|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sun Jul 03, 2005 8:16 pm
Oh I know, I don't think I could still watch it. It would just be to wierd.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 04, 2005 7:06 am
I know. It would be hard to enjoy because I'd be thinking, "Wow he doesn't look like Harry Potter as much as Daniel Racliffe did..." Or "Wow this new Ron isn't as funny with expressions as Rupert was." sweatdrop
|
|
|
|
|
|
Magnetic Conversationalist
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 04, 2005 11:21 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 04, 2005 3:23 pm
Yeah, that would be weird seeing a different cast for the Harry Potter movies. I would be thinking about how they changed the actors throughtout the movie for the first three times I saw it. sweatdrop I like to pay attention to details, so something like that would probably bother me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 04, 2005 5:24 pm
Your like my friend, she notices every little thing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 05, 2005 7:51 pm
It wouldn't be 'Harry Potter' anymore. confused
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 12:19 pm
I caught some things in the movies that were less than perfect:
>In the first movie, when Harry and Ron are on the train, you can see the trees moving outside. But what about the mountains? Apparently mountains can move, too. Because they don't change with the scenery at all.
>In the third movie, watch Buckbeak carefully when Harry first goes up to touch it. As Buckbeak moves, watch its body. The WB is the first to make an animated creature who can s**t.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 12:31 pm
That's true, the movies aren't perfect. But they did the best that they could.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 12:39 pm
Yeah, true. But I still found it odd that they made Buckbeak do that. eek
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 1:04 pm
Yeah it was odd, but some what amuzing. XD
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 2:21 pm
KimCL Yeah it was odd, but some what amuzing. XD I missed that. I'll have to re-watch the movie now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 2:57 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 3:02 pm
Ok then now I have to watch the movie again, lol.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 07, 2005 1:53 pm
I found that the first two movie were done fine, but the third one... I really feel that they insulted the book. They left alot out, including all the Quidditch Matches, the fact that Gryffindor won the Quidditch Cup and Harry also got the Firebolt at the end of the movie, which was a really crummy ending.
Plus, I don't remember them introducing 'Pig' at all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 07, 2005 8:06 pm
dranzenphoenixstrike I found that the first two movie were done fine, but the third one... I really feel that they insulted the book. They left alot out, including all the Quidditch Matches, the fact that Gryffindor won the Quidditch Cup and Harry also got the Firebolt at the end of the movie, which was a really crummy ending.
Plus, I don't remember them introducing 'Pig' at all. I was so disappointed about Pig! I drew pictures before the movie came out to see if what I thought it would look like would be what they thought and they didn't have it. I was sad.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
