Every Harry Potter movie, ranked by A.V. Club review
We looked under every sorcerer’s stone and into every deathly hallow to find the highs and lows of cinema’s wizarding world
Film Lists Harry Potter
November 14 marks the 20th anniversary of Harry Potter And The Sorcerer’s Stone, the Hollywood adaptation of the first book in J.K. Rowling’s almost inconceivably popular kid-lit fantasy series. Back then, the big question on everyone’s mind was whether the films could match the success of their source material—and maybe even if the first one would even prove successful enough to spawn a whole corresponding movie series. Which of course seems very quaint today, with the eighth and final Potter movie now a decade in our rearview mirror and the series now a holiday-season (and year-round cable-TV) perennial, despite the general cruddiness of both the Fantastic Beasts prequels and Rowling’s public remarks.
With hindsight, it’s of course possible to see a spectrum of quality in these quality-controlled all-ages blockbusters. Our own Noel Murray, in fact, offered a ranking of the whole series a few years ago. But how did The A.V. Club feel as the franchise was still in progress, before it dove into deathly hallows?
In honor of this upcoming anniversary, we’ve rounded up the contemporaneous reviews we wrote on each Potter installment and done our best to put them in order of general site preference. “Our best” because the Harry Potter franchise predates not just the A.V. Club’s adoption of letter grades for reviews but also the tenure of almost everyone who writes for the website today. Plus, they were written by no less than three AVC staffers, each with presumably different opinions about the best and worst of this smash franchise. (What they all seem to agree on: None of these movies are great, exactly.)
Nonetheless, a pattern of fluctuating enthusiasm does reveal itself as you make your way through every AVC take on every new adventure at Hogwarts. Don’t tell apple-polishing Hermione, but the first couple, at least, might have struggled to earn a passing grade.
157 Comments
Deathly Hallows: Part 1 has its fans—it’s a sleeper favorite among those who appreciate its melancholic detours and eccentric touches (like a Nick Cave waltz and an animated flashback).Count me among those fans (to an extent; it’s not one of my favorites of the series, but I’d rank it solidly in the middle). Both this film and Half-Blood Prince feel to me like they’re spinning their wheels while getting things set up for the grand finale, but the penultimate chapter at least has a strong, brooding sense of menace and some unexpected delights, not least of which is the reappearance of the best villain of the series, Imelda Staunton’s Dolores Umbridge.Anyway, not that anyone should really care, my rankings, from “okay” to “almost great”: HBP, GoF, CoS, DH1, PS, OotP, DH2, PoA.
Yup. Did a rewatch this year, and it’s probably my second favorite now. Deathly Hallows 2 is probably second or third from the bottom. Yates is a terrible action director, and it hamstrings the whole finale.
The climax of Deathly Hallows has so many awesome moments on the page where I thought “Rowling has to be writing this with the film in mind; I can’t wait to see this make it to the screen.” And I’m still waiting, because Yates decided to move all those cool moments to obvious bluescreen stages with naught but a handful of practical rubble scattered around the actors.
Harry and Voldemort’s final showdown taking place in the Great Hall, in front of all the surviving secondary/tertiary characters? Let’s shunt that off to some empty lot with just the two of them, and also find a way to make it more anti-climatic than “Voldemort’s spell simply reverses on him in mid-air.” To say nothing of how Yates chose to justify the theatrical release’s 3D upcharge by building up to that scene with a lot of shots where Harry and Voldemort kind of lazily grapple while flying at the screen.
Molly taking down Bellatrix is maybe the most disappointed I’ve ever been in something I was anticipating seeing on the big screen. It has no sense of blocking, or pacing, and Molly’s little smirk is fucking terrible in the context of everything that is going on.
HOLY FUCKING SHIT YES ARE YOU MEBonham-Carter does a little twirl; Molly *whispers* “not my daughter, you bitch.” Then goes zap, zap, zap, and Bellatrix is… dead. I am a big preacher of “different mediums, adaptations are not straight replays” but that was such a weightless interpretation of what, in the book, is LITERALLY THE SIDEFIGHT to the strongest members of the order dueling Voldemort. It’s Molly Weasley in all of her ginger-haired, older witch who is done putting up with THIS SHIT and MOM ENERGY. It is fucking spellbinding. pew, pew, pew. god.
Just for context because it is SO thrilling in the book. It is so powerful, and so PERSONAL. He changed course, running at Bellatrix rather than Voldemort, but before
he had gone a few steps he was knocked sideways. “NOT MY DAUGHTER, YOU BITCH!”Mrs. Weasley threw off her cloak as she ran, freeing her arms, Bellatrix
spun on the spot, roaring with laughter at the sight of the new challenger.
“OUT OF MY WAY!” shouted Mrs. Weasley to the three girls, and with a
simple swipe of her wand she began to duel. Harry watched with terror and
elation as Molly Weasley’s wand slashed and twisted, and Bellatrix Lestrange’s
smile faltered and became a snarl. Jets of light flew from both wands, the floor
around the witches’ feet became bot and cracked; both woman were fighting to
kill. “No!” Mrs. Weasley cried as a few students ran forward, trying to come to her aid.
“Get back! Get back! She is mine!” Hundreds of people now lined the walls, watching the two fights,
Voldemort and his three opponents, Bellatrix and Molly, and Harry stood,
invisible, torn between both, wanting to attack and yet to protect, unable to be
sure that he would not hit the innocent. “What will happen to your children when
I’ve killed you?” taunted Bellatrix, as mad as her master, capering as Molly’s
curses danced around her. “When Mummy’s gone the same way as Freddie?” “You – will – never – touch – our – children – again!” screamed Mrs.
Weasley. Bellatrix laughed the same exhilarated laugh her cousin Sirius had
given as he toppled backward through the veil, and suddenly Harry knew what
was going to happen before it did. Molly’s curse soared beneath Bellatrix’s outstretched arm and hit her
squarely in the chest, directly over her heart. Bellatrix’s gloating smile froze, her eyes seemed to bulge: For the tiniest
space of time she knew what had happened, and then she toppled, and the
watching crowd roared, and Voldemort screamed.
Sirius’ death for me. In the books, it’s not the curse that kills him, it’s that he touches the archway in the Death Chamber. Harry watches him get hit with some normal stunning spell, it knocks him backwards just enough to brush against the Veil, he’s yanked through and he’s just GONE. It’s powerful because of its immediacy; Harry sees his surrogate uncle fight and look strong, then one unlucky turn of events and he’s not there anymore. For all the hay made about Diggory’s death in Goblet, this is the one that really establishes the stakes of the war.
