Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire
Warner Bros. Pictures | Release Date: November 18, 2005
7.8
USER SCORE
Generally favorable reviews based on 1247 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
1,012
Mixed:
147
Negative:
88
Watch Now
Stream On
Stream On
Buy on
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Expand
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)

User Reviews

User scoreBy dateMost helpful
10
MegWhiteleyMar 28, 2012
One of the most better films ever!! This new movie of Harry Potter is really interesting, funny, amazing, incredible, with excellent effects. Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire is amazing.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
csw12Mar 25, 2012
This Harry Potter is pretty good especially the ending, which might have the best scene in Harry Potter to date. But i had one major problem with this film which was the dancing and the modern day kind of music mixed with the dancing . WhatThis Harry Potter is pretty good especially the ending, which might have the best scene in Harry Potter to date. But i had one major problem with this film which was the dancing and the modern day kind of music mixed with the dancing . What was up with that?… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
7
imthenoobJan 28, 2012
The first thing I really liked about this film is how it had moments (such as Ron and Harry looking for dates) that werent really in the book but are put in to prove its not all about magic, There is a lot of personal things happening asThe first thing I really liked about this film is how it had moments (such as Ron and Harry looking for dates) that werent really in the book but are put in to prove its not all about magic, There is a lot of personal things happening as well. The acting is good ,as expected, and the action is good. I didnt really enjoy the film that much until Voldemort got into the picture, the only good part of the film imo was Harry's entire confrontation with Voldemort. I just couldnt get into it.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
10
javis10Jan 11, 2012
It is funny, creepy, and it has lots of amazing and wonderful action. But it will never get above Prisoner of Azkaban. But I am a huge fan so it was a good film.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
10
AquophisDec 28, 2011
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Loved the film's portrayal of the Yule Ball, and the teenage anxiety surrounding it. I was genuinely emotionally moved by Amos Diggory's anguish over the death of his son, and seeing Harry crying along with him augmented the scene's poignancy. No fantasy story is truly complete without some dragons, and the film doles out that particular justice with a truly awesome dragon and a truly awesome battle scene, if not without taking some liberties from the book. All in all, one of the best of the HP films.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
10
marnee96Dec 28, 2011
This one is darker, more intense and funnier than previous installments. Teenage hormones have taken the forefront at Hogwarts, but so has a dangerous threat. The story and the characters are excellently adapted by Steve Kloves and it'sThis one is darker, more intense and funnier than previous installments. Teenage hormones have taken the forefront at Hogwarts, but so has a dangerous threat. The story and the characters are excellently adapted by Steve Kloves and it's brilliantly acted. I love all the Harry Potter films, but if I had to choose a favorite, Goblet of Fire would be it. 4/4 stars.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
9
heyitsmegrif4Dec 17, 2011
Thrilling with some great performances, and dazzling visuals and Potters most complex story yet, and definitely the most entertaining of all of the Potters. I give this movie 92% of a good film.
9 of 13 users found this helpful94
All this user's reviews
8
spadenxDec 2, 2011
I think its easily the best film in the series so far. The acting is far better then it ever has been in the series and the older cast members have an expanded role as well (which is good). The confrontation at the end of the film is the peakI think its easily the best film in the series so far. The acting is far better then it ever has been in the series and the older cast members have an expanded role as well (which is good). The confrontation at the end of the film is the peak of the film and makes the film well worth watching for that alone.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
asylumspadezNov 25, 2011
What you see in this film is something you dont see much in the other films, The characters growing up. You see the characters deal with the problems of growing up and that is something I rather enjoyed. The acting was ok. The older membersWhat you see in this film is something you dont see much in the other films, The characters growing up. You see the characters deal with the problems of growing up and that is something I rather enjoyed. The acting was ok. The older members of the cast were great while the younger cast did over-act quite a bit and I didnt enjoy them as much as the others.

While the film (that runs nearly 3 hours) takes a toll on you while you watch it and can get a bit boring at times, The ending more then makes up for it (The ending is easily the best part of the film). Still though, Its an enjoyable film and one of the best in the series.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
10
Jboy2468Nov 22, 2011
This movie shows the stresses of growing up, as well as the spirit of bravery. Harry is almost alone for half of the movie but yet he doesn't give up at all. There's no more of that kiddie stuff. This is a true representation of Harry and hisThis movie shows the stresses of growing up, as well as the spirit of bravery. Harry is almost alone for half of the movie but yet he doesn't give up at all. There's no more of that kiddie stuff. This is a true representation of Harry and his future. Yet another 10, Potter!… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
8
Potter17Oct 11, 2011
It has a more childish tone when compared to the dark tone of "The Prisoner of Azkaban" but Mike Newell gave a solid adaptation of a very extensive and detailed book. I think this is the last time in the series when a non-reader can reallyIt has a more childish tone when compared to the dark tone of "The Prisoner of Azkaban" but Mike Newell gave a solid adaptation of a very extensive and detailed book. I think this is the last time in the series when a non-reader can really understand the story.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
8
grandpajoe6191Sep 23, 2011
The movie's story is very linear. However, the Potter cast & crew makes the story very easy to follow. Overall a enjoyable summer blockbuster you can't miss.
6 of 10 users found this helpful64
All this user's reviews
8
JawsPapi87Aug 9, 2011
This is an incredibly entertaining movie. It has intense action sequences, solid performances all around and maybe the most interesting new characters in the whole series, such as Professor Moody.
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
7
CRLJul 27, 2011
When I first saw Goblet of Fire, I probably would have called it the worst of the series. Since then however I've come around and realized why its flaws weren't that bad. As a fan of the books, the first thing that turned me off was howWhen I first saw Goblet of Fire, I probably would have called it the worst of the series. Since then however I've come around and realized why its flaws weren't that bad. As a fan of the books, the first thing that turned me off was how much was cut from this movie. However (unlike Part 2), the director kept the most important parts and managed to piece it together to make it seem like nothing was missing, and now it doesn't feel as bad. The acting, as always, is superb. The special effects are some of the best of the series, and the Ralph Fiennes makes an incredible entrance. It's not the best, but it's not as bad as it could have been.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
8
HasrionaJul 20, 2011
An enjoyable, thrilling and alluring entry with better acting than the first three and some captivating debut performances. Itâ
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
0
NytroxJul 17, 2011
personally, the worst of the whole "Harry Potter" series, which is a shame, this chapter doesnt represent part of the saga,but just something completely apart, and the romance scene are too many and just plain. Sure had his own good specialpersonally, the worst of the whole "Harry Potter" series, which is a shame, this chapter doesnt represent part of the saga,but just something completely apart, and the romance scene are too many and just plain. Sure had his own good special effects and im always impressed by them, but they just dropped out the storyline this time.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
9
TheGorillaJul 17, 2011
This has to be the best Potter film in the series, aside 'Half Blood Prince'. It's not as dreadful as the first two movies, which kinda sucked, and it's not like the 'Prisoner of Azkaban' which is over forced. But you have to give props toThis has to be the best Potter film in the series, aside 'Half Blood Prince'. It's not as dreadful as the first two movies, which kinda sucked, and it's not like the 'Prisoner of Azkaban' which is over forced. But you have to give props to the third one, cause it definitely gave the franchise a new spooky, interesting dimension which made the franchise more enjoyable by adding some depth to it. In 'Goblet of Fire' there are some scenes that could have been done better, but overall the movie is quite fun, enjoyable and action peaked. Besides, I'm looking forward to 'Deathly Hollows Part II'. I think it will be the best one to date.… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
vivekthegameJul 13, 2011
