I disagree. Book Dumbledore always kept his sparking blue eyes and calm confident demeanor right up until the end.
Dumbledore 2 in the movies wasn't like that but he should have been.
Same for me. Dumbledore #2 seemed a little off to me. Maybe because Richard Harris is how I pictured him and I could definitely tell he was different in PoA
That one scene where Harry is slightly tempted by Romilda Vane ("But Hermione...I *am* the Chosen One...) because, come on, he's a teenage boy (and he's actually sassy sometimes in the books).
"I'm sorry professor, I must not tell lies", "but I'm the chosen one",
Snape wardrobe, Lupin cast, make up, etc.
I personally like the shrunken heads in POA.
I’m surprised by the mentions of casting. The young cast members by and large couldn’t act their way out of a paper bag.
The best things about the movies are the musical score, the set, and the magical creatures.
Some of the line readings in those early films were admittedly kinda cringy, but that’s true with a lot of child actors. To their credit, most got a lot better over the course of the series.
As for the adults actors, I thought those responsible for casting did a remarkably good job. Way more hits than misses.
> Some of the line readings in those early films were admittedly kinda cringy, but that’s true with a lot of child actors. To their credit, most got a lot better over the course of the series.
I actually think most of them were better when they were children and became even MORE unnatural/wooden as they became older. Esp. Emma Watson and Bonnie Wright.
> As for the adults actors, I thought those responsible for casting did a remarkably good job. Way more hits than misses.
They are mostly pretty solid, but not given a lot to do.
Let's be honest here, veteran British actors ARE good. They didn't really need to put in much effort with the casting because anyone they called would be more than adequate. I mean yes Maggie Smith was great as McGonagall but if they had cast Helen Mirren she would've been just as great.
While it’s no doubt easier to cast a relatively prestigious series like *Harry Potter*, I think your comment perhaps unintentionally diminishes the effort and skill of those involved in casting a film as well the talents of those eventually chosen.
As for the acumen of the younger actors, while I respect your opinion, we must agree to (strongly) disagree. You mention Bonnie Wright. She sadly proved to be a subpar choice — her acting remained fairly wooden from her first appearance to her last. Looking at some of the others, Daniel Radcliffe and Emma Watson are terribly unnatural in many of their scenes in those first two movies. You assert that they somehow became worse over the course of the series. I see a completely opposite trend.
I think Daniel Radcliffe improved, but Emma Watson didn't.
I just can't get over how bad she was in DH1 when she was supposed to be FURIOUS with Ron for leaving them, but Emma Watson played it like she was mildly dissatisfied.
I think she got better, but agree that the degree of her improvement may not have matched that of other performers. I also agree I didn’t like her in the scene you mention, but then I didn’t really like that entire scene. In fact, I didn’t much care for that movie as a whole.
A lot of people won't like this, but it was the best way to end the war and Harry's story. Though I would've liked him to fix his original wand first, but I get why he wouldn't want to use the elder wand. That much power can influence someone very quickly.
Professor Lockhart and McGonagall. They got those characters perfectly right, imo
Disagree about Lockhart.
The titles.
Casting 100%.
Eh no.
Loved movie slughorn. He was funny and likable without that affecting the plot. HBP was probably the funniest of the moves imo.
Most of the casting. Wasn’t a fan of Dumbledore #2 though
I liked dumbledore 2 but it always rubbed me the wrong way knowing he refused to read the books
Dumbledore #1 is what I pictured from the books, but dumbledore #2 was a better fit as the series tone went darker.
I disagree. Book Dumbledore always kept his sparking blue eyes and calm confident demeanor right up until the end. Dumbledore 2 in the movies wasn't like that but he should have been.
Same for me. Dumbledore #2 seemed a little off to me. Maybe because Richard Harris is how I pictured him and I could definitely tell he was different in PoA
lockhart and trelawney
Hogwarts itself. I love the atmosphere they pulled off.
Snape.
Robbie Coltrane!
The casting
That one scene where Harry is slightly tempted by Romilda Vane ("But Hermione...I *am* the Chosen One...) because, come on, he's a teenage boy (and he's actually sassy sometimes in the books).
Quidditch. It was just as I pictured it.
Yes! I just wish they had included more of it!
"I'm sorry professor, I must not tell lies", "but I'm the chosen one", Snape wardrobe, Lupin cast, make up, etc. I personally like the shrunken heads in POA.
I’m surprised by the mentions of casting. The young cast members by and large couldn’t act their way out of a paper bag. The best things about the movies are the musical score, the set, and the magical creatures.
Some of the line readings in those early films were admittedly kinda cringy, but that’s true with a lot of child actors. To their credit, most got a lot better over the course of the series. As for the adults actors, I thought those responsible for casting did a remarkably good job. Way more hits than misses.
> Some of the line readings in those early films were admittedly kinda cringy, but that’s true with a lot of child actors. To their credit, most got a lot better over the course of the series. I actually think most of them were better when they were children and became even MORE unnatural/wooden as they became older. Esp. Emma Watson and Bonnie Wright. > As for the adults actors, I thought those responsible for casting did a remarkably good job. Way more hits than misses. They are mostly pretty solid, but not given a lot to do. Let's be honest here, veteran British actors ARE good. They didn't really need to put in much effort with the casting because anyone they called would be more than adequate. I mean yes Maggie Smith was great as McGonagall but if they had cast Helen Mirren she would've been just as great.
While it’s no doubt easier to cast a relatively prestigious series like *Harry Potter*, I think your comment perhaps unintentionally diminishes the effort and skill of those involved in casting a film as well the talents of those eventually chosen. As for the acumen of the younger actors, while I respect your opinion, we must agree to (strongly) disagree. You mention Bonnie Wright. She sadly proved to be a subpar choice — her acting remained fairly wooden from her first appearance to her last. Looking at some of the others, Daniel Radcliffe and Emma Watson are terribly unnatural in many of their scenes in those first two movies. You assert that they somehow became worse over the course of the series. I see a completely opposite trend.
I think Daniel Radcliffe improved, but Emma Watson didn't. I just can't get over how bad she was in DH1 when she was supposed to be FURIOUS with Ron for leaving them, but Emma Watson played it like she was mildly dissatisfied.
I think she got better, but agree that the degree of her improvement may not have matched that of other performers. I also agree I didn’t like her in the scene you mention, but then I didn’t really like that entire scene. In fact, I didn’t much care for that movie as a whole.
Harry’s casting was SPOT ON
Careful. The book elitists don't like it when you talk positively about the movies.
Breaking the Elder Wand.
A lot of people won't like this, but it was the best way to end the war and Harry's story. Though I would've liked him to fix his original wand first, but I get why he wouldn't want to use the elder wand. That much power can influence someone very quickly.