What is the Last Film You Watched? - Part II

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Harry Potter & The Prisoner Of Azkaban.

Outstanding, simply outstanding.

Visually Cuaron brought a whole lot to the table that was then adopted by the producers as the new look for the franchise. Hogwarts and it's grounds chance radically here, a bit less Oliver Twist and a lot more gothic. Also the scenes outside the magic world now look like they take place in modern britain, instead of the slightly rustic feel Chris Columbus gave it.

The kids are back, with jeans and better hairslyles. Radcliffe is really growing in his role, and Watson is convincing in the way she has to guide the befuddled Harry though the last part of the film.

David Thewlis is simply perfect as Prof. Lupin, and his few scenes alone with Harry make for the heart of this film, and turn it into more then just a mystery story. Harry is growing up, he's no longer the little boy I saw only a few hours ago dazzled at some simply magic tricks.

The film reflects that, it's darker, edgier, overall scarier and doesn't dwell on pixies or mandrakes.

Few things though.

Like the first 2 films the plot relies on people exchanging information that Harry needs to know, even if there's no reason for them be be telling this.

The exchange between Fudge, McGonagall and Madam Rosmerta about Sirius, just happens to be eavesdropped by Harry is just a bit too contrived.

All the revelations and all the sudden appearances of characters during the Shrieking Shack scene are very hard to follow if you are unfamilar with the book, or have not seen this movie before. The movie had been going at a considerate pace up untill that point, when it suddenly goes into top gear.

This is probably my 5th time seeing it, so I get it now, but as is often said another 10 minutes in that location of the film would have made it perfect (though I disagree with Joeinar that the Shrieking Shack sequence destroys the film)

The visual style Cuaron introdued into the franchise has yet to be bettered, I love the masterfull integration of set design, camerawork, special effects and lightning.

The score by John Williams is a fairly radical departure from the previous 2, but in many ways a logical one. Window To The Past serves both as a partial replacement of Hedwig's Theme. (and the 2 themes segue into each other with amazing ease) and as a total replacement of the more childlike "family" theme for Harry in the first 2 films.

While the lighter comedy cues are still there, most of the score is rather dark and bleak, owing more to Close Encounters of TLW then Hook or Home Alone.

In the film the integration of comedy stuff like Chasing Scabbers and Monster Book works rather well, but on CD it's edited hopelessly.

And watching the scene again I'm still not 100% sure if Aunt Marge's Waltz is actually right for the scene.

Hmmmm...btw, we have heard time and time again that young wizards are not allowed to use magic outside of Hogwarts, yet in the opening Harry uses a wand to iluminate his night time reading?

All in all a very tight, suspensefull and entertaining film.

***1/2 out of ****

[Elmo Lewis 6]

Great review.

[Red 75]

Prisoner of Azkaban pretty much set the bar for the rest of the series, film and score.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Azkaban was also the last film to have a satisfying finale.

[John Crichton 4]

Like the first 2 films the plot relies on people exchanging information that Harry needs to know, even if there's no reason for them be be telling this.

The exchange between Fudge, McGonagall and Madam Rosmerta about Sirius, just happens to be eavesdropped by Harry is just a bit too contrived.

It's done a bit better in the book, at least less suddenly (it's done under the pretense of everyone explaining what's going on to Rosmerta, the barmaid), but it still does have a tad of that contrived feel.

Hmmmm...btw, we have heard time and time again that young wizards are not allowed to use magic outside of Hogwarts, yet in the opening Harry uses a wand to iluminate his night time reading?

That's a film-only plot hole. IIRC in the book Harry's managed to get hold of a flashlight (or torch, I suppose would be the proper term, being England and all).

[Morlock 11]

The only saving grace I could find in that torture that is Chamber of Secrets was Kenneth Branagh having fun.

That, and Neville Longbottom's "Why does it always have to be me?".

Azkaban was also the last film to have a satisfying finale.

I thought that the 5th one was terrific (the ministry stuff, not the rushed and unimportant wrapping things up scene).