its my favorite movie in the series till date... i have seen the first seven.. i liked Newell's style of making this film.. he didn't make this movie as dark and a little boring as its successors.. this film had everything from wonderfulits my favorite movie in the series till date... i have seen the first seven.. i liked Newell's style of making this film.. he didn't make this movie as dark and a little boring as its successors.. this film had everything from wonderful cinematography to good performances.. it also had the required amount of humor.. and the end sequences were awesome.. specially the return of the Dark Lord.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
9
AVCITYJul 13, 2011
Taking a step away from the more moody and intimate Prisoner Of Azkaban, Mike Newell instead gives us an immersive and thrilling adventure. There are more characters to deal with and the scope is much bigger than any of the previous films.Taking a step away from the more moody and intimate Prisoner Of Azkaban, Mike Newell instead gives us an immersive and thrilling adventure. There are more characters to deal with and the scope is much bigger than any of the previous films. This film is a joy to watch with lots of thrills and humor to be had. The return of Voldemort is done well and scary enough as to not frighten little children. All the actors once again are top notch in their roles, and the newcomers provide some great moments as well. A lot of fun.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
9
AlnORTIZJul 11, 2011
Goblet of Fire has something that no other Harry Potter film before it had: a deep, dark and moving tone with heart. As well as the book, the plot is very dark and simple with the performances really showing how the plot was executed. TheGoblet of Fire has something that no other Harry Potter film before it had: a deep, dark and moving tone with heart. As well as the book, the plot is very dark and simple with the performances really showing how the plot was executed. The visuals are on par with Prisoner of Azkaban and really show how magical the spells really are. This is one of the better additions the series and one that show loads of magic.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
8
MovieLonely94Jul 5, 2011
As Harry Potter and his friends begin their fourth year at hogswarts as well as meeting new friends from their respective schools, a Tri-Wizard tournament has just been taken place and only three students have been chosen. Now the fourthAs Harry Potter and his friends begin their fourth year at hogswarts as well as meeting new friends from their respective schools, a Tri-Wizard tournament has just been taken place and only three students have been chosen. Now the fourth student to overcome that event, little does Harry Potter know that the servants of the Dark Lord are planning to reborn their master as he encounters all three of these tasks. I was amazed and speechless (not to mention frightened) when I saw this dark and epic entry of the series and I was excited to see it taking the franchise into new heights. The actors did a lot of talent and charm of the now changed personalites of the characters, The action and CGI were pretty unique and very intense, The storyline from the fourth book stayed faithful and Ralph Fiennes deserved some credit (as well as the others) for his amazing performance as Lord Voldemort. Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire is the most darkest entry of the series that took the franchise into new heights in fantasy history and one of the best movies from the past five years. 8/10… Expand
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews
7
jimmytancrediMay 29, 2011
So many things to comment on this movie, I'll hold me in two, one is the soundtrack, since I failed to mention the three previous films, and I love so much. We also have a change of director, this being the first Briton to take the saga.So many things to comment on this movie, I'll hold me in two, one is the soundtrack, since I failed to mention the three previous films, and I love so much. We also have a change of director, this being the first Briton to take the saga. Talking about the soundtrack, I love that John Williams did, but this film surpasses it be so... The arrival of Patrick Doyle has only increased my devotion, I confess that this change was great, John Williams was great, but there was something missing... What about Mike Newell, the first Briton to direct a film of the Harry Potter saga, a good choice, everything works, the rush is visible, noting that the possibility of division into two movies, the book is huge, had already been contemplated in with various things out in the book that only you can find the answers. Even so, Mike Newell managed to hold the bar, showing all that should be showing the Quidditch World Cup, Triwizard Tournament, the Yule Ball and the return of the Dark Lord, despite the ludicrous speed, I was thrilled with everything, everything, every Following is wonderful! The big problem is the same speed, should have more time each event of this magnitude. And if he had abused a little more time, he took the place still held by the Prisoner of Azkaban, the best film ever made.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
9
gm101Mar 21, 2011
A near perfect adaptation of the book, and one of my top three Harry Potter movies so far. This movie really set a high point for the franchise back in 2005. And this will probably be the only time Robert Patterson is in a movie that wasn't terrible.
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
10
TheQuietGamerMar 19, 2011
My personal favorite in the series and in my opinion the best in the series, it's funnier and has more action, and the story is the best yet, a must see and deserving of nothing less than a perfect 10 not because it's the best Harry Potter,My personal favorite in the series and in my opinion the best in the series, it's funnier and has more action, and the story is the best yet, a must see and deserving of nothing less than a perfect 10 not because it's the best Harry Potter, but because it will suck you in, a must see for fans.… Expand
7 of 10 users found this helpful73
All this user's reviews
9
DramaStormFeb 16, 2011
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Man, oh man! Now this is where things really start to get interesting! Hello, everyone! I am DramaStorm. And this is my review for the fourth Harry Potter Movie: Goblet of Fire. Well, if anyone says this movie is overrated, then they have not watched it enough times yet! With a deep and dark plot and maybe even a few sub-plots, you can't go wrong if you want to watch a random film one dark and stormy night. The best part of this movie: When Harry Potter becomes one of two Champions of Hogwarts. Imagine his shock when his name flew out of the Goblet of Fire! The worst part of this film: When Cedric Diggory was killed. It really would have been nice to have him become a long-time friend of Harry and his friends. Really, I mean it. Ta-Ta!… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
sreekiranFeb 10, 2011
movie is good and decent. the thrill ride of 3 competitions are really exciting. one of the better movies of harry potter saga. the movie could"nt get 8 or 9 due to its length and dragged first half.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
9
GavGav96Dec 10, 2010
Not only does this film emphasise how HP has matured, it also shows more invention, action, and romantic, the result of which being probably the second-best film in the series thusfar.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
9
Film_Fanatic_15Nov 22, 2010
Mike Newell directs the 4th film from the Harry Potter novels. This is a major improvement from the 3rd movie, while still giving a variety of great intense sequences of action, and a well developed story. It is the most entertaining so far,Mike Newell directs the 4th film from the Harry Potter novels. This is a major improvement from the 3rd movie, while still giving a variety of great intense sequences of action, and a well developed story. It is the most entertaining so far, and proves to be brilliant. I was liking the franchise once again, after the unfortunate downfall of the Prisoner of Azkaban, in my opinion. Harry matures and developes more intimate relationships with others, and develops a better understanding of the severity of Lord Voldemort. And so as the characters mature, so does the film, into one of the best directed and produced of the franchise.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
ryancarroll88Aug 27, 2010
Though the book was tantamount for the series, this is most definitely the weakest of the Harry Potter movies. The biggest travesty is that the movie completely loses steam halfway through and ruins arguably the best climax of all seven booksThough the book was tantamount for the series, this is most definitely the weakest of the Harry Potter movies. The biggest travesty is that the movie completely loses steam halfway through and ruins arguably the best climax of all seven books because of it. It's also frustrating to watch the movie straddle between being a "grown-up" vs. a "kiddie" movie, as if the producers struggled to plaster the movie with a PG rating while it was destined to be PG-13.… Expand
4 of 6 users found this helpful42
All this user's reviews
8
GoldenEye16Aug 21, 2010
A very good and exciting movie that goes by the book reasonably well. It was really fast-paced and there was loads of action. However I wish two things better. First, the maze for the third task did not have any of the obstacles orA very good and exciting movie that goes by the book reasonably well. It was really fast-paced and there was loads of action. However I wish two things better. First, the maze for the third task did not have any of the obstacles or creatures from the book. Why take that out and put in really nothing is kind of stupid. Also, I really wish that they had Voldemort with his hood on like the book covers/illustrations. It really looks cooler that way and more menacing.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
10
nboley08Aug 16, 2010