In Yates’ vision, this changed to Sirius getting hit with Avada Kedavra – no longer the terrible green flash and fantastic roar, but now a green version of Every Other Spell – and while in the previous film AK met its book reputation as an instantaneous and unceremonious kill that knocks a body into the air, here Sirius gets to take time to register that he’s been hit with it and ease his body backwards, taking time to give Harry a meaningful “I’m dead, kid, bye” look, before the veil absorbs him in a big, lengthy CGI effect.I struggle to think of why it was changed, and I assume it was some mixture of “Because it’s a movie, idiot; ‘Guy trips through curtain, dies’ is not very dramatic” and “I don’t want audiences to be confused” mentality – but Harry’s confusion is such a big part of it. Sirius wasn’t hit with a fatal spell, he just tripped through that empty archway and it’s some magic thing, he’s gone somewhere else or he’ll come out the other side any second now. In any event, that (plus some other changes in Phoenix) really set the tone of how Yates was going to approach the material; I skipped the theater for the final three movies and only watched them on HBO long after the fact.
Harry and Voldemort’s final showdown taking place in the Great Hall, in front of all the surviving secondary/tertiary characters? Let’s shunt that off to some empty lot with just the two of themThat was one of the worst decisions Yates ever made, & showed how little he really understood the text. (And it should’ve been a big red flag about how little Rowling cared, since she should’ve used her Absolute Creative Control to get him to change it.) Voldemort disappearing with no witnesses is meaningless; he’d done that before! The point was that this time everyone saw him die.
“Yates is a terrible action director”Yup. The only part of the big climax that feels remotely inventive is when Harry flings himself and Voldemort off the ramparts.
My problem is I catch so many snippets of various Potter movies over the weekends that I can’t really remember what happens in which ones. The Columbus ones are obvious, but really kids’ movies (much like the novels they adapt) and the two Hallows films are distinctive. But the four in the middle (Goblet possibly excepted, because of the tournament) really run together for me.
Agreed that DH1 does spin its wheels a fair bit, which is the same issue I had with the first part of Book 7. With the passage of time, I have come to somewhat appreciate how bleak and hopeless it makes the whole thing seem at that time; the main 3 are on the run from the world, Hogwarts is a shithole, etc. A montage of newspaper articles or something to the same effect would not have had the same weight. That being said… it is not a particularly entertaining watch as a lot of it boils down to “idk, I guess let’s try this?” The book at least let the reader look into their fears and anxieties in a way that was just really difficult to translate to a blockbuster film.
I know it’s cliche to disagree with a ranked list but…Half-Blood Prince is definitely the worst movie. It completely misses the tone of the source material and its tone is completely inconsistent with the other movies. Silly but not in a good way.
It drains all the whimsy inherit in the series and is just a dark bore.
Also (this is such a stupid nitpick but I dont care) young Tom Riddle was supposed to be handsome and charming. His creepy moments are supposed to be fleeting. I do love the Felix Felicis scene though.
I wish that the Harry Potter franchise died in obscurity and that Discworld got all of its popularity.
Too bad the Discworld books are all inherently unfilmable. Unless…
Coming in 2025: Denis Villeneuve’s Small Gods.For real though, I wonder if Waititi could handle Discworld. I really liked Jojo Rabbit, and the original book was apparently a straight drama that he adapted into his own style. A lot of what makes the books special really doesn’t translate to a visual medium very well, but a lot of it still would, and maybe he would work his magic with the rest.
I recall at one point Disney was in talks to adapt Mort but it fell through.
I’d like to see Waititi to get more chances to adapt more things into his style, mostly because his style seems to “get it” a bit more than others. He digs down so even if it’s a drama, he gets to what the drama is. Jojo Rabbit is a great example of a book that tried to tell a certain story and failed in some ways, while Waititi’s style managed to get to the heart of what the book wanted to say and said it. i think he’d do great at Discworld.
I’d love to see them do a YA adaptation of something like The Amazing Maurice and his Educated Rodents, or the Wee Free Men books. I read these as a teenager and they stand alone really nicely, without too much of Pratchett’s legendary footnotes. I’d go so far as to say The Amazing Maurice is still probably my favourite of his books, even as an adult. Of course, the problem is that it’s a pretty standalone book and wouldn’t work for ‘franchising.’ Hence the Wee Free Men probably being a better bet!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Amazing_Maurice
If you like Hugh Laurie, Emelia Clarke, David Tennant, or Rob Brydon (among others) then you’re in luck!
This is where even a slight amount of research would have come in good! I’m a little sceptical but excited, nice to see one of my favourite books adapted!
Literally all of these lose the magic and wonder if the books, despite a mostly winning cast
Nothing like strip mining old content for a “new” article for those sweet, sweet clicks.
Don’t forget the slideshow! Can’t get more clicks if we put everything on one page, now can we?
Click once, click “List slides” at the top.
Joke’s on them. I shrunk my browser window until it went to scroll view.
Hmm… an article celebrating the work of a transphobe after so much about Dave Chapelle. An interesting choice AVC.
I think this is a valid criticism, but I think the difference is that Chappelle is himself in pop culture, while Harry Potter is a whole other world separate from Rowling. In practice, I don’t interact with HP in any way that would contribute a single penny to the author. But the work itself still occupies a big enough piece of modern culture that it cannot simply be deleted from everyone’s experiences. Even my trans and enby friends have had to struggle with this piece of their childhood turning sour, and that hasn’t necessarily resulted in them throwing out their Ravenclaw scarves or books.
It would also be different if there were now-obvious messages in the novels themselves. Other than some puppy love and, later, real relationships forged by shared experience, the books are generally sexless.
Yea, the extremely unforgiving harsh moralistic tone of the news pieces would maybe go down a little smoother if cheap cynical cash grab pieces like this didn’t consistently put the whole site under a neon flashing “Hypocrisy” sign.Chappele and Rowling deserve to be criticized. But if you’re going to peddle the righteous outrage articles that declare them hateful monsters — instead of wrong, flawed people who are caught in the double down cycle of the righteous outrage game with an aggressively hostile internet mob — maybe don’t also peddle articles celebrating those hateful monsters’ work.
It’s possible to watch the Potter movies without giving Rowling any more money, thanks to used, already-owned, & borrowed-from-library DVDs.
Ew, why?
For twelve-year-old me The Sorcerer’s Stone was a perfect movie. I hadn’t read the books yet (my mom told me I might like them, but 200 pages seemed like way too many pages back then), so this was my introduction to this world and it worked so well. The characters, the setting, the music, the costumes, everything captured my imagination like nothing before had. So yeah, nowadays I realize that it has its faults, but no, I cannot think of this movie objectively.
Adult critics often forget who makes up the main audience for movies (and books) like this. I.e. you.
I continually am reminded that I’m in the minority of HP fans in that I seem to like all the movies that are usually considered the “worst” ones and I don’t care for the “good” and “gritty” ones. I haven’t thought about this for a while, but if I was forced to rank the HP movies now (again, none of them are amazing, but I do enjoy watching some of them…), I would probably rank (from best to worst): GoF, HBP, SS, CoS, DH Pt. 1, PoA, OotP, DH Pt. 2. I like the ones that have a sense of joy and wonder and fun in them. The darker ones are not as much my favourites. I rewatched PoA recently and…really did not enjoy it. Just such a dour mood for most of the movie and it didn’t work for me.
My issue with the PoA is leaving out the story behind the Marauders Map and their friendship/Snape’s beef. An extra 15 minutes to have that would have been great.
For years before I even picked up Harry Potter or watched the movies —and for years after— I had to listen to people gush about how dark and amazing Prisoner of Azkaban was. I think it was the Hot Topic book of the week for like 300 weeks straight. The movie stands out because the first two are so much worse, and because the actors finally look like they’re alive, but the whole thing is just overblown. The fourth movie, even with half of the book cut out, is still better by a pretty decent margin.In any case, Half Blood Prince is such a complete waste of time both in movie and in book form that it honestly rivals Chamber of Secrets for being the most boring bit of the whole enterprise.
Prisoner of Azkaban gets overrated simply due to alfonso cuaron; he’s a wonderful director and that movie is competently made but it’s still just not very interesting to watch. Also why do people immediately like things just because they’re “dark”? Chris Columbus at least understood the source material; who wants to see a magical wizard school shot entirely in tones of flat grey? I guess everyone because that’s what David Yates gave us too.
With Azkaban you could argue that there’s a rationale for the desaturated color palate, with the presence of Dementors on the castle grounds casting a pall over the entire campus. Why they kept that aesthetic moving forward is a bit of a mystery (Especially since it was and remains the lowest-grossing film of the entire original HP series – even the first Fantastic Beasts film wound up outperforming it worldwide. But it got solid critical notices, so clearly somebody at Warner decided to stick with what Cuaron laid out for them even if he wasn’t sticking around.)
To me it always made more sense to have a British magic school be kinda foggy and drizzly and grey instead of constant blue sky sunny days. It’s been overdone since but heck, even the Dursley household was brightly lit in the first movie.
I love Azkaban so I’ll disagree there. But I enjoyed the coverage of Potter over the years and how every installment (mostly from Azkaban onwards – but even with the second because of murders and messages written in blood) was Potter Goes Dark. But then franchise sequels being touted as darker is as much of a cliche as the latest Bond actress announcing that her character isn’t like the traditional Bond girl.
Flip Half-Blood Prince and Goblet of Fire, and I think I’d probably agree with this list. Though honestly, I’m more likely to re-watch Goblet than Azkaban if I see it on TV.
I will forever defend the Columbus movies. They’re faithful adaptations that don’t do much more (partially because the kid actors just haven’t come into their own, and also because the source material hadn’t yet matured past basic kid’s fantasy as well), but the thing they do that the back half of the film series just forgets, is that it’s a series revolving around fucking magic. Even as the series got darker, the books never lost the understanding of whimsy and magic that made it exciting to dip into the universe, whereas the films absolutely did. The color grading starts draining all the life from the images, Hogwarts itself just becomes a monotonous series of castle corridors instead of remembering this is a place with weird reconfiguring stairs and ghosts galloping around the hallways, Gambon plays Dumbledore like even more of a jackass than is required, the John Williams score is replaced by perhaps Hooper and Desplat’s most uninspired offerings. Even little dumb things like the pointy hats and robes go away and everyone is just running around in Muggle street clothes.
The first two novels really are children’s books. I think Sorcerer’s was around 200 pages. Rowling meant for kids to grow up reading the books when they were about the same age as the characters. So it’s not surprising the first couple of films were mostly about faithfully retelling the story and making Hogwarts look fun and exciting. As an adult I thought they were fine, but they weren’t for me. My kids LOVE them.
I rewatched Philosopher’s Stone at the cinema this weekend and it’s as good an adaptation of the book as anyone could have hoped for. I worked the opening weekend at my local cinema and I can’t describe the excitement of the children going into and out of the screens. It was such a great atmosphere. For them it was real magic which I know sounds cheesy but seeing the characters and locations all come to life was amazing to them. The set design is great, the casting is pretty much perfect* and Willaims’ score is fantastic – again, it really emphasises the magic and wonder of it all (though I think his Azkaban score just beats it). I’m not as much of a fan of the second (that one does drag for me but rewatching it with my son this year reminded me how funny it is) but the first feels like a genuine family film classic – not a PG-13/12A YA fantasy, just a great family adventure. There are a million ways it could have gone wrong and the franchise could have fallen at the first hurdle – something we’ve seen with various attempts to copy it (fuck you, Eragon). And it’s not perfect (I’m sure new viewers put some of the shoddy CGI down to the time it was made but it was shoddy back then. Also Harry doesn’t just out and out kill Quirrell in the book). But I think it’s underrated in how charming, enjoyable and – fuck it – magical it is. * I actually think Watson peaks here. Radcliffe gets better, Grint develops but stays nicely reliable but whereas Watson made for a great precocious 11 year old, a lot of her later dramatic acting involved how much she can move her eyebrows and enunciate. She’s still good (the way the cast mostly stayed good-to-great for a decade of huge changes and development for them as people is amazing) but I think she’s pretty much perfect in the first film.
I can more than relate to your story of seeing how kids reacted to the films. My then GF and I thought it would be a good idea to go see the latest LOTR film while *possibly high. We were both mid-20’s and figured opening night would be a blast. It was not LOTR II that was coming out, it was Chamber of Secrets, and we watched it in a packed cinema at 9 p.m. on opening night in the back row. Nothing but enthusiastic kids and a random parent. It was the best worst cinema experience in my life. It made me remember how great it was to go to the local theatre that showed old monster movies during the summer when I was growing up. I hadn’t seen that excitement in 20 years, and it was amazing.Screaming kids and how they mentioned every detail that wasn’t -quite-there in the book was just plain annoying though. As stated, best worst cinema experience ever. But I still love/hate it to this day.* We were definitely high.
* I actually think Watson peaks here. Radcliffe gets better, Grint develops but stays nicely reliable but whereas Watson made for a great precocious 11 year old, a lot of her later dramatic acting involved how much she can move her eyebrows and enunciate. I caught up with Little Women recently, and she was the single weak link, in my most humblest of opinions.
Agreed. The other three sisters put in fantastic performances and she was fine but just… there. Such a shame that Emma Stone had to drop out of that role. That would have been a killer line-up. (In other Little Women acting rankings, I thought Odenkirk was better than Streep)
It’s Lev-ee-OHH-sa, not Lev-ee-oh-SAAAHH.
This is the perspective a friend of mine has, and it changed my own. I think Chamber is terrible, but Stone is whimsical, magical. Watching it with my 8yo after reading the first few books was special. I also fully co-sign your note about how the further the movies went, the more lifeless and dull they became. Yeah, the later BOOKS are still dark. But they’re still weird and whimsical and strange. They lose all of that.
It was Twilight that needs to be blamed. All the weird scenes (wtf was that dancing about with Harry and Hermione?) and changed details can had to have been the fault of some clueless company rep that kept telling them: “Hey, it needs to be more like Twilight, remember or we’ll cut your budget!”
Unless you were concentrating, the Twilight and later Harry Potter trailers look the same.
I don’t know if I’ll ever have the stomach to watch these again, but:Overrated: Azkaban, Half-Blood Prince.Underrated: PhoenixThe former butcher the source material to the point of incomprehensibility (Snape, apropos of absolutely nothing, hissing “I’m the Half-Blood Prince!” and then running away in HBP will always be inadvertently hilarious), whereas the latter takes a tedious slog of a book and turns it into a pretty tightly plotted and enjoyable movie.
Yeah, HBP almost ruined the whole franchise for me. I remember leaving the theater saying to my wife “I can’t believe they left so much on the table at the end.”
“I’m the Half-Blood Prince!”“You…what?”“I’m the…you know, I’m the guy who wrote all those helpful notes in your Potions textbook.”“Oh, um…okay?”“Also, the book gets into this, but my mother’s maiden name was Prince, so, you know…pun. Kind of. Pretty clever.” “Listen, I’m glad we were able to clear up this little mystery, but I’m kind of distracted by the fact that you literally just murdered my mentor/father figure.”
“Oh, yeah, shit, gotta run. Byee! I’m the Half-Blood Prince!”
This one I fully agree with you on. All the stuff that makes the HBP reveal land is fully absent in the film.
I have no idea how anyone who didn’t read the books followed any of the movies, really, but Azkaban and HBP were the worst.
I didn’t read the books until after having seen the movies multiple times, and I had no problem following any of the films.
That’s interesting. It’s been awhile so I can’t remember my specific concerns, but I recall thinking they left out a while bunch of key marauders stuff, and something about Sirius that at the time seemed important but clearly not if I can’t even remember what it was.
Movie!Azkaban doesn’t even mention that James, Sirius and co. were the marauders.
Ah yeah, that was it. It messes up the character motivation and makes the whole Snape thing really random, right?
Avid book fan, never bothered me once. I don’t think it bothered most. It was an excellent film. Perhaps the only one that bothered to try to make a good “movie” first, “cram stuff in from the books” second. It lost nothing of great important and value and foregrounded the relationships.
Relatively easily? These aren’t exactly David Lynch movies.
There are huge plot holes, though? Or did people just handwave those since they were kids movies?
It’s been a while since I’ve seen these, but what plot holes other than some time travel stuff (which I did handwave)?
No way in hell is Azkaban worse than the first two. They’re D-tier versions of Indiana Jones.
Goblet of Fire was the worst when it came to the movie leaving out essential details. But HBP was probably a close second.
The showdown in the wizard office at the end is the best battle in the series. Dumbledore owns. Dig that so much.
That right there is what crushed my soul learning about the new movies (once I knew they were going Twilight style, I lost all interest), because there was ONE glorious wizard fight still left on the table, one awesome as hell scene with the greatest wizard fight of them all…
Dumbledore vs Grindelwald.
It was detailed so wonderfully in the book, and I thought: “Yes, this is going to be so awesome to see on the screen!”
And they said…no…we prefer an awkward dance scene with Harry and Hermione that leads to nothing -_-
Correct. Prisoner of Azkaban is hands-down the worst Harry Potter movie. Like, I’m really happy for all the people that confuse “fun little camera tricks” for “well-directed”, but honestly, that movie is a mess. It’s two hours of Guillermo Del Toro sniffing his own farts and trying not to direct a Harry Potter movie.Half-Blood Prince very clearly tried to lean into the teen romance angle in an attempt to keep up with Twilight, for some reason. They cut out a whole bunch of the story from the book, and spent way too much time trying to make anyone care about who is dating whom. As a result, we never really learn as much as we should about Voldemort and Snape’s origins, and the final scene where the Death Eaters enter Hogwarts is useless – they didn’t do anything after they showed up, so why was Malfoy spending so much time trying to get them in?
“It’s two hours of Guillermo Del Toro sniffing his own farts and trying not to direct a Harry Potter movie.”All them Messicans look the same, eh?
Sidenote: Del Toro would have been a pretty great choice!
Ugh. Yeah, no excuse for that, and apparently I can’t even edit the comment to correct it. That’s my bad. Here’s the correction: it’s Alfonso Cuarón whose direction was distractingly overbearing, completely ruining the adaptation, not Guillermo Del Toro.
Guillermo Del Toro must’ve have been really successful at not directing a Harry Potter movie, seeing as Alfonso Cuarón was the guy who directed Prisoner of Azkaban.
Yes, see my other comment. I’ve already eaten crow about this. I’m aware that it was Alfonso Cuarón who didn’t want to direct a Harry Potter movie, and instead cut the book apart looking for ways to insert his own distracting camera tricks into the movie, not Guillermo Del Toro.
Agreed, I have no idea why Order is ranked so low here when it features the only good wizard battle of the entire franchise.
I love Order, but I get why others don’t: it might be the hardest book to film, since it’s almost entirely about being in Harry’s head while he’s making really poor decisions. A lot of that internal conflict isn’t helped by Gambon’s gruff and somewhat dickish interpretation of Dumbledore , because Gambon’s imperiousness, while it pays dividends in the big duel, makes the idea of Harry being frustrated by Dumbledore snubbing him kind of ridiculous. If Michael Gambon’s your school’s headmaster, you’re just happy he isn’t pulling a straight razor on you for eyeballing him wrong.Also, book fans tend to be really upset that the Harry/Dumbledore confrontation at the end gets cut to almost nothing.
Order is the longest book in the series and my least favorite, cut 200 pages please. There is a lot of good STUFF in it but… it’s fascinating it is the shortest film (I think).
Yeah, the Order book is overstuffed and repetitive (so…Harry’s upset? You don’t say!), but the final confrontation is a pretty huge moment for both characters in the series. It’s insanely long in the book (I want to say close to 100 pages all on its own?), and rather than make some attempt to streamline it or adapt it, they make it a 30-second scene to the tune of “I’m angry!” “You’re right to be angry.” “All right, then!”
Agreed. For all my complaints about Order-the-bloated-book, that final showdown is massive. We truly get a sense of Dumbledore’s power after only previously hints and glimpses; here, it’s on full display. The department of mysteries is a bit of a mess but when the entire Order swoop in to save the day it’s phenomenal. It’s more the obscenely long bit of Hagrid telling about his journies to the giants in past-tense; the absurdity of Harry refusing to go to any adult about Umbridge’s “lines”, the insidious length.That, actually, is one of my very favorite moments in the entire filmology, and something I think the movies did better. When the Order apparate in to save the day in the movie it is *BREATHTAKING*. It’s easily the best thing Yates has ever directed. It’s epic in scale and scope and wildly thrilling. The book never quite conveyed that same level of awe; it’s not Rowling’s strength. Whereas one of the things Order does poorly is Fred & George’s “quitting” of school. I don’t expect nor do I ask for the movie to be word-for-word. Cutting Quidditch is generally an easy subplot to streamline a script. But in the movie, there is no build-up or motive for them to escape. They just… do.
Whereas one of the things Order does poorly is Fred & George’s “quitting” of school. I don’t expect nor do I ask for the movie to be word-for-word. Cutting Quidditch is generally an easy subplot to streamline a script. But in the movie, there is no build-up or motive for them to escape. They just… do.That’s actually one thing I like in the movie—they provide that quick moment before the twins go wild where there’s an anonymous 11-year-old who’s been doing Umbridge’s “lines” and the kid’s crying and they’re trying to comfort him, and the outrage of that (of Umbridge’s tyranny not just being restricted to Harry’s peers) is the thing that makes them decide to quit. It’s a bit more mature response than “We were suspended from Quidditch! Might as well quit school.”The change I detest in the movie is Cho being the DA’s snitch. It felt like the filmmakers making overly sure that we’d be happy for him to move on to Ginny.
Holy crap I forgot that entirely. That sucks.
Cut Hermione’s PETA stuff, yeah, but Yates cut the plot.
Makes sense. I never read the books so I never knew the battle was more involved but watched Dumbledore fight Voldermort was awesome. Height of their powers, etc, except Dumbledore was older and weaker at that point. Still dope.
Because the movie as a whole is a rushed mess. It’s the 2nd-shortest film in the series when it should be one of the longer ones. (Chamber of Secrets has the opposite problem; it’s the longest film in the franchise—including Fantastic Beasts—when it should be the shortest, & as a result it’s a boring slog.)
That isn’t just a great wizard battle. It’s a great sequence on its own that stands up against any other sfx sequence ever. It’s amazing.
Half Blood Prince is my favorite book of the series and has a few sequences that stick in my mind (the flashbacks, the first horcrux), but yeah, the entire title bit gets so lost in the shuffle
I don’t know. There’s quite literally nothing to Order of the Phoenix except for wheel-spinning and a fairly standard critique of the UK’s education system.
I’ve always considered Half-Blood Prince to be by far the worst movie of the franchise. It cut out anything remotely fun or interesting from the book, but kept all of the angsty teen romantic drama as the film’s main focus, which is just an interminable slog to get through. Combine that with the miserable color palette, and it is just a painful watch. I don’t think I’d be able to watch if it weren’t for Evanna Lynch and the late Alan Rickman, who are the only people who seem to be having any fun.Phoenix took what I thought was the worst book in the series, cut all of the annoying, extraneous subplots, shortened the most brooding part, and made the most bloated book into the most fun and tightest film of the franchise. It’s my favorite Harry Potter film, and Imelda Staunton’s performance is so much fun to hate in it.I appreciate Azkaban as a visual marvel, and it does a great job adapting set pieces from the book, so I can have a good time with it, but I don’t get how people who haven’t read the book can follow it, considering they don’t explain why the things that are happening are happening. I get needing to cut back on scenes of exposition, but you need at least a little bit to understand what’s going on. The first two films did a much better job of cutting back on exposition scenes but keeping enough that the audience understands what’s happening. Not to mention that the film breaks its own logic in ways the books didn’t (Harry gets in trouble for using magic outside of school, but does so in the pre-credits scene with no consequence?)
“Phoenix took what I thought was the worst book in the series, cut all of the annoying, extraneous subplots, shortened the most brooding part, and made the most bloated book into the most fun and tightest film of the franchise. “This this this this
Before I even start, my first thought is “Will there be a Dowd curve?” Perhaps there will be: Plus, they were written by no less than three AVC staffers, each with presumably different opinions about the best and worst of this smash franchise.ETA: no Dowd reviews, so that settles that.
“Learning to decipher the various degrees of C-”
I think Azkaban is the best. I don’t like Yate’s visuals, so its more satisfying to me. And I absolutely love the way it re-invented magic as a blinding, white heat instead of the more sparkly particles we got in the first 2 films.Also the switch out of school uniforms set it apart right away.
Filmmaker’s Note: In the summer between Harry’s second and third year of school, a shipping error resulted in Wizarding bookstores receiving mainstream fashion magazines and hair styling products.
I agree on the uniforms, the first two films just felt a bit too much like the American idea of what English schools should be like. I also like the switch from all the pristine lawns at Hogwarts to it suddenly being perched on the top of a mountain.
I still don’t understand why they thought American children couldn’t handle the word “philosopher.” If they’d stuck with the original title, maybe they could have avoided that weird satanic panic around the books.
Seriously, an Uncle $crooge comic published in 1955 had no issue with calling its story “The Fabulous Philosopher’s Stone” on the cover, yet Scholastic wouldn’t use that name in the title when they imported the books? In terms of dumbing down a title out of fear of scaring away kids, it’s almost as bad as Columbia Pictures renaming The Pirates! In an Adventure with Scientists! to The Pirates! Band of Misfits for US release.‘Murica!
It was that the “Philosphers Stone” had meaning to British school children that wasn’t known to American kids. If the name was just meaningless, it made more sense to tie it to an american understanding of magic.
If that’s the case, why did I get the British version in Canada?
same reason the queen is on the money I suppose
Welllllll…. Fine. Though we do usually get more American cultural exports than British. I will treasure my extra ‘u’s in this case.
Because you fought on their side in 1812.
I’m not sure British 8 year olds are more familiar with obscure alchemical relics than American ones.
I’ve got a feeling pitching any mass-market book or movie in the late 90’s with the word “Philosopher” in the title, to any age group, would flop spectacularly in This Stupid Country. Unless it was, like, a bawdy rom-com called The Sex Philosopher and starred Hugh Grant in a cartoonish fright wig as a horny professor.(When I was reading the book at 14 and hit the part about Flamel, I had a flashback to the section on alchemy in one of the many “stranger than fiction!” real-life conspiracy/mystery books I picked up from the Scholastic Book Club in my elementary school days. I was puzzled as to why the stone’s name had been changed, but assumed it was just the author putting a unique spin on it. Finding out a year or two later that this was a purely American change was dispiriting but unsurprising.)
Uh, the word philosopher has a completely different meaning in American English that would make it a useless descriptor for any kind of supernatural thing.
So do jumper, torch, and lift, all of which were in the version I read in Canada. It’s a British book, let it have a British vocabulary.
This. “The Philosopher’s Stone” sounds like the name of a thought experiment; you expect Vision to bring it up while fighting himself in a library.
When I was 8 years old I knew what the Philosopher’s Stone was. (See the aforementioned Uncle $crooge comic.)
And I didn’t even know Uncle Scrooge comics existed until adulthood.
The change had nothing to do with how American kids did or didn’t understand the word Philosopher or Philosopher’s Stone. It was even more mundane. The publishers just wanted something in the title that said magic. Like they suggested “Harry Potter and the School of Magic” or something equally bad. Compared to that, Sorcerer’s Stone is a relief, even if in retrospect it seems like such an unnecessary change.
