![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire
Dec. 6th, 2005 08:57 amI have a theory.
You know the wizards of Hogwarts? I think they're secretly relatives of the child-hating hags from Roald Dahl's The Witches.
That's why they force the students to partake in outrageously dangerous sports like Quidditch. And when that fails to kill the little bleeders off, they hold events like the Tri-Wizard Tournament that pit high school students against fire-breathing dragons and drown their best friends.
Blame the transition from book to film. J. K. Rowling's novels are so cartoony, the violence against children doesn't register. But a photorealistic dragon mauling Daniel Radcliffe until he bleeds is something else.
(Although I will admit the Harry-versus-the-dragon sequence is very nicely done, whatever it says about Dumbledore's attitude towards his duty of care.)
It's a dumb plot, the weakest of the three film so far. What saves it are the character moments. Harry and Ron falling out. Worrying about who to take to the Yule Ball. It gives the characters a chance to breathe.
And Hogwarts itself still looks beautiful.
We saw an afternoon session. Most of the audience were small children. They kept wriggling and whispering through the film. Until it reached the really scary and gory (for a kid's film) bit, when the cinema went suddenly silent -- the kids from terror, their parents from wondering what the hell they'd brought their kids to.
The only thing scarier was Emma Watson's acting. She murders every scene in which she opens her mouth.
You know the wizards of Hogwarts? I think they're secretly relatives of the child-hating hags from Roald Dahl's The Witches.
That's why they force the students to partake in outrageously dangerous sports like Quidditch. And when that fails to kill the little bleeders off, they hold events like the Tri-Wizard Tournament that pit high school students against fire-breathing dragons and drown their best friends.
Blame the transition from book to film. J. K. Rowling's novels are so cartoony, the violence against children doesn't register. But a photorealistic dragon mauling Daniel Radcliffe until he bleeds is something else.
(Although I will admit the Harry-versus-the-dragon sequence is very nicely done, whatever it says about Dumbledore's attitude towards his duty of care.)
It's a dumb plot, the weakest of the three film so far. What saves it are the character moments. Harry and Ron falling out. Worrying about who to take to the Yule Ball. It gives the characters a chance to breathe.
And Hogwarts itself still looks beautiful.
We saw an afternoon session. Most of the audience were small children. They kept wriggling and whispering through the film. Until it reached the really scary and gory (for a kid's film) bit, when the cinema went suddenly silent -- the kids from terror, their parents from wondering what the hell they'd brought their kids to.
The only thing scarier was Emma Watson's acting. She murders every scene in which she opens her mouth.
