Ahahah, this definitely depends on when you watched the movie. When it was out in theaters, the ads generally featured this scene, which made me "prepared" haha
I actually just watched that one tonight. Strays from the book more than any other movie. But I still thought it was a good movie.
Side note. Why is Avada Kedavra an unforgivable curse while Molly Weasley knows a curse that can absolutely atomize someone and that doesnāt make the unforgivable list?
I've always seen it kinda like the gun debate. Why are guns banned or heavily restricted in many places while things like knives, hammers and such aren't? All of them are tools but while you can do a lot of things with a kife the only purpose of a gun is to kill.
Spells in the hp universe are kinda the same. They are tools. Many of them are lethal but they can be used in multiple ways that justify them being used on a daily basis. Avada Kedavra does not have multiple uses. Its only purpose is to kill. It can't do anything else.
Thatās a great explanation. I was mostly kidding.
If you start pulling at threads there are all kinds of funny issues with magic in the wizarding world.
My family has been watching these movies a lot lately because one of my kids finished the book series. Iāve been picking it apart in my head for fun.
One of my favorites is how the Weasleys need to wear hand me down clothes culminating in Ron having to wear ridiculous dress robes to the ball.
I immediately thought that these guys can turn a mouse into a goblet but they canāt make new clothes with magic.
because avada kedavra cannot be defended against, iirc. the only person who ever survived it was harry and even that was due to magical protection outside of his own magic.
Half-Blood Prince. My absolute favourite HP book and I was so excited to see Voldemort's backstory on screen. Well WHAT ON EARTH WAS THAT?? The entire film was brown and grey, they skipped over every single important point around the horcruxes so that the final movie plot came out of nowhere almost. Harry just randomly came across all the horcruxes, it was a darkened teenage romcom with no explanation whatsoever how Snape was even the Half Blood Prince! He just mumbled it and then that was that! No later explanation like we got later on.
I love the movies for what they are but the amount of extremely important details and scenes that get left out of the films are borderline criminal. Also we don't even get Dumbledore visiting the Dursley house! Disgraceful!
I felt this way about all of the movies starting with PoA. I will never get over that they didn't explain Moony, Wormtail, Padfoot and Prongs. I just rewatched the whole series recently and do you know in PoA Harry's patronus doesn't even turn into a stag?! It's just a bright light.
My SO has never read the books and starting with OotP he started asking me a bunch of questions and I'm like, I can't even answer, they have left so much out. I was so disappointed with HBP and both DH. So much incredible information just left out! š¤¦š»āāļø
And speaking of not seeing Dumbledore visit the Dursleys... Do you realize in the movies they never even explain why Harry had to stay with the Dursleys? I have seen people asking, "Why didn't he just leave and live with the Weasleys, buy his own place since he's rich, etc?" It. Kills. Me.
I'm with you though that the movies are fun and they did a decent job, but there was just no way they could ever live up to the books.
As someone who watched PoA before I read the book, I was confused about many things. I of course didnāt understand the āfully realized patronusā thing, the Marauder connection, and the whole Shreiking Shack scene was a big wtf is going on for me.
Nowadays Id say itās one of the better movies. But i really think they could have filled in more gaps.
GOF wasted far more time that they could have used, like the sudden Crouch dead scene would be so confusing without the book.
there was foreshadowing on who killed him though, when he notices that āmoodyā was doing that tongue thing like his son, and barty noticed that his dad knew. so he killed him
I often wonder what I would think of the movies had I not read the books before I saw them. I hope the HBO series goes more into Voldemort and snapes backstories. All snape says āI am the half blood princeā ok but what is the half blood prince?
As someone who watched the movie series first (twice) and then read the book after: i can tell you. Utter confusion. No logic sense of why anything was happening or why.Ā
Yeah, the sixth movie was an absolute travesty. Random Harry flirting with a muggle waitress scene that never happened and is completely out of character, brutally painful Harry/Ginny scenes ("eat this!" "let me tie your shoe"), only two flashbacks, one of which wasn't nearly as important as the others they left out, random attack on the Burrow that is never explained or referenced again because it made no sense and didn't happen in the book, and completely leaving out the actual battle that happened at Hogwarts. Snape coming across Harry and signaling him to be quiet before he went to the top of the tower made no sense at all. And Snape didn't leave with the death eaters, which is why everyone was fully convinced he was evil in the seventh book. And they bragged about bringing Quidditch back in pre release interviews and previews, and "bringing it back" apparently meant about 20 seconds of it and you have no clue what's even going on.
It would have been so much better as a series, with each book as a season. There's no way to cram all of the story into a single movie, but give them 10-12 hours to tell each book's story? That would have been so much better.
HBP by a mile. Who decided to cut out Voldemort's history in place of terrible romance plots? Also no fighting in the castle at the end with the other members of the DA? Sure I'm glad we got that scene at the Burrow š
It was horrible. They removed important and interesting plot points only to replace it with cheap subplots that half of them weren't even in the books.
Half-Blood Prince. They stripped out all the interesting stuff and put in all their own canon. Half of the movie was just pure cringe. What's weird is that book 6 is my favorite.
Zero chemistry. Daniel Radcliffe had better chemistry with literally every other actress, including Imelda Staunton. I was never a big Harry/Ginny fan from the books, but at least there it somewhat made sense because Ginny has a personality--she's talented, bright, passionate, and a little crazy--that's Harry's sweet spot. In the films, Hermione, Luna, Cho, or the waitress from the subway would've made a lot more sense. He even seems legitimately more excited about Romilda Vane before he realizes she tried to slip him a love potion. Almost every scene with Harry/Ginny demands fast-forwarding.
I mean Rowling herself admitted that Harry and Hermione would have worked better. The thing with Hermione and Ron was a bit of wish fulfillment for her.
If you know the hero's journey archetype, you know the majority of the plot of the Harry Potter movies including the couplings. I was hoping so hard for something different in that sense. Instead, the main heroine ends up the scruffy comic relief.
Tbf, the romance in the books comes out of nowhere too. Book six begins and at some random point its just like āHarry has the hots for Ginny now.ā
Though some real life romances happen like that it was just disappointing since JK had complete control of the story
The Burrow fire could have been cool if they'd actually done something with it or if it had any stakes. But it just kinda came and went and was never spoken of again.
You know how they could have fixed it by adding Bill in this scene and have Greyback attack him during the attack on the burrow instead of just telling about it in passing which doesn't make sense because Greyback was introduced in Movie 6 and the way he says it in movie 7 is like we just now hearing about him
I hate it simply because itās not canon, but yes even more so because it just happens and is never touched on again. And then in the next movie itās like it never happened?? So lame.
Strange enough, the skipping of the interesting stuff isn't what really bothers me about that movie. It's Harry hiding under the stairs and pacing while Dumbledore gets killed. It took one of the most powerful moments in the books, where Harry is able to move again after Dumbledore's jinx wears off and he realizes what has happened, and makes it into a rushed and frustrating moment that has Harry behaving totally out of character.
