Post #67,514
12/9/02 11:13:01 AM
|
Film:Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets
Let's just say I'm glad I didn't pay to see this film.
My niece's birthday was this weekend, and in celebration, her folks decided to take her to see this flick. Given that we're the godparents* as well, our attendance was mandatory. Luckily, her folks were paying.
FX: Okay. Nothing too blatantly bad, but nothing good.
Style: Definitely a bit darker than the first one.
Quality: Ugh. Acting was horrible, story was choppy, film was just downright BAD. Don't bother with this turd. I think I laughed once during the entire film, and it wasn't intentional on the film's part.
Don't go see it. Even for free. I want my three hours back.
* The bit in Cryptonomicon about Filipino Roman Catholics and their extended families, as described by Bobby Shaftoe, is SPOT ON. Admittedly, the same thing can be said about Irish Roman Catholics, who I'm convinced are basically Filipinos with lighter hair and skin.
"...the middle of fighting a war against religious extremism is not the time to do something offensive to God." - Some idiot.
|
Post #67,519
12/9/02 11:18:00 AM
|
Disagree.
I liked the film. Of course, I've read the books as well, so I see the films as a visual adjunct to the books.
Re: style: the books get progressively darker as well. The fourth book is especially dark compared to the first three.
Regards,
-scott anderson
"Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
|
Post #67,524
12/9/02 11:22:52 AM
|
There's nothing wrong with Harry Potter
that couldn't be solved by the addition of big guns, fast cars, and Rutger Hauer (in Split Second mode).
Peter
[link|http://www.debian.org|Shill For Hire]
[link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal]
[link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Blog]
|
Post #67,546
12/9/02 12:10:00 PM
|
And the actress playing Hermione Granger
Growing up to play one of the lifeguards in "Baywatch".
lincoln
"Four score and seven years ago, I had a better sig"
|
Post #67,525
12/9/02 11:23:34 AM
|
Just for the record...
I have no problems with a story taking a turn for the darker. Just IMO this one didn't work for me.
"...the middle of fighting a war against religious extremism is not the time to do something offensive to God." - Some idiot.
|
Post #67,535
12/9/02 11:44:57 AM
|
2nd
Thought the film worked well. If you went in expecting great acting...then you didn't see the first one ;-)
HP, Star Wars et al are NOT high drama or serious attempts at cinema...relax..shut your "critical" brain down...pretend you're a kid again and freakin ENJOY YOURSELF :-)
You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! Laurie Anderson
[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
|
Post #67,573
12/9/02 1:43:34 PM
|
Exactly.
Regards,
-scott anderson
"Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
|
Post #67,579
12/9/02 1:55:45 PM
|
You say tomato...
Hey, I just said I didn't like it - not that I came to watch it with expectations of Oscar-calibur material. Believe me, I can enjoy a good mindless film with the best of them... ;-)
/me has spent WAY too much time watching Jackie Chan flicks.
"...the middle of fighting a war against religious extremism is not the time to do something offensive to God." - Some idiot.
|
Post #67,592
12/9/02 2:31:42 PM
|
No...I say toe-mah-toe ;-)
You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! Laurie Anderson
[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
|
Post #67,527
12/9/02 11:30:34 AM
|
The editing actually got WORSE -- unbelievable
I can't tell you how many times I sat there waiting for the scene to end, but we just had to get that last cheesy silent reaction shot, inevitably reacting to something which should have been a major plot point but wasn't due to the bad writing and bad acting. "It's just not working!" (I can hear the echoes finally reaching me from the cutting room) "The audience can't tell what they're supposed to feel about this scene!" "Well, let's get 2nd unit to shoot a double-take from Hermione! THEN they'll know..." et cetera.
Not to mention I as an audience member had *zero* empathy at the end for Little Miss I've-almost-got-a-PART-in-this-movie Weasley, and I'd even read the book. Pivotal plot-moving character who got cast aside to showcase more awed looks from Herm, Harry, and Ron. I swear this director went to a Christian college, where they drill pastors to "tell them what you're going to tell them, then tell them, then tell them that you told them." Kids are not that stupid, Chris. We could've used more plot and more character, and less fore- and hind-shadowing.
* Disclaimer: I'm working as a Directing coach right now, so I'm overly critical/analytical. Take the above with a grain of salt.
Many fears are born of stupidity and ignorance -
Which you should be feeding with rumour and generalisation.
BOfH, 2002 "Episode" 10
|
Post #67,566
12/9/02 1:21:45 PM
|
Nothing like a major movie
... to bring out the shallowness in a book. I enjoyed the books to some extent, but the movie spoiled them for me. I don't think I'll care to see or read the rest of the series.
--
We have only 2 things to worry about: That
things will never get back to normal, and that they already have.
|
Post #67,583
12/9/02 2:03:44 PM
|
Dark is okay. I like dark. (spoilers)
And I haven't read the books.
The girl seemed to much of a throw away character. No depth. No personality. No anything. Just some announced relationship to the main characters. In any other series (say "Star Trek" or something) I wouldn't ever expect to see her again in any other episode.
Also, the bit with the car was never explained. Why did it keep showing up to save them?
As for Tom, I find it difficult to believe that he'd make an anagram of his name and use "I am" in it.
And doesn't Harry know more than one spell? Even the comic side-kick attempts more spells.
It's not a bad movie. The snake was boring. The spiders were good. It was based on a kid's book. It just seems to be missing a lot of material.
|
Post #67,645
12/9/02 6:11:37 PM
|
Well, I loved it
Then again, I thought the half of Lord Of The Rings FOTR that I saw was basically a big yawn-fest. So what would I know? :)
But anyway, reviews are opinions, and I still value your opinion.
John. Busy lad.
|
Post #67,744
12/10/02 1:23:57 AM
|
Simply, it's not filmable!___think radio.
Few.. 'movies' can capture say, mysteries - as in early radio shows. Then there's film noir, whose black & white Cannot be improved by giga-bit color (look at some of &#%*$ Turner's 'colorized' ones for proof. You will switch to manual and turn the color Off, in 5 min - unless you are unredeemably cuthless). In both - you Had to use *your* imagination; not just absorb vegetatively.
Hell, I can 'review' this flic before seeing it! ;-)
IMO, these books are gems. They *are* for kids but with enough (occasional) psych-training for adulthood? not to bore This 'adult' often. That is, I see the author attempting to sneak in a few gems of wisdom about dealing with umm difficulty? - that I deem that there is potentially much educational value for children, along with the romps. 'Wisdom' is prized here - not Basic Y2K entrepreneurial dishonesty (that is present, of course - as bad example).
These are about expanding imagination, about what-if-I-were in this predicament? How might I react, pause and maybe come up with a plan? I don't expect! the movies to come close, any more than LOTR was ever meant to be a '00 Murican-style, "shoot the travelogue" thingie for folks who usually Don't Read and want everything to be "shown".
Emotions still have to be evoked via empathy, from recollection.. in the reader -- not by facial expressions on a model IMhO. No wonder the filming style / directing prolly sucked, as tse reports. (But I Expect That, don't you? It AIN'T FILMABLE! but we just GOTTA do it anyway, in a country of non-read-to thus non-reading kiddies, who are made hyper by the noise)
Hey at least they get to all come to the same place and share the mood - hopefully the mood evoked from the reading, first! Seeing the movies INSTEAD of the reading? Sheer folly for any age.
I'll prolly see it when it comes out on DVD later, as I did the first - I could appreciate the sets more: because I had already seen them from the words. WTF do you Expect from a film, anyway ? 'Realistic' portrayal of verbal-fantasy?
Ashton P-Reviews
(I'll admit one prejudice for the author: I just LOVE that these stories piss off the Fundamentalists of any stripe! Imagination is anathema to the Certainty brigades, even though their stuff is a product of much the same - which when noticed, surely enlarges the Testiness? deep down..)
Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle..
|
