Harry Potter GOF will be rated PG-13

[ShadowS]

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, now in postproduction and due to hit theaters Nov. 18, has been slapped with a PG-13 rating — a first for the blockbuster franchise — due to "sequences of fantasy violence and frightening images" and one reference to that "horrible, ----------ing son of a -------, Voldemort." The first three films, Sorcerer's Stone, Chamber of Secrets and Prisoner of Azkaban, all received PG ratings. From: TVguide
http://www.tvguide.com/news/entertainment/


Good I guess... now we just need to know how many minutes the movie will be...

[Kury Wagner]

Sweet! Maybe this one won't suck as much as PoA.

[Kasumi]

"Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, now in postproduction and due to hit theaters Nov. 18, has been slapped with a PG-13 rating — a first for the blockbuster franchise — due to "sequences of fantasy violence and frightening images" and one reference to that "horrible, ----------ing son of a -------, Voldemort." The first three films, Sorcerer's Stone, Chamber of Secrets and Prisoner of Azkaban, all received PG ratings. "
Wow. That's the first time I've seen someone cuss at Lord Thingie.

Hopefully this movie will be better than PoA but I doubt it. Please don't kill my favorite book!

[Jave]

Nice. This only means the movie won't be softened.

[KuwabaraTheMan]

Of course, half the story is being cut out...

Why didn't they just make this two movies? Hopefully the parts that do get left in will be good.

[Mike Spartz]

From what I've read of the early screening reports from Chicogo, the latest Potter movie definately deserves it's PG-13 rating. And considering that the series just gets darker and darker, the big wigs over at WB outta make the next three movies all 14A or above.


Of course, half the story is being cut out...

Why didn't they just make this two movies? Hopefully the parts that do get left in will be good. Again, from the reports that I've heard, the new movies sounds like it's the best one yet. From what I understand the graveyard hasn't been changed at all from the book and Voldemort looks very scaryOf course there are going to be parts cut out, but that's to be expected when you're adapting a book into a movie.

[Michael24]

The next HARRY POTTER movie is really going to have the F-bomb in it? Was it even in the book? Seems a little hard to believe. I can see the movies getting darker in terms of situations, but not harsher in terms of language.

[Kury Wagner]

The next HARRY POTTER movie is really going to have the F-bomb in it? Was it even in the book? Seems a little hard to believe. I can see the movies getting darker in terms of situations, but not harsher in terms of language.Huh? Oh, no no. I believe there'll be no f-word in GoF. Where'd you get that idea from? The rating is most likely for the dark/morbidish (at times) plot, as you stated.

[Mike Spartz]

Huh? Oh, no no. I believe there'll be no f-word in GoF. Where'd you get that idea from? The rating is most likely for the dark/morbidish (at times) plot, as you stated.read the first post of this thread.

[PaQ]

Yea I guess it makes sense that this would be the first to go to the next higher rating. Can't wait to see it, I'm sure it'll be as good as the others. Although that reference they talk about.. sounds weird, guess i'll just have to hear it in context.

[Discloner]

Sweet! Maybe this one won't suck as much as PoA. You can always tell who's a book fan first, and a movie fan second in these kinds of threads. :p

As a person who's never EVER read a single Harry Potter book, but has seen every movie...PoA was my favorite film. It was so delightfully dark without being completely morbid, and it didn't treat Magic like the novelty that the first films did (OMG WTF A TALKING LETTER!).

Looking forward to this film though...atleast it won't be a slavish rehash of the book like Columbus did for the first two.



...Atleast I'm hoping it won't.

[Mike Spartz]

You can always tell who's a book fan first, and a movie fan second in these kinds of threads. :p Hey POA was my favorite book and I still loved the movie adaptation!

[Discloner]

Hey POA was my favorite book and I still loved the movie adaptation! Then perhaps I've over-generalized...still, I don't think anyone can disagree with me that most complaints towards that movie are made by POA-Book fans who disliked the cutting/changing/overall difference between book and film.

[Michael24]

Huh? Oh, no no. I believe there'll be no f-word in GoF. Where'd you get that idea from? The rating is most likely for the dark/morbidish (at times) plot, as you stated.
Well, when I read in the original post...



. . . stating the PG-13 rating was also because of "one reference to that "horrible, ----------ing son of a -------, Voldemort."

The F-word was all I could think of to fit that quote.

[Peter Paltridge]

This is surprising for a "kids" movie. There have been kids' films in the past that got hit with a PG-13, but not that many.

No matter what, there will now be kids who won't get to see Goblet of Fire and will have to stick with the book until they can sneak the DVD out of the library a year later. Kind of unfair to them.

[Fone Bone]

The next HARRY POTTER movie is really going to have the F-bomb in it? Was it even in the book? Seems a little hard to believe. I can see the movies getting darker in terms of situations, but not harsher in terms of language.I really don't want to hear any of the characters dropping the f-bomb. I'm sorry, but that just isn't in the spirit of the kids movie. I expected the movie to get a PG-13 because the fourth book was so violent but I really don't want to hear Harry talking like a Pulp Fiction character.

[MonkeyFunk]

I think the comment on swearing was probably facetious - if there was actually swearing, the report would probably have said 'due to "sequences of fantasy violence, frightening images and strong language"', as opposed to mentioning language seperately with a line that (I'm guessing) TV Guide probably wouldn't know about yet anyway.