It is sad revisiting the magic of the books knowing that Rowling is such a transphobe. it’s apparent she has a lot of binary thinking in her works, but sorcery is so inherently queer in history and in literature, it makes my baby queer self sad that she continues to try and strip so much magic from our community. She’s a greedy muggle who knows she possesses no magic in her own life.But the magic of the movies I always think is carried a lot by the very amazing Radcliffe who really looks so full of delight and wonder. Also the books were a lot scarier by the end than the movies, so I always think the movies toned down the grittiness in comparison.
Probably easy for me to say, but Rowling is not difficult to ignore (at least in the States) and like you said, when I watch the movies I see the young actors who we watched grow up on screen. I don’t see her. Who would have thought the heart and biggest badass of the series would turn out to be Neville?
yes, I can separate her from the series, and I think the Rowling who wrote the books probably wouldn’t recognize the villain she has become. At the same time it sucks that actual cool developments like the Harry Potter game just means she’ll get more money and more funds for anti-trans crusade.
At this point the video game money is sand added to the beach.
burying dobby and the magic even deeper.
Ranking Half-Blood Prince as #3? The consensus is that it is one of the weakest films due to plodding plot and pacing. And that movie actually ranking higher than Prisoner of Azkaban, which is often considered to be the best of series with lot of heart and pathos? That film saved the series and elevated the cast and plot to newfound level of maturity that everyone can truly enjoy. At least they did rank the Columbus’ movies low, which is quite right since they didn’t really aged well despite their marvelous creativity that sets the tone for rest of series to follow. There’s many debates about correct ordering for the two parts of Deathly Hallows, in which I thought Part 1 was great and Part 2 was weak. Goblet of Fire is fun, though mostly okay comparing to other better films. And Order of the Phoenix is my personal favorite and possibly the best adaptation. They treated a lot of controversial stuffs from book with more respect and had lot of great actings and scenes.
Here’s my list:Prisoner of AzkabanOrder of the PhoenixDeathly Hallows: Part 1Goblet of FireDeathly Hallows: Part 2Sorcerer’s StoneChamber of SecretHalf-Blood Prince
I’ll cosign this list, with the possible exception of switching Phoenix and DH Pt. 1. Regardless, HBP anywhere but near the bottom makes no sense.
I second this
I’m not a fan of Order, but I’m definitely with you on Prisoner. At the end of that movie Harry was actually HAPPY, and that meant a lot.
Sure Half-Blood Prince was a slog of a movie, but it did give us the Liquid Luck scene, which for my money is the best part of the entire film series.
Well, at least that’s one of better sequence in series, I’ll give you that. Not enough to redeem the film in whole, though.
I would argue there are great scenes in each film; but few of the movies work well as actual films.
I suspect if everyone did an actual rewatch of all the films, most rankings would look very similar to this, with the possible exception of some HBP adherants insisting, perhaps rightfully, that at minimum it should be ahead of the Columbus clunkers.
I still find it absurd that the top comment is defending those two. They’re absolute garbage.
I wouldn’t mind that list as well. HBP and Columbus’s two films do belong somewhere in the bottom of list. I enjoy Sorcerer’s Stone and Chamber of Secret much more than Half-Blood Prince because while they’re clunky, they’re still fun and imaginative with budding chemistry between actors. Half-Life Prince’s story is very much a slog comparing to other films on the list, which is why I ranked it right at the bottom.
This is the right list
I agree that HBP is trash but you put Goblet of Fire way too high up there- it didnt retain any actual magical world building from the books, just set up without delivery. The set up for the quidditch cup and not showing it, the death eaters at the cup but no further eplanation, the mystery of Barty Crouch solved immediately ruined by showing David Tennat in the start of the movie, the unecessary flair in the first task etcI can’t stand how random and unfeasible the plot changes are because the director even admitted to not reading the book in the first place.
I haven’t watched them in a long time, but Goblet of Fire was an incoherent mess of random scenes plucked from the novel without bothering with context. It was like watching its own clip show, and I hated it. To me, easily the worst film in the series.The Chris Columbus films were, like most Chris Columbus films, kind of bland and I have a general dislike for Half-Blood Prince’s source material – a book that exists because Rowling said she was going to write seven books, so it’s a ton of narrative wheel spinning until the big twist – so I was never going to be fond of any reasonably accurate film adaptation, but Goblet of Fire was the only one I hate.
That Nick Cave dance in Deathly Hollows 1 is easily my favorite moment in the whole franchise.
Going to piggy back off of MeinStroopwafel while doing my own rankings. The Columbus movies aren’t bad and it’s too easy to lump them into the bottom of Harry Potter Movie rankings, probably cause they would have to exist at the bottom of book rankings. Those two books are true children coming of ages stories and the movies do a great job of sticking their neck out to capture their whimsy. Granted in comparison that’s an easier job then what Yates/Cuaron had to tackle, but that doesn’t mean that Columbus failed in the least bit. Okay here are my rankings:1. Prisoner of Azkaban (It has it’s flaws but I don’t think it’s overrated, and the casting of the Marauders is so good, and does so much legwork for the film itself) 2. Sorcerer’s Stone3. Order of the Phoenix4. Deathly Hallow’s Part 1 (I actually think their performances are really strong in this film, they do a good job of showing the desperation and having the back against the wall, and even though i’m not a huge fan of how the movies adapted the darker elements of the series, it all ends up being a good set up for the dystopian setting that this movie has us live in) 5. Chamber of Secrets6. Goblet of Fire (I know people love it, but I honestly think all the tasks could have been handled better, Dragons are good, but the Maze becomes such a mess, and the Moody twist ends up falling so flat in the film, while being so great in the book)7. Deathly Hallow’s Part 2 8. Half-Blood Prince (I remember nothing but the end)
I’m impressed by Colombus’ ability to create hogwarts, but there’s a lot of button mashing on the wide-eyed wonder faces and ostentatious display, and for that he sacrifices depth of magic of the world. In the first one, it clearly did work as a movie for children, but it got tired with an hour left and then kept on into the second film.
I feel you on that, and agree that it suffers greatly in the 2nd film, but I enjoy Stone from start to finish. I like the execution of the tasks for the 3rd act, and the final confrontation with Quirrell is really enjoyable.
I agree with this list 100%. Daniel Radcliffe in PoA looks and acts the most like book Harry out of all the films and you feel like the child actors are finally coming into their own. DH part 1 is tragically underrated and I think your assessment is spot on. GoF has the cringiest dialogue and the whole Moody storyline was badly done. Half-Blood Prince is my favorite book in the series and the movie absolutely murdered it to the point of almost being unrecognizable. They left out almost everything about Voldemort’s past and the horcruxes (things that play a huge part in the next movie!!) but instead showed the Weasley’s house burning down for no reason at all. The only good part of the movie was the liquid luck scene which Daniel Radcliffe made hilarious.
*Philosopher’s Stone. derp
It’s hard for me to separate my appreciation of the films from my appreciation of the books, and to judge the films as standalone works.
