The Story of Harry Potter (Part 1/3) – Movies with Mikey

The Story of Harry Potter (Part 1/3) – Movies with Mikey


This piece originally began with a bunch of
facts about the best selling books of all time, but as it turns out, we don’t really
know what the best selling books of all time are. Could be the Bible. Could be Don Quixote. We don’t know. Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone-
it might have sold like 107 million copies. Again, we don’t know. It could be the fifth best selling book of
all time. And we might never understand fully the cultural
significance the Harry Potter series brought to the world. CUZ WE’LL DIE. Like always, I’m not really gonna talk about
the books and the specificities of their adaptations once we get going. They’re good. I love them. Movin’ on. When I started reading about these films,
hearing stories I hadn’t even thought about since the films were gearing up to happen
in the first place. Now brilliantly contextualized in the ambers
of time. I sat down and designed a three part documentary
series telling the stories happening just off camera. Because, here’s the thing:
There are so, so many decision points where the entire franchise could have exploded into
a fiery ball of donkey sauce, but somehow they made the right call every time. It got better and stronger as it moved forward. Because everyone stood on each other’s shoulders
to establish a new quality bar for fantasy and I wanna talk through those decisions,
to appreciate it. I wanna tell that story, a movie at a time. There was practically an entire village of
directors being considered to helm this franchise. Lemme take you back to November 2001 the year
Brendan Frasier wowed us with a second whip around the ol’ mummy rock, Jurassic Park
III is a thing that happened, and Julianne Moore starred in a Hannibal film a lot of
people elect not to remember. Directed by Ridley Scott! It’s pretty good just explosively weird. Over here is where our story begins. In 1997, producer David Heyman – notable
for producing such films as Yes Man. I Am Legend.
and Paddington. –set out thinking about a children’s book
to adapt into a film, possibly a series. His staff at his production company, HeyDay
Films, told tale of a mythical Harry Potter book that was currently enchanting the children
of the world. So, they called Warner Bros. And the next thing you know, JK Rowling is
accepting their offer to license the first four books for roughly one million pounds,
or translated for the Americans in the back, twelve million, nine-hundred and twenty four
thousand Doritos. Though many directors were considered for
the chair, it is important to remember that when this was happening, they were expecting
a single director to handle all seven films. [Chris Columbus] “I remember hearing a story
when I was being interviewed for the directing job of the first Harry Potter film. People were talking about combining two, three
of the books together, because it would be easier. As a director I have to admit…” It was an entirely different world, and one
where JK Rowling thought it ought not be someone safe and so set her heart on Terry Gilliam,
and can we all take a moment to imagine the far-flung reality where Terry Gilliam got
to make seven Harry Potter films. The studio believed someone like Chris Columbus with experience in children’s films: Home Alone and Mrs. Doubtfire, would make a lot
of sense. Which is why Warner Bros ultimately elected
to go with Columbus. I’ll take another moment here to underline
the goal of this entire venture from its outset was to set out and make children’s films
that kids would like. [Chris Columbus] “That may be a pipe dream. That may not be possible but it would be,
from a cinematic point of view, very exciting. You would see, you would actually see Harry Potter grow from an 11 year old to a 17 year old.” And to underline it further, when the audience
grows up with the kids, you can then start imagining movies that age with the audience,
and become more mature and more complex as they go, something the books did equally beautifully,
just in a different way.. Like when Ron’s all effin this and effin
that in the last book because he’s like street now. This franchise was a bet larger than really
any precedent set before it. They were like “yeah, we’re gonna make
seven movies with the same actors… unprecedented, no big.” and Chris Columbus, Susie Figgis,
Janet Hirshenson, Jane Jenkins, and Karen Lindsay-Stewart deserve a statue in the town
square for casting these films with something that huge in mind. You don’t win Oscars when the depth of your
genius is not revealed for an entire decade. I guess to illustrate that point bluntly,
you hire Alan Rickman because on one hand he’s a kind, unbelievably talented soul
who could play movie villains in a way that’s both proper to a kid’s movie and then ultimately
transform a character into someone with complex morals, depth, nuance, and range. That’s why you hire Alan Rickman. Richard Harris, Maggie Smith, Warwick Davis, Robbie Coltrane, John Hurt, Julia Walters, John Cleese– look the
films series have immense, immense cultural value just taking into account the sheer number
of superstar English actors of stage and screen (I know Harris was Irish, lemme make the point,)
each and every film managed to pull in to this massive production that just always looked
like a fun thing to work on. There’s too many notable actors to list. Because that would be doing a disservice the real find, I think, of these movies: Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, Rupert Grint, Bonnie
Wright, and Tom Felton. Columbus built exactly what he was supposed
to. The children’s performances are over the
top, people on the internet wrote articles very critical of how a 9 year old pronounced
leviosa.. “It’s leviOsa, not levioSA.” …but I contend that they cast people they knew could put in the work, literally
as children, to grow into the actors and the people they needed them to be. Do you know how impossible that mission is
to hit a bullseye on? The casting choices made in this film to define
the world of Harry Potter future’s past is on a whole other level. You don’t have to make every decision right
in the first movie, you just have to get enough right that people want to see more. Sorcerer’s Stone, or Philosopher’s Stone
if you’re hip, defines an astonishing number of things about this franchise right on the
first go. That’s Columbus and his team, they deserve
that credit. The first book is filmed pretty much straight
in this film. It’s taken like a blueprint. It feels a bit like a stage play because it’s
pretty much the book, how it all kind of plays out. Very sedentary, but still quite enjoyable. And I’ll get to that in a minute, but Columbus
noticed that. Anyway, Sorcerer’s Stone made 974 million
dollars worldwide and currently sits as the 37th highest grossing movie of all time. It was nominated for three Oscars including
best original score composed by John Williams. Nominated against Lord of the Rings, Monster’s
Inc, A Beautiful Mind, and AI Artificial Intelligence. BUT DID YOU KNOW? True Story: Steven Spielberg dropped out of
contention to direct this movie so that he could direct AI. He seemed to believe AI would challenge him
as a filmmaker more than the first movie in a kid’s franchise that is intended for the youngest audience. A lot about this franchise wasn’t totally
figured out yet, but it was a simple start, for, by design the youngest movie. It’s like diet spooky. It put the scaffolding in place. Now, to begin to age it up. [Chris Columbus] “We take what we learned
from the first movie apply to the second film, take the things we didn’t like from the first
one and change it.” I mean what do you do? [Richard Harris] “I think the most amazing
thing was my son was down, he’s a movie maker. He’s a director, writer. And he was down today on the set like ‘I can’t believe how relaxed everyone is.'” In a 2007 AV Club interview, Frank Oz casually
drops that WB asked him to direct the second Harry Potter film – without any context. It’s tough to tell when this conversation
took place, or really what it meant at all. After the success of the first film, I can’t
imagine WB was frothing at the mouth to replace their Columbus cash volcano, but while the
first film was shooting, and even after, I bet a lot of feelers were put out for different things. The original plan was 7 years, 7 movies, which
is why directors were coming in imagining how to shorten it – which given that only
the first four books were out when the first movie came out, that schedule was reasonably
going to slip a bit as JK Rowling had to write three books in that timeframe, but the books
finished publishing and they released not 7, but 8 films in less than ten years. Those were the stakes. And the first movie was fine. You take the victory lap and change things
in subtle ways so you don’t rock the boat. Shooting on The Chamber of Secrets began just
three days after the first film came out. In a 2002 article in The Vindicar, Columbus
reveals that the first change he made on a technical level was to employ more handheld
photography, to naturalize Hogwart’s and to make it feel less stuffy. You know, make it feel like you live there. You’re not just visiting anymore. [David Bradley] “I’ll I’ve got to do is just
pop these in and… it’s an instant Filch. You know, you feel. Once you put these in and you know what this
all looks like it all falls into place.” Chris Columbus shooting handheld. I guess I have seen everything. He went on to say he regretted some of the
special effects in the first film because they were done in 3 months. And that he believes the first film feels
a bit laborious because it has so much to set up and a lot of it is just exposition
for a film aimed at kids They were trying to refine the formula from the second movie on, add more action in the script sense and also in the flying car sense, but have
people doing things. Finding that simply shooting the books does
not make for a great film, because everyone just talks while standing perfectly straight
the first go around. That is challenging to an audience wider than
the novel. The climax or the first movie was two people
standing perfectly straight in a room. Columbus knew they needed to liven it up and
now he’s fighting a snake in a bunch of tunnels. Columbus took the notes. There’s also genuine appreciation for how
much more comfortable the kids were in their roles than the first time around. [Harry] “After all that stuff you did in your
books!?” [Gilderoy Lockhart] “Books can be misleading!” [Harry] “You wrote them!” [Gilderoy Lockhart] “My dear boy, do use your
common sense!” The cast added Kenneth Branaugh as Gilderoy
Lockhart and everything in this movie just feels better. Not a lot of discussion is spent on just how
much Columbus grew as a filmmaker and as a director between the first and second films,