(the last thing the world needs is a sweary Harry...)

[Kuja's Light]

I'm not surprised it's gaining a PG-13 rating. I expected it fully really. It just shows they don't plan to sugarcoat it thankfully.

[Sharklady]

> Well, when I read in the original post...
. . . stating the PG-13 rating was also because of "one reference to that "horrible, ----------ing son of a -------, Voldemort."
The F-word was all I could think of to fit that quote. <

Me too, but I don't think that's a quote from the movie dialogue.

There is no explicit cussing in any of the HP books, though it is refered to ('Harry swore', and suchlike.) Perhaps when they adapt those instances for the movies, they'll have the actors murmmer angrily under their breath.

But even with completely clean dialogue, any meaningful adaption of 'Goblet of Fire' couldn't be milder than PG-13; the story includes several nasty incidents which are absolutely essential to plot structure. Softening them would be like making 'Lord of the Rings' without the battle scenes, or with Golem reworked to resemble a fuzzy teddy bear.

[Kury Wagner]

I don't think that's a quote from the movie dialogue.I didn't think it was either... I thought it was a quote from a person (columnist or otherwise), not from the movie. There's no way they'd put the F word in a Potter movie. Sure it's way more than just a kids book/movie, but still that's not fair to the younger readers/viewers.

Out of curiousity, anyone know what the worst word they've said in the books is?


You can always tell who's a book fan first, and a movie fan second in these kinds of threads. :pI never claimed to be subtle. :p But a slightly interesting fact is that I actually fell in love with HP after seeing the first movie. Chamber (the movie) wasn't too bad either, but I thought Azkaban was rubbish. So incredibly disappointed after seeing that.

Goblet is my favorite of the books, so I'm just trying to stay positive and hope for the best with this one. *crosses fingers*

[Mike Spartz]

I really don't want to hear any of the characters dropping the f-bomb. I'm sorry, but that just isn't in the spirit of the kids movie. I expected the movie to get a PG-13 because the fourth book was so violent but I really don't want to hear Harry talking like a Pulp Fiction character.When are people going to realize that Harry Potter is no longer a "kids book". From the third book onwards it's gotten darker and darker to the point that it's more of a teen novel series than anything else. The sixth book has Harry and his classmates are swearing on a consistant basis. Having him swear in the GOF movie isn't a far stretch of the imagination because most fourteen years olds swear - some a lot and some a little. Furthermore, if/when Harry swears, he'll probably be directing it at Voldemort and that's a totally natural way for him to vent his anger.

[shadowstrain]

I never claimed to be subtle. :p But a slightly interesting fact is that I actually fell in love with HP after seeing the first movie. Chamber (the movie) wasn't too bad either, but I thought Azkaban was rubbish. So incredibly disappointed after seeing that.
Sure the film adaptation of PoA differed from the book in many ways, but the story still remained intact. Cuarón did adopt a fairly heavy creative license in his tweaking of the source material, yet in most cases, I thought his changes only helped move the story along.

Some confirmed alterations for the GoF...



At the Yule Ball, Hermione is seen wearing a pink dress while in the book she is wearing a blue dress.
The "third task" does not take place on the Quidditch (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quidditch) pitch.
The whole "S.P.E.W." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House-elf#S.P.E.W.) story has been cut.
The Dursleys (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dursleys), Percy Weasley (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Percy_Weasley), Bill Weasley (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Weasley), Charlie Weasley (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlie_Weasley), Mrs. Weasley (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mrs._Weasley), Ludo Bagman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludo_Bagman), Winky (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winky) and Dobby (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dobby) the House-Elves (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House-Elves) have been cut from the film entirely.
Harry is helped by Neville instead of Dobby for the "second task".
The only scene featuring Sirius Black (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sirius_Black) is when his head appears in the fire in the Gryffindor Common Room.
An official picture released by Warner Bros. featuring Harry standing in front of the Riddle's tombstone shows Voldemort's father named as "Tom Marvolo Riddle", which is The Dark Lord's real name, and both his birth and death years unaccurate. According to Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Potter_and_the_Half-Blood_Prince), Marvolo Gaunt was Voldemort's maternal grandfather, so it's an impossible occurrance that the Dark Lord's Muggle father could have had the very same name as middle name, which, on the other hand, was Voldemort's. Plus, Voldemort was born in 1926, which makes 1915, as shown in the picture, an unlikely birth year for his father. Sources say that the Studio is trying to figure out the best way to fix these errors, which made the Harry Potter fans worldwide almost literally go crazy, before the movie is released.

[Malex]

Oh no, another movie franchise has transcended the PG rating in 2005. Well, Harry may not be a uber-cult classic as Star Wars, but this rating upgrade is a little unexpected. Of course it was obvious that the series would be too dark to stay PG. GoF is the beginning of the horrific endings in the series. One person dies at the end of each book from now on.

Let's not forget the Triwizard Tournament. Dan Radcliffe himself said that the dragon will scare some people. Besides the Horntail, there's the lake with the grindylows, hinkypunks (sp? It's been 4 years since I read the book), and the merpeople. Even though the merpeople didn't do much in the book, they look kinda nasty from what I seen from the trailer and previews.

