12 comments on “James Is BACK Part 2

  1. Re-casting Deadpool would be slap in the face to Reynolds. He was hard at work on ‘Green Lantern’ and helped with the script to this film, so it would be done right. Re-casting the character would be like saying “We appreciate your hard work, but fuck you, were going with someone else.”

    Actors can be replaced, but what can’t be replaced is Reynold’s passion for the character. Unlike most actors, he’s actually a huge fan of the character he plays.

    As for the Green Lantern suit, I like. It’s also incomplete.

    The film I enjoyed most of the summer was ‘Scott Pilgrim’. ‘Predators’ was decent, but was left the theater unsatisfied.


  2. Ah I saw 4 movies this summer lol, well Prince of Persia and The A-Team was both pretty entertaining. Waiting to see Inception.

  3. Do NOT see The Last Airbender. Now I personally don’t review movies based off how well they compare to the original, but at least the show had character development, story arc, entertaining action sequences, a fast pace, all things missing from this movie.

    • Hiya Shane,

      No fighting, weve established that discussing movies here is done for pure fun =]

      A dramatic fight scene would have been a better scene to follow his death then the disrespectful 3 teenagers sitting in his office talking to each other with zero emotion even though Dumbledore just died

      The movie is based off the book. If they make a movie about the Cat and the Hat, with no Cat, but instead a 90 minute biography of Thing 1 and 2- one could say “well the movie should stand on its own, not based off the book” (Campea)

      When a movie is based off a book, the movie should be a short summarized version of the book- that explains the main idea and leaves out the irrelevant factors. HP didnt do that.

      Is the army Voldemort is building important to the story?
      Is Lavenders relationship with Ron important to the story?

      Now, think about this- who had more screen time in Half Blood Prince- Lavender, or Voldemort? How many times was Voldemort on screen? But how many times did they show Hermione cry about her relationship with Ron? Is the teenage drama necessary? I think so- should it be more emphasized then the Death Eaters and Dumbledore’s Army? No.

      In the movie they never even talked about the Half Blood Prince, they just mentioned him once, in the beginning and in the last scene.

      How can you POSSIBLY review a movie like HP, and not take into consideration the book? The HP movies have SO MANY PLOT HOLES, the only reason theyre not talked about is because weve all read the books and we know the answers in the back of our heads.

      The HP movies make no sense whatsoever, they never decided to explain any of it like the books did. But no one ever questions it because they read the books.

      If you REALLY want to review the Harry Potter movies without taking the books into consideration, then you should take into account that the movie by itself is senseless to an insulting level. The amount of plotholes in these movies are staggering. But i dont mind that, the only thing that ticks me off is that Voldemort had one scene in the last movie (a fucking flashback) and every other irrelevant teenager had all the spotlight


      • First thing: You commented on the wrong post LOL

        Second, there are several critics who have not read the book and have watched the film and gave it a positive review or even praised it. And the actual sixth book is a set-up for the seven, so they set things up for the next film. We don’t need to go into every single detail in order to understand that Voldemort has something that is keeping him alive. They explain it plain enough.

        Going back to what you said about them acting like nothing happened at the end, in the book they didn’t spend days crying about it. That’s why the scene where Dumbledore is lying there dead is there, so you can get a reaction then. For example when my Grandfather died, sure I cried on the day it happened, but I didn’t spend the next couple of days crying non stop. Plus that scene is to establish that Harry is following what Dumbledore wanted him to do, which is find the horcruxes and defeat Voldemort. Plus you still feel that they are sad by the look on their faces and the way their lines are said.

        I’m pretty sure that they didn’t have Hermione cry most of those scenes. She only cried once. Plus, its juxtaposing something that happens in real life. When people are in war we hear about things, but we don’t see it. It was the same way in the book.

        As far as the Half Blood Prince goes, they didn’t talk too much about it. But then again they didn’t talk too much about the actual Order of Phoenix did they? Nor did they talk about the actual Goblet of Fire did they? Hell, they could have just called the fourth book Harry Potter and the Triwizard Tournament, or the fifth book The Department of Mysteries.

        As I stated in my previous entry, there are now two roads you can take, the road of the books and the road of the films. I think the books are written well for what they give and I think the movies do a great job for what they set out to do. But in the end it comes from the same place: someone’s mind. I’m not saying that filmmakers are better than the books, but for they set out to accomplish they do what they have to do.

      • thats why its bad to have like 45 windows open at once. LEARN from my mistakes!

        How come Voldemort cant just go in Harry’s house and kill him and his uncle and aunt?
        why does he need horcruxes if he already lives forever?
        How can Harry POSSIBLY find horcruxes if Dumbledore never even told him where to look, what they look like, or who the people are that has them?
        What was the point of visiting child Voldemort back in time if 1) that horcrux was already found and 2) dumbledore never explained to him there was a horcrux on that memory to even BEGIN with.
        Why doesnt the ministry of magic overrun the Death Eaters?
        Arent there dementors guarding Azkaban? If so- why do people keep escaping. If they are against us, why doesnt the ministry do something.

        All of those questions- answered in the books. But according to the movies, Harry is going to figure out that Salazar Slitherin owned a horcrux without Dumbledore’s help, because hes dead.

        These movies where SLAPPED together.

        in the book harry YELLS and CRIES “DUMBLEDORE!” and weeps over his dead body with Hagrid. In the movie they pointed their wands at the sky.
        In the book there was a funeral that was composed of every living creature, in the book i guess dumbledore doesnt deserve a funeral.

        thats the problem. they DIDNT talk much about the goblet of fire. they DIDNT talk much about the Order. That whole movie was about him loving cho, and in the last 20 minutes they rushed voldemort in.

