Finally, a Harry Potter Film that Deserves the Title "Film"
581596
The first Harry Potter movie undoutably moved fast enough, but incorporated too much childish slapstick.

The second toned down on overall slapstick, but the reamining comedic endevours were over-the-top, and it moved unbearably slow.

The third installment of the series, has evolved from a movie to a film. Bogus physical comedy is toned down to an absolute minimum and it moves quickly. The new director far outweighs Christopher Columbus in storytelling and cinematography overall, because "Scary Imagery" is actually "Scary Imagery".

I'm getting sick and tired of artisctly ignorant people complaining about the fact that the movie doesn't stick true to the book. Film and Book are two totally different art forms. Storytelling is told through pictures, and not words, and thusly event sequences and cuts have to be different. And yes, while certain parts from the books are left out,  the movie makers have no choice, because a movie has to be quick, and to-the-point, while books can drag out as long as they please. Someone griped that one-third of the book was about the magical broomstick, but please. Who would honestly sit through a 50 minute expos on a broomstick?

Overall, the directing was superb--in this movie you will find yourself clinging to your date's hand ever now and then--the acting has evolved into something worthy of praise, the overall atmosphere has changed as the characters become young adults, and the score is absolutely beautiful. Once you get over the fact that this isn't a seven-hour Lord of the Rings type sypnosis of a 435 page book, and accept the art-form that it is, you will enjoy this film, and most likely purchase it.
2344890
I count myself, proudly, among the group who spend WAY too much time and energy on Harry Potter.  In fact, I've spent the whole day since I saw the movie discussing it with fellow fans.  So I think I can speak for a large number of people when I say that there were several things about this movie that disappointed.  Okay, they had to jettison a few things for time, I get that.  I'm not going to obsess over the tiny details (like spiders that keep their legs and gain roller skates), only the important ones.  Like, Harry leaving obvious footprints in the snow that would have gotten him caught immediately.  The leaving out of what would have been a quick but very satisfying scene in which MWPP was explained.  And, especially, the mutilation of the Three Broomsticks scene in which Harry finds out about Sirius and his parents.  I have no problem with the dialogue, as much of it was direct quotes, but the set up made it look as though McGonagall and Fudge were dating or something - ewww!
However, if you are not too terribly obsessive, you will quite enjoy this movie.  My seven-year-old did.  And so did I, most of the time.  There were scary parts that were VERY scary, funny parts, emotional parts.  The Monster Book of Monsters was done wonderfully.  The interplay between Ron and Hermione was sweet, especially the scene in which Ron does an unintentional Malfoy impression.  The whole time travel thing was very interestingly done, if predictable.  And the effects were so good, I never found myself trying to pick out what was real and what wasn't (a pasttime that can ruin a movie; see Matrix Revolutions, for example).
I could have done with less "bird/owl/leaf artfully floats through the air"; get rid of those, and they could have freed up several minutes for, say, Quidditch scenes.  And, though I can't complain about their acting ability, I was less-than-impressed by the casting of Sirius and Lupin.  To be quite honest, they weren't handsome enough for my fanfic-whetted appetite.
But all in all, it was a very enjoyable film which will find its place beside the first two movies in my DVD collection as soon as possible.  If only so I can go through the back-through-time scene frame by frame.
2101485
As a hardcore Harry Potter fan, I thoroughly enjoyed this movie.  You have to realize that this is an entertainment movie so if you are looking for something that will change the way you think or will challenge you to become a better person, this is not your movie.  This is meant to entertain, and on that point, it is a smashing success!  I very much prefer the books to the movies, especially the early movies just because most child actors are so terrible.  Most of them turned out okay by the Half Blood Prince, but before that they were a little rough.  This movie had all of the elements I liked from the previous Harry Potter movies, exciting, engaging, interesting characters, "fantastic creatures", and great special effects, without the annoying cheesiness of the early Harry Potter movies.  If you love Harry Potter, then you will love this.  The inverse is probably true as well, if you didn't like the Harry Potter movies then you probably shouldn't watch this because you probably won't like it.

For me this movie embodied everything I like about the magical world without anything that really detracts. Its not a perfect movie, I could have done with a little more character development of the main character, but other than that there is nothing not to like.  I highly recommend this to any Harry Potter fans.
3836737
I enjoyed this film more than any of the other Potter films, with the possible exception of Azkaban. Like that film, it has numerous departures from the book, but viewed as part of the series of films (and NOT as a shoe-in for the book in the series of books), it works very well. I know that Rowling had approved the scripts to these films as they were made, so I'm sure that she always had a clear understanding of the consequences of any omissions (and additions) made to the events in terms of the subsequent films. So far, it has worked just fine. Are the negative Potter diehards worried that all these changes will somehow inevitably add up to a bad movie version of the "Deathly Hallows"?

I very much enjoyed the humor. Scenes such as the tribute to Aragog were hilarious, as well as the little touches - Ron sitting between Harry and Ginny at the Burrow, and Harry being informed of Vane's love potion plans by Hermione, and the brewing of "Living Death"! Hermione's comments about Harry "enjoying his dessert", and her trying to explain to Ron how he split with Lavender during his recovery from poisoning ("I don't believe it was a particularly long conversation") are also hilariously low key. Lavender's attentions to Ron are comical, and deliberately pitched as almost painful. The effects are convincing, and the actors have hit their stride. There are lots of little details to keep the films interesting for multiple viewings.
325282
I never really fell into the fandom or the hype of the Harry Potter books/movies, so I was a bit hesitant to check out Fantastic Beasts but being it had completely different characters, in a completely new location I thought I'd give it a go.  I quite liked it, the beasts are the highlight of the film, they are as the title suggest fantastic looking creatures, the plot which to be frank is a pretty basic one, certainly takes a backstory to we the viewer seeing these really cool creatures on the screen.  I actually got the most enjoyment amongst all the human/wizard characters from the socially awkward obese guy who wanted a bank loan to start a bakery.  I think he carried the film more so than the rest of the supporting cast.  I found the police woman or whatever she was to be quite weak and uninteresting.  Newt the main character, the author of the book titled the same name as this movie in the Harry Potter timeline, was good but you can't help but think you've seen his character a million times before in countless movies. But the movie is basically him collecting the beasts he smuggled through US customs that escaped his briefcase so it does fit.

At times though you couldn't help but compare what was happening on the screen to other movies, such as Ghostbusters, with the trap from that movie simply being replaced by a briefcase. The Men In Black memory wiping for humans. The Emperor with the electricity flowing from his hands in Return of the Jedi scene hurting Luke was looking like it was going to happen in this film too, I was just wondering who was going to be Vader and pick the villain guy up over his head. This definitely isn't a fresh new ideas film, but I did like it.  Four and a half stars.
337738
I think the visual effects were well done. I was somewhat disappointed with the movie series as whole since it deviated from the books. I supposed that's why it's "based" on the JK Rowling novels.
3453278
I've just finished converting all my Harry potter films into Blu-Ray. I like the higher definition picture.  I guess other reviewers can give you a critique of the movie itself.  It is a pivotal point in the series.  We have seen glimpses of Voldemort before, but now he emerges in all his ophidian glory.  He is beyond a doubt one of the scariest movie villains ever. Right beside Charles Middleton as Emperor Ming and Anthony Hopkins as Hannibal Lecter.  I'd like to give special credit to Jeff Rawle, Who played Amos Diggory, father of Cedric. He only appears min two scenes,  but his cry of grief as Amos finds out that his son has been murdered is heartbreaking.
4380074
I suppose the biggest surprise most viewers who aren't familiar with the books got was how quickly the story becomes darker and much more serious. But, that's C. S. Lewis's point. Even a beautiful, magical place like Narnia can transform and become a place you barely recognize. Narnia does continue to change each time the children travel to this magical country. They learn, as we do, to expect these drastic changes. You do get to meet wonderful characters like Mr. Tumnus and Reepicheep, (my personal favorite) but you also see a lot of evil too.  Yes, this film was violent. It would have been nice to forewarn parents that this was not a film for younger children. Surprisingly, the film appears to be not rated. I wonder who dropped the ball on this one.

But, I suppose the biggest challenge that Andrew Adamson, the director, had to face was that several people had an expectation and picture of Narnia in their minds when they stepped into the theatres. Just as I'm sure readers did when they opened the book Prince Caspian. I wonder if they were similarly outraged. However, if you see how these stories progress you'll see why this plot line really does make sense in the large scheme of things. Think about any sequel in a fantasy series. The Empire Strikes Back, The Two Towers or The Chamber of Secrets. They are all much darker than the original film in the series. But, the sequel sets up the viewers for the rest of the series and prepares you to take a darker journey. Then, when the heroes rise victorious you are more than willing to hail The Return of the King and the Return of the Jedi as major successes.

Prince Caspian is part of the journey that the Narnians, the Pevensie children, viewers, and other characters still to come have to go on to reach the ultimate goal. Yes, there were a couple of dramatic licenses taken to further the plot line that drew away from the book. However, I think they did a fine job of developing some of the characters and capturing others. I am however interested in finding out if there's an extended edition that'll be available when it's released on DVD. I wonder if that's where the rest of the character development went. Especially considering the time and care Andrew Adamson typically takes with Narnia. I'd be surprised to hear there won't be one available.

I hope you all enjoy this movie, but please understand that Narnia is no longer going to be viewed with rose tinted glasses. There's a reason for this evil presence in Narnia, but I'm afraid you'll have to read the books to find out the answer to that one.
2113788
Theater review.  Possible spoilers.  For those who need more Harry Potter films, how about some prequels, starting with this opening adventure.  David Yates, who successfully directed a quartet of Potter films, returns as J. K. Rowlings visual story teller.  Set in 1926, Newt Scamander (Eddie Redmayne), a former student at Hogwarts arrives in New York with a satchel full of funny creatures not found in zoos or in the wild.  He wants to get to Arizona in order to release a giant eagle-like Thunderbird to its rightful inhabitant.

When Newt first arrives, a funky looking miniature platypus-like animal called a Niffler escapes.  Hes attracted to shinny things and is hard to catch.  In fact he becomes more annoying than cute for my taste, but attempts to capture him drive the story.  Newt arrives in New York at a time when unexplained acts of destruction are occurring.  Mostly toppling of walls of buildings.  Newts magic wand spinning is eyeballed by Tina (Katherine Waterston), an agent of the Magical Congress of the United States of America.  Caught in the confusion of trying to capture the Niffler is Jacob (Dan Fogler), a baker trying to get a bank loan.  In America, normal humans like Jacob are called a NoMaj rather than Muggle in the U.K., so while he sees things he cant explain his memory will eventually be wiped.

Tina buddies up to Newt and along with Jacob are introduced to her mind-reading sister, Queenie (Alison Sudol).  Jacob and Queenie flirt while the seemingly shy Newt and Tina remain mostly business like.  MCOTUSA is run by Seraphina Picquery (Carmen Ejogo) and her right hand man, Percival Graves (Colin Farrell).  They are trying to track down who or what is creating the embarrassing destruction that is causing humans to get suspicious.  The NoMajs are being riled up by a witch hater named Mary Lou (an authoritarian Samantha Morton) and her children, the oldest of which is Credence Barebone (Ezra Miller).

In addition to finding out who is causing the chaos in New York, the magicians are also trying to figure out what happened to the evil dark wizard of Europe known as Gellert Grindewald who has gone into hiding.  Then there is the expanding ball of black evil that appears to be magic gone amuck and its capture seems to be the primary focus of Graves.  As far as the special effects, well if youve seen one part of town being destroyed in movies, youve seen them all.  So not much special there.  But, the animals are cute, colorful and hard to deal with.  A favorite scene involves Jacob being the amorous target of a creature that looks like a cross between a rhino and a headlamp.

Needless to say, there is a lot going on here and I will admit to being occasionally confused, but never to the point of disappointment.  Im sure much of the missing pieces will be filled in with the next 4 installments.  Recommended.
3057004
Only the most cynical bystander could think that the Harry Potter series could have ended with anything but the triumph of good over evil.  The specific methods might range from complete slaughter of everyone to a fairytale ending, but good over evil was never in doubt by Rowling's faithful.

In this final installment, Harry, Ron, and Hermione have dropped out of Hogwarts instead of taking their final year, to concentrate on defeating You-Know-Who.  Because Voldemort's powers grow ever stronger, they find themselves on the run, only mildly insulated from the discomforts of the road by magical spells and items.  I appreciated that even though Harry and his classmates are on the verge of being graduate wizards, the powers of mature witches, both good and evil, are huge, the way the driving skills of a newly licensed driver are to a stunt driver or racing driver.  Even "accio broomstick" is magic to me, but it's baby stuff to real wizards.

