Why I Hate Harry Potter Movies
I hate Harry Potter movies. I always have. In fact it took some strong persuasion for me to even read the books. Boy was I shocked. The books, while definitely juvenile literature, are great. Yes you have to turn your mind off on a few matters. (Like the very idea that not only these wizards but all these magical creatures could exist undetected in our world and without significantly affecting our world) But they are great. Perhaps not quite up there with classic literature of my childhood like The Hobbit or The Phantom Toll Booth. But I definitely think they deserve the place in popular culture they hold. But then we come to the movies…
The films were eagerly awaited. At the time I couldn’t understand what all the commotion was about. People were excited about just seeing the train from the book in leaked shots. The first film, when I saw it, was a great disappointment. Yes it was fun, but it was shot in a very, very pedestrian fashion by Chris Columbus. (Somewhat unexpectedly given his film history) Once I read the books though I understood what all the commotion was about. Part of the charm of the books (and this was what Columbus focused in on) isn’t the plot but all the asides. The “living” pictures. The passwords. It is a series about the wonder of the world. Yes it’s recast into a wizarding world. But it captures something about childhood – that sense of wonder about nearly everything around us. And it enables children to see this in a reflected form and perhaps escape their jadedness of the regular world around them. That is it captures something essential to childhood but something that by the time kids are 7 or 8 they are already losing. The sense of wonder.
The problem is that as the books grew more complex the films became harder and harder to make. That’s why, with the exception of the second film (which I consider the best of the bunch), each film has been far worse than the one before it. With the last one being quite wretched. They end up being vignettes of moments all focused on plot. But the stories, I’m convinced, are less about plot than they are about wonder and growing up. Put an other way, all the things so inessential to the plot are the very things that make the books enjoyable. But these are the very elements that need to be cut more and more in the films.
Now I’ll give the last film some credit. The office of Dolores Umbridge is wonderfully imagined as is the entry to the Ministry of Magic. The rest though. Ugh. Say what you will about Chris Columbus’ many failings as a director but he did manage to capture that element of wonder. (Although he thankfully had a slim volume with minimal plot to deal with)
Your thoughts? To me the best of the bunch is the second film, Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets. There Chris Columbus manages to keep the little elements and sense of wonder but gets a lot more dynamic with the camera. The second best is Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban by Alfonso Cuarón. I think Cuarón is overrated as a director. But I know many love his works. He adds a bit more of a darker tone and arguably much more creativity with the camera. But he faces what later directors face worse: a longer book with a more convoluted story. The last two were complete messes that I’d just as soon have never wasted my money on.
Your thoughts? Am I alone in this?
Posted on August 7, 2007, in Books, Film. Bookmark the permalink. 46 Comments.
Steve Evans
RJH
Scott B.
John C.
Susan M
Aaron Brown
ninemoons
arandomjohn
kulturblogadmin
Kyle M
Brad
KulturBlogGuest
MCQ
Wm
Rebecca
Ivan
Geoff J
btdgreg
Clark Goble
Aaron R.
Tim J
Ben
I like all the movies, but I love Azkaban. It’s the most coherent, cinematic, stylish, and affecting of the bunch. The last two have felt kind of like a bunch of vignettes tied together and the first two were very paint by numbers. But they’re all solid fun.
The movies were my introduction to the Harry Potter world. [I just read the last two books last week because I knew I wouldn't be able to go the three or four years it will take for the last two movies to come out without having the ending spoiled.] So I never had any expectations from the books getting in the way of enjoying the movies.
I don’t think these movies should have been made until the story had been finished-after the final book. I also think they could have then made multiple films at once a la LoTR or Pirates.
I have to agree with Tom re: Azkaban; I am a sucker for Cuaron and thought it was wonderful.
Too bad they didn’t keep him. Although presumably he didn’t want to spend the next 5 years making Harry Potter movies.
I agree it was the most stylish. I can’t put my finger on what bothered me about it. But it did. And this from a Gary Oldman fan who was very happy he was getting beyond his typecast as a villain.
See, I look at a movie made from a book in a different way. As being a completely different medium, with different rules and methods, a film cannot follow a book anywhere close to exactly. As such, I actually think Chris Columbus’ films as the worst of the bunch, because he attempted to make those little things you cite as the main part of the movie. The problem is that when you deal with visuals, you cannot recreate the wonder of a book if you focus on the visuals. Wasn’t it George Lucas who said that special effects without a story is a pretty boring thing? (Of course he then turns around and gives us the boring Phantom Menace and Attack of the Clones—but that’s another story).
I found both the first two movies to be down right dull. Eye candy. Superficial. Lacking the passion, the life of the book. Alfonso Cuaron brought some life into the series with the third book, as have the last two directors.
My problem with the Harry Potter series is that the movies have been made far too soon. There hasn’t been hardly any time for artists to conjure up the world in their own minds, for readers to visualize for themselves in their own imagination just what this wizardry world really looks like. We should have given it fifty years or so to let the artistry foment and produce fantastical art, a la Lord of the Rings. What made Lord of the Rings so fantastic is that those little things, dragons and the black riders and Gollum have all been conjured up in the minds of many artists, all providing masterful artistry for the film. It allows the film to present the story without overly focusing on the fantastical and magical.
The greatness of any story is not the fantastical, but always the relationship the characters have with each other. This, in the end, is what always draws us back to the best of the masterpieces.
Oh, I agree film and book are different. That’s why I didn’t mind, for instance, Lord of the Rings which has a very different feel from the books. The books are written in this odd conversational form that I don’t think I’ve seen in any other book of that type. The movies focus in on action which plays a fairly minor role in the books. But it worked.
Now one can take a very long book, capture its essence and bring it to the screen. The best example is (in my opinion) Silence of the Lambs.
That’s just not what happened with the Harry Potter books. As I said I think the book that comes closest to being captured is the second.
Now one can, of course, look to books that are either very, very loosely adapted (say the Bourne series as an exceptional example) or that take major liberties in places (say The Shining as a great example) However none of the Harry Potter movies do this.
I’ll grant you that Cuarón brought some life and dynamism to the films. (Which is why I listed it second) The last two not only didn’t do that they brought this odd grey tone to it. Further the films ended up feeling like loosely connected vignettes. It was much more about losing what made the books interesting so as to get to the next dragon fight. Contrast this to Lord of the Rings which focused on expanded “excitement” set pieces but managed to keep the tone. Further the LotRs films flowed naturally. (The closest exception would be the extended edition of the first film which I think could use a re-edit myself)
Oh, regarding characters. I think that the second and third films are where those were drawn the best and the issues of the characters brought out the most. I’d say that Columbus increased both the characterization but also the dynamism of the second one. (The camera moved a lot more in it) By the fifth film though the plot was overwhelming the characters. So they came through as almost rehearsing lines to the camera. At least to me. (This was very glaring in the last film I thought)
Clark, I think you’re just a hater.
But seriously, I happen to hold the opposite opinion. I think each movie has gotten progressively better. I think you have to take into account the massive popularity of the books in evaluating the movies. I’m guessing at least 90% of the people watching the movies have read the books. Obviously, the books are going to be more complex and detailed than the movies. The film makers have to make a lot of decisions about what to keep and what to cut. I think the last three movies have made very judicious decisions about what needs to stay to remain faithful to the overall narrative, while cutting whatever they can. The movies have to be Harry Potter distilled to its essense. Or, put another way, they are almost the Cliff’s Notes version of the books. But if you want to get the details, you can always turn back to the books.
That said, the acting, set design, editing and visual effects in the movies have been fantastic. And I’m always amazed at the movies’ ability to maintain consistency with an amazing cast.
I’ve never managed to get into Harry Potter, books or movies, but I did end up seeing one movie. The one where there was a big lightning fight in a cemetery, or something, at the end. I thought it was pretty good, but obviously don’t remember much from it now.
I’m so lame about movies.
The second movie was the best!?! I watched the first one and was disgusted. I decided to give the second a chance, just in case it was a fluke. It wasn’t.
What I hate about these movies basically centers in two things.
1) Harry doesn’t ever accomplish anything himself. His parents always bail him out one way or another. Indeed, I would like to see a movie about his parents.
2) The ending of both the first and the second was a complete pull a rabbit out of a hat ending. Each time Harry does something completely random which just happens to be the secret to beating the enemy. This scene is then followed by the necessary “Dumbledor, WTF was that?!?!” scene, where Dumbledor has to try explain to both Harry as well as the audience why the ending was not cheating after all. Like a joke, any time you have to explain the ending of a story, it can’t possibly have been that good.
Dear Jeff,
I felt the same way at your points #1 and #2. I was hoping that Harry would become some magical prodigy like Dumbledor and mop the floor with Voldemort in some final duel.
But Book 7 explains why Harry was so lucky each time he faced Voldemort and why Voldemort couldn’t kill him. Harry is special, but not because of his magical skill.
Azkaban is the only one I really enjoyed. I haven’t liked the books at all though, enough that I haven’t read past the second, so I’m not the best judge.
Been there already.
Jeff, Harry is just a kid. Especially in the early books. Of course he can’t accomplish a whole lot himself. That seems an odd criticism. He does do a lot.
Clark,
I dislike the first two films because I had exactly the opposite reaction to them. I felt that Columbus was trying to hard to be faithful to every little detail of the book and that, as a result, we got a series of pictures that were reminiscent of the book, but no real sense of what it was like to live at Hogwarts. Columbus really had the visual equivalent of a tin ear for choosing details and tangential scenes (at least, to my mind). It always felt like a movie and never like another world to me.
