Mike Newell (1) (1942–)

The inexplicably tone-deaf casting aside (why is a mostly Caucasian American doing a British accent to play a Persian commoner turned prince?), this film is unfairly maligned. The visuals are quite lovely. The plot is rather nimble for its simplicity, and manages to keep a good pace while never being overly predictable (though it gets a bit too close at times). The action sequences, particularly the title character's acrobatics, are fun and give a different flair from most films of this show more type. And while the dialogue is nothing to write home about, the cast is largely good enough to make it work. Particularly, Alfred Molina is a delight, with him, the script and the director even managing to bring unexpected levels of emotional depth to his recurring line in its satisfyingly predictable (always a neat trick when you can pull it off) final iteration. show less

This review is from an adult who has NOT read the books. I find this film series wildly uneven and a bit mystifying for several reasons:

1) There are just way too many characters flitting in and out, and it isn't apparent what the importance (if any) of a lot of them is. Even if they are played by great actors, such as Gary Oldham, it is stilll confusing.
2) Did J.K. Rowling have any idea where the story was going when she started writing it? In so much of it, Voldemort is just an show more afterthought. We have long parts of the plot devoted to things such as the visit from the French school for wizards. What is that all about? How is it important to the overall plot? And don't even get me started on the episode when Hermoine and Ron are not on speaking terms with Harry. Since the relationship between them and the strenth of those actors is what pulls a viewer through the series despite the occasional mediocrity, this is maddening.
3) Why does everyone get married at the end? (Sorry; I'm jumping ahead to the last film, which isn't in this set!)
4) For an arch villain, Voldemort is not very interesting.
5) Why do some characters who seem so important at first, such as the Malfoys, have a distinct lack of screen time toward the end of the series?

I could go on, but you're probably mad enough at me already. What makes the films worth watching is the actors, especially Daniel Radcliffe, who has the toughest job and manages to pull it off, even while growing up in the process. Hermoine is also good, but annoying--why does the female character seem to always inherit that role? Ron is well played, but falls short of Sam in The Lord of the Rings as a best friend. Lots of the supporting cast are stellar--too many in fact to name. Even some of the ones whose purpose I have no idea of... show less

This is where the series starts to get much darker as the rise of Voldemort begins. The director makes the good decision to focus on the competition and avoid the school aspects to a large extent.

The film is very well done, in my view. It keeps close to the important parts of the plot of the book while - inevitably - cutting out some storylines, and cutting down on others. It's two and a half hours long, and quite intense. I felt myself very tense at times. Some of the action scenes were so rapid that I had to close my eyes, but that's not necessarily a bad thing.

I think I would recommend this film overall, to anyone who likes the books or has seen the earlier films. It would rather show more be confusing for anyone who knew nothing about Harry Potter, however.

I deliberately didn't watch most of the climax at the end, knowing what was coming. Just listening was more than sufficient - and it was well done.

Latest longer review: https://suesdvdreviews.blogspot.com/2023/10/harry-potter-and-goblet-of-fire-dani... show less