HARRY POTTER & THE GOBLET OF FIRE

[Moviefan02000]

http://www.cinema.com/image_lib/8195_poster5.jpg

Starring - Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, Rupert Grint, Ralph Fiennes

MPAA Rating - PG-13 for sequences of fantasy violence and frightening images

Running Time - 2 hours and 47 minutes

Plot - In Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, Harry (Daniel Radcliffe) must contend with being mysteriously selected to compete in the prestigious Triwizard Tournament, a thrilling international competition that pits him against older and more experienced students from Hogwarts and two rival European wizarding schools. Meanwhile, supporters of Harry’s nemesis, the evil Lord Voldemort (Ralph Fiennes), send a shockwave of fear throughout the wizard community when their Dark Mark scorches the sky at the Quidditch World Cup, signaling Voldemort’s return to power. But for Harry, this is not the only harrowing news causing him anxiety…he still has yet to find a date for Hogwarts’ Yule Ball dance.

Directed By - Mike Newell

Studio Releasing - Warner Bros.

http://www.cinema.com/image_lib/8195_gobf005.jpg

[War Movie Mania]

I've been waiting a long year to see this movie! I am more excited about this Harry Potter film than any of the others! Looks great to me!

[inglourious basterd]

I'm looking forward to this as well.

For those of you who have no clue about the direction of the HP series, I have to tell you that this movie is completely different than all of the other HP novels.

This is a dark book and we see incredibly noticable differences in each of the characters. The characters are now heading into adolescence and it is clearly a theme in this book.

Secondly, the focus shifts to the triwizard tournament. It features competition between Hogwarts and two other wizardry schools. There is a lot more action in this one.

If the movie is as powerful as the book, then this will easily be the best movie in the series to date.

[NightStalkerGtx]

i didnt like one harry potter movie and ive given up hope, i just cant get into this just like lord of the rings and star wars their very over hyped franchise

Harry potter 1- 5/10

H.P 2 - 4/10

H.P 3 5/10

[ANTBond007]

I saw the film this morning. Its look matches Alfonso Cuaron's Prisoner of Azkaban, but the actual execution is more along the lines of Chris Columbus' first two films. Still, the story itself is much better suited for a movie than Sorcerer's Stone and Chamber of Secrets, and there's a lot more heart here than in those two outings.

Right now, these are my ratings for the series (and Goblet's may go up on repeat viewings, as Azkaban did):

Sorcerer's Stone (6/10)
Chamber of Secrets (7/10)
Prisoner of Azkaban (9/10)
Goblet of Fire (8/10)

[Fisting Ackbar]

I seem to be liking the HP movies better with each installment, and with this being supposively darker than the previous films, I'll probably see it.

The fact that it's 2 hours and 47 minutes does have me a little concerned...I hope it won't be as disjointed as the first two, which had similar long running lengths.

[ilovemovies]

2 hours and 47 minutes??? Is it me or do these movies keep getting longer and longer!

Anyway, I hope this movie is as good as The Chamber of Secrets, which was terrific IMO and the only Potter movie to reach greatness so far, and not as unevenly paced as The Prisoner of Azkaban was.

I also hope Hermoine gets more screen time. She's easily my favorite character.

[inglourious basterd]

Its 2 hours and 37 minutes.

But there is certainly a lot of material to cover. There is easily enough material in the 4th book to make two films. Many fans are curious where cuts will be made.

The good news, though, is that there is plenty of action in this film. It should be a good time.

[inglourious basterd]

I wanted to brush up on my photoshop so I created a wallpaper with some of the high res HP images that is out on the net. Its only available in 1024x768 at the moment. I have included a low res version and a high res version. Please only click on the high res version in the slim chance that you are interested.

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y145/kchandra/hpproject.jpg


High Res:
http://www.geocities.com/kenckenw/hpproject.jpg

[ANTBond007]

Its pacing is very much along the lines of the first two films, which disappointed me.

[chinton]

due you gotta say more than that. How was





Spoilers!!!





Cedric's death and the rise of Voldermort

[ANTBond007]

SPOILERS


















Cedric's death works really well. They arrive at the graveyard and Harry immediately knows something's up because of his dreams. He tells Cedric to go back to the portkey, but Cedric's kind of impressed with the surroundings, thinking it has something to do with the tournament. Then Wormtail walks out with the creepiest, most evil look on his face and casually murders him. People in the audience gasped.

What's even better though is his father's reaction when Harry brings Cedric's body back. It even had me on the verge of tears.

As for Voldemort... in general, I was a bit disappointed with the graveyard battle, though it might not be the movie's fault (Goblet is easily my favorite book, so I had more biases walking in). Voldemort himself is bald and very pale with a snake-like nose, though you can still tell it's Ralph Fiennes. Fiennes does a really good job, playing the villain very theatrically, such as when he taunts Harry while bowing before their duel.

The trouble comes with the duel itself. Neither Priori Incantatum nor the wands connecting is never explained. Harry mentions it once to Dumbledore, who says "Prior Incantantum... you saw your parents last night, didn't you?" and then nothing after that. I can't imagine anyone who hasn't read the books not being confused when Cedric, Bryce, and Harry's parents emerge from the wand.

And just because I have absolutely nowhere else to post this, I'll point out my favorite line in the film, which comes from Dumbledore late in the film in the Gryffindor dorm:

"I absolutely hate these curtains... I burned them down my fourth year. Accidentally, of course."

[BorderEevilIII]

I am hopin that GOF iz gonna be playin at the 12plex near my house..... And I havta wait till Tuesday 11/22 to actually catch this. I am workin from the day it comes out till Monday... :(

[daddiefatsacks]

pg-13?

really

[the_sneaker]

I have come a long way since I first heard about some "kids book called Harry Potter." I'll never forget my best friend telling me to read the first book, he even let me borrow it. Anyway, I'll never forget that evening. I read the whole thing. First of all, I'd never done that before, up until then I thought I couldn't even read. Secondly, it was a book that I promised myself I'd never pick up because, to be cliche, I judged a book by its cover.

Back in July or August, when "The Half Blood Prince" came out, I bought it and read 4, 5, and 6 consecutively (SP?) so as to catch up on the story.

To make a long story short: I'm hooked. I never thought it would happen, but I'm hooked. I think the stories are so rich and imaginitve and I'll be sorry to reach the last page of year 7, and I pray that she'll keep writing.

