Who was disappointed with Harry Potter 3?

Tools    





Sam
Woody is me but Sam is my name
Who was disappointed with harry potter 3? I most certainly was because all the scenes changes too quickly and the story did not seem right. They should have made it into two parts to make the film easier to understand. Like :-

At the end of part 1, he wins the quiditch match and they have a party then the film ends with TO BE CONTINUED...

Then it starts the next part, harry waking up in bed, looking out the window to see the dog and crookshanks. Yes, that would have been better.

Your opinions here ¬ good luck talking



Well, i havnt read the books, so in that sense im not disappointed and i didnt have high hopes either, so i wasnt too disappointed. I preferred the slightly more adult fell but as film i didnt seem to enjoy it. I appreciate its better that nth e other ones, but i mean i left twice in it and fell asleep lol so it cant have been that good



Registered User
Totally ragin about the way these films have been made! Im not a book fan and I think I'd only read one before Harry Potter but when I read it I got hooked and read them all in no time! The books are a million times better than the films! I mean the actors..come on! You get the impression they havent even read the books and dont know how theyre supposed to be feeling! The movies leave parts out, dont show the emotions at all like the books do and should have been alot better! My advice..read the books in order to see the real magic of Harry Potter!



Your Puuuur-fect Movie Companion!
Yeah part three felt very dramatized. I didn't feel with the movie - but rather an audience to some mega soap opera. Probably bad representation by the actors. A pity...
__________________

"Never let a dog pick what you watch."



Lord of the Idiots!
I liked the movie, but being a huge fan of the books the lack of content was dissapointing, especially the last quidditch match. The Goblet is my favourite of the series so far, and I hope they split it into two installments, release them in the Kill Bill Vol. I and II style.



Sam
Woody is me but Sam is my name
^

That is exactly what i mean. That idea is great.. who knows Alfonso Curian ( i think ) , who knows he email?



I'm being chased by evil pirates!!!
Harry Potter is the worst book ever written, I can't see anything good in them. They suck, I want to piss and burn them all.



I was dissappointed with part 1 and 2... not 3.

I'd also like to take this oppurtunity to thank the aptly titled man_boobs66 for that intelligent addition to the discussion. Yes, I think it made us all about 10% dumber when we read it. And I mean his post, not Harry Potter.



Originally Posted by Garrett
I was dissappointed with part 1 and 2... not 3.

I'd also like to take this oppurtunity to thank the aptly titled man_boobs66 for that intelligent addition to the discussion. Yes, I think it made us all about 10% dumber when we read it. And I mean his post, not Harry Potter.
lol

I didnt read the Books i try to read 1 i think got so bored didnt feel like going on, saw the movie and liked it. i liked the Movies better than the books.



Registered User
Originally Posted by Zzat
lol

I didnt read the Books i try to read 1 i think got so bored didnt feel like going on, saw the movie and liked it. i liked the Movies better than the books.
My brother gave me the first one and I had it lyin about for about a year. Like I said im not a book fan. Over the year I kept readin bits of it now and again but couldnt be bothered with it, but I got it finished. Wasnt that impressed. No intention of getin the others, but I was in an airport and saw the 2nd in a bookshop and got it to take my mind off the boring flight. The second was alot better and The Prisoner of Azkabhan book was awesome. I had to read them all! The next ones the best! But seriously there's so much more in the books than the movies. You should try them! It's terrible going to see these movies and seein how much theyve left out!



I was slightly annoyed at the movie for a few reasons:

< Harry and everyone in his year are supposed to be 13... well, nuff said.
< The new director (in my opinion) tried to make his Harry Potter adventure stand out from the other two by changing the setting of Hogwarts completely and generally making the whole film darker.
< It doesn't seem like a sequel because of the all the changes, more of a remake.

--- I think that the director picked up on the age thing because filming began on The Goblet of Fire in March
__________________
We are the ones who bump back.



its a dog eat dog world
the movie was darker because the book was like that, bit it seemed to be missing something from the movie, cant exactly put my finger on it though



Lord of the Idiots!
The movie had to be darker, when you get into the fourth book, the series takes an adult-like turn. After being talked into reading the books, I loved them. the first 2 are more for kids, the third one is somewhat transitional, and the 4th and 5th, though written to be understood by kids, have appeal to older audiences because of the content. this is all vague sounding because im steering clear of any possible spoilers.

my longwinded point is that the next two books, and subsequent movies are going to seem darker just because the themes and plots are more mature. As Harry matures, so do his problems.
__________________
Ho! Ho! Ho! To the bottle I go,
To heal my heart and drown my woe!



OK so it had to be darker.

But why the set change?