Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (2005) Poster

User Reviews

Add a Review
1,910 ReviewsOrdered By: Helpfulness
6/10
A huge, HUGE disappointment...
TheScraggler18 November 2005
Warning: Spoilers
Before I review the film, let me start off by saying that I am a fan of the Harry Potter films and have liked all of them up to this point. I'm not going to compare the movie to the book because, as most people know, they are two completely different animals. There is no way in heaven, hell or on God's green Earth that a book the size of Goblet of Fire could appropriate EVERYTHING that happened in the novel. I'm going to go by what I saw up on the screen.

What I saw up on the screen was a completely pedestrian effort that made no attempt at contributing style, substance, or character development to a series that was getting better and better with each progressive film. Scenes start and stop with no explanation. The big action scenes (especially the fight with the dragon) just begin with no buildup whatsoever almost as if you've stumbled upon someone playing the new Harry Potter video game. There is no sense of the passage of time at all. The Tri-Wizard tournament consists of only three challenges yet the competition seems to last the entire school year. Ron and Hermione have a blow-up at the Yule Ball because of his misplaced jealousy yet six months go by (the last day of school) and NOTHING MORE is ever said about it? She even tells him that he made a mistake by not asking her out and he lets SIX MORE MONTHS go by without saying a word?!

I can forgive the fact that a lot of these things are just glossed over because of the time crunch but I can not forgive situation after situation that has something happen only because the lead character needs to live. In the aforementioned fight with the dragon, Harry ends up hanging from a ledge 100 stories above the ground trying to reach his broom which is nearby. The dragon lands on the building and begins crawling down to him, slipping and sliding, peeling away shingles as it goes and it suddenly hit me. Harry is hanging from a ledge, defenseless, and the dragon is CRAWLING toward him. He is dealing with a creature who spits fire and who can FLY. One flap of its wings and a quick belch and Harry is crispy. The ONLY reason it doesn't is because Harry has to live.

And for that matter, no one in the film acts or reacts to a situation because it's in their nature to do so. They react in a certain way because that's what the script demands that they do, even if it completely goes against their character and everything that we know about them. When Hermione blows up at Ron, it seems to come out of nowhere. She seems to be mad because Ron didn't ask her and she wanted to go with him. But if this is true, why is she so happy about being there with a competitor from a rival school? And I don't just mean happy, I mean she is absolutely BEAMING when she arrives with him. And at one point, Dumbledore grabs Harry and shakes him violently demanding that he answer a question. My reaction to that was WTF??? Has Dumbledore ever shown that he's a violent person or that he would grab a STUDENT, yelling in his face? Of course not but he does it because the script says he has to. At one point in the film, a particular curse is brought up that allows you to control another being. That's kind of funny because it seems like every character in this film is being controlled by the screenplay, even if it means going completely against character.

But I guess the biggest disappointment for me was the confrontation between Harry and Voldemort. For someone who has been built up to be the devil, he sure is beaten easily at the end of this film (and by a quartet of ghosts, no less, which took cheesiness to a new level). The appearance of Voldemort is obviously supposed to be chilling but, in actuality, he looks like a hairless rat wearing a cape. The great Ralph Fiennes does everything he can but part of the appeal of this character is NOT seeing him in closeup in full daylight. He shows up when he wants and manages to let Harry live because he'd rather talk him to death instead of just cutting off his head while Harry is pinned down. But, of course, that's because Harry has to live and this final confrontation, again, seems ridiculous in retrospect.

The entire Tri-Wizard tournament seemed a little off-kilter to me. You perform tasks that test your abilities and try to do better than your opponents, but to what end? The final test consists of entering an ever-changing maze and the first competitor to find the trophy wins the tournament. So, even if you finish DEAD LAST in every other challenge, if you're the first to find the trophy, you win anyway. So, I ask you, WHAT'S THE FRIGGIN' POINT OF EVEN COMPETING IN THE OTHER CHALLENGES?????? Why put yourself in harm's way three times when you only HAVE to do it once?

