Opinions on Columbus

[hawk1245]

It is my opinion, that Columbus was PERFECT for the first two, caus eit's about little kids vassicly, and their curiousity with their surroundings. The third is MUCH better for Alfonso, cause he is very good with teens, and good at portraying what they go through. Mike Newell will be good, cause the GoF story has many romantic hints at it, and yet it isn't cheesy, he is great at that. Who here loved what columbus and co did with the first two films? I am sick and tired of hearing everybody comlaining about him being a bad director. So anybody with something bad to say, I wll respect your opinion, but please do NOT reply to this topic! I just want possitive replys, from people with possitive opinions. I just want to see people who think the way I do, thats all! Thanks ;)

[Nick]

I am of the opinion that Columbus could have done worse. That's as positive as I'm going to be.

[Indian Blood]

It is my opinion, that Columbus was PERFECT for the first two, caus eit's about little kids vassicly, and their curiousity with their surroundings. The third is MUCH better for Alfonso, cause he is very good with teens, and good at portraying what they go through. Mike Newell will be good, cause the GoF story has many romantic hints at it, and yet it isn't cheesy, he is great at that. Who here loved what columbus and co did with the first two films? I am sick and tired of hearing everybody comlaining about him being a bad director. So anybody with something bad to say, I wll respect your opinion, but please do NOT reply to this topic! I just want possitive replys, from people with possitive opinions. I just want to see people who think the way I do, thats all! Thanks ;)

Wel that seems a bit closed minded to not want to hear any other opinions even if you don't agree with it. If eveyone always agrees then things would get boring.
But back to the topic, I guess Colunbus did an ok job, but he could have done better with the way the kids acted in the first movie though that miight not have been is fault.

[hawk1245]

That defeats the purpose of this thread! I ALWAYS hear people saying bad things about Columbus, ad Im just wanted to see how many people loved the first two movies as much as I do. I already know how many people DONT, so hI don't want to hear people who disliked the first two, It's more of a survey, if you will. Again, I respect your opinio if you didn't like him, but if so then you have no purpose replying here, I just want to know the possitive opinions. And I thought the kids were pretty dang good for begginers in film 1, and Dan was GREAT in film 2! I thought Harry seemd apropriatly confused in the first one, you could tell he didn't know what the heck was going on in this new world that hagrid takes him to. But again, thats just MY opinion. I just am curious to see people of whom share that view.

[Tarawyn]

But again, there's no point in a thread where half of the story isn't welcome, and you can't limit people's posting. The purpose of a thread is for people to converse, and anyone can post within the boundaries of the rules.... That's what the forums are for.

Back on topic. Columbus could have done worse; he also could have done better. I think there was a larger problem in what the first two films were designed for in the first place than who picked up on the design. They were designed to be rather shallow films and the kid's acting fit that at least - the kids just weren't good by other standards. And I'd say the same for anything else that Columbus was responsible for.

[daniel4hp]

I'm going to add a poll to this thread. That way, people can vote and you can get an idea how many people liked Columbus, compared to how many didn't.

[dobby_rocks]

I thought the first 2 movie were good , Columbus did a good job, it seems pretty half and half, people either liked it or they didnt like it

Maybe he does looks back at the first 2 hp's now and thinks i wish i had a done that that way or this that way etc

[star22]

I think he did a good job. He stuck to the books. I do not think that Cuaron is going to do that. I don't mind little changes, but after seeing Little Princess, I think that Cuaron is the type to completely change things. The clothes change is one thing. Anoyying, but I can live with it. I am just worried that he will change more. I think that Columbus should have stayed. His tallent was growing. Chamber was an excellent movie. I think that he had grown in his abilities and would have done a good job with the third one.

[Nick]

As far as I'm concerned, Columbus is a kiddie director, turning two decent books into Disneyesque kiddie fantasies. It's a good thing Cuaron's got the third, he's got what it takes to make it as dark and teenagerish as I'd like it to be.

I don't understand why people get so upset over changes. The books are meant to be continuous, but nobody ever said the movies were supposed to be. Come to think of it, nobody said the books had to be continuous either.

[star22]

I don't understand why people get so upset over changes. The books are meant to be continuous, but nobody ever said the movies were supposed to be. Come to think of it, nobody said the books had to be continuous either.


I get upset because I am worried about what other changes there will be. Have you seen A Little Princess? The ending was totally changed and ruined. That is what I am worried about. I am worried that if Cuaron did it there, he will do it again. I don't really mind the clothes changes. It is the other things that I worry about.

[Loz]

I like Columbus as a writer, and I like quite a few other films he has directed. I don't mind what he has done with the films. They're not terrible. Both of the two films are lacking something and the culprits must be Columbus and Kloves, however. It's a question of whose decision it was to cut/change/develop certain things, and perhaps it wasn't Columbus's, perhaps it was the Editor's? You can't just blame everything on the director, I mean. But also, he must have liked it if he authorised it.

Overall I think he has done a fantastic job organising the various different teams to bring two extraordinarily complicated and expensive films together. But I'm sure other people could do just as good, if not better a job.

[Weatherby]

Columbus isn't the more inspired director in the world. He's alright with kids and everything. He's not completely horrible. But, he's not my ideal director either. He doesn't have much of his own vision. He doesn't strike me as a risk taker. The films are just cardboard versions of the film with less heart, gut and spirit.
I've said it before and I'll say it again - they lucked out with marvellous casting for the adult roles.

[Nick]

Have you seen A Little Princess?

No, and even if I did, I haven't read the book.

Hopefully he'll put some R/Hr stuff in the movie that never happened. That'll really cause some excitement. :evil:

[star22]

Hopefully he'll put some R/Hr stuff in the movie that never happened. That'll really cause some excitement.

No way. That is exactly what I do not want. I really do not want shipper stuff added, especially not R/Hr. If that happens, I will be extremely mad. Since I do not think that it will be canon, I really do not want it in the movies.

[Loz]

It isn't the Director's choice to add 'shipper' stuff into a film - usually it would be the choice of the screenwriter in which message to convey to the audience. If a romantic theme does come through the books, it would have to be conveyed through the films as well, however, even if only marginally.



So we'll be seeing some sparks flying between Ron and Hermione, whether you like it or not Star22 :lol:

Joking, Joking. There's a thread (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?p=757261) for that, you know.

