Travis Prinzi at Sword of Gryffindor as posted a "massive review" of "Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix." Travis says the movie will "probably end up" as his favorite so far, but he has a few issues with some of the scenes. For example:
Sirius’s Death: While it’s supposed to catch us by surprise, Sirius’ falling through the veil comes out of nowhere. And since Bellatrix cast an AK at Sirius, the veil actually became rather irrelevant, except that Sirius fell through it after getting AK’d.
…
The Dumbledore-Voldemort duel: This was a killer for me. Almost all dialogue was stripped from this scene, and it was little more than a light show, which wasn’t really impressive in the first place. Once again Gambon’s poor portrayal of Dumbledore comes through. Dumbledore’s calmness in the atrium in the book makes the whole scene, as it is contrasted with Voldemort’s desparate attacks. We get no such dynamic in the massive display of power given us in the movie. The lack of Fawkes was the final straw for me, especially since it was perfectly set-up by Dumbledore’s Fawkes-escape from Fudge and Dawlish.
…
The Dumbledore Denouement: I think perhaps Yates realizes what an abysmal choice Gambon has turned out to be. The whole scene in Dumbledore’s office is almost non-existent. It doesn’t happen until a few days after the Ministry. Harry doesn’t smash anything, and only a few brief lines, taken almost directly from the book, comprise the scene. Harry actually hears the prophecy in the DoM, so there’s not much need to discuss that in Dumbledore’s office. While I’m almost glad that Yates cut this scene, because I knew Gambon would kill it, it’s too bad that has to be the case. And Radcliffe has become quite the actor, so it would have been nice to see him smashing things.
Such deviations from and interpretations of the books are why I said I wasn't going to see the movie. But I suppose they did what they could with a novel of over 800 pages.
So, is " Order of the Phoenix" as bad as I think it is or better than you expected? I'd love to read your reviews.
Update (7/13): I ranted about Cho ratting out the DA and how out of character it was, but a commenter says Umbridge gave her Veritaserum. And Cho was distraught when she found out what she'd revealed. That makes more sense, which is probably why JKR approved the change.
Maintained by La Shawn Barber, this site is not affiliated with Time Warner Entertainment Company, LP, Warner Brothers, The Walt Disney Company, Walden Media, Scholastic, Inc., or Bloomsbury Books. Copyrights and trademarks for books, films, articles, and other promotional materials are held by their respective owners. Their use is allowed under Fair Use.
Unless otherwise noted, site design modifications, original writing, and photography are copyrighted by LBC Media, All Rights Reserved.
Original WP theme Copyright Mike Little
July 12th, 2007 at 4:04 pm
My review will be up soon on the Youth Ministry Exchange. It's not nearly as exhaustive as Travis' though.
As a film, I thought it was great. When looking at the source material, they cut out a whole bunch, but that was to be expected.
July 12th, 2007 at 4:05 pm
Heh, I should have posted a link.
http://www.ymexchange.com
July 12th, 2007 at 4:33 pm
I saw it yesterday and I was very impressed. The spirit of the book is there. Many important sub-plots were cut out so the movie wouldn't last 16 hours. However, my 9-year-old commented on the way out, "Wow, that didn't seem like 2 and a half hours!"
If you think about all that goes into movies these days (director preferences, studio input, producers adding their two cents, and ginormous egos clashing), it's pretty cool that this movie came out and stayed fairly true to the book.
One very clever plot point for the book was the whole subplot of Luna's father's Lone Gunmen-esque news rag, which Harry uses to expose the Ministry's ineptness. Luna's character was also gravely underused.
I agree with Travis' quote above that Gambon is not the Dumbledore I would have wanted to see. I would rather see a Patrick Stewart or Ian McKellan (naturally) who could carry off an elder, but charismatic Dumbledore. Alas, we have Gambon, but the rest of the cast make up for it.
Overall, it's about what I expected. It was a good movie of about the same acting quality and writing of its predecessors. The special effects improve with each installation. No serious complaints here.
July 12th, 2007 at 4:38 pm
Regarding Gambon, I was deeply disappointed with his casting. "Goblet of Fire" Dumbledore didn't resemble Dumbledore in the books or the first two movies at all. He's a sorry choice of actor for such an important and pivotal character. The late Richard Harris, who played the role very well, is much closer to my idea of the late headmaster. From one of my GOF review posts:
July 12th, 2007 at 6:56 pm
I went to the noon showing today. Overall, I enjoyed seeing "…Order of the Phoenix" (the last HP book I've completed) come to life on screen. Except, there was more on screen, and less of the book coming to life.
Here's my review
July 13th, 2007 at 12:26 am
Here's my review:
http://marchhareshouse.blogspot.com/2007/07/movie-review-harry-potter-and-order-of.html
My verdict: go and see it as a movie. Enjoy it for what it is rather than fuss over what it is not. I thought Gambon was more effective as Dumbledore in this outing, but, yeah, I miss Richard Harris.
:)
July 13th, 2007 at 12:33 am
Harry Potter & the Order of the Phoenix
kay, imagine you're a director and have been asked to film a movie of a book that is a phenomenal international success. The book is roughly 900 pages long (my edition, the first hardback version published by Scholastic, is 870 pages) and is filled w…
July 13th, 2007 at 8:20 am
March Hare, I agree. Go and see it as a movie, and let it be what it is. I've been thinking about this movie ever since I saw it, which is different from my experience with the last two. I'll probably go see it at least one more time in the theater.