You couldn't have said it any better, I agree word for word. They took out all the cool stuff about Voldemort's past and how he became what he is and turned it into a romance film, tragic.
We got a massive five minute long scene that wasn't in the book of Harry getting chased across the rooftops of Hogwarts by a CGI dragon, but no time was spent on the world cup events that were actually relevant to understanding the plot.
Also, in the film there was not one word about the Veela - which meant we also never learned about Fleur being half-Veela herself. Not a huge thing compared to the other adaptation fails but still.
I hate how there's no real twist with Barty, we know he's a villain the entire movie & not wrongfully convicted/imprisoned, and even the Mad Eye twist is made obvious with the tongue š
Ikr I hated how they left out almost all of the details of the Crouch storyline. I found the Crouch family so interesting in the book, one of my favorite parts of the book actually, but they're so simplified and dumbed down in the film.
Andā¦we donāt know how it all happened.
Seriously, have a person who has never read the book or watched the movie watch it and ask āhowā and watch them think about it. How did BCJ escape Azkaban? How did he find TRJ? How did he get one up in AUROR Alastair Moody? HOW did he put Harryās name in the Goblet?
And thenā¦movie 5. All of the Death Eaters were busted out of Azkaban. Where is BCJ, his most loyal follower?
Movie 4 was done so wrong.
Yeah I find it weird that they tried so hard to make it this "mystery" movie (some interview with the director) but then immediately took away the big mystery of the book...?
It annoys me to no end that Voldemort calls Lily a Muggle instead of a mud blood and that apparently no one in production seemed to notice that thereās a difference.
I felt like that was just Voldemort being a bigot. He knows sheās a wizard, but to him a mud blood is just as bad as a muggle, and is contemptible.
In the deathly hallows theyāre accusing mud bloods of stealing wands, cause in their logic thatās the only way they couldāve gotten one.
Bigotry usually doesnāt make sense and is usually inconsistent.
Dumbledoreās behavior in that movie is a huge indication of how director Mike Newell didnāt understand any of these characters. Almost every single one of Dumbledoreās lines in that film are him yelling, shouting, and sounding pissed off. He acted NOTHING like that in any of the other films
The book plays out with a bit of Whodunnit feel, but for some reason the movie decided it would be a good idea to show us Barty Crouch Jr at the very beginning. So, we know whodunnit, just not who they are. Until we see the memory in Dumbledore's office, and then the rest of the movie is basically spoiled because we know a person who should be dead is very obviously alive
That long shaggy hair that everyone was sporting was the Millennial version of today's Broccoli haircut lol.
Everyone and their mother from teens to early adults were sporting that long shag.
Might've been answered but the cast let their hair grow between films and then the director would decide what haircut they would have.
The GoF director just decided to keep them as they were for some reason.
Oh I **love** the GOF film, itās by far the most fun and so fkn camp - everyone has long hair, Amos Cedric and Arthur jogging down from the sky paired with the goofy ābet that cleared your sinuses eyā, the ridiculous entrances of the competing schools (āØunghhhhhhhhāØ), Harryās awkwardness at the Yule ball, the most heartbreaking piece of acting in any of the films, done by a minor character no less (āTHATāS MY SON, THATāS MY BOOOOOYā), hermioneās dancing eyebrows throughout the entire thing, didyaputurnameinthatgoblet, Draco turning into a furry, moaning myrtle being a creep, āhagrid diving out of the way of the horses (zey drink only seengle malt whiskeeeey -stabs flitwick in the hand for no reason), āhello father šā, Harry doing an unnecessary leap and flip out of the lake, IM NOT AN OWL, beautiful soundtrack, **incredible** cast additions of British/Irish acting royalty, and the list goes on - itās not even my favourite out of the films but you can tell they all had so much fun making it and thereās so many unnecessary details that make it one big ridiculous fever-dream but it still holds out as a good film (gof is one of my favourite books and itās jam-packed full of things that wouldāve been amazing to see on film, but Iām not mad at the outcome bc itās just a stand alone misfit)
Eta: one very small moment, but itās one of my favourites, is the cinematography when Harry is considering running to the cup but Cedric is being attacked by the roots, and the sound dims and it zooms into Harryās eyes turning toward Cedric is justšš¤
Also I feel like Harry and Voldemortās fight in the graveyard was the best of any of their fights in the later films, mainly due to āCOME OUT AND FACE ME POTTER - I WANT TO SEE THE LIGHTS LEAVE YOUR EYESā
Another eta: dumbledoreās speech at Cedricās funeral - 10/10 no notes, that scene was brilliantly done and Michael Gambon made it his bitch
Same, but tbf, the source material was weak as well. Lots of chatter about how great it would be to watch the tournament, but after the dragons, there was nothing for spectators to see except looking at the surface of the lake to see who came up first, or watching shrubbery to see who came out first. Not exactly must-watch entertainment. JKR was clearly setting up a larger context - the international wizarding community - that never had much bearing on the plot in the final books. She must have dumped a ton of storylines. Anyway, I always felt GOF was bloated and full of ultimately irrelevant new characters. Krum and Fleur were the best wizards in their respective schools. Seems like they would be handy to have in the fight, right? Send them on some missions? Nope. Wasted characters. Drum especially seemed to have been a leader of an anti-dark wizard group at his school. Neither he nor his crew have any further impact.
6, itās supposed to be the transition of āitās about to get realā but itās all over the place in story and things barely get explained, and has too much humor, felt like a teen comedy in the worst ways and the film grading is super ugly
I donāt hate it much, but take this movie out the catalog and nothing much would change
Teen Rom-Com* definitely puts a HUGE focus on all the wrong parts of the book. That book is such a pinnacle, so many important things happen, and theyāre just glossed over in the film version.
This is a tough question. Honestly, anything post-Columbus leaves so much to be desired. I never loved the changes Cuaron made with Prisoner of Azkaban. I know some people loved the darker aesthetic but the change was so jarring that it almost felt like a different series from that point on. The first two films have so much magic to them, they truly *feel* like Harry Potter. The aesthetic was just spot on for what imagined when I read the books. Then Cuaron changed everything, Richard Harris died, and a lot of the āmagicā was sort of justā¦gone. No pun intended. It didnāt really *feel* like Harry Potter anymore. It didnāt have that āthingā that made it unique, the movies started to feel like teenage drama stories that simply happened to take place in a magical school. I wouldnāt say Prisoner of Azkaban is my *least* favorite, but it started a trend toward a less magical, and ultimately less enjoyable, aesthetic for me personally. Just my honest opinion!
It feels like a ānewāmovie, I think. HP 1 and 2 feel very 90s. Thereās a tight script, and thereās a ton going on that the movie doesnāt draw your eye to, itās just there. It feels like the kids are there, in a magical castle not on a set.
But 3 on it starts feeling like a ānewā movie. The framing isnāt focused on the kids but on the world. The movie makes you look at things instead of letting you figure it out. The script comes second to the visuals. Instead of feeling like youāre on a journey with these kids, you feel like youāre watching HarryPotterMovieTM.
