Slashdot Mirror
Goblet of Fire Teaser Trailer Released
bryan8m writes "The teaser trailer for the next installment of the Harry Potter series has hit the web. The clip begins with a bit of a flashback but quickly turns to the triwizard tournament with some amazing visuals. And there is new director (again): Mike Newell."
It was on Apple's movie trailers site a week ago today.
when it comes to puberty, it's got to be hard to match older kids as younger kids.
Almost as big as Star W. . . .Ahh!!!! Get away you freeks!
Always going forward, 'cause we can't find reverse.
http://bash.org/?111338
http://movies.apple.com/movies/wb/harry_potter_gob let/hp_gobletoffire_480.mov
here tis
Harry Potter and the Kafkaeque Prison of Self?
Source?
For, well, either of those (a) baseless, and (b) totally illogical assertions? :-)
How long are they going to make these things for?
:)
If I was in her shoes, I'd keep doing it for as long as it took for my paychecks to drop down to 5 figures, then I'd retire. After buying an island to retire on.
The first two were both directed by Chris Columbus.
I agree that Haryy Potter is not a Slashdot type of subject. However, I would recommend you read the books. They're enjoyable by both adults and older kids.
Self awareness - try it!
Not true.
Harry Potter and the Sorceror's Stone and Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets were both directed by Chris Columbus (this one, not that one).
v4sw6HPU$hw5ln6pr5$ck4ma8u7LMO$w2m6l7DL$i2e3t4MWb9AHKMRTen5a29s0r1p-5.88/-8.36g5CST
I bought the books last summer and read all 5 of them in a matter of days (spread out over a few weekends). Since them I have reread them and I am most certainly looking forward to the next one in ~62 days.
Give them a change, most likely you wouldn't be disappointed.
They are funny, well written and at the end of each book, you hit yourself over the head, because you didn't see it coming. One really can't stop reading them. Rowling even makes a joke in one of her books about a magical book that you can never put down. Well, her books are certainly magical.
They are also kind of a mystery spread out over 7 books. Only two left to go.
But if you can't take the suspense, perhaps you should wait untill book 7 is out in a few years.
What is also surprisingly is that the writing style ages with the characters. While book one is more targeted at 11 year olds, the 5th one is more for young adolescentes. But any age can and does enjoy them.
A decent fansite is: www.mugglenet.com
The editorials are usually good.
Before I read them I just discarded them as over hyped kids books. I was proven wrong, lucky me.
Gilliam: Eventually they went with another director, and since the film made over $300 million, that was obviously the right decision.
NPR: What did you think of the movie when it came out?
Gilliam: Crap.
Lawrence Person (lawrencepersonh@gmailh.com (remove all "h"s to mail)
http://www.lawrenceperson.com/
She's doing something right. The quality of the films has been reasonably consistent, unlike George Lucas, who will be lucky if he scores 3 out of 6 on Star Wars.
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
Anybody know of a way to install quicktime without iTunes?
sorry, couldn't resist
What were they thinking getting rid of a director who successfully translated books to movies?
They didn't exactly "get rid" of Chris Columbus. He chose not to direct the Prisoner of Azkaban in order to spend more time with his family (he was still an executive producer though). According to the IMDB, he wanted to come back and direct the fourth film, but Warner Brothers chose Mike Newell instead.
Slashdot Jr. News for prepubescent nerds, Stuff that would matter if I were 12.
(I kid, I've actually seen all of the other ones).
Why?
The movies are most definitely aimed at kids, however, as many others have already pointed out, the books are very enjoyable to adults as well. JKR has done an awesome job of sticking in subtle humour and wit that would completely pass over childrens heads, but which make the books alot more enjoyable for older readers.
Also, the books contain the entire story. Important parts of the plot aren't discarded to make time for an extra 30 seconds of pointless special effects. I've found it surprising that JKR has ok'd the scripts for the first three movies because in each of them alot of important info has been cut out of the movies. Which is a pity because she spends alot of effort going back to her stories to add hints and clues as to what might happen in a future book.
In short, the books rock. I've had the 6th one pre-ordered for months now
OK you sickos.
She's underage. You're going well over the line in making remarks about panty shots.
If you don't respect the fact that she's jailbait, at least respect the fact that she's a human being. I remember reading somewhere she actually was quite shy about a scene in which she was supposed to HUG one of her fellow actors. I can't imagine how I would feel being in a film knowing that pimply, greasy nerds and other creepy people were trying to picture my genitalia.
So in short, grow up and get a life. As for the guy with the "coming of age" clock - anyone who produced something like that about my daughter gets his CPU reprogrammed with a softball bat and rightly so. Get it? Even if I was creepy enough to look at a little girl in a sexual manner, I would accord the same respect to Emma Watson and to her father as I would expect shown to me and my own kids.
When did we as a society decide this kind of sick crap was OK? Fatty Arbuckle's career was ruined by the suggestion he was a diddler. R. Kelly, of whom we have VIDEO EVIDENCE he's a child molestor and kiddie rapist, is top of the charts. Go figure.
--- Jump!! Fire!! Bullet time!! - Lego version of the Matrix
No, you're pretty on topic, I submitted a year ago the teaser/trailer of Prisoner of Azkaban and it was denied posting because it was noted as "Off topic/not relevant".
The fans of the books/movies are growing older each year too. I'm still a big fan of the books, which I started reading when I was 11 or 12. That was 5-6 years ago.
> She's underage.
She is a fully physically mature woman.
> Even if I was creepy enough to look at a little girl in a sexual manner
Oh, nice strawman. Sure, she's a 'little girl'. Sure.
What I hear from you is "baa baa, 17 years 364 days = little innocent kid, 18 years = full grown responsible adult woman, baa". to which I submit that you're just proving you can't think for yourself or independently of what society tries to tell you. Plus, you obviously don't recall high school, or you just never got laid during it.
Actually I'd argue that the third movie, directed by Alfonso Cuarón was vastly superior to the previous two, which came across as long and a bit dry.
When asked to do the fourth movie, Alfonso said no, we wanted to spend the time to get the third one right in post-production. The result? An excellent 3rd movie, but I'm worried that the 4th won't be anywhere near as good.
There are lots of silly rumors about J.K. Rowling. The only conflict that has any real basis in fact is that she's not producing more Harry Potter as quickly as the publisher would like. One reason for this is the novels are getting progressively more bloated. Which I personally find a pain, but which most fantasy fans seem to love.
The big problem with the HP movies was not that the movie people didn't get along with Rowling, but that they got along all too well. So the first two movies were very literal adaptations of the first two books. Not a good way to make a movie, because you end up with a shortened version of the book that doesn't take advantage of cinematic story telling. Which is why I enjoyed the first two books, but found the first two movies utterly boring.
Well...that explains why the first two movies are so much better than the third.
Which movies did you watch? The scenery, sets, characters, and acting have got progressively better with each film.
Because I hate watching movies in a browser window.
Save dis shiz
$ whatis themeaningoflife
themeaningoflife: not found
Agreed, this is one of the few series that I've quite enjoyed my younger sister lent me her set to read. By far better then the movies. The movies are well, trash, total complete ... trash compared to the books.
Om, nomnomnom...
Yes, yes, of course...
YOUR kink, whatever it may be, is just fine and good. MY kink, however, is sick and twisted and disgusting.
I would point out to you that the age of consent in much of the world is 14, not 18, as you seem to believe. With some places as low as 12. So "underage" is a mere matter of location, at best.
http://www.ageofconsent.com/
I find this entire concept of "age of consent" somewhat tenuous, at best. It seems to imply that there is an age at which one magically is able to make intelligent, rational decisions about their own body and their sexuality, and below that they're just too stupid and/or immature to make any such decision. If that were actually the concern, I know plenty of 30 year olds who aren't able to make said intelligent, rational decisions... and plenty of 12 year olds who are. People mature at different ages. Get over it.
