Harry Potter

Tools    


How much money will Harry Potter make in its Opening Weekend?
10.00%
1 votes
$0-$25 million
0%
0 votes
$26-$50 million
50.00%
5 votes
$51-$75 million
40.00%
4 votes
$76 million or more - a hell of a lot
10 votes. You may not vote on this poll




Registered User
Helms Deep huh? Wonder what they'll do about Isengard then.

I wonder how they'll do the second book at all, Tolkein wrote it in chunks, first here is how these people are doing, then here is what Frodo did. But I think it'll end up like Return of the Jedi in the end, with 3 things going on at once and switching back and forth(Luke in the Death Star, Lando in the Battle outside, and Han Leia etc down on Endor)

One thing I'm hoping for is a nice trailer at the beginning of Attack of the Clones.
__________________
Chris Beasley
CB Swords - Get LOTR replica swords.
Coupon Codes - Get deals on Amazon, Dell, Gateway, and more.



The second film will be brilliant, and then the third even more so, just because of how brilliant the books are.

I'm looking forward to a lot of Gollum, and a lot more of what I think turned out to be the highlight of Fellowship [film version], Christopher Lee as Saruman. I though he was brilliant.
__________________
www.esotericrabbit.com



I ain't gettin' in no fryer!
If I'm not mistaken...isn't this a thread for Harry Potter???
__________________
"I was walking down the street with my friend and he said, "I hear music", as if there is any other way you can take it in. You're not special, that's how I receive it too. I tried to taste it but it did not work." - Mitch Hedberg



Potter = Fantasty

Fantasty = LOTR

LOTR + Potter = Fantasy

Therefore:

LOTR = Potter

But not "=" of course. LOTR is much better, hence the change of the tide. Sir.



Back on topic: "Potter" has topped $300 million, and is now the 10th highest grossing film of all time. It's not too far from the film in 9th, either, "Independence Day," which has around $306 million to its credit. After that is "Return of the Jedi," at $309 million. After that? "The Lion King," with $312 million. After that? "Forrest Gump," with $329 million. IMO, it'll pass all of those, except for "Gump." Probably $315-320 million after scraping by for awhile in some second-run theaters, giving it 7th place on the all-time U.S. Box Office list. Not bad!



henry hill's Avatar
gone
What the hell is going on? Why has it made so much money?

It's a bog average book from a bog average director with a less than average cast (bar alan rickman) equating to a BOG AVERAGE FILM.

I mean I can understand all hype regarding lord of the rings, good director, more solid actors, solid book with a f|ck load of followers etc.

But this just takes the piss, it's literally a marketing campaign and nothing else. No heart soul or story.

But then again they do say this was the weakest book to be adapted and it was not complete crap (think of how shite all other kids movies are: home alone, stuart little, 3 ninja kids, arghhh)
__________________
henry hill - Disclaimer: This disclaimer disclaims any claims that could be claimed from my post.



I thought the movie, for what it was (an over-the-top fantasy world aimed at kids), was amazing. Yes, it made the mistake of interpreting the book TOO literally, but there are FAR worse mistakes it could have made. The cast was quite good; Daniel Radcliffe IS Harry Potter, Emma Watson/Rupert Grint filled their roles quite adequately. Beyond that, I dunno how you can look down on people like Richard Harris and Maggie Smith...AND John Cleese, even if he's only in a few scenes.



I ain't gettin' in no fryer!
No doubt about it, the cast of this movie was incredible. I mean only seeing the cover of the Potter books then seeing Radcliffe as Potter, simply amazing.



henry hill's Avatar
gone
/me bangs head against table. Repeatedly.

But they were so.... arghhh!!!

They were just the same as every single children's BBC production - such as the demon headmaster, same kind of children, same kind of lifeless acting.

You can just see the director saying: "LOOK SURPRISED"

For what it was it could have been much worse, but to say amazing...uhm!!!!!

Good point though: here, as with the book its called Harry Potter and the philosopher's stone. Why is it called the Sorcerers stone under IMDB ? ? ? ?

Is there a title change? did they change the movie for that too? How does that go down with taking the book down to a T?

I just feel films that get praise should have some quality...

John Cleese didn't do much, he's just a name to sell the film...

Maybe I have too high expectations. I take films for what they are, but even as kids films, I have a brother 12 years younger than me, I take him to the cinema on a regular basis, I really wish they didn't think along the lines of, it's a kids film, it can be any old loud shite...

Most enjoyable kids films have all been animated ones:

Toy Story, Toy Story 2, Shrek, Chicken Run, can't wait to see Monsters Inc. and Jimmy Neutron (not till february though)



I ain't gettin' in no fryer!
Well, the title change was discussed in another thread here on the site, kinda foggy on which one simply because there are lots of Potter threads.

I guess Philosopher in America means something different in Europe. I really have no idea why they changed it either.



They changed it because they were worried that "philosopher" might not fit in very well to us Yanks. Personally I doubt it makes much difference, but "Sorcererer" is definitely a better word for the title, IMO. They do indeed follow the book to a T (far more than most movies...and far beyond what any fan could reasonably expect)...the UK version of the movie uses "philosopher" and the US version uses "sorcerer."

And yeah, some of the acting was obvious: 11 year old kids rarely look subtle, as smart as they may be. Their emotions are usually fairly straightforward...at least in terms of things like surprise. What I really wanted, though, was more music...the score didn't play the role it should have. I also wanted to see at least ONE truly emotional moment.

WARNING: "Harry Potter and the Sorcerers Stone" spoilers below
I don't want schmaltz...but when Harry got that photo album at the end, tears were in line. They really were.