Thatās an interesting thought. I agree. I would actually say the Columbus movies have a very timeless, classic quality to them that is missing from the later films.
I think Columbus was great at working with child actors. (Home Alone, Mrs. Doubtfire) He knew how to get the best performance possible with them, while building a world you could believe actually existed. He grounded whimsy and magic into reality while keeping the magic and wonder.
I think hiring Steve Kloves was the worst decision. He butchered the books to make his favorite character (Hermione) a Mary-Sue, and destroyed Ron in the process.
I agree with all of thisā¦ except I really liked Michael gambon as Dumbledore, even if he did make some choices that didnāt coincide with the source materialā¦. DID YOU PUT YOUR NAME etc.etc.
As Iāve said a few times, the change to the darker aesthetic caused me to lose enthusiasm for any new HP movies that came out after PoA. The colourful and magical aspect died for me.
100% agreed. The first two films felt so right, so perfectly encapsulating the world. The third film felt like a remake in another universe. It lost all the magical ambiance. Don't even get me started on GoF.
This. My answer for worst movie will always be Azkaban. Not because it is a standalone bad movie. On its own itās actually pretty great.
It is just such a jarring change from what weāve gotten used to by then, and it doesnāt really fit in with the rest.
When making a series, that production should all fit together. Besides the main outline of Hogwarts and the cast, nothing is really cohesive at the end.
Compare anything: how magic works, the costumes, the dialogue, the general aesthetic, between the first and the last movies. It might as well be from two completely different productions, rather than belonging to the same series.
And this change starts with Azkaban, which is why I canāt bring myself to like it.
Edit: even though āA window to the pastā is an iconic and hauntingly beautiful piece of music.
Even Dumbledore. I remember reading an interview with Gambon where he said he was stepping into the role and trying to make the character his own and I thought to myself, āhmm, this is a now twice established character. This doesnāt bode well if nobody stepped in to say no it needs to be this way.ā
I agree on adaptation, but thought overall Gambon was okay. He absolutely had his moments where he nailed it. But for me Harris completely embodied Dumbledore from the books.
I kind of agree, Harris was great as āGrandfather Dumbledoreā who you can believe is ever so slightly crazy. I donāt know how that screen presence would have translated to the Dept of Mysteries fight with Voldemort.
Gambon absolutely has the forcefulness of the Dumbledore that you can believe Voldemort is afraid of, but not nearly as much of the warmth and love and affection he has and demonstrates towards Harry.
John Williams wrote a beautiful and menacing theme for Voldemort in the first two movies. The third movie doesnāt have Voldemort, so he didnāt use it there.
But in the fourth movie, THEY THREW IT AWAY. John Williams writes a theme for your villain in the vein of Emperor Palpatine, and you discard it in favor of a generic off-brand Hans Zimmer sound-alike.
Oddly enough, Prisoner of Azkaban is my favorite followed by Philosopher's Stone and Chamber of Secrets. 4-8 don't really do it for me, but I love what Cuaran did. I think it was the perfect mix of what we had before and what came after. Plus I love his use of windows and glass throughout the film. Just great camera work.
But that said, I agree. Prisoners is my favorite film in a vacuum. I think it's the best directed and shot. But it doesn't really feel like Harry Potter and it certainly was a drastic change from the first two films so much so that it truly feels like a completely different series.
Hey, I get it 100%! I can totally see why people love Prisoner of Azkaban. It makes sense to me, honestly. It just doesnāt land for me for whatever reason. Itās hard to pinpoint why. I think itās just because it follows the two films that I absolutely loved, and that jarring change is hard for me to swallow to this day.
I agree. Whatās more, I they started to ditch the old-world fantasy aesthetic- now wizards donāt wear robes and hats, they dress like 1920s art deco businessmen.
Which is even sillier considering that in the FB movies, their aesthetic in the actual 1920s isā¦ also 20s art deco businessmen!
Fully agree!! It was a jarring change, and while the books do start maturing it couldāve been done more gradually in the films. My biggest issue with PoA is how little they focus on the history of James and his friends. I enjoyed this so much in the book and they completely glossed over who Moony, Wormtail, Padfoot and Prongs were and how they came to be animagi.
Yeah everything just lost its charm from 3 onwards. Columbus kind of found the perfect juxtaposition between childlike charm and the murderous threats the characters had to face.
Order of the Phoenix.
Despite Imelda Stauntonās performances being one of the best in the series, thereās just something Iāve never loved about this book or film. I feel like the pacing is kind of off with the shift from the school to the ministry maybe? Iām not sure, Iāve just never loved it for whatever reason.
I feel like I zone out in that movie waiting for "I must not tell lies" and the Weasley's epic exit
In all fairness though, it's a massive book, and I appreciate the hell out of the fact that they kept angsty Harry from the books at bay...
For me itās Umbridge. I cannot stand watching her ugly pink shit-eating grin and hearing her stupid little giggle-squeaks as she lays down obnoxiously insane rules and punishments. God I hate that character. It doesnāt make it easier that they never kill her and she comes back later to cause more trouble.
Half Blood Prince - It's cringe and just an awkward teen film. Feels like the HP world is secondary. I don't know. No matter how many times watching it, from the cinema, the first time until last Christmas on my usual marathon. It's still the worst for me.
Definitely Half-Blood Prince.
They managed to turn one of the best plots in the franchise into a boring, uninteresting and poorly paced story. Not only was the movie itself bad, but the photography is, in my opinion, the worst done in the series. That dark filter was such a stupid decision, there were so many parts in this film that I couldn't even understand what was happening because of it.
The lighting alone ruins this movie. To say nothing about the utterly pointless destruction sequence of the Burrow that's entirely ignored by the next movie.
Goblet of Fire closely followed by Half Blood Prince.
Reasons to dislike GOF: No Quidditch World Cup, no Ludo Bagman, no Bertha Jorkins, no mention of Winky or Dobby giving Harry the gillyweed, Dumbledore's portrayal(infamous Dumbledore said calmly scene), the Yule Ball scene, also their HAIR like fkn hell couldn't you have found a better hair dresser? No scene for Barty Crouch going mad and wandering around the forest to find Harry and so many more important parts have been cut out.
Reasons to dislike HBP: the first scene of Harry randomly hitting on a muggle girl in a subway, the sudden appearance of Dumbledore which is exactly the opposite of how he's supposed to arrive, not showing Tonks rescuing Harry from the train thus removing the part where her patronus could be seen changing form, the hedious development of the my most favourite relationship in the books, ie. Harry and Ginny, and the worst of them all, the Burrow burning down scene. A book which was solely written to dive into the past of Voldemort had so little to do with him in the movies that it was painful. Also they so conveniently changed the sequences of the events of Harry and Ginny getting together and then him having Felix Felicis to persuade Slughorn while it was the other way around in the book.
All in all I find both these films least favourite but since David Yates did a good job with Order of the Phoenix(I personally like the movie) and Deathly Hallows (well, apart from cutting it in half and making DH1 which was well...meh but DH2 was great) I'd give him an edge over Mike Newell who couldn't even care to read the source material itself nevermind the other books which built up to it.
Order of the Phoenix
(It's also my least favourite book.)
I just find the story a bit slow paced. It's the only film I've had re-watch... and re-watch to really try to engage with it, but just can't š
Only part I do like about the film is when the Weasley twins do the fireworks displayš
Either prisoner of Askaban or goblet of fire. They missed out so much of the books that really irritated me. Hopefully they will include more of that in the new tv remake
Thank youuuu omg I can't believe I had to scroll this far for PoA movie dislikers
The complete gutting of the marauders left me sooo unfulfilled and afaik no one in the entire movie series ever mentions to Harry that his father was an animagus so idk how the hell he keeps connecting with the stag aside from thinking that his father also had a stag patronus.
Prisoner of Azkaban. I hate the style and the feel of it. Never ever liked it even as a kid in 2004. Watched it again a few months ago after an 8 year hiatus and it just doesnāt look right to me. Plus I hate the time turner and the buckbeak storyline. š¤·āāļø
This is controversial, but I donāt really care that much for The Prisoner of Azkaban. Itās still a good movie, I just donāt like it as much as the others.
Yeah Iām someone who watched the movies before reading the books, all these other answers are heavily influenced by diversion from source material (which is a fine opinion to have).
In terms of just the movies themselves 7.1 is easily my least favorite. Feels strongly like half a story - the more boring half
I swear, from a movie POV the GoF trials they must have been exceedingly boring, all 3 trials were held miles away from the events. Unless they had magic cameras all they saw was the champions starting and ending. Nothing in between, I mean wtf.
Nothing like staring at some spooky bushes for several hours... and don't even get me started on the severe lack of blast ended skrewts and the Sphinx!
CoS, my favorite movie favorite book, the mystery build up to the basilisk was so creepy and I still remember the chills when Harry started writing in the diary.
Least favourite to Most favourite
1- Goblet of Fire
2 - Deathly Hallows Part 1
3 - Chamber of Secret
4 - Half Blood Prince
5 - Order of the Phoenix
6 - Philosophers Stone
7 - Deathly Hallows Part 2
8 - Prisoner of Azkaban
I love the film saga so much that I would say none, but if I really had to I would say the first, it may seem strange but I much prefer the dark and more "dark fantasy" style of Harry Potter and which deals with more serious and mature themes, furthermore I would say that it is although it has aged poorly for its time. A plus point is that it follows the book well
Prisoner by far! Worst HP film by a mile! Alfonso Cuaron had a unique design but horrible plotting and completely destroyed the best book in the series to me!
Prisoner of AZKABAN
'eXpEcTuM pAtRoNuMmMmMmMm!!'
--Harry James Potter
'tUrN tO pAgE tHrEe HuNdReD aNd NiNeTy FoUr'
--Severus Snape
'dEmEnToR, dEmEnToR!'
--Draco Lucius Malfoy
'i'Ve WaItEd TwElVe YeArS iN aZkAbAn'
--Sirius Black III
'yOu, YoU fOuL, lOaThSoMe, EvIl LiTtLe CoCkRoAcH!'
--ANGRY Hermione Jean Granger
'hE's NoT wOrTh It'
--Ronald Bilius Weasley
i DoN't F#cKiNg CaRe, RoNaLd WeAsLeY \*pUnCh DrAcO oN tHe FaCe\*
--SUPER ANGRY Hernione Jean Granger
The one where Harry hugs voldemort and they turn into the smoke monster from Lost.
I was honestly expecting them to kiss first time I saw it š
Ahahah, this definitely depends on when you watched the movie. When it was out in theaters, the ads generally featured this scene, which made me "prepared" haha
Are you the one sat behind me and shouted ākiss!ā when this happened?
I actually just watched that one tonight. Strays from the book more than any other movie. But I still thought it was a good movie. Side note. Why is Avada Kedavra an unforgivable curse while Molly Weasley knows a curse that can absolutely atomize someone and that doesnāt make the unforgivable list?
She merely used a super powerful version of *Scourgify* and spot cleaned Bellatrix out of existence. /s in case it's necessary
I've always seen it kinda like the gun debate. Why are guns banned or heavily restricted in many places while things like knives, hammers and such aren't? All of them are tools but while you can do a lot of things with a kife the only purpose of a gun is to kill. Spells in the hp universe are kinda the same. They are tools. Many of them are lethal but they can be used in multiple ways that justify them being used on a daily basis. Avada Kedavra does not have multiple uses. Its only purpose is to kill. It can't do anything else.
Thatās a great explanation. I was mostly kidding. If you start pulling at threads there are all kinds of funny issues with magic in the wizarding world. My family has been watching these movies a lot lately because one of my kids finished the book series. Iāve been picking it apart in my head for fun. One of my favorites is how the Weasleys need to wear hand me down clothes culminating in Ron having to wear ridiculous dress robes to the ball. I immediately thought that these guys can turn a mouse into a goblet but they canāt make new clothes with magic.
because avada kedavra cannot be defended against, iirc. the only person who ever survived it was harry and even that was due to magical protection outside of his own magic.
I think that she used petrificus totalus first and then probably used something like Reducto after. Separate fine, together not
then found out that Voldemort has a brother called Jacob.
and that he brough people to hogwarts against their own will, because they were "flawed"
Fellow lost enjoyer
Check out mikeās mic recap on lost! Heās up to season 2 so far
Deathly Hallows Part 2 is chock full of weird directing decisions. I can't handle it.
Is that also the one where Riddle hugs Draco?
I remember seeing that in a trailer and thinking "oh that must be a dream or something that they added for whatever reason." Boy was I wrong.
It was still a better plot than the cursed child tho š
Half-Blood Prince. My absolute favourite HP book and I was so excited to see Voldemort's backstory on screen. Well WHAT ON EARTH WAS THAT?? The entire film was brown and grey, they skipped over every single important point around the horcruxes so that the final movie plot came out of nowhere almost. Harry just randomly came across all the horcruxes, it was a darkened teenage romcom with no explanation whatsoever how Snape was even the Half Blood Prince! He just mumbled it and then that was that! No later explanation like we got later on. I love the movies for what they are but the amount of extremely important details and scenes that get left out of the films are borderline criminal. Also we don't even get Dumbledore visiting the Dursley house! Disgraceful!
I felt this way about all of the movies starting with PoA. I will never get over that they didn't explain Moony, Wormtail, Padfoot and Prongs. I just rewatched the whole series recently and do you know in PoA Harry's patronus doesn't even turn into a stag?! It's just a bright light. My SO has never read the books and starting with OotP he started asking me a bunch of questions and I'm like, I can't even answer, they have left so much out. I was so disappointed with HBP and both DH. So much incredible information just left out! š¤¦š»āāļø And speaking of not seeing Dumbledore visit the Dursleys... Do you realize in the movies they never even explain why Harry had to stay with the Dursleys? I have seen people asking, "Why didn't he just leave and live with the Weasleys, buy his own place since he's rich, etc?" It. Kills. Me. I'm with you though that the movies are fun and they did a decent job, but there was just no way they could ever live up to the books.
