the dragon moved like a bat when it was crawling around on the roof of Hogwarts.
 

---

Posted by William Hooper (Member # 71) on 11-28-2005, 02:40 AM:
 
A guy who said he knew everything about the new HP movie welshed when I bet him that he didn't know all the words to the song. "There's no song in the new Harry Potter movie!"

Hmph.
 

---

Posted by Brian Michael Weidemann (Member # 2243) on 11-28-2005, 04:34 AM:
 
He didn't think the "Come seek us where our voices sound" tune counted as a song?
 

---

Posted by Greg Mueller (Member # 17) on 11-28-2005, 08:56 AM:
 
Yawn
Harry Potter films are wearing a bit thin. THis one is just more of the same
 

---

Posted by Brian Michael Weidemann (Member # 2243) on 11-28-2005, 08:51 PM:
 
Agreed, but when it comes to a popular audience, and a younger crowd at that, more of the same is exactly what the fans want, methinks. Or, that's what the author/studio/whomever thinks the fans want, anyway.
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 11-28-2005, 11:25 PM:
 
I checked out the new Harry Potter flick in Oklahoma City -mainly to finally see a movie at the 1 year old Harkins Theatres Bricktown 16 and its large Cine Capris house.

The movie was pretty decent. Solid three stars out of four. I haven't read any of the books, but simply judging on their page count it is easy to see lots of things were cut. Viewers that liked any of the previous Harry Potter installments should like this one. Those that don't like Harry Potter can just save their money.

"The Goblet of Fire" is at its best with the action set pieces, the dragon challenge in particular.

I didn't really care much for all the teen-romance angst since so much of that kind of stuff often has the "seen it before -on TV" feel to it. The best kind of romance stuff gets more deeply into character and specific motivations, not the sort of stuff that seemed clichéd here. The movie has to do everything with an economy of time. It's hard to do any kind of romance stuff well in a very short amount of time and when the movie has to serve more action oriented purposes.

The conflict between Ron Weasley and Harry Potter also seemed a bit forced. I felt something was missing from that (which may be revealed in the book in more sense making detail). The only other thing that had me scratching my head was what happened with the nasty Lucious Malfoy at the end. Seemed like the other shoe didn't drop.

Image quality on this show was pretty decent -at least as good as it could be with 35mm projection blown up a bit too big for its britches. The big Cine Capris screen at the Bricktown 16 is 30' tall by 70' wide. That's a size more appropriate for 70mm projection. The booth does have a nice Kinoton projector. I couldn't see well enough into the booth from the port glass to tell what else was in there.

Sound quality on this picture was really pretty good overall. The mix had a good number of aggressive surround movements and startlingly loud instances. Again, the dragon challenge was the big sound system workout. The Cine Capris showed the movie in Dolby Digital -they even ran the "Aurora" DD trailer (as well as a Cine Capris snipe) right at the show's beginning. This was the first time in several years that I have seen a DD trailer played in a commercial movie theater. The last time was at a Mann location in Colorado. All of the movie trailers before the show played in Dolby Digital as well. With all the trailers in DD, there weren't any stupid instances where an analog track was playing way too loud. Some of the trailers were pretty aggressive (such as the one for Monster House).

A manager greeted the audience before the start of the show, something you typically see only in IMAX theaters these days. It's also rare to find a theater that has curtains. They play a video-based Kodak Digital Cinema pre-show (which looked pretty dim compared to the film projection). The curtains closed when the manager walked in to greet the audience. I forget how many speakers he said were in the auditorium (since one of my friends was running his mouth at the time). I counted 29 Klipsch speakers in the surround array. I think the guy said "17,000 watts of amplification" but I might have heard it wrong. The sound system had more thump to it than I've heard in a good while, especially for a stadium seated auditorium this size. Brad's private theater still wins the "most thump" contest. It's the only one I've visited that creates wind.

Here's a question for people familiar with other Harkins Theaters. Do most of their locations feature a full blown projection setup in the lobby just for playing movie trailers? I've never seen this kind of setup before. A full projection and platter setup is installed above the box office and it throws onto a large screen above the really big concession counter. Overall, the Harkins Bricktown 16 holds the title as Oklahoma City's best movie theater. At least it holds the title for now. We'll see what happens when Warren Theaters finishes that all-THX 20-plex just south of OKC in Moore.
 

---

Posted by Sam Graham (Member # 2889) on 11-28-2005, 11:40 PM:
 
CINEMA: Megaplex 17 at Jordan Commons, Sandy, UT
AUDITORIUM: Cricket IMAX
PRESENTATION: IMAX
PRESENTATION PROBLEMS: None
Rating: Three stars (out of four)

I can see one benefit to this whole "reserved seating" thing. Large families (in Utah? Naah!) can assure everybody can sit together. Aside from that, it's kind of annoying. Most people seem to have to be guided to their seats. This includes late comers, who are directed by an usher with a big flashlight. The late comers have to climb over timely patrons, whereas late comers to normal movies usually just pick an available seat convenient to the aisle.

Then there's the people who don't like the seats they reserved. There was a guy and his two teenagers next to us (lower tier, row F). His daughter is complaining. "Dad, why did you pick these seats?"

"So we could see."

"Well my friends and I sat up there last time and it was PERFECT!"

"Fine. We can move."

"No we can't. Those seats cost more."

"No they don't."

"Yes they do, Dad."

"I don't think so."

"Well you're wrong."

So they stayed. By the way, she's wrong. And there was plenty of empty seats. Another couple in our aisle DID get up and move to the upper tier seating after the movie started.

This is the first Potter movie I have no desire to see a second time. It was good, and I'll be getting the DVD, but it does come off as being cut quite a bit. And elements of the tournament really bugged me. I'm not going to get into them.

I WILL get into the presentation. This was my first IMAX show, and it was good. The center channel problem noted in the "Large Format" forum is fixed, though the new equipment sounds like it's stressing on loud voices. The picture was outstanding. Wife #1 asked "So when the screen (at the Century 20 Jordan Creek) looks blurry to me, it's NOT my eyes?"

I'd like to watch ALL movies in here from now on, please.

[ 11-29-2005, 10:23 AM: Message edited by: Sam Graham ]
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 11-29-2005, 01:09 PM:
 
It would be nice if Warner Bros. would just make some standard 5-perf 70mm DTS blowup prints for theaters with large screens. Doing so would get that "IMAX DMR" quality onto quite a few more screens.

A 5/70mm print would have helped where I watched the show. Of course, 70mm capability would have to be installed. But that isn't as difficult as some would make it sound. Brad has given the details about it in other threads.
 

---

Posted by Matt Fields (Member # 3211) on 12-01-2005, 08:17 AM:
 

quote: Bobby Henderson

---

The conflict between Ron Weasley and Harry Potter also seemed a bit forced. I felt something was missing from that (which may be revealed in the book in more sense making detail). The only other thing that had me scratching my head was what happened with the nasty Lucious Malfoy at the end. Seemed like the other shoe didn't drop.

---