I literally got up and walked out after this scene

I never watched the last two movies but story wise they're just typical good wizards vs bad wizards but the bigger draw of the movies is the world / atmosphere which is consistent across all movies and admittedly very comfy.

>ywn spend a Christmas at Hogwarts
Shame.

The films are lovingly made and it shines through in the final product. It's really comfy to watch as a sort of documentary with the kids all growing up (both the actors who progressively become more and more believable in their performances and also the characters who themselves become more multi dimensional in their relationships and as standalone characters). There is little pretense to the story, it's just classic good vs evil, coming of age, destiny/legacy/identity, all those fairy tale sort of tropes bundled up into one package that's easily digestible for young viewers but will still resonate very deeply with most of the adult audience too. The real appeal is in how the relationships between the characters mature - it feels really natural.

It is far above the quality of capeshit.

Thanks to you faggots I had to explain to my girlfriend why I started laughing like an autistic at the end of this movie when we were rewatching it.
I told her about sneed and we lost it when we were at her parents and her dad was watching football with a player named "SNEED" in it.

Attached: 1650827956150.gif (498x266, 610.2K)

The effect on Harry's face resembles the effect for when the dementors suck out his soul. However, in contrast to his experiences with the dementors, Harry is happy in this shot.

This is the only movie in the entire series that is heavily stylistic, the use of lots of practical effects, the quiet still shots, the dynamic camera, the use of mirrors and windows to introduce scenes, the dutch angles, the tropicalized humor (Like the shrunken head in the Knight Bus or the Fat Lady scenes), blur effects were one of these many stylistic choices, in this case like mentions it was done to contrast the final scene with the dementors, throughout the movie Harry is accosted by the dementors and the blurring effect is always used to convey their evil influence, in this scene the dementors are gone and Harry has reconnected with his godfather, so the blur effect is taken back and now means something positive.

Agreed, it was too much for me. I left the theatre and haven’t watched a Potter film since.

In general no, but it kinda varies with each movie.
GoF is a fucking travesty, somehow right after making the best movie in the franchise they made the worst one, the cinematography is boring, the story meanders about, the characters have zero personality and literally nothing happens.
OotP is a weird movie, it has extreme GoF-level lows, but the final act is absolute kino and the villain couldn't have been cast better.
HBP isn't quite as bad as GoF but it is definitely a weaker OotP.
DHp1 is shit, it takes the worst, most boring parts of the book and reproduces them in painstaking detail, ironically the only good things in it are the things they made up specifically for the movie.
cDHp2 is decent, it is the most capeshit-ish of all the movies, but it has a good payoff.
Fantastic Beasts is the only one of the prequel series worth watching, it's plagued by the generic Yeates art design but the story itself feels like it harkens back to early Harry Potter and is just a fun romp.
Crimes of Grindelwald and Secrets of Dumbledore are the only films in the series I would advise to actively avoid.

kek, you dorks act like you are USC film students when you watch a preteen wizard movie series. Give me a detailed thesis about a coloring book next, lol.

>GoF is a fucking travesty, somehow right after making the best movie in the franchise they made the worst one, the cinematography is boring, the story meanders about, the characters have zero personality and literally nothing happens.
>OotP is a weird movie, it has extreme GoF-level lows, but the final act is absolute kino and the villain couldn't have been cast better
You are crazy. Fiennes' Voldemort nosedives in quality and sense of threat in OOTP. His presence was much better in Goblet. Goblet is the best one, you're a pleb.

Perhaps in your world of battery-sucking redneck what I said sounds like it requires a film degree, IRL I barely finished high school and went straight into a trade instead of going to college and the things I mentioned are very easy to notice if you just watch PoA and compare it to CoS or GoF, like how scenes often fade in and out like those old movies, the director clearly wanted to give the franchise an old timey feel.

You should have walked out much earlier, so as not to suffer through the dullest franchise in the history of movie franchises. Seriously each episode following the boy wizard and his pals from Hogwarts Academy as they fight assorted villains has been indistinguishable from the others. Aside from the gloomy imagery, the series’ only consistency has been its lack of excitement and ineffective use of special effects, all to make magic unmagical, to make action seem inert.

Perhaps the die was cast when Rowling vetoed the idea of Spielberg directing the series; she made sure the series would never be mistaken for a work of art that meant anything to anybody?just ridiculously profitable cross-promotion for her books. The Harry Potter series might be anti-Christian (or not), but it’s certainly the anti-James Bond series in its refusal of wonder, beauty and excitement. No one wants to face that fact. Now, thankfully, they no longer have to.

>a-at least the books were good though
"No!"
The writing is dreadful; the book was terrible. As I read, I noticed that every time a character went for a walk, the author wrote instead that the character "stretched his legs."

I began marking on the back of an envelope every time that phrase was repeated. I stopped only after I had marked the envelope several dozen times. I was incredulous. Rowling's mind is so governed by cliches and dead metaphors that she has no other style of writing. Later I read a lavish, loving review of Harry Potter by the same Stephen King. He wrote something to the effect of, "If these kids are reading Harry Potter at 11 or 12, then when they get older they will go on to read Stephen King." And he was quite right. He was not being ironic. When you read "Harry Potter" you are, in fact, trained to read Stephen King.

Attached: D42EB247-66AA-41B8-89F6-A164340E1DBE.jpg (828x1483, 1.04M)

Goblet of Fire is really fucking boring and how the fuck can Voldemort be threatening if he's a fucking dying fetus for 95% of the runtime? The only decent scene in that entire movie is the cemetery one, and even that could have been much better with better direction.
OotP is not a good movie, but you cannot deny the fact that Umbridge is by far the best villain of the series, and the final battle between Dumbledore and Voldemort completely beats anything that came before it.

Don Quixote is great conceptually, but there is no way in hell you're going to make me read that fucking tome ever again.

>Calls other people stupid rednecks
>in the same post brags about being in 'the trades' and barely finishing high school
>in a thread where he is seething about the cinematography of a children's movie.

Triple fucking kek. Please be real.