Who else hated the 4th Harry Potter movie??

Question

Ok, I love Harry Potter, always have but i alway thought that the books where a little bit better than the movies. Untill the 4th, beacause then i thought that the book was way better than the movie. The 4th book was my favorite and i was startled at how horrable the 4th movie was. All my friends loved the movie thou. is it just me who think that there was ALOT missing???

Answer 1

There was a lot missing, because it's a huge book. I thought the film was quite rushed and I was sad when they didn't include anything about S.P.E.W. and how Barty Crouch Jr.'s explantion wasn't anything more than a couple lines and they had nothing to do with what he was doing all year.

That being said, I didn't hate the film. It was okay. It could have been done a lot better and I'm really hoping that the Order of the Phoenix doesn't feel as rushed as Goblet of Fire.

Answer 2

In general the books that movies are based on are much better. The 4th Harry Potter movie was okay, but it wasn`t great, although it was a HUGE improvement from the 3rd movie. The 4th movie just included the high-points of the story and lacked all the small details. It also included a lot that wasn`t in the book, which was extremely annoying. I`d say the movie could be great for those who haven`t read the book first, because in the end you`ll feel the movie missed a lot if you`d read the book beforehand.

Answer 3

I hate the 4th and the 3rd movie coz many things which are interesting in the book are cut.I was looking forward to this World Cup and it was not there.During the yule ball they made Hermione look like as if she was a superstar whereas in the book she was unnoticed by many for a short time.I enjoyed the part when Pansy looked at Hermione with her mouth wide open.In the movie Harry actually sees Barty Crouch II which is totally stupid.In
the third movie they don't show "Griyffindor versus Ravenclaw"
which was my favourite chapter.I liked the first and the second movie.In my locality too everyone says the 4th movie is the best.There are abt a hundred things to criticise in the 4th movie for which I do not have the patience.

Answer 4

Yes there was lot missing. Whatever happened to S.P.E.W?

But did I hated it? -
No way. I mean even if they DID forget alot of stuff, that doesnt stop it from being Harry POTTER.

Yeah sure the director and screen writer was a little dumb leaving important things out..but hey thats life.
People are always leaving things out in movies. There's nothing we can do about it.

First time I saw it I was couldnt think straight I could only smile, no idea what I was doing or what was happening, I was just happy I was watching HARRY POTTER! So, I went to see it again...I was then sorta disappointed. I noticed every little thing they forgot.
But now after watching it thousands of times I'm kinda ok with it again. Still it does make me mad they forgot s.p.e.w....hmph.

Horrible? - no.

Brilliant? - no way.

I think the part though that really got me was when Harry brought back Cedric's dead body...that, to me, is what helps it from being horrible. the overall mood of that part is devastating. Mr. Diggory...the way he yelled and cried...is just horrible it's so realistic. It makes you really feel as if this guy has died. And Harry there...enough to break your heart...the way he fights Dumbledores grasp to get back to Ced. *tear* Haha, I'll stop rambling about Cedric because that has nothing to do with the question.

But yeah I agree, The 4th book was WAY better than the movie.

Answer 5

I completely agree. There were so many things wrong with the movie when compared to the book that I thought it was just a waste of money. I was actually confused at parts, and the 4th book I've read like twice! My imagination did a better job on picturing it than the director.

Answer 6

I absolutely LOATHED the fourth Harry Potter movie. I hated its predecessors, but this was the worst. I was so angry with Mike Newell's direction that i wrote a long and mad review on Yahoo!. They left out the house elves entirely, not to mention changed what actually happened at the Quidditch World Cup. It was a dreadful movie, and I doubt the next one will be any better, unfortunately. Chris Columbus did the best job out of all of the terrible movies.

Answer 7

I also think so that they had cropped a lot in the movies. I feel that the books are loads better than the movies as in the movies they have been changing the whole storyline since the past 5 years.

Answer 8

I don't care for the fourth movie, but I really hated the third movie. For me, the movies are something like:

Sorcerers Stone. Chris Colombus does a good job of bringing the book to life. Naturally as Harry Potter is a fantasy world he's got to use lot's of special affects, but the story remains the key to the movie, and as such he pays it more attention than the effects. They become just the tool they should be rather than more important than the story itself. Naturally there are many differences from the book, but at least there's no rushed feeling and Colombus at least tried to stay fairly close to the book. Best movie of the series so far.

Chamber of Secrets. Columbus returns as director. Again he seems to follow the book as well as can be expected for most movies based on books. But sadly this time he's more intrested in the special effects, spending more time with them than he does the actual story. As such, the non-effects oriented scenes seem more rushed and the story becomes more of a means to getting to the next effects oriented scene. But at least the story's still important enough not to pull quite the same hack job on it as will happen with future movies. Leaving it overall the second best of the series.

Prisoner of Azkaban. Colombus steps down as director, becoming producer instead. Alfonso Cuaron steps in to butcher.... I mean direct the third movie. No, I mean really do mean butcher the third movie adaptation of the book. Only scenes Cuaron seems to like from the book get much in the way of screen time, otherwise most scenes feel far too rushed. Some things, such as the talking shruken heads, get added when we could have done without them. Others get even get changed for the worse, like no students being allowed in the Three Broomsticks on the day Harry learns why Sirius is believed to be in league with Voldemort. And still others are moved well out of their placement, like Harry getting the firebolt at the very end of the movie. Too much of the book is missing and it feels like Alfonso Cuaron and the Prisoner of Azkaban would have been a much better title. With three Harry Potter movies left to go, this worst movie of the series so far can only hope one of them will take it's place (and will find out on the 11th if that will be fairly soon).

Goblet of Fire. Columbus steps down even as producer and has no apparent involvement with this one, and one wonders if it's because he had other projects he was more involved in or because he was disgusted with what happened to the third movie. Thankfully Cuaron also steps down and Mike Newell steps in as the new director. Not so thankfully, Newell is convinced by Cuaron to cut enough of the subplots to do a single movie instead of two movies released within a few months of each other as the studio wanted. Oh what we might have gotten if not for Cuaron's interference. At least Newell followed the course of the book, even though he wiped out about three quarters or more of it, and didn't switch the order of the Tri-Wizard cup. Too bad he did alter some characterizations. (Did anyone else find Myrtle to have become a serious pervert in the fourth movie? If she'd been flesh and blood instead of a ghost, she'd probably have tried something with Harry.) Over all, it ended up as the third best of the movie, I just wish Newell had done two movies so that we could have gotten more of the book in there.

Answer 9

I didn't hate it but I do prefer the books. It is so frustrating because it's was confusing to my friends who hadn't read the book. So the whole movie I was explaining all the stuff they didn't get. I don't get why they won't just read the book. They did leave out a whole bunch. But the thing that is still the most annoying thing was in the 3rd movie, they didn't say who the mauraders were. Geez!!!!!! That was cool to me!

Answer 10

I never look at the movies as an adaption of the book, I look at them as a way to see a visual effect to the novels. The major plots were present but movies based on books rarely tell all. Reading the books AND watching the movies is good for me :)

I loved the movie.