Support NeoGAF

[daTRUballin]

Just like with the books, I wanted to make a poll thread focusing on the movies. Something that I find really interesting when talking about Harry Potter is that there never seems to be a clear consensus on the series whether we're talking about books or movies, so you're always bound to hear wildly varying opinions.

I suppose there is something closer to resembling something of a consensus of sorts with the films because there are some films that are more highly regarded than others. For example, Prisoner of Azkaban has always been a popular choice for the best movie because of Alfonso Cuaron's creative direction. But then you have others who prefer the more lighthearted, charming and very faithful-to-the-book approach that Chris Columbus took with the first two. But then you also might have those who prefer the films directed by David Yates when the overall tone of the series became much more serious and much more gloomier.

I'm looking forward to seeing how the films rank on the poll!

 

[AJUMP23]

Goblet of fire is my favorite one.

 

[Kilau]

Kinda has to be Azkaban. The first two suffer from bad effects and dodgy acting from the kids. The later 4+1 suffer from the complexity of the books. Azkaban kept the tone and spirit of the book well, much better effects and fantastic additions to the cast. Goblet was my favorite book and second favorite movie.

 

[Saber]

I would say either Azkaban or Chamber of Secrets. The only problem with Azkaban is the time travelling crap. Its hard to believe they would give such strong artifact to an young teen just for the sake of school, as they said wise people got their wrongs by just using it.

 

[analog_future]

It’s actually kind of a tough question.

Sorcerer’s Stone/Chamber of Secrets are by far the most faithful to the books, but the stories themselves are very kid-centric and the child actors haven’t honed their craft yet.

Prisoner of Azkaban is probably the best film, but it’s average at best as an HP adaptation and is the first film in the series that cut a ton out of the source material.

Goblet of Fire is full of memorable scenes with the Triwizard cup and Voldemort’s reemergence, but Dumbledore was all wrong and a lot of the cinematography was amateurish and has aged poorly.

Order of the Phoenix took the longest book and made it into the shortest film, which is baffling. But damn, that final 20 minutes leading into Dumbledore vs Voldemort was incredible.

Half Blood Prince bastardized and made pointless the entire title of the book/film, but Dumbledore’s death and retrieving the horcrux from the cave were some of the best scenes in the whole series.

Deathly Hallows Part I was a bit of a bore, but had some standout scenes like the Bathilda/Nagini encounter and the death of Dobby.

Deathly Hallows Part II was all out action from beginning to end, but they butchered Voldemorts death and it’s a shame that Harry didn’t repair his wand like in the books.



So I dunno. I’d probably pick the first film, oddly enough. I’m a sucker for faithful adaptations and they just nailed the magic, tone, awe and mystery of the world, and John William’s score was one for the ages.

 

[reezoo]

The one with time loop. Which one is it? I need to vote.

 

[daTRUballin]

The one with time loop. Which one is it? I need to vote.

That would be Prisoner of Azkaban.

 

[cormack12]

The Chris Colombus ones are most faithful I imagined, but they are a too light and airy.

Anything after 3 is hard to treat as authentic Harry Potter where it was just 'stick another filter on the camera'. The unavoidable switch of Dumbledore and the switch from house robes to Primark wardrobe supply really hurt the 'wizarding world' too.

Half blood Prince was a good adaptation and the effects in Phoenix were brilliant but Azkaban (though it was the first to start cutting essential material from the books) is probably the closest in tone and capturing the core part of the story the best.

 

[Kenpachii]

Goblet of fire is the one that sicked the most with me, because dating concept started to come full swing.

First movie is obviously the best because its new and fresh, even while u are older now its a bit dodgy.

By far the worst was the one where they tried to find those crusafixes or whatever they called it, and they roam outside on a forest with some goblin. honestly i never saw the end just put it off, terrible boring.

 

[NeoIkaruGAF]

Chamber of Secrets for me.
It’s the one I watched more times, because incidentally I kept finding it on air while TV zapping several times, and there’s something about the movie that just makes me sit there and watch the whole thing. I’ve probably seen it five or six times.

I like the first two movies the best because they’re so faithful to the books. Nothing major has been cut, and while this isn’t good for the total duration of the films, they just flow so well. Having read the books first, starting with Azkaban there’s a major shift in tone, scenery, and rhythm in the movies that just ruins it for me. Yes, in the Columbus movies the SFX are crude and the child actors are still learning the craft (Ron is awesome, though). But in Italian the dubbing does wonders to mitigate recitation issues, and in the early 2000s the CG was good enough.

Goblet of Fire has been called an extended videoclip and that’s sorta true, but it’s an awesome movie and probably more faithful to such a long book than Azkaban managed to be. It’s stylish in a funny, goofy way, with haircuts and costumes way over the top. Michael Gambon screwed up that Dumbledore scene royally, but it kinda gels well with the overall tone of the film.

The David Yates movies ruined everything. Piss filter everywhere, bad casting (Jim Broadbent as Slughorn is beyond baffling), tons of stuff cut from the books, amateurish direction… Deathly Hallows 1 is the only one that didn’t greatly disappoint me. Unfortunately it set my hopes high for the finale, which was also a letdown after more than 10 years of movies.

 

[Jinzo Prime]

It’s actually kind of a tough question.

Sorcerer’s Stone/Chamber of Secrets are by far the most faithful to the books, but the stories themselves are very kid-centric and the child actors haven’t honed their craft yet.

Prisoner of Azkaban is probably the best film, but it’s average at best as an HP adaptation and is the first film in the series that cut a ton out of the source material.

Goblet of Fire is full of memorable scenes with the Triwizard cup and Voldemort’s reemergence, but Dumbledore was all wrong and a lot do the cinematography was amateurish and has aged poorly.

Order of the Phoenix took the longest book and made it into the shortest film, which is baffling. But damn, that final 20 minutes leading into Dumbledore vs Voldemort was incredible.

Half Blood Prince bastardized and made pointless the entire title of the book/film, but Dumbledore’s death and retrieving the horcrux from the cave were some of the best scenes in the whole series.

Deathly Hallows Part I was a bit of a bore, but had some standout scenes like the Batilda/Nagini encounter and the death of Dobby.

Deathly Hallows Part II was all out action from beginning to end, but they butchered Voldemorts death and it’s a shame that Harry didn’t repair his wand like in the books.



So I dunno. I’d probably pick the first film, oddly enough. I’m a sucker for faithful adaptations and they just nailed the tone, awe and mystery of the world, and John William’s score was one for the ages.

I agree.

I feel that people are awed by the effects of Prisioner of Azkaban more than the storytelling and acting. Philosopher's Stone and Chamber have a 'magical' feeling that the later movies lack.

 

[Pegasus Actual]

Azkaban, but the movies as a whole are trash.

 

[reezoo]

That would be Prisoner of Azkaban.

voted!

 

[The Cockatrice]

Goblet. Epic ending.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

The best movie was Azkaban, the only entry directed by Alfonso Cuaron.

All the movies were not good adaptations of the books, though.

 

[Punished Miku]

The 1st one.

 

[DGrayson]

Goblet of fire is my favorite one.

 

[FeralEcho]

Goblet of fire is my favorite one.

Yup,my pick as well,I like tournament shit no matter if its in anime,movies or games.

 

[Grildon Tundy]

I voted Prisoner of Azkaban. It seemed to set the style and tone for all the rest moving forward.

 

[AV]

Azkaban is the best source material, direct by Alfonso Cuaron, and they got Gary Oldman, David Thewlis and Timothy Spall in a room having a whale of a time. It's 3.

That said, the final movie is easily the 2nd best.

 

[daTRUballin]

Really surprised by all the Goblet of Fire love in here. Many fans (especially those that read the books) usually hate that film with a passion lol

The Chris Colombus ones are most faithful I imagined, but they are a too light and airy.

Anything after 3 is hard to treat as authentic Harry Potter where it was just 'stick another filter on the camera'. The unavoidable switch of Dumbledore and the switch from house robes to Primark wardrobe supply really hurt the 'wizarding world' too.

Half blood Prince was a good adaptation and the effects in Phoenix were brilliant but Azkaban (though it was the first to start cutting essential material from the books) is probably the closest in tone and capturing the core part of the story the best.

Was it though? Was it?

Don't get me wrong, I still enjoy the film. I love all the films, but HBP was probably the worst adaptation of them all. Just an oddly misdirected movie.

Chamber of Secrets for me.
It’s the one I watched more times, because incidentally I kept finding it on air while TV zapping several times, and there’s something about the movie that just makes me sit there and watch the whole thing. I’ve probably seen it five or six times.

I like the first two movies the best because they’re so faithful to the books. Nothing major has been cut, and while this isn’t good for the total duration of the films, they just flow so well. Having read the books first, starting with Azkaban there’s a major shift in tone, scenery, and rhythm in the movies that just ruins it for me. Yes, in the Columbus movies the SFX are crude and the child actors are still learning the craft (Ron is awesome, though). But in Italian the dubbing does wonders to mitigate recitation issues, and in the early 2000s the CG was good enough.

Goblet of Fire has been called an extended videoclip and that’s sorta true, but it’s an awesome movie and probably more faithful to such a long book than Azkaban managed to be. It’s stylish in a funny, goofy way, with haircuts and costumes way over the top. Michael Gambon screwed up that Dumbledore scene royally, but it kinda gels well with the overall tone of the film.

The David Yates movies ruined everything. Piss filter everywhere, bad casting (Jim Broadbent as Slughorn is beyond baffling), tons of stuff cut from the books, amateurish direction… Deathly Hallows 1 is the only one that didn’t greatly disappoint me. Unfortunately it set my hopes high for the finale, which was also a letdown after more than 10 years of movies.

I don't know if I'd blame Gambon for that scene in Goblet. It was probably all on the director. Gambon was so terrible in that film that I find his performance to be in the "so bad it's good/funny" territory lol.

Gambon seemed to play Dumbledore differently under each director. In Cuaron's PoA, he was very whimsical and quirky. In Newell's GoF, he was just a maniac. I've always thought that he seemed like he was playing an angry drill sergeant rather than Dumbledore in GoF lol. And then when Yates took over, he seemed to tone Gambon down and by HBP he was a lot calmer and came the closest to being like book Dumbledore/Richard Harris' Dumbledore in that one.

Idk if I can agree with your opinion on Yates' films though. I do wish they hadn't stuck with him for the last 4 movies, but I still enjoy them. I think he handled a lot of the emotional moments well (Sirius' death, the Prince's Tale, the resurrection stone scene in the forest, etc.). I also think all 4 of his films feel and look quite different from each other. And I thought Jim Broadbent did a fantastic job as Slughorn even if he did play the character a bit differently from the book. Yates did kind of fuck up HBP though, as I mentioned above.

You wanna talk about miscast or misdirected characters? I think Barty Crouch Sr. and Jr. in GoF are better examples of that.

 

[EverydayBeast]

I don’t know, Harry Potter somehow lost me after the 4th one.

 

[Rival]

My favorites are Azkaban or Chamber. I just watched them all for the first time a few months ago.

 

[Tams]

The Philosopher's Stone is the most magical as it introduces the world. Everyone being fresh, especially the kids does show, but that just makes it easier to put up with.

Prisoner of Azkaban is great, but Goblet of Fire has a fuller, more interesting story and you actually get to see more of not only the Hogwarts community, but the Wizarding World.

tl;dr: Goblet of Fire because of hot French female witches.

 

[NeoIkaruGAF]

And I thought Jim Broadbent did a fantastic job as Slughorn even if he did play the character a bit differently from the book. Yates did kind of fuck up HBP though, as I mentioned above.

You wanna talk about miscast or misdirected characters? I think Barty Crouch Sr. and Jr. in GoF are better examples of that.

The point is, book Slughorn is comically fat and there isn't a single appearance of him when this point isn't driven home with a passion. Jim Broadbent just doesn't have the required physique du role. He's a plain guy in a school where the professor closest to a normal human being is usually Snape. That casting choice alone put me off the movie in a heartbeat.

 

[Rockondevil]

Such a hard decision as I find them all interesting in different ways.

PS opens the magical world in such an amazing way.
POA is a great movie that I thought portrayed the time travel well.
GOF has the most emotional ending.
HBP ending also gets me.

I think my vote might go to GOF with POA a very close second.

Bonus but DH:2 has peak McGonagall taking on Snape and also using Piertotum Locomotor and OOTP has the Dumbledore v Voldemort.

 

[Nobody_Important]

It's the first one for me. I went to the opening as a kid with my mom. Even had on my Harry Potter costume. Then went to my grandparents after that to tell them all about the movie.


A favorite memory of mine.

 

[jshackles]

It's the first one for me. I went to the opening as a kid with my mom. Even had on my Harry Potter costume. Then went to my grandparents after that to tell them all about the movie.


A favorite memory of mine.

That's awesome man I love stories like this

Spoiler: Me, after reading this post

 

[daTRUballin]

The point is, book Slughorn is comically fat and there isn't a single appearance of him when this point isn't driven home with a passion. Jim Broadbent just doesn't have the required physique du role. He's a plain guy in a school where the professor closest to a normal human being is usually Snape. That casting choice alone put me off the movie in a heartbeat.

But then what about Imelda Staunton as Umbridge? She looked absolutely nothing like how Umbridge is described in the books either, yet her performance is considered one of the best in the series.....

 

[Melon Husk]

Azkaban and I'm happy to see everyone agrees on that.
They're all good, but
Goblet couldn't be contained by one movie.
Yates' films feel all samey and they blend together. Everything is a dim corridor. Order of the Phoenix was ok in his style but should have been a one-off. Rehiring him was a mistake. Half-Blood Prince should have been all about romance and whatnot and Alfonso Cuaron would have been a better fit again for that. Why couldn't they take turns and alternate?!

edit: While I'm ranting about HP adaptations, a radical idea: the miniseries should straight up start from the end of Goblet of Fire and tell the previous books as flashbacks to bypass the aging problem.

 

[daTRUballin]

Azkaban and I'm happy to see everyone agrees on that.
They're all good, but
Goblet couldn't be contained by one movie.
Yates' films feel all samey and they blend together. Everything is a dim corridor. Order of the Phoenix was ok in his style but should have been a one-off. Rehiring him was a mistake.

I guess it could be argued that Yates' films feel too samey in tone, but after seeing these movies so many times, I do think his movies feel quite distinct visually from each other. OotP has this blueish tint across the whole movie and it's probably the one with the most color. HBP probably has the darkest pallette of them all with a very brownish-yellowish color scheme with some very impressive cinematography from Bruno Delbonnel. HBP's color scheme is a very love it or hate it thing. Not everybody likes it, but it's very visually distinct from any other movie in the series. It kinda reminds me of how the newest Batman movie looks. And then, of course, you have the Deathly Hallows movies which move away from HBP's unique look and go back to something that looks a bit more 'standard', but they still have a grayish filter that's different from OotP and some scenes are really dark as well.

But yes, I do agree that they shouldn't have stuck with him for 4 movies. I would've liked to have seen different directors take a crack at them.

Half-Blood Prince should have been all about romance and whatnot and Alfonso Cuaron would have been a better fit again for that. Why couldn't they take turns and alternate?!

What do you mean? HBP was all about romance. In fact, it had way too much of it. It almost overshadowed everything else. That's one of the most voiced criticisms of the movie! Lol

I've been wondering lately about how a Harry Potter movie directed by Tim Burton would be like. Wasn't he a candidate for the first movie? It would've been interesting to see him do one of the later entries. Or would his style be too weird and dark for HP? I bet he straight up would've made an R rated Potter movie lol

 

[nightmare-slain]

3 probably. 1, 2, 7 are most faithful to the book.

I’m going to the film studio tour today in London!

 

[E-Cat]

David Yates is a loser. That is all.

 

[NeoIkaruGAF]

But then what about Imelda Staunton as Umbridge? She looked absolutely nothing like how Umbridge is described in the books either, yet her performance is considered one of the best in the series.....

I didn't particularly care for that choice, too. But she's the lesser of the problems I have with OOP. She fits the part, and she does look kinda toady.

 

[Melon Husk]

What do you mean? HBP was all about romance. In fact, it had way too much of it. It almost overshadowed everything else. That's one of the most voiced criticisms of the movie! Lol

Yates did it poorly.

I do need to rewatch it, the only thing I remember about HBP is vague plot points associated to the map. When I think of romance I think of Goblet of Fire.

 

[NeoIkaruGAF]

Yates did it poorly.

I do need to rewatch it, the only thing I remember about HBP is vague plot points associated to the map. When I think of romance I think of Goblet of Fire.

Yeah. HBP tells one of the darkest stories in HP. And in the movie basically every scene that isn’t about that story is poorly acted, poorly directed teen drama. Bonus cringe points for the movie being so dark in every scene, which grates terribly with those already bad parts. The book manages to keep the two parts in balance and not grate against each other. The movie fails spectacularly at that.

I will never understand the piss filter hoopla. I get it can enhance the atmosphere of horror scenes, but there’s no film where it should be applied on every single frame. Going from the first three HP movies to Yates’s dark filter galore was a terrible ”artistic” choice.

 

[Dazraell]

If we're listing the movies, I enjoyed Prisoner of Azkaban the most. Out of books, Goblet of Fire was my favorite

 

[JimmyRustler]

Liked Deathly Hallows Part 1 and 2 as a whole the best.

 

[daTRUballin]

Yeah. HBP tells one of the darkest stories in HP. And in the movie basically every scene that isn’t about that story is poorly acted, poorly directed teen drama. Bonus cringe points for the movie being so dark in every scene, which grates terribly with those already bad parts. The book manages to keep the two parts in balance and not grate against each other. The movie fails spectacularly at that.

I will never understand the piss filter hoopla. I get it can enhance the atmosphere of horror scenes, but there’s no film where it should be applied on every single frame. Going from the first three HP movies to Yates’s dark filter galore was a terrible ”artistic” choice.

Yeah, I think that's one of the problems with the direction of the movie. It feels like the tone of the film is at odds with itself. The movie looks incredibly dark (possibly the darkest film in the series) yet it has all these lighthearted and awkward romantic comedy moments that take place in this dark filter and it just doesn't fit together. And those moments are like 80% of the movie.

My guess is that they knew that HBP would be the last movie where the kids would be spending an entire school year at Hogwarts and they wanted to put more of a focus on the Hogwarts school experience for that reason. But there had to be a better way to balance that side of the story with the darker and more important elements. We barely get any of Voldemort's backstory as a result which is a real shame and a really odd choice to make.

I love the film series as a whole, but if I had to pick the worst one, this one would probably be it for me. GoF is always another popular choice for the worst movie for a lot of people, but at least that one kept the core plot of the book. Imagine if the GoF film had cut out the Triwizard Tournament entirely. That's basically what they did to Voldemort's backstory in the HBP film.

 

[Sidney Prescott]

I really like Prisoner of Azkaban. I think it's the perfect Harry Potter movie.

