loved the movie, but...

Rating: 9/10 (18 November 2005)

...for a huge Harry Potter fan who has read the books a number of times, I must say that the film did leave me with some small yet significant feelings of emptiness.
Highlights: The actors were wonderful -- the young trio of stars truly did their characters justice. And the new characters, especially Moody, were very entertaining; Gleeson did a fabulous job. For the most part, director Mike Newell did a superb job at the helm of this popular franchise. Some of the best parts of the story highlighted in this film were the scenes involving the painful yet cruelly necessary awkwardness of adolescence. I think those quirky moments set the stage wonderfully for the upcoming movies. The rift between Harry and Ron is so believable, you wonder if they'll ever be friends again. Furthermore, the action scenes surrounding the Triwizard Tournament were visually appealing to the point of sometimes being breathtaking (despite the fact that some of them seemed a bit abbreviated).
However, as not only an avid Potter fan but also a die-hard reader of the books, there are some obvious holes in the movie. Certain scenes just seem "thrown out there," leaving many questions unanswered. For example, the scene where Harry finds Barty Crouch Sr lying in the Forbidden Forest -- he sees him there, then goes to Dumbledore's office, but does not say a word about his grisly discovery. Hmm. The introduction and explanation of Barty Jr seems a little painfully compressed. Many of the main characters were seen far too sparsely, namely Sirius, who as a major player in "Phoenix" perhaps should have been seen in more than one scene in "Goblet." Besides, last we saw Sirius in "Azkaban," we were left with a heart-touching scene in which you believe Harry finally has some family in his life to truly care for him. Yet we are supposed to believe that with all of the strange things happening at Hogwarts during the Triwizard Tournament, Harry talks to his beloved godfather only once? (Twice if you count the letter before the fireplace scene, but still far too infrequently.) And of our new characters, whatever happened to that pesky Rita Skeeter? From the movie, you don't know. And although I think Ralph Fiennes does an amazing job portraying Voldemort, the graveyard scene, the climax of the film, was mildly disappointing. Voldemort needed to be a bit more evil, rather than just walking around the graveyard in circles.
Overall, I loved the film, but I think that an extra 15-20 minutes added on would have answered a world of questions and left the die-hard fans not feeling as though they got cheated out of dessert. The whole thing just seemed a bit rushed, even choppy at times. And though the film clocks in at about 2 1/2 hours, I think most fans would not have minded a few more minutes if it meant more resolution to the story. (Many popular movies have kept fans in their seats for upwards of 3 hours +.) For those of us who have read the books, we can fill in these blanks. But I can't help but wonder if those who haven't read the books may feel a little lost in all the hurriedness.
I do highly recommend the movie, and I know that you can't squeeze every detail from the page to the screen. But book fans, be prepared to be thirsting for a bit more. And also be ready to fill in some blanks for your non-Potter-reading friends who accompany you to the theater.