And this post is courtesy of a 49-year-old married man with kids of my own, but, unlike you, with a rational view of human sexuality. So much for your idea that anyone who thinks such things are OK must have problems with adult relationships. As a libertarian, I believe it's no business of the State to get involved with anything two people do consentually in private.
RE: Barely: and if she'd been born on a council estate she'd have a couple of kids of her own by now. You're living in a fantasy world if you think that underage sex isn't a regular occurence in the UK.
Underage with underage, fair enough - though I don't think it's the perfect state of affairs it happens. I can of course have a problem with adults shacking up with kids. And I dunno about you but where I came from the 25 year old who knocked up the 15 year old ended up razor scarred and fleeing the province for his life.
RE: In any case, it wouldn't surprise me at all if NuLab reduced the age of consent to fourteen: after all, they've already reduced the butt-shagging age for boys to sixteen, and I'm sure they'd like to reduce that further.
And of course, there'll be people like me saying it's wrong, and these oh so enlightened folk claiming that it's repression or whatever that's the root cause. Whatever happened to decency?
--- Jump!! Fire!! Bullet time!! - Lego version of the Matrix
Hey, this is just in: you can tell if someone is a pedophile by tossing them in the water. If they float, they're pedophiles. If they drown, eh, we had to make sure.
Now, I dislike pedophilia as much as the next guy, but the sort of furious demagogue rhetoric I hear from some people in this forum sounds like someone trying to inflame a mob to lynch a witch to me.
Further more, Emma Watson is 15 years old, which makes her below age of consent, but only barely, so you are actually justified in your moral outrage legally. And I do understand you stance, being the protector of a little girl and all.
However, expression of sexual attraction to a physically adult human being sounds vulgar to me, but not nearly as vulgar as your threat of death by softball bat that you spewed. I really don't get how an expression of violence should somehow be acceptable, but one of sexual matters should be labelled "sicko".
Now que the "You're a God-damn pederass lover and need to be executed same as them!" flames.
RE: However, expression of sexual attraction to a physically adult human being sounds vulgar to me, but not nearly as vulgar as your threat of death by softball bat that you spewed
It was the server I threatened with a bat.
--- Jump!! Fire!! Bullet time!! - Lego version of the Matrix
I do think you're over reacting a bit. I agree that sexualising children is wrong, but surely you're aware that a lot of children are taking cues from older segments of society and sexualising themselves quite happily without any conspiracy of "kiddie diddlers". Go out on any Friday night, and you'll see that not a single 25 year old dresses as sexually provocatively as the average 14 year old, not even the prostitutes.
I can't tell you how many times I've been out and seen a girl where I honestly couldn't work out the faintest clue as to how old she was - anywhere between 15 and 26. I'm in my 20s and not the least bit interested in anyone under 21, but in some cases, you genuinely can't tell from looks alone.
It's a pain in ass, but it's life, so I think going near-ballistic because someone dares observe that 15 year olds can be (and often are) sexual is a little baffling. I know one very sexy, gorgeous 24-year-old night-clubbing girl who has even commented out-of-the-blue that she really doesn't like going to all-ages events because the 14 year olds make her feel so unsexy and plain in comparison.
And I guarentee you she isn't creepily projecting fantasies on those girls. Many, if not most 14 year olds are NOT asexual chidren. They are sexual beings. You don't have to like it (I don't, she doesn't), but that's the way the world is.
Is the Slashdot Main Page some sort of temple that must not be defiled?
What if the story was about a new video card, is that pimping?
I think Slashdot should cover geek things in general - be they scientific, technical, or cultural.
"The world is a construct of forceful imagination. Those who don't know walk around in the reailties of those who do"
Not only is this old, but it hardly seems fitting for the /. main page. I realize the books are much-loved and all, but let's be serious. Do we really need Slashdot pimping movie trailers? I'm sure a good majority of us hit apple.com/movies often enough anyway. I prefer /. to report on cool tech stuff, not hollywood bullshit.
