Friday, November 25, 2005
 "I love magic," Harry says early in the movie "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire." And apparently he's not alone.
Even with a PG13 rating, for it's darker themes, the wizard's cup overflowed last weekend taking in $102 million. Last years "Prisoner of Azkaban" opened at $93.7 million.
Goblet execs said the record breaking results exceeded all of the studios expectations.
Indeed, the story about a boy wizard coping with power and love continues to lure fans of all ages. People are growing up with Harry Potter, and they're turning out to see what happens next to him. According to distributor Warner Bros., 38% of moviegoers were adults attending without children.
This has a few Hollywood execs hoping the magic rubs off on something else at the multiplex.
"Potter" franchise matures smoothly
British director Mike Newell does justice to J.K. Rowling's book. I'm sure he had hard choices to make about what parts of the 700 page book to leave out.
Goblet does clock in at two-and-a-half hours -- it's certainly a lot to take in at one sitting. That said, some of this film actually seemed rushed. I would have enjoyed a slower pace to offer more characterization; fan favorites Ron Weasley and Hermione Granger seem more like bit players in this film.
Hell, why not get crazy and go for a two part movie version of the book -- like the way they did "Kill Bill volume one" and then "Kill Bill volume two" -- there's certainly enough material available to explore.
But that's a minor complaint, the film does a great job of marrying "eye-popping special effects" with "quieter moments of coming-of-age teen turmoil." The darker plot centers on the "Triwizard Tournament," a competition among magical teens from around the world.
You can tell the director feels right at home at Hogworth's and blends bits of humor with a fine cast. There is a funny scene where a giggling female ghost makes a game out of trying to see Harry naked through the suds of his bath.
Miranda Richardson is also quirky and energetic as journalist Rita Skeeter. Ralph Fiennes makes his first appearance as the terrifying Lord Voldemort, the evil wizard who killed Harry's parents.
Does a "Darker Potter" leave audiences wanting more?
There no doubt this is a "darker film" than the previous ones. But fear works because it's a part of the human experience.
At a time when critics complain that we are in a era of cultural decline (that everything gets dumber and dumber) NPR's John Powers says Potter is more "intelligent."
He says the J.K. Rowling's series is wildly successful because it avoids "the static world" and dares to "go there" by showing the "moral and psychological growth of Potter."
Powell says, "audiences are turned on by stories that show people and situations changing." It's not a perfect world.
Just like real life: people change, relationships fade, and yes, just like real life people die.
In his book, "Everything bad is good for you," author Steven Johnson argues that we actually become "smarter" by watching characters who don't stay the same. He points out the success of HBO's Sopranos has all to do with a world where bad times can get worse-- and people can "get whacked" before lunch.
The Potter effect says, "give us better films!"
Whatever the themes in "Harry Potter" -- a quarter of a billion in ticket sales is the kind of film that studio executives lie in bed dreaming about (talk about a happy ending).
A USA Today article noted the effects of Potter on the rest of the fantasy world. They said that "sales of science fiction and fantasy books have jumped 8.5% in the past five years - nearly double the rate for all consumer books. -- much of that growth was sparked by the popularity of J.K. Rowling's Harry Potter series." I think we'll we be seeing more fantasy films in the years to come.
So, when you hear talk about a sluggish year at the box office -- statistics do say fewer movie tickets were sold in 2005 than the past three years -- where should you point the finger?
I would start with the fact that Hollywood lacks imagination.
The success of "Potter" this week indicates the slump has more to do with the weak product lineup, rather than what some have said: "that audiences were skipping movies in favor of home-entertainment options."
The films coming out of Hollywood this year are not good enough. Bottom line: if you get people to say "I want to see that," they will drop everything and come to the theater.
By Henry Cruz
|
|
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home