Support NeoGAF

[Sophia]

Anyone but Alfonso Cuarón!

My favourite book of the series became my least favourite movie of the series due to the artistic style and atmospheric touch he chose to implement for the movie.

I have no idea why that movie get so much love!

Like I said, Cuarón's adaptation is a bit of a love it or hate to deal. It is by far the most adopted of the films, and Cuarón has the directorial skills to back it up. Or, as jtb noted, it would stand out on it's own. However the drawback to this is at times it's the least faithful to the book. I remember a number of people who were very displeased by the missing plotlines and the cheesey ending scene. If you liked the Columbus directed films, then it'll definitely come off as a very different experience. If you didn't like the Columbus films, then you were probably pleased with the end results.

Like I said, PoA is only film that, if you hadn't read books, I think would stand on its own as a good movie. Given literally everyone and their mother has read the books, that's not really an issue—and I'd extend "good" to the Yates films, which I thought were well done. Chris Columbus movies are really stiff and hold up terrible; Goblet is a fucking mess.

I liked the Columbus films myself, but there's no denying they were working in uncharted territory at the time.. It shows in the stiff nature of the films, especially the first one.

Only god knows why Goblet of Fire was the way it was. But I think everyone can agree it's the worst adaptation.

I think Yates's work on the last two films was my favorite, personally. Once they made the decision to split it into two movies and thus length was no longer an issue, his directorial ability shined.

 

[DrForester]

Another little nitpick in book seven for me was the Kings Cross scene. Maybe it's more on Yates than Radcliffe's acting ability, but one thing I love about Harry and Dumbledore's dialogue in the book is that Harry's about had it. He still respects Dumbledore, and now understands pretty much everything that Dumbledore had done. At the same time he's a bit short with Dumbledore, and for the first time, talks to Dumbledore more as an equal, than a student. And I just loved that.

 

[Five]

The directors kept getting better as they were being replaced.

 

[brandonh83]

I don't like how they did the ending to DH part 2. it was fine and quite faithful to the book up until Harry shows himself alive, then its a bit of a mess with harry and voldy flying round together, the final battle not being in the great hall in front of evryone and voldy and bellatrix turning into confetti. Also harry never repairs his broken wand with the elder before snapping it which was another oversight.

I liked the film version better. I liked that it was a more personal battle, and if you look in the background there are still people watching. They were all also in the Great Hall watching out as the GH and courtyard were basically connected. So you still got everyone watching Harry own Voldemort.

When I read the book I felt a little upset that there wasn't more of a confrontation and the film version largely made me happier in that regard, personally. It was also nice to get something different instead of knowing exactly what to expect.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Alfonso Cuaron was the only director who actually tried to make a movie.

It's sad that they asked him to continue on with the series but he declined as he didn't like the breakneck pace of the Hollywood blockbuster production line. Instead we got the really shitty Mike Newell-helmed Goblet of Fire movie.

 

[Edwardo]

Cuaron. Prisoner of Azkaban was definitely my favorite of the movies.

 

[EktorOni]

Cuarón was the first to introduce real "danger" to the series, a feeling that should've been from film 1 because Hogwarts is some dangerous shit. Cuarón also brought some much needed realism to it... As in, the wizarding world he presented felt more tangible and alive. That feeling carried out throughout the rest of the series, thanks to Cuarón. Buckbeak's Flight scene is masterful... Also, that Time Turner sequence was fantastic. So, again, kudos to Cuarón.

Yates made Order of the Phoenix my 2nd favorite film of the series; I specially like the way he handled montages to advance the story in a very brisk way without losing much of it. Yates' action sequences are fantastic, as well, specially during Deathly Hallows Pt. 1 & 2.

Columbus handled the first two movies decently, but in retrospective, those films felt very studio-made, if you know what I mean.

Newell directed an extremely haunting climax and final scene in Goblet of Fire. Still get shivers when I think about it.

So I believe the series as a whole is quality, but yeah, Cuarón.

 

[Kyleripman]

Harry uses Sirius's mirror to communicate with Dumbledore. Where and when did he get that mirror? Never explained.

Haha, thank you. This pisses me off every time.

