Potterdom Film/Score Series Thread

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

It has logic issues.

[Arpy 4,145]

I'm sorry you feel that way.

[Bilbo 3,709]

3,1,2,7,4,8,6,5 is how I would rank the scores.

 

3,7,1,4,8,6,2,5 is the films for me. 

3,4,7,1,5,2,6 of the books I guess but my opinions there change more frequently. 

[Jurassic Shark 12,008]

12 hours ago, Arpy said:

Collider ranks the Harry Potter films, strangely putting Order of the Phoenix high on the list. http://collider.com/best-harry-potter-movies-ranked-worst-to-best/

 

 

 

Perhaps Hooper should venture to using the remaining five tones of the scale.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Shit is POA really that good? I mean its alright I spose...

[Disco Stu 15,495]

1 hour ago, Bilbo said:

3,1,2,7,4,8,6,5 is how I would rank the scores.

 

3,7,1,4,8,6,2,5 is the films for me. 

3,4,7,1,5,2,6 of the books I guess but my opinions there change more frequently. 

 

My book preference:

 

3,4,6,1,7,2,5

 

My film preference:

3,4,6,5,7,1,2,8

 

For scores:

3,1,2,4,I don't care I never listen to them

[Jurassic Shark 12,008]

Don't you people ever get tired of making lists?

[Disco Stu 15,495]

I don't make that many anymore, actually.  I abstain from 90% of list-makin' round here (all the "top 5 Williams tuba notes that sound like farts" stuff).  But I always have Potter rankings at the ready.

[Nick1Ø66 4,687]

44 minutes ago, Jurassic Shark said:

Don't you people ever get tired of making lists?

 

What would you say are your top 3 reasons for not making lists?

[Jurassic Shark 12,008]

I just don't feel the need to rank everything.

 

[Disco Stu 15,495]

It depends.  In the case of Potter I have very strong, polar preferences (meaning the ones at the top I really like, and the ones at the bottom I really dislike).  So a ranking is an easy way to communicate that.

 

In the case of something like Wes Anderson movies or, say, 15 Williams scores or something, the "affection gap" between top and bottom is so minuscule, a ranking isn't useful to me or anyone else.

 

But I definitely see the perspective of doing away with them completely.  It's just like, "here's an opinion."  Without anything else what the heck am I supposed to take from that?  And yeah, pitting works of art against each in competition isn't exactly the best way to think of them.

[Jurassic Shark 12,008]

At least it's a waste of time to rank how bad things are. 

[Smaug The Iron 510]

Score: 1,3,2,8,7,5,6,4

Film: 3,1,8,5,7,2,6,4

Books: Equal. I love them all. 

[JoeinAR 1,949]

2 hours ago, Cherry Pie That'll Kill Ya said:

Shit is POA really that good? I mean its alright I spose...

No its not. Its the most overrated. 

 

In reality Potter is just one massive story but Goblet is head and tails the best chapter. Its where all the stakes come into play. Its life lessons are paramount. 

[Chen G. 3,940]

Yeah, if one was so inclined to look at Harry Potter as a single cohesive story (to me, it’s not quite there, but whatever) than Goblet of Fire would be the end of Act I. 

 

However, I’m not the biggest fan of the film. It’s one of the better screenplays, streamlining the written work quite wonderfully, but the way it’s directed leaves something to be desired: I like Gambon’s Dumbeldore but the way his role is directed has him far too intense throughout this film; the maze at the end is just decidedly not intimidating, the grading is off, etc...

 

Prisoner of Azkaban is brilliant. Hardly the best thing since sliced bread or anything but it’s delightful.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

POA is the most dark and disturbing entry I guess.

[Chen G. 3,940]

No. But it does have a palpable sense of danger, which is paramount for the stakes.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

5 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

No. But it does have a palpable sense of danger, which is paramount for the stakes.

 

Just give them all Felix Felicis and all those stakes will magically disappear.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

1 hour ago, Cherry Pie That'll Kill Ya said:

POA is the most dark and disturbing entry I guess.

In no way is it the most dark or disturbing. Its one of the weakest films. Its sometimes incoherent because of the poor script.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Its the best film.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

I like the eighth one the most.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

23 minutes ago, Stefancos said:

Its the best film.