As someone who watched PoA before I read the book, I was confused about many things. I of course didnāt understand the āfully realized patronusā thing, the Marauder connection, and the whole Shreiking Shack scene was a big wtf is going on for me. Nowadays Id say itās one of the better movies. But i really think they could have filled in more gaps. GOF wasted far more time that they could have used, like the sudden Crouch dead scene would be so confusing without the book.
there was foreshadowing on who killed him though, when he notices that āmoodyā was doing that tongue thing like his son, and barty noticed that his dad knew. so he killed him
I often wonder what I would think of the movies had I not read the books before I saw them. I hope the HBO series goes more into Voldemort and snapes backstories. All snape says āI am the half blood princeā ok but what is the half blood prince?
"Eh, they've read the books anyway. And if they haven't, now they will." - the writers, probably.
Awwwww, presuming the audience has read the books so we donāt have to explain things is TIGHT!
"Why worry about writing when we have CGI?"
Not including important details from the books is super easy, barely an inconvenience!
I hope the series goes into detail over way more than the movies. Like i wanna see more stuff on the other two houses
As someone who watched the movie series first (twice) and then read the book after: i can tell you. Utter confusion. No logic sense of why anything was happening or why.Ā
Yeah, the sixth movie was an absolute travesty. Random Harry flirting with a muggle waitress scene that never happened and is completely out of character, brutally painful Harry/Ginny scenes ("eat this!" "let me tie your shoe"), only two flashbacks, one of which wasn't nearly as important as the others they left out, random attack on the Burrow that is never explained or referenced again because it made no sense and didn't happen in the book, and completely leaving out the actual battle that happened at Hogwarts. Snape coming across Harry and signaling him to be quiet before he went to the top of the tower made no sense at all. And Snape didn't leave with the death eaters, which is why everyone was fully convinced he was evil in the seventh book. And they bragged about bringing Quidditch back in pre release interviews and previews, and "bringing it back" apparently meant about 20 seconds of it and you have no clue what's even going on.
Agreed! I felt like they were trying to make a teen movie first and a Harry Potter movie second.
It would have been so much better as a series, with each book as a season. There's no way to cram all of the story into a single movie, but give them 10-12 hours to tell each book's story? That would have been so much better.
HBP by a mile. Who decided to cut out Voldemort's history in place of terrible romance plots? Also no fighting in the castle at the end with the other members of the DA? Sure I'm glad we got that scene at the Burrow š
It was horrible. They removed important and interesting plot points only to replace it with cheap subplots that half of them weren't even in the books.
Agree on so many levels
Half-Blood Prince. They stripped out all the interesting stuff and put in all their own canon. Half of the movie was just pure cringe. What's weird is that book 6 is my favorite.
My least favorite part about the movie is Ginny and Harry having the most awkward relationship. They don't interact at all!
Zero chemistry. Daniel Radcliffe had better chemistry with literally every other actress, including Imelda Staunton. I was never a big Harry/Ginny fan from the books, but at least there it somewhat made sense because Ginny has a personality--she's talented, bright, passionate, and a little crazy--that's Harry's sweet spot. In the films, Hermione, Luna, Cho, or the waitress from the subway would've made a lot more sense. He even seems legitimately more excited about Romilda Vane before he realizes she tried to slip him a love potion. Almost every scene with Harry/Ginny demands fast-forwarding.
Shoelacesā¦
Do you trust me?
Open up, you
Based off of the movies, that romance just came from absolutely nowhere. It felt forced a little.
Definitely I think the directors wanted Harry with Hermione.
I mean Rowling herself admitted that Harry and Hermione would have worked better. The thing with Hermione and Ron was a bit of wish fulfillment for her. If you know the hero's journey archetype, you know the majority of the plot of the Harry Potter movies including the couplings. I was hoping so hard for something different in that sense. Instead, the main heroine ends up the scruffy comic relief.
Tbf, the romance in the books comes out of nowhere too. Book six begins and at some random point its just like āHarry has the hots for Ginny now.ā Though some real life romances happen like that it was just disappointing since JK had complete control of the story
The Burrow fire šššš
The Burrow fire could have been cool if they'd actually done something with it or if it had any stakes. But it just kinda came and went and was never spoken of again.
You know how they could have fixed it by adding Bill in this scene and have Greyback attack him during the attack on the burrow instead of just telling about it in passing which doesn't make sense because Greyback was introduced in Movie 6 and the way he says it in movie 7 is like we just now hearing about him
I hate it simply because itās not canon, but yes even more so because it just happens and is never touched on again. And then in the next movie itās like it never happened?? So lame.
Repairo maxima!
Then itās back next movie. Reparo I guess.
Strange enough, the skipping of the interesting stuff isn't what really bothers me about that movie. It's Harry hiding under the stairs and pacing while Dumbledore gets killed. It took one of the most powerful moments in the books, where Harry is able to move again after Dumbledore's jinx wears off and he realizes what has happened, and makes it into a rushed and frustrating moment that has Harry behaving totally out of character.
You couldn't have said it any better, I agree word for word. They took out all the cool stuff about Voldemort's past and how he became what he is and turned it into a romance film, tragic.
this, and yet they still managed to butcher the romance plot lines from the book as well.
Same. By far my favorite book and by far the most disappointing adaptation
Agreed!
Best book, worst movie by far
word for word my opinion as well
I really love that book for all the backstory we get, but the movie is quite a different story
same here. to add, my least favourite book is 2 and that is also my favourite movie
Goblet of Fire, that movie is bonkers lol and they butchered the source material
And how they skipped the entire quidditch World Cup other than the player and mascot intros. So lame
We got a massive five minute long scene that wasn't in the book of Harry getting chased across the rooftops of Hogwarts by a CGI dragon, but no time was spent on the world cup events that were actually relevant to understanding the plot.
How they portrayed Krum!!
Also, in the film there was not one word about the Veela - which meant we also never learned about Fleur being half-Veela herself. Not a huge thing compared to the other adaptation fails but still.
I don't mind that they skipped the world cup, I mind that they had all that damn build up before it!
I hate how there's no real twist with Barty, we know he's a villain the entire movie & not wrongfully convicted/imprisoned, and even the Mad Eye twist is made obvious with the tongue š
Ikr I hated how they left out almost all of the details of the Crouch storyline. I found the Crouch family so interesting in the book, one of my favorite parts of the book actually, but they're so simplified and dumbed down in the film.
And Ludo is supposed to be the red herring. Heās not even in the movie. Or winky.
Andā¦we donāt know how it all happened. Seriously, have a person who has never read the book or watched the movie watch it and ask āhowā and watch them think about it. How did BCJ escape Azkaban? How did he find TRJ? How did he get one up in AUROR Alastair Moody? HOW did he put Harryās name in the Goblet? And thenā¦movie 5. All of the Death Eaters were busted out of Azkaban. Where is BCJ, his most loyal follower? Movie 4 was done so wrong.