 

[DrForester]

Cuarón was the first to introduce real "danger" to the series, a feeling that should've been from film 1 because Hogwarts is some dangerous shit. Cuarón also brought some much needed realism to it... As in, the wizarding world he presented felt more tangible and alive. That feeling carried out throughout the rest of the series, thanks to Cuarón. Buckbeak's Flight scene is masterful... Also, that Time Turner sequence was fantastic. So, again, kudos to Cuarón.

Yates made Order of the Phoenix my 2nd favorite film of the series; I specially like the way he handled montages to advance the story in a very brisk way without losing much of it. Yates' action sequences are fantastic, as well, specially during Deathly Hallows Pt. 1 & 2.

Columbus handled the first two movies decently, but in retrospective, those films felt very studio-made, if you know what I mean.

Newell directed an extremely haunting climax and final scene in Goblet of Fire. Still get shivers when I think about it.

So I believe the series as a whole is quality, but yeah, Cuarón.

I hated how he did Voldemort's return. He tried to cram in everything from the book, but didn't give it the time it needed. As a result, it sounds like Voldemort is delivering his lines at 2x speed.

Not to mention Newell had no grasp on the characters. Having Dumbledore throw Harry against a wall. Getting the two worst performances of the entire franchise out of David Tennant and Roger Lloyd-Pack, who were both abysmal in their roles.

 

[BraXzy]

I'd say Columbus, mainly just because the first film was so magical. And they brought the world to the big screen SO SO well. I know that's more due to production but whatever.

Cuaron second though. The weird thing is though, whenever I picture the third film in my head, I feel dislike towards it. But when I actually watch it, I think it's great.. it's really odd. I can't put my finger on what gives off the initial bad vibe.

I went to the Harry Potter tour (Warner Bros studio) in London recently which was awesome. Well worth going for any Potter fan. A lot of props and set pieces that were great to see up close, a lot of which I was surprised to find were actual props and not CG. Like the snake door from Chamber of Secrets. They had a bunch of screens dotted around with videos too.. quite a cool one at the start by some of the producers talking about when they initially picked up the book series. They'd relegated the first book to a bottom shelf of "Probably not anything special" and got the intern to take it home to read.

 

[Hasphat'sAnts]

If it weren't for Cuaron they'd still be wearing wizard robes everywhere.

 

[DrForester]

If it weren't for Cuaron they'd still be wearing wizard robes everywhere.

Which would have been a good thing.

 

[Daft Bird]

I think that Columbus's were the best. And then last place is Yates. The others are about equal.

 

[Lebron]

Columbus brought the world to life, so he's always has a special place for me.


But really, the only "good" film was PoA. So, Cuarón.

 

[Hasphat'sAnts]

Which would have been a good thing.

No it would've made the movies look really drab.

 

[EktorOni]

I hated how he did Voldemort's return. He tried to cram in everything from the book, but didn't give it the time it needed. As a result, it sounds like Voldemort is delivering his lines at 2x speed.

Not to mention Newell had no grasp on the characters. Having Dumbledore throw Harry against a wall. Getting the two worst performances of the entire franchise out of David Tennant and Roger Lloyd-Pack, who were both abysmal in their roles.

I know what you mean, but I didn't mind it. The scene felt very dangerous, immediate and heartbreaking when Harry went back through the portkey. That's all it needed to work for me.

As for your second point, yes... Dumbledore acting like that felt incredibly out of place. Don't remember much of Tennant as Barty Jr., though... I'll have to rewatch it.

 

[inm8num2]

Columbus did right by the books, so I've got a soft spot for him. Cuaron made what I think is the best film in the HP film franchise. Newell was fine. Yates got more out of the actors, but his films felt a little sterile. Overall I'd pick Cuaron, but you can make an argument for Yates or even Columbus.

 

[Killua]

Alfonso Cuarón directed my favorite potter film.

 

[Jarmel]

Which would have been a good thing.

Agreed without any doubt. Part of the charm of Hogwarts is that it's part of a separate world, if you will.

 

[Madness]

I thought Watson just gave up even trying after the 3rd film. She stopped being Hermione after that.

She basically became Emma Watson playing Hermione, an almost caricature. Her acting was better, but whatever she was given was the direction of the directors. So away went the ugly bangs and the downplay on looks. You're right in that I also didn't feel like I was watching Hermione anymore either.