Anyway, I already got my ticket for the Goblet of Fire. I'm there man. I'm more excited about this movie than I think any other movie that has come out this year...even last year. I haven't been this excited to see a movie since Return of the King; wait, I take that back. I was pretty psyched about Revenge of the Sith.

[inglourious basterd]

Originally posted by daddiefatsacks
pg-13?

really

Absolutely.

The book is starting to change in tone. This is where kids are forced to start learning how to grow up. I think that those who read the book would be disappointed if it came out to be anything less than PG-13. The source material is incredibly dark.

I hope that people will embrace the change in tone. This film is definitely targeting a slightly older age market. Lets see how it works out.

[thedudeman69]

almost 3 hours? aw, jeez.

[BorderEevilIII]

The 12plex near my house is showing 3 Midnight Showings....
Went to see "Zathura" & noticed that 12:01 show is already SOLD OUT! Daaaaaamn! I am sooooo tempted but it SUCKS that I havta work @10AM on FRIDAY! :mad:

When I got out of "Zathura" the theater has a desginated area for the midnight showings and there is already one guy in line. And this is 1PM...
That guy that I saw must have NOTHING else better to do when capming out in a line to see Harry Potter.:D

[inglourious basterd]

I'm holding out till 3pm tomorrow. Going to see it at an IMAX screen. Tickets for that sold out on Monday.

I'll definitely post back about whether it was worth seeing on the IMAX screen.

[Watur2Phunk]

I'm leaving the house now to get in line fore the midnight showing at the Village Fox where they had the LA premeir last night. EXCITED I AM

[ilovemovies]

Got back from the midnight showing and it was very good. I still think The Chamber of Secrets is the best Potter flick thus far, but this easily comes in second place. I hear that this is the longest book which is pretty ironic since this is probably the tightest adaptation yet. Steve Kloves and Mike Newell definately did an excellent job of condensing the novel down. Not a boring and unnecessary scene in the entire movie.


SPOILERS!







My only complaint is the that showdown between Harry and Voldemort is kind of a letdown. But hopefully, it's just a warmup of what's to come in the later installments.

[Watur2Phunk]

:o SPOILERS BAH :o

I am thoroughly dissapointed with the films pace, and Steve Kloves' disguistingly horrific screenplay writting. The film was terrible in comparrison to the novel, just total shit. NO HEART GOES IN THESE FILMS, and the result is a money sucking piece of trash. The tasks shoudl have been amazing, instead they were all abysmall and overdone for the sake of being overdone, and then major characters cut out, plot points missed, WTF, LUDO BAGMAN ANYBODY? Did J.K. Rowling approove the script? My god, I can't wait till these movies are finished and somebody with true love for these books will adapt them from scratch and make actual good movies. J.K. Rowling writes better movies than we see on screen, it's true.

Prisoner of Azkaban is truely the only good adaptation thus far, and I believe it to be becvause Alfonso Cauron really but his heart into, I seriously think he did.

SS - 4/10
CS- 5/10
POA - 9/10
GOF - 6/10

Although, I must say, Voldemort could not have been any more perfect. Ralph Fiennes did an a-m-a-z-i-n-g job, and the visual effects really did a great job transforming words to image.

[JCPhoenix]

I've read all the books and personally, Goblet of Fire blows all the others away for me. (First two are good, solid books, third is great, Goblet of Fire is amazing for me, Order of Phoenix is solid, and Halfblood Prince is passable)

I love that it's really the true turning point in the series (with the open ending as well as the death that occurs at the end) and it was the book that had me convinced the next 3 books would be incredible. That didn't exactly happen (though I still have hope for the 7th book) but it's still amazing on its own. Of all the Harry Potter movies, I've been waiting for this one the longest.

Speaking of the Harry Potter films, I actually had the opposite reaction to most people with them. I'd give the first two 7/10 and Prisoner of Azkaban 5/10 - the movie version of this really just didn't click for me at all. But I don't think there's a way to screw up the 4th book's awesome storyline and from what I'm hearing, it sounds like they haven't.

It's the first Harry Potter with a really serious ending and I'm glad they haven't taken away from that, it sounds like. Can't wait to see it! :D

[Backstabba]

I have lost some faith in the movies, but I am going to try and give this one a chance.

SS - 9/10
CS - 7/10
PA - 5/10

Its been declining....Im REALLY hoping they are able to get rid of the bad acting by "the kids" and the "Emotional scenes" (both of which I thought were cheesy as hell, whch affected the movie horribly for me), and because of the fact "The prisoner of azkaban" was my favorite book of the series..it was a huge dissapointment....

....Please be good Goblet Of Fire....please....

[Lazy Boy]

I'm of the opinion that the series is steadily improving -- by attempting to be so slavishly close to its source, the first film was deadly dull. The pacing was better for the second film, and a hell of a lot better for The Prisoner of Azkaban. I'm interested in seeing GOF.

Of the kids, the only one who I think will grow up to be a terrific actor will be Emma Watson -- she has what it takes. Dan Radcliffe is just getting out of the stiffness which plagued his first two tries, and Rupert Grint never impressed me much outside of his hamming for the camera.

[Arc]

Loved it.

One of the best films of the year, which is a bit surprising as I'm not one to enjoy big blockbusters.

9/10, a score I rarely give out. This is how I would rank the films so far...

SS - 6/10
CoS - 7/10
PoA - 8/10
GoF- 9/10

The movie was far more epic and darker than I had been expecting, not to mention looking equal, if not better, than the previous film. They really are turning into the best looking films around.

Ralph Fiennes & Brendan Gleeson steal the show.

[Lazy Boy]

A little OT: for those who have seen the movie, did they attach the Lady in the Water teaser trailer to it? If so, how was it?

[ANTBond007]

Originally posted by Watur2Phunk
Did J.K. Rowling approove the script?

Yes.

[therealjohng]

SS - 9/10
CS - 9/10
POA - 9/10
GOF - 9/10


Yeah, I love the series. Prisoner is my favorite.

[ilovemovies]

Originally posted by Lazy Boy
A little OT: for those who have seen the movie, did they attach the Lady in the Water teaser trailer to it? If so, how was it?


Yes, the Lady in the Water teaser was in the showing of Harry Potter I saw and IMHO, it was a major piece of shit! One of the worst, if not the worst, teasers I have ever seen. And that's really disappointing because Shyamalan's flicks usually have brilliant teasers. Even The Village, which sucked, still had an amazing teaser/trailer. But not this time.

