Jump to content



Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo
- - - - -

Different director for 4th Harry Potter movie Goblet of Fire


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
328 replies to this topic

#1 of 329 OFFLINE   oscar_merkx

oscar_merkx

    Lead Actor



  • 7,632 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 15 2002

Posted July 27 2003 - 10:43 AM

http://filmforce.ign..../430469p1.html

very interesting development indeed
Toastmasters International

Communication is Everything

#2 of 329 OFFLINE   Matt Stone

Matt Stone

    Lead Actor



  • 9,070 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 21 2000

Posted July 27 2003 - 11:16 AM

Hmmm. I'll wait until I hear something official.
In Heaven, everything is fine.
[ 2006 Films | 2005 Films | 2004 Films | 2003 Films | YMDB Top 20 ]
[ Star Wars | Sideshow | HT | DVDs | LDs | AIM: Maulrat87 ]

#3 of 329 OFFLINE   Chris

Chris

    Lead Actor



  • 6,790 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 04 1997

Posted July 27 2003 - 11:46 AM

Same appeared on MSNBC today.

http://www.msnbc.com...5.asp?0dm=L34IL
My Current DVD-Profiler


"I've been Ostrafied!" - Christopher, Sopranos 5/6/07

#4 of 329 OFFLINE   Chad R

Chad R

    Screenwriter



  • 2,174 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 14 1999
  • Real Name:Chad Rouch

Posted July 27 2003 - 12:31 PM

That's interesting. That means that either Cuaron is over budget or over schedule on the current shoot and being difficult about it (the only reason this stage in the game Warners would be unhappy with him) or he's already told Warners he doesn't want to come back. Doesn't matter much, this series seems to be on auto pilot as it is, and I doubt we'll see that much difference between the directors.

#5 of 329 OFFLINE   Phil Florian

Phil Florian

    Screenwriter



  • 1,190 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 10 2001

Posted July 27 2003 - 01:26 PM

I would wait until the third movie comes out before declaring "autopilot." Cuaron has more chops than Columbus, as does Newell. Columbus came across as a hired hack while the newest two have more artistry between them that the series deserves. We will have to see what comes of Azkaban, but I am sure it has a lot of potential to be a great film (seeing as how it is the best of the books, too).

Phil

#6 of 329 OFFLINE   Adam Lenhardt

Adam Lenhardt

    Executive Producer



  • 14,399 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 16 2001
  • LocationAlbany, NY

Posted July 27 2003 - 01:41 PM

Has anyone else seen the Newsweek article from the Azkaban set? Obviously not, if you think the franchise is on auto-pilot:
http://www.msnbc.com/news/943721.asp

#7 of 329 ONLINE   Tino

Tino

    Producer



  • 5,636 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 19 1999
  • Real Name:Valentino
  • LocationMetro NYC

Posted July 27 2003 - 02:03 PM

Great article. Thanks Adam. Apparently the Potter series is on anything but auto-pilot.Posted Image
It's gonna be a hell of a ride. I'm ready. .

#8 of 329 OFFLINE   oscar_merkx

oscar_merkx

    Lead Actor



  • 7,632 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 15 2002

Posted July 28 2003 - 01:17 AM

yep thanks for the link to that intriguing article

Posted Image
Toastmasters International

Communication is Everything

#9 of 329 OFFLINE   Brian Kidd

Brian Kidd

    Screenwriter



  • 1,718 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 14 2000

Posted July 28 2003 - 01:31 AM

Sweet. Maybe Cuaron will make a Potter movie that I can stomach more than once. Love the books, but Columbus really needed to learn what should and shouldn't be left in a film.
---------------------------------------------
Support Film Preservation before it's too late!
---------------------------------------------

#10 of 329 OFFLINE   Chad R

Chad R

    Screenwriter



  • 2,174 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 14 1999
  • Real Name:Chad Rouch

Posted July 28 2003 - 07:27 AM

With Columbus still attached as producer, Kloves still the writer on all of them and Rowling so protective of her baby, I'd still say auto-pilot. Sure, the actors might talk about the different style to directing, but that doesn't mean we'll see a vast difference on the screen after Columbus and Rowling have their say about the final cut.

#11 of 329 OFFLINE   Eric Fisher

Eric Fisher

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 172 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 22 2002

Posted July 28 2003 - 07:38 AM

a bit risky putting a one-hit-wonder in on something of this scope isn't it?

#12 of 329 OFFLINE   TheLongshot

TheLongshot

    Producer



  • 4,119 posts
  • Join Date: May 12 2000

Posted July 28 2003 - 07:50 AM

Quote:
a bit risky putting a one-hit-wonder in on something of this scope isn't it?


Who's the one-hit-wonder? Both Cuaron and Newell both have a decent amount of films behind them...

Jason

#13 of 329 OFFLINE   Ricardo C

Ricardo C

    Producer



  • 5,060 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 14 2002

Posted July 28 2003 - 08:01 AM

The Strokes are an edgy band? Ok...

(Yes, it's not related to the film, but I just found that comment funny :P))

As for the films themselves, here's hoping the three leads stick with the series till the end. They may have been unknowns when they shot the first one, but now it's hard to imagine anyone else playing Harry, Hermione, and Ron.