No

[Arpy 4,145]

Films: 3,4,2,1,6,7,5,8

 

Sometimes I think Goblet of Fire is a stronger entry than Prisoner of Azkaban, but the two (personally) encompass the best of the magic of Harry Potter, both in light and dark with some great storytelling and powerful music. The production design I feel has been consistent throughout the films largely due to the same crew working on all eight films, but GoF and PoA are gorgeous films that are standouts in art and design with memorable sets, locations and creatures/beasts, props, characters etc.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

1. DH2

2. COS

3. POA

4. GOF

5. DH1

6. PS

7. OOTP

8. HBP

[Arpy 4,145]

*Gasp!* 

[Chen G. 3,940]

I don’t recall each individual film that well to brandish a rigorous list. I also believe, like @Disco Stu that the merit of such lists only goes so far.

 

I should preface that I’ve only read the first few books, having given up on them early. As such, I’m coming at this from a purely cinematic viewpoint.

 

I would say I find Prisoner of Azkaban the best. It pulls the trick ending thing ,which so many movies use to a numbing effect, brilliantly; it’s wonderfully stylized and inventive with ample use of practical long takes.

 

Other films I like are The Order of the Phoenix: it’s grown on me in retrospect. It inspects Harry’s anxiety and his connection to Voldemort very well. I’m also partial to The Half Blood Prince And the first Deathly Hallows.

 

I couldn’t care less for the Columbus entries. They’re bland and lethargic. A lot has been said for the child actors being over-the-top, to which I answer that the performance is as dependant on the director as it is the cast. And indeed, in spite of the talented adult cast, they aren’t giving us anything of note, either. I give a big pass for the first of the two, because I’m always lenient with the establishing film of a series. It’s at least charming in its own way, to no small extent due to John’s score. I can’t extent the same to Chamber of Secrets, unfortunately. To my mind, it’s a BAD movie.

 

Goblet of Fire is a significant improvement, but some of the directorial choices don’t work for me.

[Disco Stu 15,495]

Everyone seems to like Half-Blood Prince less than me.  I have to admit I wish it had included more of Voldemort's past, and I haven't seen it in a few years, but it's definitely in the upper half for me.

[Jurassic Shark 12,008]

8 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

I should preface that I’ve only read the first few books, having given up on them early. As such, I’m coming at this from a purely cinematic viewpoint.

 

You should give the books another try - they're not that hard to read as people say!

[Chen G. 3,940]

12 minutes ago, Disco Stu said:

Everyone seems to like Half-Blood Prince less than me.  I have to admit I wish it had included more of Voldemort's past, and I haven't seen it in a few years, but it's definitely in the upper half for me.

 

Well, JWFan attracts people of a certain taste in cinema. The kind of cosy, lighthearted fare, which accounts for some of the films that merited Williams’ most iconic scores. 

 

Harry Potter is an unusual case where the series started very much in that mould and developed into something...well, more mature. So naturally it wouldn’t sit well with those who grew attached to the feel of the early entries. And it doesn’t get much more, ummm, mature, than The Half-Blood Prince, does it now?

[Kasey Kockroach 2,343]

I like the last one best because by then Emma Watson was legal.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

She's cute but oh-so-boring.

[Kasey Kockroach 2,343]

1 minute ago, Cherry Pie That'll Kill Ya said:

She's cute but oh-so-boring.

She's a carpenter's dream! Flat as a board and in need of a screw!

[mrbellamy 6,270]

8 hours ago, Bilbo said:

3,1,2,7,4,8,6,5 is how I would rank the scores.

 

3,7,1,4,8,6,2,5 is the films for me. 

3,4,7,1,5,2,6 of the books I guess but my opinions there change more frequently. 

 

Been awhile since I spent much time on the series as a whole but my rankings always roughly circled around here at the height of my Pottermania.

 

Scores, I really only listen to Williams anymore and my opinions on 1-3's pros and cons are pretty much in line with consensus. 4 and 7 next, GOF is a fun listening experience but it's a little shrill and "conventionally" magical for me. DH1 creates a more effective atmosphere and I prefer its more soothing and exotic orchestrations to Doyle's, but melodically dry even though I can appreciate some of the thematic through-lines Desplat highlights. DH2, "Lily's Theme" is stellar to start with but unfortunately doesn't amount to much for me and the rest of the underscore only occasionally inspires. Sometimes I prefer the Hoopers to that one....his music deserves the flack it gets but those scores are warm and charming.

 

Movies, definitely on the Azkaban bandwagon. More fluidly paced and stylized, funnier, more expressive and inventive, has the clearest emotional narrative. As for the rest, honestly I'd rather go back to the first one anymore because the most worthwhile things about the films originate there and I think it achieves its goals better than the others. End of the day the most enjoyable parts of the movies are in watching a supporting ensemble of master thespians pantomime their way through world-class production design and the first one just indulges in that accompanied by a musical genius. Plus it asks the least of the kids. 2 and 4 are loud and corny entertainments, 5-8 are dull and handsome productions with nice moments. All eight live and die together.