[ak]

** MAJOR SPOILERS THROUGHOUT....**

...YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED!

I was suitably impressed by Goblet Of Fire. This may sound odd to some, but to me the film played out like an adult drama in a lot of places, injected with humour throughout.

It's a shame to lose some great material and characters from the books, but I suppose that's what has got to happen with such epic films. They'd be far too long for their own good otherwise.

Generally, the acting was stronger from the teenagers in this one. Radcliffe in particular was decent generally, and actually quite great when he travels back through the port-key with the body of Cerdic. I was surprised how emotional that whole scene was, actually. Quite powerful.

Voldemort was played very well by Fiennes. The make-up/CG rendering on his face was simple yet very effective (pale make-up, snake-like pupils, and slits for a nose).
I was not disappointed by that scene at all, it played out just as I'd hoped it would. I'm glad Voldemort's clothing wasn't the typical bad-guy attire. It actually looked quite elegant and almost ghost-like.
The battle was short, sweet, and obviously just a little taster of the future. Film 7 will have a mighty duel between hero and villain, that's for certain, but for now, this one is just right (I base this on the current direction of the books).

Nice tender moment between Harry and Dumbledore at the end, too.

On the whole, I'd say this is the most succesful of the four films thus far. Visually, it is more 'earthy' than the previous films - It looks more real, if you catch my drift. It just looks less polished.

Roll on Order Of The Phoenix. I'm looking forward to seeing what David Yates does with it. He's directed several TV-based dramas here in the UK, one with the theme of sexual abuse, and the other a political drama, so this is indeed a very interesting choice of director.

One thing's for sure, this series has come a long way since Chris Columbus's efforts. 8/10

P.S - This is the only image of Voldemort that's known to exist as of yet. It's from a documentary that showed one of the CGI guys airbrushing his nose, so he's missing his 'slits', but the rest is how he looks in the film, for those who haven't seen it yet.

Voldemort unfinished. (http://usera.imagecave.com/Ali_c/volsharknown.jpg)

[HHH123007]

Just got back from it...I liked it, but think the 3rd one is best. I get the feeling that I'm never gonna be satisfied with these movies. I haven't read the books, but I still get that feel (that I'm sure fans get) that they are skipping over parts that would make these characters more interesting to me, the viewer.

SS - ** out of *****
CS - ** out of *****
POA - *** out of *****
GOF - *** out of *****

[inglourious basterd]

If you guys get the chance, definitely see this film in an IMAX theater.

My experience with this film in an IMAX theater was incredible. It was well worth the drive, the line, and the wait. If you guys are fans of the series and you want to enjoy this maximally, head to an IMAX theater near you. The visuals and the sounds are amazing.

[Lazy Boy]

I haven't seen a wrap-around line for a film since probably the summer. Tonight was PACKED. I'm quite interested in the box office figures come tomorrow morning.

Not having read the book in many years, I can go into this with a fresh start and minimal clench on details -- at least the "Power to the house elf" subplot is gone.

[Danger^Cart]

Most definetely the best executed of the harry potter films, without a shadow of a doubt. I'm embarrassed to say that I'm now almost excited about the next one.

....ALMOST.:rolleyes:

[inglourious basterd]

As someone who read the books, I could honestly say that I really enjoyed the film.

My brother has not read the books and he felt that this was a bit dense with detail. The movie, based on the 750+ page novel, was condensed so much that pertinent details are in every scene. He said that it felt at times that it felt like a cliffs notes version. One issue my brother cited was the apparently schizophrenic relationship issues between Ron/Hermoine/Harry.

I found his criticism as interesting and valid. Regardless of that, both him and I thoroughly enjoyed the film. This film has incredible atmosphere. And it goes from being incredibly funny to being incredibly suspenseful. I felt that Newell masterfully shot atmosphere in every scene.

[the_sneaker]

Originally posted by daddiefatsacks
pg-13?

really

Hell yeah. People can claim that the first three were childish and light-hearted, but man, by the fourth, fifth, and sixth, the readers start to understand that Rowling isn't writing just some children't fantasy books. The stories in these novels are pretty heavy. Especially "The Half Blood Prince." I can only imagine what number 7 is going to be like.

[JCPhoenix]

Well, what can I say?

They did justice to the book that's easily my favorite of the 6 HP books out so far...

Definitely more epic and darker than any of the other films so far...

POSSIBLE SPOILERS (for the ending)
3
2
1
I was really worried that they'd screw up the ending somehow but nope, they did an admirable job with it - like many reviews have said, those moments seriously feel like the first "true" moments in the series...to me the moments after the death are the turning point in the entire series (in the books too) and they did a credible job of the scene as well as not dwelling on it to the point that it was melodramatic. Nice touch there. Dare I say, I actually felt a little emotional over the death which is the first time in all four movies that I've actually felt some emotion really.

END SPOILERS

It also felt more epic but also more attached to the characters at the same time than any of the other movies, if that makes any sense. They did a nice job with the relationships, even if some of the acting was a bit uneven (Watson does a good job sometimes but other times, I couldn't help but look at how much her eyebrows were going up and down...and what was up with her delivery of the line "Boys..."...Katie Leung was barely in the film but considering how long they spent looking for Cho Chang, she was surprisingly underwhelming and only sketchily passable...did like her accent though :p) and the relationships were a little compressed Actually, I was most surprised by Daniel Radcliffe who, for me anyway, didn't strike a single false note in the movie. Again, with the ending, he played all the emotions perfectly.

Loved Mad-Eye Moody as well...the cast for these movies just gets more and more impressive every time. It's easily worth the admission just to see all of the cast assembled, it's really quite something, though many of the original actors (Maggie Smith, Alan Rickman, Gary Oldman, Timothy Spall) get short shrift here in favor of Gleeson's Moody. FIennes and Richardson have pretty much extended cameos in this film, though, of course, Fiennes cameo is much needed in the film whereas Richardson's is not.

I'm not sure what to think about Voldemort...I saw this with a bunch of friends and we had varying reactions, but for the most part, I think people were disappointed. But you know what, the villain is built up so much that I think it'd be impossible to not be disappointed. As for me, I personally liked Fiennes version of the villain. It didn't freak me out by any means but I liked the oddness and his creepy diction.

