Well Harry Potter - Goblet of Fire showed for the first time in Theaters today. Did anyone go and see it?

And how was it?

decent graphics, bland story... as usual. the "Mad-eye" is horrible.

It hasn't gotten very good reviews... I think I'll wait until the DVD comes out and rent it.

I'm going tomorrow. Looks fabulous.

it wasn't too bad...I never read the books but i've enjoyed the movies. I didn't think Mad Eye was horrible but there was something about the film I didn't like...can't put my finger on it. If you dug the previous installments you should be able to dig this one.

They bounced around too much, changed too many things, and gave away too many surprises. This was my favorite book... but I don't think that they had enough time for all of it to be a film. Perhaps they should start doing like what Jackson did with the LOTR films and release extended versions on DVD.

or,

pt1, pt2. kill bill style.

got a long story to tell, split it.

you don't need to have everything in the book on film...besides film is a different interpretation and should be looked at as its own beast, but comparrisons are always gonna happen...anyway thats how I see it.

indeed, but some people moan about that kinda shit.

hell, i wouldnt wanna watch LOTR the way it was written exactly with all the bits in it.

Oh, no kidding. Lord of the BO-Ring! ...that sucked... but my point remains.

Still, there were certain things that were barely given a chance (like more explanation on Snape's character and who 'Mad-Eye" is) and others that were not shown at all (the Quidditch Tournament). And then they just threw Cedric in this one without too much character development (hard to do in the time alotted, I'll admit)... but how are we supposed to care about this guy if we don't even know who he is?

That's what bothered me, mostly. They just jumped through a lot of stuff. Still, I think that this one was much better than the last installment.

They HAD to jump through stuff or the movie would have been 6 hours long!

Personally, the book is better, but then isn't it always? I loved the film - the funny bits were REALLY funny! You HAVE to see it on the big screen though, DVD just wouldn't give it justice.

Out of 10 - I'd give it 9.

True but what they left out was stuff that should of been important to carry over into the fifith story, people and events that where important to the next chapter of the movies.

and somethings where just them being lazy in not wanting to animate the Creatures, because some of the scenes where just as long as i would of thought from the books, and i mean this seirs is wrakeing money with all the merch like starwars they could of paid for the CG work

I still like the movie, saw it twice, second time was on IMAX which was really awsome.

Well, just got back from seeing Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. It was good- very intense despite they skipped many parts- but still good.

Umm, though it eould have been cool if they put the whole story in- but it would be like showgun and take 8-10 hours- which is hardly bad for some of us Harry Potter fans.

Ok, I did see it opening night at midnight, and here is my take on it...

Without having read the book:
Great movie. Visually entertaining, great characters (although the newer ones were a bit underdeveloped), and a familar setting that makes it easy to get into the film. Good story line continuation (especially the ending) and it leaves you wanting to see the next one. I'd give it an 8/10. I wasn't pissed that I had paid $17 (me and the girl) to see it.

With having had read the book:
With-in the first 15 minutes of the movie, I was pissed. They didn't even show the Quidditch match!! That easily could've been the biggest scene in the movie, including storyline and graphics. Then through-out the rest of the movie, they show partial scenes of a much bigger storyline (such as the Cho scene), or just cut that part of the story out all together. Still, knowing what REALLY happened between the lines, I enjoyed the movie. But if you've read the books and liked them at all, the movie takes a hit. I'd say 7/10. Still wasn't pissed that I'd paid for it, but I believe that it could've been better.

And someone mentioned that they didn't like the movie because it seemed that something was missing, and what that was (for me at least) was about half of the freakin' story. I believe that each book is longer than the last, and so accordingly, the next movie should be longer than the last. Instead, we have a way bigger and more complex story shoved into a time-slot that fitted the first, maybe the second book. The LoTR movies were over 2 hours a piece, and hell, I thought I'd see my 37th birthday before the last one ended, but still, I sat and watched it, and so did 120 million other people. This movie could've been a bit longer (like an hour) and it still would've sold and brought in the same amount of viewers/money. It just felt like this film was very rushed in the storyline.

potter sucks, i fell asleep in the thearter for the first one. i would have been mad but i was theartre hopping so it was free.

it was enjoyable...even with my daughter clipping her tongue and a five minute wail of pain in the packed theatre.

i was more impressed by the amounts of people and rude insanity they demonstrated when showing up five minutes before show time on opening night, and agry that they had to wait in line to be seated, even if they purchased their tickets a week in advance. Stupid people!

And that is why you don't go on the opening night.

I still haven't seen it. *tear*

i realize that, unfortunately i was ticketing, i had no choice but to smile and get a twisted since of justice telling them to enjoy the movie.

At least you put up with it- I'd probably have said something.