Looking back, I just realized that you could completely skip this film and move right on to number five without missing a beat as long as you had someone to tell you two things about the film - Harry's interest in Cho and Voldemort being back, sort of. Here's hoping Order of the Phoenix doesn't follow the same path.
122 out of 153 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
4/10
The worst Potter film yet.
cryptkeeper300018 November 2005
Warning: Spoilers
I have to say, I'm really disappointed in how this film turned out, especially in comparison with how great the book is. In my humble opinion, studios have to face up to the fact that two and a half hours is no longer sufficient to capture the scope and power of J.K. Rowling's universe.

In this film, Harry is forced to enter the Triwizard Tournament when someone unknown puts his name into the Goblet of Fire, a magical artifact that serves as the selector of competitors from each participating school. The special effects, as always, are spectacular, but they seem to be a cover for a lack of effort, not the results of a work of love.

All of the highlights of the book are shown; the Quidditch World Cup, Harry's battle with the dragon, the underwater world of the merpeople and the enchanted hedge maze are all done in exquisite detail. But this only seems to point up the movie's shortfalls. Michael Gambon has none of Richard Harris' quiet dignity or unflappable demeanor as Dumbledore; instead he seems to jump at every shadow and constantly be lost in the situation. The worst example of this is when he almost tackles Harry and desperately interrogates him on whether he put his name in the Goblet of Fire.

The movie skips from one event to the next with very little shown of the intervening time; action is held up as a replacement for character development and plot. Draco Malfoy, the cruel bully everyone loves to hate, is only shown twice through the whole film. Mad-Eye Moody, beautifully portrayed by Brendan Gleeson, is given little to do other than push Harry along. Nothing is explained of the backstory between Barty Crouch and his son, nor of Snape's past or what Dumbledore intends to do in the face of Voldemort's return.

Along that line, Ralph Fiennes' portrayal of Lord Voldemort suffers in much the same way Michael Gambon's portrayal of Dumbledore does. Instead of the patient, cunning Dark Lord I'd come to expect from the first two movies, he is easily angered and has no control of his emotions or reactions, much less the situation. The scene should look hopeless, but it is obvious right from the start that Harry is more than Voldemort's equal. In the same scene, Timothy Spall seems almost bored in his portrayal of Wormtail, reacting to the loss of his hand with as little pain or emotion as one would scratching an itch. He literally doesn't seem to feel it.

I could go on, but I think I've made my point. Don't go expecting the magic of the first three films; it's gone, and only a severe rearrangement of cast, director and editor will bring it back if this franchise hopes to survive. If you must see it in a theater (and for all its faults, I recommend doing that at least once), see it in a matinée or better yet, wait until it's in a dollar theater.
80 out of 99 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
1/10
A movie standing alone
h2o_ns19 November 2005
Warning: Spoilers
There are a lot of things wrong with this movie and the part that's really wrong are the characters. 1000 words aren't enough to explain everything so I'll have to be brief. The worst character is Dumbledore. What version of him Kloves & Newell see I have no idea.. I mean, have they read the books at all? Would Albus Dumbledore, one of the greatest wizards alive manhandle one of his own students, especially his favorite student? I should think not. Would he use Harry as bait to lure Voldemort out of hiding? Same answer as above, NO. Gambon can't play him to save his life, Richard Harris could, he had the twinkle in his eyes... something that makes Dumbledore so special. Gambon just comes off as a lunatic.

If it isn't broken, why change it? So why change the first task? Why is Harry getting attacked by the dragon as soon as he leaves the tent? In the book he get's on his Firebolt first... he doesn't run around and almost die for 5 minutes. But then, finally he's in the air and I thought they'd stick to what's in the book but no. There is a chain instead of the dragon being a nesting mother, protecting its eggs. Instead of Harry luring the dragon to get airborne by gently guiding it upwards, teasing it, tempting it, we get this chain that breaks (What happened to the new security measures?) and a stupid dragon that forgets it can fly and has to climb instead.

