|
Harry Potter And The Goblet Of Fire [2005] | ![Harry Potter And The Goblet Of Fire [2005]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/5196PQ96X9L._SL160_.jpg)
 enlarge | Director: Mike Newell
Actors: Daniel Radcliffe, Maggie Smith, Timothy Spall, Rupert Grint, Emma Watson
Studio: Warner Home Video
Category: DVD
List Price: £10.99
Buy Used: £2.39
You Save: £8.60 (78%)
New (12) Used (12) from £2.39
Rating:  28 reviews
Sales Rank: 1427
Format: Pal, Widescreen
Languages: Arabic (Subtitled), English (Subtitled), Greek (Subtitled), Icelandic (Subtitled), English (Original Language)
Rating: Suitable for 12 years and over
Region: 2
Aspect Ratio: 1.78:1
Number Of Discs: 1
Running Time: 150 Minutes
Shipping Weight (lbs): 0.2
Dimensions (in): 7.4 x 5.4 x 0.6
EAN: 7321900593885
ASIN: B000G8P26S
Theatrical Release Date: 2005
Release Date: July 24, 2006
Availability: Usually dispatched within 1-2 business days
Condition: Ex-rental, disc and case in good working order.
| |
| Similar Items:
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 23 more reviews...
 The best and darkest yet!! August 19, 2008
N. Thompson (Hull, England)
Upto now I have quietly enjoyed the first 3 movies although they were nothing special. In previous reviews I gave all of them 3/5 and to be honest up until the final 20 minutes I was about to award the same for 'the Goblet of Fire'. The finale' certainly makes this film and we see Lord Voldermort at his evil best. Actually, it is a darker more absorbing film than the others and carries on in a similar vien to 'The Prisoner of Askaban'. The downside to this film is that it does drag on for a bit but that doesnt really bother you until you watch it again. For your children, they will find this scarier than the others .... but not too scary. Enjoyable for kids, enjoyable for adults.
 The big plot hole March 28, 2008
Francesca Cook (England)
0 out of 1 found this review helpful
The film itself is well shot and the effects are very good which almost goes without saying these days. The script is plain and lacking any kind of natural dialogue, and the acting is of the usual wooden standard but the well known adults make up for that. But what about the story itself?
Well when I read the book, and then in the film, it struck me early on that alarm bells should have been ringing when Harry's name magically appears in the Tri Wizard Tournament. If it's been known to be fatal in the past and that the tasks are extremely dangerous even for older students, well if we consider that Lord V is intent on killing Harry isn't it likely there's a connection? Nobody sees this. And the whole goblet port-key issue is overlooked as well, as if nobody had a brain in their head to see that coming. And why does it take a convenient school year to have just three events? And if Harry's so important in the fight against a resurgent Voldermort how come nobody in authority tries to help him along even if that means he can't officially 'win' the tournament? Surely surviving it is more important? He didn't want to be in it, he's too young, he's too important, and we're all too stupid. Poor book, poor film, poor series!
The Best Ever Potter November 27, 2007
Stampy (England)
Many critics have questioned whether young Daniel Radcliffe is up to the task of creating the passion of the central protagonist from J.K Rowling's series. Personally I believe he is performing well as the young troubled wizard and this film showed Radcliffe again rising to the occasion to prove he will do whatever it takes to make Potter an interesting character.
Radcliffe stars as Potter who is forced to compete in an ancient magical competition, the Triwizard tournament, only someone put Potter's name in the Goblet of Fire, so he has no choice but to compete in deadly tasks that will see him tested to the extreme.
I'm a big fan of the Potter books and this is my all time favourite Potter book, so I was a bit unsure about seeing the film as it may have taken away some of the imagination from the book. As usual many scenes are cut away from the book but also as usual, many scenes are brought to breathe taking life, especially the Dragon scene and the lake task which were visually and emotionally stunning with on the edge of your seat entertainment.
The films keep getting darker and none more so than the ending to this film which is very powerful and shocking to the system and the most deadly anticipated return of the series.
One element of the films which I'm not too happy with is the character appearances. The first two films shone for me by having regular appearances of the favourite characters from the books, Draco Malfoy, Hagrid and Professor McGonagall. Now they are hardy in the films which are a real shame as they are able to provide more interesting scenes between them.
Its minimal criticism however for a brilliantly visual and moving tale about the teenage wizard, with many laughs and excitement for the whole family.
with many twists, turns, magical creatures and laughs, it is the most engaging Potter film there ever will be
 Poor November 9, 2007
Christopher Withers
2 out of 3 found this review helpful
I'm in the position of seeing all the released films first, and only now am I reading the books (misguidedly I filed them as children's books and so overlooked them, a mistake I made with 'his dark materials trilogy' too!)
First time I saw this film, although slightly disjointed, it was an entertaining way to spend a few hours. The film contained a lot more action then the previous films, and a lot less character development. But the tri-wizard tournament and CGI was enough for me to enjoy the film.
