Poorest of all the Harry Potter films

Rating: 6/10 (26 May 2008)

The actors did a fantastic job and it was overall an enjoyable film, however...I gave the others in this series a 10. This one rates a 4 because it was terribly adapted.
I write films and know that when adapting a book, you must make omissions. There's no way around it as a book cannot be fully captured in 2-4 hours.
The previous installments were fantastic in that regard. There were simply omissions. This, however...wow. What a mess. I did like the movie, but that's just the problem: It was the first time I left a movie theatre after seeing a "Potter" film merely...liking it.
There is no excuse for this. The first book was very thin in comparison and had a runtime of 152 minutes. This book was at least twice as thick as the first and had a runtime of 138 minutes.
BRING BACK STEVE CLOVES & ALFONSO CUARON! Shame on the jackasses who green-lit this inaccurate "Synopsis" of a Harry Potter film.
I do hope they at least get back to the level of the previous 4 installments.