3 ms·
I grew up reading the books, but lost interest in the movies (or perhaps aged-out of them) after the fourth film. I'm excited by the possibility of telling the
by Slow_Hand 3y ago
I grew up reading the books, but lost interest in the movies (or perhaps aged-out of them) after the fourth film. I'm excited by the possibility of telling the story in a way that allows them to breathe more.
It's not that I think the movies didn't serve the stories well, but I love the potential of long-form cinematic storytelling. That's much more my mode these days. I'm curious to see what changes in tone they choose to make, or rather, what they intend to do differently.
- danny_codes 3y agoThe 4th movie definitely didn't serve the story well. That movie is just bad. IMO the Harry Potter movies suffered from: (1) switching directors between movies, causing tonal consistency problems (2) trying to compress long novels into a 2 hour runtime. The first 3 books are _just_ short enough that this could possibly work, but books 4-7 are just not going to fit. They got this split right-ish by splitting book 7, but books 4,5, and 6 suffered for it. (3) The director of the 4th movie _didn't read the book_. What a call! Imagine if Peter Jackson hadn't read Lord of the Rings but just went for it.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- truculent 3y agoI broadly agree, but the third film is genuinely excellent and while consistent direction might have aided the franchise as a whole, it would have robbed us of the best film.