Harry Potter Fans

[pyronerd]

the movies was fairly captivating, easily the best movie of them all

the worst one in my opinion was the 5th one, they didn't even get many of the things that happened in the book! Although they have an excuse- the book has 700 and something pages  8)

I liked the books, wasn't a huge fan of the movies. IMO, the only movie that stood up was the Third one.

The others to me were only good if you already had read the books, and already had connections with the characters. The third movie was clever in its own right and hit the right emotional notes.

The first two movies were a bit too silly. Movies 4-6 missed out of a heap of stuff but failed to compensate (the makers needed to watch the LotR to show them how its done).

And movies and 7 and 8 were harmed by the ridicolous decision to split them in the middle. The first part didn't have an ending, and the second one didn't have a beginning - either in story, action or emotion. Damn money-grubbing movie execs :(

I enjoyed them all! But as movies they weren't great. The books were - #4 my favourite for the record.

The only problem with not splitting them would mean that either the movie would go for 4 hours or that the plot wouldn't come together nearly as well :-X

[CrowsFan]

Every book was better than the movie made from it

^^This

I was talking about every HP book since that is what this topic is about  ::) ::)

[Cicjose]

there is one exception voldy

No there isn't.
Every book was better than the movie made from it

and ive tried to educate you all that there is an exception to the "rule"

[ossie85]

The only problem with not splitting them would mean that either the movie would go for 4 hours or that the plot wouldn't come together nearly as well :-X

Have to disagree. The Return of the King had FAR more material, went for almost 4 hours (with extra scenes counted) and won more Oscars than the length of Harry's wand in inches. In fact, I'm worried about them splitting The Hobbit up :(

BUT, I'd have been ok with it if they actually made two separate films.... but they really didn't, they just made one film with a 5 month intermission :( Still enjoyable, don't get me wrong!

[CrowsFan]

Yeah can't believe they are splitting The Hobbit in to 2 movies considering there is only about 300 pages in the book. Anything to make money I guess ::)

[bomberboy0618]

Every book was better than the movie made from it

^^This

I was talking about every HP book since that is what this topic is about  ::) ::)

IKR, learn to read.
Offtopic discussion is offtopic.

[Voldemort]

Every book was better than the movie made from it

^^This

I was talking about Harry Potter...

[Cicjose]

and crowsfan suggested something else and i responded with proof against his post

[CrowsFan]

Cic all I every said was all the HP books were far better than their movie counterparts. You then started talking about shawshank ::)

[Voldemort]

haha true that- although Shawshank is a pretty damn good movie  8)

[kingkingston]

there is one exception voldy

na mate, all the books are better than their movie counter parts

except the books didn't have Emma Watson in them :P

[PowerBug]

there is one exception voldy

na mate, all the books are better than their movie counter parts

except the books didn't have Emma Watson in them :P

lol, true there.