The Goblet of Fire Doesn't Burn So Bright

When I saw "Harry Potter and The Prisoner of Azkiban" a few years back I walked out of the theater feeling disappointed. I felt director Alfonso Couran traded in substance for style. The film lacked a certain amount of depth towards the plot and the characters. Now having just seen "The Goblet of Fire" I am feeling many of the same emotions.

I didn't think it was possible but this Potter film felt even more rushed than its predecessor. New director Mike Newell does an excellent job of providing plenty of humor (as expected), showcasing the awkwardness and insecurity of the films pubescent teens. But he tells the story so superficially, just trying to get as much of the story out in the time allotted. The plot feels like it is going through boot camp, being pushed and shoved along with little down time for reflection. Obviously much had to be cut from the book for the big screen (primarily the Rita Skeeter part and the Quidditch World Cup) and so once again one feels that if a viewer has not read the book he/she is left with a multitude of questions. And even having read the 4th novel I was left pondering certain aspects merely alluded to and trying to understand why certain scenes and plot elements were changed for the film (why doesn't the winner of the Tri-Wizard Tournament not get 1000 Galleons?). These cuts are mostly for time, as it is believed that children wont sit through a three hour film. Yet I seem to remember quite a few kids in the theater around the ages of 9-12 when I saw The Lord of The Rings films in theaters. And though it was 10 o'clock on a Saturday night in Israel I also noticed that there was not one child in the sold out audience for Potter. One can only hope that Newell and producer Chris Columbus (who brilliantly directed the first two films) will take a page out of the book of Peter Jackson and release a directors cut of the film, adding a good deal of footage and thereby elevating the overall quality and enjoyment level of the movie .

Fortunately the film is full of excellent acting. Rupert Gint and Emma Watson perfectly bring to life Ron and Hermoine, and one can already see the romantic comedic delight their relationship will bring to the final three films. James and Oliver Phelps ARE Fred and George Weasely providing comic relief that will hopefully continue in the next film. Hogwarts Professors Snape (Alan Rickman) and McGonogall (Maggie Smith) are along for the ride once more, though with little to do, yet they still play there roles aptly. Brendan Gleeson is delightful in a creepy way as Mad-Eye Mooney, and though the CGI felt somewhat fake and misdirected Ralph Fiennes does a fine job of reincarnating the evil Lord Voldemort. Unfortunately I, as were many of the people in the theater, was once again irritated by Michael Gambon as professor Dumbledore. He just lacks the boyish charm that makes the Hogwarts Headmaster so pure and trustworthy, a trait that the late Richard Harris possessed. As Dumbledores part grows more significant in the next two films the producers must find a way to smooth over much of the rigidity that Gambon brings to the part, or in the best case scenario, simply find a new Dumbledore (I'd like to see Michael Caine). Gambon in this part is hurting the films.

A huge, and very noticeable absence in this film is the music of legendary composer John Williams. Williams' scores have been key in bringing a great deal of magic to the Potter films. I noticed half-way through the picture that I didn't find myself being carried along by the films music, and quickly remembered why. In fact the main motif of the previous films (known as "Hedwigs Theme") isn't heard until the closing credits. That is like having a "Star Wars" movie not open with their famous William tune (feel free to hum it now. I am.)

The film centers around Harry's tasks in the Tri-Wizard tournament, and the scenes involving Harry and his competitors (including a surprisingly generic looking Fleur Delacour), and for the most part the don't disappoint. They provide for a good deal of excitement, and help the flow of the film. Yet I was left yearning for more plot development, more character insight, more of the book brought to life (it would have been nice to meet Ron's brother Charlie in this film), more "fun" scenes between the three young friends (though there is a nice bit of nostalgia with them and Hagrid in a late night walk into the Forbidden Forrest), ....just more. But I guess this is what to expect when adapting an 800 page book: a bare to the bone stripping of all but the essentials. But it is the added extras of the books story lines, the "little things" if you will, that make them so enjoyably addicting, and what has made the last two installments so lacking.

I was glad that I got to see the movie with two good friends of mine (And their respective women). It might be the last time I get to spend time with both of them together for quite a while. For anyone who knows me, going to the movies isn't only about the film and the theater, but also who you watch it with (I can still remember who I've seen every movie with :) And I'm glad that I got to see this movie with two of my oldest and best friends.
So I was once again disappointed with a Harry Potter movie (which I think I'll enjoy more upon a second viewing as I did with the previous film because my expectations will be insignificant and I can just enjoy the film as it is, not what I want it to be). Yet there was enough comedy, excitement and viewing companionship to make the overall experience an enjoyable one.