Out of all of the "Harry Potter" books, "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire," the fourth in the series, is my favorite. It's a huge book, though. To give you an idea, if you were to combine the first two books, and then add another 84 pages, you'll have the length of the fourth book. The creates a problem when trying to adapt the book into a movie. Obviously, much of what's in the book couldn't be squeezed into the movie, and that worried me. On top of that, I was worried about who was chosen to direct the movie. As it turns out, I was worried for nothing, because "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire" is an excellent movie. As it stands right now, just as the the fourth book is my favorite book in the series, the fourth film is my favorite movie in the series.
"Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith" marked the first time that a "Star Wars" movie was rated PG-13, and that PG-13 was certainly well deserved. We have a similar situation here. "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire" marks the first time that a "Harry Potter" movie is rated PG-13, and again, it's a well-deserved rating. This is, by far, the darkest film in the series, and the last half hour may in fact be too dark and intense for younger viewers.
Just about the entire cast is back, which includes, most importantly, the main three (Daniel Radcliffe as "Harry Potter," Emma Watson as "Hermione Granger," and Rupert Grint as "Ron Weasley"). I really hope the three kids stay with the movies for the entire run. Even though they may not be the best actors (which is not to say that they're bad at all), having any or all of them replaced would be way too jarring. Besides, I can't see anyone else playing those characters. I hope the same for the adult performers (especially Alan Rickman as "Severus Snape"), but it's the three kids who I think are irreplaceable.
There are some new faces this time around, and they are welcome additions. Katie Leung (making her feature film debut) plays "Cho Chang," Robert Pattinson (whose previous work I'm not familiar with) plays "Cedric Diggory," Clémence Poésy (I'm not familiar with her previous work either) plays "Fleur Delacour," and Stanislav Ianevski (his feature film debut) plays "Viktor Krum." All of them are really good, especially Robert Pattinson. As for adult roles, Brendan Gleeson plays "Alastor 'MadEye' Moody," Miranda Richardson plays "Rita Skeeter." and Ralph Fiennes plays "Lord Voldemort." The "Harry Potter" movies have done an exceptional job casting the adult roles, and this film is no exception. Ralph Fiennes is an inspired choice to play "Lord Voldemort," and he is terrifying in the role. He's not in the movie much, but his few minutes will stick with you.
I remember early in the production of this movie, there was talk of splitting it in two, sorta like what they did with "Kill Bill." Instead, they decided to get rid of some of the needless subplots, and as much as I love the book, I think that was the way to go. A lot of stuff from the book isn't included in the movie, but most of what's left out isn't missed. There's one thing I AM concerned about, though; the absence of some of the "Weasley" family members, and how that affects the storyline involving one of the "Weasley" brothers and "Fleur Delacour" that pays off brilliantly in the future books. It's not even touched upon in the movie. Hopefully that will be taken care of in the next one.
"Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire" was directed by Mike Newell, and I must admit that I was very skeptical. He directed "Donnie Brasco," a movie I liked a lot, but he also directed "Mona Lisa Smile," "Pushing Tin," "Four Weddings and a Funeral," and "Enchanted April." None of those movies would have me thinking that he would be the ideal guy to direct this film, but he ended up doing an excellent job. The screenplay was written by Steven Kloves, who wrote all of the previous "Harry Potter" screenplays, and has proven to be an excellent choice each time. Although it goes without saying, the movie is based on the novel by the brilliant J.K. Rowling.
When I reviewed "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone" in 2001, I gave it a 9 in my scale of 1-10. A year later, I reviewed "Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets," and even though I liked it a little more, it also got a 9. Last year, I reviewed "Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban." Again, I liked it a little more, and again, it got a 9. Well, here I am with my review of "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire," and it's the same thing. I liked it a little more than the last one, but it's getting another 9. I know that it doesn't make any sense, but over the years, I've become less comfortable giving a movie a 10. However, every movie in the "Harry Potter" franchise has been excellent, with each one being a little better than the last. I don't think you can say that about any other movie franchise. Warner Bros. does a lot to piss me off (don't get me started on that cinematic abortion, "Catwoman"), but with the "Harry Potter" movies, they've done everything right. So far. Four down, three more to go.
Scale of 1-10: 9