Which is the best Harry Potter movie? (1 Viewer)

[Noel Aguirre]

Harry Potter And The Sorcerers Stone was released on November 16, 2001.

Spiderman was released almost six months later on May 3 2002.

Correct but Spider-man was also slated to be released that fall but had to be pulled to remove the World Trade Center scenes and the delay was a major disappointment as the trailer had been released.. So instead that fall I went to see HP not knowing anything about it except that it was a bestselling children’s book and found it too long and tedious. Also imho the UK title should have been kept- HP and the Philosophers Stone as I was expecting it to contain more sorcery and less magic. So when Spider-Man was released 6 months later it delivered that “movie magic”that HP didn’t.

 

[Mikael Soderholm]

I thought the 1st 3 just spent too much time with Harry and his pals as they did Hogwarts stuff and they didn't push their plots very well.

I think that content works in the books but becomes tedious in the movies!

"GoF" was the first where I felt they really started to emphasize story movement over unrelated wizardry...

Well, they're basically Enid Blyton for a new generatrion, there is not supposed to be much of a plot, just things happening to kids you can relate to.
You guys do remember Enid Blyton, no?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enid_Blyton
Just like Rowling, more a producer of books than an author, as such.

Sorry if I seem harsh, I actually only read the first one, and barely finished it, but the films were ok, but still, not anthems, only well made genre films, and more so because of the directors and screen writers than the original author.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

Correct but Spider-man was also slated to be released that fall but had to be pulled to remove the World Trade Center scenes and the delay was a major disappointment as the trailer had been released.. So instead that fall I went to see HP not knowing anything about it except that it was a bestselling children’s book and found it too long and tedious. Also imho the UK title should have been kept- HP and the Philosophers Stone as I was expecting it to contain more sorcery and less magic. So when Spider-Man was released 6 months later it delivered that “movie magic”that HP didn’t.

I'm 99% sure "Spider-Man" was always planned to come out spring 2002.

9/11 impacted trailers and the final cut but not the movie's release date...

 

[Tino]

but still, not anthems, only well made genre films, and more so because of the directors and screen writers than the original author.

Strange statement considering you only read the first book.

Imo, the books are the reason the films were successful. The source material was so rich that the films benefited as a result.

 

[Tino]

I'm 99% sure "Spider-Man" was always planned to come out spring 2002.

9/11 impacted trailers and the final cut but not the movie's release date...

As per Wikipedia, before filming began it was scheduled for a late 2001 premiere. Once it was in production it was always scheduled for a May 2002 release. The 9/11 terrorist attacks had no effect on the release date.

Wikipedia

With Spider-Man cast, filming was set to begin November 2000 in New York City and on Sonysoundstages. The film was set for release a year later,[11] but when the film was postponed to be released on May 3, 2002,[50] filming officially began on January 8, 2001[49] in Culver City, California. After the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, certain sequences were re-filmed, and certain images of the Twin Towers were digitally erased from the film.

 

[Noel Aguirre]

I'm 99% sure "Spider-Man" was always planned to come out spring 2002.

9/11 impacted trailers and the final cut but not the movie's release date...

As per Wikipedia, before filming began it was scheduled for a late 2001 premiere. Once it was in production it was always scheduled for a May 2002 release. The 9/11 terrorist attacks had no effect on the release date.

Wikipedia

With Spider-Man cast, filming was set to begin November 2000 in New York City and on Sonysoundstages. The film was set for release a year later,[11] but when the film was postponed to be released on May 3, 2002,[50] filming officially began on January 8, 2001[49] in Culver City, California. After the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, certain sequences were re-filmed, and certain images of the Twin Towers were digitally erased from the film.

I stand to be corrected! Thanks guys for the clarification. I must be remembering the trailer and I think it ran that fall.

 

[Mikael Soderholm]

Strange statement considering you only read the first book.

Imo, the books are the reason the films were successful. The source material was so rich that the films benefited as a result.

Perhaps, but there is only so much tea drinking in British boarding schools I can take, and I did read all of the Enid Blyton books when I was young, and after HP 1, I didn't feel like doing it again.
But I did enjoy the films.
The abundance of material is one of the problems, though. Stuff introduced in one book, and used there, but then gone, or forgotten in the next book. It's like there wasn't a plan, and maybe there wasn't. Let's have a candy that tastes like anything, let's have something that makes you breathe under water, let's have time travel, let's have spiders, let's have this and that, just because. I'm not sure it was the richness that made the films successful, but rather the ability of the writers/directors to try and pick out the story hidden in there, although a lot of bells and whistles still remained.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I disagree with that assessment. I think it was very well planned out and that Rowling in the books (and the filmmakers with the series) did a good job of laying things out early on that would come back in big ways by the finale.

 

[Tino]

.
The abundance of material is one of the problems, though. Stuff introduced in one book, and used there, but then gone, or forgotten in the next book. It's like there wasn't a plan, and maybe there wasn't. Let's have a candy that tastes like anything, let's have something that makes you breathe under water, let's have time travel, let's have spiders, let's have this and that, just because. I'm not sure it was the richness that made the films successful, but rather the ability of the writers/directors to try and pick out the story hidden in there, although a lot of bells and whistles still remained.

How do you know this if you only read the first book??

 

[Lord Dalek]

The only things notable about Enid Blyton is Noddy and the fact that she kinda sorta but not really created Scooby-Doo.

 

[Mikael Soderholm]

How do you know this if you only read the first book??

How do I know what? The stuff I mentioned was from the movies, they were overloaded with stuff not necessary for the plot, I just assumed there was even more like it in the books, but maybe I was wrong, maybe it was put there by the screenwriters.

 

[Tino]

How do I know what? The stuff I mentioned was from the movies, they were overloaded with stuff not necessary for the plot, I just assumed there was even more like it in the books, but maybe I was wrong, maybe it was put there by the screenwriters.

You do know what happens when you assume don’t you?

You said books not movies.
“Stuff introduced in one book, and used there, but then gone, or forgotten in the next book.”

 

[Eve Babcock]

harry potter and the sorcerer's stone was the best Harry Potter movie for me

 

[steve jaros]

My top three are:

Prisoner of Azkhaban
Sorcery's Stone
Deathly Hollows Part 1

IMO, "Prisoner" is technically the best, it could stand easily on its own as a film. There is a spirit of foreboding about it and the story is well executed. The acting is also top notch, with real growth in the key characters.

Sorcery's Stone will always be in my top three because it set the standard technically and artistically for the entire series. Kind of like the first Star Wars film, this movie really raised the bar for fantasy film and storytelling. Your jaw dropped at how well it was brought to life.

DH #1 I like because it's Harry and Hermione's story. Their relationship drives this one and the actors disappear into the characters. They both come through because of the strength of the bonds forged and it feels so real because we've been watching them for 9 years at this point. It's also the most harrowing movie in the series, a darkly beautiful nightmare.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

My top three are:

Prisoner of Azkhaban
Sorcery's Stone
Deathly Hollows Part 1

Azkaban
Sorcerer's
Hallows

Carry on!