Just came back from seeing it again. Stand by my original review. It is a weak tea, story-wise, when compared to the book. But, in relation to what it could have been, and certainly in relation to the previous film, it is terrific.

[John Crichton 4]

I can't believe I still haven't seen OotP, I was gonna go last Friday night before the book came out but didn't feel like it. Must make time...

[SturgisPodmore 0]

After seeing OotP again, I found I liked it considerably better than the first time, though of course there are still some big plot holes.

I would rate the Potter films:

-PoA: A-

-OotP: B

-SS: B-

-GoF:C

-CoS: D+

~Sturgis

[Morlock 11]

My list is similar:

PoA: A-

OoTP: B+

SS: A benevolant B-

CoS: C-

GoF: F

[Marian Schedenig 8,173]

I thought that the 5th one was terrific (the ministry stuff, not the rushed and unimportant wrapping things up scene).

The ministry stuff also felt rushed when I watched it.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

I like the Weasley's, a lot, a complete contrast from Harry's unloving family. Julie Walters has fun playing Mother Weasley.

Jason Isaacs makes for a deliciously vile nazi-like villian

The Weasleys suck. They've been nothing but an annoyance since the very beginning of this franchise... well, except for Fred and George.

[A24 4,326]

The first film now feels much more like a childrens adventure film then ever ...

They all are.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Well, you are right of course, but the target audience the films are aiming for has gone up, since like the fans of the books and films are getting older.

[BurgaFlippinMan 7]

Unlike Star Wars....

[Morlock 11]

I thought that the 5th one was terrific (the ministry stuff, not the rushed and unimportant wrapping things up scene).

The ministry stuff also felt rushed when I watched it.

The entire movie felt rushed. That was one of the few sequences that felt right, to me. I thought that it was too long and too convoluted in the book. I've never gotten a good sense of the geography of places from Rowling, this film cut out all the unnecessary padding, and left one clear, solid sequence.

[John Crichton 4]

I've never gotten a good sense of the geography of places from Rowling,

Well in her defense you are seeing the whole sequence from the kid's perspective, who are overwhelemed by the Department of Mysteries.

[Morlock 11]

Like so many other Rowling explanations, I feel that that is awfully convenient. There are so many things, particularly in the last book, that have an explanation, but the explanation is very, very convenient. Every single problem I've had with any of the books has been explained away "it's all part of the master plan". I'm sure that sometimes, it is the case. But I don't buy it. Rowling is weak on geography, if you ask me.

[Ray Barnsbury 8]

Do you mean it's hard for you to understand how places are laid out, through her writing?

Ray Barnsbury

[Morlock 11]

Precisely. I rarely get a real sense of the dimensions of particular locations.

[Marian Schedenig 8,173]

I've never gotten a good sense of the geography of places from Rowling,

Well in her defense you are seeing the whole sequence from the kid's perspective, who are overwhelemed by the Department of Mysteries.

I thought the whole DoM introduction in the book, though somewhat lengthy, serves as a very good setup for the long action sequence which follows. The geography seems pretty well laid out, as far as that's possible in a location where the kids constantly get lost. Without this introduction, most of the things happening during the action sequence would seem awfully like dei ex machinae - which I guess is why the movie, having abandoned the entire setup, had to resort to a series of confusing, flashy magic tricks instead of an actual chase with a sense of danger.

[Ray Barnsbury 8]

I personally don't find fault with the geography of the books...isn't that what your imagination is for?

Ray Barnsbury

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Harry Potter & The Goblet of Fire.

Most people who now talk about this film on the MB (me included) talk about how the finale was botched, how Lord Voldemorts return was not the epic moment of darkness that it could...no should have been.

This made me forget the parts of the film I really enjoyed when watching it for the first time.

Mike Newell, more then any of the other directors, remember what it was likle at school. the camraderie with friends, the ganging up against enemies, the terrible prospect of a school ball and having to ask a girl out (school dances were not thought up by teenagers, that's for sure).

When Ron is chosen by McGonagall to show the class how to dance, we kinda know how he feels, like it's like when we were called to the blackboard by a teacher, but even worse. All these character scenes in the film, between students are fantastic, and it's were our 3 main actors are at their most natural.

