logo Sign In

Harry Potter 3 — Page 3

Author
Time
Post link
Nope. Read a story about it in Entertainment Weekly and Cuaron and Steve Kloves (screenwriter) butched it beforehand. There is very little actual cut footage. They made the edits before shooting and shot only what was absolutely necessary. So the DVD is gonna be pretty sparse on extra footage. Fine by me.
"You fell victim to one of the classic blunders, the most famous of which is 'Never get involved in a land war in Asia'."
--Vizzini (Wallace Shawn), The Princess Bride
-------------------------
Kevin A
Webmaster/Primary Cynic
kapgar.typepad.com
kapgar.com
Author
Time
Post link
I think it's better to cut beforehand too. Better to decide @ the script stage what is going to go than get all the way to filming and realise that a scene is not going to work or have it drag out the pacing. Longer does not always equal better. I still haven't seen all of P of A, but I think that much of the work laid out in it will influence the future films for the better.

Princess Leia: I happen to like nice men.
Han Solo: I'm a nice man.

Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: Bossk
Nope. Read a story about it in Entertainment Weekly and Cuaron and Steve Kloves (screenwriter) butched it beforehand. There is very little actual cut footage. They made the edits before shooting and shot only what was absolutely necessary. So the DVD is gonna be pretty sparse on extra footage. Fine by me.


Not fine by me. This movie needs an extended edition bad. Really bad
Author
Time
Post link
I agree as well, but then again, I'm not too worried about it, because if people read the book, they'll understand everything much better. The books are a lot more enjoyable than any of the films.
My Blog
Currently Reading: Shatterpoint, by Matthew Stover
Unrepentent Nader Voter
Author
Time
Post link
The Original Trilogy has been available in DVD format.
They are in dual layer DVD and in widescreen format.
They are transferred from the Definitive Collection LD.
Only $29.99 per set at www.endorforest.com.
Author
Time
Post link
I understand stuff needs to get cut. But I still think they cut a bit too much. If the movie becomes confusing for those who don't know the book or loses dramatic weight as a result.
And I dance. And I sing.
And I'm a monkey, in a long line of kings.
Author
Time
Post link
saw it liked it but why didnt they explain the story about how lupin sirius, james and peter were all friends at school and that they all were agamenus because lupin was a werewolf. it would have added so much and only taking up like 5 mins
Author
Time
Post link
So much missing. Gone. Release an extended edition. If there isn't the footage make it. These details need to come to screen.
Author
Time
Post link
Or we could go with my idea, stop making Harry Potter movies, and quit reading that thing and start reading true literature.
“Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.” — Nazi Reich Marshal Hermann Goering
Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: ricarleite
Or we could go with my idea, stop making Harry Potter movies, and quit reading that thing and start reading true literature.


Dude are you trying to make an ass out of yourself? Harry Potter has more story, substance, and imagination then most of that so called great old literature.
Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: jimbo
Quote
Originally posted by: ricarleite
Or we could go with my idea, stop making Harry Potter movies, and quit reading that thing and start reading true literature.


Dude are you trying to make an ass out of yourself? Harry Potter has more story, substance, and imagination then most of that so called great old literature.


that is so true my god.
Author
Time
Post link
Only posting in this thread to say:

Never read the books.
Never seen the movies.

Have no intention to do either at any time during the remaining years of my life.
Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: starkiller
Only posting in this thread to say:

Never read the books.
Never seen the movies.

Have no intention to do either at any time during the remaining years of my life.


Then I can only pity you.
Author
Time
Post link
Man, you guys need to get out more! If you need everything explained to you, you deserved TPM and AOTC. Part of the brilliance of Prisoner of Azkaban is that it assumes you're smart enough to fill in the details.

Princess Leia: I happen to like nice men.
Han Solo: I'm a nice man.

Author
Time
Post link
I think a could figure out the details its just that the movie would have played better cinematicaly with them in.
Author
Time
Post link
I beg to differ, and cite the example of Jurassic Park (the first one). Very little in the film was explained (@ least compared to the novel), certain characters were changed, and the ending of the film was drastically altered (in the end of the book, Isla Nublar is nuked). Does this make the film any less of a good film? NO! I could go on and on about the alterations that were made to the LOTR trilogy that no amount of expansion could possibly correct, and while I agree with many of the changes made, I disagree with almost as many. Are they still good films? YES! They may not be the perfect adaptations of the novels, but they work well cinematically, and the truth is, no adaptation will ever be truly perfect, because everyone who reads a novel perceives it in a different way; the fact that Cuaron's version of Prisoner of Azkaban has incited such discussion is a good sign. Why? Because it means that not everyone is willing to take Hollywood's word as gospel. I think it's a good adaptation because it takes chances on the audience's familiarity with the novel, and it has polarised fans of the films and the novels. Only a really good piece of filmmaking can do that. If everyone is in agreement as to quality, something is wrong.

Princess Leia: I happen to like nice men.
Han Solo: I'm a nice man.

Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: GundarkHunter
(in the end of the book, Isla Nublar is nuked)


That was also the original ending of the "Giligan's Island" book.
“Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.” — Nazi Reich Marshal Hermann Goering
Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: GundarkHunter
I beg to differ, and cite the example of Jurassic Park (the first one). Very little in the film was explained (@ least compared to the novel), certain characters were changed, and the ending of the film was drastically altered (in the end of the book, Isla Nublar is nuked). Does this make the film any less of a good film? NO! I could go on and on about the alterations that were made to the LOTR trilogy that no amount of expansion could possibly correct, and while I agree with many of the changes made, I disagree with almost as many. Are they still good films? YES! They may not be the perfect adaptations of the novels, but they work well cinematically, and the truth is, no adaptation will ever be truly perfect, because everyone who reads a novel perceives it in a different way; the fact that Cuaron's version of Prisoner of Azkaban has incited such discussion is a good sign. Why? Because it means that not everyone is willing to take Hollywood's word as gospel. I think it's a good adaptation because it takes chances on the audience's familiarity with the novel, and it has polarised fans of the films and the novels. Only a really good piece of filmmaking can do that. If everyone is in agreement as to quality, something is wrong.


I disagree. After reading the book Jurassic Park my opinion of the movie went way way down. I used to love it now its average to me. Really Prisoner of Azkaban was a much better adaptation then Jurassic Park but was an inferior adaptation then the first two movies. I believe the first two movies both adapted the book perfectly. Not everything was included but they had just the right amount. I believe Chris Columbus has more respect for the books then Alfonso Curanon does. Prisoner of Azkaban is missing details that are very very important.
Author
Time
Post link
like I said before the movie had a "rushed" feeling. I think adding in some of the small details would have improved the pacing of the movie. As for polarising the fans being a good thing. The special edition of the OT polarised fans but that doesn't make it a good piece of filmmaking does it?
Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: GundarkHunter
Man, you guys need to get out more! If you need everything explained to you, you deserved TPM and AOTC. Part of the brilliance of Prisoner of Azkaban is that it assumes you're smart enough to fill in the details.


your right, its just i wish they could have explained that stuff. i know it already so it didnt really matter to me but it would have been cool. and i that is my only complaint with the movie besides that it was very good, and much much better thent he last two.
Author
Time
Post link
Oh, about the whole "start reading true literature" thing, it was some sort of a joke I've made. Anything with more than 2 words is literature to me.
“Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.” — Nazi Reich Marshal Hermann Goering