 

The books I can't say enough about personally and don't really care to rank them. They're all very flawed and special.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

I remember picturing a more juvenile cartoon land in the books as I read them. The movies are so removed from that.

[Nick1Ø66 4,687]

I agree that ranking works of art against each other is not exactly the best way to judge their merits. 

 

Here are my rankings for the Harry Potter films/books:

 

Films:

1. Order
2. Half-Blood
3. Deathly 2
4. Prisoner
5. Goblet
6. Philosopher's
7. Deathly 1
8. Chamber

Books:

1. Fire
2. Prince
3. Azkaban
4. Phoenix
5. Hallows
6. Stone
7. Secrets

Goblet of Fire is a great book, but the movie is a bit of a let down...oddly paced, weird colour grading, terrible performance by Gambon (who isn't a great Dumbledore to begin with), a miscast David Tennant, etc. 

 

Phoenix is a decent book, but a bit of a slog and the less said about Hermonie's House Elf wokeness, the better. But the movie holds up surprisingly well. Yates cuts even more fat out of the story than usual, and of course Imelda Staunton probably gives the most memorable performance in the whole series (aside of course, from Rickman).

 

The first two do a decent job of world building (especially the first), but otherwise I find them more or less bland and boring (especially the second).

 

I tend to like the Yates films....though I agree with all the comments about the considerable artistic merits of POA. Probably the only Potter movie which is really a work of art as a film in its own right. Objectively speaking, I think it's probably the best film of the bunch, but I still prefer the later ones.

 

I've developed a great deal of affection for these films, despite the fact that they're all flawed in one way or another. 

 

I'd need to listen to the scores again to consider ranking them beyond the first three.

[Docteur Qui 1,544]

2 hours ago, kaseykockroach said:

She's a carpenter's dream! Flat as a board and in need of a screw!

 

Gross.

[Kasey Kockroach 2,343]

Not as gross as Roger Ebert was.

 

 

[Jurassic Shark 12,008]

Did he really say that?

[Alex 2,833]

POA is the best film and HBP is the worst. These are just facts.

[Kasey Kockroach 2,343]

1 minute ago, Jurassic Shark said:

Did he really say that?

E'yep. I think it was his Chamber of Secrets review, but I could be wrong as to which movie it was.

 

Not to mention being a condescending jackass regarding horror movies, which obviously wasn't gross so much as merely unnerving.

[Jurassic Shark 12,008]

14 minutes ago, kaseykockroach said:

E'yep. I think it was his Chamber of Secrets review, but I could be wrong as to which movie it was.

 

Not to mention being a condescending jackass regarding horror movies, which obviously wasn't gross so much as merely unnerving.

 

I don't believe it before I see it.

[Disco Stu 15,495]

3 minutes ago, Jurassic Shark said:

 

I don't believe it before I see it.

 

Look up his review, he refers to Watson as being “in the early stages of babehood.”  Relatively tame but not in good taste.  He was always something of a horndog though.  Still one of my heroes in my teens 

[Kasey Kockroach 2,343]

At least I have the decency to be infatuated with a lady twelve years older than me!

[Disco Stu 15,495]

Ebert was a great newspaper writer and is more responsible for turning me on to great and interesting movies than any other person. 

[Jurassic Shark 12,008]

1 hour ago, Disco Stu said:

 

Look up his review, he refers to Watson as being “in the early stages of babehood.”  Relatively tame but not in good taste.  He was always something of a horndog though.  Still one of my heroes in my teens 

 

That's not that bad. It could just as well be taken as critique of the industry. He's still the best reviewer, even though he's no more.

[Disco Stu 15,495]

His first “Great Movies” book was like my bible in my teens.  That and his Sky Captain review, which as I’ve said before I used to keep in my three ring binder at school

[Jurassic Shark 12,008]

I was introduced to his reviews through Microsoft Cinemania '97.

[Nick1Ø66 4,687]

What I liked best about Ebert was his earnestness and complete lack of cynicism with regards to cinema. He was joyful about film and it showed.

[Jurassic Shark 12,008]

Indeed.

[Disco Stu 15,495]

14 minutes ago, Jurassic Shark said:

I was introduced to his reviews through Microsoft Cinemania '97.

 

Oh boy that brings back memories.  I was only 10 when we had that so I wasn’t into “films” but for some reason I remember watching this clip of a Nightmare on Elm Street movie over and over and over.  I don’t remember which one but the clip is of a girl running away up a set of stairs which go all melty and her feet get caught.