This film builds up the tension and energy of Voldemort's arrival so brilliantly and enthusiastically that it's impossible to think anyone didn't love the book as they were filming it. The tasks are incredible to watch and even though I hadThis film builds up the tension and energy of Voldemort's arrival so brilliantly and enthusiastically that it's impossible to think anyone didn't love the book as they were filming it. The tasks are incredible to watch and even though I had read the book before I watched the film, I was constantly on pins and needles as I watched Harry struggle. This is probably the best of the series, definitely my personal favorite thus far.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
JoS.Mar 8, 2009
Good attempt at my favorite of the books. I think K P's response was head on. What made me love this book was the of course Goblet of Fire. But the Yule Ball seemed to last forever with the odd punkish band. After the Ball it seemed Good attempt at my favorite of the books. I think K P's response was head on. What made me love this book was the of course Goblet of Fire. But the Yule Ball seemed to last forever with the odd punkish band. After the Ball it seemed that they raced against time to catch up with the story and the 2nd competition was over before it even started.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
AdnanA.Jul 19, 2008
When I watched this movie for the first time I was like... what the hell. They've ruined it! But when I watched it again and again the more I started to love it. Even though this movie also like the third one differs from the book but I When I watched this movie for the first time I was like... what the hell. They've ruined it! But when I watched it again and again the more I started to love it. Even though this movie also like the third one differs from the book but I liked whatever they did. The only thing I didn't like was the third task which is totally different from the books. Has no creatures or any excitement, but then the graveyard scene after that totally makes it up for the third task and all the credit goes to Ralph Fieness as our dear Voldemort. Story... What can I say!!?? It's Harry Potter, of course it's gonna rock. Acting... The trio remains marvelous, no doubt about that, but the rising stars are Ralph as Voldemort, Brendon as Moody and Miranda as Rita. They take the movie to a whole new level. Other adult actors are already perfect so i'm not praising them here. Michael Gambon sucked again!! In face he sucked more than he did in the previous one. That scene in which he runs towards Harry asking if he had put his name in the goblet is evidence enough for his suckage. Richard Harris we miss you!!! May he rest in peace. Direction... I found Mike Newell better than Alfonso Cuaron. Handling such a big novel is not easy but he has done an excellent job. But of course the main credit will go the Steve Kloves who is the screen writer. Even though i'd still say Warner bros should have never changed Chris in the first place. Since Chris is gone Harry Potter has lost smoothness. See lord of the rings, all the three movies feel ONE! This is not the case with HP. Visuals... The dragon was superb. The second task was superb. Voldemort's makeup was superb. In short the visuals were superb!!!… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
JenniferB.Jul 7, 2008
KP You need to get a life! are you normal, you should write a book. Harry Potter was great, yeh they left a lot out but how many children can keep up with jk rowlings twists and turns. Stop analyzing in depth and start enjoying whats on KP You need to get a life! are you normal, you should write a book. Harry Potter was great, yeh they left a lot out but how many children can keep up with jk rowlings twists and turns. Stop analyzing in depth and start enjoying whats on screen, trust me it help!… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
DalePMay 12, 2008
Agree with Tom K. The third movie is by far the best.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
JonLDec 15, 2007
Doesn't handle the angst as well as it should, but otherwise another finely crafted and thrilling build on the series as a whole.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
BamM.Nov 20, 2007
I don't think it was bad at all I mean some parts could have been better but for the most part I LOVED IT! I cont think the movie is getting the perks it deserves. If you think it was bad I don't think we were watching the same I don't think it was bad at all I mean some parts could have been better but for the most part I LOVED IT! I cont think the movie is getting the perks it deserves. If you think it was bad I don't think we were watching the same movie. Watch it again if you think its bad maybe you'll change your mind!!!!!… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
KPAug 23, 2007
The Goblet of Fire is the worst Harry Potter film of them all so far. Mike Newell was terrible as a director and I'm not sure if he entirely understands the world of Harry Potter as well as the other directors, Chris Columbus, Alfonso The Goblet of Fire is the worst Harry Potter film of them all so far. Mike Newell was terrible as a director and I'm not sure if he entirely understands the world of Harry Potter as well as the other directors, Chris Columbus, Alfonso Cuaron and David Yates, do. They completely changed certain characters. Dumbledore, for instance, they changed him from the book. They changed him from a nice, caring, believing guy into an aggressive, shouting, unnice lunatic. For instance that line where he said to Harry "I thinks its unwise for you to linger over these dreams, Harry" Dumbledore from the books would NEVER say that. Dumbledore from the books believed Harry in thinking that the dreams might be happening. Dumbledore sending Barty Crouch Junior to Azkaban? That's not Dumbledore! Barty Crouch junior's character was terrible. They changed him from a clever, disguising, death eater into and aggressive, lunatic, who wants to fight all the time. I feel sorry for David Tennant, playing a character like that. They didn't include the fact that he got kissed by a dementor. That was important. Daniel Radcliffe's acting wasn't very good, neither was Emma Watson's. Rupert Grint as Ron is by far the best out of the main 3 characters. I thought Ralph Fiennes as Voldemort was good, and Brendan Gleeson as Moody was good. Robert Pattinson as Cedric was quite good. The only 2 bits of the film I really liked were the Defense Against the Dark Arts class, when Moody's teaching them how to use unforgivable curses, and I like sections of the bit where Voldemort returned. Mike Newell tried to include too much romance reference bits in the film. He was to focused on bits like the Yule Ball, and the humor, and not focused enough on bits like the tasks, the pensive scene and the bit where Voldemort returns. Emma Watson thought that they included the bits that need to be there from the book...she was WRONG! There were plenty of bits that weren't in the film that need to be there. My sister was confused by many bits and she hasn't read any of the books. How Harr Potter and the Goblet of Fire, the film, became as successful as it is I have no idea!! It was that bad. There were 38 differences from the book and the film! That's shocking! J.K. Rowling should be furious. Obviously I don't expect them to include everything from the book, but they should have put enough in to keep everyone in character and to make it have sense! I'm a huge Harry Potter fan, and it made me angry seeing the 2nd best book of the series being made into a film like that. Here's a list of things they didn't explain in the film: They didn't see who killed Barty Crouch Senior. They didn't explain why Barty Crouch Junior fired the Dark Mark. They didn't explain why Harry's scar kept hurting. They didn't explain how Barty Crouch Junior got to Azkaban. They cut the scene where Karkaroff and Snape are discussing the dark mark, it was in the deleted scenes. They changed it to make it look like Karkaroff was threatening Snape, when he was supposed to be terrified and begging Snape to believe him. They didn't include the fact that Karkaroff ran away at the end of the Triwizard Tournament. They didn't include enough magic. It was to muggle like at alot of times, especially the bit where Fred and George try to put their names into the Goblet of Fire. Krum's character didn't have much to say. The list is almost endless.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
TomK.Aug 19, 2007
The fourth film in series is better than the first too, but not better than the third one. it is matching the books in style and environment, but it's moving too fast and skipping important events from the book. Still, the movie stands, The fourth film in series is better than the first too, but not better than the third one. it is matching the books in style and environment, but it's moving too fast and skipping important events from the book. Still, the movie stands, but not as the third one.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
GEAug 4, 2007
Watched it again on dvd the other day, and have to say it's pretty dreadful. It wasn't the special effects or how faithful it was or was not to the book, but the acting! Man, totally sucked. Newell obviously wanted to give his Watched it again on dvd the other day, and have to say it's pretty dreadful. It wasn't the special effects or how faithful it was or was not to the book, but the acting! Man, totally sucked. Newell obviously wanted to give his version some theatrical flair, and because of that everyone acts really over the top, turning every character into a caricature and no nuance whatsoever. There were nice scenes and all, but on the whole the bad acting destroys it.… Expand
2 of 6 users found this helpful
5
SophieJul 31, 2007
