why do the harry potter movies look so boring

Anonus · 2016-03-14 21:37:14

they do, they look boring as fuck

Obā-san · 2016-03-14 21:38:52

anonus why are you so judgey

Anonus · 2016-03-14 21:45:57

hm?

Odradek · 2016-03-14 21:57:20

Today is Tomorrow said:
anonus why are you so judgey

Anonus · 2016-03-14 21:58:24

well what I should say is that they vaporize any wonder the books had

Anonus · 2016-03-14 21:58:40

I mean, as usual, John Williams gave them a boss-ass theme song, but still

Odradek · 2016-03-14 21:59:32

??

Anonus · 2016-03-14 22:01:11

their aesthetic does not appeal to me

Toolsie · 2016-03-14 22:03:55

They look boring as fuck, but they are some of my favourite films ever made. The third one in particular due to its clever use of time travel.

Imipolex G · 2016-03-15 00:33:00

because they do not have zombies, bewbs or thrash metal

Hexartes · 2016-03-15 00:42:53

I appreciate their toned down aesthetic if only because something more aesthetically vibrant would begin to get tiring

Hexartes · 2016-03-15 00:43:46

I mean, it's not like they're super boring; they're certainly not hurting for some MARVELOUS setpieces like the great hall and the Ministry of Magic

Bee · 2016-03-15 01:12:45

Imipolex G said:
because they do not have zombies, bewbs or thrash metal

Half-Blood Prince has zombies, and Voldemort is kind of a zombie. Goblet of Fire had a band with a mosh pit. No comment on bewbs.

Imipolex G · 2016-03-15 01:13:37

I stand corrected then

Anonus · 2016-03-15 01:14:13

Well, they can't call them zombies, they're "Inferi"

Bee · 2016-03-15 01:14:17

Kexruct said:
I appreciate their toned down aesthetic if only because something more aesthetically vibrant would begin to get tiring

Also this. The coolest part of the movies isn't what gets thrown in your face, it's the little touches all around.

Aliroz · 2016-03-15 02:59:06

I remember the first two movies being really neat-looking and having loads of stuff to look at, and neat costumes and brightly colored food, and the third one being basically grey and cold-looking.

Which makes sense because, yannow, Dementors.

Sure, the Basilisk was paralyzing people all up in this place, but c'mon, it's not like it sucked the joy outta folks.

Anonus · 2016-03-15 03:15:01

i don't think anyone deserves azkaban

Odradek · 2016-03-15 03:16:08

I have heard people say the first two Harry Potter movies are the ones nobody likes.

Those people were all goons though, so that might just be the Goonsensus again

Anonus · 2016-03-15 03:20:54

they're the only ones I've seen all the way through :n

I dunno, I'm just thinking about how seeing screencaps of the movies just DESTROYS my mental images and stuff

I know this isn't a rational thing to complain about but like, the world those movies created isn't very immersive to me

Tatterhood · 2016-03-15 03:43:01

I feel like the first two are The Good Ones, but I only saw the first four anyway.

Bee · 2016-03-15 03:47:38

Keep in mind the screencaps you're going to see will naturally be SUPER DARK AND EDGY OMG please give us money now.

The last few movies kind of stayed that way I guess, but they had pretty darn good reason to.

Also we are talking about a series that holds death and how we deal with it as we grow up to be a primary running theme.

Anonus · 2016-03-15 03:51:40

Bee said:
SUPER DARK AND EDGY OMG please give us money now

if Warner Bros. had a coat of arms this would probably be somewhere on it

Bee said:
Also we are talking about a series that holds death and how we deal with it as we grow up to be a primary running theme.

that's not my problem, though

i guess it's hard to explain

Tachyon · 2016-03-15 13:31:07

Harry Potter's aesthetic is like, literally my preferred aesthetic, i think? Not stuff like the lightning font, but like, old buildings, especially old academic buildings, libraries, and just, randomly archaic stuff (esp. with a British flavour)? Steam trains, pendulum clocks, gold coins and imperial measures. i like the combined effect, it's comfortable and warm.

Tachyon · 2016-03-15 13:34:20

Bee said:
Goblet of Fire had a band with a mosh pit.

They played alt rock though, no thrash. Jarvis Cocker.

Odradek · 2016-03-15 13:34:27

Speaking of: Guess who got to check out the Harry Potter area in Universal Studios California

Tachyon · 2016-03-15 13:36:00

i like, like, the first 4 movies? i think i started to lose interest after that point, although i stuck with the books

i've seen all the films, but the later ones left less of an impression on me

Tachyon · 2016-03-15 13:37:05

that looks awesome!

what did you do there?

