Ambitious and innovative, but due to little emotional power and quite ugly cinematography it ranks as one of the weakest in the series

Rating: 6/10 (24 June 2018)

After the extraordinary Prisoner of Azkaban there is no doubt that it was hard to live up to its reputation, and The Goblet of Fire definitely did not manage to do that, as it is definitely the weakest of the bunch up to this point.
The biggest problem with this entry when comparing it to its predecessor is its use of digital backdrops instead of natural ones. This is also a part where The Prisoner of Azkaban shines in so brightly, as it used a lot of gorgeous backdrops of natural surroundings and showed a lot of interconnectivity of its area's to create a truly immersive experience. In the Goblet of Fire, many of the outdoor shots are bleak, colorless & quite ugly, and after the incredible cinematography that Azkaban had, the Goblet of Fire just looks like its ugly auntie. Also, this is, like Reign of Fire (2002) once again an absolute insult to common mythology as it is common knowledge that Dragons have four legs, and not two like in this film. The correct term for this creature should be 'Wyvern' instead of Dragon, as they do walk on two legs like the ones in this movie do.
The previous two movies were exceptional at introducing new characters, but in this film this is not so much the case, except for Brendan Gleeson ( Moody ) who was, ofcourse, brilliant as usual as this completely mad and insane yet mostly likeable character. However, the addition of two schools of who we have never heard of and its colorless characters such as Krum or Fleur Delacour definitely does not help give the film character. Ofcourse i do not need to explain to people who have seen Twilight what a terrible actor Robert Pattinson ( Cedric ) is, and it is no different in this film. Luckily, he was only used sparingly and his dialogue is quite limited.
Another obvious problem is the lack of a John Williams score. The composer Patrick Doyle tries to give it his best but he is obviously no match for Williams, and the score for this film is not memorable in any way, which is in stark contrast to the extremely emotionally powerful scores the first three movies had. The result is the iconic feel of the series is kind of gone, and a great part of it is due to Williams's departure from the series.
In the end the film really isn't about anything. It's about a tournament with three deadly objectives just for the sake of 'Tradition and honor'? It seems so out of place after what we have seen in the first three films, in which the narrative seemed logical and humane, but in the Goblet of Fire the narrative seems to be there for the sake of being a narrative, and not much else. There is also a gigantic ball scene with a lot of characters no one cares about and Ron who always seems pissed off at either Hermione of Harry for no obvious reason, which significantly lowers the audience's connections with its three main leads which has been established so wonderfully in its predecessors.
Luckily there still is the final half hour, as the graveyard sequence and Voldemort's resurrection is quite fascinating to behold, although it still has its flaws. It is said many times that Voldemort was scarier when he was not fully seen, and there is truth to this, yet i still find it that this scene is the most memorable in the film due to the exceptional special effects clashing of the wands and the fantastic Ralph Fiennes ( Voldemort ) performance. However, it seems he was so obsessed with himself that he let a hollywood cliché get the better of him, preferring to talk Harry to death instead of actually trying to kill him, and this admittedly makes Voldemort less intimidating compared to how intimidating he was in its predecessors when not being seen. Cedric's death is supposed to be an emotional moment after this, but we do not really actually know Cedric's character or what good he has done except tip Harry off about the dive objective, and therefore an emotional connection with his character cannot really be formed which results in his death not affecting the audience that much.
It is by no means a bad film overall, as its costume design, parts of indoor cinematography and acting by most of the established actors is still pretty good, but for a Harry Potter entry it is definitely a let down. Oh well, atleast the audience has the joy of seeing that annoying guy from Twilight get killed. That alone makes sure it still deserves some praise.