        The movies have little sense, all it takes is a person that likes to ask questions to notice how much shit is wrong with those movies.

        The first two movies where good, because there wasnt much story depth to fuck up, but once they reached the third one, they got pants-over-head retarded


      • We don’t need to know why his aunt and uncle aren’t being hunted, its irrelevant to the story. As for the horcruxes its never said in the movies themselves that Voldemort can live forever so it doesn’t affect the film, and Harry has to figure out where they are in the book. As for trying to figure out what they are, they’ll probably do something in the next movie explaining it all. All those questions have to do whats in the book not what’s in the movie.

        Plus the next movie will probably end up opening with the funeral of Dumbledore. Again, not to sound mean, but you are focusing more with what isn’t in the film rather than what is. You’re not looking at it as a film, you’re looking at it as an adaptation. You haven’t stated anything about the film itself that has backed up that its a bad movie based on its acting, story, character development, the list goes on and on.

        You bring up the first movies, movies that were criticized for being TOO faithful to the book, where as everything afterward has gotten better reception. The Prisoner of Azkaban is a perfect example of how you should adapt material, where you keep the theme and the basic plot of the film intact while still bending things and making them your own. You can continue to say what you will about what is cut out, but in the end you haven’t mentioned anything that HBP was bad as an overall FILM.

  4. His uncle and aunts safety IS relevant, Harry LIVES there. Whats to stop him from knocking on the door?
    Maybe they can do “flashbacks” of Dumbledore explaining it to harry. I fucking guess?
    in the movie they never went over what the hell Harry’s supposed to do. Maybe in the movie theyll have dumbledore leave harry a letter filled with directions.

    Fine, Harry Potter the books never hapened. Its just a movie based on itself.
    the following questions come from the POV of someone who never read the books, only watched the movies:

    So now i ask this, if Dumbledore is the only one tasked in retreiving horcruxes, how will Harry know what the hell hes doing? Why didnt voldemort just go to Hogwarts right after Dumbledore was killed and kill all the kids? According to the movie, the only thing stopping voldemort from entering hogwarts is dumbledore. So why did they retreat after he died. Why didnt voldemort kill harry right after dumbledore died? especially if harry stayed in school like nothing happened?
    How did Sirius die? how could voldemort POSSIBLY get the order of the phoenix’s location and get him to go to the ministry? because apparently in the movie Voldemort never tortures people for info or has inside job death eaters or anything.

    Why are people so scared of voldemort? sometimes you hear things about him and some army, but i always see the same 3 death eaters and him hiding somewhere. if only the movie emphesized more on this “army” (of like 3, in the book there where hundreds)

    HBP was a bad movie because the 2nd main character, Voldemort had 1 scene in it. It was bad because its called the HALF BLOOD PRINCE, yet… the HALF BLOOD PRINCE HIMSELF is mentioned twice in it. Luna Lovegood, Lavender and Neville, all INDIVIDUALLY have 3 times more lines and screen time then Voldemort. It missed the emotion, action, and suspense the trailer led me to believe it had.


    • I never said that any of those were irrelevant to the books, and I never stated that you should go in thinking that the books aren’t real. But within the whole context in the movies they are irrelevant and yes you can go in knowing this is based off the books, hell I know that everytime I go to see the Harry Potter films because I am a fan of the books. But you gotta go in knowing that there are going to be changes.

      But I can answer some of those questions for you.

      It is never explained in the MOVIES why Voldemort goes after his uncle and aunt, but then again we are never told in the MOVIES that he knows anything about Harry’s uncle or aunt or even Dudley.

      As for finding out the tasks that lay ahead with the horcruxes, Harry’s not an idiot. He knows what they are and what they do and he could probably figure out what to do with them. Plus as you stated they could put something in there where Harry learns through something what the horcruxes are.

      Why did the death eaters escape after killing Dumbledore? The same reason why murderers flee after having killed someone, they don’t want to get caught and go back to Azkaban or whatever. I know your gonna bring up the fact that the dementors are on the dark side, well that’s not said in the movie. In the book, yes, in the movie, no. As for Voldemort, Draco was put to the task, plus, if Harry knows about the horcruxes, he could have fled to find them. Voldemort doesn’t know everything.

      The death of Surius was pretty much laid out for us to interpret. As for the Order, you noticed how they got to it in the fifth film? It’s hidden behind the other houses once you go in, and as far as we know the villain hasn’t figured out where the headquarters are.

      They show you in the front of the film and in the previous movies why we fear Voldemort and his army. As for the army itself and hearing about it, I’ve already stated it in my last post.

      All of these questions are there for the movie, the book has a different interpretation. Adaptation means change; it means to take something that has been given to you by the author and left to you to interpret as your own. That’s how adaptation have done for years. Lord of the Rings cut a good deal out and was done by fans of the material. The same can be said with Harry Potter. Most of the cast and crew (including the screenwriter) are fans of the book so they understand they are making changes, but that does not take away from the fact they are doing their best to make a great movie.

      As for the stuff you said about the movie itself, well, that’s just your opinion. Personally I loved the film for what it set out to do, it did have a good affect on me and for PG it was very dark. Just remember that they aren’t gonna put everything that was into the book into the film because what works in a novel doesn’t work in a movie sometimes. I mentioned that with the death of Dumbledore. Now while you may not have felt anything, for whatever your reasons are, it would not have worked if they followed up an emotional moment that affects all the characters and the audience with a huge battle, it wouldn’t have ended on the right note.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s