Is there any good Harry Potter film?

book was better, but i liked 4th movie anyway. maybe the most

youtube.com/watch?v=uwfdFCP3KYM

Yes, it was better. Don’t get me wrong, the 4th film is very enjoyable. It’s just that it isn’t well written. How come everybody can escape from Azkaban, the amazing prison? In the 3rd film it made sense because it was only a person (and that person becomes a wolf at night), but now it’s just ridiculous. Knowing that he had that transform potion, why didn’t he just turn into Hermione or Ron and make him touch the cup so Voldemort returns; instead of doing all that competition?

5, 7, 8 - shit
rest - ok

3 is pretty good. Otherwise, not really

>HP8 and FB&WTFT1
?

Nobody escaped Azkaban in 4, the Death Eaters that show up in the graveyard are only the ones who got away with claiming they never really supported Voldemort and were under the Imperius Curse. Also you can't portkey out of Hogwarts, the plan had to involve Harry touching it outside the school wards.

Unironically, imagine if Spielberg had directed The Philosopher's Stone. I feel like he would've taken the time to force the world to have some kind of consistency for every director that followed

4 is shit
6 is the best because it doesn't deal with fucking voldemort , it's just regular wizard school.

He also would have raped the kids and they would have died of intestinal blockages before they finished filming the series.

Azkaban is the only Harry Potter movie a non-fan might like.

i can watch every movie quite comfyly so i'd say they're all good chill movies

I can't remember a fucking thing that happened after 4. Everything after that is just a convoluted, messy gray blur.

Yeah, you just posted it.

>5: Goofy montages, then Sirius Black Dies
>6: Gay teenage romance and angst, then Dumbledore dies
>7: Literally nothing
>8: The Matrix Revolutions but with wands

the first 3 are great. It should've just been a trilogy.

Because everything that wasn't a major plot point (ie everything that made the later books entertaining) was cut for time

Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them

Even some major plot points were cut, like most of the time Harry and Dumbledore spent watching pensieve memories about Voldemort from HBP

;-;

Attached: tumblr_nlqk2zCd691u80bgoo1_250.gif (245x245, 780K)

Whoa, never noticed it before

single mother core

1 and 2 were the best and most faithful.
3 was a great piece of cinema.
4 shat the bed but at least it tried
5-8 meh who cares

I like them because of the comfy atmosphere, nothing else.

>Good
1 and 2

>Ok
3 and 4

>Shit
The rest

>4 shat the bed but at least it tried
They didn't even include the opening with the Dursleys in the movie version, a staple of the books. I remember seeing it in theaters and being disgusted from the very beginning because of this. Perhaps the most disappointing movie theater experience of my life

fuck imagine if 4 was a 2-parter and they had time to include all the cut parts

>teen
Alright grandpa

Dullest

oh thanks

The first two are good kid films, something that is rare.

The third film is geneunely a decent film.

The 4th film is a bit of a mess, but I didn't mind it.

5th film is better then the book, only due to the book being awful.

The rest is grimdark

Almost walked out the cinema right then

Attached: Image15.png (750x300, 299K)

For a minute I wondered if the projectionist had accidentally skipped part of the movie, like what the fuck. If you're gonna cut something out, the iconic Dursley moments shouldn't be it. The Dursleys are fucking hilarious

>When you hate your nephew so much you send him crap Christmas presents just to make him more miserable than if you had ignored him

>A tissue
>A toothpick
>A 50p coin when he can't spend it

Attached: 1474061492926.gif (276x298, 1.22M)

For me, it's Deathly Hallows Part 2, because even if it was a terrible film, it at least has the distinction of finally putting an end to the dullest franchise in the history of movie franchises. Seriously each episode following the boy wizard and his pals from Hogwarts Academy as they fight assorted villains has been indistinguishable from the others. Aside from the gloomy imagery, the series’ only consistency has been its lack of excitement and ineffective use of special effects, all to make magic unmagical, to make action seem inert.

Perhaps the die was cast when Rowling vetoed the idea of Spielberg directing the series; she made sure the series would never be mistaken for a work of art that meant anything to anybody, just ridiculously profitable cross-promotion for her books. The Harry Potter series might be anti-Christian (or not), but it’s certainly the anti-James Bond series in its refusal of wonder, beauty and excitement. No one wants to face that fact. Now, thankfully, they no longer have to.

>a-at least the books were good though
"No!"
The writing is dreadful; the book was terrible. As I read, I noticed that every time a character went for a walk, the author wrote instead that the character "stretched his legs."

I began marking on the back of an envelope every time that phrase was repeated. I stopped only after I had marked the envelope several dozen times. I was incredulous. Rowling's mind is so governed by cliches and dead metaphors that she has no other style of writing. Later I read a lavish, loving review of Harry Potter by the same Stephen King. He wrote something to the effect of, "If these kids are reading Harry Potter at 11 or 12, then when they get older they will go on to read Stephen King." And he was quite right. He was not being ironic. When you read "Harry Potter" you are, in fact, trained to read Stephen King.

Attached: 1485284441230.jpg (1300x2345, 964K)

Based. You, /gif/'s gooseposter, and /pol/'s cuckposter are my favourite people on Yea Forums. Fuck tripfags, fuck namefags, this is how its done. This is how you become based.

>/gif/'s gooseposter,
that is one of the best pasta image combos ever

Half Blood Prince was at least visually quite nice and it had the best score I think.
I think the later movies are better in general than the early ones.