Oh and THE scene. (You know what scene I talking about if you read GoF). That scene is the practically the reason GoF has to be PG-13 just like Anakin's hack-and-slash scene was in RoTS (or at least the top three reasons why I could not let my 8-year-old cousin see it). I had this perfect vision of the scene involving the movie characters because I thought back then that the movies would end at PoA. So far from what I have read the only thing that could go wrong is Tom senior's tombstone. I would like to blame J.K. Rowling for explaining Marvolo in HBP and not in CoS and that should be the only thing. Too bad we might not get to hear Dumbledore's speech as a speech.

Hopefully, my favorite HP book would get a wonderful adaptation. -apparates to look for a GoF avatar-

Edit-



At the Yule Ball, Hermione is seen wearing a pink dress while in the book she is wearing a blue dress.
The "third task" does not take place on the Quidditch (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quidditch) pitch.
The whole "S.P.E.W." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House-elf#S.P.E.W.) story has been cut.
The Dursleys (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dursleys), Percy Weasley (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Percy_Weasley), Bill Weasley (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Weasley), Charlie Weasley (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlie_Weasley), Mrs. Weasley (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mrs._Weasley), Ludo Bagman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludo_Bagman), Winky (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winky) and Dobby (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dobby) the House-Elves (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House-Elves) have been cut from the film entirely.
Harry is helped by Neville instead of Dobby for the "second task".
The only scene featuring Sirius Black (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sirius_Black) is when his head appears in the fire in the Gryffindor Common Room.

Oh my gosh!!! Hermione is not wearing the right dress! GFO IS KNOW TEH S UCK [/stupid HP fan]

Okay, some of these changes are okay. I can live without S.P.E.W. and without some of the Weasleys, but not Dobby, the Dursleys, or Sirius. Drat, the Quidditch World Cup is going to be a experience I won't forget.

[Fresh V]

Dobby and the House-elves are gone? Noo!!

[the Amanda]

They've gotta cut some things from GOF -- it's inevitable -- and as far as things go, SPEW is probably the best thing to cut (much better than cutting the Map background from POF). No Dursleys or Weasley twins means no Ton-Tongue Toffee scene :( -- I'm guessing we're going to open straight to the Quidditch World Cup, but shouldn't that scene have all the Weasleys in it? In fact, the omission of four Weasleys, Ludo Bagman and Winky seems to indicate that the World Cup scene might be short or absent...

I can't argue with this movie being PG-13. As others have pointed out, it allows them to do the final task proper justice.

[Lord Dalek]

At the rate we're going, maybe the film of Book 7 will be rated R. :p

[Kury Wagner]

I can understand the Dursley's being cut. Maybe even S.P.E.W. (loud sigh). But removing Bagman, Winky/house elves, and several Weasleys is just wrong. =(

I guess, if S.P.E.W. is gone, there's no need for house elves. But Bagman is still needed. Or is there not going to be a dive into a pensieve??

[KuwabaraTheMan]

You can always tell who's a book fan first, and a movie fan second in these kinds of threads. :p

As a person who's never EVER read a single Harry Potter book, but has seen every movie...PoA was my favorite film. It was so delightfully dark without being completely morbid, and it didn't treat Magic like the novelty that the first films did (OMG WTF A TALKING LETTER!).

Looking forward to this film though...atleast it won't be a slavish rehash of the book like Columbus did for the first two.



...Atleast I'm hoping it won't.
Rehash of the books? Did you see the same first two films that I did? I recall SS barely even maintaining half of the important scenes from the book, cutting Neville out almost entirely, and cutting out nearly all of the good stuff.

And unless my memory is failing me, Chamber of Secrets turned the students mistrusting Harry plot from an important one, to something that was acknowledged briefly in a 10 second scene.


The CoS movie wasn't a rehash of the book, it was 9 hour long flying car scene(okay, that's exaggerating a little bit, but it's true) And then they made the same mistake in PoA with the Knight Bus.

All I want it a movie that actually stays true to the books. Thus far, Chamber of Secrets has been the closest, but it was still off by a good 60% at least.

Goblet of Fire sounds like its going to be a hackjob based on what I'm hearing.

[shadowstrain]

With no mention of the Quidditch Cup in the last film and an absence of the Dursleys this time around, audiences who haven't read the books will be pretty confused at the start of the GoF.

[the Amanda]

With no mention of the Quidditch Cup in the last film and an absence of the Dursleys this time around, audiences who haven't read the books will be pretty confused at the start of the GoF.
Not really. The concept of a Quidditch World Cup is pretty self-explanatory if you understand what Quidditch is....

[AF$]

Rehash of the books? Did you see the same first two films that I did? I recall SS barely even maintaining half of the important scenes from the book, cutting Neville out almost entirely, and cutting out nearly all of the good stuff.

And unless my memory is failing me, Chamber of Secrets turned the students mistrusting Harry plot from an important one, to something that was acknowledged briefly in a 10 second scene.


The CoS movie wasn't a rehash of the book, it was 9 hour long flying car scene(okay, that's exaggerating a little bit, but it's true) And then they made the same mistake in PoA with the Knight Bus.