As I have said, I think Columbus did okay. He wasn't stellar. He didn't make the Harry Potter movies the best darn movies ever, but then, that is pretty much impossible.

[Lord_Chatterley]

I read two terrible news....

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0373889/

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001060/

[martinnyg]

You should never trust IMDB on stuff like that. It wasn't long ago they had some elderly British guy who had directed 1 or 2 movies in his life mentioned as the director. IMDB believes whatever any little fanboy writes them. They just need to fill out their missing holes. Let's hope they choose someone new or maybe get Cuaron back.

EDIT: The elderly British guy, was Stuart Baird. The guy who apparently killed off the Star Trek movies.

To answer this thread. I think Columbus made some boring superficial movies without any interesting characters. But that could be just as much Kloves fault, but I choose to put the main blame on Columbus. Because then there's hope that PoA will turn out great.

[JofpGallagher]

I read two terrible news....

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0373889/

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001060/

Well, they are not terrible but discouraging ones. I think we should wait until Warner Bros releases information about it. GoF has to be done first to start especulating with OotP. I do hope that Columbus will not be picked as a director for any of the remaining Harry Potter movies.

[star22]

Why is everyone so down on Columbus? All rightm, the first movie was not the greatest. Still, Chamber is very good. Columbus' other movies were well done. Columbus stuck to the books, and I really do not think that Cuaron is going to do that.

[Lord_Chatterley]

The problem is:
Clumbus stucks too much to the books so the result is something very androgine...

[JofpGallagher]

Columbus' other movies were well done. Columbus stuck to the books, and I really do not think that Cuaron is going to do that.
The good question is: What is well done?...Selling tickets success? Artistic success? or a mix of both? Peter Jackson made Lord of the Rings an artistic success and a ticket selling success. Columbus made ticket selling success on the Harry Potter movies. That's all.

Home Alone I and II
Bicentenary Man
Mrs Doubtfire
Harry Potter I and II

All good movies in the ticket box....but there are movie goers (like me) that also enjoy to go and see art in movie-making, something Columbus is not capable to do IMO.
And in case someone asks why I dislike Columbus: My answer is very simple: his movies are too fake, predictable, he does the minimum necessary to bring entertainment, but not something you can deem artistic.

[Dedalus]

I don't actually mind Columbus, and I think that some people confuse his role in the film, and that when they diss him they actually mean to diss Kloves, or even everything down to the wardrobe department, which isn't his responsibility (or not directly his responsibility, anyway).

I wasn't overly keen on some of the Philosopher's Stone film, though I didn't mind the Chamber of Secrets at all, give or take a few problems that still stand, for me, but those reasons have never been down to Columbus.

Though I wouldn't choose his style of directing, myself, it wasn't badly done. I'd just prefer someone to be less technical, and be a little more artistic because I think that'd suit a lot of the other aspects of the films more, and the film would be more free to appreciate these things and show more of the other work off in the best light rather than focus primarily on the main thing all the time, which a technical director often does.

[hawk1245]

I think he did a good job. He stuck to the books. I do not think that Cuaron is going to do that. I don't mind little changes, but after seeing Little Princess, I think that Cuaron is the type to completely change things. The clothes change is one thing. Anoyying, but I can live with it. I am just worried that he will change more. I think that Columbus should have stayed. His tallent was growing. Chamber was an excellent movie. I think that he had grown in his abilities and would have done a good job with the third one.

Though I am glad you have a possitive opinion of Columbus, but I am going to disagree with youon ONE thing: saying he should have stayed on for film 3. I think, from what I have seen, film 3 looks every bit as good as the first two. Even better1 I think Columbuswas good for doing the parts where the trio was very young, and now Alfonso is making a smooth transition into teens. The clothe change makes sense, the characters are starting to find their own style (CHARACTERS, not actors). I mean, look at the costumes: Rons are mosly sweaters (aka made by Mrs Weasley) Harry's don't really match and don't it at sometimes (hand me downs) and Hermione has stylish Muggle clothes (she is a muggle born). I don't know if you noticed bu they wore muggle clothes in the first two, alot!

[hawk1245]

[QUOTE=JofpGallagher]The good question is: What is well done?...Selling tickets success? Artistic success? or a mix of both? Peter Jackson made Lord of the Rings an artistic success and a ticket selling success. Columbus made ticket selling success on the Harry Potter movies. That's all.

Home Alone I and II
Bicentenary Man
Mrs Doubtfire
Harry Potter I and II

{QUOTE]

Well, I liked all those movies but one, Bicentenial Man wasn't so good. But Home Alone (the first two) were very good, as was Mrs. Dobtfire. He also did a movie called Stepmom that I liked. You should't judge a director byy his past works. Like, you keep on using Peter Jackson as a reference; did you see the movies HE did before creating LOTR? LOL

[JofpGallagher]

hawk1245, I also enjoyed Columbus movies :D I have seen Mrs. Doubtfire about 10 times, and I alway have a good laugh. I'm not talking about "I like the movie" mood. Yes, his movies can be very entertaining but that's all. Of course, if one goes to see a movie, just for fun, then Coulmbus is a good director, but I have burnt that stage in my life, and sometimes I want to see a little be more than "entertainment".

Another example to enhance my point of view: I never liked "Citizen Kane". I think the movie is boring, but after I took some classes of film appreciation I started to understand certain things that I used to overlook when watching a movie. At that time my professor spent two classes talking and analysing "Citizen Kane" art-direction, script and shots, and I learned to acknowledge that is a masterpiece. However, I think most of the people who like just merely to be entertained will fall sleep in th first 15 minutes of "Citizen Kane" or will find aweful Eisenstein's "Battleship Potemkin" which is consider another cinematography masterpiece.

Hence to me and though no one here is doing this type of comparissons, to compare Orson Welles or Eisenstein with Columbus is like comparing a Faberge egg with a McDonald's Happy Meal gift (IMO), and that is my point.
I want or desire, as a Harry Potter fan, good movies or better said, a better movie from those Columbus has brought to us. I'm not saying he did a bad job, just that many other directors could have done it better. I'm confident that Cuaron will prove me right.

[star22]

Why is everyone so confident about Cuaron? Has anyone seen his other movies? I am terrified of how much he will change. I think that it will be a lot more than necessary like it was in A Little Princess.

[hawk1245]

Why is everyone so confident about Cuaron? Has anyone seen his other movies? I am terrified of how much he will change. I think that it will be a lot more than necessary like it was in A Little Princess.

He dosn't WRITE the scripts! He just direscts the movie! The third movie is written by the same guy that did movies 1 and 2, o it won't be any less faithfull. The only thing I am worried about is continuity, storywise. I know most disagree with me here, but that is my opinion. Now, I am not relly worried about that anymore, cause I have foudnd explainations for all of Caurons changes from the first two, exept one. But thats another subject. I think they should get directors who can handle the subject matter of each movie. Columbus, was in my opinion, perfect for the first two, and it seems to me that Cauron is PERFECT for the third, and Newell seems to be a very good choice for film 4. I think they are choosing wisley.

[daniel4hp]

I think he did a good job. He stuck to the books. I do not think that Cuaron is going to do that. I don't mind little changes, but after seeing Little Princess, I think that Cuaron is the type to completely change things. The clothes change is one thing.
Do you have any idea what the director does? Yeah, A Little Princess was changed. So what? That wasn't Cuaron's decision, and any changes made in Prisoner of Azkaban won't be his decision either!

The director directs the movie that is written by the screenwriter. The director takes what the screenwriter writes and films it to turn it into a movie. The director controls artistic aspects of the film, but he has very little control over the actual story.


The reason I don't like Columbus is because I feel he gave the films no artistic or emtional depth. This is, in part, the screenwriters fault, but there are things Columbus could have done. Characters never came to life (a mix of a screenwriting and a directing problem) and the film lacked much emotion (again, a mix of a screenwriting and a directing problem).

The films are hardly what I would call artistic. They lack any real mood or feeling, they are not particularly well made. The cinematography (which the director has some control over) is average at best, the images are anything but powerful, the acting is poor (largely the actor's problem, but partly the director's). The films just aren't artistic films.

Certainly I don't blame Columbus for everything -- there are a whole host of people responsable for the making of the film, and they all contributed positive and negitive things. However, there is a lot more he could have done. He didn't give any real feeling to the movie -- there's little emotion, the films lack any mood or real tone. The general artistic quality is low. Columbus can be blamed for a lot of this.


Why am I confident about Cuaron? Because the guy is a good director. The movies he has done in the past were well directed. Yes, I'm talking about A Little Princess, as well as others, such as Y Tu Mama Tambien. This guy is an artist who will be able to take the script written by Kloves and turn it into a good film.

[FlyingPhoenix]

Hopefully he'll put some R/Hr stuff in the movie that never happened. That'll really cause some excitement.

You make me smile because this he did already, no?
As I saw the last few pics it was like that. I can't remember that R/Hr looked that scary in the book.

But to the topic. In my opinion Columbus did rather a poor job. Why? Though I love the movies but in all honest its not because how Columbus did it rather how it looked on screen. He turned this books to much in to american children movies. He cut the Potion task, movie one. He cut the hospital wing scene. The first movie was still okay after that.
But the second was poor. If I watch it after I tried to forget what I know from the book its turns out as horrible pointless. Columbus did never understand how this book works. Thats sad you know.
In the movie we see Ginny only at the beginning then shortly in the middle and then in the Chamber again. There is no mind in that scenes, unlike from canon. See in the book Ginny turns up at Hogwarts always just before the chamber had been opened and shortly after every attack. This are rather strange scenes which let you if you look close enough getting suspicious. Especially after Hermione had been attacked. But in the movie this don't exist. You are clueless, its not even scary just this single scene in the forrest is scary.
Now Columbus had better cut this whole car scene which was anyway to long. There was no need to bring in that Harry falls nearlly out of the car. Rather he should have stay at the plot. But he didn't.
The whole mystery was no longer a mystery rather a story where the audience has some big questionmarks over his head.
Then the nearlly laughable handshake and that hug? Honestly this we didn't need in the book and of course not in the movie. Why bring it if it plays a role in book4? Its nonsense, really.

[daniel4hp]

He cut the Potion task, movie one. He cut the hospital wing scene. The first movie was still okay after that.
But the second was poor. If I watch it after I tried to forget what I know from the book its turns out as horrible pointless. Columbus did never understand how this book works. Thats sad you know.
Although I agree that Columbus did a poor job, I don't think you can blame him for what was cut. That's Kloves' job, and all Columbus did was adapt what Kloves wrote. Certainly he could have done a better job (making the films more artistic, adding emotional depth, etc.) but you can't blame him for what was cut.

[Cat]

Hopefully he'll put some R/Hr stuff in the movie that never happened. That'll really cause some excitement. :evil:

Cuaron, you mean? I hope so. Columbus was obviously a fan of Harry and Hermione getting together and he wasn't afraid to show it. Or maybe that was Kloves. Somebody read too much fan fiction, anyway.

*Shudder*

Another pairing, however out of place, would be a breath of fresh air.

***
I'm not entirely sure of how to spot the differences between a badly directed film and a well directed film. I agree that Columbus might have been a bit technical, though. There wasn't much that really jumped out and bit you on the bum, as far as the general style was concerned. I don't mind how the first two were directed (especially some parts of the second), but I'm all for a more artsy-fartsy approach.

[Loz]

:lol: artsy-fartsy approach... see now Cat is getting to the heart of it.

Some people here have a conception that film should be Art, and that if the film is not Art it is a badly directed film. I disagree - now bare in mind I majored in Film Studies and English, I LOVE Citizen Kane and Lawrence of Arabia (considered two of the most artistic films) not to mention various other highly artisitic films, but I do not think all film should be Art. Some films are just entertaining movies and whilst it pains me to say it, the Harry Potter novels are popular culture novels for young readers. As you know, I am a huge Harry Potter fan - why spend so much time on a HP forum if I wasn't, but I accept its limitations. It is brilliant, it is fantastic. It's not what one would strictly call Art from a writer's point of view. Art in writing is very subjective, and highly debatable, but I think most agree that Harry Potter isn't striving to be Art for Art's sake.

It seems to me it would be unwise to create a truly brilliant Art film adapted from a popular entertainment Novel. For one, we would probably lose a lot of the plot. Certain things would become nonsensical. Now, if you were only referring to Artistic Elements, a few cleverly crafted shots, a symbol or motif here and there, then okay. You have to remember, however, that a Director is not only responsible for working on developing atmosphere in a film or tinkering with the mise-en-scene, a Director has to rally the troops, work with cast and crew, worry about when to shoot, work with the special effects department, the hair and make-up department, the costume designer, the editors, the marketing officials, the composer, the cooks in the kitchen, Kenneth Branagh's left foot. It isn't just Columbus's fault the film lacks a certain aesthetic appeal and doesn't have the look of some of the truly beautiful films of our age. It can't be everything at once. The films have been successful, and they're not the worst films ever made - there are some nice shots, on the whole I'd say Columbus did an adequate job.

However, I do hope there is more care taken into what we see in a frame in future. There has to be more than adequate, right? ;) :p

:lol:

[daniel4hp]

I tend to fall into the film-is-art camp, but I do think Loz brings up valid points. Not all film is art, and not all film is intended to be hard. Some is entertainment, some is pure art, a lot is a mix.

But even when a film is intended to be, first and foremost, entertainment, I think it should have artistic elements. It does not have to be stripped of all artistic quality to be entertaining. The best popular movies are a mixture of both entertainment and art -- they strive to entertain the audience, but they do is in a way that is artistic and well made. An example of this would be Lord of the Rings.

This is how I see Harry Potter. Harry Potter will never be Citezen Kane, but it can be artistic. This is what I expect Cuaron to bring to it, and this is why I think that Cuaron will be a better director. Columbus' version was purely entertainment with no artistic quality, and I don't think that cuts it. It should be entertaining, yes, but it should be presented in an artistic way.

[Cat]

Something can be artistic witout being surreal and bewildering, though. Like the difference between a magnificently decorated gateaux and an iced bun. Neither are the stuff of galleries in Paris, but one's got a bit more style than the other.

Loz, I firmly believe that every work of fiction is art (unless it's Mills and Boon), just like every painting is art (unless it's something I did in art classes). There are different styles of art, and you can't really say which is more artisic than the other. More poetic, perhaps, more philosphical, political, romantic or wordy. Not more arty. You might as well say which cheese is more cheesey.

You know, I think I might be hungry.

[Loz]

Cat, I did say Art for Art's sake. I think most works of merit can be classified as artistic - but pure Art? Hmm... It's one of those "it's subjective" things I find myself saying time and time again on these forums. It's subjective.

I'm hungry too, pass the cheese?

[hawk1245]

Cuaron, you mean? I hope so. Columbus was obviously a fan of Harry and Hermione getting together and he wasn't afraid to show it. Or maybe that was Kloves. Somebody read too much fan fiction, anyway.

*Shudder*

Another pairing, however out of place, would be a breath of fresh air.

***
I'm not entirely sure of how to spot the differences between a badly directed film and a well directed film. I agree that Columbus might have been a bit technical, though. There wasn't much that really jumped out and bit you on the bum, as far as the general style was concerned. I don't mind how the first two were directed (especially some parts of the second), but I'm all for a more artsy-fartsy approach.

OT. I think it is not out of the question for hand h to be togehter. JK moght be throwing us off. Tey are perfect for eachother, I mean look at it like this: Both were raised by muggles, both have uncontrolable hair, both have a time where they don't speak to Ron. I think a love triangle will happen, but I can't predict the outcome. You have to watch JK, she makes sure you are suprised in the end (look at all the supposed "deaths" in OopP before the real one!) Sorry, back to the thread!

[hawk1245]

Columbus' version was purely entertainment with no artistic quality, and I don't think that cuts it. It should be entertaining, yes, but it should be presented in an artistic way.[/QUOTE]

Thats not completly tue! The lighting and moddy atmoshere of Cos couts for a LITTLE art, not original, but icolumus requested it be moodier, and even got a new DP! I may be no LOTR, but it had SOME art in it, not alot, but some.

[Loz]

Hawk1245, I must ask that you stop double posting. If you want to add something to your comments, use the edit button.

As for your Harry/Hermione comments, they belong in the love thread.

[ginnybatbogeysyou]

I think Columbes did an OK job. I had expected the first two movies to be much more magical. I get the real magic feel when I see the trailer for PoA, but that feeling is missing when I watch the firts two movies.

[sawyer]

My personal opinion is O.k.: first movie was not very good, but the second one, with a very amusing Branagh, was enjoyable. ;)

[daniel4hp]

Columbus' version was purely entertainment with no artistic quality, and I don't think that cuts it. It should be entertaining, yes, but it should be presented in an artistic way.

Thats not completly tue! The lighting and moddy atmoshere of Cos couts for a LITTLE art, not original, but icolumus requested it be moodier, and even got a new DP! I may be no LOTR, but it had SOME art in it, not alot, but some.
The second film did have a little artistic quality. Key word: little. In other words, not enough. Yeah, there was a difference cinematographer, who was, admittedly, better than the one for the first film, and there was some mood in the film. The second one was a bit more artistic than the first. But neither was artistic enough, in my opinion. Sure, they are basically children's movies, but that's no reason not to have mood. It doesn't have to be dark, but it should have mood and character. There was a bit of this in the second, although not enough, and almost none in the first.

[leenielou]

And in case someone asks why I dislike Columbus: My answer is very simple: his movies are too fake, predictable, he does the minimum necessary to bring entertainment, but not something you can deem artistic.

I completely agree with this, yet I don't think that the two Harry Potter movies were poor. The screenwriting was maybe a bit dodgy and sick-inducing at some points, but in general Columbus was doing what he knew with the script that he was given. You can't bleed a stone, and you can't make an epic out of an excellent book dumbed down to fit kiddie-merchandising route for a film.

[Constant Vigilance]

I'm a total film geek with a love for "Artsy Film" (I actually get exited seein Citizen Kane & Potemkin) but I got to tell it like it is: Columbus did a good job and there is no reason to belive Cuaron is in any way better than him.

Let's talk first about Columbus. He's no Peter Jakson (and I cry because of that!) but he came up with a good couple of films. They were fun and retained the core of the books. Sometimes the scenes were just Ok (as the scene when the Dursleys hide in the island) but we also got top notch scenes (Ollivander's). These are producer's movies (more bussines venture oriented than say LoTR that gave Jakson more creative freedom) and Columbus got what was wanted: blockbusters that are also good films. Not great but good enought to merit getting them on DVD and seeing them several times. They are carefully done and it shows.

It must be noted that the films' strenght is the acting. The acting is very good. The adults may have acted by themselves Woody Allen style (he just says what he wants and goes to fuss over the camera or something) but the kids need the director to come up with something good. Even the more experienced ones like Tom Felton. They are just kids and it's the director that keeps them in line. Remember Home Alone? That showed good kid acting too (but dumb story). So let's recognice Columbus worth: he's a good actor's director. And a great kid actor director. That is of the utmost importance for Harry Potter films. I think that was the number one requirement and Columbus did Fine.

On Cuaron. Everybody says Y Tu Mamá También was great so Pricioner of Azkaban will be great too. Sorry but that's really a weird idea. Wen I first heard the news I was shocked, the poeple I told them were also shocked. What does that movie have to do with Potter? Nothing. It's NOT a teen movie. It's a movie about young men, not boys. It's about sex and the loss of frienship. Harry Potter is not about loosing friendship. It's about boys and girls (I really don't understand why girls liked Y Tu Mamá También, it's an anti girl movie remember the scene on the pool in the sports club?). Harry Potter's definitively not about sex. The title means And Your Mother Too (the character had sex with his friend's mother) What does this have to do with Potter? First time I read the news I was horriefied, it looked surreal like turning HP into a road movie about sex. Had the worst visions of a H/Hr/R thing. Y Tu Mamá También is a great film (I loved it) but comepletely unrelated to Harry. It's like saying "I'm great for Harry Potter because I did a great WWII drama" Good for you, but so what?

Cuaron only got the job because of A Little Princess (not showed in my country) a film almost no one has seen. So until I see Prisioner it's all a "definitive maybe". Yes, Cuaron's a good director, but so are many others. Don't see why he's special. Little Princess must better be good. It looks like a whim on the part of JKR who got him the job. JKR is a fan of Little Princess both movie and book so if you guys did not like the changes of the movie...JKR did. So it's feasible that she'll be OK with a similar thing in Prisioner.

If you wanted a latin director Guillermo del Toro was a more obvious choice. He's a horror director: HP has scary parts. You want art? El Espinazo del Diablo was artsy, it was also high budget and sold a lot. It had special FX, it had beautifull production design, and most important, it was about an orphanage (almost the same as a boarding school) with wonderful children's acting.

So Little Princes' suposed to have some of this stuff too? OK, I'll take your word for it. But Y Tu Mamá También is not relevant at all for Harry Potter. Saying that movie makes Cuaron an ideal choice is as weird as saying David Lynch is an ideal choice. Didn't Lynch prove great at "teen romance" with Blue Velvet and Wild at Hart? Both those movies had a suposed "adolescent" in love: Kyle in the first and Laura Dern the second. That's the kind of movies that are similar to the very hard Y Tu Mamá También.

[daniel4hp]

It must be noted that the films' strenght is the acting. The acting is very good. ...the kids need the director to come up with something good. Even the more experienced ones like Tom Felton. They are just kids and it's the director that keeps them in line. Remember Home Alone? That showed good kid acting too (but dumb story). So let's recognice Columbus worth: he's a good actor's director. And a great kid actor director. That is of the utmost importance for Harry Potter films.
The acting on the part of the child stars was not good. Admittedly, they were not very experienced, so you can't dump all the blame on Columbus, but you certainly can't say that the acting was good. I'd be interested to here how Radcliffe's performance in the first film can be construed as being a "strength." Or the other child stars. The adult actors were good, but I see nothing in HP to indicate that Columbus is good with kids.

On Cuaron. Everybody says Y Tu Mamá También was great so Pricioner of Azkaban will be great too. Sorry but that's really a weird idea. Wen I first heard the news I was shocked, the poeple I told them were also shocked. What does that movie have to do with Potter? Nothing. It's NOT a teen movie.
I think A Little Princess is a better example of what can be expected from PoA than Y Tu Mama Tambien. "Y Tu" is about teens becoming adults; PoA is about kids becoming teens. There are similarities, but they certainly aren't the same. "Princess" is an adaptation of a children's book, so it may bear more relevence.

Yes, Cuaron's a good director, but so are many others. Don't see why he's special.
Of course he's only one of many good directors. I would not pretend that he was the only director who was good for the film, or that no other director could have done it. I didn't make the choice of director; I support Cuaron because that's who was chosen by others. He's going to be the director, and since he's a good director, there's no reason to think he won't make PoA into a good film.

[rotsiepots]

The acting on the part of the child stars was not good. Admittedly, they were not very experienced, so you can't dump all the blame on Columbus, but you certainly can't say that the acting was good. I'd be interested to here how Radcliffe's performance in the first film can be construed as being a "strength." Or the other child stars. The adult actors were good, but I see nothing in HP to indicate that Columbus is good with kids.

Have you perhaps considered that the child actors would have been even worse without Columbus? He's directed inexperienced children before, which was one of the primary reasons he got the gig. These were kids who didn't know how to hit their marks, say their lines or where to look. Columbus taught them a lot, no doubt. I think the improvement of some of the child actors from PS to CoS is a testament to this.

[star22]

think A Little Princess is a better example of what can be expected from PoA than Y Tu Mama Tambien.

Yes, I agree. That is exactly why I am worried. A Little Princess was well done, but totally different from the books. I know people will dissagree with me, but I prefer sticking to the books to making a film artsy, etc. I don't mind little changes, but big changes bother me. A Little Princess was about as far from the books as you can come. They changed the setting, the characters, and the ending. In my opinion, it totally ruined it. I can understand changing the character, but the other changes were not necessary.

[hawk1245]

Yes, I agree. That is exactly why I am worried. A Little Princess was well done, but totally different from the books. I know people will dissagree with me, but I prefer sticking to the books to making a film artsy, etc. I don't mind little changes, but big changes bother me. A Little Princess was about as far from the books as you can come. They changed the setting, the characters, and the ending. In my opinion, it totally ruined it. I can understand changing the character, but the other changes were not necessary.

Well, I agree with you. I think they shoudl stick to the books as best they can. JK is watching him don't worry, he won't change the ending. He is merely putting his own stylistic aproach to the film, all directors do. The story overall is going to be the same, JK will make sure of this. I think POA is going to be the best one yet! You will see! :)

[phoenixsong]

Okay, I'm going to throw in different criteria for what makes (great) art: not (simply) formal criteria, but affective resonance. I think that a film should resonate with its audience, so that you continue to feel its effect even after you leave the theatre. And while that is somewhat a product of the script (Kloves' job), it is primarily a product of the direction (Columbus' job). And I didn't feel like Columbus did that, which is fine. The first two movies were well-produced, Columbus told a story, but I didn't really care about it. The only thing that really stood out to me as great were the props, but I didn't care about any of the characters.

Now I understand Loz's point that these are popular books, after all, and maybe not the highest of literature, but we do care about the characters and what happens to them, no? Isn't that why everybody was waiting at their local bookstore at midnight of June 21 last year?

So, for me, where Columbus fails is in emotional resonance. And I think that Cuaron has proven himself in this regard. Apologies to those who live in places where the movie isn't available, but A Little Princess is one of the best children's movies ever made, in my opinion. At risk of sounding like a complete sop, when I watch that film I feel like I'm on the verge of tears from beginning to end, and it is completely due to Cuaron's directorial decisions, which somehow, like magic, made the film more powerful than the book (and I love the book, too). That rarely happens, in my experience. I can't really think of any films that I like more than the book on which it was based.

As for Y Tu Mama Tambien, how remarkable, in my opinion, that Cuaron can make us care about these two, apparently callous, sex- and drug-obsessed teenagers. Not to mention the subtle and wonderful ways that he lays their story over the political and economic realities of the country around them.

I'm sorry for wandering off-topic here, but this thread somehow turned into a thread about Cuaron as much as about Columbus. I could go on and on about the merits of Cuaron, but I'll save that for a different thread! This thread is supposed to be about Columbus, and I'll repeat that the reason I judge him rather harshly is because what I want from a movie-going experience is to be emotionally moved, and Columbus didn't give me that.

[Constant Vigilance]

I think Phoenixsong's right, Columbus' a bit weak on the emotion department. In the books we are painfully aware of Harry's solitude. In the movies we just know it. Kloves wrote scenes specially for that (the one with Hedwings flight in winter, Harry's vigil by the window), OK not great script scenes but Columbus does not exploit the material to it's fullest. It's pretty matter of fact filming, you see he's itching to get back to his action comedy turf.

I stand by my words on the kids acting good. Ok, so Dan is no Haley Joe Osmand, he's just adecuate, but Tom Felton, Emma Watson and Ruppert Grint do a really good job. Of the 3 only Felton was a pro.

[hawk1245]

I actually got goosebumbps during the scenes with Hedwig flying off from Hogwart and music swelling. I also got goseump EVERY time Harry get ripped out of the diary in COS. I thought that whole part ws well done. I thought the mirror of erisedwas VERY emotional, Harry trying to reach out and touch his parets though the glss just made tear swell up in my eyes, thats one of my favorite parts of both movies!

[Constant Vigilance]

I actually got goosebumbps during the scenes with Hedwig flying off from Hogwart and music swelling. I also got goseump EVERY time Harry get ripped out of the diary in COS. I thought that whole part ws well done. I thought the mirror of erisedwas VERY emotional, Harry trying to reach out and touch his parets though the glss just made tear swell up in my eyes, thats one of my favorite parts of both movies!

The Mirror was the best segment in the movie! That was great. Columbus does put emotion on film, just not all the time. He's like the latter Lucas. Does one thing at a time: drama or action, as oposed to guys like Peter Jakson who can put emotion on a bunch of elephants stomping kinghts (I mean epic emotion, not just the GO LEGOLAS! kind of emotion). The Quidditch matches have been fun, but not the truly epical stuff I expected (besides they kind of remind me of pod racing, and the Trench segment in CoS was clearly a Star Wars Rip Off)

[hawk1245]

The Mirror was the best segment in the movie! That was great. Columbus does put emotion on film, just not all the time. He's like the latter Lucas. Does one thing at a time: drama or action, as oposed to guys like Peter Jakson who can put emotion on a bunch of elephants stomping kinghts (I mean epic emotion, not just the GO LEGOLAS! kind of emotion). The Quidditch matches have been fun, but not the truly epical stuff I expected (besides they kind of remind me of pod racing, and the Trench segment in CoS was clearly a Star Wars Rip Off)

I wasn't a RIPOFF. It was an h'omage. The music for when they enter the trench is taken directly from SW:AOTC, so it was done on purpose.

[SamIAm]

I think Colombus did an okay job at the movie. But i cannot wait for the 3rd movie to come out! You get to see a whole differnet view of the movie from a very different director. For some reason I think Alfonso is going to be doing a better job at it than Colombus.

[petronus]

Columbus did okay as a 1st director. But, he was too into books and the story line, what I mean is, he made the films just like books, we almost knew that when Draco said 'Scared Potter', he would reply 'You wish!'.

Columbus was too chaptered, if you know what I mean. I think Alfonso has done better. I wish I could just see it today (yeah, right! dream on!)

~/*-*\~ Petronus

[Cat]

Columbus did okay as a 1st director. But, he was too into books and the story line, what I mean is, he made the films just like books, we almost knew that when Draco said 'Scared Potter', he would reply 'You wish!'.


.... Did that dialogue even happen in the book?

Anyway, I disagree. I don't think Columbus was too true to the book. I think he was too true to the marketing. There's a big difference.

I thought, although there were some scenes that were beautifully done, most of it had 'Warner Bros.' stamped in enormous lettering all over it. Columbus is probably a very good director of kiddie films, but there are far too many scenes and aspects of Harry Potter that shouldn't be looked at in a kiddie way. It's rarely cute. It's never cuddly (well, except Fluffy, bless 'im).

[lxs234]

Columbus could have had them do more takes, which would make the story better, but at least he didn't make it too hard. If they didn't enjoy their first movies, they wouldn't have wanted to continue. At least now they want to do the fourth.

[Rowena Ravenclaw]

It seems to me it would be unwise to create a truly brilliant Art film adapted from a popular entertainment Novel.

I don't know. The Godfather came from popular entertainment, after all, and it's considered right up there with Citizen Kane.

Anyway, I'm inclined to side with those who think Columbus kiddified the movies a bit too much. I'd also argue that his problem wasn't so much staying true to the books as focusing too much on the wrong parts; surely a few seconds could have been trimmed from the Quidditch matches to explain the source of Snape's dislike for Harry. On the other hand, he was hampered somewhat by the fact he had to introduce so many other aspects of Harry's world; poor Hermione didn't have much to do in CoS but spout exposition.

As for Cuaron, I refuse to believe he bore no responsibility for the changes to A Little Princess (from what I understand of Hollywood, if the director or the studio wants something changed, the screenwriter changes it or finds he's no longer the screenwriter), but at least we know he can't possibly bring James back to life...right?

[daniel4hp]

As for Cuaron, I refuse to believe he bore no responsibility for the changes to A Little Princess (from what I understand of Hollywood, if the director or the studio wants something changed, the screenwriter changes it or finds he's no longer the screenwriter), but at least we know he can't possibly bring James back to life...right?
The power of the director differs greatly from film to film. Ultimately, the producer(s) is in charage of the film and can make any changes; neither the screenwriter nor the director can make changes the producer(s) doesn't approve of. In a film such as The Lord of the Rings, where it was basically one person's idea, that one person wields a lot of power. But when the director is just hired to direct a film that's already been written, it may be a rather different story.

In other words, it is possible Cuaron is responsible for the changes to A Little Princess. But it just isn't likely. I would guess that it was a decision of the screenwriter or the producers to make major alterations, and Cuaron was simply hired to direct a story that had already been written. This might not be the case, but I would consider it the most likely. And remember, any changes that were made to that film were approved by that film's producer(s).

[Mad Macca]

I voted Okay. Reason being, I think Columbus could have totally butchered the first 2 films, and although he didn't do a fantastic job, they were still ok.

[hawk1245]

It's kinda funny, but I guess all movies are best the first time you see them, casue when COS first came out, EVERYONE (almost) was saying how awsome it was. Now alot of peopl are talking about it being bad or okay. I just thoguht it was kinda funny, maybe movie are best watched when you see it for the very first time. There was something about COS in theaters thats missing from watching it on DVD,the quiddithcscene in paticular was SOOO cool in thaters, but is much less exiting on DVD. Don't know why.

[daniel4hp]

I say okay to the adaption of PS by Columbus due to the fact that I had not read the Harry Potter books until after PS. So I was not in a position to judge the film version. With CoS I noticed the difference and was a little disappointed with all the out takes but then again there is only so much you can do with a set budget. Perhaps if the director had been given more finances then both films might have been better.
I don't think a lack of funding is the problem -- the films had a budget of around $125,000,000. Note that each LotR film cost around $75,000,000. I think its more a matter of how the money is used, how much time the director has to make the film, and, quite simply, how tallented the director is. In the case of cutting things out, that's just a matter of cutting the film down to a reasonable length.

[SaveeSurpens]

Columbus has no style. His direction was as bland and unrisky as it could get. I don't see why they didn't hire a mre unique director because the movie franchise would have taken off with or without safety precautions such as Chris. The least they could have done is get a director who would imbue some artistic flair into the movie and somewhat honor the books.

[hawk1245]

Columbus has no style. His direction was as bland and unrisky as it could get. I don't see why they didn't hire a mre unique director because the movie franchise would have taken off with or without safety precautions such as Chris. The least they could have done is get a director who would imbue some artistic flair into the movie and somewhat honor the books.

One of the reasons they got Columbus was becasue he is very good with child actors. Lots of directors hate working with kids, CC loves it. He also has a great respect and love for the material. I for one think that POA wouldn't be nearly as enjoyable as it is bound to be if Columbus had given us a bit canvas of art with the first two films. When you think about it that is what made the POA book stand out, the first two were seemingly kids books (not really, seemingly) and then POA hits you like a canon ball in the chest. I think the movie will do that too.

[Cyrus]

he blows...the acting blows...the films blow. simple as.

[hawk1245]

he blows...the acting blows...the films blow. simple as.

Well, that's your opinion. Want a tip? Don't watch the first two films expecting Gone with the Wind and you will enjoy them. They are for entertainment purposes, and the acting didn't blow! I mean, I admit it was loose in places, but most of it was great, especially by the adults!

[LumosSoleil]

I think Columbus did a pretty good job, though he was kind of bland....ok, he was really bland, but the films weren't bad at all. I think the 2 films were artsy, not so grand, but artsy. I agree with everyone on the emotional levels of the films. They could have been stronger, but there were great moments too. My favorite of all is the Mirror of Erised (mirror of desire) scene. I loved the music, tone, and color of the whole thing. Then when it's followed by Harry walking with Hedwig and we see the change in seasons, that was great! I always have to rewind that part over and watch it again. I never saw either films in the cinema and I still think they're both great. It took me a while to like CoS because it just felt plain IMO. But after watching it a couple of more times, I began to like it. Plus, on first watching it ever (on Dvd) I felt the change shift in mood immediately. It felt darker, less cheerful and musical.

One of the things that bugged the heck out of me is the music. I love it but, some of the tone don't fit certain scenes. I was hoping they would hire a new composer, but got pretty annoyed to find they didn't. I have to say, the new "potter" music is much better than the first 2. It's more dramatic and it ranges more. Plus, it actually sounds a lot different from the first 2 but with subtle hints from the original scores.

On Cuaron, I think he'll do fine. I'm really rooting for him to do OotP. That's an emotional and dark book.

[hawk1245]

I think Columbus did a pretty good job, though he was kind of bland....ok, he was really bland, but the films weren't bad at all. I think the 2 films were artsy, not so grand, but artsy. I agree with everyone on the emotional levels of the films. They could have been stronger, but there were great moments too. My favorite of all is the Mirror of Erised (mirror of desire) scene. I loved the music, tone, and color of the whole thing. Then when it's followed by Harry walking with Hedwig and we see the change in seasons, that was great! I always have to rewind that part over and watch it again. I never saw either films in the cinema and I still think they're both great. It took me a while to like CoS because it just felt plain IMO. But after watching it a couple of more times, I began to like it. Plus, on first watching it ever (on Dvd) I felt the change shift in mood immediately. It felt darker, less cheerful and musical.

One of the things that bugged the heck out of me is the music. I love it but, some of the tone don't fit certain scenes. I was hoping they would hire a new composer, but got pretty annoyed to find they didn't. I have to say, the new "potter" music is much better than the first 2. It's more dramatic and it ranges more. Plus, it actually sounds a lot different from the first 2 but with subtle hints from the original scores.

On Cuaron, I think he'll do fine. I'm really rooting for him to do OotP. That's an emotional and dark book.

Finally someone of whom I almost completley agree with. The mirror and change of seasons scenes are my favs too! The only thing I disagree with you on is the issue of music, if they replaced Williams, I would be very upset, he is one of the best movie composers (one, the THE though). But everything else I agree on. I do admit that Columbus isn't as good as Cauron, but if someone like Cauron did the first two, they wouldn't have fit the stories as well, in MY opinion. And I also think that Columbus wouldn't have handled POA as well as Cauron is. I like both of 'em.

[Auror Williamson]

While the movies weren't great under Columbus, they weren't as bad as some people think they were.

Columbus should not take the full blame for the movies, rather, a large part of it needs to fall on Kloves with his abhorrent script writing skills. Truthfully, Warner Bros needs to fire him.

Columbus was simply working on the the script that Kloves made. If Columbus was forced to strictly adhere to what Kloves wrote, then even more blame should be lifted from Columbus.

On the other hand, Columbus didn't do a great job in making the movie colorful and more like the books. As LumosSoleil said, the movies were pretty bland. I think Columbus could have put a little more effort into making the movie as good as it could be.

On another point, Columbus made it a little too Kiddish, as in too directed to really young viewers. Apparently it never occured to him that there were older viewers paying good money to see the films.


With Columbus being relieved from the job, I look forward to Cuaron's interpretation of the the books. In the teasers and photos I have seen, I can tell and extra effort in the making of the movie was made and can't wait for June.

[thethirdman]

I was disappointed with the way Columbus handled the films. I'm with Loz and daniel4hp about the art/entertainment thing. Art is good. Entertainment is good. A film can be either or both. I think the thing that makes a film good or bad is the way the story is told and the technical aspects. I think Columbus assumes that his audience has all read the books. I think that leads to too much choppy-ness in his story-telling approach. He'll leave out details that I think are important to the story/characters. I also think he technical work is sloppy. I don't think he's experimentive enough. He doesn't play with angles and shots. I think that since the books were so inventive that the films should have reflected JK's style more. I find her style to be laid-back. Columbus is just too forced.

I also don't like the way he directed his actors, namely the trio and Draco. It makes me wonder if Columbus actually knows anything about acting.

[Godrics_Heiress]

I thought he did okay. But the fact is that I saw the two movies when I wasn't as obsessed about HP as I am now, so I didn't really care about some variations that he made in the movie that a big HP fan will notice. I know I'd be critical to the this upcoming movie but from what I have seen so far in the pics and trailers, Cuaron did a better job. I still think Columbus did an okay job, though.

[mirandam]

I think that Colombus did fine. Yes, they were a little bland. I think we need to remember that he was starting from the ground up. Also with younger actors that did not have the experience that some others do. Also as some have said about it being choppy-he didn't write the script. There are things that he can not control. I think that he would love to go back and start over again as everyone would with most things. There was also a budget to consider and time, so everything can't be the way we percieved it in our minds-too many minds work differently anyways. I think that each film will get better as they come along as we do learn from our mistakes in the past. I look forward to seeing the changes in all the films.

[thethirdman]

Also as some have said about it being choppy-he didn't write the script. There are things that he can not control.

The choppyness isn't all in the script. A smoothly written screenplay can be easily butchered with a bad director at the helm. Likewise a good director can turn a choppy script into something worth watching once or twice. The director has control over what gets cut during editing. I don't think Columbus was doing his job. If I was someone at WB, I'd have fired him...of course I wouldn't have hired him to being with.

[thinkpink38]

I choose okay, becasue I think he could have done way better, honestly I thought the first movie was pretty bad, I can't stand watching it bad! The COS, was way better, hopefully he keeps improving.

[darklord_grindelwald]

Columbus was okay. Nothing more.
He just copied the book to screen, and that doesn't mean the films are good adaptations (esp. PS/SS). I almost fell asleep while watching the first movie, the second was much better, it was exciting and everything, but still... something is missing from both films. I think Columbus didn't really catch the feeling, the mood of the story.

[Wab]

The first movie failed the vital watch check test. It was blah. Thankfully a lot of the weight was shifted in the scriptwriting from the trio to the adult cast. The kids couldn't have carried the movie. And I don't buy the "go easy they're just kids" argument. At their age Anna Paquin (equally inexperienced) was picking up an Oscar.

The second was better although I skipped the cinema and bought the DVD.

From the trailers PoA looks a lot more accomplished.

[thethirdman]

. At their age Anna Paquin (equally inexperienced) was picking up an Oscar.


Anna Paquin also had really good acting coaches and a director. Natural talent can only take you so far. After that it's the effort and the direction and the training that get actors where need to be to pick up that Oscar. Yes, the kids were inexperienced, but Columbus should have seen that and given them the direction and brought in the coaches needed to make them better. I think Columbus did them a lot of harm by letting them get away with half-way acting. However, this problem seems to have been corrected in POA.

[Honeydukes]

I don't think Columbus is to blame for the poor quality of the films; I think the real problem is the kids *cringe*

[thethirdman]

I don't think Columbus is to blame for the poor quality of the films; I think the real problem is the kids *cringe*

Columbus is the same guy responsible for Home Alone. That paint can to the face festival of over-acting. You can see his trademark directing (look at the camera and scream. Now look over there and scream. Now fall over) all over the film. Honestly I'm surprised he didn't throw a kick to the groin in for good measure. Spielburg who have made a better film if it weren't for the fact that he insisted on Haley Joel for Harry. That and Spieburg's been hit and miss lately. Still Columbus could have learned a lot about storytelling from him.