Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire

[Mike Olbinski]

The trailer is out...not super great, but I'm excited nonetheless...



http://www.apple.com/trailers/wb/harry_potter/thegobletoffire/

Mike

 

[Chaplin]

What do you mean? Considering the movie isn't out for 6 months, that's a pretty solid teaser.

 

[Brian in Mesa]

trainer

trailer

 

[Mulli]

This was one of my favorite books in the series. I hope it is good.

 

[Mike Olbinski]

What do you mean? Considering the movie isn't out for 6 months, that's a pretty solid teaser.

Oh I dunno, it was good, just didn't get me too excited...

But you are right, not out for awhile...

Mike

 

[Mike Olbinski]

trailer

troll



Mike

 

[Chaplin]

Oh I dunno, it was good, just didn't get me too excited...

But you are right, not out for awhile...

Mike

It didn't show too much, which was cool, and it started off really well, showing shots of the kids from the first 3 movies. Good way to accentuate the evolution of the characters, even if it is unspoken. Plus, they have Star Wars hair too.

 

[Mulli]

It didn't show too much, which was cool, and it started off really well, showing shots of the kids from the first 3 movies. Good way to accentuate the evolution of the characters, even if it is unspoken. Plus, they have Star Wars hair too.

Does Star Wars hair mean brutal bilevel mullets?

 

[Brian in Mesa]

Poster...

 

[Pariah]

Are they using the same kids? What're they now, 23? 24?

 

[Chaplin]

Ron: 18
Harry: 17
Hermione: 16

 

[Mike Olbinski]

It didn't show too much, which was cool, and it started off really well, showing shots of the kids from the first 3 movies. Good way to accentuate the evolution of the characters, even if it is unspoken. Plus, they have Star Wars hair too.

I'm okay with them looking older...they DO get older in the books....so it's all good.

They still look like high schoolers to me.

Mike

 

[Stout]

Krum looked like a great actor for the part, but Fleur looked way too young...just as young, if not younger, than the trio. She's supposed to call Harry a child.

 

[Chaplin]

Krum looked like a great actor for the part, but Fleur looked way too young...just as young, if not younger, than the trio. She's supposed to call Harry a child.

She calls him a child because she's smug, not because she's a lot older, although she is a bit older by a couple years.

 

[D-Dogg]

Are they using the same kids? What're they now, 23? 24?

Of course they are using the same kids, and they aren't very far off on the ages. Especially since they shot this last year, so they were younger then.

I for one am VERY excited by that trailer...I thought it was perfect, and can hardly wait for November to roll around. I love the HP books, and the movies are good as well. Interestingly, it was the first movie that got us into the books...we didn't want to read them when my wife's mom was talking about them...we avoided the movie....finally we saw it on DVD at my sisters and were like "Uhm, that's pretty good...we should read the books and stop being snobs."

We read the books, and couldn't believe what we missed out on. Can't wait for The Half Blood Prince this summer, and this movie. It looks great, and I actually like the Mullet look for Ron...and Emma Watson is going to be quite the beautiful woman in a few years...she looked very pretty in the ball scene...I was wondering how they would pull that off making her look great when she doesn't look all straggly and big toothed as portrayed in the book. The contrast in the ball scene I thought would be hard, but it looks like they'll have some level of contrast.

Good times...more Voldemort asskickings to be had very soon.

 

[Stout]

She calls him a child because she's smug, not because she's a lot older, although she is a bit older by a couple years.

Bzzt, wrongo. *Mark Hamil voice* Don't &*!# with a Potter master, son!*

She's several years older than Harry, and when he walks in, she naturally assumes, before knowing he's a participant, he's there on an errand. And calls him a child (or boy, can't remember which), when she does find out.

Not that she isn't smug. She's quite smug and conceited, but she specifically looks down at him because of age.

 

[Chaplin]

She says that Harry is too young, but it's common knowledge that she's only at the most 3 years older than him. Angelina had to be 17 to be eligible, so you might say that Fleur is probably 18. How old is Potter? 15? 16?

 

[D-Dogg]

I didn't think Fleur was that alluring....I hope she has camera charisma, because that is central to her being part Veela. Of course, only saw her for just a bit.

Hmm, mid post I went to find some info on her and found this:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/tv_film/newsid_3806000/3806067.stm

Maybe she will be alluring...sure looks that way in that pic. She's also 21 (the actress) so maybe she just looked younger in the trailer?

 

[arthurracoon]

 

[Stout]

She says that Harry is too young, but it's common knowledge that she's only at the most 3 years older than him. Angelina had to be 17 to be eligible, so you might say that Fleur is probably 18. How old is Potter? 15? 16?

I do believe she is 18, and Harry is 14, as it's the fourth book and he was 11 in the first book. Now remember back to when you were 18, and think how much respect you gave to 14 year olds.

 

[Dback Jon]

Movie Pic

 

[Dback Jon]

Entertainment Weekly article - no real spoilers

It's been four years, three films, and $2.6 billion since Harry Potter first made the page-to-screen transfiguration. And judging from the millions who made J.K. Rowling's sixth book a record-shattering smash last summer, kids are still wild about Harry. But with Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (out Nov. 18), change is in the air — and it's scary. Puberty hits. Hard. So does death. Almighty Professor Dumbledore (Michael Gambon) suddenly shows weakness, while the malevolent Lord Voldemort (Ralph Fiennes) finally shows his (freaky) mug. For the first time in the series — but certainly not the last — Harry the all-conquering hero (played by Daniel Radcliffe, now 16) is rendered not-so-conquering. ''His life is taken out of his hands,'' says Radcliffe. ''Hogwarts isn't a safe place for him anymore.''