 

[Dark Star]

Growing up I loved sorcerers stone and chamber of secrets. They’re so magical and simply a great, fun time. The John William and Chris Columbus vibes are unmatched IMO. I rewatch 1 and 2 all the time.

Prisoner of Azkaban is the best made HP film IMO. Alfonso Curon has great style.

Goblet of Fire is like a bollywood movie or something, it’s bizarre but a treat. You could argue it’s one the better HP movies. It has an even amount of action, adventure, romance, comedy, etc. and also great casting choices.

The rest of movies are kinda … gloomy, cold, dark. Not a huge fan of Yates but I think he did a decent job at adapting the books.

 

[Muffdraul]

Not a huge fan, but I instantly thought "It's going to be the one with Gary Oldman." Had to look up which one that was. Ding ding ding.

 

[AlteredForms]

The first two movies are my favourite and it's purely due to the childlike innocence and sense of adventure radiating from our trio. Outside of that one I found Goblet Of Fire to be another excellent entry.

 

[IDKFA]

Prisoner of Azkaban is my favourite. It's such a dark tone shift from the previous two films and Gary Oldman is simply fantastic.

 

[FullMetalx117]

Goblet of Fire and then Chamber of Secrets. They also nailed 7 part 2 but wasn’t my favorite at that point

 

[daTRUballin]

When people praise Gary Oldman's performance, they seem to only talk about Prisoner of Azkaban, but he was great in Order of the Phoenix as well. I feel like he may have had more screen time in that movie too, but I could be wrong.

 

[Dural]

The first will probably always be my favorite, captured the magic of the book so well. There were certain changes I didn't care for, but overall it's really damn good.

Azkaban is probably my least favorite, trash adaptation and removed my favorite parts from the book. Made the whole thing dark and completely changed Hogwarts Castle. This is also where they decided that wizards don't wear robes anymore. Really, this is where they seemed to stop giving a fuck about being faithful at all.

 

[Soodanim]

As much as I like the entire series, ranking them is actually just scoring what fucked things up the least.

1 and 2 have the best feel, but being early movies the flaws are apparent
3's great, but fucked up robes and made the rest of the series be school uniforms which was absolutely dogshit. Also, Flitwick looks completely different.
4's fun, but the romance stuff is bad. Plus, Gambon not being told how it's played in the book after not reading it
5 introduced the stupid "All Death Eaters and therefore OOTP members can mist fly" bollocks
6 missed out the Voldemort flashbacks which was absolutely criminal
7 was alright but somewhat forgettable as the set up movie
8 was a huge letdown. The moment they stepped back into Hogwarts the entire thing turned to shit. Some of the most memorable stuff was cut, changed, or flat out ruined. This one definitely isn't my favourite

 

[daTRUballin]

3's great, but fucked up robes and made the rest of the series be school uniforms which was absolutely dogshit. Also, Flitwick looks completely different.

The Flitwick thing was really weird. Apparently, Warwick Davis' character in PoA wasn't even supposed to be Flitwick but a random choir conductor. And then from the 4th movie on, they decided that the conductor guy would be the new look for Flitwick, therefore retroactively making the conductor be Flitwick in the 3rd movie. Not sure if this was Davis' own decision or if this was on the directors, but it's really weird.

I don't really mind the new look tbh. In the first two movies, he looked way too.......'wizardy' even compared to the other teachers lol. He looked like a mini Dumbledore.

 

[March Climber]

The Chamber of Secrets.

1) It didn't have the burden of needing to introduce the audience to everything like the first one.
2) It still managed to keep it's whimsical nature and sense of discovery due to expanding the lore of the school and characters.
3) We still had the incredible John Williams score to accompany it
4) It was the perfect mixture of a lighthearted movie with just a dash of dark corners, before things became too serious in the sequels.

Honestly the movie felt like a perfect homage to older treasure hunt movies like Indiana Jones, yet at the same time it helped bring us into the future by showing that a multi-entry movie series based on a book series, can work.