I'd prefer /. to go without the endless Microsoft-bashing and Apple/Google fanboyism, but one can't always get what one wants. The great thing about the internet is that you get to decide what you click on. There's plenty of other stories on the front page, if you don't like this one, why whinge about it? You could always try submitting something you'd like to see on the main page yourself.
Personally, I'm looking forward to the fourth movie after seeing the trailer. I wasn't very impressed with the first two, but I think the third made up for them and then some.
O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!
A claim of FUD used to be a very serious accusation. It was meant to counter act some of the subtle marketing that the big players were pushing. FUD goes hand in hand with vapourware. FUD is all about promissing that a company's future product is better then a competitor's product. A common claim was that a competitor's product had no future. A important part of FUD is that it is difficult or impossible to varify a company's claim.
Now FUD is claimed by any 13 year old fanboy who does not like a negative comment about their product of choice. A claim of FUD has become no better than true marketing FUD.
...I mean, you got plenty of kids being trialed as adults, but not one that can screw like an adult. This has lead to silly stuff like a 12yo girl being charged with molesting two 11yo girls, or the teenager (how old was she? 15?) charged with molesting herself.
So if the underage person is the "molester", she understands everything, but if she is the "molestee", she understands nothing. That requires a few leaps of logic, but that is the way it is.
We're approaching the same kind of sillyness here. A 16yo can screw as much as they want with whoever they want, but if you take a picture of it it is child pornography. It's like saying you can smoke weed, but not take a picture of it. Go figure
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
I have to agree with you; I think the third movie was worse than the others.
IIRC there were some big plot holes for people who didn't know the story;
the Marauders Map (looking very nice) was put very much into the foreground, but it lacked some explaining - for example who created it:
Lupin knew what it was, but there was no explaination why he - but not Snape - did know how to use it
(no explaination of the creators' nicknames and that Lupin was one of them).
That could have been nicely integrated with a remark of Harry's father being and Animagus and the shape of Harry's patronus.
Another thing (again IIRC) was that there was no explaination how Sirius knew about PettiDon'tKnowTheSpelling and why he was at Hogwarths
- which was the reason for him trying to escape from Ascaban
These might sound like nitpicks (and I might remember them wrong, only saw the movie once last year) but if you don't know the books they are examples of things that create some basic WTF?-feeling.
Also I didn't like the atmosphere. The castle and its surroundings might be a matter of taste,
but I sure didn't like that the students ran around in Jeans and Sneakers instead of their robes most of the time.
but I sure didn't like that the students ran around in Jeans and Sneakers instead of their robes most of the time.
Actually, this was one of the things that I thought was a brilliant idea. It really helped to show that they really ARE kids, and helped decrease the "fake fantasy" feeling that tends to permeate the other two movies.
The third movie felt "real" (for lack of a better word). Ordinary kids thrown into extraordinary circumstances.
N.
"Nothing strengthens authority so much as silence." - Charles de Gaulle
Steven Kloves has written the screenplay for all 4 movies. He's the one, not the director, who has to pry the secrets from JKR.
Read the books. This is a natural side effect on basing it on the books.
The books get darker each book, so the movies should get darker too.
On the other hand, the last movie wasn't actually as good. It told a very small portion of the story the book did, and the things it focused on weren't nearly as interesting as some of the things it left in there.
Like, for instance, they didn't even mention some (IMHO) crutial plot things - SPOILER OF BOOK WARNING-:
1) all the new adults in the third movie went to Hogwarts together and were really good friends - and all really good friends with James Potter, Harry's dad. This group also made Harry's map.
2) Because of this friendship, all of them became animagi (people who could transform into animals) in sympathy for Lupis, who was naturally a lycanthrope.
3) including Harry's dad, who could turn into a stag.
4) Harry's patronus is a stag. He takes after his dad a lot it seems.
A big theme - probably the biggest that seems to run through the book is how heredity and your past affects it's future and the choices you make.