All I want it a movie that actually stays true to the books. Thus far, Chamber of Secrets has been the closest, but it was still off by a good 60% at least.

Goblet of Fire sounds like its going to be a hackjob based on what I'm hearing.
These movies can't each be 7 hours long.

[shadowstrain]

Not really. The concept of a Quidditch World Cup is pretty self-explanatory if you understand what Quidditch is....
I'm not talking about Quidditch, because yes, it's pretty self-explanatory. I'm referring to how Harry managed to escape his aunt and uncle again and where he's headed with Mr. Weasly, Ron, Hermione, and the others. Counting the absence of Mrs. Weasly, we probably won't get a Burrow scene which means the film will probably start off with those attending the cup trekking to the portkey.

[KuwabaraTheMan]

These movies can't each be 7 hours long.
No, but they can be 3 hours long and not include unnecessary scenes(flying car, knight bus) that don't add anything except "look at our special effects!!!!!!111!!shift+1".

Plus, GOF onward should all be two movies anyways.

[the Amanda]

I'm not talking about Quidditch, because yes, it's pretty self-explanatory. I'm referring to how Harry managed to escape his aunt and uncle again and where he's headed with Mr. Weasly, Ron, Hermione, and the others. Counting the absence of Mrs. Weasly, we probably won't get a Burrow scene which means the film will probably start off with those attending the cup trekking to the portkey.
While I'm sad that the scene has been cut because I like it, it really only requires a few lines of exposition.

RON: I can't believe the Dursleys let you go to the Quidditch World Cup.
HARRY: Well, you guys did have to practically drag me out, but I couldn't miss this for anything. It's not every day your dad is going to get free tickets to the biggest sporting event of the year.

Translate this to good dialogue and you're good to go.

[purplehairedwonder]

Plus, GOF onward should all be two movies anyways.Agreed.

Anyway, I actually would have been surprised had GoF not gotten a PG-13 rating, though I was worried for awhile. After PoA (my favorite book) got hacked to pieces, I was (and still am after seeing all that's been cut) worried about how the film is going to turn out. I thought PoA was a good movie, just as a movie (not a book adaptation). I'm worried the same will end up being said of GoF. I wonder if they'll ever address the Map history after it was cut.

I'm kind of confused about some of the story is going to flow with Winky, Ludo Bagman, and Sirius (at least) gone. I'm disappointed to see so many of the Weasleys gone as well. I was looking forward to seeing Bill and Sirius especially.

*sigh* I guess we'll just have to wait and see where it goes.

[Yash]

Guys, the last time they tried faithfully adapting the books was Chamber of Secrets. Which blew chunks. Don't look at these as book adaptations, but instead as movies.


At the Yule Ball, Hermione is seen wearing a pink dress while in the book she is wearing a blue dress.OMG MAJOR CHANGE :O


The "third task" does not take place on the Quidditch (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quidditch) pitch.OMG MAJOR CHANGE :O


The whole "S.P.E.W." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House-elf#S.P.E.W.) story has been cut.Good. S.P.E.W. was a waste of time.


The Dursleys (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dursleys), Percy Weasley (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Percy_Weasley), Bill Weasley (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Weasley), Charlie Weasley (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlie_Weasley), Mrs. Weasley (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mrs._Weasley), Ludo Bagman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludo_Bagman), Winky (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winky) and Dobby (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dobby) the House-Elves (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House-Elves) have been cut from the film entirely.Meh. It's not like these characters had much to do with the plot - well, except Dobby, but that's explained in the next bit.


Harry is helped by Neville instead of Dobby for the "second task".It makes sense. Faux-Moody said something about trying to get Neville to give Harry the gillyweed in the book.


The only scene featuring Sirius Black (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sirius_Black) is when his head appears in the fire in the Gryffindor Common Room.Looks like more information is going to be revealed then, or Harry will find out by other means (Rita Skeeter).


An official picture released by Warner Bros. featuring Harry standing in front of the Riddle's tombstone shows Voldemort's father named as "Tom Marvolo Riddle", which is The Dark Lord's real name, and both his birth and death years unaccurate. According to Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Potter_and_the_Half-Blood_Prince), Marvolo Gaunt was Voldemort's maternal grandfather, so it's an impossible occurrance that the Dark Lord's Muggle father could have had the very same name as middle name, which, on the other hand, was Voldemort's. Plus, Voldemort was born in 1926, which makes 1915, as shown in the picture, an unlikely birth year for his father. Sources say that the Studio is trying to figure out the best way to fix these errors, which made the Harry Potter fans worldwide almost literally go crazy, before the movie is released.Didn't Harry see Voldemort's tombstone as well? That would mean that it could be accurate and the 1915 was a slip-up.

[Fone Bone]

They've gotta cut some things from GOF -- it's inevitable -- and as far as things go, SPEW is probably the best thing to cut (much better than cutting the Map background from POF). No Dursleys or Weasley twins means no Ton-Tongue Toffee scene :( -- I'm guessing we're going to open straight to the Quidditch World Cup, but shouldn't that scene have all the Weasleys in it? In fact, the omission of four Weasleys, Ludo Bagman and Winky seems to indicate that the World Cup scene might be short or absent...