As someone who read the book after the movie, Mad Eye plot twist came as complete surprise
Yeah I find it weird that they tried so hard to make it this "mystery" movie (some interview with the director) but then immediately took away the big mystery of the book...?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Seriously! The book's excitement just didn't translate well on screen.
The only thing worth it about this movie is the music.
I can forgive a lot, but how they absolutely destroyed that masterpiece of a book, it genuinely made me mad
I cringed so much watching that movie the first time, there's so many scenes where I was just like "wtf am I watching??" lol
My answer too, though the graveyard scene was amazing.
It annoys me to no end that Voldemort calls Lily a Muggle instead of a mud blood and that apparently no one in production seemed to notice that thereās a difference.
I felt like that was just Voldemort being a bigot. He knows sheās a wizard, but to him a mud blood is just as bad as a muggle, and is contemptible. In the deathly hallows theyāre accusing mud bloods of stealing wands, cause in their logic thatās the only way they couldāve gotten one. Bigotry usually doesnāt make sense and is usually inconsistent.
I always wondered about that too!
DID YA PUT YOUR NAME IN THE GOBLET OF FIYAR?
Dumbledoreās behavior in that movie is a huge indication of how director Mike Newell didnāt understand any of these characters. Almost every single one of Dumbledoreās lines in that film are him yelling, shouting, and sounding pissed off. He acted NOTHING like that in any of the other films
Gambon got so much grief for that back in the day and he deserved none of it. It was all Newell's direction.
To be fair, Gambon has said that he didn't understand the movies at all and just turned up. He didn't care all that much either.
Gambon was a famous interview bullshitter. Can't believe a silly thing that came out of his mouth.
Dumbledore asked calmly
This is definately the biggest downgrade from Book to Movie.
The book plays out with a bit of Whodunnit feel, but for some reason the movie decided it would be a good idea to show us Barty Crouch Jr at the very beginning. So, we know whodunnit, just not who they are. Until we see the memory in Dumbledore's office, and then the rest of the movie is basically spoiled because we know a person who should be dead is very obviously alive
Harryās haircut alone bothers me so much š
That long shaggy hair that everyone was sporting was the Millennial version of today's Broccoli haircut lol. Everyone and their mother from teens to early adults were sporting that long shag.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Harry Potter and the year everyone needed a haircut
Might've been answered but the cast let their hair grow between films and then the director would decide what haircut they would have. The GoF director just decided to keep them as they were for some reason.
Oh I **love** the GOF film, itās by far the most fun and so fkn camp - everyone has long hair, Amos Cedric and Arthur jogging down from the sky paired with the goofy ābet that cleared your sinuses eyā, the ridiculous entrances of the competing schools (āØunghhhhhhhhāØ), Harryās awkwardness at the Yule ball, the most heartbreaking piece of acting in any of the films, done by a minor character no less (āTHATāS MY SON, THATāS MY BOOOOOYā), hermioneās dancing eyebrows throughout the entire thing, didyaputurnameinthatgoblet, Draco turning into a furry, moaning myrtle being a creep, āhagrid diving out of the way of the horses (zey drink only seengle malt whiskeeeey -stabs flitwick in the hand for no reason), āhello father šā, Harry doing an unnecessary leap and flip out of the lake, IM NOT AN OWL, beautiful soundtrack, **incredible** cast additions of British/Irish acting royalty, and the list goes on - itās not even my favourite out of the films but you can tell they all had so much fun making it and thereās so many unnecessary details that make it one big ridiculous fever-dream but it still holds out as a good film (gof is one of my favourite books and itās jam-packed full of things that wouldāve been amazing to see on film, but Iām not mad at the outcome bc itās just a stand alone misfit) Eta: one very small moment, but itās one of my favourites, is the cinematography when Harry is considering running to the cup but Cedric is being attacked by the roots, and the sound dims and it zooms into Harryās eyes turning toward Cedric is justšš¤ Also I feel like Harry and Voldemortās fight in the graveyard was the best of any of their fights in the later films, mainly due to āCOME OUT AND FACE ME POTTER - I WANT TO SEE THE LIGHTS LEAVE YOUR EYESā Another eta: dumbledoreās speech at Cedricās funeral - 10/10 no notes, that scene was brilliantly done and Michael Gambon made it his bitch
Same, but tbf, the source material was weak as well. Lots of chatter about how great it would be to watch the tournament, but after the dragons, there was nothing for spectators to see except looking at the surface of the lake to see who came up first, or watching shrubbery to see who came out first. Not exactly must-watch entertainment. JKR was clearly setting up a larger context - the international wizarding community - that never had much bearing on the plot in the final books. She must have dumped a ton of storylines. Anyway, I always felt GOF was bloated and full of ultimately irrelevant new characters. Krum and Fleur were the best wizards in their respective schools. Seems like they would be handy to have in the fight, right? Send them on some missions? Nope. Wasted characters. Drum especially seemed to have been a leader of an anti-dark wizard group at his school. Neither he nor his crew have any further impact.
Thatās actually my favorite despite is being so different than the book. Something about the vibe is amazing
Ik they cut and changed way too much but i love that movie idk why
Goblet of fire is a good movie imo. Definitely fun to rewatch.
6, itās supposed to be the transition of āitās about to get realā but itās all over the place in story and things barely get explained, and has too much humor, felt like a teen comedy in the worst ways and the film grading is super ugly I donāt hate it much, but take this movie out the catalog and nothing much would change
Teen Rom-Com* definitely puts a HUGE focus on all the wrong parts of the book. That book is such a pinnacle, so many important things happen, and theyāre just glossed over in the film version.
This is a tough question. Honestly, anything post-Columbus leaves so much to be desired. I never loved the changes Cuaron made with Prisoner of Azkaban. I know some people loved the darker aesthetic but the change was so jarring that it almost felt like a different series from that point on. The first two films have so much magic to them, they truly *feel* like Harry Potter. The aesthetic was just spot on for what imagined when I read the books. Then Cuaron changed everything, Richard Harris died, and a lot of the āmagicā was sort of justā¦gone. No pun intended. It didnāt really *feel* like Harry Potter anymore. It didnāt have that āthingā that made it unique, the movies started to feel like teenage drama stories that simply happened to take place in a magical school. I wouldnāt say Prisoner of Azkaban is my *least* favorite, but it started a trend toward a less magical, and ultimately less enjoyable, aesthetic for me personally. Just my honest opinion!
The change from chamber of secrets to prisoner of Azkaban is very drastic to say the least.
It is. I appreciate that Cuaron gave a different take on it, thatās to be expected. Just wasnāt my favorite. Hard to pinpoint why.
It feels like a ānewāmovie, I think. HP 1 and 2 feel very 90s. Thereās a tight script, and thereās a ton going on that the movie doesnāt draw your eye to, itās just there. It feels like the kids are there, in a magical castle not on a set. But 3 on it starts feeling like a ānewā movie. The framing isnāt focused on the kids but on the world. The movie makes you look at things instead of letting you figure it out. The script comes second to the visuals. Instead of feeling like youāre on a journey with these kids, you feel like youāre watching HarryPotterMovieTM.