I could go on for hours about my problems with Goblet Of Fire, and 99% of them have nothing to do with being faithful to the book in the slightest. Complete void of the magic and fun of the first three movies, and makes a poor attempt atI could go on for hours about my problems with Goblet Of Fire, and 99% of them have nothing to do with being faithful to the book in the slightest. Complete void of the magic and fun of the first three movies, and makes a poor attempt at going adult. If you want to see the first truly magical and more adult Potter movie, go and see 'Order Of The Phoenix'.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
6
AndrewN.Jul 13, 2007
Goblet of fire turned out to be pretty much what i expected it to be. An average book to movie adaptation. It also could not live up to the standard of the book, just like the previous films. Still this is definitely the strongest Potter Goblet of fire turned out to be pretty much what i expected it to be. An average book to movie adaptation. It also could not live up to the standard of the book, just like the previous films. Still this is definitely the strongest Potter movie yet. The set pieces were amazing and i thought that the overall tone of the film was much darker than previous Potters. The quality of the acting is improving as the actors themselves become more mature. However the film is just found wanting in so many areas. Without doubt the biggest problem are the numerous episodes missing from the film. The book is over 500 pages so the film would have to be condensed, but these compromises make the film seem rushed and its unsatisfactory that the film feels like two-thirds the experience of the book. There are other elements overlooked too. Why is it that Snape (Alan Rickman), who is one of the best characters, plays such an insignificant role in the film. Fred and George don't have any of the wit and humor that they portray in the book. There were some fantastic scenes in the film, such as the third task and Harry's confrontation with Voldemort. Sadly though these scenes were too short and overall were few and far between. For those who have not read the book, this is certainly a very enjoyable watch. For the many who have read the book, the film will only feel like a compromised adaptation.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
GeorgiaW.May 30, 2007
I thought that the movie was enjoyable, definitely. However, I thought that Dumbledore was far too harsh - um, why would he push Harry? - and I preferred the original Dumbledore. I thought that Rupert Grint was excellent (easily the best of I thought that the movie was enjoyable, definitely. However, I thought that Dumbledore was far too harsh - um, why would he push Harry? - and I preferred the original Dumbledore. I thought that Rupert Grint was excellent (easily the best of the trio), followed by Daniel Radcliffe. Emma Watson has issues with her acting. Seriously. Why would you continuously wiggle your eyebrows when trying to show an emotion? Why? WHY? Its useless - i'm so glad other people agree with me. I would have given up on her a long time ago too if i were her acting coach. Dear Lord. Also, the dress. You know the one - purple, floaty, various tiers...absolutely VILE. I don't think they could have possibly made a more disgusting dress. In the book it is periwinkle blue at least, not pink/purple (which, in itself, I don't have a problem with. Just as a dress...) And why the tiers? Couldn't they have made something elegant and chic? Why does she have to look like a meringue that was tie-dyed??? Otherwise, I thought it was excellent; very amusing. Daniel Radcliffe has certainly grown up, hasn't he? Very nice. Robert Pattinson, Clemence Poesy and (can't remember actor's name) Krum gave excellent performances, as did Miranda Richardson (fabulous fabulous fabulous). I though Katie Leung was pretty good too, though I wasn't at all expecting a Scottish accent (which, eventually, I got used to). Mad-Eye Moody was very funny, but lacked the mad bit, especially for those who wouldn't have read the book (not me - I am an avid Harry Potter fan, but I know they are out there). Ralph Fiennes was excellent also; rather creepy as opposed to downright terrifying, as he is in the books. Then again, I suppose thats the only way to portray a wizard like Voldemort, as the sheer dangerous elegance is impossible to act. Snape as always gave the best performance (he is my favourite character); Alan Rickman can really pull off the cruel, mean, but somewhat good character (is anyone else having issues about believing Snape's Death Eater-ship? I can't figure him out. Shame we don't know anything about his patronus or boggart). All in all, the most enjoyable Harry Potter film, but the fifth looks excellent.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
9
Guy!May 15, 2007
I loved this movie, best one yet. It was suprisingly close to the book for it's length, although it cut out some vital parts, but the book is over 400 pgs, so we can't expect them to put in everything. Something I really despise I loved this movie, best one yet. It was suprisingly close to the book for it's length, although it cut out some vital parts, but the book is over 400 pgs, so we can't expect them to put in everything. Something I really despise though is that people accuse the whole series of promoting Satanism. WAKE UP PEOPLE!!… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
ChingF.Apr 15, 2007
As a fanatical Harry Potter fan, I cannot give this film a 0 (though I want to). There were many, many errors in this movie, and I believe that has been the worst movie yet. Though CoS was the least well-received, it stuck well to the As a fanatical Harry Potter fan, I cannot give this film a 0 (though I want to). There were many, many errors in this movie, and I believe that has been the worst movie yet. Though CoS was the least well-received, it stuck well to the plot-lines, and the major theme, and POINT of the story. GOF however, detracted completely from the plot of the book, and boomeranged off into the Forbidden Forest with unnecessary focus on the first task, the "motherly" relationship from Hermione, the Yule Ball event, and the Quiddtich World Cup. I am not saying that Quidditch should not have been in there -- but if the director wanted to completely cut off the game, then why not cut off the entire sequence in general, and have the Death Eaters attacking the World Cup through the Daily Prophet, while Harry stays at the Weasley's and allows the characters to develop personalities (something LACKING greatly). Moving on with the character development, let me just say this to Mike Newell, Steven Kloves: YOU HAVE FAILED! Not only were the dialogue delivered cheesy (ahem, "I love magic"? What the f.ck?), the trio seemed like people from Orwell's 1984. Hermione was this overly protective mommy, and yet, Emma Watson's acting never ceases to amaze us with its poor quality, makes it seem as though her "love" may be borderline sexual. Her eyebrows certainly tell a different tale. Michael Gambon as Dumbledore could not have been worse, if not, catastrophic -- it destroyed the loving, cool, grace of Harris' work, and made Dumbledore into a confused, blibbering, irrational, untrusting lunatic. The real dumbledore would have never pushed Harry into a pile of pots/pans/trophies. Though Rupert and Dan seem to be improving (not well, but working hard), Emma is simply embarrassing next to them. The third movie, Prizoner of Azkaban, was my favorite. Although Cuaron snipped off critical bits of information, altogether, it seemed like a film that followed a plot, a string of events that tied together, and smart dialogue that brought quirky humor (except for the talking heads) and subtle, yet blush-worthy, enjoyable adolescent moments (not like it overboard, and useless in GOF). The budding adolescence theme in GOF was overworked, and cutting some of it out could have been used to cover some gaping plot-holes. In general, PoA was an artful film, one that seemed like it was delivered by a true film maker, an artist -- NOT some bimbo who could only string a slideshow of events together. GOF deserves a 5. Perhaps even less. But I'll do it some dignity, as a Harry Potter fan.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
Louis'sBroMar 21, 2007
Best Harry Potter movie I've seen (thus far). After reading the book, I couldn't wait to see how the movie would turn out. The action was amazing and the acting was incredible. However, I wouldn't give this movie a ten because Best Harry Potter movie I've seen (thus far). After reading the book, I couldn't wait to see how the movie would turn out. The action was amazing and the acting was incredible. However, I wouldn't give this movie a ten because the creators cut out too many parts from the book.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
JenK.Feb 28, 2007
It want that good and was as close to the book and the graphics stunk. It was more drama and not enough info that should've been on there. They took half the book out and added what they wanted. The best movie to me was the third. Keep It want that good and was as close to the book and the graphics stunk. It was more drama and not enough info that should've been on there. They took half the book out and added what they wanted. The best movie to me was the third. Keep them coming but try not to make them so corny. Stick to the book some more. I mean the maze was poor and it would've been cool if they kept some parts in it. Although movies cost money the book I would rate like a 9. Oh well.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
DonnaHJan 8, 2007
Although I loved PoA, and would be thrilled to see Cuaron come back and direct another HP movie, GoF is the one I enjoy the most. There are just so many things to love: Daniel Radcliffe's growth as an actor, Maggie Smith's Although I loved PoA, and would be thrilled to see Cuaron come back and direct another HP movie, GoF is the one I enjoy the most. There are just so many things to love: Daniel Radcliffe's growth as an actor, Maggie Smith's pitch-perfect delivery in every scene she's in, Brendan Gleeson's delightfully eccentric Moody, David Tennant's wonderfully insane Barty Crouch, Jr., Alan Rickman proving that he's one of the only actors capable of acting out elipses, the most realistic dragon I have ever seen on film, Dumbledore showing his very human vulnerability, everything about the Yule Ball, Ralph Fiennes' perfect blend of ruthlessness and madness as Voldemort. And, of course, there is Jarvis Cocker. Granted, there's only about 3 seconds of Jarvis...but that's what DVD extras are for, right?… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
NoahB.Dec 11, 2006
This movie was absolutely terrible. My problem with this movie is not that it didn't stick to the book although I did love the book. My problem with this movie was that it destroyed all the characters and any sort of character This movie was absolutely terrible. My problem with this movie is not that it didn't stick to the book although I did love the book. My problem with this movie was that it destroyed all the characters and any sort of character development, had numerous plot-holes which were certainly not present in the book (Where the deuce did Barty Crouch Jr. come from. They certainly didn't explain how he got out of azkaban). They utterly destroyed Albus Dumbledore's character. The character of Dumbledore is very calm and collected old and wise, but never rash and gruff. In the movie when Harry's name comes out of the goblet of fire, Dumbledore shakes Harry violently and smashes him into a bunch of trophies. The main argument defending the inconsistencies with the book or just things that generally are not explained or the lack of character development is that the book is over 700 pages long and needs to fit into a movie. However so much time was wasted with useless and boring sequences, such as the huge focus on the Yule ball and the ridiculously long action sequences such as the scene in which the dragon chases Harry. I'm tired of writing about this, but I have a billion more reasons why this movie sucked so much when it could have been so good!!!!! ARRRG!!!!… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
MattCSep 30, 2006
Any Harry Potter movie is gonna be good. The only people who might not like it are obsessive fans of the books.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
SidF.Sep 4, 2006
This movie was like no other Harry potter! It sucked! It was crap! I hated it and I give it a 0
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
JackieAug 8, 2006
I must admit, I liked this movie. Lots of people are saying that it is not true to the book, but think about it. There is no way a book that is over 700 pages long is going to fit well into a movie. They put the parts into the movie that I must admit, I liked this movie. Lots of people are saying that it is not true to the book, but think about it. There is no way a book that is over 700 pages long is going to fit well into a movie. They put the parts into the movie that will be important later in the movies. I admit, I was disappointed with the parts about Nevilles parents; if you haven't read the books, you would defiantly miss that little bit in the Pensieve where Kakaroff mentions his parents. Harry should have talked to Dumbledore about it afterwards. It would take 5 minutes. Then we could cut that stupid dragon scene. Does Harry really need to be flying around the castle all the time?… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
KatherineJul 23, 2006
Best of the whole series!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
JasmineJun 27, 2006
this movie is so great fantastic man! I like Hermione Granger, Cho Chang and Fleur Delacour they are so pretty especially when Fleur Delacour was in their Beauxbatons uniform and with the hat. The character that i hate is Viktor Krum, he this movie is so great fantastic man! I like Hermione Granger, Cho Chang and Fleur Delacour they are so pretty especially when Fleur Delacour was in their Beauxbatons uniform and with the hat. The character that i hate is Viktor Krum, he always give himself that type of proud look and give other people that type of proud look, and he is like always thinking that he is the best in the world wearing the sports shirt and going out for a exercise at the hogwards beach and attracting girls and he always walks with the chest high up nag as if like hr doesn't do that it will be very disgusting but anyway he is the character that i hate most in HARRY POTTER AND THE GOBLET OF FIRE. my favorite part was when Fred Weasley and George Weasley drink the aging potion and putting their name in the pot of goblet of fire and when something happen to them then they started fighting that part was so interesting and somehow funny. but although i have a lot of comments HARRY POTTER AND THE GOBLET OF FIRE this movie RAWKS man sooooooo fun, interesting and exciting.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
AlisterL.May 17, 2006
Some are calling this the best of the series. Some are even suggesting it was a good movie. What I saw was yet another turgid, effects heavy attempt at bringing spirited, energetic children's literature to the silver screen. The only Some are calling this the best of the series. Some are even suggesting it was a good movie. What I saw was yet another turgid, effects heavy attempt at bringing spirited, energetic children's literature to the silver screen. The only thing that separates 'Goblet of Fire' from penniless amateur community hall drama (other than the uninspiring digital effects) is Brendan Gleeson's enjoyable turn as 'Mad Eye' Moody. Note to Hollywood producers- when casting child actors, how about going for the ones that can actually act (yes, I'm also looking at you, Narnians)? The series' trio of adolescent protagonists sure are pretty but boy do they lack the chops to carry these characters off. If I was Emma Watson's acting coach, I would have long ago given up on attempting to explain that wiggling one's eyebrows continuously does not convey any emotion that exists in the spectrum of the human psyche, and simply have a truckload of Botox shot straight between those furry jumping caterpillars to keep the damn things still. Grint and Radcliffe are obviously trying hard but their lack of real talent for the craft is painfully apparent, and the real actors in the piece: Alan Rickman, Maggie Smith, Gary Oldman (and the list goes on and on) are relegated so far into the periphery their parts would be more aptly described as cameos. And yes, a book stuffed so thickly with story, subplot and character development is difficult to adapt, and it was done here as best I think it could be. I just couldn't get past how awful and forced the acting was, and how much time was spent dwelling on romantic subplots that have no resolution until the next installment of the series. The movie's already nearly three hours, do we really need 10 minutes of Harry and Ron moping in the corner at the yule ball? All in all I have to say that the entire series is a disaster, and the rollicking good time of the books has been clipped down to a flashy, stilted highlights package that looks nowhere near as impressive as it did in my imagination, which is where it should have stayed. Go back to the library kids, this sound-stage facsimile adds nothing to the mythos.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
ChuckieK.Apr 30, 2006
There were many things on the surface that would make the average movie goer rave about it. But being a Harry Potter reader, I just have to say that this movie disappointed me very much. It skipped many important details, as well as leaving There were many things on the surface that would make the average movie goer rave about it. But being a Harry Potter reader, I just have to say that this movie disappointed me very much. It skipped many important details, as well as leaving out an entire "theme" of the story. The whole aura surrounding Voldemort is very confusing, and I want to laugh and cry from embarrassment for the directors when the Barty Crouch scene ended so quickly when leaving out pretty much everything that explained why the events happened as well as foreshadowing for the next book. I seemed to be reading sparknotes of Harry Potter as the scenes in the movie had almost no connecting transitions. Get a new director!… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
RobApr 30, 2006
I was really looking forward to this movie as I was home for Thanksgiving break from college. When I did see it, I thought it was great due to the action and the special effects. But then, about a week later, I thought to myself that it was I was really looking forward to this movie as I was home for Thanksgiving break from college. When I did see it, I thought it was great due to the action and the special effects. But then, about a week later, I thought to myself that it was exactly the same way I had thought about Revenge of the Sith. The bottom line is that there are many flaws in the movie. Supporters of HP movies say that naturally, the movie will add things in and leave some things out, as it never will follow the book perfectly. That is exactly true! Except in TGOF's case, the things that were left out (little as they seemed) had a tremendous negative impact on the portrayal of the story. There seemed to be almost no continuity to the film. [***SPOILERS***] Rather than have a central theme like #1 and #2 have, and that #3 sort of has, this movie didn't have any! Rather, it seemed like a showcase of Harry Potter scenes rather than a movie that is supposed to tell a story. The obvious problem with the movie was the rushed sequences. It seemed as if we saw the first 200 pages of the book displayed in less than 15 minutes! Some of this is okay, but it is sad for other parts because we miss some very important things and we don't understand some of it at all. The most obvious example was when they showed the Quiditch World Cup, but no game. I was like, "Are these story writers serious?" Then, they rush straight to the dark mark scene with the death eaters parading through the camp grounds. The scene just appears out of no where, and for the person who hasn't