I was surprised to see so many little kids at this movie. I mean little little. Like three year olds, five year olds. I wasn't surprised to see them being carried out halfway through. This is definitely not for littluns.

It's worth mentioning that I have not read the book, so I'm commenting on the film, and not the story contained in the novel, because if there is one, then it doesn't appear at the cinema. There is a sort of loose wiggly thread that holds the thing together, but when the director came on TV the other night and said if he filmed it as a thriller, it might just work, he was talking bollocks.

For me, it didn't work at all. The motive behind putting Harry through three big tasks (which could well kill him) just to get a couple of drops of his blood in Voldamort's melting pot was almost beyond grasp, and any clues as to who was the secret "evil" teacher were scattered thin/invisible until he pops up at the end and says, "yeah, it's, like... me!". The dance, or prom night, or whatever the hell it was supposed to be was boring and the clever effects that made the Weasly twins interact, though brilliant, became tedious because it was so obviously a special effect, and that distracted me from whatever it was I was supposed to be concentrating on. (I'd love to see how they filmed some of those bits though).

However, there are three good reasons to see this film: the three tasks.

In the first, Harry is chased about the castle by a big scary dragon. Superb effects, wonderful modelling and brilliant animation. Very bat-like.

The second is set underwater and, again, is brilliant, breath-taking and quite disturbing. Stuff of nightmares. Really!

The third, set in a maze, is almost as disturbing as the underwater scenes. Very dark, claustrophobic and quite horrific, and this leads up to the highlight of the film, which again, is not for young kiddies.

The thing is, you can't really complain, because you know what to expect with Potter films. But it truly is a shame that the film makers couldn't have pulled a better plot from the novel, but maybe it isn't there.

To conclude: a good couple of hours entertainment, but possibly better suited to DVD, because you'll want to watch the task scenes again and again.

Colin M

Just found out that the Weasley Twins are real twin, and not clever composites. And here I was staring at the screen thinking how complicated some of those scenes would have been to film, and how it would have been so much easier to have real twins.

Wow.

The story was still shite.

Go and see "The Libertine" instead!

It's great fun to stroll casually past the hordes queuing for Potter and if you ask for a ticket for a different film the cinema staff will be really nice to you because their brains are melting due to everyone else gabbling "Harry Potter" at them.

And it's a fabulous film. What more could you want?

optimist

I saw 'Harry Potter' the day before 'The Libertine', and you can see from my review which one I wanted to write about. I agree HP&GF is not at all suited to under-twelves, and it does have the certificate to indicate same. Whereas the last one was too scary, though, this is just too long and, as you suggest, too complex for the average under-twelve concentration span. Yes, the dragons were scary, but for me the best scenes were the amazing deep-focus interiors and the interaction between the protagonists.Harry may have made an appealing nine year old, but is it me or does his thin-lipped weediness make Ron look more like a hero, even when, or especially when he's being foul-mouted and sulky?

Sheila