My Order of the Phoenix comments

Rating: 10/10 (20 November 2007)

First of all, I have to agree wholeheartedly with the previous person and would like to add some more.
I thought the original casting of Richard Harris for Dumbledore was spot on - he was the exact image I had of him from reading the books and I loved his gentle quietness and yet very powerful demeanour. When I saw Michael Gambon for the first time, I thought...noooooo - it's all wrong - but as an adult I knew they were not going to be able to replace the late Richard Harris and to try to do so would have been futile - so they had to come up with a more "off the wall" character. It took me several years and countless viewings of Azkaban and Goblet to finally find that he has now grown on me. Thank god! Daniel, Emma and Rupert's acting abilities have certainly come a long way from what I thought was a bit robotish, reading off script to now a much more flowing sense of ease - growing into their characters and yes, showing by expression rather than words alone - they have done well. One thing in particular is Daniel's acting of emotional pain - he does that so well. Always brings tears to my eyes and a painful churning in my stomach. He achieved that also as the character of Jack, in "My Boy Jack" too. Very Well Done Dan! I think the films version of the kiss was actually better than the book - I think the books portrayal of Harry being so confudled by the idea of girls at the age of 15 is a bit out of date - boys are much more "with it" at that age - and this is where the film gets the vote for that scene, he comes across a bit more like a 15 year old boy would.
I only have one real disappointment - considering it is the longest book of the series, it so far is the shortest film at 2 hours 16 mins and it is because of this it gets my criticism. There was so much in this book that it definitely should have been a three hour film. So much was left out - important stuff that will affect the next two films. I really would love to have the people who decided on the length and what should be in it to tell me what the reason was behind it. It certainly cant be money - Warner Bros on a budget? I don't think so. It couldn't be because they thought kids couldn't sit still for three hours - as we know the books grow with kids, so its older ones watching it. So what on earth could the answer be? Deadline on the production causing them to cut scenes out? Actors being committed to other projects? Please someone give me a justified reason to why this film was so short and therefore compromised some vital elements. And please someone reassure me that this wont happen with the last two films.
There, that's my only moan - effects - brilliant, scenery - fantastic, music - fantastic.
All in all, 99.9% perfect. I have to be loyal!