read the book, they wouldn't have a clue what goes on!!! All things seem to focus around the triwizard tournament, which is an okay thing to focus the majority of the movie on, but it dominated the movie and forced special effects to be the only redeeming quality of the movie. Not to mention that the dragon scene took about 5 to 10 minutes too long and that time could have easily been used to fill in the missing gaps in the story. One thing that made me mad was the portrayal of Mad-Eye Moody. The acting was great, but it made the audience, even the people who hadn't read to book, to suspect him of mischief the entire time. No where in the book does it make him seem like a paranoid freak of nature who drinks from his hip flask every minute of the day. Just as an example of a missing thing, why the heck would Neville be so terrified of Moody's Cruciatus curse and nobody else? The writers don't let us know anything about Neville's parents being subjected to this when he was a child. Another example is the random part when Snape get pissed at Harry for thinking he's been stealing his polyjuice potion. That scene was so out of context and just confused us more! One thing that was just WRONG was including Barty Crouch Jr. at the Riddle home scene with Voldemort and Wormtail. We were never supposed to even see Barty Crouch Jr. until Harry Potter sees him in Dumbledore's pensieve. That got me skeptical from the very beginning. All I've done is talk about what should have been done, but offer no solutions as to how the movie could have been like TSS, TCS, & TPOA. Well, I could name a hundred little scenes that could have been switched around, added in, or done better. The most important thing that was left out was the second plot of the story other than the triwizard tournament--Voldemort's phantom but understood presence throughout the entire story. The only time we see or think about him is at the very beginning and in the graveyard. I had to explain a dozen things to my little brother who hadn't read the book because of this. For example, what happened to Bertha Jorkins? What happened to the plot that was talked about in the Riddle House? What is the significance of the Dark Mark? What is Ludo Bagman's (who is never even mentioned) role in the book? What is the reasoning behind Barty Crouch, Jr.'s trial? Why is Barty Crouch, Sr. never mentioned to be murdered by his son? Why didn't the writers put in the confession by of Barty Crouch, Jr. into the story at the end? This last question was the most important because it would have explained everything that the book told us about Voldemort. The movie makes it seem as if everyone accepts the fact that Voldemort is back, when Fudge (who is never even seen) should be denying it. In fact, this and the story of Barty Crouch, Jr. set up the most important part of The Order of the Phoenix because it makes everyone doubt Harry, and in the case of the ministry, cause people to make sure they believe otherwise. Another interesting the book has that the movie didn't touch on, which would have made the teen hormonal urges get more intense, was the rivalry that Harry and Cedric had. This would have made Harry much angrier when learning that Cho is going with Cedric to the Yule Ball. Overall, the movie seemed to do a showcase of the events in the book, rather than trying to be the book itself, hence the title The Goblet of Fire. In addition to the plot being confusing and entirely unfinished, the acting of Michael Gambon playing Dumbledore was atrocious to say the best. Richard Harris definitely was the best actor on the face of the earth for Dumbledore, but since he passed away, the writers should have found a worthy actor to follow in Harris's footsteps. Gambon was the second biggest turnoff in the movie for me. He did not match Dumbledore's character at all. Instead of being a loving, confident sage, he was an angry, uncaring, and confused man. His should-be consoling scene with Harry at the end is completely unnecessary, and does nothing to strengthen their relationship is the book does. Also, he frequent yelling completely takes away from the Richard Harris-esq Dumbledore we all love. With all of that said, I still give the movie a 4 rather than a 2 or 3 because most of actors did a good job. Ralph Fiennes (although he could have had red eyes and had a slightly more intimidating presence) was a great Voldemort. While Mad-eye did not act that way in the book, the acting was great. The 3 main characters, particularly Emma Watson as Hermione, are really beginning to progress. Hagrid was always great as usual! All in all, if this is how the 4th book was portrayed, and because of the way the writers didn't include the information that was crucially needed to lead in The Order of the Phoenix, I'm afraid for when the next three movies come out, if they want to keep making them.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
LouisApr 11, 2006
I read only the first HP book and found it 1-dimensional and predictable. This movie is not different. In most books/movies the "twist" is that one of the professors turns out to be the baddy. Special effects are entertaining though. But I read only the first HP book and found it 1-dimensional and predictable. This movie is not different. In most books/movies the "twist" is that one of the professors turns out to be the baddy. Special effects are entertaining though. But otherwise dull. A children's story does not need to be so shallow.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
S.M.Apr 11, 2006
First off, I'd like to say: it's Harry Potter, so I think it would be hard to screw up _completely_. Goblet of Fire is an intense book with far more action than the books previous, and although it does leave some of the whimsy of First off, I'd like to say: it's Harry Potter, so I think it would be hard to screw up _completely_. Goblet of Fire is an intense book with far more action than the books previous, and although it does leave some of the whimsy of the previous books behind, it's still there. The movie, however, ignores that completely. Relative to the previous film, the Prisoner of Azkaban, it's a much more lackluster film (though that may be unfair because, out of the two, Prisoner of Azkaban is the better book---of all the series, in fact). Less artsy, I think. (Though, I'd like to note that the World Cup at the beginning of the movie looked absolutely SUPERB. However, the fact that you didn't actually get to watch the course of the game disturbed me immensely.) What turned me off the most about this movie is the dramatic change in Dumbledore's temperment that is not synonymous with how he behaves in the actual book. It seems like he's always angry and yelling and confused, and that's a LOT different than what happens in the book. The fifth movie is where he should show some anger, though not even of the degree shown in this film. I just really hated how they portrayed him in this film.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
JeremiahM.Apr 5, 2006
Chris Columbus staged his "Potter" as a kind of droll pageant, like a "Harry Potter's Greatest Hits" that inexplicably insisted on remixing every song, draining away their grungy vitality and blissful wit by burying them under a pyre of Chris Columbus staged his "Potter" as a kind of droll pageant, like a "Harry Potter's Greatest Hits" that inexplicably insisted on remixing every song, draining away their grungy vitality and blissful wit by burying them under a pyre of studio redubs, children's choirs, and "Home Alone"-level John Williams. Alfonso Cuaron reconceived of the series as a canny mix of the eccentric, the frightening, and the beautiful. His film is the one J.K Rowling had embedded in her story all along. Mike Newell, with "Goblet of Fire," comes to the preceding with a patience long-eroded by television, or "Mona Lisa Smile," or the sugar he might have compulsively consumed to "brainmeld" with the world's kids. His movie simultaneously feels repellently unmagical and drunk on the idea of magic. [***SPOILERS***] When Harry says, "I love magic," he's stepping far outside the confines of Rowlings verisimilitudinous world to be cute. And that's precisely where this film fails. Rowling crafts a world where magic is the order of the day, every day.At times, it's so familiar as to seem frustrating, or absurd. This movie loves magic and has the special effects to prove it in court, if need be. But where's the life behind it all? Not in Hogwarts' paintings, or in its musty halls: Newell has done the greatest disservice of all by imagining Hogwarts as a boarding school- Rowling's starting point- and then stopping. Instances of the novel or beautiful occur at precisely spaced intervals- namely, when the kids' patience might start to wear thin. Speaking of patience, Newell has none to speak of. He has conceived of "Goblet of Fire" as a three-act drama. Everything prior to and including the first challenge is Act One; suddenly, as if someone forgot to mention it, the Yule Ball and, shockingly immediately thereafter, the second challenge are upon us in Act Two; Act three has no structure to speak of but contains the good, Hammer-horror stuff from the book, slapped onto an unbelievably brief third trial. Are we to believe that after the dragon, that's all the tournament would have for Harry? Doesn't old Voldy (Ralph Fiennes, for Chrissake) need to slow down a little so that all those long awaited curses can be uttered? Doesn't Harry's adrenaline flow compensate for his youth by allowing him to experience the most climactic moment of his life thus far without feeling that it's all far too ephemeral? The whole affair seems ingloriously rushed, and Newell has so pounded our brains with vain special effects that when the really beautiful image of the wand-beams meeting comes about it feels like so much more of the same. Yes, Potter stories require the sum of effects present here. But no other Potter film has so shamelessly rubbed them in our faces. It felt like "Revenge of the Sith" all over again. Newell, to be fair, does much better with the humans in the film; this Potter, even more than Cuaron's, seems populated by breathing individuals. Apparently, directing Hugh Grant and Julia Roberts puts one at ease with the lesser celebrities of Potter's world, because Mike here has done an excellent job capturing the mannerisms, rough speech, and conflicted emotions of adolescence; he seems more at ease when relaxing with his cast than when sitting beside the editor or parsing through thousands of effects shots. The episodic nature must be due in part to Kloves, but I liked his work on the last one (and "Wonder Boys") so much I'm hesitant to blame him. To close, Rowling's "Goblet" was the least magical of the series so far; Newell's is on par with Columbus's for that title among the films. It doesn't fix any of the book's problems, but creates new ones; thankfully, it's all very well acted (kudos to Michael Gambon & Brendan Gleason). The film simultaneously is tiring and needs to be longer (to compensate for the rushed feel), and needs desperately for Rowling's whimsy to save it from its dour self.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