I’ll still go to bat for Half-Blood, if only because its cinematography is phenomenal and it is happily gloomy. Yes, it could have done so much more if it worked with the source material, but it is what it is. I have that same gripe about Azkaban – a terrific film in its own right but incredibly frustrating for leaving out all of five extra minutes of material that would have lent it and the rest of the series much greater heft and context.
I also have a lot of love for Deathly Hallows 1. It shakes up the formula (and still suffers from some omissions from the books).
Goblet of Fire has aged the poorest for me, and not because of how much they hacked the book to get to a final product. It’s a frustrating film because of pacing, odd character beats, and the score. Props, though, for going all in on PG-13. I remember whooping for joy when the first trailer dropped and it showed the MPAA rating. They did not make it weaker for the sake of kids.
Order of the Phoenix is also a frustrating film, and perhaps the most frustrating for me as its own work, totally divorced from the book. It’s just kinda… there – although I loved the inclusion of Sirius deludedly calling Harry “James” during the final battle, a nod to Sirius’ isolation and longing for the good ol’ days with his friends. That part wasn’t in the book.
Rather than rank these films (which have been ranked to
death), I’d just like to list what is great and terrible about each film. I
love all of them and hate none (I certainly prefer them over the books), but I
know each one has its champions and detractors. It’s hard to deny that, among
film series, the original 8 Potter films are one of the most (if not the most)
consistent franchises of all time (keep in mind, I’m of the age that each one
gives me a pretty big nostalgia boost, though).1. Sorcerer’s Stonea. Great: A real sense of magic and discovery (“You’re
a wizard, Harry”) and early-LOTR levels of CGI paired with wonderful practical
effectsb. Terrible: An aversion to risk that plays out in
each scene – what sets some of the later films apart are their looseness; SS is
a pretty diorama that the creators won’t let you play withc. Best Moment: HP and the envelopes flying around –
true movie magic2. Chamber of Secretsa. Great: One of the scariest of the series (the basilisk
hissing “Kill, Kill, Kill” is still spine-tingling) and sneakily sets up some
of the later plotting (the diary Horcrux, the sword of Gryffindor, Ginny, etc.)b. Terrible: Too long and, once again, the
filmmakers trying to cram as much in as possible without tinkering gives the
film a stale, quotidian qualityc. Best Moment: “Dobby is a free elf.”3. Prisoner of Azkabana. Great: Compared to Columbus’ films, there is a
loose, bedraggled quality that enlivens the third film; Cuaron is a master, and
his filmmaking sensibilities are a welcome addition to the franchise; one of the
best and maybe most accurate depictions of time travel in all of cinemab. Terrible: Really leans into slapstick sometimes
(Harry face-planting on the bus) that feels like a different film; the ending
is rushed and truncated, a real let-down after such an energetic and emotional
film to not stick the landingc. Best Moment: HP realizing he cast the stag patronus
and saving himself4. Goblet of Firea. Great: The first “mature” film that successfully
interweaved the darkest elements that had been in the background; introduces
Voldemort in a way that is both faithful and exceeds the book, making him a
3-dimensional character and a worthy adversary for HP; the priori incantatum
scene is a series highlight (never
fails to move me)b. Terrible: Ruined, ruined, ruined the hedge maze;
all the tasks (the meat of the book other than the graveyard scene) are weakened
in the film, but when the whole book is leading to this test of HP’s abilities
and willpower, to take out all of the obstacles is maybe the film series’
greatest sinc. Best Moment: The ghosts of Voldemort’s wand (see
above)5. Order of the Phoenixa. Great: Other than Prisoner, some of the best
cinematography of the series and, in contrast to Goblet, cut out parts of the
book that made the film manageable without sacrificing character growth; hands
down, the best magical battle of the series (nothing in Hallows part 2 compares
to Dumbledore vs. Voldemort in the MoM).b. Terrible: A consequence of editing the longest book
to the shortest film – some important developments are rushed; Luna is handled
about as well as they could have, but, in particular, Occlumency is given very
short shrift. Hard to follow without having read the booksc. Best Moment: Wizard Battle (see above)6. Half-Blood Princea. Great: Paradoxically, this is both the funniest
(HP on felix filicis might be Radcliffe’s best acting in the series) and
most depressing entry (more so than Hallows part 1). The teen drama is amped up
to 11, but it’s balanced beautifully by Dumbledore’s sacrifice and the loss of
innocence in the end.b. Terrible: Lavender Brown is a necessary evil;
she’s mightily annoying, but it gets Ron and Hermione together at least.c. Best Moment: The burning of the Burrow (exhilarating
and mournful)7. Deathly Hallows Part 1a. Great: To echo above, this is a great “hangout”
movie; spending more time with just these 3 characters makes up for the times
plot and action sidelined the character development in earlier films; the most
melancholic of the series before the roller-coaster finaleb. Terrible: In lieu of any big moments outside
Malfoy Manor, the decision to personify Ron’s anger and fear with inky, nude, airbrushed
HP and Hermione kind of derails the movie for a minutec. Best Moment: Bagshot’s house (truly frightening)8. Deathly Hallows Part 2a. Great: Gives every (surviving) character their
due; pure fan-service in the best way that hits all the great moments of the
book but with a playful, chaotic air – the filmmakers are finally playing with
the dioramab. Terrible: More a feature than a bug, like Phoenix,
it’s all so rushed; by trying to end every character’s story, we get fleeting
moments rather than earned emotion. It can’t really stand on its own – I feel
like it has to be watched with Part 1 in the same sitting to get the set-up and
payoff.c. Best Moment: I’m a sucker for the ghosts of HP’s
parents, so the scene with HP and the resurrection stone before he “dies”
I read 4 Harry Potter books in my 20s because of a gf who insisted I try them out. I can totally see a kid falling in love with them, and I enjoyed the British wit, wordplay reminiscent of The Phantom Tollbooth, and world-building.Despite no attachment to the books, I somehow have seen every film (damn cultural zeitgeist!). From what I remember, here’s how I’d rank them.Prisoner of Azkaban – distinct visual style, fun if ridiculous plot, really beautiful John Williams score that sets a very specific tone different from the first twoSorcerer’s Stone – For all the shit Columbus gets I remember it as a really solid kids movie with great lead performances and some fun visual gagsGoblet of FireDeathly HallowsThe two middle ones where Oldman and Dumbledore die (I could definitely google them but I won’t), which had very little personality and really bland visual styles and musicChamber of Secrets So looking at it, it looks like I generally enjoyed the more innocent qualities of the franchise, and when it became *dark and gritty* I think I tuned out a bit. Also, Quidditch is the dumbest sport of all time, and every time they play it it drags everything down for me.