The Tri-Wizard Tournament I'm less happy with, I just don't believe that 2 schools would sent a group of their best and most gifted students away for an entire year to compete in just 3 tasks. High school football doesn't work like that, now does it?

The first task with the dragon is well staged, I like the build up to when Harry finally has to face his. But when the Dragon breaks free and the action moves outside the Arena, it's no longer the sporting events that it's supposed to be. I mean if during a bull-fight in Spain, the bull breaks out of the arena, the contest is over and the bull is either caught or shot to protect the public.

The second challenge is a lot better, but I kept wondering. Fleur Delacour does not finish this challenge, yet she's still eligable for the last one and can still win the Tournament. That just doesn't make sense to me at all.

The third challenge starts out rather well but gets less interesting untill they finally get to the graveyard.

The death of Cedric is handles as badly as the death of Sirius one film later. I suppose the suddenty of Cedric's dead was done to show that even a very talented young Tri-Wizard tourmanent is no match of Voldemort even in his weakest state.

Voldemorts rebirth, the dead eaters, the unmaking of Lucius Malfoy...I don't know, it looks like all the elements are their for a classic scene, but for some reason it just feels...by the numbers, like someone is just ticking of the plot points.

Only during the last part of the duel, with the reappearance of Harry's parents, does the scene become more dramatically interesting.

Harry's harrowing near escape from death is not the nail-biting close shave they probably envisioned though.

The distraught felt over the death of Cedric and Dumbledore's eulogy are well staged, well directed, well scored, well acted, but since the film has spend almost no attention to the character during the course of the film, the impact is limited. Again not what it could have been. I think maybe a few minutes more showing Cedrid as a person, and a few less with Hagrid and his huge girlfriend might have made a difference.

Another flaw was that after the very dark opening the film does not return to the Voldemort plot for about 1 hour and 15 minutes, and then only very briefly.

Despite all these flaws this is still an incredibly watchable film, in it's character scenes it beats all of the others, I suddenly remembered what school was like.

As a whole, as a package, this feels like watching 4 episodes of a TV series with the same characters but different stories. But in the details it's very good, it shows that Mike Newell is more into doing character driven stories that plot driven one.

The music by Patrick Doyle is even better in the film then I remembered. Gone completely is the fluffy feel of magic and pizzicato, but in it's place is something very effective.

Patrick Doyle scores the sporting events in this film like an event of Olympian scale. Fanfares, Pomp and Circumstance and suspense and the vast sound of the LSO are brought to bear very effectively.

The waltzes for the Yule Ball part of the film are delightfull, and I like the contemplative underscore which closes the film.

Yes Hedwig's theme sounds completely different in the hands of Doyle, but so did the James Bond theme when Kamen had a go with it, and that came out very well.

All in all a whole bunch of scenes and storylines that do not make the film better then the sum of it's parts, but fun can still be had watching it.

**1/2 out of ****

[Luke Skywalker 1,792]

I mean if during a bull-fight in Spain, the bull breaks out of the arena, the contest is over and the bull is either caught or shot to protect the public.

Shoot it? To Kill it?

That sadistic animal harming

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

My point exactly.....

[Elmo Lewis 6]

Once again, I totally agree with Stefan's review. People watching this movie are too obsessed with what could have been to appreciate its virtues. And the score fits the new tone like a glove.

A mostly entertaining film, except that Voldemort is the crappiest, most clichéd, less menacing and disappointing villain ever to grace a fantasy saga. In the films, I mean. I just like him so much better when he isn't around and people just react to the mention of his being. One detail I really liked was Harry hiding in the graveyard before confronting him - one of the very few occassion where Harry is shown like a human being and not as the product of some history. The way he closes his eyes before finally coming out really changed the way I perceived the following events.

Maybe the fact that I didn't remember a thing from the book helped my appreciation for the film.