JeffP.Apr 4, 2006
I gave this film an 8, I have read all the books, my basic run down starts from 10, it lost one point for missing a few senses and lost another point for being a little hard to follow if you haven't read the books or seen the other I gave this film an 8, I have read all the books, my basic run down starts from 10, it lost one point for missing a few senses and lost another point for being a little hard to follow if you haven't read the books or seen the other three movies and thus know the characters. However we must all remember that when things change from book to movie that it's not going to be the same. The book was over 600 pages long, to fit everything the movie would have to be almost 4hours and 30 mins long. Some of us (me) wouldn't mind that but that hard to do with some people. All in all good movie likeable characters (even if one of them isn't explained entirely in their emotions to me (ron)), always room for improvement of course. Can't wait to see more.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
SamX.Apr 1, 2006
Let me start off by saying that the film in no way follows the book, and that to me this isn't really a bad thing because I hated the book as well. But, instead of adhering to the overhyped book's many followers, the director has Let me start off by saying that the film in no way follows the book, and that to me this isn't really a bad thing because I hated the book as well. But, instead of adhering to the overhyped book's many followers, the director has managed to cut out half the book and fill it in with fast paced action. The atmosphere the film has has been pilfered straight out of the LotR trilogy, and the musical score was absolutely horrible. For someone who hasn't read the books it would seem confusing and shallow because there doesn't seem to be much of a story, unless a reader fills you in on all the gaps in the plot (of the book) that the film misses out.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
10
RyanQ.Mar 25, 2006
Anyone who said this movie was bad should keep that incoherent mouths shut and bludgeon their head off a wall until they grow what might resemble a brain. YES the movie did follow the book's storyline and YES the acting, effects, and Anyone who said this movie was bad should keep that incoherent mouths shut and bludgeon their head off a wall until they grow what might resemble a brain. YES the movie did follow the book's storyline and YES the acting, effects, and action was more than anyone could dream of asking for. Quite obviously the most spectacular HP movie to date and one of the best movies of the year period.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
DerekH.Mar 24, 2006
Very entertaining. Many people seem to be claiming that those who haven't read the books surely couldn't follow this plot. Not so. I vaguely remember seeing the first two films, skipped the third (I'll get around to it), and Very entertaining. Many people seem to be claiming that those who haven't read the books surely couldn't follow this plot. Not so. I vaguely remember seeing the first two films, skipped the third (I'll get around to it), and have never touched the books, but Goblet of Fire made plenty of sense to me.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
NatS.Mar 21, 2006
The 2 points I gave this movie were only because it was Harry Potter. This film was a joke compared to the other HP's. Half of its lines are completely made up and extremely corny. I have to surpress a laugh everytime I see this movie, The 2 points I gave this movie were only because it was Harry Potter. This film was a joke compared to the other HP's. Half of its lines are completely made up and extremely corny. I have to surpress a laugh everytime I see this movie, it's a complete joke. Watching this movie is like trying to read a book on a roller coaster. They try to combine complicated plots with fast-paced action, leaving those who haven't read the books dazed and confused. Plus, the music was the worst of all of the other films.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
AlexM.Mar 21, 2006
Best Harry Potter yet. So cool and everything. I read the books and all and im the only one who realizes why lot of people hate it. God people get it through your heads most movies that are created that have books wont be the same. Man you Best Harry Potter yet. So cool and everything. I read the books and all and im the only one who realizes why lot of people hate it. God people get it through your heads most movies that are created that have books wont be the same. Man you people can get so retarded sometimes.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
EricS.Mar 20, 2006
When I saw it for the first tme, I saw it with a friend who had never read any of the books. I spent half the time filling in the gaps in the plot that were left out. The other half I spent marveling at the large amount of cuts from the When I saw it for the first tme, I saw it with a friend who had never read any of the books. I spent half the time filling in the gaps in the plot that were left out. The other half I spent marveling at the large amount of cuts from the book. I gave it a 2 becasue if you have read the books like I have, there is no choice but to see them or there is a void left somewhere. All in all, a bad movie.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
FraserW.Mar 12, 2006
Everything about this movie was perfect I think the next one wont do anything but rise and i might give it a 10.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
AndyO.Mar 7, 2006
Not my favorite of the series, and NOT because the movie left a lot out from the book (I prefer to read the books after seeing the movies, that way I don't miss anything), but just because I didn't think the movie was as good as Not my favorite of the series, and NOT because the movie left a lot out from the book (I prefer to read the books after seeing the movies, that way I don't miss anything), but just because I didn't think the movie was as good as those that came before it. Currently I believe Prisoner of Azkaban is my favorite, I wish they had used Gary Oldman's character more in this film as he's always been one of my favorite actors, and his part in the book was slightly bigger than the movie gave him credit. Can't wait for the next one in 2008 or whenever.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
SamFeb 26, 2006
I loved all of the Harry Potter movies, but this one does something much better than any of the sequels before, it evolves, without losing that magical touch that we all know and love.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
EstebanF.Feb 24, 2006
No, I didn't go out with the feeling of "What the heck was that!?". The movie is pretty good, the effects were unbelievable, but the movie was obnoxiously cutted. Yeah, obnoxious is the only not-curse-word that I can use to describe the No, I didn't go out with the feeling of "What the heck was that!?". The movie is pretty good, the effects were unbelievable, but the movie was obnoxiously cutted. Yeah, obnoxious is the only not-curse-word that I can use to describe the cuts. The book was amazingly better. In fact, it was one of the better ones, tied with the phoenix order (that's the directly translated name, I don't know the exact English name), and only being outstanding by the 1st book. I'm totally sure that this movie had the better effects, but talking about plots, it was the worst one. I felt a bit disillusioned after that, specially of the not-so-scary Voldemort. This absolutely destroys my expectations. Anyways, a good movie.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
KarenE.Feb 19, 2006
The last installment of the HP series was one of the best movies I've seen this year. Full of action and mystery, Harry Potter finally meets the badie in the series. there were only a few bad points. Otherwise it was wonderful!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
KyleL.Feb 10, 2006
I like the Harry Potter movies and this is just like the previous...entertaining. It wasn't dull, yet I wasn't on the edge of my seat. Perfect for younger tweens!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
CharlieFeb 6, 2006
Come on! This movie left so much of the book out that it was just unbearable to watch. I have gotten 10 times more out of the books and audio tapes that watching these absolutely terrible screen adaptations. This movie in particular did the Come on! This movie left so much of the book out that it was just unbearable to watch. I have gotten 10 times more out of the books and audio tapes that watching these absolutely terrible screen adaptations. This movie in particular did the book no justice what-so-ever. The first movie was very very close where much of the dialogue was taken directly from the text or used in a way where you knew they were trying to consolidate the book, but not leave anything out. But this movie just cut HUGE parts of the book out and massacred the theme. This was nothing more than an action movie and was not even close to the book. Terrible. I gave it a 3 because the special effects were good. The next book is going to be much harder to make into a movie because there is almost no action until the end. This could be bad.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