The second task. This is where a part of me died inside. When Harry get's pushed in by Moody and doesn't re-surface at once Neville goes South Park. "Oh my god, I killed Harry Potter!". I'm sorry but Kloves, Newell or just about ANYONE involved in the making of this movie, how on earth could you let him say that! South Park quotes, although hilarious and one of my absolute favorite shows of all time has no right to be in a HP movie! Didn't you think we'd notice!? *exhale, calm down* The third task. What happened to the Sphinx? What about the Acromantula, we do know they exist thanks to Chris Columbus, why couldn't Harry help Cedric out there instead? So you skipped the Blast-Ended Screwts but you could have at least given us one of the other two...

The graveyard. This scene is very right and very wrong at the same time. Wormtail (Who was just awful in PoA) is just as bad here, and what is wrong with the other Death Eaters? Wormtail including the others are terrified that Voldemort is actually back! One of them flings himself onto the ground, crawling towards Voldemort while begging for forgiveness and kissing his robes, and get's tortured in the book. I think Ralph does a good job of Voldemort, since the make up or whatever they used makes it hard for him to really use his face which is basically the real problem. Where are those red slits for eyes? They're what really makes him creepy in the book... but then again (Yes Kloves & Newell, I'm pointing at you) where is his thirst for repayment of his 13 lost years? I didn't see it at all. There is also a BIG problem with the name Voldemort. It is said out loud at the QWC after the Death Eaters have had a go at the tents but no one shudders? They don't even use You-Know-Who, they actually say Voldemort? Where's the gasps when Dumbledore says Voldemort in front of the whole school? This is something established so early in the series, did you actually forget it?

Why is Harry wearing the newest Levis jeans... what happened to him wearing Dudleys old cast-offs? Perhaps Hermione has done some shopping for him since she apparently has taken a liking to pink clothes.. what was wrong with the blue dress she had in the book? Is blue a more expensive color to make a dress in or something? Or is it because we have to see her girlie side in GoF? First you took her bushy hair... now the pink dress.. I don't even want to know what's going to happen to her in Order of the Phoenix. Also, who the hell was Nigel? Why not use Colin or Dennis Creevey? They're already established characters for gods sake! What happened to Filch? When did he stop being bitter, evil and quite frankly a real bastard? He's the caretaker that wants to whip students, hang them from their ankles in the dungeons dammit, not some idiot jumping around and firing off cannons... and why on earth is McGonagall teaching them how to dance? Would she order a student to place his hand on her waist? I don't think so... even if you haven't read the books you must have noticed that she'd never do that.

I think the only good thing about this whole movie was Ginny. She showed me that she can act (She just didn't get much screen time in Chamber of Secrets, even if she was very promising), that she's sweet and has a temper! Finally a character that's actually working! Although I really did miss the moment where Ron suggests that she can go with Harry to the Yule-Ball. Sure, there's action, there's cool special effects but it's just not what the STORY is about and the story is what makes Harry Potter special, something more then your regular Hollywood script action movie. It, just like PoA get's an extremely well deserved 1.
73 out of 91 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
3/10
They got Dumbledore all WRONG!! and lots of other stuff too
Reed Armstrong18 November 2005
Warning: Spoilers
First, the good news -- The special effects and the music in the this movie were the best yet! The underwater scenes especially were very well done.

The thing I disliked most about the movie is that Albus Dumbledore is not portrayed as the calm, wise old wizard he is in the books. Instead he is portrayed as a stormy, confused old man that doesn't have much of a clue what's going on. The character of Dumbledore is just WAY off. In one scene Dumbledore grabs Harry around the neck and shakes him, what's THAT about? The very thought of Albus Dumbledore being physically violent with a student is Absolutely ABSURD!! THATS NOT IN DUMBLEDORE'S CHARACTER!! Real Harry Potter fans all over are going to be outraged by this portrayal of Dumbledore. That pretty much ruined the movie for me. Another thing I didn't like about this movie was that so much of the real story was left out and/or changed. I guess i'm just spoiled because I'm so attached to the books... I know it's impossible to fit that whole story in a 2 1/2 hour movie, but there was some pretty good stuff that was left out.

