Welcome to BigScreenBiz.com

OK - this year I am excited about Harry Potter. I wasn't last year because I hadn't read the books. I am still working on the 4th and my husband is listening to it on tape, but we have both finished the 2nd and are both happily anticipating the screening tomorrow 10/22. I even took a vacation day to go!

Anyone else going?

We are all over it! We've read them all, enjoyed them all and last year (our first) it was our highest grossing flick. We are waiting anxiously.

Its going to open huge,but,like the first one,its too long!I know you can't book by running times,but that is the only reason JURASSIC 3(90+ minutes) outgrossed POTTER (142 min.)the first week in one of my theatres.

With each book being longer (#4 Goblet of Fire is 752 pages compared to SS at 312 and CoS at 341) it will be interesting to see how that effects the length of the upcoming films.

By my watch at the screening the film (including end credits) came in at 155 minutes - almost the same as the first one.
It was 9 reels same as the first.

The reason for the similar running times and reels became clear as the picture unspooled -it was in many ways the same picture as the first one - the same scenes at the same places and times throughout the course of the film (e.g. the quittich match occupied the same first five minutes of Reel #4 - the fight in the dungeon was the last part of Reel #8 etc. etc.). Virtually each major scene from the first one was duplicated - with a slightly different twist or villanous force; in each case the scene appeared in almost the same place as in the original film.

Not a bad movie - quite cute actually - but a real sense of deja vu.

We were told that the movie was 2 hours and forty minutes long but I noticed that at 2 hours and 37 minutes I was already on my way back to the car after the appropriate restroom stop. I know that we started exactly at 10:00.

Enjoyed the movie a lot but I was much more attuned to the pieces cut out and changes in dialogue to make it fit the shorter time requirements of movies. I could have stayed longer myself.

As far as sameness - That is a valid observation but each book follows a school year and we know that they do have a pattern. Each book begins in the summer before September 1 train to Hogwarts, continues through 3 Quidditch matches spaced over the year, Halloween feast, Christmas holidays, Easter holidays and end of term with the final scenes on the train back home or at the station. Same pattern but we learn more information about the wizard world with each book and each time Harry has to deal with different forces that may or may not be really the same forces and rely upon himself to deal with whatever comes at him. Perhaps you notice the sameness more because many of the important details in the books can't be fit in the films and they have to go for the high action sequences.

I don't love the screening room that we sat in because it is so noisy. I can hear the timer go off on the projector every time the reel is about to be changed and the sound doesn't come on right in the speakers at each change. Also the screen is about 10' wide and the picture was cropped so that the changeover dots weren't even visible. I can hear the projectionist running the film off the cores and onto reels during the whole showing. It will be much better in a real theater!

I saw this screening yesterday in San Rafael at a Century theatre. Ky was kind enough to sign me up for the screening.

What did I think of it? I am going to have to resort to a quote.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, helvetica">quote:</font><HR>it was in many ways the same picture as the first one - the same scenes at the same places and times throughout the course of the film (e.g. the quittich match occupied the same first five minutes of Reel #4 - the fight in the dungeon was the last part of Reel #8 etc. etc.). Virtually each major scene from the first one was duplicated - with a slightly different twist or villanous force; in each case the scene appeared in almost the same place as in the original film.

Not a bad movie - quite cute actually - but a real sense of deja vu.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

[This message has been edited by Large (edited October 23, 2002).]

I don't see a problem with this installment of the Potter Series, other then it might run too long for small children. As adults we see things like samness as a possible problem, but the film is really not directed to us, or is it? The kids want to see the some of the same things because they are comfortable with that. I think it will be as big if not bigger then the first one.

That's the problem with the movie versions of Harry Potter. The books can be very much enjoyed by an adult reader. But the films are so aimed at the 7-16-year-old audience that they aren't as enjoyable to the adult audience as the books are.

The biggest critisism you can level at Chris Jackson is that he made the films too childish.

And now - very sad news!

Sir Richard Harris aka Albus Dumbledore died last night in a London hospital. The part that he plays in the books as leader of the fight against Voldemort is even more important as the series continues. Do you think that they will cease making the movies now? Can they replace him?

Yes he will be replaced. It's a makeup roll anyway. They have had different Bonds, Jack Ryans and I guarentee you, there will be different Harry Potters.

If all the prints are not already struck, I hope they have time to include a "In Memory Of Richard Harris" or something like that.

I think Sean Connery would be a good candidate to take on the robes of Albus Dumbledore. Any other ideas?