I can't argue with this movie being PG-13. As others have pointed out, it allows them to do the final task proper justice.They never said they were cutting out the Weasley twins. I just wish they had more to do in the movies as they are two of the best characters. I'm still holding out hope against hope that they will somehow manage to work in Peeves for Order of the Pheonix and the scene where the twins tell him to "Giver 'em hell" regarding Umbridge when they fly off on their brooms from Hogwarts.

None of these cuts really bother me except for Winky, Dobby, and Ludo Bagman. And Sirius should be at the end of the movie as well.

[the Amanda]

They never said they were cutting out the Weasley twins. I just wish they had more to do in the movies as they are two of the best characters. I'm still holding out hope against hope that they will somehow manage to work in Peeves for Order of the Pheonix and the scene where the twins tell him to "Giver 'em hell" regarding Umbridge when they fly off on their brooms from Hogwarts.

None of these cuts really bother me except for Winky, Dobby, and Ludo Bagman. And Sirius should be at the end of the movie as well.
D'oh, you're right. For some reason I misread Bill & Charlie as Fred & George *smacks self* I know that the OOP movie will have tons to fit in, but I really hope that they won't cut F&G's triumphant exit. It's one of the best moments in the book. (Likely things to be cut from OOP: Visit to the insanity ward, especially because they'd have to get Branagh again; parts of the Cho Chang stuff; all but the absolute necessities of OWL preparation and taking)

[Fone Bone]

D'oh, you're right. For some reason I misread Bill & Charlie as Fred & George *smacks self* I know that the OOP movie will have tons to fit in, but I really hope that they won't cut F&G's triumphant exit. It's one of the best moments in the book. (Likely things to be cut from OOP: Visit to the insanity ward, especially because they'd have to get Branagh again; parts of the Cho Chang stuff; all but the absolute necessities of OWL preparation and taking)It is the best moment of the book and I'm nervous that Peeves hasn't made an appearance in the movies yet. I forget, was he in the cut Deathday Party scene in the Chamber of Secrets?

[Style]

I'm not talking about Quidditch, because yes, it's pretty self-explanatory. I'm referring to how Harry managed to escape his aunt and uncle again...Considering the first three films had "escape the Dursley's" scenes, I'm content to assume from now on that Harry always escapes them somehow and just get to the action. I don't have to see how it happens every time...

[shadowstrain]

I'm still holding out hope against hope that they will somehow manage to work in Peeves for Order of the Pheonix and the scene where the twins tell him to "Giver 'em hell" regarding Umbridge when they fly off on their brooms from Hogwarts.
Indeed, because that line and Peeves's salute in return really made the scene.


(Likely things to be cut from OOP: Visit to the insanity ward, especially because they'd have to get Branagh again; parts of the Cho Chang stuff; all but the absolute necessities of OWL preparation and taking)
Just as long as they leave Dumbeldore's Army in the script, i'll be happy.

[the Amanda]

Just as long as they leave Dumbeldore's Army in the script, i'll be happy.
I can't imagine how you'd have an OOP with no Dumbledore's Army at all, so I doubt that'll be an issue.

[shadowstrain]

I wonder how they'll introduce the Room of Requirement since Dobby discovered it only because he needed a place to store Winky. It wouldn't surprise me if Harry found it himself.

[Ishtar]

Well the Dursleys are cut from this film, but there really is no way they can be cut from Order Of The Phoenix because Harry's hearing with the Ministry is caused by Harry saving Dudley and himself from a couple of lose Dementors in the Muggle World and Harry's hearing is important. If you want specific information about what has been altered, taken out, ect of GOF read these reviews by people who went to the special screening of the movie: http://www.mugglenet.com/movies/movie4/gofreviews.shtml

[shadowstrain]

Does anyone know if John Williams will be writing the score for GoF? I can't seem to find a crew list that credits him, let alone a composer at all (which doesn't surprise me).

[Wounded_Dragon]

Considering JKR's penchant for overdeveloping and then abruptly dropping elements, I'm not surprised at any stuff that doesn't make the movie cut.

[Fone Bone]

When are people going to realize that Harry Potter is no longer a "kids book". From the third book onwards it's gotten darker and darker to the point that it's more of a teen novel series than anything else. The sixth book has Harry and his classmates are swearing on a consistant basis. Having him swear in the GOF movie isn't a far stretch of the imagination because most fourteen years olds swear - some a lot and some a little. Furthermore, if/when Harry swears, he'll probably be directing it at Voldemort and that's a totally natural way for him to vent his anger.Let me answer that simply. I still think it's a kids book. Let me ask YOU a question: when are people going to have to stop justifying they like something by saying it's geared toward adults? There is NOTHING wrong with liking a kids book especially one as well-written as Harry Potter. I never see the plots twists coming and it's very exciting. Why shouldn't I read it, even if I believe the majority of the tone is geared towards younger readers? It's the same thing with Justice League Unlimited. People will go overboard insisting it's a cartoon for adults when it's not. A story made for a younger audience does NOT mean adults can't enjoy it. I just personally would find it hard to accept to hear Harry talking like Chris Rock because he doesn't in the books and he hasn't in the first three movies. It strikes me as out of character and I find it troubling that someone actually finds swear words to be proof of the story being for mature viewers and readers. Has ANYBODY who's seen Scary Movie believe it is written at a level that anyone older than thirteen would enjoy it?