I agree with the majority in saying that Cuaron’s film is the best of the bunch (although I haven’t seen the latest). Mike Newell’s version was servicable. Columbus’s were a little less than that.
My father always wondered what the hub-bub was about, but he didn’t read the books until a couple of weeks ago. His opinion is that they leave out too many details in the movie (perhaps assuming that all the audience has read the book and is able to fill in the details). The books are much, much richer in detail (and heart). Maybe the reason that the movies have been dissatisfying is that, in keeping the plot, they lose the magic. As an example, Fred and George are, by far, the most dynamic and exciting characters in the story. They are reader’s version of the id gone wild. They played next to no role in the first 4 movies and, while I imagine they must play a larger role in the fifth, they are still just scenary.
John, that was sort of the point I was trying to make. By losing all the details the magic was lost.
Let me say I do think Columbus went too far in the first film (which I hated) in giving details. But what was most egregious was that annoying,”look, here’s the dinner table.” “Look, here’s a talking picture frame.” Now part of this was justifiable since it was Harry seeing them for the first time. But it was just too “in your face.” The first film was dismal film making on many, many levels. I really thought he got away from much of that in the second.
But, while I think the second and third films to be much, much better than the rest I honestly can’t say that I liked them.
I think Harry Potter might have been better as a series. Rather than 7 movies, a total of about 18 hours, how about a 3-year series of 50-minute-long episodes, so 50 hours of Harry?
heres the order i think the movies are from best tol least
1. Prisonor of Azkaban
it was the most exciting
2.Order of the phenoix
it would of been my 1st choice but it left
too much out and a lot of it was
essentail to the 7th book
3. Chamber of Secrets
i liked it and they stayed pretty close
to the book
4. Goblet of Fire
left some stuff out and it wasn’t
really really wasn’t excting till the
end
5.Sorceror’s Stone
wasn’t that exciting…. it was cool to see all about hogwarts and the magical world but it didn’t leave me on the edge of my seet it was bassically setting you up for the rest of the story line to come
I’m really surprised to hear that anyone really liked the two films Chris Columbus directed. They invoked a sense of wonder well enough, but I think that was more due to the story itself than anything on his part. As Tom said, paint by numbers.
Azkaban is still the best of the five movies by far. I would have loved for Cuaron to direct all of the rest.
harry potter is a roller coaster ride of excitement
harry potter is a roller coaster ride of excitement coz of its versatility
I LOVE HARRY POTTER HOW COULD YOU NOT??????????? I THINK HARRY POTTER FILMS ARE VERY GREAT MOVIES AND ALSO ARE THE BOOKS TOO. PLUS I THINK THERE GOOD BOOKS FOR KIDS LIKE AROUND THE AGE OF 10 TO 17 TO READ. I JUST DON’T SEE WHY CLARK WOULD HATE THE HARRY POTTER MOVIES AND BOOKS.
HARRY POTTER ROCKS!!!!!!!
YOU HEART LESS PEOPLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I don’t see how everyone can say that the movies were full of fun but not very good. Is this some sort of ‘Pirates of the Carribean II’ thing, where it’s only funny to the hardcore fans? Because I’ve read all the books multiple times and have all the movies and I can’t see how soeone can like a movie but not think it’s good. I agree with whoever said that films and books cannot be compared. They are simply different mediums, just like books and paintings. The books are on a higher plane than the films, that’s all.
I think tht the books are better than the movie’s, and Azkaban is probably the best, but if you think all the movies suck, you’re a dumbass. =)
Umm… yes I can say that the books are teeny bit than the movies, but the movies aren’t crap. You can even say some of them are good! And chill, it’s just a movie…
Ok, I hated Azkaban because it was too fast paced for the story and I keep feeling frustrated by the artsy-fatsyness of the film while neglecting the story. I did really enjoy Chamber of Secrets, I think it got the pace correct and the idea that the books were mystery novels was kept as paramount. Order of the Phoenix was my least favorite book because the whole mystery novel approach felt abandoned and that took getting used to. (My Favorite book was Goblet of Fire. BTW) I really liked the last film because I only remembered the primary points of the story, and did not thus feel like anything was lost.
However, I am pretty much over Harry Potter. I’ve dumped him and moved on to Percy Jackson (Though I am worried the movies will suck)
try not to watch the movies. it would help. no, but srsly, i think the third movie was the best so far. cuaron was such a great director, i must say. next is the latest, Half blood prince. i really appreciated the simplicity of the plot. cant wait for the next two movies!
