Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire

When I saw this installment of the series in the movie theater, it made quite an impression on me, probably because it's again so grandiose, unlike the third installment, where I actually liked the intimacy. The effects are sometimes absolutely great, no doubt about that, but apart from the emotional finale, not much else stayed with me from the film. And I particularly like the fourth book. It's an excellent film, but for me, the third one is still the winner. (30/12/2014)

You might well expect that the best part of this series based on a 570-page book would be difficult to adapt. A priority was the main story around the tournament itself, but the creators couldn’t help themselves from at least a taste of the remaining elements to avoid disappointing the fans... Unfortunately this was a mistake, because this movie has a little taste of everything, but all in all it seems like nothing. Nothing is (fully) said, if you haven’t read the novel, you won’t orient yourself, drastic truncation of the fundamental scenes might be understandable, but it is shocking that the longest (and paradoxically the best) scene of this picture and most important for the story is the ball. The low-quality screenplay could be saved only by the steady hand of a director with a clear vision that he wants to film. Which unfortunately Newell was unable to do and so was unable to add the smallest hint of emotion even to the most receptive scenes like the finale in the cemetery. Something simply happens and we carry on with the rest of the movie. And doesn’t help that the music is completely drowned out, so you don’t notice it at all during the movie, which is surprising considering the outstanding soundtrack. The only thing that Newel managed to do in the Goblet of Fire is the adolescent aspect and the action scenes, but Harry Potter isn’t about that. It is pretty easy to watch, but it relies too obviously on the Harry Potter brand, instead on filmmaking qualities. (21/11/2010)

The fourth episode, the third director and it really shows! The dark atmosphere that Alfonso Cuarón started with The Prisoner of Azkaban continues with Mike Newell's The Goblet of Fire, and the overall feel of the two works is similar in many ways. This episode is pleasantly funny, appealingly narrative and, again, audiovisually perfect. All three challenges in the tournament were imaginative and elaborate to the max. The return of the Evil Overlord came at just the right time and the final twenty minutes of the film are absolutely wonderful. The music was once again a delight, and in fact I could go on like this listing other parts of the film that I have mentioned in previous installments. Newell pleasantly surprised me and served me a fresh spectacle that doesn't lack action, mystery and romance. (22/06/2011)

When Harry and Ron have a falling out and piss Hermione off, you feel that it's really happening, not that the actors are just acting out something in the script. And that's great. Despite the abundance of action scenes (and that there are a lot of them in Goblet of Fire and that they are good), this is what I liked most about the fourth installment of the Potter saga. And when the teenage magicians tried to ask the female teenage magicians to the ball, when they learned to dance, and when they eventually danced, there was so much feeling and tenderness and perhaps even romance... No Beverly Hills, no Teen Idol romance, really believable situations. Well, Mike Newell. As far as the young actors are concerned, I was very pleasantly surprised by Robert Pattinson, who I haven't seen in any film so far and who is very likable. The adult ensemble cast is traditionally excellent, especially the slapping Snape and Dumbledore, who certainly doesn't give that tired old man impression anymore thanks to Michael Gambon. Plus the casting of Brendan Gleeson as Mad-Eye Moody was a great idea, and I don't think I'll even mention Ralph Fiennes as Voldemort. He looks great, and his resurrection definitely matched the darkest moments of Cuarón's previous contribution in terms of horror atmosphere. In conclusion: Great music by Patrick Doyle, John Williams couldn't have asked for a better successor. (09/09/2015)

When you love a book series and its film adaptations, you can watch them over and over again and forgive many things. For example, the forced chase with the dragon, the insufficient explanation of the second task, and the fact that the film has to rely on catchphrases (even if they are magical). For the first time, Steve Kloves' screenplay had to omit a lot from the original, which occasionally leads to missteps, turning Harry into an indecisive fool, Dumbledore into a hyperactive weirdo, and the film into definitely the worst adaptation. The only good luck is that Mike Newell does what he can in the non-action passages and transforms The Goblet of Fire into an adventurous romantic comedy with his good ideas and brilliant multi-layered scenes of dubbing, dancing, and the actual ball. But that is ultimately the crucial problem. I want to see what the book gave me: more precisely, the spirit of the book. While Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban is still largely a fairytale story, the source material of Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix is already a dark, dramatic, almost thriller-like fantasy set in the wizarding world. The Goblet of Fire is supposed to represent a combination of both. However, that transformation is missing here. And it is a huge relief that under David Yates, it ends up being much, much better from the next film onwards. (20/01/2006)