Oh and while I know the Qudditich World Cup was not necessary at all to the movie and therefore (mostly) cut, that scene showing the place just made me want to get them to spend like an hour purely on that section of the book. Cause that setpiece really stunned the fuck outta me. It's somewhat simple but totally unexpected in terms of how cool it looks and how trippy the whole thing feels.

I was a little surprised coming out of the movie to be honest...I saw it with 8 other people, I think besides me, 3 of them loved it, 2 thought it was pretty good, 2 found it not that great and 1 i'm not sure about. I didn't expect such varying reactions. Again, for me, while I agree Columbus's first two movies were somewhat "soulless", they just worked better and more coherently for me than Prisoner of Azkaban. But this movie is the first Harry Potter movie that really gets the feel right and just "feels" like a true movie. The series has always had the problem of not being structured quite like a normal movie (In terms of rising action etc) but by this entry we've gotten used to it and for the first time, it doesn't detract from the experience.

At this point I'd probably give the film a HIGH 8/10 with room for possible movement up the scale.

FILMS
Harry Potter & the Philosopher's Stone: 7/10
Harry Potter & the Chamber of Secrets: 7/10
Harry Potter & the Prisoner of Azkaban: 5/10
Harry Potter & the Goblet of Fire: 8/10

BOOKS
Harry Potter & the Philosopher's Stone: 7/10
Harry Potter & the Chamber of Secrets: 8/10
Harry Potter & the Prisoner of Azkaban: 8/10
Harry Potter & the Goblet of Fire: 9/10
Harry Potter & the Order of the Phoenix: 7/10
Harry Potter & the HalfBlood Prince: 6/10

[inglourious basterd]

Originally posted by JCPhoenix
(Watson does a good job sometimes but other times, I couldn't help but look at how much her eyebrows were going up and down...and what was up with her delivery of the line "Boys..."...

This is definitely true. I was distracted in one scene. I think she was supposed to be concerned/crying. But it looked to me like she was laughing. In other times she had good acting chops. Hopefully her performances will get more even with time.


Katie Leung was barely in the film but considering how long they spent looking for Cho Chang, she was surprisingly underwhelming and only sketchily passable...did like her accent though :p) and the relationships were a little compressed

I was a little surprised that she only had so few speaking parts as well. They have been promoting the hell out of her. I definitely agree about the accent though. The accent = hot. Her brand of "shy little scottish accent" is probably the most attractive accent I've heard.


Actually, I was most surprised by Daniel Radcliffe who, for me anyway, didn't strike a single false note in the movie. Again, with the ending, he played all the emotions perfectly.

Daniel Radcliffe really did step it up in this film. He hit dramatic points in this film that I previously did not believe he was capable of reaching. As did Rupert Grint. I was incredibly impressed. Rupert Grint, in particular, deserves some credit for coming off as funny/unique as opposed to the spineless character he played in parts 1-3. A lot of this has to do with a change in character in the source material; regardless, Grint's "Weasley" had a different charisma this time around.


FIennes and Richardson have pretty much extended cameos in this film, though, of course, Fiennes cameo is much needed in the film whereas Richardson's is not.

You are right about Richardson. Her role is streamlined so much that it adds nothign to the film. The thing is, though, that the character of "Rita Skeeter" was never really an incredibly compelling/interesting character. I'm personally glad that they cut much of her plotline out (in order to make this a 2.5 hour film).

SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS
SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS
SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS

I'm not sure what to think about Voldemort...I saw this with a bunch of friends and we had varying reactions, but for the most part, I think people were disappointed. But you know what, the villain is built up so much that I think it'd be impossible to not be disappointed. As for me, I personally liked Fiennes version of the villain. It didn't freak me out by any means but I liked the oddness and his creepy diction.


I personally agree with your contention that Fiennes did a great job. He was flawless with what he needed to do. I'm not surprised that some people felt that the hyped "return of Voldemort" was going to be more action-packed. But those people don't really understand the point. The point is that the Hogwarts of the past is not going to come back anytime soon. With that in mind, I think that it was an incredibly compelling and powerful scene.
/END SPOILERS
/END SPOILERS
/END SPOILERS


Oh and while I know the Qudditich World Cup was not necessary at all to the movie and therefore (mostly) cut, that scene showing the place just made me want to get them to spend like an hour purely on that section of the book. Cause that setpiece really stunned the fuck outta me. It's somewhat simple but totally unexpected in terms of how cool it looks and how trippy the whole thing feels.

I definitely agree with you here. I saw it on an IMAX screen that was 70X84 feet with a 12,000 watt speaker system. And, trust me, they used every watt and every inch effectively. If you enjoyed this film, you should definitely see it again in IMAX. This scene in particular is truly incredible. The World Cup ranks as one of the best computer generated scenes I have ever seen.

[EDsoulsurvive*]

Th special effects are better than ever, as is the acting. However, I liked Alfonso Cuaron's style more than Newell's.

I thought the climax was distractingly better in the book, and though I hate too sound like one of those "They ruined the book!" types, it really bothered me. Also on the negative side, Hermoine, my favorite character, was an annoying waste in GoF.

Still, I read that Newell wanted to add his perspective of British school to the Potter series and I really liked the high school feel this movie created between the aqction set pieces.

8/10

[Watur2Phunk]

THEY DID NOT DO THE BOOK JUSTICE - so stop saying it's the best adaptation. Prisoner of Azkaban is, it kept the themes and did actual characters justice.

It's insult already to say it's 3 hours.

They completely cut out all the books themes... S.P.E.W., Rita Skeeter's article about Hagrid, Fallen Façades, and so much more.

The movie was so dissapointing. It totally focused on the big action scenes for the sack of being a blockbuster when really the Harry Potter books may be block busters but they are far more deep than the terrible film presented to us which was not fuled by passion for the books or it's themes but money. :mad:

I want to lower my grade more.

[Dragonforce]

Sometimes a good adaptation has to change things and take things out to make it a good movie. The first two HP movies followed the books perfectly, but as films they were horrible. Just like with the new Charlie and the Chocolate Factory movie, the remake was more faithful to the book but the original in a much better movie.

[inglourious basterd]

Originally posted by Watur2Phunk


I want to lower my grade more.

You are entitled to your opinion. No one can change that.

THEY DID NOT DO THE BOOK JUSTICE - so stop saying it's the best adaptation. Prisoner of Azkaban is, it kept the themes and did actual characters justice.