I recently finished the book, and yesterday decided to give the film another watch - and I wished that I hadn't. In light of what I know now, the film absolutely reduces the story to a few scenes which aren't even perfectly joined together. Many of the characters have actually changed their personality. Dumbledore is more moody and seems to be quite bumbling, and for all Snape does, he could be removed from the film (although it's always great to see him). Krum is a totally different character, rather than the sulky, quite unattractive, big nosed teenage from the book - he is now some brutish, physical beefcake. Such changes happen to most characters, and also, most of the story has been removed (along with quite a few characters from the book).
Without the book, the ending is quite confusing, and many of the dark and negative sections have been made happy and jovial: "oh no, Voldemort back!" grins harry as the recent terrible traumas slide off him and happy music plays as he skips down the corridor with Ron and Hermione at the end.
In conclusion, yes I'm being critical in light of the book, but it's hard not to be. If you have never read the books, then it is an entertaining film (although somewhat shallower than the earlier films). If you have read the book, the film suddenly becomes a near disjointed mess with changed characters and missing scenes.
Not as good as the first 3 September 6, 2007
C. Hayward (Kent, England)
3 out of 5 found this review helpful
I love Harry Potter, i want to say lots of good things but to be honest i felt cheated when watching this film. Films with a lots of detailed thought put in them at the planning stage tend to end up being really well done, and evidently the creative decisons during the planning of this film have not been thought through, it is as if all the budget has been spent on expensive CG shots and not on charactorisation, or exposition, which leaves the film emotionally unsatisfying.
Because of these flaws i will mentioned them first. The first big mistake in this film, i think, is the choice of director, Mike Newell ( four weddings and a funeral) his style seems to be well suited to charactor driven adult movies, but the sense that he was out of his depth here never leaves the film. i felt that several scenes felt as if there was loads cut out of them leaving the film feeling rushed and slopply edited together. Directorial decisions were made which were in wrong context to the books and other movies ( Dumbledore coming across as agressive and frustrated) and i kept feeling as if the "lens" this film was shot with was " its for kids" and not for " young adults" , in other words i just felt like an adult watching a film about kids, instead of feeling enthralled and caught up in the action and emotion and magic as if i was a child right there at hogwarts with harry, like i felt with the first three movies.
I think the decision to have no muggle related scenes at the beggining prevented the movie from having a grounding and therefore it does not invite you ( the audience) along for the ride.
I felt as if the director had never produced a big a budget CG driven blockbuster like this and made many mistakes that i feel shouldn't be made at this level of film making. The decision to have huge panoramic scenes and huge C G scenes when there is no emotional context to them dilute the movie, and this film has tons, and, as i said at the expense of charactorisation and plot development. The only CG scene that really carries its emotional weight is voldemorts' return, where the CG really supports the scene rather than dimishes it.
Instead of feeling a mystery unfolding around you that keeps you glued to you seat until the end, like the first 3 films did, this film feels like the 3 trials glued together by a string of scenes that really don't do much, in other words the sub plots did not go any where and tie the film together at the end.
This being said the good elements are in there in abundance and beautifully done, The casting choices for Cedric Diggory and Fleur Delacour, are excellent and Ralph Fiennes is truely terrifying as Voldemort, his blend of arrogance, thugishness and cruel intelligence come across very convincingly ( i wouldn't let my kids watch this film) he truely is haunting, The CG when it done is good and what you have come to expect from a big budget film, but it is really the emotional details that lets this film down, decisions made at the drawing board level that in the end let the film down. I was left with the feeling as if each scene was supposed to be much longer but it had to be cut down at the editing stage, i wouldn't be surprised if theres half a movie lying on the cutting room floor.
David Tennant( Dr Who) cast as a barty crounch Jr, i think is a casting mistake, he is a great actor, but he is a leading man, and in this place ( a minor supporting role) i think he was miscast, and its little decisions like this that left me with a slighty cheated feeling through out.
i was left several times feeling as if it was " assumed" at the screen writing stage and by the movies makers, that the majority of the audience would have read the book, this may be so, but i think you owe to the audience to weave the story from start to finish and leave the audience satisfied.Obviously its impossible to make the film exactly as the book, but if you are going to include the subplots, then they should be done justice to.
I won't hear a bad thing said about the main three, Grint, Watson, and Radcliff, as really they are still young inexperienced actors and when people fault find with their perfomances they seem to be missing the point, you can't expect oscar winning perfomances from them and knowing this you can accept them for where they are at this stage of development as actors, i think Radcliff, Grint and Watson make Harry, Ron and Hermonie as lovable and sweet as ever, and if any fingers should be pointed at this film it should be at the movie makers, not the actors.
This being said, its not un enjoyable, its just not up to the standard of the first three, or film number 5 OOTP.
However if you are a Harry Potter fan, you not going to not like the film, but compared to the others and as a standalone film much could have been improved here.
|
|
|
InsideTheMarket.co.uk | | Buy With Confidence |
Secure Checkout by Amazon.com
Your order is secure
and backed by Amazon's
A-to-Z Guarantee
which guarantees your purchase, the condition of the item you buy, and
its timely delivery. |
|
|
|
