They try to weave the two together, but it didn't quite work for me. Potter fans will like it, I'm sure (I'm glad I saw it), but I think Rowling fans, and general magic aficionados, will both be a bit disappointed that more time wasn't given to their particular obsession, which breaks down to about 70% Potter and 30% magic in general. I'd have preferred they chose one path and stayed on it. What it ends up doing is a disservice to both, I think. Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix: 15 years old. Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire: 14 years old. Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban: 13 years old. Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets: 12 years old. It's as if they couldn't decide whether they wanted to do a documentary on the history of magic in general, or Rowling and Potter in particular. How old is Harry Potter in each movie: Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone: 11 years old. I was about half way through the one hour viewing time when I realized that the direction of the documentary was a little wobbly. The library was going to host an exhibit on magic and Potter. Rowling spent time at the British Library, looking at rare books on magic, alchemy, and medicinal herbs, and gives her thoughts on the subjects. A few bits of interviews with Potter fans is also included.
#Who made the harry potter movies movie
A documentary in style, and narrated by Imelda Staunton, who played Dolores Umbridge in the Potter movies, it features the musings of J.K Rowling and snippets of the books read by secondary movie cast members, including Evanna Lynch/Luna Lovegood, and Mark Williams/Mr. That's not quite what it turned out to be. By the title, I thought it was going to be all about Hogwarts, Harry, and all his friends. Having read all the Potter books, and seeing all the movies, I was looking forward to this.
0 kommentar(er)
