Harry Potter 6 Harry is missing his scar???

B

Brian.

Member
anyone notice that harry didn't have a scar half the time.....

and the movie was a huge disappointment.... very cheesy hated it

they should make it like the first HP movie
 
i thought it was bomb, and he had his scar the entire movie.....

anyone who doesnt like hp can eat some smelly poop!!!
 
haha i love HP im a huge fan movies are a disappointment though...

and i was talking about it with friends half the time his scar was defs not there
 
i read the books, and thats all the harry potter i need in my life. movies are just a waste of my time and money when i could be doing shit outside.
 
édidn't like the movie really, it was a cool movie but not good enough to fit my harry potter 6 demands. I mean, Even Dumbledore's sizzurp wasn't green,,,,wtf
 
suked ballsssss. i was goin to c public enemies but all my friends went to go c potter so i went with them. suchhh a waste of time. any one c public enemies, i want to
 
movie wasnt bad, but easily could have been better. the 6th book was really good thats why the movie was but it was actually poorly acted and way to corny. and in the end there was supposed to be an all out battle where George dies and lupin dies. but w/e. ide give it a 6 out of 10
 
public enemies wasnt horrible, but wen i saw the preview i thought it was gonna be so much more epic. watch the rotten tomatoes review of it, they pretty much describe it perfectly.
 
meh, lord of the rings kicked ass in both movie form and book form, harry potter though has not been to incredible in the cinema
 
i fell asleep during it. but im surprised more parents arent pissed because all they did was get hammered and get high off "potions."
 
to be fair, its a tough book to translate into a movie. if they'd done them right it probably would have taken at least 30 years to make all 7.
 
i would've waited that long to see a good HP movie....

they missed out all the important parts of the movie like the big battle at the end and lupin and others dying...

yet they put so much attention into unneccesary stuff like ron making the team and relationships and stuff.. the movie was wayyyyyyyyy too cheesy the whole time... the first HP movie was probably the best one that actually made the movie seem like the book. Other movies they cut out too much like 5th book quidditch wasn't even mentioned. Id rather pay more money to go watch a full like 5 hour movie with every detail of the book in the movie
 
nobody but dumbledore dies in this book. pretty sure lupin dies at the end of the last book. but they did leave out the entire big battle which was wierd. that's something people would really want to see, i mean its basically the climax to the whole movie. but i do see what you're saying here. its super jumpy, like they just go from one point to the next and it follows no logical path. like they'll be playing quidditch, and the next scene its the middle of winter. no transition at all.
 
hmmm two hour movie or 30 hours reading the book.. or 10 bucks for a movie ticket or 20 for the book. care to rethink your argument?
 
They made Dumbledore obviously Gay in this one too...I just go for the cinematography...I really like it. And yes I noticed all of the references.
 
I liked the movie. It was entertaining and did exactly what it said it would do. The credits say "Based on the book". I don't think they set out to make an exact copy. I found it to be a very funny and entertaining movie.
 
Woah woah woah, you guys say this one was cheesy? Go watch the end of the first movie and tell me again what cheesy is.

The 6th one wasn't cheesy, it was just centered on relationship and getting fucked up on potions and butterbeer instead of SNAPE KILLING DUMBLEDORE
 
i noticed that too! the only time you see it is when hes showing it to someone- i don't remember who...

i thought it was pretty good even tho i feel asleep hahahaha i was just really tired. i woke up when everyone in the theater screamed haha
 
I've never read any of the books, saw the last movie, but I'm not into harry potter at all. I went to the midnight showing with this girl and her brother dressed up as Harry as a joke. The near 1000 people outside of the theater were all cheering for us while he rode his broom around, it was legit. I thought the movie sucked, but then again I'm just not into wizards and crap.
 
that's because you're a mindless little shit who has to be entertained like a 4-year old by moving pictures.
 
haha well i read before bed when i have nothing else to do. if i spend thirty hours of my time on a book, who the fuck cares, thats thirty hours i would be doing nothing anyways, and i enjoy a good book much more than a good movie. call me a nerd or whatever i dont give a fuck, but if you ever read the book fight club i think thats a good enough example. or even fear and loathing. both are good movies, but great books, so i personally would rather spend the time reading the book instead of the "convience" of a movie. and to your second point, i buy books at thrift stores. two bucks a piece, so now i already saved eight dollars, plus the food that i always end up buying, and i dont have to drive anywhere to read. the closest theatre to my house is around twenty five miles. besides, i would rather go for a fucking hike than watch a movie, or save my money for a concert. so yeah, i guess i thought about it a little.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top