Current Events > how are the harry potter films generally ranked?

(+) Yeah! (+)

are there any rian johnson-esque films that divided the fanbase?

---

Order of the Phoenix is crap, dont watch it.

---

binged them all for the first time not too long ago
they're not really that great and get progressively worse

---

first two are awesome modern classics imo

the rest of the series is extremely mediocre

---

Duncanwii posted...

Order of the Phoenix is crap, dont watch it.

half blood prince film is worse

ive heard the book is the best

---

The first film is corny but charming, the second is "okay", and from then on it just got awful.

---

I like most of them. None are particularly divisive at all from what I've seen, but a lot of people like Chris Colombus' style for 1/2 and check out for the rest, while a lot of people like 3 in particular because of Alfonso Cuaron's directing style.

There is an impression I get that some of the later movies suffer a lot from losing plot points. Order of the Phoenix is the shortest movie and it adapts the longest book and ends up losing a ton of very good material from the book, although I think it's still a pretty good movie in its own right in terms of pacing, but an extra 30-40 minutes would've made it fantastic


---

Prisoner of Azkaban is generally considered the best. No real consensus after that. Some people dont like 1 and 2 because theyre too childish. Some people dont like 4-6 for some reason.

---

The first three are usually regarded as the best. The third one is a very Marmite like situation where the people who like it, really, really love it, while the other hate it. The fourth isn't as bad as the following ones, and seems to have some fans. I don't think I've really seen fans for the last four films. Not sure how I'd really rate the popularity of the last four, other than worse than the first four.

Like the books, Prisoner of Azkaban is the best

I didnt like 5 because it felt like a big summarization (and it was, being the shortest of the movies)

I like DH Part 2 for making Harry vs Voldemort more than a rap battle, but they made a critical error in explaining the actual reason it ended the way it did.

---

I thought azkaban was shit because i didnt understand the story near the ending. When i was a kid i was like, whos this rat all of a sudden amd whos that werewolf, and couldnt be arsed because the new dumbledore was shit to me as well.

---

radical rhino posted...

Prisoner of Azkaban is generally considered the best. No real consensus after that. Some people dont like 1 and 2 because theyre too childish. Some people dont like 4-6 for some reason.

A lot of book fans consider Prisoner of Azkaban the worst. Cuaron threw in some dumb shit & the movie left out some incredibly important background info about James Potter & his friends-- hence why Harry's Patronus is a stag, which is a really big deal in the books & never explained in the movies.

Plus, changing the art style of the entire series in the middle loses the whimsical feeling of the books.

The later movies also have the adaptation problem of having the cut out tons of character development & side plots as well as having some really lame digital color grading that washes the life out of everything & makes some of the movies seem like a sepia-toned mess-- in particular Half Blood Prince.

i definitely get the case for ranking prisoner of azkaban as the best but goblet of fire is probs my personal favourite

---

I think 3 is the best one

---

Parappa09 posted...

fire is probs my personal favourite

It has some good stuff, but it has so much content cut from the book (like most of Harry's training), it annoys me.

---

Parappa09 posted...

ive heard the book is the best

It's the worst book by far. Meandering as hell, virtually nothing "new" happens till the end.
---

I think I liked all the movies with no thought since I watched them when I was 13. Prisoner of Azkaban is my personal favorite movie wise.

---

I liked 3, 4, & 8.

---

3 is the only one that arguably improved upon the source material by adding some fun timeline shenanigans to the climax that weren't in the book, and would have been hard to do in print anyway, plus Cuaron's unique style really helped it stand out. 1 and 2 benefited from Richard Harris' superior Dumbledore, and were fun and cutesy. 4 had some really weird / unwelcome directing choices (killthespareAVADAKEDAVRA*ded*), and the kids were all in their teens and mumbling through their lines. The remaining four were pretty forgettable tbh (I never bothered to watch Deathly Hallows Pt 1, now that I think about it).

---

The first 3 are excellent, it goes downhill from there. I actually think they were better as child actors than teenagers.

---