[John Crichton 4]

I've never gotten a good sense of the geography of places from Rowling,

Well in her defense you are seeing the whole sequence from the kid's perspective, who are overwhelemed by the Department of Mysteries.

I thought the whole DoM introduction in the book, though somewhat lengthy, serves as a very good setup for the long action sequence which follows. The geography seems pretty well laid out, as far as that's possible in a location where the kids constantly get lost. Without this introduction, most of the things happening during the action sequence would seem awfully like dei ex machinae - which I guess is why the movie, having abandoned the entire setup, had to resort to a series of confusing, flashy magic tricks instead of an actual chase with a sense of danger.

Yes, you can fault geography all you want, but you cant deny that whole sequence has tons of atmosphere and tension, possibly the most of any she's ever written.

[Marian Schedenig 8,173]

Yes, from what I remember, the character stuff in GOF was done extremely well. A shame that this makes for many enjoyable moments and yet a disappointing film.

[Trent B 337]

Has anyone bothered to check out The Simpsons movie? If so what's your opinion on it?

[Morlock 11]

Yes, from what I remember, the character stuff in GOF was done extremely well. A shame that this makes for many enjoyable moments and yet a disappointing film.

The character stuff well-done? I totally disagree there. Only scene I can recall where the character stuff was well done was Brendan Gleeson's classroom scene. I know a movie is not clicking with me when I only like Brendan Gleeson in one scene.

[SturgisPodmore 0]

The Simpsons Movie

Not a lot to say, but it was certainly a very funny and enjoyable time. It started out with a joke a second, moving at a fast pace of funniness, but over the course of the movie the jokes became more sparsely placed, though still very enjoyable. B+

Zodiac

I saw this in the theater in March and liked it, and this time, my second viewing, I found it even more enjoyable. The first scene is quite chilling, and then when the killing happens, and the music (a 60s-era song) swells, it's a wondrous contrast to the horrific images. I love how the movie is shot; it's not showy, but the photography is consistently interesting. It has a nice retro 60s/70s look to it overall. The movie has a great first 45 minutes or so, with the scenes of investigation interspersed with murder sequences. The lakeside killing got my heart pounding just as much or more than seeing it the first time, even knowing what was coming. So many chilling scenes: the attempted murder of a woman and her baby on the roadside, the encounter with a man who seems to be the mysterious killer without a shadow of a doubt. You really feel for the characters; you get just as excited as they do when a new lead pops up, just as crushed when you find another dead end.

One could argue that the film becomes less engaging as it goes on, with most of the murder scenes being in the first half of the film, but the investigation and the effects it has on people keep it interesting for me. I like how the movie doesn't show any particular bookended glimpse of the investiagtion; it just tells a story, and it spans a period of time as long as it takes to do that, going from July, 1969 to August, 1991: a length of 22 years. It's a pretty unique film in that, though it's about a serial killer, its purpose is to examine the effect the case has on those who try to solve it. A really great, really long film, with a lot of dialogue, Zodiac is probably my favorite movie of the year so far. A

~Sturgis

[QMM 4]

Watched Zodiac for the first time yesterday (read the book though) and I pretty much agree. I thought it was great.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

DuckTales the Movie: Treasure of the Lost Lamp.

Been a long-time DuckTales fan here and this film delivered the goods being my favourite animated Disney film. Sure, I reckon the Valley of the Golden Suns four-episode arc would have probably made for a better film, but this one makes for a good finale to the series overall.

[Elmo Lewis 6]

Hey, I remember watching that when I was little!

[A24 4,326]

Stranger Than Fiction: I appreciate the idea of this film but certain things, 'mushiness' certainly being one of them, prevented it from working. Woody Allen, whose spirit lurks around the corner, would've done better things with it. I was pleasantly surprised with Dustin Hoffman's restrained performance. Come to think of it, all the performances (Will Ferrell, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Dustin Hoffman, Emma Thompson) were quite good.

Alex

[Luke Skywalker 1,792]

Hey, I remember watching that when I was little!

I liked it too..then it dissapeared

[Morlock 11]

Come to think of it, all the performances (Will Ferrell, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Dustin Hoffman, Emma Thompson) were quite good.