They missed it in this last movie.
Mod me down and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine!
Oh if only Lindsey Lohan would play Hermine... http://www.liquidgeneration.com/blog/video/snl_pot ter.mov
-tom
I find this entire concept of "age of consent" somewhat tenuous, at best. It seems to imply that there is an age at which one magically is able to make intelligent, rational decisions about their own body and their sexuality, and below that they're just too stupid and/or immature to make any such decision. If that were actually the concern, I know plenty of 30 year olds who aren't able to make said intelligent, rational decisions... and plenty of 12 year olds who are. People mature at different ages. Get over it.
Ugh. You don't seem to understand anything about society engineering. I don't mean social engineering. I mean engineering societies so that they productive and not too screwed up.
Sure, some 12 year olds are more mature than some 30 year olds. That's not the point.
We can't have a society where everyone has to take long, drawn-out tests to allow them to do certain things. Think about applying for a driver's license (including the written and driving tests) for everything adults are allowed to do. Drinking alcohol, voting, signing legally binding contracts, entering the Army, getting a job, buying a firearm (*), owning a house, etc..
Geez, think of the cost. Think of how thick your wallet would be, carrying around all those different ID cards. Then, when you have to move, think about all the change-of-address forms.
So we don't do that kind of stuff. We don't have the time and money to implement comprehensive ability tests for all aspects of adulthood. So we pick a number (14, 18, 21, whatever) and hope for the best.
It is fine to question the rules of society. People don't do that enough. But to dismiss the rules without understanding the reasons for them is folly.
(*) Actually, I think a more comprehensive test for gun ownership is a good idea, but even that's probably not going to happen in the USA.
Slashdot has plenty of news in different areas, and in many of them I have absolutly no interest, but other people obviously do. There is a visible interest for StarWars, StarTrek, Lord of the Rings, HitchHiker's guide and so on. Harry Potter isn't far from that category of films. If it had been "When Harry met Sally" I would have jumped, but Harry P is within limits I think.
For the record, I'm no dirty old man, I'm 17.
Right, a basic fact: The human body is biologically designed to be attracted to anyone who is past the age of puberty.
Sorry, but that's the way it is - we're designed to start breeding as soon as we hit puberty so we can further the species - this comes from the days when humans barely made it past 25 if they lived to their old age, and babies and such were likely to die before they got anywhere near double-figures, thus it was important to pump out as many kids as you possibly could in the short space of time there was availible. It was biologically neccessary and thus it occurred.
Therefore, I wouldn't call it 'sick' to be attracted to someone who was 14, 15, etc, especially if they *act* like adults - can you tell me an accurate way to differentiate between a 14-year-old who is physically mature and acts like an adult and an actual adult, short of asking their age? I'll give you a clue: there isn't one.
The real 'sickos', as you say it, are the ones that are attracted to kids *because* they're kids - 'paedophile' means 'lover of children'; they are sexually drawn to the innocence of children, the overt prepubescency - I'll cede to you, anyone who lusted after Emma Watson when she was 12 (either prepubescent or at the very early stages of it) may just fall into this category. Not so now she's 15. I had my first sexual experience when I was that age, and my girlfriend of the time was a year older - legal in Britain. Do you think she should have been arrested for child molestation? If you do, you're either against base humanity or simply incredibly naive. Just because the age of consent is 18 where you are, that doesn't mean that any girl under 18 is an innocent little girl and any man attracted to a girl under 18 is a steaming paedophile.
Law and your so-called 'morality' are simply conveniently ignoring reality, and while I agree perfectly with laws to keep middle-aged perverts apart from early-teen girls (as any decent person would), I would also argue they are too strict and fail to take nature into account - what sort of law or society would say that two 15-year-olds making love are raping each other, or that a 16-year-old lusting after a 15-year-old is a vile pervert? Sorry to jump into this interesting debate, but to my mind you're both equally wrong.
Dealing with lawyers would be a lot less tedious if they all looked like Casey Novak.