I’m far from the biggest Potter fan in the world, but I’ll never forgive Yates and co for reducing the grand face off between Harry and Voldemort in Deathly Hallows to two people pointing sticks at each other and making faces. In the book, Harry destroys ol’Snakeface with words before ultimately defeating him with a purely defensive hex, and it’s brilliant! As bogged down in lore and plot as book Deathly Hallows was, it’s a fantastic ending. In the movie they just gurn at each other for a bit, then some CGI happens, The End. Bit of a letdown.
I think the first two movies have to be graded on a curve. This series starts off squarely for children so the first movie *especially* would have been torn to shreds by kids if it was anything other than a note-for-note adaptation. Moreover, Columbus had a reputation for working well on kids movies and this movie needed a lot of coached-up performances from kids, which he provided.
The movies, IMO, are all pretty average. The casting was generally good to great but the movies themselves ironically often lacked magic due to dull direction and unimaginative cinematography.
I always liked the Prisoner of Azkaban the best. It’s the first time they got a director who was like “this is a magic school!” and then played with it a little.
“None of these films were great, exactly” nonsense, movies three and four were fantastic
Hey, for real, fuck this shit made by a transphobe, y’all. Every bit of free promotion for HP is just more money in JKR’s coffers to fund her hate campaign against folks like me.I wish y’all would just stop covering it. Take a stand against the click money, for god’s sake.
Several years ago, I tried to get into these films. I’m a fan of genre, fantasy, and I have friends who loved Harry Potter (yes, past tense). And after going through all of them, it made me feel like it was something that didn’t deserve its fanbase. While the first two films were an exhausting time suck that felt like cartoons screaming, “Hey, kids! Look at this thing! Look at this thing! Look at this thing!” and somehow blasting that into my face with a firehose.I loved Prisoner of Azkaban, though. It was such a tightly-scripted and entertaining movie that put characters, character dynamics, and story ahead of the insubstantial elements of the Columbus films. The fact that so many of the book readers dislike the most accessible and fun film makes me question their taste.I forget which film it was, the one with the big competition, it felt so off with how low stakes the competition was contrasted with whatever Voldemort bullshit was happening at the time. So when the guy from Twilight dies to no one’s surprise, it’s hard for it to feel tragic when it felt so inevitable while they spent the entire time trying to win, I dunno, points?I don’t know the books and I never will, I have no interest in Joanne’s work at this point, but the films are a mostly underwhelming affair, making a world supposedly full of magic seem pretty lame when most of it is wand Latin, riding brooms, and inconsequential conveniences reminiscent of the Flintstones. You’d think, with how limitless the concept of magic, it wouldn’t be easy to say this universe has the most boring version it.
Yep, Prisoner is far above the terrible first two films. The Columbus films are awful—they take everything bad about the books and none of the good.
I used to be a big fan of them, and I just grew out of it, even aside from Rowling herself. They’re still very easy to read, there are just much, much better genre authors out there for adults.
Here we go. My hot take opinion is that Azkaban and Goblet of Fire are the only two good movies in the series, full stop.I do think the first two deserve some credit, because even though they’re boring, they established the look and sound of the Harry Potter world in such a profound way that I doubt anybody in the world has a different image in their head of what the world looks like than in those films. And the main theme that John Williams wrote is just…I mean it’s exactly right. If the original books could play music, that’s what they would sound like.Every single one of Yates’ movies were like swimming through tar. Dark and gloomy and plodding and sleepy. I couldn’t stand a single one, and it’s wild to me that they just handed over the whole franchise to him. I mean I guess fair enough cause me and this franchise are pretty much on the outs these days (I finally got rid of my book collection cause I just…didn’t like having them on display anymore), so I suppose it’s for the best that the movies aren’t good anyway.Prisoner of Azkaban actually brought the magical world to life in a dynamic way, and Goblet of Fire is a non-stop thrill ride that is loads of fun. I love both of them. The remaining 6 movies are at such a distance from those two that they might as well be a different list.
1. Prisoner of Azkaban2. Philospher’s Stone3. Deathly Hallows, Part 1the rest can kick rocksespecially deathly hallows pt2.like, wtf. i know it’s a silly list but how that movie ends up #1 is baffling
Phoenix is one I will firmly defend, because it feels like they finally started adapting these books five movies in. It moves stuff around, compresses timelines, cuts events, and has the story make sense on its own even if you’ve never read the books.
I was hoping they’d go further in this direction, but then we get to Deathly Hallows and suddenly we’re acting like we’ve been following the books all along instead of when it was convenient for us.
Goblet of Fire is the best film because of the Weird Sisters musical number at the Yule Ball. I hope Billy Idol went after them and got a huge settlement.
When “Sorcerer’s Stone” came out I had not yet read any of the books (started reading those when “Azkaban” came out in theaters), and will admit after “Phoenix” hit theaters, I felt like seeing the rest (after reading the books) felt like a chore where I would match up what I had read w/ what was on the screen, which is never a good thing to do. “Hey look, here’s where “Sirius Black” dies!!!” By the time I got to HBP in the theaters, it was more about just completing the journey then enjoying the movies and after DH Pt II, I let out a sigh of relief, knowing the chore was over.
I still think Goblet of Fire is the best movie because it felt the most like a movie and not a book adaptation.
Ranking Goblet of Fire *four* places above Chamber of Secrets? Holy shit, no.
My vote is for Goblet of Fire as the best (or at least #2 as nothing beats the 4 sequence payoff of DH2: Snape Flashback – Harry using the death stone – Harry & Dumbledore in the train station – final battle).But Goblet was the first with mini mysteries, first that went dark, first with Voldemort, first that felt like high-school, Rita Skeeter’s only movie, Do The Hippogriff, and more.The music is the best too. This and the Thor soundtrack made me a big Patrick Doyle fan. Here’s the ending song as the gang watch the exchange students ride off into the sunset. Wistful, sad, resigned, hopeful. I get misty-eyed at the 1:30 mark.
What a terrible list lol. What happened to the AV Club?
Everyone knows that this list will be incomplete until the greatest Harry Potter book is adapted. https://botnik.org/content/harry-potter.htmlBonus- as far as I know, this robot author isn’t a transphobe!
The final potter movie has so many great coming of age moments for Harry and company. Just sticking with Harry, knowing he has to go face his death to save everyone. And he does it like a Boss. He is a fucking teenager and shows more guts than most people ever would.And then, him grabbing Voldemort by the widow and saying “lets finish this Tom” like again a fucking boss and saying “come one you limp dick child killer, lets fucking go” and beating his ass. It’s meathead shit in a geek magic world and it’s fucking great. Now I can go into how much Neville stole that fucking movie but hey the point is that it was great.
I thought we cancelled Harry Potter.
1.) Prisoner of Azkaban 2.) Order of The Phoenix (Delores is such a great villain)3.) The End of Deathly Hallows: Part 24.) – 8.) Who CaresThough honestly I could maybe swap 1 and 2 depending on my mood. Those two resonated with me the most, certainly enjoyable bits in all the movies, but the first two definitely aged poorly (as someone who watched them all after they had all been released, ~2013-14).