Sorry, for being so grumpy, because I like you a lot Spontaneous Mike and think your Harry Potter views are awesome. It's just a pet peeve of mine when someone tries to argue that a family film should primarily appeal to adults. I'm not sure if that's what you were saying exactly but that always gets under my skin.



Considering JKR's penchant for overdeveloping and then abruptly dropping elements, I'm not surprised at any stuff that doesn't make the movie cut. S.P.E.W. really didn't go anywhere, did it?

[Kury Wagner]

when are people going to have to stop justifying they like something by saying it's geared toward adults?Ya know, I personally take pride in the fact that I like this stuff. I realize that I probably shouldn't, but I do. I'm very proud to have the same interests as an a eight year old boy. :D

S.P.E.W. really didn't go anywhere, did it?Really, it just added another something that Harry and Ron could pick on Hermione about/something that Hermione could nag about. =/

[Fone Bone]

Ya know, I personally take pride in the fact that I like this stuff. I realize that I probably shouldn't, but I do. I'm very proud to have the same interests as an a eight year old boy. :D Try owning 526 stuffed animals! Ha! I have the same interests as three year olds! Beat that!:anime:

On second thought this line of discussion is turning kind of creepy.:ack:

Really, it just added another something that Harry and Ron could pick on Hermione about/something that Hermione could nag about. =/Hermione is easily the most abused character in the book next to Neville. S.P.E.W. added nothing to her but I was still bummed to see it dropped in Half Blood Prince as we had to put up with it for two whole books and it went nowhere.

[Sharklady]

> S.P.E.W. added nothing to her but I was still bummed to see it dropped in Half Blood Prince as we had to put up with it for two whole books and it went nowhere. <

That might have been a nod to how things happen in real life- sometimes stuff just fizzles out.

Or, maybe in the 7th book S.P.E.W.'s unsuspected importance will be revealed.

[Scirel]

Gah! They cut Dobby out of GoF? grr...

Seriously, all I found majorly missing from PoA was the explanation of the marauders. It would have taken like 2 minutes but they didn`t do it, wtf...

But this leaves me worried for OOTP. If the cut Luna out of the movie, this means war. Luna>>>>>>all. NOT ONE SCENE of hers better be cut. NOT ONE.

[KuwabaraTheMan]

Oh if Luna is cut out, there will be hell to pay! Hell, I say, Hell!

[Scirel]

Hermione is easily the most abused character in the book next to Neville. S.P.E.W. added nothing to her but I was still bummed to see it dropped in Half Blood Prince as we had to put up with it for two whole books and it went nowhere.
She has gotten the shaft indeed. I really wanted her to be with harry, or Harry to be with Luna but instead it`s Ginny, who could`ve had any guy in the whole freaking school. GAH. They do go together I guess, but it was a little dissapointing.

Oh well, that still leaves Luna for me (which is not illegal since she`s technically 3-4 years older then me.) :evil:

[Fone Bone]

They couldn't cut out Luna if they wanted to. She gives the thestrals their explaination and is pivotal in the climax. I can see them working around Bagman and even Peeves but I garantee you Luna WILL be in the movie.

[Sharklady]

> If the cut Luna out of the movie, this means war. <

Take heart! JKR has stated in interviews that Luna is one of her favorite characters, so she's probably a shoo-in for the movie.

Anyone have any preference on who should play her?
I'd rather like Dakota Fanning- she turns 11 this year so should be old enough for Hogwarts:

http://www.vjcatkick.com/spt/archives/DakotaFanning.jpg

[Ishtar]

You know Peeves was actually casted when the first movie was made, so I've always wondered if there were scenes that were filmed with him , but just didn't make the final cut or even on the Deleted Scenes section on the DVD? I didn't think Winky would get cut out aswell since she was kinda important in the book. I wonder if they'll try to cut out Kreacher in OOTP aswell?

[Malex]

I would not want Dakota to be our beloved free spirit because she is too young, american, and too big of a hollywood juggernaut to be in this movie. The Harry Potter crew picks actors who would not eclipse the scene they are playing. I have seen good movies be reduced to the new "insert big actor here" flick. Also that would make Dan Radcliffe a very creepy guy.

[Scirel]

I would not want Dakota to be our beloved free spirit because she is too young, american, and too big of a hollywood juggernaut to be in this movie. The Harry Potter crew picks actors who would not eclipse the scene they are playing. I have seen good movies be reduced to the new "insert big actor here" flick. Also that would make Dan Radcliffe a very creepy guy.

Also Dakota is too young. Luna is supposed to Be Ginny`s age, only 1 year younger than Harry, 14/15. Dan will be around 17 when the movie is shooting so they`ll need someone older.

And Fone Bone, that`s what they said about the Marauders in PoA, look there. Also, they repalaced Dobby`s part with Neville in GoF. It is a scary thought, but it can happen.

[Kury Wagner]

Excuse me, but am I the only one on TZ that DOESN'T like Luna Lovegood?! :sweat:

Oh, and to stay on the topic of the movies: I didn't find PoA to be that bad of an HP movie, but I just found it to be a crappy movie in general.


