hgar78

surprised this isn't posted yet...

http://www.harrypotterspage.com/inde...rt_from=&ucat=

Baron Of Hell

Just looking at the films he has done. I haven't seen or heard of any of them. How is his other films?

hgar78

i think he is mostly a TV director...i'd never heard of him, either.

FantasticVSDoom

Interesting pick for this movie...Such a big movie for a "new" director to take on. We'll see in the end.

Geofferson

Initially, I thought this thread was referring to the great British director, Peter Yates. (The Dresser, Breaking Away, Bullitt, Krull). Never heard of David Yates.

Get Me Coffee

I'm thrilled that they have these movies popping out every couple of years....I just hope the quanity doesn't degrade the quality. to keeping the core cast!

rexinnih

Wow. Order of the Phoenix would be a challenging shoot for any director. Hope he's up for it. Doesn't matter, I'll see it anyway.

tofu

His second comment about falling short of his budget on his first movie attempt doesn't really inspire a lot of confidence. I guess we'll see how it turns out though.

madara

Blah, so much of soul and plot where cut out of third one I have no faith left in this movies.

Matthew Chmiel

So who did this man blow again to get the job?

DRG

I have a bad feeling about this. He has nothing on his resume that anyone has heard of, and he hasn't even read all the books? He may have some talent, who knows, but why take a chance with such a huge property on a complete unknown?

Groucho

I think you're in the minority on that one. Most have found the third movie to be the strongest of the series.

hgar78

i agree, i loved the 3rd. i felt that it was impossible to capture the book in one movie but i was completely proven wrong! and being the shortest of the series, very impressive!! very soulful and touching, too.

jaeufraser

I agree, Azkaban was the first Potter movie that I would say was really damn good, whereas the first two, while probably more faithful were in general rather flat and dull. I'm hoping Cuaron goes back to the HP series at some point, as his entry was really the best. I'm not a book follower though, just watched the films, but as a film part 3 is leaps and bounds better than its predecessor. Some people prefer slavish devotion to the books though.

Seantn

Andrea Yates?

riley_dude

So did I. Bummer.

Joe Molotov

Leave it to someone with a "DVD Talk Unrated Edition" ranking to bring up that.

Matthew Chmiel

Everyone makes the joke when Mike Newell got the job for Goblet of Fire. Now I make the joke for someone who has even less of a resume than Newell, and I get shit upon. Booo!

Dr. DVD

I totally agree. The first two were faithful, but under Columbus' direction the movies came across as trying to sell toys and products first and telling the story second. In fact, you almost got the vibe off the first two that they were afraid to make some changes for the screen adaptation.
Cuaron definitely set out to tell a story first and foremost, as this one didn't look that glittery and the merchandising was rather second rate as compared to the first two. While I loved the books, there is a lot of redundant material that can afford to be left out without affecting the main plot.

mimi

I thought the 3rd one had the most soul. It actually gave me hope that HP movies won't all suck, because I was really losing hope after the first two.

jaeufraser

Actually, I'd say the third one was the only one WITH a soul. I think the major complaint about the first two were that they were soulless, pretty to look at, but really kinda dull. They're not terrible movies, but they really seemed more like a string of scenes here and there.

I think it's kind of telling that the author herself finds the third film to be her favorite (as do, well, most critics).

Baron Of Hell

Though I liked the third movie I did not leave thinking it did justice to the book like the other 2 did. This was the first book where things get dark but instead they went disney. They didn't show the cruel side of Harry's father. The ringwraths( I forget their true name) were tone way down. The werewolf looked like a giant puppy. They never went into why the rat betrayed Harry's dad.

The was good but it was a very bad translation. The movie catered more for people that haven't read the book which isn't a bad thing in general but for the fans its kind of a slap in the face. I wont be rushing out to see the next one. Instead I'll wait for the video or when the crowds have died down.

If I hadn't read the book the movie would have been the best of the 3 but instead I saw what it could have been and was left disappointed. I have no doubt they will take all the dark moments out of next one also and they'll never show the reason why Professor Snape hates Harry. I doubt they'll show anything that makes Harry less the hero.

silentbob007

I don't think the "cruel side" of James Potter was ever brought up until OotP. I also curious as to how the dementors were toned down. After all, I think the movie made them more ominous than they were in the book (the whole cold issue).

tanman

No, no, no, no, no. Third one was horrible. A horrible empty shadow of the story. I have already posted my reasons enough on this forum. Basically he sacrifices character development for visual effects.

talemyn

We've been over this in a couple of PoA threads already.

Short version of my opinion (read the old threads if you are interested in more detail) . . . the third was decidedly the best of the three movies, yet, it also could have been much better by adding in about 15-30 minutes more to flesh out some plot points.