July 13th, 2007 at 10:04 am
Mine:
http://bibchr.blogspot.com/2007/07/harry-potter-and-order-of-phoenix-very.html
July 13th, 2007 at 2:26 pm
My least favorite of the books turned into my least favorite of the movies. It was horribly rushed and poorly directed. Please someone tell Emma Watson that when she delivers her lines breathlessly we can't under stand what she's saying. Way too much DA, not enough of the scene with the dementors and harry being expelled, not expelled, etc…they completely omitted "REMEMBER MY LAST PETUNIA!" which may be critical in book 7 and has relevance in book 6. The whole bit about it taking months for the Inqu. Squad getting into the RoR is lame. Hello? Aren't Ron and Hermione Prefects? The scene with Snape and Harry regarding Occlumancy might has well have been ommitted they diluted it so badly.
Most importantly…if you haven't read the book, you'll have little idea what's going on all too often.
It's time to can Yates…this one and Goblet were weak.
The 21st can't get here soon enough.
July 14th, 2007 at 9:26 pm
Jay, why exactly would you blame Yates for anything in Goblet? Is he really the same person as Mike Newell, and everyone has been lying to us all along?
The overwhelming sense I got from the fifth film is that it didn't spend enough time developing anything, and several things made little sense and seemed thrown in there for little reason. If you don't know the books, the purposes behind several things are lost. It felt rushed, and some scenes seemed to use maybe a sentence or two to get out what took a little activity to develop properly in the book. I understand that some things needed to be cut, but it seemed excessive. It's the shortest film of the whole bunch while being an adaptation of the longest book in the series. That's pretty sad. If they'd given it as much time as the longest film, they could have had a few more minutes on several scenes that really needed a little more time for explanation or for a more solid emotional impact rather than a quick word or two and then moving on.
Would I say it's the worst film of the bunch? I'm not ready to say that. I thought the third was particularly hard to understand, and it wasn't until my third watching, after I'd read the book, that I really grasped the plotline of several key scenes. It was horrible storytelling that resulted from a desire to favor action over exposition. I think Yates made the same mistake with this one. The fourth film didn't have as much of that problem, and the changes in it made some of the story very different, but it wasn't bad in any important way. It didn't change crucial things the way the changes in this one did. I do blame most of the problems on the screenwriter, not the director. I hope the sixth film, with the original screenwriter back, doesn't have the same problems.
July 14th, 2007 at 9:31 pm
I've finally posted my review. here.
Bottom line: The movie is basically a trailer for the book.
July 16th, 2007 at 1:39 am
My family saw it this afternoon and I have to agree with MK Anderson, the movie captured the mood of the book well. I thought they did a good job of hitting the main points. We were also surprised at how fast 2 1/2 hours went by. We could have sat there another 2 hours without complaint.
Everyone has known since the first movie that it's impossible to portray everything from the books in the movies so you just need to enjoy the movies for what they are. The books are for analyzing and debating, the movies are to enjoy seeing that world come to life. My husband, who has not read the books, enjoyed it as well.
The only real disappointments were Gambon who has never been Dumbledore to us, too smirky, and the twin's swamp. That was the funniest part of the book and it would have been fun to see on the screen.
All in all, an enjoyable movie and a fun prelude to the last book. We will be at B&N at midnight!
July 16th, 2007 at 6:29 am
Personally, I don't believe that the movies are made for those in the audience who HAVEN'T read the books - when you have a ready-made audience of hundreds of thousands who love the books, that's who you make the film for.
I always enjoy a HP film as it's fascinating to see what someone else deems important to the storyline. For example, in OotP, Yates makes sure to start the slow build to the relationship that blossoms between Harry and Ginny, though gives no care to the one with Ron and Hermione that other directors have chosen to recognize.
Leaving Neville out of the prophecy was an interesting choice and one that doesn't make sense unless Yates knows that Neville has little to do with the probable end of Voldemort and the series. Since it was said in interviews that he spoke with Rowlings about some of the storylines, I think this is probably significant and it makes me a little sad. Neville is a great character.
I do think that Emma Watson has turned out to be a weak Hermione - she's just too darn gorgeous first of all and has a tendency to overplay her active features. There's no sign of the self-doubting Hermione, which makes her much more real in the books.
Finally, Gambon really is a terrible Dumbledore. I too read that Gambon had not read the books, but that's little excuse for directors allowing him to recreate Dumbledore as an anxious worried little man over-reacting in every scene. My Dumbledore is stoic, calm and almost all-knowing - he seems to see the inescapable future and understand his part in it. Gambon is hyper and prone to extravagant hand gestures that distract from his lines. After I read Book 6, I immediately thought that Gambon was a disaster for the remaining films. I do wish that Rowlings had requested someone more suitable and knowing that she had such influence over the casting, wonder that she hasn't spoken up. I remember reading that Richard Harris was not well when approached to play Dumbledore inititally, and said that he took the role because his grandchildren would never have forgiven him if he hadn't. Somehow that meant to me that he had spent time with the books and understood the wonderful qualities of the headmaster. I suspect that Gambon remains in the role as the filmmakers have focussed more on the kids in developing the storyline, so a weak Dumbledore is not as catastrophic.
Do see the film - it's quite enjoyable. Imperfect, but enjoyable.
Robin
July 16th, 2007 at 7:41 am
Thought I would share this with you:
http://vocatum.blogspot.com/2007/07/in-praise-of-potter.html
July 16th, 2007 at 3:07 pm
I liked it a lot. The mood of the series is getting darker and more ominous just as it is in print. Digging deaper into Neville Longbottom's character would have strengthened this story even more, though. They left out the scene where Harry discovers Neville visiting his crazy mother in the hospital where Mr. Weasly is recovering. Neville's surprising acheivement with his wand impacted the audience less than if they had known how big a stake he has in the Good Guys' struggles with the Death Eaters.
Neville is a huge hero character for me. The movie producers would do well to play that up. Movie audiences love an underdog hero.