Gene Shalot, ABC movie critique thought it was the best
of the HP series. He did mention that some might be
bothered by some of the changes, but several of the
original actors have died, and so needed replacements.
He also mentioned that it is hard to reproduce a
500 plus page book into a movie that is only two hours
long. It is the screenwriters decision as to what to
put in from the book and want to leave out. Of course,
computer graphics, which were missing in the first
movie, are much more apparent in the realism of this
production, one the best being the flying horse in both
movies, it is much more believable in the present movie.

Tom L.L.
---------------------------------------------------

wrote:

It wasnt as good as the first. like MIB 2 wasnt as good as the original. but at
least they didnt put in a Kafkaeske overtones and make it an "edgier" movie.
a lot of the critics use terminology when describing this HP that is really a cover
for all that it lacks.
England is lush and green and foggy and that is why it is a good setting for magical,
for Stonehenge, for the Arthurian tales. Cuaron created this overly bright, rocky
steep sloped setting and light it so that every pimple shows. on everything.
everything looks old and old in a worn out and unloved way.
double yeck. Ingrid

"Benign Vanilla" wrote:

What about Shrek 2?

BV.





~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
List Manager: Puregold Goldfish List
http://puregold.aquaria.net/
www.drsolo.com
Solve the problem, dont waste energy finding who's to blame
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Unfortunately, I receive no money, gifts, discounts or other
compensation for all the damn work I do, nor for any of the
endorsements or recommendations I make.