![]() Great special effects, good enough acting (I wouldn't go so far as to say it was amazing). Overall, it was a decent enough movie though. It's an 800 page book! LOTR books were only 400-600 pages and the films were considerably longer than any of the harry potter films. Maybe it's just me, but I wouldn't be the least bit disappointed if the film-makers simply came out and said "this book is too long to put into a single film with out leaving out a lot of the book and changing a lot of other parts, so we're releasing it in two films." It's completely understandable. I personally would love to see more of the "boring" parts of the book simply because it's interesting seeing a high-budget Hollywood interpretation of what was in the book. You don't get much of that when a 26 hour read is condensed into a 2.5 hour film. I think a lot of what people enjoy is looking at the wizard world, seeing cool looking spells, and generally learning more about everything to do with the harry potter universe. It's just a tad short-sighted to say it wouldn't work with a harry potter film. Lots of "stories" have had to be split up into multiple films and they all worked great. Look at the matrix 2&3, look at pirates of the caribbean 2&3, look at LOTR (it's all one continuous story). But what can anyone reasonably expect? I went into this expecting exactly what I saw, it's still just a tad annoying hearing people talk about how impossible it would be to follow the book. ![]() So many great parts were skipped over, rushed with ridiculous cliché transition scenes, or simply changed because, apparently, it's impossible to include everything.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |