wow he looks just like snape!!

I must re-read book 6, I don’t recall a vampire lol!

To Kerrie, I also would definately go and watch a HP four hour movie but they make such a large revenue from non HP fans going to see them and I just dont think that many of them would be willing to go and see a movie that long. For me OotP was my favourite Hp movie to date, although I also really enjoyed PoA (although I didnt like the way the warewolf looked!). The reason why is this: I think the first two movies really followed the book, and direct lines were taken ect ect but for some reason I was a bit bored. The movies were long and they didnt capture my attention the way the books did. With PoA it was a bit dark and spooky and the effects and scenery were great (although wasnt a big fan of the acting!). I thought GoF was good but again I was a bit bored, there was no comedy elements in it and there should of been (Dobby ect). In OotP when it started I was really dissapointed as the dementors werent how I wanted them and I also thought the actor who plays Dudley has developed into such a bad actor! I would have liked more of the scenes from the book to be in there, there were some things that I would have loved to have scene on the big screen. but the way the characters were portrayed seemed right to me and I really like the scene at the ministry, the death eaters in their masks looked how they should do: terrifying. Unlike the other movies it didnt drag for me and I guess I felt Yates new interpretation made the story seem fresh, if you know what I mean. Sort of like what Curran did for PoA. Also I think tha the trio have become better actors and that may have something to do with why I prefered their character portrayl. And as for JKR, I really dont know why she allowed them to cut so many scenes, all I can presume is that she felt a similar way that I do regarding OotP/ I guess it all depends on wether you like Yates interpretation or not. But I do like the fact he is a total HP geek! lol. Anyways sorry for the essay! hope to here back from you!

I agree with most of what you said there. I also thought the first two movies were a bit boring, POA was original dark and different, thats why i love it. GOF was ok and quite accurate, although a bit boring i agree . OotP to me was terrible, I was also dissapointed with the dementors as well as Dudley, Lupin, Sirius, Telawney, Neville, Hermione and even Harry a bit. They were nothing like the characters were in POA and GOF, complelety different characters to me… I don’t really like Mike Newell that much but at least he tried to stay accurate, and he tried to add a little humour like Alfonso did. Yates did not add any humour at all which i found strange and annoying and the characters were completley different to me. I found it quite annoying. I agree it was fresh and different but to me it was different in a bad way. Maybe it was Yates or the script or the acting but something was definaltey terrible in my opinion. It was just so horribly inaccurate to the books. I don’t know why JK Rowling says its her favourite film coz it was the most inaccurate to the book lol. Oh well, i agree i did like the ministry scenes and death eaters but too much was missing. Ginny didn’t break her leg, Ron didn’t get attacked by brains, Hermione didn’t nearly die and they didn’t get separated. And i’ll still never forgive them for leaving out St. Mungos. I was really looking forward to seeing poor Neville’s parents. It would have been such a good scene for a more mature audience. And they really really could have done with an extra Ron/Hermione scene to portray the fact they still always argue but secretly fancy each-other. That duel they had was stupid and a bit pointless to convey the Ron/Hermione relationship, which is nothing like that. (was that duel even in the book i can’t remember lol). And there was so much Harry/Cho missing i’m not going to even gonna metion it lol. So thats my opinion of OotP. It should have been 20 mintues longer with that stuff included and the characters should have been a bit more similar to POA and GOF and they’re should have been some humour to lighten the mood in the middle of the film or something. Do you perhaps agree with any of that?

Yeah I also think there shouold have been more humour in it but in the actual book there is hardly any humour in it so maybe thats why? The characters were different then in the other movies but Im quite glad about that. In PoA they seriously got on my nerves, I think hermione had more lines then Harry. And yes compared to GoF there were less Ron/Hermione moments and I did kind of miss that. Cant remember the dual though? But I dont think its just Yates who cuts things, if you lokk at PoA and GoF there are tons of stuff missing. I know lots of people were upset about the whole background to Sirus, James and Lupin missing from PoA. The St. Mungoe seen would have been good but aparently it was too expensive to create, particually as it isnt really important to the plot. It seems to me that people either love OotP or hate it. But I really do hope that so much has not been cut from HBP. I think the key is not to go to the cinema expecting a larger a replica of the book on the big screen. There are so many things that work better on paper then they do in the movies and really most adaptations are pretty different to the books. (Although the LOTR’s movies did the book justice). I also think that OotP must have been a harder movie to fil then the others, simply because Harry visits so many different places, instead of just Hogwarts ect ect. These would seriously effect how much money they spent and the director has to work within the budget given. I am glad that the wohole Harry/ Cho thing was minimised as it was kinda obvious it wasnt going anywhere and, other then Harry’s first kiss, it didnt add anything to the story.

Aw thats dissapointing to hear, i loved the characters in POA, they were the most accurate to me. Hermione was actually tolerable. I can’t stand her in the other movies lol. Yea i know a couple of people who were dissapointed with the marauders stuff missing in POA but if you think about it, it wasn’t needed to make the movie better. It would have been a waste of time. All that was missing was Lupin’s speach about being a werwolf in hogwarts. Lupin had already told Harry he was friends with James and Lily and he knew how to use the map and knew all about it when he took it from Harry, so when Lupin hugged Sirius like a brother it was totally obvious they were both friends with james and they wrote the map. Remember that Alfonso had already spent like 30 mintues of the film on the last 3 chapters, he couldn’t have really made it any longer without it getting boring and a little pointless. Thats from a film point of view. Anyways, you’re perfectly entitled to like OotP thats your choice, but there is not reason it should have been a shorter movie then GOF as it was a longer book. It just doesn’t make any logical sense. I also hope they do HBP justice, and thats why I want Bill included, to me he’s a really big part of the last two books. I have a soft spot for Bill, i was all sad when he got attacked by Greyback and his wedding was a lovely scene. I think they’d make the movies better to include those scenes and Bill as a character. I must not be only one who thinks that. I can’t be only person who thinks Bill is important right? JK Rowling chose him for those scenes so obviously she considers him important. I think the reason we didn’t see him much before HBP was because he’s the oldest Weasley sibling and JK didn’t want to introduce him until the trio got a little older, until they really started fighting Voldemort and Bill could help them? does that make sense to you? There was not point putting him in the first couple of books because the TIO are 11 and Bill’s like 20. They’d have nothing in common, the readers wouldn’t relate to Bill or get attached to them until they were a bit older because they’re still relating to the TRIO at age 11.