The devil is in the details, and this book is so cram-full of details I should have gone back and started from the first book rather than the most recent in order to be up on the story.  I didn't remember anything about the Shrieking Shack at all, or the features of the Chamber of Secrets, or dozens of the various elements from books one through six that Rowling threw at me in this one.  But that's OK, I just rolled with it and it all worked out fine.  My only criticism of Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows is that, although it's a great read, the plot is so baroque that Rowling has to pause intermittently for Harry or another character to explain events to someone (who stands in for the reader) or to have a villain confess to Harry when he is sure that Harry is in his clutches.

The facet of Harry's increasing maturity that's under the microscope in what should have been his final year at Hogwarts is his perception of the adults around him.  Harry spent most of&nbsp;<a data-hook="product-link-linked" class="a-link-normal" href="/Harry-Potter-and-the-Deathly-Hallows-Book-7/dp/0545010225/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_rvw_txt?ie=UTF8">Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows (Book 7)</a>angry with his headmaster Dumbledore.  Harry repeatedly ignored his requests, and withheld information from him.  In Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows, Harry gets a more three-dimensional view of Dumbledore.  At first Harry is intolerant of any flaws in his idol Dumbledore.  Harry can't complete his quest until he appreciates Dumbledore as a complete human being.  Seeing adults (especially parents) as flawed human beings, and loving them anyway, is the final lesson of growing up.  Ultimately Harry's most important lessons, and his most valuable strengths, are the ones that we Muggle readers can aspire to.
3411054
They definitely picked up the pacing with this one! In Harry's third year, a deranged murderer escapes Azkaban and is on the hunt for the young wizard. The writers for this one and the director really trimmed the fat of the story and just focused on Harry and the hunt for Black. We quickly get through the Dursleys and the Leaky Cauldron scenes and after thirty minutes we're on the Hogwarts Express. Not even the first two had us on the train after thirty minutes. The cast continues to mature and add depth to the roles and continue to get better. Michael Gambon joins the cast as Dumbledore, replacing Richard Harris and in my opinion is the better Dumbledore, especially now in the recent two where the character's more involved in the action. And he has good comedic timing. Gary Oldman is perfect as Sirius Black, but he's not in the movie enough, in my opinion, to really bring an impact to the character. David Thewlis portrays Lupin as a caring teacher with a dark secret and Emma Thompson is great as the looney Prof. Trelawny. There's a little more tension and action in this one and John Williams score is a great upgrade from the rather drab music of the first two installments.
4067318
I don't know why this film gets so much flack, it's an excellent movie and an excellent interpretation of the book. People whine and gripe that certain things were cut out or changed around a bit, but to them I say: GET OVER IT! Sometimes things that worked in the book won't work on film, why can't people realize that?

This one is quite a bit darker and mature than the previous films, and is rated PG-13. There is some murder, blood, and torture involved. It also deals with the pain of losing a child, a man cuts his own hand off, and, since the kids are growing up and beginning to discover the opposite sex, there is also some innuendo. And there are some pretty creepy scenes taking place in a graveyard.

The three teen actors have all greatly improved over the years. Rupert manages to be more serious and subtle while still providing enough comic relief. Daniel does an excellent job with some very difficult emotional scenes. His Harry is much more sarcastic and under a lot of stress this time around. The adult actors are truly an all-star cast. Not only is there Ralph Fiennes, Jason Isaacs, and David Tennant (the new Doctor Who) as villians, we also have Dame Maggie Smith as the stern but fair headmistress, Michael Gambon as the wise headmaster, Brendan Gleeson as the creepy, eccentric Defense Against The Dark Arts professor, Miranda Richardson as a pesky yellow journalist, and Alan Rickman as the sinister potions professor. Also along for the ride are Shirley Henderson, Roger Lloyd-Pack, Eric Sykes, and Timothy Spall. An impressive cast, indeed!