 

[modernlifeisANDY]

I'm a big fan of both the books and the movies. I think the previous criticism of Yates is valid in that he definitely caters to people that have read the books and are able to fill in the blanks as needed. Cuaron is definitely the best director on the list and there was a time where Azkaban was my favorite Harry Potter flick, but I can't get past the last three films and how fucking great they were. I love 6-8 and I think Yates did a great job with them, so he is probably my favorite.

 

[Jarmel]

This is probably nostalgia talking to an extent but my favorite director was Columbus. Cuaron made the best film but he cut out so much of the Marauder history that I can't forgive him for that.

 

[DrForester]

She basically became Emma Watson playing Hermione, an almost caricature. Her acting was better, but whatever she was given was the direction of the directors. So away went the ugly bangs and the downplay on looks. You're right in that I also didn't feel like I was watching Hermione anymore either.

I thought the best actor of the three was easily Grint. He did great, despite the films really shitting on his character. In the books, Ron is the pragmatic one. He's got a fairly cool head in a crisis. Hermione is the one that, while very learned, loses it a bit in a crisis. In the films, Hermione gets to be both the book smart one, and the cool headed one, leaving Ron with nothing.

 

[Jarmel]

I thought the best actor of the three was easily Grint. He did great, despite the films really shitting on his character. In the books, Ron is the pragmatic one. He's got a fairly cool head in a crisis. Hermione is the one that, while very learned, loses it a bit in a crisis. In the films, Hermione gets to be both the book smart one, and the cool headed one, leaving Ron with nothing.

To be fair, the later books sort of shit all over Ron as a character.

 

[Poetic.Injustice]

Columbus because he was more faithful to the books than anyone else.

 

[Dénouement]

She basically became Emma Watson playing Hermione, an almost caricature. Her acting was better, but whatever she was given was the direction of the directors. So away went the ugly bangs and the downplay on looks. You're right in that I also didn't feel like I was watching Hermione anymore either.

I think even she knows it. I remember watching an interview with her when they were promoting Part 2, and when asked what her favourite Potter movie was, she said it was still Azkaban. And when Azkaban was coming out, I remember she was just gushing about how amazing of a director Cuaron is and how he brought her best out of her.

 

[watershed]

Columbus did a great job in bringing the first book to the screen. I think his style was completely the right choice for the first movie which was very much a children's film.

Cuaron succeeded in transitioning the series to its darker, more mature future and made the best entry in the series.

Yates did a good job with his entries but I don't feel he brought anything new to the films. He just continued the work Cuaron started.

 

[Currygan]

Alfonso Cuaron, not even in the same galaxy

 

[nawwafh]

Cuaron.. End of discussion

 

[Kater]

Columbus established and introduced the people really well to the world of magic, but it only really got interesting with Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban. The Dementors in the movie were frightening, I bet they still would scare me after years of not seeing it. Left the best impression on me. The movies afterwards were not on the same level and just above acceptable. I'd advose anyone who hasn't read or watched the last four books/five movies they should just stick to the books. The movies did the story and what I imagined what it looked like in my head no justice.

 

[Maninthemirror]

Newell' film was the only Potter film which connected with me emotionally. The rest were good. I always thought Harry Potter movies were poor until goblet of fire and that's when I got hooked.

Underwater sequence is the only time I got scared with the intention to scare me
The parents talking to Potter from the Potter Voldermont streams scene is the most emotional i have felt in a Potter movie and really felt connected to Harry from that moment
The soundtrack was amazing
This was the only movie which I felt transitioned from fun Potter to dark Potter

 

[double jump]

Columbus

The other directors are ok but they failed to bring that sense of wonder to the screen that is pivotal to the series.

To clarify a bit it seemed liked the world building stopped after the first two films. That took away a bit of the magic from that universe in my eyes.

 

[itwasTuesday]

Alfonso Cuarón, only because I saw prisoner in an imax dome and have the fondest memories of it compared to the others.

 

[Krowley]

Columbus did the best job of capturing the feel of the novels. The second movie, in particular, was exactly like reading the novel.

Cuaron was the most technically skilled director of the whole lot, but that particular movie was the least faithful adaption in the series, and it sort of pissed me off the first time I watched it. I liked it a lot more on second viewing.

Yates started very generic, but kept getting better, and I think Deathly Hollows is probably the best film in the whole series.

 

[Akahige]

I've only seen up to Order of the Phoenix.

But Prisoner of Azkaban was the best directed out of those so Cuarón. Order of the Phoenix I do remember having some memorable camera work so Yates second I guess, though I didn't like the film much.

 

[Vulcano's assistant]

Cuaron directed a film that can stand on its own without a franchise to support it.

 

[KittenMaster]

I'm gonna guess Cuaron, as at the time I saw Prisoner of Azkaban I was only familiar with the first story and wasn't really into the series, and thought the movie was fantastic. It didn't feel like it was trying to target a particular audience like the first movie would have for kids/book readers, it just felt like a good movie.

 

[ostrichKing]

Surprised by all the love for Columbus...the first two are by FAR my least favorite.
Cuaron all the way...

 

[v1lla21]

ThisDi

 

[Quick]

Columbus was the right director for the first two movies. He really captured the world perfectly. Chamber of Secrets was the most faithful adaptation, and really gave you a sense that the Wizarding World was larger than inside Hogwarts.

From a technical standpoint, Columbus was also the only director to actually have completed deleted scenes (effects and CG), vs. rough cuts. You could actually re-insert those deleted scenes in the movie and it would blend in perfectly.

Cuaron directed the most beautiful movie, and also propelled it forward into a more mature series.

Mike Newell was okay. He did provide us with one of the best scenes in the series: the first task with the dragon chasing Harry along Hogwarts. Huge cocktease with the Quidditch World Cup, though.

Yates directed a straightforward adaptation, with his own little twists. I didn't hate anything he did.

 

[Redd]

Cuaron followed closely by Columbus. The other two directors were average.

 

[CentroXer]

I am very disappointed in deathly hallows part 1 and 2. Yates is too inconsistent imo. I have no idea how he got to direct 4 movies :/

 

[injurai]

Cuarón

I have to say though I liked the lighter feeling of the first two movies.

 

[TheXbox]

Cuaron > Columbus > Yates > the other guy

Nothing needs to be said about the first two. I don't care for three of Yates' HP flicks but DH Part 1 is the second best film of the series. Maybe it's a disservice to him to rank him that low but the other three films are so... dull.

 

[Tookay]

I think Cuaron made the best film on a number of levels, but I'm not sure if it was good for the series. I kind of think he jumped the gun on making POA the "dark entry" before the books themselves were at that stage (edit: though I guess the Dementors' appearance might be considered a turning point). Personally, I would have saved the loss of innocence for the fourth film.

Did anyone like Mike Newell's lone entry? Seems to frequently and consistently come up as the least liked film in discussions.

He turned the best book into the worst film. Man, I cannot stand his adaptation.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

I am very disappointed in deathly hallows part 1 and 2. Yates is too inconsistent imo. I have no idea how he got to direct 4 movies :/

Well Yates had one shining moment at the end of Order of the Phoenix where he put together a really amazing sequence for when Harry watches

Spoiler

Sirius being killed

and that one scene probably cemented him for the next 3 outings.

Also at some point I think they ran out of directors who wanted to do it. This is the same problem the James Bond films have run into on and off over the decades. By the end of the Pierce Brosnan era no one wanted to touch Bond with a 10-foot pole. After the reboot suddenly there was interest again in Daniel Craig Bond and now they've got Sam Mendes directing back-to-back installments.

 

[Laieon]

Columbus, easily. I think he captured the feeling of the books better than any of the others. Sorcerer's Stone and Chamber of Secrets are amazing.

Cuaron also made a great movie, even if Azkaban is my least favorite book in the series.

 

[Cody_D165]

Columbus, easily. I think he captured the feeling of the books better than any of the others. Sorcerer's Stone and Chamber of Secrets are amazing.

This is pretty much my opinion too.

 

[Maximus.]

I hate how Yates shot Dumbledores death scene. I pictured it to be significantly different when I read the book. There were a lot of other issues, but that was persistent with all the movies.

I don't really have a favorite director, but I guess I was most pleased when Colombus was done after two movies. He made the second movie more enjoyable than the book though.

 

[jrush64]

I think Prisoner of Azkaban was the best Potter film, so Cuaron. But Yates did well with Deathly Hallows 1 & 2. They were damn great films.

Half Blood Prince and Order of the Phoenix were totally shitty especially Order of the Phoenix. There are no words to describe how much I hated Order of the Phoenix movie. The guy skipped over so many parts.