Monday Morning Quarterback Part III
By BOP Staff
July 20, 2011
BoxOfficeProphets.com
Kim Hollis: With the entire Harry Potter franchise now completed, what are your grades for the various books and movies? Also, where do you think Harry Potter ranks amongst the greatest film franchises in movie history?
Edwin Davies: I haven't read the books recently enough to really assess them, and my opinions of them are heavily clouded by the nostalgia of being at school and the communal experience of reading them at the same time as my friends, but based on these biased memories of them, I'd probably give all of them As, with the exception of Order of the Phoenix, which would get an A minus, and Deathly Hallows which, almost solely on the cringe-inducing epilogue, would get the worst grade imaginable; an A minus MINUS. So yeah, I like them a lot.
The films I've seen much more recently, so I can offer a more specific breakdown.
Films:
Sorcerer's Stone: B-
Chamber of Secrets: C+
Prisoner of Azkaban: A
Goblet of Fire: C-
Order of the Phoenix: A-
Half-Blood Prince: A
Deathly Hallows Part 1: A-
Deathly Hallows Part 2: A
I think that the film series stands alone in film history since I can't think of a series that remained relatively consistent in terms of quality, and undoubtedly consistent in terms of popularity, for such a long period and for so many instalments. I do think that Azkaban and David Yates' films in the series can hold their own as some of the finest fantasy cinema ever made.
The franchise as a whole is the Star Wars of my generation, which is more than can be said of the Star Wars films that actually were made for my generation.
Brett Beach: The books - I can't break them down individually all that well (I have only read them each once), but I want to elaborate on my personal feeling towards the series as a whole. Round about 2002, when I had heard enough praise from people I respected to want to read the series, I also knew that I would not want to wait a year between installments if I liked them as much as I thought I would. Thus, being the deferrer of pleasure that I am, I waited until the release date for Deathly Hallows was announced and then three months prior, I started in on Sorcerer's Stone and pushed on through to Half Blood Prince. I got the final book delivered from Amazon on opening day (I still have the awesomely cute packaging it came in hanging in my cube at work) and "spaced it out" over 48 hours, managing to avoid the internet and all spoilers for that period.
In sum, the book series was everything I could have hoped it would be. It made me feel like a kid discovering a world of wonder and magic again and then growing up along with the characters as they got older and their troubles became more worldly and overwhelming. Finishing Deathly Hallows, I was able to appreciate how beautifully Rowling seemed to have the entire series mapped out from the start, tying the threads together at the end both skilfully and emotionally. (I loved the epilogue and found it both poignant and appropriate).
For the films - I too am amazed at the consistent quality of all the films (haven't see DH Part 2 yet) but I find The Prisoner of Azkaban to be both the best of the series and one of the best films of last decade. Alfonso Cuaron managed to find a tone somewhere between his magical A Little Princess and his sultry Y Tu Mama Tambien (which shouldn't generically be possible). From the opening shot of an adolescent Harry "practicing magic" under the covers of his bed to the time-tripping wrap-up, it shaded darker and deeper than the first two installments and began the difficult process of helping the characters and actors grow up (which David Yates helped drive home during his reign).
Samuel Hoelker: I grew up with the books and read each one multiple times in lieu of reading other literature. I even read Goblet of Fire millions of times, despite me not liking it as much when it came out. It's been a while since I've read the series straight through, but I constantly struggle with the actual quality of the books vs. the rose-colored glasses through which I view them. I treat them like a little brother - I'll make fun of Rowling's writing, awful character motivations, etc. as much as I want, but I'll attack anyone who dares speak ill of the series.
Outside of the first two, I've not seen any of the films since their theatrical releases. I've found all of them to be perfectly cromulent yet unremarkable and unfortunately forgettable. I don't know if it's because I'm not a diehard Potter fan, if my expectations are too high, or if they're simply average movies. I think it would be hard for someone who comes in blind to be enraptured with the franchise and be content with the films, and I feel like that should be their goal. Then again, the films do have a magical lure, whether it be from my childhood, my want to be part of a cultural zeitgeist, or my wish to be a wizard. For me, the films work on a whole, not individually (almost opposite of the books for me).
I think it's too early to tell Potter's place in cinema history. We'll have to see if the youths of the future, who will be less and less likely to have read the series, are as enraptured by it as we were. I think it depends on how much Potter stays in the pop culture in general. J.K. Rowling has the chance to keep Harry Potter as, well, the biggest thing in the world in the next few years. If the cards are played right, it may even be the biggest thing throughout our entire lives.
Jason Lee: Mark my words, this franchise will be a cultural touchstone for a generation. The combined power of the seven books and eight movies will make sure that the tale of Harry Potter will live on for years and years to come. I'm willing to bet that 25 years from now, a good number of people will still recognize reference to Wingardium Leviosa. As for the movies and books, I'd say that the best three books were Deathly Hallows (amazing wrap up to an amazing journey), Goblet of Fire (fantastic year-long integration of the Triwizard Cup arc into the story) and Half-Blood Prince (riveting back-story on Voldemort/Tom Riddle), in that order. The best movies, IMO, were Goblet of Fire (strongest story, strongest adaptation), Order of the Phoenix (best acting performances in the franchise) and Chamber of Secrets (most satisfying as a stand-alone picture), again in that order.
Joshua Pasch: For anecdotal purposes, I thought the world should know that I was apparently a child without a heart and no imagination for magic, as I gave up on book three when I was supposed to be JK's wheelhouse reader. Instead, my college roommate got me to give the series another chance at love when I was 21 years old. And love it I did. Here are my book ratings:
Sorcerer's Stone: A (for setting up the world)
Chamber of Secrets: B+ (docked points for introducing Dobby)
Azkaban: A- (for introducing werewolves. seriously, who saw that coming?)
Goblet of Fire: B+ (docked points for being a book that feels elementary in scale compared to the others. a tournament? really, how could the stakes feel big enough?; wins back respectability for having maybe the best finale of all seven books).
Order of the Phoenix: A+ (for introducing Umbridge, one of modern literature's most bad-ass villains. she is so evil)!
Half-Blood Prince: A (props for keeping me guessing until the very end on who the half-blood prince is)
Deathly Hallows: A- (comes as close as it could to giving something so momentous as the final comeuppance for Voldemort. those are high expectations to try satisfy).
As for the films, the grading is a bit harsher:
Sorcerer's Stone: B (points for introducing a world that felt magical when I saw it 10 years ago and was a little kid; docked points for not holding up over 10 years).
Chamber of Secrets: C+ (never feel any real excitement; this franchise needed a fresh director to add higher stakes moving forwards).
Akzaban: B+ (ask and you shall receive; Cuaron provides a much needed change of tone for the series and while some of it didn't quite work for me - the freeze frame on Harry at the end of the film is unfortunately imprinted in my mind - this was still the first sign that the movies could grow up with the books).
Goblet of Fire: B- (mostly docked points because the source material is also weak, but it fails to capture the chillingness of the Voldemort's re-birth in the graveyard).
Phoenix: A+ (Yates takes over and nails the fifth entry better than I could've hoped; my favorite moment in the ENTIRE franchise remains Harry yelling to Dumbledore "Look at me!!!!" as he channels his inner dark side. Amazing stuff. First time I really got chills from the movies).
Half-Blood Prince: A (Yates proves he's the friggin' man. His greatest accomplishment here was injecting comedy and hormones into the series with a deft touch. also he perfected the flying "raining ink" effect and uses is brilliantly in a climactic badle scene).
Deathly Hallows 1: A- (this entry reminds me a LOT of the first Lord of the Rings flick with lots of aimless wondering. But I like the three main actors so much, I didn't mind it one bit. also wins respect for making Dobby awesome - previously believed by scientists to have been impossible to achieve).
Among the greatest franchises, I think this is just tough to judge at this point. My disappointment in rewatching the first two films recently means that I really need to give it AT LEAST ten years before I can judge this entire thing with some level of perspective.
Matthew Huntley: I've never read the books, but I think now is as good a time as any to start. As for the movies, here are the grades (out of 10) I would give them, along with the rank, in brackets, of where they stand from best to worst in my opinion:
Sorcerer's Stone: 7/10 [#6]
Chamber of Secrets: 8/10 [#2]
Azkaban: 7/10 [#7]
Goblet of Fire: 9/10 [#1]
Order of the Phoenix: 6/10 [#8]
Half-Blood Prince: 7/10 [#4]
Deathly Hallows Part I: 7/10 [#5]
Deathly Hallows Part II: 8/10 [#3]
For me, anything above a 5 is recommendable, so I'd encourage anyone to watch any of the movies, and the entire series is very durable as far as quality is concerned. To give you a perspective on my grading, the reason I like Goblet of Fire the most is because it has the most emotion, character development and strongest plot. It was also this installment where I think the series took a darker, more serious turn and it paid off with our greater investment in the well-being of the characters (coincidentally, the tag line read, "Everything is about to change.").
Like so many others on this thread, I think overall Potter's greatness in film history will have to be measured at a later point. Because it created a world all its own, one with few references to the popular culture or technology of our real world, I think it's safe to say it will be timeless, but as far as re-watch value and influence, I leave my answer pending. Right now, in 2011, I think it's an amazing series in terms of how well it's made and I'm pretty sure I'll buy the entire set when it comes out. I hope I feel the same way in 10 years.
Max Braden: I haven't read any of the books. They should be my type of material but I think I was turned off by the epic length and heft of the volumes. I also have a general opinion of the movies as "pretty good but not memorable for me." I don't have much to criticize, and I'm happy for people who have been satisfied by the series, but it's just not something that moves me. I have a very vague recollection of what happened in each movie, but I do remember liking the darker mood enhanced by the directing and cinematography in Half-Blood Prince. I might say that I liked Deathly Hallows 1 the least because there was just so much moody angst in it that I thought they were coming dangerously close to appeasing the Twilight crowd. The series has come a good distance since the bright, cheery, adventurous mood of the Sorcerer's Stone.
Daron Aldridge: Samuel, with regards to Sorcerer’s Stone not selling a non-reader of the books on the world of Harry Potter, I disagree. Having not read a single page of any of the books, I was drawn in by the first movie but I admit that I watched at least the first three over a few days. So, it was more like a long movie-going experience that might not be attributed solely to Sorcerer's Stone. I bought into the magical world that Columbus offered and that the subsequent directors have shaped to fit the tone of the stories. For me, it was Chamber of Secrets that hooked me, though, and I agree with Jason that it was satisfying as stand-alone adventure.
Also, I think significant credit belongs to Steve Kloves for deftly handling the insurmountable task of adapting all the books to screenplays (except Order of the Phoenix), which equates to turning 3,230 pages published in the U.S. to 1,041 minutes of screen time. Truly awe-inspiring. My grades for the films would be:
Sorcerer’s Stone – B
Chamber of Secrets – A-
Prisoner of Azkaban – B+
Goblet of Fire – B
Order of the Phoenix – B+
Half-Blood Prince – B
Deathly Hallows: Part 1 – B+
Deathly Hallows: Part 2 – A
I am actually looking forward to reading the books now to get a bit more from Rowling’s creation that didn’t make it on the screen.