The soundtrack is also excellent. "The Story Continues" is new, more dark and intense take on the traditional "Hedwig's Theme". "Harry In Winter" is an absolutely gorgeous track that plays in a few different forms in various scenes, "Do The Hippogriff" is a very catchy Billy-Idolish rock track from the popular wizard band The Wierd Sisters (actually performed by Jarvis Crocker and members of Radiohead), "The Dark Mark" is deliciously sinister, and you can really feel the excitement while listening to "The Quidditch World Cup".

All in all, it's an excellent film and without a doubt the best in the series so far. I doubt that they'll be able to surpass this one.
2202810
The Lord of the Rings trilogy is by far a collection of five-star films that have (hopefully) set the pace for all future fantasy films. In the past fantasy films fell into one of two categories:
Category 1 -- Good, but too light (not serious enough):
Examples being movies like "Willow," "The Princess Bride" and "The NeverEnding Story." While these are very enjoyable films, they are more adventure-like fantasy than they are epic dramas. And others (such as "Labyrinth" or "Legend") although still enjoyable, made the genre even less respectable by using silly costuming and childish humor.
Category 2 -- Flat-out stupid:
Three words: "Dungeons & Dragons"
The Lord of the Rings trilogy consists of fantasy movies made the way fantasy movies were supposed to be. Gone is the notion that the fantasy genre is for kids, or that comic relief and cheesy characters are needed to make the movie bearable. The Lord of the Rings is an epic drama. It has the majesty and dramatic tone of "Braveheart" or "Gladiator," only set in the context of Tolkein's masterful tale of Middle Earth. Let us hope that Hollywood studios and film execs have learned their lesson--you CAN make a big-budget, high-quality, dramatic fantasy film and still make a lot of money. Let us give credit to New Line Cinema for going out on a limb to make the LOTR movies. And let us all hail Peter Jackson, cast, and crew for pulling off the film accomplishment of a lifetime. I only hope that future fantasy films can at least try to come close to the extravagant perfection of The Lord of the Rings.
Having said all this, the Extended Versions are EVEN BETTER! Usually when watching the "deleted scenes" on various DVDs I say to myself, "well I can see why they deleted that scene." Scenes are usually deleted for a good reason. Either they cause the movie to drag on, or do nothing to develop the plot. This is not the case with the new scenes on the extended versions of the LOTR films. These scenes not only help add more clarity to the plot, but they go a long way in further developing the characters--the lack of which was a common criticism of the theatrical release of the first film, The Fellowship of the Ring.
Add to this how well done these extra and lengthened scenes have been done. Each scene has been edited smoothly into the movie for a seamless experience. Sounds, special effects, and even additional scoring have been added to ensure the same quality throughout. These extra scenes are not essential, but surely add quite a bit to the films, enough so that I don't even watch the theatrical version anymore, because the extended versions offer so much more enjoyment. The packaging is very well done and with two discs of bonus material, you definitely get your dollar's worth.
So, my suggestion is that if you're one of the dozen Americans who don't own any of the LOTR films yet, splurge and get the extended version. I promise that after seeing them you'll realize that you don't need (or even want) the theatrical versions. However, if you're on a tight budget, this box set is a nice way to get three of the best films of all time for a fair price.
2240418
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 2 (+ UltraViolet Digital Copy) is the second a final part of the seventh Harry Potter film. It is a macabre and terrifying film that should be seen with an adult as children even at the age of 11 can find some of the scenes to be a bit frightening. The special effects are amazing and Radcliffe, Grint and Watson play their parts to perfection. It sticks much closer to the book then many of the prior sequells and at times one wishes that the other movies had also been made into two parts. At 130 minutes it is a little rushed at a few spots and I am waiting for an extended version to be released. Even so I definitely recommend this film. A strong 4 out of 5. 4/5.
2703704
Regardless of how faithful The Spiderwick Chronicles movie is to the original stories by Tony DiTerlizzi and Holly Black, the film is tremendously entertaining and thankfully resolute. Unlike the recent flock of fantasy epics including The Golden Compass and The Seeker, which conclude feeling wholly unsatisfactory due to an abrupt resolution that suggests further films in the series, The Spiderwick Chronicles easily stands alone as a complete story. With sensationally mirthful creature designs and likeable human characters, topped with state-of-the-art special effects, The Spiderwick Chronicles is another big win for Paramount and a high bar for family films of 2008.