Yes, they were. Well, except for the unnecessary Queen Latifah. I loved the film. I was okay with the mushiness, because the the movie is very concious that it is 'mushiness', and explains that, well, sometimes, 'mushiness' can be alright. Either way I loved the movie because of Ferrell and Gyllenhall. It felt like I hadn't seen a couple quite like this in a very long time. I think Woody would have done some things better.....but the persona of his films would overpower the concept (although a couple of his best films are lacking that persona).

[A24 4,326]

Because he's been around the block a few times, Woody would've made the lessons in this film less obvious, cliche and superficial. The mushiness lies mainly in the film obvious treatment of its subjects. Everything feels quite green behind the ears, like it's a genre introduction meant for an unexperienced (young) audience. The comedy could've been better too.

BTW, Morlock, here's a (musical) quiz question for you: What do Stranger Than Fiction and Danny Boyle's Millions have in common?

Alex

[Morlock 11]

Well, it worked for me. I thought it was going ot be a one-joke gimmick, and was surprised by how much I liked it. A lot of it is due to the good performances, I'm sure. (EDIT: As for your question, I believe our favorite Greek composer had a piece in both).

I bought The Right Stuff and Once Upon a Time in America Special editions. Seen the Leone once before, I'll get to it soon. Saw The Right Stuff for the first time. Strange movie. Didn't work for me. It seems to be torn whether the Right Stuff of the title is the the astonauts, or Chuck Yeager. Or, rather, it is quite sure that Yeager has the Right Stuff, which makes juxtaposing it with the astronauts quite odd. Is this something like Saving Private Ryan, where they're forced into this public relations mission, yet try to prove that they are better than apes? is this pure satire, where they are not the Right Stuff, but get propelled into that image totaly unjustly, while the perfect Yeager is taking the real risks? are they the true Right Stuff, and Yeager is just an onlooker? I don't know. The movie's tone seemed uneven, I was never quite clear on what all the scenes with the seven astronauts were aiming for, whereas Yeager is the pure, all-American, John Ford-ian hero.

Overall, it felt more like a docudrama than anything else, with a sprinkeling of Yeager, and that weird exception of the juxtaposition of John Glenn and the Aborigenees.

The performances are.....hard to place. Sam Shepard has an amazing quiet presence. Ed Harris is bit too nice to be believable (although the scene with his wife on the phone is great, one of the few dramatic moments in the film). Scott Glenn is always terrific, no exception here (though the whole Latino thing seemed forced). Dennis Quaid kinda grew on me. His impossibly huge smile was quite irritating. Fred Ward was good. Donald Moffat as LBJ was ridicules. It was a very stupid decision to make him the bumbling, loud Texan (I happen to like LBJ).

Cinematography is a joy to behold, Caleb Deschanel is a master.

The music. Very mixed bag. Just about all of the electronics were quite annoying. The main theme is not bad, but it's so overblown, when the film is not terribly exciting or dramatic. Still, it works in a couple of scenes. One of the gentler themes is quite attractive. The Holst was just plain ridicules. It is the perfect example of how destructive a temp score can be. It may fit the images for this scene, but has nothing to do with the emotions of the movie. Jerry must have felt like crap, losing to something as hodge-podge as this, with his masterpiece in hand.

Didn't do it for me. It was not uninteresting, but I don't feel it flowed at ALL in any discernable direction, and left me with very little that is worth anything. But still....there is something in the ambition of it all that makes it a dignified failure in my book.

**1/2/****.

King Kong (2005). I still feel it's a sloppy movie, even though the finale is excellent. There's a lot of good in there, but even more that's not good. But the creation of Kong himself is masterful.

The effects are good, but not great, with the exception of Kong, who is pulled off practically perfectly. A lot of the other stuff is not. The dinosaurs are never convincing. The Stampede was terrible, not for a moment did I believe that there was anything but pixels running over these humans. Far too often was I reminded of the fact that this was blue screen work. Kudos to Lesnie, for pulling off such stunning magic hour lighting against a blue screen.

Score works overall, but only on a couple of occaisions does it pushe the images to that extra level. And the bug scene is one of the worst scored scenes I've ever seen (no doubt this is was Jackson wanted).

**1/2/****.

[A24 4,326]

Wow, your consensus about The Right Stuff surprises me. It's been a while but this was one of my favorites of the 80s. It baffles me that you have more praise for something like Stranger Than Fiction then for a classic like The Right Stuff.

[Morlock 11]

I believe I explained myself above regarding the impact the film had on me. I would be happy for you to explain what makes you love it so, as it was certainly an interesting film, and I'd be happy to understand it better. But it felt like a whole lot of different ideas, cancelling each other out. I do not take the film lightely, it did not work for me.

And comparing Stranger than Fiction and The Right Stuff is a rather moot point. One worked for me, the other didn't. Actually, The Right Stuff might have paled in comparison to the other kind of similarly themed film I've seen recently- the excellent documentary in the Shadow of the Moon. I am not terribly interested in space travel, but that one got me entirely, in many ways that The Right Stuff did not.

[A24 4,326]

Well, on this one, even Ebert disagrees with you and he's your greatest role model

Alex

[Morlock 11]

Well, I will console myself with the knowledge that Pauline Kael, Ebert's role-model, agree with me.

[A24 4,326]

What?! Pauline Kael absolutely loved The Right Stuff.

"Astonishingly entertaining. Great fun to watch." - Pauline Kael

Nice try though!

Alex

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Oh my, now they can't even agree about who's opinions they should agree with.

Didn't I make a thread for this?

The character stuff well-done? I totally disagree there. Only scene I can recall where the character stuff was well done was Brendan Gleeson's classroom scene. I know a movie is not clicking with me when I only like Brendan Gleeson in one scene.

They you obviously were not paying attention, or have never been to school.

I liked Gleeson a lot, but he was not as interesting a character as Prof. Lupin.

(BTW, this franchise has the annoying habbit of creating a great new character for each new film, which is then reduced to cameo status for the next, or completely removed.)

[A24 4,326]

As for your question, I believe our favorite Greek composer had a piece in both.

Very good. Your Google skills are improving. What's moderately striking is that both films use the same piece (La Petite Fille De La Mer) quite extensively in a rather similar way.

Alex

[Morlock 11]

They you obviously were not paying attention, or have never been to school.

I beg to differ. The reason I liked the third film so much, and to a certain extent, the fifth film, is because the kids were so believable as teenagers and high school students. The fourth film had that terrible Yule Ball sequence, a sequence that could easily have been cut out of the film, and there, it wasn't Harry Potter, but some stupid teen comedy.

As for your question, I believe our favorite Greek composer had a piece in both.

Very good. Your Google skills are improving. What's moderately striking is that both films use the same piece (La Petite Fille De La Mer) quite extensively in a rather similar way.

Alex

Google? How would I find that through Google? IMDB was right there. I have no idea what the piece is, and don't recall any music from Millions, aside from the main theme being Elfman-esque.

[Marian Schedenig 8,173]

And the bug scene is one of the worst scored scenes I've ever seen (no doubt this is was Jackson wanted).

It's odd how often scenes that aren't scored in a stereotypical way get the "worst scored" mark. Just like the organ cue from Morricone's Mission to Mars - one of the most brilliantly scored moments of recent years.

[Mr. Breathmask 555]

It was an interesting approach (the King Kong cue), but it was so radically different it pulled me out of the movie and became distracting.

[A24 4,326]

It's odd how often scenes that aren't scored in a stereotypical way get the "worst scored" mark. Just like the organ cue from Morricone's Mission to Mars - one of the most brilliantly scored moments of recent years.

Please Marian, that is just plagiarizing Tarkovsky's Solaris.

Ppppplease!

But I agree with the first part of your post.

Alex

[Elmo Lewis 6]

Oh my, now they can't even agree about who's opinions they should agree with.

Didn't I make a thread for this?

You'd be better off creating a new Movie thread, and leaving this one to them.