Man, an hour wasted on this sig! Thanks, Toshiba! :P

#14 of 329 OFFLINE   Adam Lenhardt

Adam Lenhardt

    Executive Producer



  • 14,399 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 16 2001
  • LocationAlbany, NY

Posted July 28 2003 - 04:30 PM

Quote:
Sure, the actors might talk about the different style to directing, but that doesn't mean we'll see a vast difference on the screen after Columbus and Rowling have their say about the final cut.
I do. Rowling (while having final cut rights) has thus far only interfered with the script stage. Once it went to filming, she pretty much left the hell alone. And while Columbus has an influence, it's not like he's on the set from day-to-day. If he was there'd be no reason for him not to direct. I very much doubt this is on auto-pilot any more than Lord of the Rings is. No matter how you cut it, Cuaron doesn't have studio hack record. (And if you don't believe he stirring things up quite a bit, check out here for proof to the contrary) Just the Newsweek pictures alone point to a radically different voice behind the camera. The only way it could be less "auto pilot" would be to abandon Kloves' script and Rowling's source and go off on a tangent. And I don't know why anyone who's a fan of the book would want that.

#15 of 329 OFFLINE   Galen_V

Galen_V

    Second Unit



  • 352 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 12 2003

Posted July 29 2003 - 05:00 PM

From reading the Newsweek piece, it has become clear that Cuaron has forgotten a major point in the setting of the novels-Azkaban takes place in 1993 (I believe-give or take one or two years), yet he is dressing the actors in 2003 clothing. While Rowling's herself has slipped in her setting a little bit herself (when I reread Goblet of Fire a few nights ago I noticed she mentioned a PlayStation-obviously not around in 1994), so I am sure it will go unnoticed. Also, is that just me or is that a tattoo on Sirius's neck?

#16 of 329 ONLINE   Tino

Tino

    Producer



  • 5,636 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 19 1999
  • Real Name:Valentino
  • LocationMetro NYC

Posted July 29 2003 - 10:06 PM

AFAIK, the books and films are not set in any particular year other than the present. Sorcerer's Stone was written in 1997 according to the text copyright, Chamber in 1998, Azkaban in 1999, and Goblet was written in 2000, when millions of Playstations were available, btw.

Could you list a passage in any of the books when the year it is taking place is mentioned? I don't recall any.Posted Image

And IMO, the style of clothes being worn would be a very minor issue.
It's gonna be a hell of a ride. I'm ready. .

#17 of 329 OFFLINE   Matt Stone

Matt Stone

    Lead Actor



  • 9,070 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 21 2000

Posted July 29 2003 - 10:47 PM

I don't recall any passages regarding the time that the books take place in either.
In Heaven, everything is fine.
[ 2006 Films | 2005 Films | 2004 Films | 2003 Films | YMDB Top 20 ]
[ Star Wars | Sideshow | HT | DVDs | LDs | AIM: Maulrat87 ]

#18 of 329 OFFLINE   Mark Hedges

Mark Hedges

    Second Unit



  • 442 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 21 2003

Posted July 30 2003 - 12:47 AM

In Chamber of secrets, Sir Nicholas gives his deathday as oct 31 1492, and he is celebrating is 500th deathday.

Mark

#19 of 329 OFFLINE   Brian Kidd

Brian Kidd

    Screenwriter



  • 1,718 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 14 2000

Posted July 30 2003 - 03:51 AM

Mark, could it be that Rowling hadn't particularly thought about that particular piece of continuity when she wrote it? I'm with the camp that says that the books don't take place in any particular set of years. The Playstation that was mentioned could be the Playstation 5 for all we know. I don't think it's anything to get all worried about.
---------------------------------------------
Support Film Preservation before it's too late!
---------------------------------------------

#20 of 329 OFFLINE   Adam_S

Adam_S

    Producer



  • 6,119 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 08 2001

Posted July 30 2003 - 06:38 AM

And the events in Chamber of secrets speak of Tom Riddle and Hagrid attending Hogwarts fifty years ago, this makes both of them near 70, and Dumbledore would need to be 100 or above (since I got the impression that he was already rather old.) Then in order of the Phoenix, one of the OWL testers mentions testing Dumbledore in his Newts, making her at least 130 or so. The chocolate frog card also mentions Dumbledore aiding Nicholas Flamel in discovering (or was it ascertaining the properties of? I can't remember) the Sorcerer's Stone, but Flamel is 665 years old, making Dumbledore even older (as well as that witch). He also helped defeat a major dark wizard in 1945 (!) suggesting he was already quite accomplished at probably in his late twenties or thirties at that point at least.

If you really want to get into trouble, ask yourself why the creators of Hogwarts castle designed W.C.s with modern, muggle-like sinks and toilets. Especially the sinks, which had to be around for Salazar Slytherin to hide his entrance to the chamber.

If you start examining years and dates there are all sorts of little authorial errors I"m more than willing to forgive. I don't think Rowling intends for it to be set to a specific era other than modern.
 





Forum Nav Content I Follow