I really do think the books were better than the movies. The Deathly Hallows was great, but if the director for both movies of Deathly Hallows fails to accomplish making them a good movie, everybody will say Harry Potter sucks because most people don’t read books.
The books are beautiful. The movies, well, I dismissed them all after watching Prisoner (most people love it, but mnhe, didn’t work for me) But I don’t hate them either; they are okay, and anyway I just watch them to see what they did. I must say that, even the movies and the script suck, the casting usually tends to be wonderful! I mean come on! Gary Oldman for Sirius, Alan Rickman for Snape, Ralph Finnes for Voldemort? I have to say that’s inspired.
you’re an idiot, Clark. You don’t even know what you’re talking about! I agree that the movies could be have been made better, of course. I still enjoyed them. Every movie that comes from the story of a book will be off. However, I wonder if you have any REAL reasons you didn’t like the movies? Every point you made in your little blog was ridiculous. Coming even from a purely cinematic standpoint with the privilege of being involved with many film students and actors, you had no true reasoning for comments you made. It seems to me you just wanted to be “different” and be someone who didn’t like the Harry Potter films.
Well, it’s definitely true I’m an idiot. People used to yell out in conferences I was at, “are there any idiots here?” A few minutes later I’d understand and yell out, “oh, I am.” But then the conversation had gone on and no one knew what I was talking about. Which made them think I was an idiot. Which was fine. I was.
Harry Potter movies still suck though. (Except for #2 & #3 IMO)
Harry Potter SUCKS
He’s another useless & stupid character ever created in this world(like Superman)
Harry Potter is scum(idiot & moron)
The entertainment industry doesn’t need him(The entire franchise,hype & craze are needless & unneccessary)
Harry Potter books,films,etc are all rubbish,garbage & all dump
He should be removed from this face of this planet
Harry Potter SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS & SUCKS
No, you’re all wrong!!! Harry Potter is great! It’s a worlds where you can chase your dreams. When i am lonely, I watch Harry Potter and then i feel great!!! He’s not stupid! You just hate him because he’s famous and you’re not! I wish i lived in the Harry Potter world!
You SUCK! You (an useless & stupid fan) is a scum, moron & asshole.
All Harry Potter fans SUCKS!
Harry Potter SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS & SUCKS!
You think the Phantom Toll Booth is a classic, and you criticize Harry Potter?…. everyone is entitled to there opinion. But you really do have to be able to grasp more than what you are seeing in front of you… which does require a considerable amount of intellect…
“All Harry Potter fans SUCKS!”
So does subject-verb agreement, apparently.
“You (an useless & stupid fan) is a scum, moron…”
Let’s just pause and parse that little gem of grammar.
i think that the movies were a major let down i looked forward to them and boy was i disapointed the worst is the pathetic acting done by radclif in the 3rd film and overall the books make u expect so much that after watching u just think of all the parts that were left out
Harry Potter is really good so you shouldn’t defile it and say it’s not good because it’s actually a complex story with many meanings. Long live HP!
This is my take: I know a lot of people have a problem with the movies focusing “too much” on the “visuals”….but it’s a movie. Movies are nothing but visuals. And to me, I don’t read too deeply into what went into making these movies because I thought all of them were superb. They certainly did their job with getting as much detail from each book as they could into each movie. If they really tried to break down and dissect every detail of every book, these movies would each be about 8 hours long. It’s just common sense that they have to leave some things out, just for the sake of having to do it to cut back on time. Knowing that, I think they did an amazing job at bringing all of the characters AND the small details come to life, because they go hand in hand. You can’t just focus on the characters and the plot without focusing on the little things that bring the true “wonder” of the film to life. All in all, they were entertaining, and it gave me my moneys worth. Because every time I leave the theater after watching one of the potter films, the child inside of me is happy and satisfied. So satisfied, that my inner child resurfaces within me, and it’s a little easier for me to believe in the magic that is within our everyday lives. I give Kudos to the films and will always be a huge fan of both the books and the movies <3
I think any one brave enough to admit the whole Harry Potter phenomenon is crap is one cool dude.
Wait, that’s me!
HAHAHAHA! Harry potter series are a serious pain. I was forced to read the books and i dont even want to mention my experience.
All those potter lovers, i’m not going to tell u to start hating him cuz i hate him, no. Carry on, i respect your choice but i have a tiny request.
Please dont force these series over someone, they might end up with a nervous break down.
M serious.
So in my opinion, though i know that JK is a good writer but i dont like it. Maybe that is because i m one of those people who are rarely impressed.
And another thing, plz dont say anything foolish about another person’s choice cause it might hurt them like it might have hurt u if i would have said something about HP.
It is satisfying to see at least one person who hates the movies and loves the books. I usually feel like the only one.
Pingback: Kulturblog » Rewind: Twilight New Moon