''This is the hinge,'' says franchise scribe Steve Kloves of Goblet's significance. ''This one closes the door on everything that came before, and sets the stage for a new kind of Potter experience altogether.''

For Warner Bros., fielding its first PG-13 Potter picture, the encouraging news is that Rowling's fans made this segue into Harry's angry young manhood en masse back in 2000, thanks to a novel that marked a bravura leap in ambition (and size, nearly twice as long as any preceding installment). Yet the worrisome news for Potterphiles is that adapting Rowling's fat, beloved opus has made for the greatest challenge Hollywood's Pottermakers have ever faced. Director Mike Newell (Four Weddings and a Funeral), the man at the epicenter of Goblet's transition, understands the stakes. ''Of course I'm worried! We're talking about a passionate fan base. I won't know if I've pleased them until I put the movie in front of them,'' says Newell. ''Now that will be a very freaky occasion.''

Newell, who in 1999 had declined to launch the Potter franchise as its first director, eventually accepted the gig of helming Goblet. (American Chris Columbus directed the first two Potter movies, and Mexican auteur Alfonso Cuarón helmed the third.) Newell loved the book, and recognized that beneath its meaty humanity beat the cold heart of a lean, mean thriller. He also saw the chance to give Harry a makeover. Newell has only praise for Columbus (''a heroic job''), but he has a different perspective on British school life, having experienced it firsthand. ''I felt the children were rather...oh, stiff,'' says Newell, 63. ''My view is that children are violent, dirty, corrupt anarchists. I was very anxious that [the franchise] break out of this goody-two-shoes feel.''

Newell had the makings of a provocative new Potter. Then, a month into preproduction, Cuarón invited him over to see Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban. ''As I watched his film, I realized, to my horror, that he had done everything I had planned to do,'' says Newell. ''Darker tone. Sharper edge. The kids were more untidy and rougher and 'realer' and so on.… I had thought, 'Number 3 will be roughly the same as the ones before it.' It wasn't. I had to come up with something else.''

Newell's solution was to zero in on Harry's increasing inability to count on friends, adults, and Dumbledore to bail him out of jams. The only problem with this narrow approach is that it left out the billion other things that made the book so special. Rowling's dense, complex plot concerns Harry's life-changing participation in the Triwizard Tournament, a dangerous triathlon involving three schools. Weaving in and out of this story line are several subplots: an outing to the Quidditch World Cup; the reemergence of the Death Eaters, Voldemort's Muggle-hating followers; and the efforts of a radicalized Hermione (Emma Watson) to liberate Hogwarts' indentured house-elves. At one point, Warner Bros. considered splitting Goblet into two films, but abandoned the idea because the book didn't offer a natural breaking point. ''It's fiendishly intricate. It resists adaptation,'' says Kloves. ''Far and away the hardest one yet to crack.''

Ultimately, it took eight formal drafts to get Goblet rolling by summer 2004. Scenes were telescoped (like the Quidditch World Cup). Subplots were ditched — like that Hermione/house-elves business. (''I was disappointed to hear that,'' says Watson, 15. ''But I guess something had to go.'') Newell continued to worry throughout filming that Goblet lacked a thriller's proper backbone. Over Christmas, he brainstormed a way to bring more cohesion to the tale — a recurring motif, too spoilerish to describe — that required further script work. On top of all this, he had to make sense of a massive budget (reportedly $130 million) that never seemed massive enough, while also mounting some of the trickiest set pieces ever in a Potter film, including an underwater tussle with fanged aquatic creatures that called for the construction of the largest water tank for filmmaking purposes in Europe.


Like Cuarón before him, Newell was offered a chance to direct the next Potter flick — in his case, Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix — but he declined; wrapping one film while prepping another, he says, ''isn't possible.'' Up-and-coming British helmer David Yates and screenwriter Michael Goldenberg have been tapped to adapt, and over the summer, Radcliffe, Watson, and Rupert Grint decided to return. ''I'm out of school now. Got nothing else better to do,'' quips Grint, 17. Watson — known for being the one who deliberates the most carefully about returning — says working with the performance-driven Newell (he put all the kids through weeks of improv boot camp with an acting coach) recharged her batteries. ''[He] really made me remember why I love acting in the first place,'' she says. ''Leaving this all behind would be very difficult.''



At present, the only concern is whether Potter loyalists will drink deeply from Goblet. Newell is confident, but he recently got a taste of what disappointment might feel like when he gave a talk to a group of teenagers. ''Afterward, these kids were all over me, asking me things like 'Is the giant squid in the movie?''' says Newell. ''I actually had to say, 'No, sadly, the giant squid is not in the movie.' These kids, they own these books. You mustn't disappoint them.''

 

[Dback Jon]

Hermione and Krum

 

[D-Dogg]

I. Can't. Wait.


There are three movies that for me are must see in the theatre. Potter, Narnia and King Kong.

Bring on my Potter.



Yes, I'm a Potthead, sorry.

 

[Pariah]

Hermione and Krum

They should have cast someone a little more rough and tumble for Krum, IMO.