Goblets, fire, for the burning of

[kingandy]

Seen Harry Potter's Flaming Receptacle.  And saw that it was good. 

DUMBLEDORE: Good news, everyone!  This year, instead of an evil plot that draws Harry Potter into a series of improbable death traps, this year we're going to have a series of improbable death traps that draw Harry into an evil plot!  And we all get to watch from the stands, isn't it grand.

Much props to the staging, and the loading of a gun not only in Act I but repeatedly throughout the movie, and in doing it in such a way that you don't even realise what it is you're seeing.  Slapped myself, really I did.  As to the villain himself ... well, it was a bit Scooby-Doo, being a character that we'd only really properly seen once before, and that only in an "accidental" plot device.  (Not that anyone really believes that.  Come on, every time he leaves Harry alone in his office, something falls off a shelf or ignites or crawls out of its secret passage to deposit plot information in the lad's lap.  Either the sneaky old bat's up to something or his office is filled with the most helpful of ambulatory furniture.)

Nice to see the other teachers (particularly Snape) getting a bit more to do, though I suppose from one point of view it must be nice getting a regular paycheck for the better part of a decade for a part that you can basically phone in (qv. Warwick Davies).

If the movie suffers from anything it is that it is very definitely a middle movie.  Fourth of a purported seven, it is notable for its lack of closure and reliance on canon.  Certainly none of the wizarding world is explained, nor are many of the characters identified, though it is fair to assume that most of the audience would be at least passingly conversant with the basic setup unless they've been particularly fervent about stuffing rocks in their ears or something.  The plot is liberally littered with elements from earlier films, from Moaning Myrtle and the Polyjuice Potion to the ubiquitous Cloak of Invisibility and Sirius Black.  Most of these could be accepted as random local colour (and, indeed, Moaning Myrtle's appearance actually serves to mention that Potter and pals have previously produced a Polyjuice Potion), but Black's appearance doesn't particularly advance the plot and would leave the casual viewer very much in the dark.

Conversely, the climax of the film doesn't really resolve anything.  Voldemort isn't defeated Once Again, nor do the Forces of Good suffer any particularly crushing blows (except one character who existed only to be beloved by all and then die); all that happens is that Evil is strengthened so that he can more convincingly threaten Good in future films.

But, this does not necessarily make a bad movie.  The Empire Strikes Back is likewise a Middle Movie, and widely acclaimed as the better of the three^[1].  And I think I liked it marginally better than the Escaped Convict.  If only because it didn't have any time travel plot devices being entrusted to thirteen-year-olds.  (Not that the time travel in that wasn't very well done, since it didn't involve actually changing anything that they'd explicitly seen ... but I digress.)

I look forward to seeing how the movie compares to the book.  The only obvious element that lacked explanation (either explicitly or through previous movies) was the use of Accio, which I am given to understand is a generic summoning/telekinesis spell, though so many spells are randomly called without prior explanation that I'll allow it.  (Oh, and the wording "Accio Firebolt!" could lead to confusion if you didn't know the Firebolt was the brand name of his broom.  Or whatever.  For a moment I thought he was trying to deflect the dragon's fire.  But anyway.)  Judging by the Wikipedia entries there are a number of substantial omissions and alterations.  Still, the movie stands by itself as a movie (and it in some ways may make more sense - compare the movie's foreshadowing and laying down of plot threads with Ms Rowling's preferred out-of-the-ass method of denouement).

Notes:

• THEMES: Everybody Takes After Their Parents.  Note how the Death Eaters are composed of Crabb, Goyle, Malfoy etc, while Potter and Longbottom both were on the side of good (or at least victims or something).  The only exception thus far has been Barty Crouch Jr, who appears to be the only instance in the wizarding world of teenage rebellion.  Maybe in a book or two young Draco will start shrieking that Luscious is so unfair and I hate you and I'm joining the forces of Good just out of spite.
• The thought occurs that, in the larger sense, these books aren't actually about Harry Potter.  I mean, they're clearly about him, but what they are is the story of Voldemort's prolongued downfall by his own hand.  Harry, in and of himself, wouldn't be at all special without the reverberations from Voldemort's attack on his parents.  Voldemort's inability to touch him is an obvious consequence, but his parselmouth ability, the Sorting Hat's dithering over houses and potentially even the affinity for his particular wand (the mate of Voldemort's, and apparently the reason for the Priori Incantatem) - all of that is a direct result of the essence absorbed during Voldemort's attack.  Little Harry doesn't have to do very much, it seems, as Voldemort is his own undoing.  Possibly later books will give the lie to this but, as things stand now, that's how it looks to me.
• Snakes are bad.  Except that one in the first book, who was quite personable.  But since Book 2, everything snakey has been eeeeevil.

I think that's about it for now, time for bed.

ADDITIONAL: Krum's wand is made of hornbeam and has a dragon heartstring core. It is ten and a quarter inches long. Blimey. Yes, not bad at all from the neck down.
ADDITIONAL ADDITIONAL: According to the movie site, Cedric's wand is a little over a foot long ... oh sod it, just go and look at the Wikipedia entry. FILTH! SUCH FILTH!

[1] Naturally, the prequels are here considered to be a distinct entity.

Comments

[happy101.livejournal.com]

I was just glad for a wizard that uses magic alot in a very aggressive fashion.........

and also how the hell did harry stop the death spell..........as this now means he has survived it twice ...(I know that there was a wand joining typething but surely when the spells hit and the death spell was pushing through it like it wasn't there harry shoiuld have died...)


but I enjoyed it as a film and havenever read any of the books and never plan too I don;t like watching books that I've seen the film of or vice versa... I don;t like all the comparing that is guaranted too happen

[amber-missy.livejournal.com]

Again - the books explain the wand thing quite well - the pheonix feather in the wands are from the same pheonix (Fawkes) and therefore the wands are like brothers and won't hurt each other - there is a struggle to see which way the 'flare' goes and the prior incantatum ends up at V's end.

[happy101.livejournal.com]

Is voldemort vaguely scary in the books... cause I've always seen him as a rather rubbish bad guy.. who kept getting his plans thwarted by a child.

and he's done all that to make it so he can touch the potter...but all potter has to do is cast spells to regain his voldemort invulnerability

and it would have been so much cooler if harry had of gone... okay lets have it you way AVRA CADAVER (or whatever the correct spelling is) ha ha I kill voldemort you all suck ........then did a little dance whilst all the deat heaters looked scared

[amber-missy.livejournal.com]

In the books there's a lot more of the "what it used to be like when he was in charge" which sets the atmosphere a bit. The townspeople are scared, everyone's scared, which helps to make the reader scared. Yup - he's a bit more scary than the films, but could be scarier in both books and films I think...

As for the killing spell - one has to REALLY mean it and have the blackness of heart to pull it off. It's not something that can be done by someone inexperienced and "good" very easily.

[happy101.livejournal.com]

it's just as a main villain he couldn't touch harry potter until the end of the fourth book/film so I never really saw him as all that worrying

As for the killing spell - one has to REALLY mean it and have the blackness of heart to pull it off. It's not something that can be done by someone inexperienced and "good" very easily.

ahhh that makes perfext sense...........though is somethin else I herefore don't like about miss rowlings magical world.... it is better if god guys CAN do evil nasty spells and merely choose not to

[kingandy]

"as a main villain he couldn't touch harry potter until the end of the fourth book/film so I never really saw him as all that worrying"

From a certain point of view, that's sort of what the fourth book seems to be about. It's very much the transition between "kids" and "young adult" stories - Harry notices girls, somebody dies and Voldemort transforms himself from a nebulous threat easily fended off by a clever young whippersnapper and friends into a real and deadly force in the world, complete with henchmen and powerbase.

[happy101.livejournal.com]

yeah but I still didn't see him as being more of a threat.. cause if he casts at harry surely the same thing will happen again (presuming that harry cast at the same time)

and also he has henchmen that he doesn't trust, and in fact seems to mostly hate, and therfore are about as useful as a chocolate kettle.. besides I am sure that malfoy wants the dark lord crown anyway....

I suppose the level of threat he pose's is slowly rising and by the last book/film he will be scary as hell

[amber-missy.livejournal.com]

Good guys can do the killing spell (I can't remember the spelling either *sigh*) but they do have to really mean it. A lot of Aurors would have used it in their battle against the Death Eaters (when V was up and about originally) - including Moody (the real one). No-one blinked an eye when the "good guy" teacher used it in a class room.

[kingandy]

"it would have been so much cooler if harry had gone... okay lets have it you way AVRA CADAVER"

....... you really have missed the point entirely, haven't you.

[happy101.livejournal.com]

no I just being daft...........

though I am expecting that to be how the final book ends prett ymuch

[kingandy]

I rather expect it will very nearly come to that, then Harry will turn away from Darkness, and Voldemort will die anyway in such a way that Harry is not directly responsible. Perhaps by his own hand. Because murder is never a satisfactory resolution. See also: all Disney villains.

[happy101.livejournal.com]

okay... but if he kills him with love then me.... a few kilograms of c4 and j.k. rowlings house have a meeting to attend to.

but In seriousness I don;t know because it is aimed at an older audience one that knows that killing and murder aren;t the same thing, and that sometimes you have to make that sacrifice for the greater good, even if it wears on your own heart and soul.......plus killing evil people is fine

[kingandy]

Oh I'm sure he won't kill him with love. He'll just die by falling off a tall place, or let go of the ledge to take one last stab at Harry, or forget about the one vital ingredient or try to consume an energy field larger than his own head. Or something.

[happy101.livejournal.com]

as I said I think it depends on what audience her lat book is actually aimed at... as they are getting progressively older, it might be time for a slightly older view point...

or big maigcal duel going on.. it;s scary and frightenning harrie's getting beaten annd draco malfoy shows up and kills voldemort for killing his dad after his dad made a play for taking control.....


well no-one but mewould see it coming

[kingandy]

Yes - that is something that is entirely unexplained in the filum. Unfortunately I'd already learned about the Priori Incantatum effect from wandering around the Wikipedia so I'm not sure what I would have made of it if I hadn't. The shared core element was mentioned in Philosopher's Stone, but I probably wouldn't have realised its significance ... Dumbledore just implies that the effect is a very rare occurance and glosses over exactly what it is. Perhaps I would have put it down to Harry and Voldemort's general linkage ... or a general deus-ex-machina of everyone Voldemort's killed coming back to haunt him (though one would have thought he'd killed more than four people in his lifetime).

[amber-missy.livejournal.com]

It was only the last 4 that he'd killed - technically had the spell gone on longer, every spell he'd done would come back out of the wand... apparently(?)