Odradek · 2016-03-15 13:47:06

There were some rides, and my little brother got a wand, and he could wave it in front of shop windows to make stuff happen.

Tachyon · 2016-03-15 13:50:03

:D

Tatterhood · 2016-03-15 14:10:12

Tachyon said:
i like, like, the first 4 movies? i think i started to lose interest after that point, although i stuck with the books

I mean there weren't many books to stick with. The last book came out the same month as the fifth movie. That's basically why I stopped watching them: I read the last book, it ended, and after that I just...sorta felt like I was done with Harry Potter, I guess.

Tachyon · 2016-03-15 14:35:42

i think i had something similar happen

the books were definitely the main attraction for me, the films were like, i know they were official but, they were something extra, they were someone else's idea of what the story was like, and that was fun in itself, but it wasn't the real harry potter to me

Tachyon · 2016-03-15 14:38:46

also partly i was put off by how much of book 5 was changed in the film, i guess

i mean it wasn't huge but it significantly altered certain characters (principally Cho, by making her betray the DA, and Grawp, by making him much gentler and cuddlier) and i didn't like that

book 5 was my favourite at the time, and i know i'm probably in the minority on this, but it had some of the best character moments imo and that was a big part of the appeal of those books, for me

Odradek · 2016-03-15 14:49:27

Did that baby dragon ever come back in either the books or the movies? I forget

Tachyon · 2016-03-15 14:55:39

no

it was mentioned in one of the later books that it turned out to be a female dragon, and was renamed "Norberta"

Crystal · 2016-03-15 16:34:43

Tachyon said:
Harry Potter's aesthetic is like, literally one of my preferred aesthetic components, i think? Not stuff like the lightning font, but like, old buildings, especially old academic buildings, libraries, and just, randomly archaic stuff (esp. with a British flavour)? Steam trains, pendulum clocks, gold coins and imperial measures. i like the combined effect

I like old stuff.

Anonus · 2016-03-16 07:16:57

i like old stuff too but like the wizarding world, especially according to the movies, is just so not-fun

beauxbatons is overseen by a fat lady named Olympe Maxime

the movies seem to have made that not fun ;_;

MadassAlex · 2016-03-16 08:13:02

ITT we learn that various fairy tale aesthetics are often underappreciated by those in positions of creative authority and I most definitely sympathise.

On a related note, the less detailed, more abstract graphics of many SNES JRPGs had me feeling the kind of aesthetic many of you appear to be describing, but modern JRPGs have taken a more overtly anime position and this is where I sympathise. I mean, some anime aesthetic was almost always part of JRPGs and I have no problem with inclusion of its elements, but I feel the aesthetic is too "modern" for me in high resolution. I'm not sure exactly how to describe my issue here, but I get the feeling.

Hexartes · 2016-03-16 14:15:16

Anonus said:
i like old stuff too but like the wizarding world, especially according to the movies, is just so not-fun

beauxbatons is overseen by a fat lady named Olympe Maxime

the movies seem to have made that not fun ;_;

I mean, maybe it wasn't outright cartoonish but there was some pretty garish costume and character design

Odradek · 2016-03-16 14:16:27

The fourth movie felt really rushed to me, in ways even the movies based on longer books didn't.

Toolsie · 2016-03-16 14:34:20

The fifth book, which was the longest out of all of them, made the shortest film.

Anonus · 2016-03-16 16:38:19

Second-shortest.

The shortest was Deathly Hallows Part 2

Odradek · 2016-03-16 16:44:01

It felt way less rushed, and I remember enjoying it much more.

The on-point casting for Luna Lovegood and Dolores Umbridge helped.

Bee · 2016-03-16 17:06:35

Oh God I wanted to punch Umbridge so hard.

Which I guess is the highest praise for the actress because you're kind of supposed to.

Tachyon · 2016-03-16 18:32:36

she wasn't how i pictured her in the book

she was good though, and Luna was perfect

Tachyon · 2016-03-16 18:33:48

4th film did feel rushed now you mention it

but i just really disliked the 5th at the time, i remember sitting in the cinema feeling really dissatisfied with it, really put out, annoyed, even

Toolsie · 2016-03-16 18:37:45

I think the thing with the 4th book is that there was some time between each of the tasks, which was clearly laid out. With the film, it felt like all the tasks happened within the space of a few months.

Fossilmaiden · 2016-03-16 18:43:49

Ignore, i red gud.

Sredni Vashtar · 2016-03-17 03:40:18

The fourth and fifth films were painfully rushed, but the casting was excellent in the fifth and the pacing as a film was less atrocious. The sixth felt more balanced, but it still excised some key scenes in a way that really annoyed me.

The first three were solid, however, and kept to the tone at the very least.

why do the harry potter movies look so boring

Comments

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories