Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire
a review by Scott on November 18^th, 2005

Difficult times lie ahead, Harry
Cast and Crew
Director	Mike Newell
Writer (Screenplay)	Steven Kloves
Harry Potter	Daniel Radcliffe
Hermione Granger	Emma Watson
Ron Weasley	Rupert Grint
Lord Voldemort	Ralph Fiennes

When I read Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire for the first time, I finished it in two days. The movie, unfortunately, isn't nearly that long. As with any novel to film adaptation, you will hear the classic complaints of what was added and what was missing from the original material. Ultimately these are minor issues in this film, with the sloppy writing and weak direction snatching up the more significant flaw awards. Yet, in spite of these errors, the simple strength of the story it's based upon is powerful enough to deliver an entertaining film.

What Went Wrong

The two major flaws in this film were sloppy writing and weak direction. At times, it was difficult to pin down which of the two was the offending party. For example, was the excessive use of alliteration simply lazy attempts to cover up a lack of clever dialogue? Or did it appear overbearing and pretentious because of the direction given to the actors? Either way, there's no denying that previously sophisticated, intelligent characters suddenly appeared tongue-twisted in their sophomoric attempts to sound sophisticated and intelligent.

This brings up an interesting quirk relating to the production of the Harry Potter films. Due to there being a different director for each film, the movies are often set in drastically different Hogwarts, populated by suddenly alien characters. I hesitate to complain about this, however, considering The Prisoner of Azkaban was a far better film than Chamber of Secrets and Sorcerer's Stone. In Goblet of Fire, though, the professors aren't the same professors we've come to know in the past films (or the books) and not thanks to a natural character development, but instead, a sudden and drastic personality alteration. Fortunately, the same cannot be said for the three main actors whose portrayals of Harry, Ron, and Hermione are their strongest by far. They show true character maturation in light of the greater pressures their world has presented them with.

What Went Right

None of this is to say the film was all bad - far from it. As mentioned above, Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, and Emma Watson give their best performances to date. Harry's struggle with even more fame, Ron's jealousy (on two fronts), and Hermione's first true foray into the world of romance are all captured beautifully. It's quite obvious that they have grown significantly as actors (actress) since Sorcerer's Stone. No one, however, compares to Ralph Fiennes who, as Lord Voldemort, steals the show in the 10 or so minutes he's on screen.

Speaking of Lord Voldemort, while it can be said that the direction was weak through much of the film, the same cannot be said about the rising of Voldemort. From the touching of the Triwizard Cup, through the climax of the film, it is spot on. You can feel the fear, both of Harry as he struggles for his life, as well as for the wizarding world as a whole who must once again face this evil, dangerous creature. All this makes it all the more unfortunate that the final speach by Dumbledore and the ensuing farewells seem so forced and meaningless (with easily the worst dialogue of the entire film).

Where it Stands

In spite of all of these problems, though, the story is so fantastic that the film is still fun. In relation to the other 3 movies, it would rank above Sorcerer's Stone and Chamber of Secrets but would not quite reach the heights of Prisoner of Azkaban. For anyone who is a fan of the previous 3 films, there should be no doubt in your mind about whether to take the time to see this movie.