I dont think anyone said that it was the best adaptation. I do agree with others who have said that this is the best movie so far, though.


They completely cut out all the books themes... S.P.E.W., Rita Skeeter's article about Hagrid, Fallen Façades, and so much more.

The movie was so dissapointing. It totally focused on the big action scenes for the sack of being a blockbuster when really the Harry Potter books may be block busters but they are far more deep than the terrible film presented to us which was not fuled by passion for the books or it's themes but money. :mad:

I question your hypothesis of the movie "completely cutting out themes". I don't agree. Was the movie really about SPEW? Was the movie really about Rita Skeeter's articles? They took out storylines, but the themes were still in the film. My brother, a non-reader, believed that this was an inherent weakness of the film. He felt that the movie played like a cliffs notes version. It seemed that every scene had a lot of information regarding the characters.

The elements of the film that were taken out of the film were all interesting elements of the books that developed many of the characters further. I acknowledge that, as a result, many of the characters were a lot less dimensional in the movie in the book. This includes Hermoine, Cedric Diggory, Cho Chang, and most of the other characters that were not Harry. This is a problem, but it doesn't kill the movie. The reason for this is that Kloves and Newell were committed to making an airtight storyline that can be told over two and a half hours.

Kloves told Creative Screenwriting that he worked harder on GoF than he has on any other project he's worked on in the past. I honestly believe that he did a pretty good job of salvaging the book's main themes (i.e. the beginning of adolescence and the transition to the rest of the series) even though length issues prevented all the details from being shown on screen. Can you think of an alternative that would have worked more effectively? (eg: splitting the book over two films, making the film longer, or de-emphasizing action).

If they included all those subplots that were in the book, two things would happen. First, fans of HP who have not read the books would have just lost their patience with the film. Keep in mind that the film was 2.5 hours even with this heavily streamlined adaptation. Second, production would have been a whole lot longer.

While I wouldn't have minded seeing house-elves, Rita Skeeter, and the conflicts between all the characters fleshed out in more detail, I understand why they were taken out. Do you really believe that you could make an interesting film that contains every detail from the 750 page book in 3 hours?

[KcMsterpce]

I read the book a couple years ago, and I thought this movie was good. In fact, I only remember what was in the movie, so the major details and 'stand out' sequences from a pseudo-nonfan being in the movie means that I think they did a good job doing what was most important.

I mean seriously, there isn't much to ANY of the books. In this one, the final act says all that needs to be said.

For those that are hardcore fans of the book, they MUST realize that abridging shit is a given. It's stupid to ask for everything from the book to be in every movie, and also expect those who haven't read it to be entertained with the movies.

[inglourious basterd]

Originally posted by KcMsterpce


I mean seriously, there isn't much to ANY of the books.
.

I don't quite agree. I think that after the 7th book comes out, people will begin to give more credit to the depth of Rowling's world.

I'm not saying that Rowlings novels have deep philosophical themes. What I am saying, though, is that the themes of the series should be much clearer after the series is complete. Additionally, although, The scale of Rowling's world is not as immense as Tolkein's, (How many are?), it isn't as superficial, childish, or inept as some older readers would believe at this point.

[Fisting Ackbar]

Liked it the best of all the four movies – in other words, it was exactly what I had hoped it would be. And between the blonde Tri-wizard competitor and the cute Asian girl, It's easier to get over my unhealthy obsession of Hermione.

7/10 (sleeping over this one, could be higher)

BTW, did anybody else think of THE ENGLISH PATIENT when Ralph Fiennes showed up?

[Lazy Boy]

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire - 7/10

At times, I felt a "meh" reaction, but other parts stood out enough for me to give the film a passing grade. My biggest problem is that, while they cut out a lot of unnecessary fat, the story still feels dragged out. I like the serious turn the series is taking, and would rank this second or third, with Azkaban being the best film yet.

[Nachokoolaid]

Originally posted by Lazy Boy
A little OT: for those who have seen the movie, did they attach the Lady in the Water teaser trailer to it? If so, how was it?

I don't know which trailer I was more disappointed in, The Lady in the Water, or Superman. They both were weak.

Supes would have gotten a 0/10, or maybe a 1/10 if it hadn't been for the use of Brando's voiceover. That alone bumped it to a 2 or 3. It was just boring, though. No sense of excitement or fun at all. It seemed badly edited. I hope this is not a representation of the final film.

And The Lady in the Water was just strange. I like that it started with the titles "Once upon a time..." But then, it just follows around Giamatti's character with some violin music playing over the top. It's him cleaning and doing some paperwork and stuff. I could actually feel people getting agitated and going "WTF???" It continues for longer than it should, and nothing happens. Then we hear some water sploosh, and he looks to his swimming pool. We see a P.O.V. shot looking up at him from the water, and then it says...

THE LADY IN THE WATER

And everyone in the theatre was like "What the hell is this crap?"

And then the title comes up

A FILM BY M. NIGHT SHAMALAYAN.

At that point, you could feel everyone in the room go "Ohhh," like they collectively understood an inside joke or something, and you could hear the quiet buzz of people discussing it, sounding very interested.

And then we hear Giamatti say "How many of you are there?" and it ends.

I think it's a credit to Night that his name alone can garner interest in his films, moreso even than the rest of the trailer.

[Nachokoolaid]

Oh, and as for GOF, I liked it. It's the most money I've ever paid to see a film (damned ticket prices!), but I think it was worth it. I also waited from 7:30 pm in line to see an 11:00 show.

If I have one complaint, it's that Newel, or the screenwriter fumbled big time in one area. I'm sure fans of the book don't care so much becasue they know

SPOILERS!!!!

that Moody isn't Moody at all, and he's actually Barty Crouch Jr. But Newel assumes everyone seeing the film is 4, maybe 5 years old (or mentally retarded) and has to hit us over the head wit ha sledgehammer with the oh-so-subtle (sarcasm) hints that Moody may not be who he appears to be. That tongue licking stuff was way over the top. MAybe if he only did it once, but like 6 scenes in a row? Only to be followed by a flashback where we get an extreme close up of Barty Couch Jr. doing to the exact same thing? Ok, that was over the top. It totally killed the suspense at the end. And then, when they do reveal him at the end, Newel plays it like it's supposed to be some big shock to the audience. Okay...only if you still wet the bed.


END SPOILERS.

Other than that, I thought it was fun.

And I loved that Fiennes didn't make Voldy the epitomy of pure evil, who's so strong and powerful and worthy of fear. Yes, he was frightening, but the flaws were also present. And I loved how each of Voldy's movement's were calculated, almost like a dance.

And the voice work that Fiennes did was great as well. He made the character oddly effeminate or something. I liked the choice.

As for the rest of the cast, this is the first film where Radcliff didn't do something that made me laugh (cruel, I know) at his effort. This was certainly his strongest performance.

It's Emma's weakest. She was a little too excited sometimes, over trivial things, but to her credit, she did the best acting of her young career on the steps in that teary scene with Ron. She's going to have a nice future I think.

And surprisingly Rupert Grint was the strongest he's ever been. He (thankfully) dropped that annoying bit he was doing in the other films, and Ron seemed much more like a real person in this one.

And as much as I wanted Robin Williams for Moody, Gleason was great, especially in the "3 curses" scene.

The other professors barely make appearances, but they are all professionals, and do admirably.

Oddly, I thought Gambon was weaker in this than in POA. I liked his "younger, more energetic" take on Dumbledore, but in this, he seemed inconsistent. Anyone else think this? His line readings were off or something, like he was being rushed, or rushing himself.

I thought Fleur was not pretty enough, and she was pretty much wasted in this film. Considering that she pops up again in the series, I thought she would have gotten a little more to do. And nothing against the actress, but Rowling makes her to be stunning, and that girl was simply "cute." I was far more attracted to several of the other Beaxbatons girls. And I think Newel fumbled the handling of them as a whole. Their introduction was great. I got the same sense of them I got in the book. But after that, their charming ways must have worn off, because it never really happened again, and they were pretty plain, and if it wasn't for the clothes, would have been indistinguishable from the Hogwarts girls. What happened to their famous charms?

I still like POA better as a film, but GOF was certainly the second best film, and the best book.

Honestly, I like book 5 the least of the novels, so I think the director of the next one will have his work cut out for him. But I also think it has the potential to be one of the better films (some of the themes, Umbridge, and more Gary Oldman).

Overall, probably an 8/10.

[inglourious basterd]

Originally posted by Nachokoolaid

Honestly, I like book 5 the least of the novels, so I think the director of the next one will have his work cut out for him. But I also think it has the potential to be one of the better films (some of the themes, Umbridge, and more Gary Oldman).



I agree. But my gut instinct is that there is a very good film in there if they condense it to a 2.5 hour film.


I really hope the kids stick with the series till the end. At present, they only have a contract for part 5. It would suck if they opted out of part 6 or 7. However, if they did that, I'd think that they would fear the reaction from the hardcore HP fans....LOL.

On Showbiz weekly, Emma Watson (who plays Hermoine) says that she has had to change her number 6 times, there have been fans who have called her parents at work, there are people who have been following her around, and there have been people who have randomly stared at her house.

For some reason, I think that the kids will finish the series, if anything, out of fear for the fans. :p

[War Movie Mania]

Spoilers, read at your own risk!!!


Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire:

Wow! What a movie! This really blew everything out of the water. It is everything I ever could have wanted from a Harry Potter movie. Let me start off by saying how I felt about the first 3 HP movies.

HP: Sorcerors Stone 6.5/10
HP: Chamver of Secrets 7/10
HP: Prisoner of Azkaban 8/10

Every movie so far has gotten much better, and Goblet of Fire is no exception. This movie has an AMAZING background. From the moment it started, I was hooked.

The World Cup scene was utterly amazing, that they could have made an entire movie about that game alone. I was disapointed that they didn't show the actual game, but for the sake of time I understood the sacrifice.

We see very little of the classroom in this movie. Infact, the only classroom we see is the new Defense Against the Dark Arts teacher, Moody. The actor pulled this character off amazingly.

I was surprised at the very limited role Snape played in this movie too, he had very few lines which was sort of disapointing.

Dumbledore, is well, the same old Dumbledore. All the champions played their roles excellently. Fleur Decour was played perfectly in my opinion, and quite hot I might add. Viktor Krum wasn't as good as the rest, but still did a good job. I'll talk about Cedric below.

Hermoine and Ron were back with their usual bickering. And I was very happy with both their performances, especially Ron's who was no longer annoying in this film, infact he was very funny.

Voldemort... well Voldemort was actually the most disapointing character in the film for me. I was really looking forward to seeing Ralph Fiennes in this role, but to be honest, If someone had told me that was Ralph Fiennes I wouldn't believe them if I hadn't already seen the casting. I wish they hadn't used so much make up and made his face more normal looking.

Now, the performances that made this movie for me was Cedrick Diggory and Harry Potter. Both of them were perfect in this movie. I was in tears when Cedrick and Harry were ported back to Hogwarts after the scene with Voldemort. That's a pretty good accomplishment to make me cry in a movie.

The 2 and 30 minute length didn't bother me at all, at no point in this movie did it feel slow or boring. The pacing is actually quiet nice, and the special effects are (dare I anger a fan boi?) much better than Lord of the Rings or Star Wars (Except for Ep. 3).

Everyone must go see this movie immediately!

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire: 9.5/10

[Mentiroso]

Saw this on Friday afternoon. I did not read the book (or any of them for that matter). I do like the movies though. This one seemed to have too much going on. One big scene after another, no down time really. I did really enjoy it, the best of the 4 potter movies. No one really irritated me, the story was goo. The fx were done quite well. Several funny parts and a few that were quite sad. An ejoyable movie experience.

GOF - 8/10

[inglourious basterd]

I may or may not type up a full review (so bogged down by work at the moment). But I just want to say that I enjoyed this movie immensely even though much of the character development was cut from the movie (for the sake of making this a 2.5 hour movie).

But even though there was character development cut out, I think that this movie did an incredible job of making all of the characters feel human. And that is an improvement that I really didn't expect.

It seemed that all of the actors were asked to step up a notch in their acting performances. Dan Radcliffe and Rupert Grint did just that. Rupert Grint had a certain charisma that he lacked in the past films. He was no longer the whiny, annoying character that he was. Emma Watson lost the whiny attitude as well and she was brilliant at times. Unfortunately, at other times, her acting seemed amateurish. In those times, when drama was required, she overacted and overstressed certain lines. Dan Radcliffe was a surprise and I feel that he had an inspired performance. His emotions were completely believable in this movie. He has made huge steps as an actor. Robert Pattinson (Cedric Diggory) also was well played and I look forward to seeing more of Katie Leung (Cho Chang) in HP5.

If you guys have the opportunity, please do yourself a favor and check it out at the closest IMAX screen. It wont be on IMAX screens for long as it will be replaced by Polar Express 3D in the near future (which is also very cool).

Seeing the Quiddich world cup on a 70x84 screen backed up by 12000 watts of sound was fucking incredible and was worth the price of admission in its own right. I won't even speak about how awesome it was to feel the powerful subwoofers as the horntail was about to decapitate Harry. This movie fit the format perfectly. Even the dark mark looked amazing (the film was remastered digitally in order to be high resolution on IMAX screens). It magnificently filled the frame over its 5800 square feet of screen space (that is over a mile!). And despite my concerns previously, it was not too much screen for me to handle. The experience was so perfect that I will reiterate it again. See it in an IMAX theater. See it in an IMAX theater. I was blown away by this film.

8/10. It was an incredibly taut film even though they cut a large amount of material out. The cutting of material costed a bit of character development, but I think it increased the human element of this film. The CGI was incredible and the acting was great (except for the times when Watson overacted).

[Criminal Rock]

*Minor spoilers* It was OK, I wasn't expecting anything to be better then its predecessors; pacing was off, I caught myself laughing from time to time (at serious scenes)… I don’t know, I felt that the movie could have been “that” much better if they spent more time on the script… but its just my opinion. I thought the action sequences were cool and enjoyable to boot, I also enjoyed the chemistry between Ron, Potter, and Hermione… that said, I give the film 6/10… though, I can understand why people would give it a higher rating.

[Bourne101]

I am having trouble getting time to see it. I want to see it soooooo bad. Here are my rankings of the first three:

1. Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets
2. Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban
3. Harry Potter and the Philosipher's Stone ( I'm Canadian)

[BorderEevilIII]

whoops!

[BorderEevilIII]

FINALLY
FINALLY!!!!

*** MAY TALK ABOUT THE MOVIE DIRECTLY SOOOOO WATCH OUT! ***

After a 4 DAY wait I secretly went to see this... :D
I LIKED THE ADAPTATION of GOF to a certain extent.......
Mike Newell and sad to hear that Steve Kloves is NOT returning :mad: did a A OK job w/ Rowlings GOF transformation to the big screen.

Movie was mystical, dark and different from Azkaban and the other 2 done by Columbus.

I knew that Cedric was gonna get his and I hate to admit (SHADDUP!) that I got teary eyed when Harry finally came back w/ Cedric and he was a mess....


HERE's some downsides of the movie...

- Was disapoointed that THE DURSLEYS got dissed and dismissed from the movie.

BTW can someone help me refresh my memory what went on at The Dursleys in the book? Was it GOF where Harry had to save Dudley who was being followed by a death eater errrrr somethin? :confused:
I do hope they re-appear in Phoenix....
- And WTF?!?!? Julie Walters gets cut out of the movie?!?! :mad:
Thats not right!!!!!

- With all due respect to Miranda Richardson I kinda wished it was Tracy Ullman who should have dawned the role of Rita Skeeter...

- And wha happen to the traditional HP jingle usually seen in the opening? :(


Other than that a 9/10

[dk789]

Originally posted by BorderEevilIII
FINALLY
FINALLY!!!!
BTW can someone help me refresh my memory what went on at The Dursleys in the book? Was it GOF where Harry had to save Dudley who was being followed by a death eater errrrr somethin? :confused:
I do hope they re-appear in Phoenix....


In a nutshell, the Weasleys send Harry a letter while at the Dursleys through the muggle post inviting him to go to the Quidditch Cup. They then proceed to arrive at the Dursleys through the fireplace via floo powder and Dudley ends up eating a ton-tongue toffee.

Harry saved Dudley from the dementors in OOTP.

[Arc]

Originally posted by psudoazn Seeing the Quiddich world cup on a 70x84 screen backed up by 12000 watts of sound was fucking incredible and was worth the price of admission in its own right. I won't even speak about how awesome it was to feel the powerful subwoofers as the horntail was about to decapitate Harry. This movie fit the format perfectly. Even the dark mark looked amazing (the film was remastered digitally in order to be high resolution on IMAX screens). It magnificently filled the frame over its 5800 square feet of screen space (that is over a mile!). And despite my concerns previously, it was not too much screen for me to handle. The experience was so perfect that I will reiterate it again. See it in an IMAX theater. See it in an IMAX theater.[/B]

!!! :eek:

I'm sold. A new IMAX screen just opened up this month, and is playing this one. I'm checking it out Saturday for sure!

[BorderEevilIII]

ahhhhh thanks for the recap dk :D
I can see WHY Mike Newell decided to NOT use them in the movie. :(

[Ender]

***SPOILERS MAY FOLLOW***




Well it's heartening to see that most Potter fans were pleased. I, on the other hand, find myself wanting, but then, I'm an odd duck (I thought PRISONER OF AZKABAN was an abominable movie, so that tells you right there were I'm coming from). I will say this for the Harry Potter flicks, when the first one came out I wanted nothing to do with it, now I'm actually looking forward to the news ones and I even read two of the books, something I previously would never have been caught dead doing.

I found GOBLET OF FIRE to be sort of a muddled movie. It seemed like they had too much material to fill up too little space. Although each successive book increases by an encyclopedia's length, the films don't have that luxury, and so just as with THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN I felt like I was watching a movie that was going at 2x speed. Too often I found myself wondering just what in the hell was going on. Too many formerly important characters are falling by the wayside. Poor Alan Rickman must somedays wonder why he even shows up on set. And was it just me, or did Emma Watson have nothing but a string of awkward scenes where she yells or cries? Compounding these issues, the "surprise" ending can be predicted by a mentally deficient reesus monkey somewhere in the third reel (although at least it makes sense, unlike the ending to PRISONER, which even today puzzles me to the point of making my eyes cross). Probably most dissapointing of all was Voldemort, a villian who had recieved a level of buildup usuallly reserved for season archs of DRAGONBALL Z, finally now revealed to be none other than...Ralph Fiennes without a nose. And I won't even ask what the hell was up with the ghosts at the end.

But it's not ALL bad, GOBLET OF FIRE does finally showcase the franchise's first truly good CGI effects, most impressive of which is the dragon chase scene, which is really spectacular. In fact, the tournament as a whole I thought was a very good way to structure the story, I was genuinely interested in the individual events and their outcome, I wish more attention had been paid to creating a competitive spirit (although how fucked up was that thing with the lake? I understand that the contestants put their lives at risk, but the other kids didn't sign up for anything. That's just fucking wrong. And isn't it odd that none of them complained about it afterward?). It’s a shame that the series seems to feel it has to keep getting dark in order to be taken seriously, because he most enjoyable material in GOBLET for me was the more light-hearted fare, I found most of the comedic moments around Ron and Harry’s awkwardness with the opposite sex extremely funny. The standout of the entire show however was Brendan Gleeson, who stole every single scene he was in and a few of the ones he wasn't. He verged on overexposure but damn if he wasn't entertaining, I suppose it's too much to hope that that character sticks around? Finally, although I thought the finale was a letdown, offing the kid was a bit of a shocker and not one I saw coming.

GOBLET is a step up from PRISONER but I find myself a little wistful for the first two Potter flicks, which actually made sense and had a quirky charm that's lacking in the last two, darker installments. I certainly hope that greater scope and direction can be found in future films, as despite the blunders that have been committed I'm still invested in and curious about the final outcome of the story and characters

[inglourious basterd]

Originally posted by Arc
!!! :eek:

I'm sold. A new IMAX screen just opened up this month, and is playing this one. I'm checking it out Saturday for sure!

Two things:

1. Preorder your ticket if you can. They have been selling out.
2. You MUST get a good seat. Go early. If you get a seat at the very front, then you will get extreme neck/back pain.

[Backstabba]

Originally posted by Fisting Ackbar
. And between the blonde Tri-wizard competitor and the cute Asian girl, It's easier to get over my unhealthy obsession of Hermione.


Well its not easier for ME! :(

[thedudeman69]

Well, I went to see this yesterday, and I have to say, this blows the first two away and is equal to the third. The effects were pretty amazing. There were also some amazing shots by Mike Newell that were just great. But, The only bad thing about this movie was the acting. Daniel Radcliffe annoyed the fucking hell out of me with his whiny acting. I let it go for the first 3, but it realllly showed here.

Overall, It was probably the best Harry Potter yet.

[BorderEevilIII]

Originally posted by Fisting Ackbar

And between the blonde Tri-wizard competitor and the cute Asian girl, It's easier to get over my unhealthy obsession of Hermione.



As I recalled from the book wasn't Ron & That Girl sorta dating? The movie seemed like that girl did not like him but FINALLY lightens up towards the end. And would have been puuuuuuurfect if Hermoine bitch slapped Ron but then again die hard fans might get confused or question if Newell decided to do so.

[Dragonforce]

Which girl are you talking about? Ron didn't get with any girl until Half-Blood Prince. Ron's older brother got with Fleur if that's what you're talking about.

[BorderEevilIII]

Originally posted by Dragonforce
Which girl are you talking about? Ron didn't get with any girl until Half-Blood Prince. Ron's older brother got with Fleur if that's what you're talking about.


http://media.movieweb.com/galleries/531/1976/lo/HP4-TTRL-0017.jpg

well its BEEN AWHILE since I read GOF so my facts weee bit hazy :D

[inglourious basterd]

Originally posted by BorderEevilIII
As I recalled from the book wasn't Ron & That Girl sorta dating? The movie seemed like that girl did not like him but FINALLY lightens up towards the end.

Ron was physically attracted to her. They didn't explain it in the movie, but the reason is because she is a Veela. It is sort of like a "Siren" in the Odyssey. When they look at men, they have the power of attraction.

The reason that the girl was grateful to ron is because of what happened in the 2nd obstacle in the triwizard tourney. But she wasn't really opening up her legs to him.

[Arc]

Originally posted by psudoazn
Two things:

1. Preorder your ticket if you can. They have been selling out.
2. You MUST get a good seat. Go early. If you get a seat at the very front, then you will get extreme neck/back pain.

Thanks, just got back. Pre-Ordered like you said.

The World Cup and Dragon scenes were CRAZY on a screen that big. The seats were so steep I was afraid of leaning forward! :D

Well worth the cash.

[inglourious basterd]

Originally posted by Arc
Thanks, just got back. Pre-Ordered like you said.

The World Cup and Dragon scenes were CRAZY on a screen that big. The seats were so steep I was afraid of leaning forward! :D

Well worth the cash.

I'm genuinely glad you enjoyed it.

I saw it in a regular theater this weekend and it wasn't the same experience.

Seeing the film in IMAX is immersion at its best.

[Ender]

I can only imagine how spectacular a scene like the Quidditch Cup must be on an IMAX screen (would have been even better if they'd, ya know, showed us any of the actual freaking Quidditch game, that was a gripe I forgot in my last post, although I suppose they figured that after three movies there wasn't much new to show us with the game and they were probably right. Still, I felt cheated), but what about the more downbeat scenes? Something about seeing Daniel Radcliffe's head talking at fifty times normal size just seems awkward to me.

[inglourious basterd]

Originally posted by Ender
Something about seeing Daniel Radcliffe's head talking at fifty times normal size just seems awkward to me.

It actually wasn't that bad. His face is already grossly magnified on a normal theater screen. So it felt the same to me. A close up is a close up.

For me the IMAX screen just allowed me to be fully immersed. Visual elements, subtle dialogue, and fine detail on the CGI that are easily missed on the regular theaters are crystal clear on the IMAX screens.

I wish I could see something like Indy on the IMAX. With the big screen and the powerful 12kwatt speaker system, I'd prematurely wet myself if I knew I could have that opportunity.

[BigRedNeck]

I thought it was a good movie not the best one, but still really good.

[FilmKing2000]

Being a fan of the books, I was pretty nervous about weather or not they were going to pull off making my personal favorite book of the series into a motion picture. It turns out that director Mike Newell and screenwriter Steve Kloves pulled it off. Even though most parts were trimmed away due to running time, they managed to do it well by still keeping the spirit of the book, which is the most important thing. And I loved how they portrayed Harry's stuggle with talking to memebers of the opposite sex and showing all the casts' growing pains. To me, it made the film more relatable, which makes it better.
9/10