6
RitaP.Jan 31, 2006
Would've given it an 8 if it was truer to the novel. If they couldn't get the whole plot in then they should've made it a two parter rather than take shortcuts - also they would've made twice the money. It was also a bit Would've given it an 8 if it was truer to the novel. If they couldn't get the whole plot in then they should've made it a two parter rather than take shortcuts - also they would've made twice the money. It was also a bit too violent for kids.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
SteveL.Jan 27, 2006
Very good movie. I've never read any of the books so I am judging it on its own merits. Parts in the middle were a bt slow (e.g. anything involving dancing), but the action scenes delivered.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
GilbertM.Jan 26, 2006
Yeah, some of it's a bit different. Which is a shame. But I really don't envy Steve Kloves his job in adapting these, and I'm not surprised he's given the next one to someone else while he buggers off to direct something. Yeah, some of it's a bit different. Which is a shame. But I really don't envy Steve Kloves his job in adapting these, and I'm not surprised he's given the next one to someone else while he buggers off to direct something. Take a look at the book one day. It's huge. It's a housebrick. And the next one's even bigger. I seriously had no idea how they'd shrink this fourth one into one film. More than three hours is for no - exactly three hours is pushing it. Fortunately, they managed it, and if some of the characterisation and plotting is simpler, it's because it's a different medium. You still should read the books before you see the films, because the books are the real story and the films are just moving picture versions of them, but they're damn good moving picture versions. Oh my god, there's a Big Momma's House 2? Okay, this review is over, I've got some calls to make.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
ZippyZ.Jan 22, 2006
No relevance to the book at all. terrible Hollywood garbage.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
RaulS.Jan 21, 2006
I saw this movie five times in the same day starting at midnight
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
RyanD.Jan 21, 2006
Too many short cuts were taken to make fans of the book truly love this movie. Movie goers will enjoy this story, But real fans are still gonna have to wait for a Great Harry Potter movie.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
AnonymousJan 18, 2006
The book was the best of the six... but the movie didn't stay true to it... Should have made it longer, regardless of childrens attentions spans of an hour and a half Lame excuse to make a good story short.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
DanielV.Jan 18, 2006
This movie was total mockery of the novel. More than half the story was missing, characters were portrayed wrong (eg Barty Crouch JR., Dumbledore, Voldemort), and scenes were changed dramatically ( e.g. the dragon scene). I personally did This movie was total mockery of the novel. More than half the story was missing, characters were portrayed wrong (eg Barty Crouch JR., Dumbledore, Voldemort), and scenes were changed dramatically ( e.g. the dragon scene). I personally did not like the other movies, and I was hoping for this one to be much better, but it only made me mad. Had I not read the book I may have found the movie entertaining so that is why I gave it a five. I hope J.K. Rowling is resenting that she had signed off her books to these directors who can't seem to get it right. And for the love of God please get these kids to act. Emma is by far the worst( also seeing her face constantly contorting when she talks is really annoying)but Rupert is decent compared to the others.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
DerekP.Jan 17, 2006
I overall think it was worth the admission, but I would have liked to see Newell throw out the rulebooks and go for something outside of the box. Put his own stamp on it. I mean, you can't really go wrong with making such a film from a I overall think it was worth the admission, but I would have liked to see Newell throw out the rulebooks and go for something outside of the box. Put his own stamp on it. I mean, you can't really go wrong with making such a film from a great and appealing novel. But would someone please teach these kids how to act? Please.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
SinaJ.Jan 14, 2006
This is best Harry potter movie yet, great effects, great story, a bit less PG-ish than the others and I believe that its ok if they didn't include everything in the books. Emma Watson looked so pretty in this one.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
HarryluverJan 13, 2006
I think the special effects were great but I have read the book and think that this movie is to short and doesn't have what is should have.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
ClaudiaL.Jan 13, 2006
Is the best movie.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
ClaudiaL.Jan 11, 2006
Is the best movie.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
DimitrisB.Jan 11, 2006
It is good film like other three.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
ConstantJan 11, 2006
HP4 suffers from heavy rhythm problems. You can tell from the directing that scenarists have struggled for months to fit the whole book into a 3-hour footage, yet at the end of the day so much is eluded and things stay at such a superficial HP4 suffers from heavy rhythm problems. You can tell from the directing that scenarists have struggled for months to fit the whole book into a 3-hour footage, yet at the end of the day so much is eluded and things stay at such a superficial level (dialogues never longer than 2 lines) that no pace can possibly install. Ironically for "too short a movie", you end up looking at your watch. Technically, it is good though (but who would rate a movie on its technical achievement? so easy nowadays), despite the age problem for the main actors, which can easily be abstracted. In a nutshell, not essential, less interesting than the previous one.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
KasunJan 6, 2006
I don't know why this movie didn't get higher credits, it was phenomenal.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
HughH.Jan 6, 2006
The best Harry Potter movie to date.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
sritikac.Jan 5, 2006
I am a great fan of Daniel. i loved this movie the best. I have seen all the movies a 100 times but i never get bored watching them.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
DJan 4, 2006
Best Harry Potter Movie yet. Can't complain!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
samirat.Jan 3, 2006
As the Harry potter movies go on, you can see the acters are more comfortable with their characters. In this movie you see how harry, although very powerful, has yet to fill his destiny. the special effects are great and the storyline is As the Harry potter movies go on, you can see the acters are more comfortable with their characters. In this movie you see how harry, although very powerful, has yet to fill his destiny. the special effects are great and the storyline is full of adventure and drama. In the movie harry is mysteriously entered into the triwizard tournament and by that is forced into the match and has many challenges to overcome. Near the end he gets an unexpected encounter with voldemort(who was way too cheerful for me. He was a cross between mr. edwards (little house on the praire) and the penguin. In my opinion this is the best of the harry potter movies.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
MiladS.Jan 3, 2006
This movie was the best movie i had ever seen . You most be a Harry Potter reader to understand it !
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
ConnorS.Dec 31, 2005
This was by far was the best harry potter movie, and definetly matched the greatness of the book. it did not follow the book completely, but it was the longest one until the fifth. even though i wished they added some things it was definetly This was by far was the best harry potter movie, and definetly matched the greatness of the book. it did not follow the book completely, but it was the longest one until the fifth. even though i wished they added some things it was definetly worth seeing twice, and would not mind seeing it a third time, but i dont want to spoil it so bad that i dont want to buy it on dvd.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
JohnM.Dec 31, 2005
Faithful to the book, for the most part. In the name of literacy, PLEASE pick up the book and read it!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
RitB.Dec 31, 2005
Wizards exist and this movie proves it --- because it was made by technical wizards. This is movie making and story telling at its best. I hope Rowling lives and writes for a thousand years.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
MicahE.Dec 30, 2005
Loved it.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
CaseyG.Dec 30, 2005
Sticks to the book and very good acting. This is the best one so far. Very good directing and costumes.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
Page:
More From This Movie

81 Critic Reviews

7.8 User Reviews

Details & Credits|Trailers

Current Movie Releases
By MetascoreBy User Score
1 77 Project Hail Mary
2 75 Send Help
3 73 Hoppers
4 72 The Sheep Detectives
5 68 Crime 101
SEE ALL
Essential Links
New on Amazon Prime Video
New on Netflix
Coming Soon to DVD/Blu-ray
SEE ALL