The moment the Grace family moves into the dilapidated Spiderwick Estate, strange things begin to happen. Jared (Freddie Highmore) is a curious, adventurous boy who quickly seeks out the hidden cob-web-covered remains of great great uncle Arthur Spiderwick's laboratory. He unleashes a mysterious force when he locates a field guide full of the secrets of the magical creatures that inhabit the forest surrounding the mansion. His twin brother Simon is calm and reserved and very much the intellectual one, but is rapidly drawn into the fantastical world of faeries and goblins. Older sister Mallory and their mom are harder to convince, but after the almighty and ruthless ogre leader Mulgarath (Nick Nolte) begins to attack the home, everyone must band together to combat the hordes of goblins and ensorcelled creatures that lurk outside.

The Spiderwick Chronicles is, on the surface, an alluringly delightful fantasy that blends the very best of character designs, both human and CG, into a story that effortlessly engrosses without stumbling out of the realm of suspended disbelief. Everything within the story makes sense as it unfolds, and we don't question why certain things are feasible - because as the world of goblins and boggers is defined, we have no reason not to become completely immersed in the fantasy. Director Mark Waters doesn't rush the process of illustrating the multitude of magic and myths, and doesn't overload us with jargon that we couldn't possibly comprehend. The pacing is fantastic for a family film, and doesn't fall into the three hour trap that The Lord of the Rings sets.

The children have more appeal and charismatic personalities than those of the Narnia kids, and the creatures are more loveable and waggish than those in Harry Potter. Each computer animated monstrosity and cuddly ally beautifully blend into the forested environment, and never reach a level of utter annoyance. The designs themselves are ingenious, with a mix of gelatinous abominations like Redcap, the angry henchman goblin, a furry old hamster-like man (Thimbletack, voiced by Martin Short) who speaks in rhyme, and a mighty griffin that soars above the picturesque clouds. Eloquently wispy faeries and an enormous horned ogre are also substantial parts of the Spiderwick mythology, and many other exciting creatures frequent this action-filled fairyland.

The Spiderwick Chronicles undeniably makes fantasy and magic fun. While a few scenes of unnecessary predicaments involving the children's divorced parents could have been cut, the film manages not to be overly preachy, even with its many positive messages and abounding morals. With pleasing characters, family-friendly magical adventure and a mind-bogglingly fantastical world of faeries, goblins and ogres, The Spiderwick Chronicles is extraordinarily entertaining fantasy fun.

- The Massie Twins
86561
This fifth installment in the Harry Potter series is the first that doesn't quite hang together as a movie for me.  Parts of it seem like a dramatization of scenes from the book rather than part of a narrative whole.  That said, it is overall an enjoyable movie and, if you've read the book, you should be able to follow it as such.
As usual, the story has been streamlined by cutting characters (Mundungus Fletcher, Rita Skeeter, Marietta) and subplots (house elves at Hogwarts, everything at St. Mungo's, the Quibbler).  This works, although I would have liked to see just a bit of character development for Tonks and Shacklebolt and Mrs. Figg -- it isn't even made clear that she's a squib.  These character just appear, sort of like -- ok, you read about them, so here they are.  Same goes for Kreecher, who shows up muttering twice but whose role in Harry's attempt to rescue Sirius is totally left out.  It was nice to see more of the Weasley twins, though.  The acting is superb, particularly Daniel Radcliffe's portrayal of Harry's reaction to Sirius's death and his possession by Voldemort near the end. The sets are wonderful, and the special effects -- as expected -- are spectacular.  I particularly enjoyed Dumbledore's sudden departure from his office, but the Weasley twins' rampage and the Thestrals were also great.  The confrontation in the Hall of Mysteries lived up to all expectations, particularly the breaking glass globes and the chaotic battle scenes, through which Death Eaters flow at will.
That said, I really didn't like a lot of the costuming.  Too many characters were dressing like muggles and the Dementors are much scarier when they're shrouded.  In the tunnel scene, they looked like human thestrals.  And the scene between Hermione and Grawp was way too King Kong.  Overall, though, this film is well worth watching.
2343901
I loved the movie from the first time I saw it, even though others claimed it was too tame, not enough Harry Potter. I also love the specials on how everything was done.