A - B - C - D - E - F - G - H - I - J - K - L - M - N - O - P - Q - R - S - T - U - V - W - X - Y - Z

After being greatly disappointed over Daniel Radcliffe's performance in HP and the Prisoner of Azkaban I dreaded the outcome of this film. In the book there are so many layers of Harry's feelings and thoughts, and I thought that if Radcliffe had not improved his acting skills in time for this one to be shot, there will be no hope left for the Harry Potter films.
Now I can be rest assured that all the rest of the films will be four of the greatest film experiences ever. They will be equal in quality as The Lord of the Rings.
Daniel Radcliffe was excellent. He was able to express fear and grief, he even managed to cry (which he embarrassingly enough was not able to do in the Prisoner of Azkaban)
This film is by far the best. It is hilarious, exciting, scary, and sad. The perfect balance. And the entrance of Lord Voldemort as a strong and real person was amazing. Now he is a real threat, to both Harry and the wizarding world. He is not just a fragment of a memory, he is real. This became very clear at the end of the Goblet of Fire.
All the things I thought was not so good in the book (the Quidditch World Cup, Dobby and Winky, the Spider at the end of the maze) has been removed. This pleased me. All the relevent facts and events from the book was succesfully inserted into the film which, in my opinion, made this the first film that is actually better than the book.
Another thing I found hard to imagine when I read the book, was Harry's feelings towards Cho. And equally hard to imagine was the complex relationship between Ron and Hermione. This was amazing to see "for real". The chemistry, which is hard even for more experienced actors to achieve, is remarkably achieved by these young actors. This was a little unexpected bonus for me, which I had not expected.
My conclusion is that in comparison to the other Harry Potter film, the books, and acting achievements, this is a masterpiece. And, please, all you who has no´t seen it yet...what are you waiting for!?

After the first three Harry Potter movies, I had my reservations (but also hopes) about the fourth. My impression afterward was the same good-and-bad as before, but here the movie was shorter and the material more demanding.
Daniel Radcliffe has matured with Harry into a believable character. His actions and expressions are less mechanical; Rupert Grint (Ron) is marvelous. I can't get used to Emma Watson's facial expressions and her Hermione seems either prissy or teary, not the acerbic, astute yet kind-hearted witch I consider her - and honestly, it's Pansy Parkinson who's supposed to wear the frilly pink dress at the Yule Ball!

The post-Richard Harris Dumbledore is disappointing. He can't figure out his accent or his moods and his clothes are effeminate and flimsy. Where are the rich robes and quiet authority that DEFINE Dumbledore?

Although I can understand that liberties must be taken to compress the storyline, I think Newell sacrificed the early events for more action during the Triwizard Tournament - but these were wasted on the first two tasks to show off special effects. The labyrinth was sadly bereft of anything but unpredictable hedges. Characters like Krum and Fleur became almost anonymous. Where is Fleur's hauteur? She's pretty, but without lines how can she be the snobby "look-at-me" princess. Krum is discussed (by Ron), but says hardly anything himself.

On a positive ending, the effects are spectacular, the music haunting; I would almost say the foreboding atmosphere has more impact than in the book. The acting improves with each movie; McGonagall, Fred and George, Neville and Mad-Eye add humour and a richer diversity to the film. Harry's adolescent struggles are pathetic and adorable by turns. It's no Oscar-winner, but definitely worth a trip to a big screen.