I have the same interests as three year olds! Beat that!:anime: Ah Fone, I don't think anyone can beat that.

[TnAdct1]

Comments on the following changes/cuts:


The whole "S.P.E.W." story has been cut. Smart move here, as this plotline isn't really important to the story.


The Dursleys, Percy Weasley, Bill Weasley, Charlie Weasley, Mrs. Weasley, Ludo Bagman, Winky and Dobby the House-Elves have been cut from the film entirely. Cutting out the Dursleys is understandable (as their involvement in 4th book is minor compared to the other books). Also, with the exception of Percy (as he is working as Crouch's assistant in the fourth book), cutting most of the Weasley family out of the film can be acceptable. However, cutting Ludo Bagman and Winky may be costly, as they both have significant roles in the book (especially Winky).


The only scene featuring Sirius Black is when his head appears in the fire in the Gryffindor Common Room. That's probably going to disappoint a lot of the Sirius Black fans, and it also suggests the scene where Dumbledore starts up the Order of the Phoenix again following the "Parting of Ways" with Crouch may be cut from the film, considering Mrs. Weasley's obmission in the film and Sirius's limited role.

[purplehairedwonder]

Cutting out the Dursleys is understandable (as their involvement in 4th book is minor compared to the other books). Also, with the exception of Percy (as he is working as Crouch's assistant in the fourth book), cutting most of the Weasley family out of the film can be acceptable. However, cutting Ludo Bagman and Winky may be costly, as they both have significant roles in the book (especially Winky).Well, it wouldn't work for Winky, but Percy can still be mentioned or letters can be sent from him if nothing else. Just because his actor isn't there doesn't mean we don't have to know he's Crouch's assistant.


That's probably going to disappoint a lot of the Sirius Black fans, and it also suggests the scene where Dumbledore starts up the Order of the Phoenix again following the "Parting of Ways" with Crouch may be cut from the film, considering Mrs. Weasley's obmission in the film and Sirius's limited role.Like me:sad: And that would be such a perfect wrap up scene for the movie. According to those reviews posted earlier, the end sounds like it wraps up a little too quickly. That would have been a nice addition (or keep in or whatever). And the "Parting of the Ways" was with Fudge, not Crouch.

[Mike Spartz]

Plus, GOF onward should all be two movies anyways.That's your opinon and I respect it. All I have to say is that I've always viewed the Potter movies as separate entities from the books. I never expect them to be completely faithful to the books and frankly I don't want them to be. In my eyes, the success of a book to film adapation is measured by how well the film crew can take elements from the books and produce an end product that is not only faithful in sprit to the source material but a work of art in itself. A movie that remains - down to the last detail - completely faithful to it's source material is NOT A MOVIE, IT'S A ELABORATE WASTE OF OPPORTUNITY. A good movie has to be able to stand on its own two feet, it's got to have elements that are no where to be found in it's source material. The reason the Prisoner of Azkaban movie stands head and shoulders above the previous two films in the series is because Caroun set out to create his own separate version of the book into a movie. He had his own vison and he was smart enough to go with it instead of going the safe path and trying to please the die-hard fans. No matter how screwed up it was, most fans will remember the POA movie because it was different and more creative than a BORING 15 HOUR LONG RADIO VERSION OF THE BOOK!


Let me answer that simply. I still think it's a kids book. Let me ask YOU a question: when are people going to have to stop justifying they like something by saying it's geared toward adults? There is NOTHING wrong with liking a kids book especially one as well-written as Harry Potter. I never see the plots twists coming and it's very exciting. Why shouldn't I read it, even if I believe the majority of the tone is geared towards younger readers? It's the same thing with Justice League Unlimited. People will go overboard insisting it's a cartoon for adults when it's not. A story made for a younger audience does NOT mean adults can't enjoy it. I just personally would find it hard to accept to hear Harry talking like Chris Rock because he doesn't in the books and he hasn't in the first three movies. It strikes me as out of character and I find it troubling that someone actually finds swear words to be proof of the story being for mature viewers and readers. Has ANYBODY who's seen Scary Movie believe it is written at a level that anyone older than thirteen would enjoy it?

Sorry, for being so grumpy, because I like you a lot Spontaneous Mike and think your Harry Potter views are awesome. It's just a pet peeve of mine when someone tries to argue that a family film should primarily appeal to adults. I'm not sure if that's what you were saying exactly but that always gets under my skin.
Look my point was that I don't think swearing should be seen as such a big deal in the movies - especailly considering the darker tone of books 4 to 6. In my eyes, Harry swearing is natural bahavior of a kid his age. He's only fourteen and still too young to understand how to control his emotions. Plus, it's a known fact that Harry's got a bit of a hot temper so I don't think it should surprise anyone if and when we do see him lash out at his enemies or friends in rage.


Excuse me, but am I the only one on TZ that DOESN'T like Luna Lovegood?! :sweat: Yes, you might actually be. :p Speaking of Luna, I also hope they cast an unknown for the part. I really enjoy Dakota Fannings work but like eveyone else says: she's too famous. I'm also not sure if she can pull off a good British accent.