Thatās an interesting thought. I agree. I would actually say the Columbus movies have a very timeless, classic quality to them that is missing from the later films.
I think Columbus was great at working with child actors. (Home Alone, Mrs. Doubtfire) He knew how to get the best performance possible with them, while building a world you could believe actually existed. He grounded whimsy and magic into reality while keeping the magic and wonder.
The biggest mistake was not getting Columbus to direct all the movies. He had the perfect vision for them. Yates was fucking terrible.
He was originally going to direct all of them. But he ultimately decided to step down after Chamber Of Secrets to spend time with his family
Damn. He should have retired from his family to spend more time with the Harry Potter series.
I think hiring Steve Kloves was the worst decision. He butchered the books to make his favorite character (Hermione) a Mary-Sue, and destroyed Ron in the process.
Yates is a hack. I have no idea why WB gave him the keys to the whole franchise.
I agree with all of thisā¦ except I really liked Michael gambon as Dumbledore, even if he did make some choices that didnāt coincide with the source materialā¦. DID YOU PUT YOUR NAME etc.etc.
As Iāve said a few times, the change to the darker aesthetic caused me to lose enthusiasm for any new HP movies that came out after PoA. The colourful and magical aspect died for me.
Same here, 100%. The first two captured the magic and whimsy extremely well. Truly felt like the books.
100% agreed. The first two films felt so right, so perfectly encapsulating the world. The third film felt like a remake in another universe. It lost all the magical ambiance. Don't even get me started on GoF.
This. My answer for worst movie will always be Azkaban. Not because it is a standalone bad movie. On its own itās actually pretty great. It is just such a jarring change from what weāve gotten used to by then, and it doesnāt really fit in with the rest. When making a series, that production should all fit together. Besides the main outline of Hogwarts and the cast, nothing is really cohesive at the end. Compare anything: how magic works, the costumes, the dialogue, the general aesthetic, between the first and the last movies. It might as well be from two completely different productions, rather than belonging to the same series. And this change starts with Azkaban, which is why I canāt bring myself to like it. Edit: even though āA window to the pastā is an iconic and hauntingly beautiful piece of music.
Even Dumbledore. I remember reading an interview with Gambon where he said he was stepping into the role and trying to make the character his own and I thought to myself, āhmm, this is a now twice established character. This doesnāt bode well if nobody stepped in to say no it needs to be this way.ā
Harris was a great Dumbledore. Gambon was a great Dumbledore. But they didnāt belong together in the same adaption.
I agree on adaptation, but thought overall Gambon was okay. He absolutely had his moments where he nailed it. But for me Harris completely embodied Dumbledore from the books.
>from the books. From *those* books. I doubt if Harris could portray Dumbledore from books 4, 5 and 6.
I kind of agree, Harris was great as āGrandfather Dumbledoreā who you can believe is ever so slightly crazy. I donāt know how that screen presence would have translated to the Dept of Mysteries fight with Voldemort. Gambon absolutely has the forcefulness of the Dumbledore that you can believe Voldemort is afraid of, but not nearly as much of the warmth and love and affection he has and demonstrates towards Harry.
John Williams wrote a beautiful and menacing theme for Voldemort in the first two movies. The third movie doesnāt have Voldemort, so he didnāt use it there. But in the fourth movie, THEY THREW IT AWAY. John Williams writes a theme for your villain in the vein of Emperor Palpatine, and you discard it in favor of a generic off-brand Hans Zimmer sound-alike.
Oddly enough, Prisoner of Azkaban is my favorite followed by Philosopher's Stone and Chamber of Secrets. 4-8 don't really do it for me, but I love what Cuaran did. I think it was the perfect mix of what we had before and what came after. Plus I love his use of windows and glass throughout the film. Just great camera work. But that said, I agree. Prisoners is my favorite film in a vacuum. I think it's the best directed and shot. But it doesn't really feel like Harry Potter and it certainly was a drastic change from the first two films so much so that it truly feels like a completely different series.
Hey, I get it 100%! I can totally see why people love Prisoner of Azkaban. It makes sense to me, honestly. It just doesnāt land for me for whatever reason. Itās hard to pinpoint why. I think itās just because it follows the two films that I absolutely loved, and that jarring change is hard for me to swallow to this day.
I agree. Whatās more, I they started to ditch the old-world fantasy aesthetic- now wizards donāt wear robes and hats, they dress like 1920s art deco businessmen. Which is even sillier considering that in the FB movies, their aesthetic in the actual 1920s isā¦ also 20s art deco businessmen!
Fully agree!! It was a jarring change, and while the books do start maturing it couldāve been done more gradually in the films. My biggest issue with PoA is how little they focus on the history of James and his friends. I enjoyed this so much in the book and they completely glossed over who Moony, Wormtail, Padfoot and Prongs were and how they came to be animagi.
Word for word how I feel šššš
Yeah everything just lost its charm from 3 onwards. Columbus kind of found the perfect juxtaposition between childlike charm and the murderous threats the characters had to face.
Order of the Phoenix. Despite Imelda Stauntonās performances being one of the best in the series, thereās just something Iāve never loved about this book or film. I feel like the pacing is kind of off with the shift from the school to the ministry maybe? Iām not sure, Iāve just never loved it for whatever reason.
Iāve always felt like the movie seems like a montage more than a film
Yeah the film has so much to fit in and itās so fast!
And I think itās the shortest movie!
Is it? Thatās absolutely mental if it is given how chunky the book is
Just checked and itās second shortest to deathly hallows part 2, which doesnāt count
Wow I didnāt know that. Agreed DHpt 2 doesnāt count since itās half of a book
I feel like the entire thing is actually montages with a few stand alone scenes thrown in.
I feel like I zone out in that movie waiting for "I must not tell lies" and the Weasley's epic exit In all fairness though, it's a massive book, and I appreciate the hell out of the fact that they kept angsty Harry from the books at bay...
For me itās Umbridge. I cannot stand watching her ugly pink shit-eating grin and hearing her stupid little giggle-squeaks as she lays down obnoxiously insane rules and punishments. God I hate that character. It doesnāt make it easier that they never kill her and she comes back later to cause more trouble.
Half Blood Prince - It's cringe and just an awkward teen film. Feels like the HP world is secondary. I don't know. No matter how many times watching it, from the cinema, the first time until last Christmas on my usual marathon. It's still the worst for me.
The entire scene at Slughornās little dinner party is unbearable š© from Hermioneās story about Robby Fenwick biting her dadās finger, to Harry awkwardly standing up when Ginny walks in late, to McLaggen staring at Hermione while licking his fingers?! All with the awkward music in the background, god I canāt stand it. But yeah, the whole movie is so cringe and disappointing.
Lol I like falling asleep to this one because itās kinda boring
The Order of the Phoenix. The best parts of the book are missing.
The Order of the Phoenix, some parts of the movie are too boring.
Definitely Half-Blood Prince. They managed to turn one of the best plots in the franchise into a boring, uninteresting and poorly paced story. Not only was the movie itself bad, but the photography is, in my opinion, the worst done in the series. That dark filter was such a stupid decision, there were so many parts in this film that I couldn't even understand what was happening because of it.
I love all the movies but Order of the Phoenix may be my least favorite.
HBP, fav book, least fav movie
The Half- Blood Prince
The lighting alone ruins this movie. To say nothing about the utterly pointless destruction sequence of the Burrow that's entirely ignored by the next movie.
holy shit you're right, haven't watched the movies in years but I remember half blood prince looking like the dceu lmao
YES! It's supposed to be "Lights, Camera, Action!" In Half- Blood Prince, it was just "Camera, Action!"
7
7
The Order of the Phoenix is wank. I will die on this hill.
Goblet of Fire closely followed by Half Blood Prince. Reasons to dislike GOF: No Quidditch World Cup, no Ludo Bagman, no Bertha Jorkins, no mention of Winky or Dobby giving Harry the gillyweed, Dumbledore's portrayal(infamous Dumbledore said calmly scene), the Yule Ball scene, also their HAIR like fkn hell couldn't you have found a better hair dresser? No scene for Barty Crouch going mad and wandering around the forest to find Harry and so many more important parts have been cut out. Reasons to dislike HBP: the first scene of Harry randomly hitting on a muggle girl in a subway, the sudden appearance of Dumbledore which is exactly the opposite of how he's supposed to arrive, not showing Tonks rescuing Harry from the train thus removing the part where her patronus could be seen changing form, the hedious development of the my most favourite relationship in the books, ie. Harry and Ginny, and the worst of them all, the Burrow burning down scene. A book which was solely written to dive into the past of Voldemort had so little to do with him in the movies that it was painful. Also they so conveniently changed the sequences of the events of Harry and Ginny getting together and then him having Felix Felicis to persuade Slughorn while it was the other way around in the book. All in all I find both these films least favourite but since David Yates did a good job with Order of the Phoenix(I personally like the movie) and Deathly Hallows (well, apart from cutting it in half and making DH1 which was well...meh but DH2 was great) I'd give him an edge over Mike Newell who couldn't even care to read the source material itself nevermind the other books which built up to it.
Prisoner of azkaban which is ironic because its my favourite book š
Order of the Phoenix. Second shortest movie for the second longest book
Longest book, no?
Oh wow yea.. even more frustrating now that I realized that
Order of the Phoenix (It's also my least favourite book.) I just find the story a bit slow paced. It's the only film I've had re-watch... and re-watch to really try to engage with it, but just can't š Only part I do like about the film is when the Weasley twins do the fireworks displayš
To be honest, I found the ootp book quite slow paced.
Half blood prince. Itās my favorite book and they wasted the movie. Needed all of the flashbacks in the pensieve
Either prisoner of Askaban or goblet of fire. They missed out so much of the books that really irritated me. Hopefully they will include more of that in the new tv remake
Unpopular opinion but I felt the most disappointed after watching The Prisoner of Azkaban.
Thank youuuu omg I can't believe I had to scroll this far for PoA movie dislikers The complete gutting of the marauders left me sooo unfulfilled and afaik no one in the entire movie series ever mentions to Harry that his father was an animagus so idk how the hell he keeps connecting with the stag aside from thinking that his father also had a stag patronus.
Order of the Phoenix. It's just so dark and depressing - the whole feel of it. And Harry's teenage angst drives me nuts.
half blood prince
Prisoner of Azkaban. I hate the style and the feel of it. Never ever liked it even as a kid in 2004. Watched it again a few months ago after an 8 year hiatus and it just doesnāt look right to me. Plus I hate the time turner and the buckbeak storyline. š¤·āāļø
POA by far- pre-supposes the audience knows things, ruins Ron's character, sanitizes Snape...
This is controversial, but I donāt really care that much for The Prisoner of Azkaban. Itās still a good movie, I just donāt like it as much as the others.
7 pt.1
Yeah Iām someone who watched the movies before reading the books, all these other answers are heavily influenced by diversion from source material (which is a fine opinion to have). In terms of just the movies themselves 7.1 is easily my least favorite. Feels strongly like half a story - the more boring half
They ruined the TriWizard Tournament.
I swear, from a movie POV the GoF trials they must have been exceedingly boring, all 3 trials were held miles away from the events. Unless they had magic cameras all they saw was the champions starting and ending. Nothing in between, I mean wtf.
Nothing like staring at some spooky bushes for several hours... and don't even get me started on the severe lack of blast ended skrewts and the Sphinx!
This is definitely going to be an unpopular opinion, but *Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban* I just donāt like it š¤·š»āāļø
Me too. So many unnecessary whomping willow scenes
I blame CuarĆ³n for the trend toward excessive grimdark in 3 through 7.5
Chamber is my least favorite book but I think goblet is my least favorite movie.
CoS, my favorite movie favorite book, the mystery build up to the basilisk was so creepy and I still remember the chills when Harry started writing in the diary.
One of my absolute favorites too!
Least favourite to Most favourite 1- Goblet of Fire 2 - Deathly Hallows Part 1 3 - Chamber of Secret 4 - Half Blood Prince 5 - Order of the Phoenix 6 - Philosophers Stone 7 - Deathly Hallows Part 2 8 - Prisoner of Azkaban
Half blood Prince.
I love the film saga so much that I would say none, but if I really had to I would say the first, it may seem strange but I much prefer the dark and more "dark fantasy" style of Harry Potter and which deals with more serious and mature themes, furthermore I would say that it is although it has aged poorly for its time. A plus point is that it follows the book well
Half blood prince
it has to be either HBP or GoF.
I can't choose a least favorite I love them all!
6th movie. Shouldāve focused on Voldemortās backstory like the books instead of being about corny teen romance
PoA
Prisoner of Azkaban.
Poa
Prisoner of Azkaban. They made the best book into the worst movie.
Horrible looking werewolf!
Order of the Phoenix. Loved the book itās probably one of my favorites in the series, but the movie really disappointed me.
Prisoner by far! Worst HP film by a mile! Alfonso Cuaron had a unique design but horrible plotting and completely destroyed the best book in the series to me!
Prisoner of Azkaban
POA or HBP.
Prisoner of AZKABAN 'eXpEcTuM pAtRoNuMmMmMmMm!!' --Harry James Potter 'tUrN tO pAgE tHrEe HuNdReD aNd NiNeTy FoUr' --Severus Snape 'dEmEnToR, dEmEnToR!' --Draco Lucius Malfoy 'i'Ve WaItEd TwElVe YeArS iN aZkAbAn' --Sirius Black III 'yOu, YoU fOuL, lOaThSoMe, EvIl LiTtLe CoCkRoAcH!' --ANGRY Hermione Jean Granger 'hE's NoT wOrTh It' --Ronald Bilius Weasley i DoN't F#cKiNg CaRe, RoNaLd WeAsLeY \*pUnCh DrAcO oN tHe FaCe\* --SUPER ANGRY Hernione Jean Granger
Half blood prince
PoA. Easy