If you're interested, Some of the things that weren't included in the movie that stuck out in my mind are:

  • The scene where Dudley eats the ton-tongue coffee and has an enlarged tongue. The Dursley's aren't included in this one at all.


  • Weasley's Wizard Weezes are not mentioned


  • The character Ludo Bagman is left out altogether


  • Winky isn't in the movie


  • S.P.E.W (Society for the Protection of Elfish Welfare), the Elf-rights activist group formed by Hermione, is left out altogether. And i thought this added a lot to the story throughout the book


  • Hagrid's humiliation at being exposed as a Half-giant is left out, and so of course is Harry, Ron, and Hermione coming to comfort him


  • no Blast-Ended Screwts


  • Hermione never catches Rita Skeeter in her animagus form (a beetle) as she does in the book


  • The scene in which Draco Malfoy is attacked on the train near the end isn't in the movie


  • The money Harry wins from the tournament and gives to Fred and George to go toward starting their joke shop is left out


  • The discussion with Fudge about Voldemort's return and his refusal to accept it is left out. I don't know how they're going to reconcile this one because Fudge's refusal to accept Voldemort is crucial in Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix.


  • Sirius coming to Hogwarts to see Harry after the Third Task is left out


I'm still ticked off about Dumbledore... I'm starting to think that the people who make the movies just don't even read the books, because Dumbledore was SO out of character it made me angry. That bothers me more than anything else. I wouldn't rush to see this movie, wait until it comes out on DVD. Besides the good special effects and music, the movie was really bad. I Hope this review has been helpful.
288 out of 385 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
8/10
See the movie for action, read the book for story
Hypno Toad22 November 2005
It's unfortunate that so much of the book needed to be cut for time and the movie is still nearly 2 1/2 hours long. The rule of movie editing is when you must trim for time you remove the sub-plots. A lot of story and character development isn't there.

But what is there is a great visual treat. If the movie leaves you with questions just read the book or get the audio version on CD. It would have taken a minimum of another half hour to flesh the movie out and that simply wasn't going to be done by a studio whose primary target is a younger audience. (Note how no studio wants to release an animated film longer than 90 minutes for this reason.) Perhaps Alphonso Curon would have done a better job of cohesion but there really isn't much more that could have been done in the time and the script would have been essentially the same. This movie begs for an extended Lord of the Rings type DVD, another 30 to 60 minutes to give you what was left out for theatrical release.

See it and spend the bucks to see it on the big screen.
275 out of 371 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
1/10
horrible idea to make it one movie and not two
Lucifer80018 November 2005
Warning: Spoilers
The movie ran as if it were a series of highlight clips from an actual film representation of the fourth harry potter novel. Details were thrown in haphazardly, if for no other reason than to bring a feeling of recognition from readers. If the viewer had not read the book, but only seen the previous two movies, s/he would not have understood the movie. The screenwriters created no semblance complicated plot, but rather the rather single-minded story of the three tasks in the tri-wizard tournament. All new characters were hardly introduced and remained quite one-dimensional, which is unfortunate; even old favorites got the shaft in this one. There was no time for more than two short scenes with either Malfoy, no magical lessons, and Dobby the house elf was completely absent. Crouch never disappeared, but his body was found dead. The cinematics in this case were atrocious: Harry appears in Dumbledore's chambers in the scene immediately after discovering Crouch's body, but then proceeds to tell him about his scar hurting and dreams rather than Crouch's discovery. There was no magical map, no late-night encounters with Moody, no discussion of Snape and Karkaroff's relationship, nor of Dumbledore trusting Snape. Seeing as this relationship will rise to be the single most prominent issue in the entire series, I was very disappointed to find it was ignored in favor of large and ineffective theatrics, such as a hedge maze without any traps, only shifting walls and evil roots, an extremely obnoxious modernized yule ball, and a pointlessly drawn out dragon chase scene. Dumbledore's lines and the directing of his acting made him look like an old, bumbling fool, rather than the clever, most-powerful-wizard on the planet, the only person of whom Voldemort is afraid. The writers decided to add Crouch Jr. into Harry's dreams, completely removed the second house-elf and the invisibility cloak from the quidditch world cup, and had the audacity to explain that Crouch Jr. had been sent to Azkaban, but never explained his escape. Finally, the movie ended with Crouch Jr. being sent back to Azkaban. The Minister of Magic never showed up with dementors to kill Crouch, Dumbledore never argued with him about the verity of Harry's claims, and the potential for an amazing cliff-hanger conclusion with Dumbledore in all his might giving orders to Hagrid and others as a general before the final battle, was instead replaced by a horrible attempt at a eulogy combining direct quotations from the novel with poor scriptwriting to make Dumbledore out to be a poor speaker as well as incompetent wizard. I shudder to think how the next movie will have to deal with all of these plot gaps, and how Dumbledore can hope to maintain any semblance of respectability when he trusts Snape and continues to avoid Harry in the fifth movie. Much better would have been to stick with the original idea and make two movies. This movie didn't feel like it had any plot, one did not become attached to the characters, and spent the movie groaning or laughing at the contrived immaturity of it all. Some acting by Harry and friends was good, but it was overshadowed by a terrible attempt to fit everything and nothing into the movie.
233 out of 314 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
4/10
Highly Disappointing
egarmon18 November 2005
Warning: Spoilers
I have to say that I disagree with almost every review posted here. I traveled for an hour to see the movie at midnight, for the first showing. I am a huge Harry Potter fan and have been eagerly awaiting the release of this film. How disappointed I was. I must say that I think that the fourth book is perhaps the weakest in the series, but it is still a good read. The movie, however, was by far the worst yet. So many important details were left out, the movie raced along trying to fit as much plot into two and a half hours as possible. Of course there was excitement, funny moments,and talented acting. But overall, the plot moved so quickly, that one barely felt any connection to the characters involved other than what has been built up from the last three movies and the book. The Yule Ball was ridiculous, and Hermione (Emma Watson) was overly dramatic. The challenges in the Tri-Wizard Tournament were rushed through and the other competitors characters were not built up. You barely know, yet alone feel anything about Viktor Krum, Fleur, or even Cedric Diggory. The special effects were great, but could not make up for the loss of the "magic" felt in the books and other movies. The final scene with Voldemort was well-done. Scary, suspenseful, exciting. But I must say I will not be seeing this movie again in the theaters as I have the last three.
66 out of 86 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
6/10
Good though rushed
Mel J18 November 2005
Based on one of the best books of the Harry Potter series, the film adaptation of 'Harry Potter and the Goblet' had a lot to live up to and I think it succeeded. As Potter fans will know, in GoF, Harry is now fourteen and in his Fourth Year at Hogwarts. When an ancient tournament between Hogwarts and two other European wizarding schools is held that year, a Seventh Year contestant is chosen from each school to compete but things go dramatically awry when Harry, three years too young to even be entered in the dangerous and challenging tournament, is somehow also chosen after his name is mysteriously nominated. GoF is a sharp turning point in the books as the tone darkens considerably and the characters themselves change from being rather wide-eyed innocent children to adolescents thrust the turbulent, uncertain adult world where being 'good' or even an innocent will not guarantee your survival. This shift is also reflected in the film, which was rated 12A (PG13 for Americans), the first of the HP films to be rated so high.

I have to say I did enjoy this film, although Prisoner of Azkaban remains my favourite of the four. Unlike the first two films, this did not attempt to condescend as much to small children in the audience. The tasks of the Triwizard tournament captured most of the thrills of the book, particularly the second water-based task where the merpeople were suitably creepy (now we know why none of the kids go swimming in the summer term!), but the first task over-ran for a minute or two more than needed. Light romance was touched upon yet wasn't over-emphasised and the Yule Ball will please those who enjoyed the scenes in the book but audience members over the age of sixteen might find teens ogling each other a tad dull (Hermione is very out-of-character and the scene does drag).

The acting of the adult cast is, of course, exemplary as always. Alan Rickman's Snape may only have had four or so scenes but he definitely made his presences known while Maggie Smith really captured the essence of McGonagall. Many people do miss Richard Harris' Dumbledore but I found that Michael Gambon has done an excellent job of moulding the role to make it his own. In GoF, Dumbledore feels very human in the way he carries the weight of the wizarding world on his shoulders and though he struggles at times, his concern for his pupils is paramount. I finally felt the close rapport between Dumbledore and Harry in this film that was missing in the previous three HP flicks. However, the prize has to go to Brendan Gleeson for his scene-stealing depiction of Mad-Eye Moody. Gleeson clearly enjoyed illustrating Moody's dangerous, feral edge.

The younger cast have also grown into their roles, improving from their previous outing. Rupert Grint, usually used to playing a comical and stupid Ron, had the chance to cut his acting teeth and show Ron's darker, bitter side and he did well. The Phelp twins have also improved dramatically. No longer do they come across as wooden cut-outs just reading from a cue-card and instead they are able to show the mischievous spontaneity of the Weasley twins. And I look forward to seeing more of Matthew Lewis, who was great at showing Neville's sensitive side without making him too klutzy. Out of the younger cast, though, Dan Radcliffe is the one who has progressed the most. In PoA, he was awful in the 'he was their friend' scene so he seems like another boy in the harrowing graveyard scene and the aftermath, depicting Harry's anger, feelings of vulnerability and grief. He still stumbled on occasion in other scenes but I, at last, have faith he might be able to do the Harry of 'Order of the Phoenix' justice when the time comes.

The film did lose points on a few issues. Although most of the young cast have expanded their acting skills as they have gone on, Emma Watson is waning. She has a tendency of over-enunciating her lines and being too melodramatic, which worked in 'The Philosopher's Stone' when Hermione was condescending and childishly bossy, but is just annoying by this point. She spent most of the film sounding as if she was on the verge of tears or in a hormonal snit, even in scenes which were not remotely sad or upsetting. There was also a choppy feel to the film, as if Steve Kloves struggled to properly condense the book into a two-hour film. Those who haven't read the books will have missed quite a bit and those who have read the books will feel the film is very rushed. Molly Weasley and the Dursleys were also missed, especially since I think Julie Walters would have been exceptional in the Molly/Harry interactions that take place aftermath of the graveyard scenes of the novel as the film didn't round off in a manner that reflected a boy had died and Harry would be traumatised by what he saw.

