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."

Comments

Late as usual

[Anonymous Coward]

It was on Apple's movie trailers site a week ago today.

The Kids are aging too fast

[yincrash]

when it comes to puberty, it's got to be hard to match older kids as younger kids.

Re:The Kids are aging too fast

[dark404]

Yeah, by the time they get to the last movie (whenever she finishes the series) Potter's going to have a beard, three kids, and a beer belly.

Re:The Kids are aging too fast

[TheWanderingHermit]

The kids grow at the usual rate of 1 year to a year, and the movies are coming out about 1 1/2 years apart. In the first one, some of them (at least Hermione) were younger than the part they were playing. The kids in the storys are also a year older with each story, so if you consider 7 movies at 1 1/2 years each, that's 10.5 years to finish, which means when the last one is DONE, they'll be about 3.5 years older, assuming they started when they were the same age as their characters. But, again, some actors are younger than their characters, and the first two came out only 1 year apart.

There's also the difference of their age when they start filming a movie and their age when it is released, about a year and a half later. For instance, when I mentioned Hermoine's age (I remember seeing it in the "What Happened Today" column in the newspaper), she was a year or so behind her movie age at the time of release. Even if you don't take that into account, assuming the kids ages matched when they started filming, at the end, they'll be 21 playing 18 year olds. That has happened quite often in TV and film.

So, yes, the actors are aging fast, but you have to remember the characters are aging, too. It is a bit hard to get used to, since we see the characters in "snapshots" spaced a year to year and a half apart, and if you're used to watching a kid grow up, it's so gradual you don't notice it as much. In the latest movie, they should be 14, and I don't think the characters look too far off.

Teens also tend to grow much more when they're 12-16. Often you don't see quite as much of a change from 16-18, so if they look okay for the next movie, I think they'd be fine in the last 2.

Re:The Kids are aging too fast

[Anonymous Coward]

That's what you get for expecting intuitive behavior from an open-source project.

This'll be big

[Gabrill]

Almost as big as Star W. . . .Ahh!!!! Get away you freeks!

obquote

[Psionicist]

http://bash.org/?111338

direct link

[slashjames]

http://movies.apple.com/movies/wb/harry_potter_gob let/hp_gobletoffire_480.mov

Re:direct link

[Seft]

Actually, the direct link is: http://movies.apple.com/movies/wb/harry_potter_gob let/hp_gobletoffire_m480.mov

Re:direct link

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, the first one only gives a small file to the link for the m480 file. People who want to download the actual video needs the m480, not just 480.

Anyway, those who want full screen:
http://movies.apple.com/movies/wb/harry_potter_gob let/hp_gobletoffire_ifs.mov

filerush torrent...

[i88i]

here tis

Re:the reason

[Pete]

Source?

For, well, either of those (a) baseless, and (b) totally illogical assertions? :-)

Re:Ahem, wrong site

[hb253]

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.

Re:the reason

[bjprice]

there's been a new director for every film so far

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).

Re:I've seen 3 Harry Potter movies so far

[Councilor Hart]

The books are much better. They are not solely for kids.
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.

Terry Gilliam almost directed the first movie

[Nova Express]

I was listening to National Pravda Radio when they did an interview with Terry Gilliam. He said that he had been one of the three finalists for the job of directing the first Harry Potter movie, but only because J. K. Rowling had wanted to see him direct it. He said he felt stupid that he'd actually believed he had a chance when the studio was dead-set against it. Then there was the following exchange, which is as close to verbatim as I can remember it:

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.

Re:Terry Gilliam almost directed the first movie

[jfengel]

Too bad he thinks that. Cuaron had nothing but nice things to say Columbus on the commentaries. Duh, and if you read between the lines you can see that Cuaron wasn't entirely pleased.

But Cuaron rightly praised Columbus for a number of things right with those movies. He picked a knockout cast, both kids and adults, and an awesome location.

Some of the failings of the first three (yeah, all three) I put on the screenwriter, who seems to have a tendency to substitute action scenes for character moments. That made the first two movies rather long for kids' movies and still leaving out some important scenes from the books. Still, that's Rowling's chosen screenwriter, so I guess it's what she wanted.

I much prefer the gritty realism of the third movie to the first two. But for Gilliam to dismiss Sorcerer's Stone as "crap", given that he's been rather hit-and-miss himself, seems undeservedly arrogant.

Columbus made basic kiddie fare. Gilliam's would have been a fascinating change, though in some ways I like the idea of the first intro movie being a more pedestrian adaptation of the book, to serve as a foundation for the sequels to be more interesting. I'd love to see Gilliam direct one of the future movies, but with an attitude like that there's no way they're going to let him.

Of course, the studio was probably dead set against him from the start. He has a tendency to create truly grand visions and then run over schedule and budget. Baron Munchausen almost didn't make it, and his Don Quixote did fail. He blames it on circumstances and cheapskate studios.

Me, I'm a director myself (stage, rather than film), and I know that disasters happen and you need to be flexible to fix them. The documentary Lost in La Mancha is very favorable to him, and he did have a run of bad luck, but it also sounds to me like he failed to have backup plans and cut things too close to the wire. Under those circumstances projects will always fail, because things go wrong.

He needs a better unit production manager, or he needs to listen more closely to the one he has.

Re:the reason

[Detritus]

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.

Re:Quicktime install

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.apple.com/quicktime/download/standalone .html

dragon feed

[natedubbya]

It is wise not to meddle in the affairs of dragons...
...for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup.

sorry, couldn't resist

Re:the reason

[Blackeagle_Falcon]

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.

[Rasta Prefect]

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).

Re:Ahem, wrong site

[beuges]

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

Re:Emma Watson

[BluedemonX]

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.

Re:the reason

[fm6]

Nonsense. Chris Columbus, who directed the first two films, is still Executive Producer of the series. Directing a film is hard work, and it's not unusual for somebody to launch a series, then delegate that job in later films.

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.

ROFL!!!

[absurdist]

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:ROFL!!!

[bwalling]

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.

If you think you know a 12 year old that is capable of understanding the consequences and is willing to consent to having sex with you, then you are mistaken. Finding some country that tolerates slavery does not make slavery okay.

Re:Quicktime install

[HumanTorch]

To the nerf who modded parent as 0, offtopic.. please tell me how installing the software needed to view the trailer is 'offtopic'.

Re:Very interesting.....!

[-Harlequin-]

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.

Re:yo yo ma

[novakreo]

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.

Well it's a funny country, the US...

[Kjella]

...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