[Sharklady]

> I'm also not sure if (Dakota Fanning) can pull off a good British accent. <

There is no way to be sure, since we've never heard her try. She's a talented kid, though, so I won't be surprised if she could do it with proper coaching. And I know she's a bit young for the part, but there are ways to conceal that on film.

Casting Luna is bound to be challenging, since she doesn't behave like a regular kid- she's got Somewhat Loopy and Very Direct personas. We've already seen Fanning can play both, but if there's a young British actress around with the same capabilities, that would work even better.
Does anybody know of anyone like that?

[Nightflower]

> I'm also not sure if (Dakota Fanning) can pull off a good British accent. <

There is no way to be sure, since we've never heard her try. She's a talented kid, though, so I won't be surprised if she could do it with proper coaching. And I know she's a bit young for the part, but there are ways to conceal that on film.

Casting Luna is bound to be challenging, since she doesn't behave like a regular kid- she's got Somewhat Loopy and Very Direct personas. We've already seen Fanning can play both, but if there's a young British actress around with the same capabilities, that would work even better.
Does anybody know of anyone like that?
I doubt Dakota Fanning would get it. I read somewhere that JK Rowling specified that she strictly wanted British Actors. I think Robin Williams even offered to do a part for free, but she turned him down. :(

[Yash]

I think Robin Williams even offered to do a part for free, but she turned him down. :(Dang, that's pretty harsh :(

I don't know which character he wanted to play, but I bet he would've done a good job at it.

[Rook]

I doubt Dakota Fanning would get it. I read somewhere that JK Rowling specified that she strictly wanted British Actors. I think Robin Williams even offered to do a part for free, but she turned him down. :(
i prefer the british ascent of the voices anyway. i guess the english language combined with the cultural background works.

[the Amanda]

I doubt Dakota Fanning would get it. I read somewhere that JK Rowling specified that she strictly wanted British Actors. I think Robin Williams even offered to do a part for free, but she turned him down. :(

Good. Robin Williams can be good at some things, but he's a scene-stealing ham. The only person in HP who should be a scene stealing ham is Lockhart.

And Kenneth Branagh > Robin Williams :D

[Sharklady]

> Robin Williams can be good at some things, but he's a scene-stealing ham. <

Which is exactly why he'd make a great Peeves.

It is too bad that character was written out (I know they had to cut *something*, but still... Robin Williams as Peeves. *sigh*)

[Fone Bone]

I doubt Dakota Fanning would get it. I read somewhere that JK Rowling specified that she strictly wanted British Actors. I think Robin Williams even offered to do a part for free, but she turned him down. :(I really do need to send Ms. Rowling a fruit basket one of these days. I do everything I can to avoid seeing Robin Williams' movies but if he had been in Harry Potter I would have been in a pickle.

[Rook]

now see hes great when hes doing kids movie comedies, but when he does those suspence thrillers........i still cant get that one with the photo guy out of my mind.

[MonkeyFunk]

> Robin Williams can be good at some things, but he's a scene-stealing ham. <

Which is exactly why he's make a great Peeves.

It is too bad that character was written out (I know they had to cut *something*, but still... Robin Williams as Peeves. *sigh*)
Actually, Rik Mayal was cast as Peeves before being removed

[Jave]

People actually hate Robin Williams? For shame!

[Ishtar]

Actually Robin Williams wanted to play Mr.Weasley. Steven Spielberg was also an original option to direct but turned down because he didn't agree with Rowling about only British actors (Scottish and Irish were allowed aswell) because he wanted Haley Joe Osment as Harry Potter, which would not have been right at all!

[the Amanda]

*ugh* Robin Williams as Mr. Weasley... Haley Joel Osment as Harry Potter... I'm glad THAT never happened.

[Fone Bone]

People actually hate Robin Williams? For shame!I know. I so ashamed that I only like comedians who are funny.

Rik Mayal would have made an excellent Peeves.

Screw Spielberg.

[Kury Wagner]

Wait, we haven't seen Peeves at all in the flims?? Oh geez, I'm losing my mind then. Well, it also took me an embarrassingly long time to realize Nearly Headless Nick is played by John Cleese. :sweat:

I agree with those who said that Ms. Lovegood should be played by a rather unknown actress, as most of the Hogwarts students are. As long as the girl they pick has an awkward charm about her and an odd cuteness, she'll be good enough for me.

[Malex]

Robin Williams as Mr. Weasley... Haley Joel Osment as Harry PotterHA HA HA! Oh mercy.

Seriously, perhaps Robin might have done an okay job, but I doubt that Haley could. Isn't he in his early twenties? Nevertheless, the British actor only rule may be sometimes foolish, but at least it keeps the movies focused on the characters than on the actors.

[purplehairedwonder]

People actually hate Robin Williams? For shame!My thoughts exactly. But though I love Robin Williams, I'm kinda glad he isn't in the movies... but he would have made a fun Peeves I bet.

[Sharklady]

> Haley Joel Osment as Harry Potter... I'm glad THAT never happened. <

Ditto. Though Osment is a good actor, and about the right age (he was born in 1988), it is appropriate that the principals should be played by UK nationals. Because that *is* where the story takes place.

[Azrael24]

*back on topic*

im glad that goblet of fire is getting a PG-13 cause that means its gonna be better and more violent and darker, which is pretty cool. cant wait to see this!