I think most Potter fans will enjoy this although they will remark that it could have been better. Non-fans will also get something from this film as I imagine it is hard not to be captivated by the many action and dramatic events but they may find themselves muddled by the story. I would recommend that parents of young children either keep away or, at the very least, check out the film firstly before deciding if their child is old enough to cope with it. When I went to see it, there was a small lad of four or five being dragged along and in the middle of a particularly fearsome incident, the silence of the moment was cut by a wee voice crying, 'Mummy, I'm scared' so, parents, be warned.
421 out of 603 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
1/10
Did the producers even glance through the book?
kaoruchan3019 November 2005
Warning: Spoilers
A fabulous film -- if you haven't read the books. Really exciting, and nothing left out -- if you haven't read the books. However, if you have read the books, it is a complete and utter disappointment. I went into the theater thinking, 'This shouldn't be too bad,' but, after seeing what they did to Mad-Eye Moody (i.e. the HUGE BLACK STRAP) I wasn't all that thrilled. Dumbledore - completely out of character. During one scene, he actually shakes Harry and yells in others. The Albus Dumbledore of the books is a wise, calm old man, not a raging but clueless crackpot. Many things are left unexplained; such as Neville's fear of the Cruciatus (sp?) curse, and what exactly happens to Barty Crouch (senior). Of course, if you have read the book, you know exactly what is going on, but as an innocent movie-goer who has never even glanced in the books, you are left wondering. And as Emma Watson already being quite pretty, the supposed transformation when she appears at the Yule Ball is muted and almost nonexistent; it simply that she put her hair up. All house-elves are not mentioned at all. S.P.E.W. is gone (though, despite it being a interesting subject in the book, it wasn't particularly important to the story). And it is Neville who gives Harry the gillyweed, instead of Dobby. Of course, that still works quite well, as Neville is so good at Herbology. But, did anyone think that Voldemort was far too jolly? Or is that just me? 'Oh, Harry, I'd almost forgotten you were there!' Can you honestly picture that coming from the great Dark Lord's mouth? There were many other examples during that scene; it was extremely annoying. As for the Dark Mark appearing in the sky, it comes too late. The tents are set on fire (where are the people suspended in the sky?) and everyone is running. Yes, that's reason to be scared, but surely the Dark Mark appearing is far better. So, after everyone has left, who should come along but Barty Crouch Jr. Then he fires the Dark Mark into the sky, and the producer thinks, 'Oh, good. We've got that in the story; people shouldn't complain.' Nope; wrong. He fires it a bit too late. After EVERYONE has left he brings out what should have started the terror. How stupid. (And it was also disappointing when they only made one comment that might suggest who won the World Cup. I'm Irish; I would have been very pleased if they had made that a bit more apparent. While we're on the subject of Barty Crouch Jr., I will bring up that his character totally changed. Instead of being this sniveling, scared young man who calls out to his father in desperation only to have Barty (senior) say, "You're no son of mine," we have him as a weird, explosive monster who comes up and licks his lips at his dad and is all, "Nyehehehe. Hello, Father." The 'son of mine' line only works if you make Barty (Jr.) a proper, terrified, misunderstood boy. And Sirius. Gary Oldman makes no actual appearance; how do we even know that it was him who was talking to Harry? And that was done horribly. Instead of Sirius's head appearing in the flames, we have a grotesque thing (that did not look anything like Sirius) popping out of the embers. And also, when Harry sends off his letter to Sirius at the beginning, it is clearly marked on the front to go to Sirius Black. But how ridiculous! His letter could have been intercepted, and then everyone would know that Sirius was somewhere nearby, and that someone (if they weren't one of the people who knew either Harry's handwriting or Harry's owl) was in contact with him. But, as for the acting and the special effects, it was all fine.
23 out of 28 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
1/10
Worst Harry Potter Film so far
HMSDauntless21 November 2005
Warning: Spoilers
This is the worst conversion of book to screenplay in the whole series. From the first scene where there are characters in the movie scene that are not in the book scene, to added scenes in the storyline, to radically changed scenes in the triwizard trials, this screenplay bares only a passing resemblance to the book. The book was fine, and had plenty of drama and excitement at the needed times. there was no need to rewrite the story, only trim it down for runtime.

I was very disappointed watching this, and surprised to see that it was the same screenwriter as the first three films, since this was of such substantially lower quality.

And the director completely wasted Brendan Gleeson as Moody. This is an incredibly talented actor, and should have been an anchor of the movie. instead, he's almost nothing like the character in the book, even going as far as substituting a metal leg for the wood one. he's practically a footnote to the whole movie.

And the final showdown in the graveyard felt incredibly rushed. there's been four movies and 1500 pages of book building to this scene, the scene were everyone finally sees Voldemort in the flesh, and watches him duel with Harry. this should have been a powerful climax, yet is over almost as soon as it's begun.

bottom line, get a new director, and a new screenwriter for the next one. if the climax at the Ministry of Magic is as bad as the climax of this movie, the series will lose a lot of fans.
52 out of 69 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
loading
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews