Entertaining and simplistic, even thought it doesn't capture Rowling's original glimmer to the original fourth book.

Rating: 9/10 (23 November 2005)

This film is the "darker" one, with the PG13 rating. Some fans consider this a treat and thinks of it as a better movie or something just because a ten year old can't get in alone. But I should just start off my review with negative feelings such as: I enjoyed the first film with the sugarcoating that was exactly like the book. That's how it would always feel like from here on. I'm not saying this is a good or bad movie, yet - but I just want to make my point so people won't come and destroy me in the middle of the review.
The beginning with Voldemort and the World Cup is really rushed. It seemed as if ten scenes were cut out and we are automatically presented with the Dark Mark, a sign of Voldemort's. The audience is told that "he is back." I think this film is really only for the people who read the book. I am sure if this film was presented to someone who never read it, they would be confuzzled in question marks. Nothing is explained in this film. It seems as if everything was just "rushed into." Nothing gets any development - not emotionally, physically, or even in CGI terms.
Then we get to Hogwarts - the "excitement" is about to begin. Anyway, we find out about the Triwizard Tournament and how Hogwarts is hosting it and how two other schools are also participating. Because of some great magical force, someone enters Harry Potter into the dangerous competition, even though he is below age limit and is not allowed and the whole thing would be too dangerous for him. The sad part is that we know everything is going to be just okay and he's going to come back victorious. Just the scene makes the situation just too predictable. Harry is joined by three other competitors - Viktor Krum, Fleur Delacour, and Cedric Diggory. (sorry for any spelling errors - I'm typing this quite fast as the moment) The four is joined in three tasks that are all really dangerous and some might not even survive.
The film runs through its twist and turns and of raging hormones and puberty. Yeah. You heard me. Harry Potter is going through puberty. (Yeah, that makes me laugh, too) The Yule Ball is quite interesting, though, but that is also rushed, like some blocks of cement or something. The romance in this film didn't really work out well for me. I thought it was kind of pointless in a way because it was sort of crammed into the whole plot with the Triwizard Tournament. A scene in the Yule Ball I would like to mention is when the students starts partying like they are in some 80's teen flick. That felt rather ... strange. The whole idea just didn't fit in well. But it was really - interesting.
Anyway, the movie goes on and on. There are some parts where it shouldn't be rushed but they rushed it. There are some parts that should be over ASAP, but it doesn't work that way. It just took forever.
Near the end, Voldemort rises from the caulderon. Do you know what's missing? THE SPEECH! He doesn't give a speech. He rises, and he talks to the Death Eaters (aka, the KKK - at least they looked like them - only with Halloween masks) a bit and then suddenly he feels like attacking Harry. If you haven't seen the film yet and is eager to see how Voldemort looks in full-form instead of the trailer one that shows him as something that looks like a ball of wax, think: Ralph Fiennes with AIDS and a bad nose job.
Now, the performances. I really liked Brendan Gleeson and Miranda Richardson in their roles. They were excellent comic relief and they really kind of "saved" the film in a way. The trio is okay, though. Not spectacular or anything, but okay. I really though Emma Watson is going to become the better performer, but now she kind of just levels with Daniel Radcliffe and Rupert Grint, which kind of disappoints me because since Sorcerer's Stone, she kind of was the leader of the pack and was really good at it, but now she just kind of "floats" in the role and is slowly fading. Whenever I see Michael Gambon as Dumbledore, I feel that I really miss Richard Harris. I thought Harris made a better Dumbledore. The supporting cast is still great, with Maggie Smith and Alan Rickman, which really makes the film shine. Ralph Fiennes makes a "believable" Voldemort. Not a great one, but acceptable, I guess - but dude, you can do better than that! I wished he had more screen time, really.
As much complaints I have about this film, I thought it kept me entertained. Mike Newell isn't the kind of director that lets emotions run through or lets everything go. The scenes felt tight and awkward at times and their real smiles seems fake and at times, the actors seem clueless. I'm not thrilled about his HP directorial debut and I'm not looking forward for him to make another Potter film. This film is OK. Just so. It had good performances that kept me going and the classic British humor that made me chuckle. It was enjoyable and fun and I don't really have anything to say. I just have to remind myself not to sweat the small stuff because this is really not that bad of a film. And I'm sure the PG13 rating doesn't stop little kids all over the world from watching this film.
And what happened to Hermione's SPEW? My rating: B (85%) - yeah. out of 100% (8/10 for IMDb because on IMDb I rate movies on how entertained I was, not by the quality)