I've thought about it ...
... and I have to say "Potter Stinks!"
We're talking about the movie, now, not the book which I felt was rather good in many respects. Maybe that's why I didn't enjoy the movie Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire - I was comparing it to the book. Don't get me wrong. There were some rather good bits (and I'll get to them), but all-in-all, I was rather disappointed.
First off, trying to cram 734 pages of cellulose into 157 minutes of celluloid was a mistake. There were too many sub-plots that were mismanaged. For example, Ron's jealousy of Harry's wealth, fame, and favor couldn't have been clear to someone who hadn't read the book. While this had very little to do with the primary plot of the Tri-Wizard Tournament, it greatly explained the social and emotional development that is crucial to the next installment, Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. Likewise the sub-plot with Cho Chang. We get the idea that Harry is uncomfortable around girls, but why this one? And lastly, there were so many changes to the story behind Barty Crouch, Jr. that it almost bore no resemblance to the one in the book. I can see cutting out Durselys entirely (sorry for the spoiler), but this movie could have easily been given the Peter Jackson treatment - make it as long as necessary to tell the story right. Hopefully the producers will take another trick of Jackson's and add considerably to the body of the film for release on DVD. Even if that were to happen, don't expect to understand the next book if you have only seen Goblet and not read it. And that's the second major gripe.
Too many liberties were taken with the story. Sure, this sounds like a reiteration of the first gripe, but there's a fine point here. Thus far the films have had a bit of fame for being as faithful to the books as possible. That is rare with such adaptations, particularly children's stories. But the fourth Potter was not for children. Removing elements such as the dangers faced in the maze as written in the book and replacing them with simply malicious bushes was just poor manipulation in the cause of cutting the film's length. And don't ask about Harry's fight with the horntail dragon. I'm trying to forget it so I re-read that section of the book.
And so was the bad acting. The third gripe I have is that almost without exception, the acting was appalling. It reminded me of the later seasons of the television M*A*S*H where the characters had two moods: Angry and hurt. Hermione, for example, seem to have knit her eyebrows together with a painful look in her first scene and then was unable to undo them until the end credits. All the actors seem to be hurrying through their lines, particularly Michael Gambon as Dumbledore. Perhaps I'm showing a bit of bias because I feel that Richard Harris was so much better in the role, but Gambon has more talent than he displayed here.
All was not lost, however. The character of Alistor "Madeye" Moody was excellent. At first I thought it was a bit overplayed, but in retrospect it might have been because of the nature of the character in this installment. I'm sure the ex-auror Moody in the next installment will be a better portrayal. Or I hope. And I rather liked the development of Neville Longbottom's character. The transliteration from book to film actually expanded the lad's part while completely changing the original story line. It worked out for the best, oddly.
This film also secures Lord Voldemort's place in film villain history. Thus far he has been a pretty good character in his various incarnations, but Ralph Fiennes put such an edge to his performance that you could almost feel the evil. The make up was superb as were the digital effects that helped bring the character to life.
That's also one of several minor gripes, however. As a whole the effects were sub-par compared to the previous films and to the industry standard. You don't even need a careful eye to catch the botched job in most every stadium crowd shot, particularly at the final challenge. Other minor gripes include the monochromatic color palette, the dismissed sub-plot of Rita Skeeter (rather important in the next installment), and the poor casting of nearly all the new characters.
Maybe it will be better in IMAX. The local venue has finally started showing commercial films and seeing Charlie and the Chocolate Factory was a much better experience on the big screen than it was the small screen. Of course, the screen I saw Potter on was the biggest indoor screen I've ever seen. It rivals drive-in theater screens in size, though IMAX has an impact all its own.
