MOVIE REVIEW: Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire
UNIVERSAL REMOTE
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire is easily the best of the film series. The first two movies were weak, almost religiously faithful renderings of the books. Hackteur Chris Columbus seemed terrified to leave anything out for fear of reprisals from millions of second graders. The third film, directed by Alfonso Cuaron, was excellent, in part because of how much it diverged from the source novel. It seemed more stream-lined and focussed. (There is nothing worse than a bloated suspense story and that is essentially what all the stories are. Author J.K. Rowling starts by introduces readers to some new aspect of wizarding life and eventually a mystery unfolds until the eventual confrontation in the last act.)Golblet of Fire strips away all the excess and jumps right in. Instead of opening in the Muggle world of the Dursley's (which I've always found tedious, both in the novels and especially the movies), the film starts at the Quidditch World Cup which is almost immediately attacked by Klan-like Death Eaters. From there, we jump right back to Hogwarts where danger is around every corner as Harry competes in the Tri-Wizard Tournament. The tournament acts as the spine of the story and is very well done. I usually hate CGI crap, but this one really works, especially in the first challenge when Harry has to fight a dragon. It looked about as good as this sort of thing has ever looked onscreen.
The most impressive thing about the film is its intensity. Not just in its pacing, but in its performances. Everyone is amped up, yelling and manhandling each other. All theperformers are terrific. Brendan Gleeson steals the first part of the movie as new Defense Against the Dark Arts teacher Mad-Eye Moody. I couldn't help being reminded of R. Lee Ermey's horrifying performance as the drill instructor in Full Metal Jacket. Gleeson does a great riff on that type of character here. But his performance is no match for the appearance of Ralph Fiennes as Voldemort in the third act. In what the New York Times says "may be the greatest screen performance ever delivered without the benefit of a nose," he is sublime. As the snake-like villain, Fiennes give an award-level performance. (He practically usies his perfect diction as a weapon.) He was a perfect choice to play the ultimate villian of this series and his one-scene apearance is a mere preview of great things to come.
As I said before, this is easily the best of the Harry Potter films and the first to reach a Lord of the Rings-like level of quality. It was tied for tenth on my list of films to see this fall. If I see nine films better than this one between now and the end of the year, it's going to be a great season at the movies.
posted by Yossarian at 11/21/2005 10:18:00 AM
5 Comments:
I was going to steal your thunder and write my own review. I couldn't agree more. Although I was a little shocked by the klan-like death eaters. Just completely frightening. And there was a political undertone that I think could use further exploration.
I open the floor.
Also, let it be said that this is the only movie that has some actual grown-up laughs in it. Some of it was very funny.
I saw it with too many kids. Of course they laughed every time they showed Moody's googly eye. That sort of took some of the humor out of it for me. Even the legit funny parts were tempered by kid noise. The perils of seeing a movie at 4 on a Sunday.
I saw it with a pretty mixed crowd and we were all laughing. Not just at the Moody stuff, though some of that was good. I can't think of any specifics, but I definitely remember sitting there thinking "this is funnier than the other ones."
I liked the movie but there were a couple of scenes that I definitely think should have been included in the movie. I couldn't figure out what was bothering me about the movie until now. One major thing was Dumbledore. He would have never put his hands on Harry or accused him of putting his name into the tournament as he did in the movie (he was mad in the book and asks Harry but I don't think he genuinely believed Harry did it). He never really even loses patience with Harry until the Half Blood Prince. One other about Dumbledore was that he did not explain the events leading up to Cedric's death, Harry seeing his parents, the reason behind Voldemort and Harrys wands linking or Voldemort's return. At the end of every book Dumbledore helps Harry understand the significance of the events of the year and I think it was a mistake to not include a scene like that in this movie. That scene at the end of every movie is integral to understanding the complexity of Harry and Dumbledore's relationship.
I guess my last complaint is the movie barely included any scenes with Ron, Harry and Hermione together and Sirius was basically an afterthought. Ron and Hermione are Harry's best friends and the movie made it seem like he stood alone when that has never been the case in any of the books or movies. Sirius was not a major player in this movie but he will be in the next one. I think it was a mistake to only have one scene with him. They might as well have just left him out of the movie all together. I don't think his death in the next movie will mean as much to some members of the audience, especially if they haven't read the books. They will have no idea how much he means to Harry.
Though I have some complaints, overall I think this movie was the best out of the others. The book was extremely long and Mike Newell had to focus on the tournament. I think he did a good job in changing some plot lines. The special effects were amazing, the younger actors are getting better with age and Ralph Fiennes as Voldemort is genius casting (as is Gary Oldman as Sirius).
Post a Comment
<< Home