Koray Savas 2,251 Posted November 18, 2008 Share Posted November 18, 2008 Prisoner Of Azkaban is the best Potter film, and also a fantastic film in itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unlucky Bastard 7,782 Posted November 18, 2008 Share Posted November 18, 2008 The photography of the first two was what I thought made them look boring, uninspired, and generally not very magical. I was relieved whe Columbus left the series and it was allowed to grow up a little bit. This is of course just my opinion, but I consider Columbus one of the least visually/creatively imaginative directors working today.At least he wasn't afraid of color. That's a rather feeble argument. He was afraid to make something that stands on it's own, and something that enhances the book. He took a book and filmed it. I find it insulting when a director assumes that a book is so far above film in class, that anything less than literal and unimaginative adaptation would be fitting. Cuaron showed so much more respect for the characters and the world. His film had some real magic in it. Columbus tried to say 'look at the color! Pretty magical, eh?' and proceeded to yell out 'MAGIC!!!!!!!!!!!' at every stage. Cuaron showed us real characters, and the relatability of it made the magic infintesmaly more magical. Columbus filmed a book. Cuaron made a film. Columbus cared about Rowling and WB. Cuaron cared about these characters. I find most of the criticisms of the third film mind-boggling, partiuclarly when compared to it's predecessors.That doesn't change Newell and Yates' films looking awful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Crichton 4 Posted November 18, 2008 Share Posted November 18, 2008 I wasn't really making an argument Morlock, and I'm not wading into the whole Columbus vs. Cuaron thing, the Potter movies honestly don't interest me enough to care anymore. I was just continuing my tirade againt rampant grading, and at least Columbus wasn't afraid to mostly use natural color. Nor was Cuaron, for that matter. The sickly green look of every HBP trailer is just that- sickly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeinAR 1,949 Posted November 18, 2008 Author Share Posted November 18, 2008 Columbus set the look for the Potter films and his two are colorful and well shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry B 50 Posted November 18, 2008 Share Posted November 18, 2008 Columbus set the look for the Potter films... A sucky look. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Docteur Qui 1,544 Posted November 18, 2008 Share Posted November 18, 2008 And one which was quickly abandoned. He didn't really succeed in setting much of a look. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koray Savas 2,251 Posted November 18, 2008 Share Posted November 18, 2008 He's nothing special as a director. Honestly, the only good thing about him is that he likes Johnny and Hansy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeinAR 1,949 Posted November 20, 2008 Author Share Posted November 20, 2008 Columbus set the look for the Potter films... A sucky look.you're full of it, its a great look, the school looks spectacular. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265 Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 did not enjoy the hats worn by the wizards though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry B 50 Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 Columbus set the look for the Potter films... A sucky look.you're full of it, its a great look, the school looks spectacular.It's pleasant and inoffensive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Brigden 7 Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 I don't get the appeal of these at all. The books were an ok read, but I barely made it through twenty minutes of POA, which I thought was the best of the books I had read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSM 126 Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 The photography of the first two was what I thought made them look boring, uninspired, and generally not very magical. I was relieved whe Columbus left the series and it was allowed to grow up a little bit. This is of course just my opinion, but I consider Columbus one of the least visually/creatively imaginative directors working today.At least he wasn't afraid of color. That's a rather feeble argument. He was afraid to make something that stands on it's own, and something that enhances the book. He took a book and filmed it. I find it insulting when a director assumes that a book is so far above film in class, that anything less than literal and unimaginative adaptation would be fitting. Cuaron showed so much more respect for the characters and the world. His film had some real magic in it. Columbus tried to say 'look at the color! Pretty magical, eh?' and proceeded to yell out 'MAGIC!!!!!!!!!!!' at every stage. Cuaron showed us real characters, and the relatability of it made the magic infintesmaly more magical. Columbus filmed a book. Cuaron made a film. Columbus cared about Rowling and WB. Cuaron cared about these characters. I find most of the criticisms of the third film mind-boggling, partiuclarly when compared to it's predecessors.Only the wardrobes of the characters make POA one of the ugliest Potter films in the series. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koray Savas 2,251 Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 I don't get the appeal of these at all. The books were an ok read, but I barely made it through twenty minutes of POA, which I thought was the best of the books I had read.I stopped after POA, because I felt the books wouldn't get any better. I also think it's the best and will remain the best of the films. I'm probably done seeing the Potter films in theaters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indy4 155 Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 The books are all masterpieces of literature, all 7 of 'em. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koray Savas 2,251 Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 Umm, no.Hamlet is a masterpiece of literature. The Inferno is a masterpiece of literature. Harry Potter doesn't even come close, I'd say it's about 50 million miles away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pieter Boelen 740 Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 Did I understand correctly some work is being done on making better rear-channel HP 1 rips?I'm still wanting to make a low-SFX extended version of that.At the moment I am in no position to give it a listen (Internet is too slow),but I'll be very interested in about a month when I get back home again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeinAR 1,949 Posted November 22, 2008 Author Share Posted November 22, 2008 Umm, no.Hamlet is a masterpiece of literature. The Inferno is a masterpiece of literature. Harry Potter doesn't even come close, I'd say it's about 50 million miles away.speaking like you always do again, how typical, there are many types of masterpieces, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koray Savas 2,251 Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 I'm not being ignorant. Yes there are many types of masterpieces, but he said masterpiece of literature. Harry Potter is not a masterpiece of literature.Literature is a pretty damn broad category. If he said literary masterpiece of the 21st century, that would be more understandable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeinAR 1,949 Posted November 22, 2008 Author Share Posted November 22, 2008 its doesn't matter what century, though just to correct you its the 20th century. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Brausam 214 Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 I wouldn't call the books a masterwork by any stretch of the imagination. However I do think that what it did for reading is excellent - it brought people to books that may never have gotten into reading. It's pretty much the largest cultural phenomenon since Star Wars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Crichton 4 Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 I wouldn't call the books a masterwork by any stretch of the imagination.I would. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unlucky Bastard 7,782 Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 Umm, no.Hamlet is a masterpiece of literature. The Inferno is a masterpiece of literature. Harry Potter doesn't even come close, I'd say it's about 50 million miles away.Not bad for a... human. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLUMENKOHL 1,068 Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 Harry Potter is perfumed sh*t in comparison to Shakespeare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demodex 557 Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 But more people read that than Shakespeare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry B 50 Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 Therefore it must be better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red 75 Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 Therefore it must be better.And J.K. Rowling must be one of the best authors who ever lived. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry B 50 Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 She's up there with such great thinkers as Dan Brown, Mitch Albom and Stephenie Meyer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unlucky Bastard 7,782 Posted November 23, 2008 Share Posted November 23, 2008 She's up there with such great thinkers as Dan Brown, Mitch Albom and Stephenie Meyer.They made literary intellectualism an element in the periodic table. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265 Posted November 23, 2008 Share Posted November 23, 2008 But more people read that than Shakespeare.Yes Shakespeare is still read and performed hundreds of years after his death. We don't know how it will be for Rowling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeinAR 1,949 Posted November 23, 2008 Author Share Posted November 23, 2008 She's up there with such great thinkers as Dan Brown, Mitch Albom and Stephenie Meyer.only a f'ing moron would put her books along side the works of those authors.and only a f'ing moron would say JKR is the equal of Shakespear.but even those authors bring out readers so why is that a bad thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pieter Boelen 740 Posted November 23, 2008 Share Posted November 23, 2008 What is literarture anyway?The books I had to read for school that they claimed were "literature" were pooE!However, books like the Hornblower series really are literature as far as I'm concerned.And Harry Potter is very close to that; I need to read the books again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koray Savas 2,251 Posted November 24, 2008 Share Posted November 24, 2008 Literature is essentially any kind of written work. Drama, poetry, fiction, it's all literature. There is so much of it, that it's inconceivable to put Harry Potter at the top. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indy4 155 Posted November 24, 2008 Share Posted November 24, 2008 Literature is essentially any king of written work. Drama, poetry, fiction, it's all literature. There is so much of it, that it's conceivable to put Harry Potter at the top.It's more than conceivable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unlucky Bastard 7,782 Posted November 24, 2008 Share Posted November 24, 2008 That's because you're a Potter Rotter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay 37,353 Posted November 24, 2008 Share Posted November 24, 2008 How come other threads get capped at 100 pages but not this one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Crichton 4 Posted November 24, 2008 Share Posted November 24, 2008 Because it's a very old thread that's worthy of being exempt from that rule. Closing it would be sacrilege. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indy4 155 Posted November 24, 2008 Share Posted November 24, 2008 Marc made an Unbreakable Vow not to close this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSM 126 Posted December 18, 2008 Share Posted December 18, 2008 I couldn't find the HP thread Cool trailer, I think it is new.http://www.apple.com/trailers/wb/harrypott...alfbloodprince/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indy4 155 Posted December 18, 2008 Share Posted December 18, 2008 It's not new, but I really like it.The music is awesome, except for that rendition of Hedwig's Theme at the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeinAR 1,949 Posted December 18, 2008 Author Share Posted December 18, 2008 I really don't see this one going to 200 unless John decides to score the Deathly Hallows Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Breathmask 555 Posted December 18, 2008 Share Posted December 18, 2008 With three more movies to go, I think it can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indy4 155 Posted December 18, 2008 Share Posted December 18, 2008 If TDK thread can make 50 pages, then a series of 3 films can make 16 more, regardless of whether JW works on them or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSM 126 Posted December 18, 2008 Share Posted December 18, 2008 It's not new, but I really like it.The music is awesome, except for that rendition of Hedwig's Theme at the end.I also think the music is exceptionally exciting and appropriate for a trailer. Who wrote it?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wojo 2,453 Posted December 19, 2008 Share Posted December 19, 2008 [Yet] Shakespeare is still read and performed hundreds of years after his death. We don't know how it will be for Rowling.I have a feeling if she has anything to say about it, nobody will be allowed to read and perform her works in a hundred years unless her estate can somehow profit from it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Parker 3,040 Posted December 19, 2008 Share Posted December 19, 2008 Is J.K. Rowling the female counterpart of George Lucas? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wojo 2,453 Posted December 19, 2008 Share Posted December 19, 2008 I think J.K. Rowling would be hot in plaid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Mark 3,631 Posted December 19, 2008 Share Posted December 19, 2008 [Yet] Shakespeare is still read and performed hundreds of years after his death. We don't know how it will be for Rowling.I have a feeling if she has anything to say about it, nobody will be allowed to read and perform her works in a hundred years unless her estate can somehow profit from it.honestly,I think Potter was just a passing thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Crichton 4 Posted December 19, 2008 Share Posted December 19, 2008 The Potter books will endure. The movies will not.So we have a new mission, 200 pages. With Hooper's scores, I figure that should only take about another 5 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Mark 3,631 Posted December 19, 2008 Share Posted December 19, 2008 How about that Beetle the Bard ?Anyone read that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Parker 3,040 Posted December 19, 2008 Share Posted December 19, 2008 No, but I am still waiting for J.K. Rowling to write "Harry Potter and the Mid-life Crisis". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts