Harry Potter & The Deathly Hallows - Part 2

[chaseter]

I think the cover was orange/red and a lot of shots in the movie show Hogwarts burning with a orange/red hue.

The direction in OOTP-on concerning cinematography, set decoration, lighting, etc. have been amazing.

 

[Liam_H]

I'm not so sure. Mostly because EVERYONE in GOF was over-acting. It's like Newell came in and said "Okay everyone, get BIGGER!" Gambon was fine in POA. He seemed to be channeling the kindly grandfather vibe Harris had. GOF he was horrible...and OOTP he was all right. The only bad scene was the "Don't you all have some studying to do!?" And in HBP he was quite good.

I preferred Harris as well, the only criticism I had of him was something Harris couldn't control. He seemed too frail...because he was. Had Harris been ten years younger he would have been completely perfect. But as he stands he was only mostly perfect. Which still isn't bad. I would have loved to see how he played the scenes where Dumbledore got angry though.

Harris was just too old and frail. While he is an amazing actor, it wasn't a good idea to cast him in the first place as this was an obvious 11 or so year commitment.

While he was good as Dumbledore from 1 and 2, I don't think he could have played well the Dumbledore from 5 or 6. I just can't see him being stern at all.

I like Gambon, he exerts energy and playfulness as well as being serious when he needs to (like in OOTP when he meets Tom) but the only thing that irks me about Gambon was him saying he didn't read any of the books. I wanted to slap him. But, I feel Gambon has done a great job. He is a top notch actor. Harris exuded a grandfather like feel as Dumbledore while Gambon fells like the eccentric uncle, which imo is what Dumbledore from the books was. He wasn't a grandfather figure, he was more of a loving uncle that you got to do cool stuff with but also was at the same time protective and stern when he needs to be.

A good number of the adult actors have not read the books. I believe Rupert Grint has even said he hadn't read the books for a good while. So nothing wrong with that.

Yes I agree that Harris was probably too old at that point in his life to play Dumbledore all the way through the series. Especially through some of the more physical acts in the later movies.
However, in the 1st movie he did show he can play stern and scary when he needed to be. The part where he roared "SILENCE" to calm everyone about the troll. That was only a snippet but I thought it was perfect how he went from that to kind old man after that outburst. Maybe it was amplified but Harris still sold it

 

[DarthSkywalker]

What's so ugly about HBP?

I don't know what your home set up is, but it is quite clear on my HDtv. The vast majority of the film has this grainy filter that kills contrast and gives the film a fuzzy and muddy look. Watch the scene with Harry and Draco dueling it out in the bathroom. How Harry, Draco and Snape all seem to match the decor.

It is like watching a bad transfer, which many in the Blu ray/HD community thought it was.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I think the cover was orange/red and a lot of shots in the movie show Hogwarts burning with a orange/red hue.

The direction in OOTP-on concerning cinematography, set decoration, lighting, etc. have been amazing.

I don't remember much, if any of that in Part 1. The Hogwarts scenes in Part 2 look gray.

 

[Infinity9999x]

A good number of the adult actors have not read the books. I believe Rupert Grint has even said he hadn't read the books for a good while. So nothing wrong with that.

Yes I agree that Harris was probably too old at that point in his life to play Dumbledore all the way through the series. Especially through some of the more physical acts in the later movies.
However, in the 1st movie he did show he can play stern and scary when he needed to be. The part where he roared "SILENCE" to calm everyone about the troll. That was only a snippet but I thought it was perfect how he went from that to kind old man after that outburst. Maybe it was amplified but Harris still sold it

Yeah, like I said, had Harris just been a bit younger, he would have been completley perfect. Heck, even when I look at pictures of him from his earlier movies like Camelot, he looks the way I imagine a younger Dumbledore would look.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I think we all know the truth of the Dumbledore situation. He is a less ornery, less awesome Gandalf. McKellen would of been perfect, but he was already playing the same role.

 

[chaseter]

Even John Hurt was up for the role of D but Harris got it.

 

[Victarion]

I think DH would be more orangish, if you go by dust jackets.

 

[Infinity9999x]

I think we all know the truth of the Dumbledore situation. He is a less ornery, less awesome Gandalf. McKellen would of been perfect, but he was already playing the same role.

Well, Gandalf isn't actually human, so it's not surprising

I agree though. McKellen showed he could convey the kindly grandfather figure while also being able to convey a sense of real power. He would have been perfect.

And part of me would have loved to see John Hurt do it as well. I was personally hoping they'd give it to Peter O'Toole once Harris passed away.

 

[chaseter]

I don't remember much, if any of that in Part 1. The Hogwarts scenes in Part 2 look gray.

There wasn't any in part 1, I was referring to part 2. The book cover implicates fire in the air as everything burns and they are going for that in this part.

Watch the trailer and look at how many scenes involve fire as lighting.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Well, Gandalf isn't actually human, so it's not surprising

I agree though. McKellen showed he could convey the kindly grandfather figure while also being able to convey a sense of real power. He would have been perfect.

And part of me would have loved to see John Hurt do it as well. I was personally hoping they'd give it to Peter O'Toole once Harris passed away.

John Hurt isn't a bad shout, but possibly my favorite scene in the entire film series is when Harry gets his wand, so Hurt as Ollivander is utter perfection for me.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

There wasn't any in part 1, I was referring to part 2. The book cover implicates fire in the air as everything burns and they are going for that in this part.

Watch the trailer and look at how many scenes involve fire as lighting.

Is Part 1 not based on the same book? If we are going by your theory, both films should have that filter throughout.

Also the prevailing look of the Hogwarts scenes in Part 2 is this gray/green grain look.

 

[chaseter]

Part 1 had absolutely nothing to do with the cover of the book, the Voldemort and Harry showdown at Hogwarts while everything burns behind them.

It's not a theory, look at the movies. Yates didn't just pull blue and green out of his butt for OOTP and HBP to reference the way those movies look.

 

[Infinity9999x]

John Hurt isn't a bad shout, but possibly my favorite scene in the entire film series is when Harry gets his wand, so Hurt as Ollivander is utter perfection for me.

Yeah, he really did nail that scene. He captured the mysterious yet slightly creepy feel I've always imagined Oliver having in the book.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Part 1 had absolutely nothing to do with the cover of the book, the Voldemort and Harry showdown at Hogwarts while everything burns behind them.

It's not a theory, look at the movies. Yates didn't just pull blue and green out of his butt for OOTP and HBP to reference the way those movies look.

The Burrow and opening scenes on HBP look no different from the ones at the school. How are these represented on the cover? Same for Hogwarts in OoTP. So what is your theory? They apply to the specific locations of the book cover or just the color of the cover?

And the color of HBP was pulled out of the ass as it was original suppose to look just like Order. It also isn't really all that green.

 

[flickchick85]

And the color of HBP was pulled out of the ass as it was original suppose to look just like Order.

Book or movie? Because if you're saying HBP The Movie was supposed to look just like OotP The Movie, I'd be interested in seeing some evidence to back that up. You don't hire Bruno Delbonnel - who has a very specific, well-known style - when you just want to duplicate someone else's work.

 

[chaseter]

You're right Darth, it's all just coincidence. Yates really has no idea what he is doing. OOTP and HBP look exactly the same color wise.

 

[luke1234]

I don't understand the hate for HBP's look. I don't understand whats wrong with the grainy look as well. Like what Flickchick said, you dont hire Bruno Delbonnel to retain someone else's look. I believe the "murkyness" was a supreme interpretation to realize what is "in focus" and what is merely background material. The peniseve scenes served a point and so did the fight between Malfoy and Potter and the bathroom. Keeping the shallow depth of field left clear focus on the characters faces further keeping in tune their emotions. This may be a case of subjective differences but to say Delbonnel didn't do a hell of a job is to denounce is artistry towards the franchise.

 

[Marvolo]

Book or movie? Because if you're saying HBP The Movie was supposed to look just like OotP The Movie, I'd be interested in seeing some evidence to back that up. You don't hire Bruno Delbonnel - who has a very specific, well-known style - when you just want to duplicate someone else's work.

Well, this actually came up on the fansites after the release. Some of the early trailers showed HBP with a blue hue. An interview was done with one of the powers that be on the production and they mentioned that Yates was originally going for a similar look to OOTP. Through his own choice or someone elses, cant remember which, he changed it during post-production. Irregardless, Delbonnel is a great cinematographer, and HBP is the only one of the films to be nominated for an oscar for cinematography. It didnt win, but the nomination speaks for itself. I know many dont put any stock in the oscars, but in the technical departments they do a pretty good job.

 

[Asteroid-Man]

Just a couple of questions:

Have you read all of the books?
Do you own all the books?
Are any of them 1st edition and unaltered? (U.S. prints have altered wording)
Did you have the original Philosopher's Stone with the depiction of a Young Dumbledore on the back?

 

[Superwoman Prime]

Well, Gandalf isn't actually human, so it's not surprising

I agree though. McKellen showed he could convey the kindly grandfather figure while also being able to convey a sense of real power. He would have been perfect.

And part of me would have loved to see John Hurt do it as well. I was personally hoping they'd give it to Peter O'Toole once Harris passed away.

As soon as Dumbledore emotionally burst out and physically pushed Harry back while exclaiming "Did you put your name in that goblet?!", I knew this was a completely separate Dumbledore from the books.

But to be fair, Gambon was playing the role the script and director determined. If Dumbledore had been written correctly for the 3-6 films, I'm sure Gambon could have pulled that entire persona off very well.

The representation of Dumbledore is only half the problem of the films. The other half is Voldemort. Instead of having a villain that is legitimately intimidating, we have something that borders on the cliche. He's every bit how you would expect the main antagonist in a young adult animated series to act. Voldemort in the books is introverted and gathered. And when he becomes angry, it's white hot. He lashes out like the serpentine man he is. There's tension in every scene, because you never know when he's going to lash out at Wormtail, Malfoy, or Bellatrix for whatever petty reasons he sees fit.

When Fiennes as Voldemort becomes angry, such as in the graveyard scene of Goblet of Fire, he's over-the-top and sometimes embarrassing to watch. I use Goblet of Fire as a reference for the problems of Dumbledore and Voldemort, since while it's my favorite film of the series, it goes far in giving us scenes that bring to light the creative faults of both character incarnations.

They dropped the ball with the two most important characters besides Harry Potter himself, and for that, the films will never come close to measuring up in comparison to the books. This is usually the case when comparing a book turned into a film, yes, but the quality gap here is especially noticeable. They could have done a hell of a lot better; given their budget, given J.K. Rowling's guidance, and given the fair amount of time they had to prepare.

 

[Marvolo]

Just a couple of questions:

Have you read all of the books?
Do you own all the books?
Are any of them 1st edition and unaltered? (U.S. prints have altered wording)
Did you have the original Philosopher's Stone with the depiction of a Young Dumbledore on the back?

1.Yes. Many times.
2.Yes. Multiple copies and versions.
3.OOTP-DH are first editions. I have OOTP and POA in the british editions. My HBP is the US edition with the the added bit of dialogue between Dumbledore and Draco on the astronomy tower that was cut out of all subsequent prints.
4. Tried buying it a few years ago, but never got it

 

[DarthSkywalker]

You're right Darth, it's all just coincidence. Yates really has no idea what he is doing. OOTP and HBP look exactly the same color wise.

Oh, so you are going to get chippy instead of answering my question? Because you are the one contradicting yourself.

Well, this actually came up on the fansites after the release. Some of the early trailers showed HBP with a blue hue. An interview was done with one of the powers that be on the production and they mentioned that Yates was originally going for a similar look to OOTP. Through his own choice or someone elses, cant remember which, he changed it during post-production. Irregardless, Delbonnel is a great cinematographer, and HBP is the only one of the films to be nominated for an oscar for cinematography. It didnt win, but the nomination speaks for itself. I know many dont put any stock in the oscars, but in the technical departments they do a pretty good job.

The technical awards are no better when it comes to nomination. However, outside of Avatar, I think they have actually done pretty well in picking the winner in the cinematography category.

Still, while I agree the film is shot well, the filter and post makes hurts it the point of ruin.

I don't understand the hate for HBP's look. I don't understand whats wrong with the grainy look as well. Like what Flickchick said, you dont hire Bruno Delbonnel to retain someone else's look. I believe the "murkyness" was a supreme interpretation to realize what is "in focus" and what is merely background material. The peniseve scenes served a point and so did the fight between Malfoy and Potter and the bathroom. Keeping the shallow depth of field left clear focus on the characters faces further keeping in tune their emotions. This may be a case of subjective differences but to say Delbonnel didn't do a hell of a job is to denounce is artistry towards the franchise.

This was the reaction to the Blu ray-

http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/2711/harrypotterandthehalfbloodprince.html

There have been some rumblings about the 'Half Blood Prince's transfer. The rumors have consisted of a myriad of problems that may exist with Warner Brothers' product. I hope to address those issues here.

It was mentioned in our forum, by forum member Hogarth, that the disc he bought was defective. He mentioned watching it and having lighter bands appear at a certain interval in the film. Following the time stamp given I watched the scene (timestamp 1:12) and couldn't see anything wrong with the transfer. I didn't see any lighter horizontal bands appear at that time or any other time during the film. Hopefully this problem, if it is a defect in some of the Blu-rays, is localized to a certain group of discs and is easily replaceable.

There has also been talk, around the web, about groups of artifacts muddying up the screen in certain areas. I hope to straighten this out right now. Take for example the timestamp of 47:47. It has been said that Lavender's face is completely confounded by artifacts. Indeed if you travel to that point in the movie, you'll find that her face is quite hard to see, but it is not because of artifacts like blocking. Instead I believe that people may be confusing the heavy layer of grain in this film, for digital artifacts. The grain is very heavy here, but it still isn't as heavy and nauseating as it was in 'Burn Notice: Season 2.' The grain ends up creating an artifact-like mess, because the movie is so outrageously dark by design.

When I previewed 'Half Blood Prince' in the theaters I did notice a very processed and stylized look to it. All of the colors are muted. Soft mustard yellows, dingy greens, faded blues, and soft earth tones take over the film. If it weren't for the engulfing darkness that constantly surrounds every scene, I'd think I was watching a Wes Anderson film.

Because of the heavy grain, the film does lack some fine detail, especially in the characters' faces. Crushing shadows persist throughout the movie. This is a directorial choice, but nonetheless, it does hamper the details at times. The overly stylized look also plays its part in making fine detail unnoticeable.

Overall the dark, grainy, and muted video presentation is representative of what the director envisioned and how it appeared during its theatrical run. Because of the crushing shadows and lack of fine detail, this wouldn't really be a disc you'd show off to friends as demo material, but it is a disc that is free from malicious artifacts, as far as I can tell.

When you faithful transfer is believed to be defective, I think there is a problem.

 

[Marvolo]

Oh, so you are going to get chippy instead of answering my question? Because you are the one contradicting yourself.



The technical awards are no better when it comes to nomination. However, outside of Avatar, I think they have actually done pretty well in picking the winner in the cinematography category.

Still, while I agree the film is shot well, the filter and post makes hurts it the point of ruin.




This was the reaction to the Blu ray-

http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/2711/harrypotterandthehalfbloodprince.html



When you faithful transfer is believed to be defective, I think there is a problem.

I have read many posts about this so called defect. I watched this film in theaters and at home on multiple TVs on dvd and bluray and I have never seens these defects. I'm gonna chalk it up to problem on the viewers end. Honestly it seems to only show up for those who are watching frame by frame. Under normal viewing conditions on a calibrated screen it doesn't seem to be a problem. Merely something that shows up under unnatural viewing conditions.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

Darth, I didn't have a problem with Order of the Phoenix's cinematography. I felt it was fine.

I however had a problem with the Half Blood Prince's cinematography. I did feel like it was too muted and grainy. I'm glad that was rectified for Deathly Hallows.