Harry Potter and The Goblet of Fire (Spoilers)

[Amidala Starkiller]

We caught it yesterday afternoon.

I'm sorting out what I thought about it.

Casting, acting, effects, were great.

But the screenplay and directing not so much. I knew there going to cut the book up to fit it into a 2 hour movie but they cut the wrong things. Way too much of what was cut leads into the next books.

And how did they do that to Ralph Fiennes nose?

[D-Vader]

I thought it was great. Seems like (and I'd have to go back to the book) the movie started about a third of the way into the book. I knew they'd have to cut things way down (over 700 pages, the book is), and I'd read that they'd cut out all of the Dursley's. I think cutting out the Dursley's was a wise choice, since we already know that they are bad people, plus Harry starts living with Sirius Black after this movie, right? Or is it the next book? I can't remember.

There's that Rita Skeeter/animagus deal that was skipped. And am I mistaken, but wasn't there a part where Ron, Hermione, and Harry were at the Ministry of Magic and had to wind their way through it to find something? Or is that the next one?

There was some talk about doing this movie in 2 parts, so that the whole book would be covered, but I couldn't see doing that. The main story was told - Harry won the Tri-Wizard Championship, Voldemort lives, and Crouch Jr. had become Mad-Eye Moody.

I'm sure that for another 15 mins of screen time, we could have gotten a few other tidbits from the book, but overall, I think that the movie was done well. I can definately tell the differece between Chris Columbus's movies, Alfonso Cuaron's movies, and Mike Newall's.

I didn't like Dumbledore's acting. Seemed to phrenetic and unlike the Dumbledore we've come to know. He seemed to uptight and upset. From what I remember in the books, he was always cool, calm and collected. Here he seemed mad all the time and rushed. But then, maybe that was the tone.....