First, we start with the Sorcerer's Stone
- or, for my non-US readers, the Philosopher's Stone.
This first movie keeps very close to the book. The book is short, the shortest of the series, so there isn't much to cut. We lose a few minor details, but just about everybody and everything is in there. Story authenticity: 9/10 The worst thing I can think of about this movie is the inevitable: they're just kids, and they're in every scene. Kids are... well, kids. They aren't Oscar winning geniuses (the adults in the movie are though... 13 Oscar nominations between them. Yowza.), heck none of them were even professionals when they started. They were 10, 11 and 12 years old. If you have kids anywhere near that age, think about their ability to focus and take direction every day for months at a time... yeaaahhhh... that's what I thought. Acting: 5/10
I should also mention the CGI in this film is horrendous. It's ridiculous, really. I know this came out before HDTVs, before HD cameras, and before BluRay had even been imagined, but, yikes. There are some scenes where they (particularly Neville and Harry) look just like their Lego-video-game counterparts. Special Effects: 4/10
Total for SS/PS: 18/30
 |
| teens.aol.com* |
. For all of you who are not entirely obsessed, this book is the book J.K. Rowling suggested readers should scour if they wanted clues as to Snape's true character and intentions, and if you haven't read it with that frame of mind, I suggest you do; that little exercise cemented my correct assumptions about Snape ;) Again, the movie stays pretty close to the book, the only thing I can think of that got cut is the subplot about Filch being a squib (non-magical person born to magical parents), and that's not really all that important; in the films he's just a jerkwagon, and we all hate him an appropriate amount as a result. Story Authenticity: 8/10
The kids are better in this one, and we see a lot more of the adults, particularly Snape, and Gilderoy Lockhart, the only character to be based on a real person. Acting: 6/10
The CGI is measurably improved, mostly because they had to make Dobby. The first movie made money, so Warner Brothers was willing to shell out a little bit more, but more importantly, Lord of the Rings had been released. The public had seen Gollum and knew what was possible in the world of fully-CGI characters (Gollum was done differently, yes, but the standard was set- nobody was going to settle for Lego-men anymore). Special Effects: 7/10
Total for CoS: 21/30
 | |
| harrypotterwallpaper.org |
. People were finally starting to realize that these were not just kids books, and adults were falling love too, and this is where I was actually introduced to Harry, when this movie came out. Which is a shame, really, because I think this movie is the worst of the bunch. The book is considerably longer, and much more of it gets cut. By the time you get to the end, there is a litany of questions unanswered, so many that I felt the film didn't even make sense. Story Authenticity: 3/10The kids are better, but still not great. Plus, they started tying their ties really, really stupidly in this film. Acting: 7/10
The special effects backslid tremendously, in my opinion, too. The tilting camera stuff in the Shrieking Shack? Nauseating. The "werewolf?" More like a stretched out prairie dog. Maybe they just put all their time and money into the dementors, which were truly terrifying. Special Effects: 5/10
Total for PoA: 15/30
 |
| reelingreviews.com |
, we move into what has undoubtedly become darker territory. The villainy is more dangerous than ever and we see the death of a character for the first time. The kids are unquestionably much better in this one. Harry especially turns it on, and the kid who plays Ron has entirely perfected the "I'm so scared/upset I might vomit" face. Acting: 7/10This book is much longer, and thus more of it needed to be cut. Aside from the death of S.P.E.W. and the houselves altogether, I don't think they cut anything necessary to the main story. The screenwriting/editing team did a better job of paring down the story while staying true to the intent and the overall story arch. Story Authenticity: 7/10
The special effects are also improved. The dragon? Totally awesome. The mermaids? Vicious and completely scary. Special Effects: 9/10
Total for GoF: 25/30
 |
| allmoviephoto.com |
is the most condensed of the series. First off, it is the longest book with the US hardcover version boasting over 850 pages. But, it is the shortest film to date, at only 138 minutes, nearly 20 minutes shorter than the first film (based on the shortest book). As such, there is a huge amount of stuff cut from the story. Subplots, almost all of the romance and lots of nearly overwhelming tension got dropped. They stuck to the theme and the overall arch, but a lot of the complex details and relationships are missing. Story Authenticity: 6/10The acting is better yet again, considering the fact that most of this film is more understated. The tension comes not from violence but from political oppression, and we see real personal loss for the first time. But Hermione's nostril flares have got to go. Acting: 7/10
The special effects are more subtle, simpler, to fit the feel of the movie. They're spot on, but not too technically impressive. Special Effects: 8/10
Total for OotP: 21/30
 | |
| reviewstl.com |
This is the Snape-iest book of them all, and therefor my favorite. It's shorter than the other "later" books, and is barely longer than Prisoner of Azkaban. This one actually serves as a launching pad for number seven, and is the only book that I don't feel can stand on its own two feet; the end is completely untied-up and leaves you literally scrabbling over a cliff's edge. The movie adapted most of this very well, and actually did a good job lightening the mood and playing up the relationships, both romantic and otherwise, that we hadn't seen previously. Story Authenticity: 8/10The acting is yet again better, and since we see even more of the amazing adults in this one, we get even more support. Cormac McLaggen is the douchiest kid ever, and the creep factor is exquisitely painful all through this movie. Acting: 9/10
The special effects are stunning. The inferi (animated corpses... zombies dedicated to a master, I guess) are terrifying. The whole "feel" of the film is brilliant, right from the get go. This one is perfectly nailed, right on the head. Special Effects: 10/10
Total for HBP: 27/30
 |
| moviematics.com |
PS/SS 18
CoS 21
PoA 15
GoF 25
OotP 21
HBP 27
Half Blood Prince, number 6, wins this weekend showdown!
Enjoy your Harry Potter weekend, and we will return to regularly scheduled posts on Monday, folks!
Please post your ideas in the comments- whether you agree with me or not!
*Was anybody else surprised to see that AOL.com still existed? Just me?