but Chamber of Secrets is a marked improvement on Sorcerer’s Stone in practically every
way. And when this film came out. It was the third highest opening weekend of
all time in the US and Canada. 88.4 million, second to Spiderman and the
Sorcerer’s Stone. Number 1 of all time, in the UK. In 2002, worldwide, it was number 2. Second only to Two Towers, shows you were cinema was going in 2002. The age of the franchise was upon us. There’s more of a focus on magic, and what
it means to be an adolescent wizard. Book elements don’t often serve a movie
plot the same way they serve a book plot. They confront this issue head on in the next
movie, but for now we’ll stay in the rainy day blanket comfort zone of Chamber of Secrets. I watch chamber when I’m sad and it’s
rainy outside. It makes me feel good because it charmingly
does not want anything more than to make you smile. That’s it. A movie that improved upon the first movie
in nearly every way. They were starting to realize the elements
that needed to be in every film, and also some of the elements they could do away with. Columbus was the first filmmaker to start
refining the formula, and he’s the one that came up with it. So, credit where due. Because we’re about to suck your soul out
through your pores and nostrils. They took the victory lap. They had fun this time. Now, it was time to get real with it. We come to this. Back where we started. The Prisoner of Azkaban. I’m gonna get into the weeds on book adaptations
now. I knew I said I wouldn’t, but I have a little
time as I’ve already done an entire piece on this film. I think this film illustrates the problem with adapting things quite wonderfully. It’s impossible to talk about how to make
this idea filmic without talking about the contributions of Steve Kloves, who wrote every
single Harry Potter film expect for Order of the Phoenix. (We’ll talk about that next episode) He was growing as a Harry Potter writer and finding the best ways to adapt the books into films. He absolutely got better at it as he went. This film I think defines that central problem
better than the other films. And by that I mean, In my original piece,
I never got to talk about Time Travel because I spent my entire episode talking about what Cuaron
did for the franchise aesthetically. Since that episode came out , it has come
to my attention that a lot of Harry Potter fans were quite cross with Azkaban as a film
in particular, and I think a lot of it has to do with how much of a diversion it was
from the precedent set by the first two films, that treated the first two books like screenplays, in a lot of ways. So let’s talk about adapting things for
the screen. The book is like OH YEAH TIME TRAVEL as like
a b-plot. And in film, I don’t really think time travel can be a b-plot. So the entire film is structured around this
third act time travel reveal. I full understand the criticisms, and frankly,
“why don’t they just use the time turner” is something that both the books and the films
had to deal with for literally the rest of their lives, but the film is structured in
such a way that you at least understand how dumbledumb gave kids access to universe-destroying
powers to save a Hippogriff. [tripping over words] “Like, the
time traveling, that is such an abstract thing. An actually it’s so difficult that even trying
to explain it right now. Is hard” [Rowling] “Yeah, it is hard because you just
go in circles.” The film focuses on the big three. There is infinitely more character development
in the books, especially considering the number of characters they can focus on. The movie focuses on Harry and his inner circle
and is better for it. The films got better at hinting at these storylines
in the next film, but in Azkaban, it’s all about Harry, Hermione, and Ron. And I cannot say enough nice things about
what Cuaron brought to the proceedings. It’s darker without losing the fun and the
wonder of magic, the characters are starting to come to terms with the weight of: oh hey,
this kid is fated to save the world, so let’s lie to and coddle him. Big statement time: Harry Potter, as a franchise
(books and films) can be viewed through the lens where adults consistently lie and manipulate children. (how’s that for a harry potter take?!) putting them into far greater danger
than they would if they were just honest with them in the first place. Like, Dumbledore plays it so close to the
vest, that he gives kids access to time travel but never tells them fully what to use it
for. He’s consistently mysterious, leaving the
kids to puzzle together to figure out what his intent was. And this is the film that Michael Gambon took
over for Richard Harris after his unfortunate passing. Out the gate, Gambon plays with the dark side
of the character and I applaud him for it. For the first time, we kind of get that feeling
of “whose side are you on, dude?” Harry has to deal with the Dursleys in this
film, but for once he has the upper hand. And he snaps to start this movie and greatly endangers his
horrible aunt by turning her into a balloon person and letting her float away. She says this about his deceased mother, who
was murdered saving him. “It’s all to do with the mother. You see it all the time with dogs. If there’s something wrong with the bitch
then there’s something wrong with the pup.” I’d have bike pumped her too. This is the first film where it wasn’t neat
and tidy. While also being a perfectly realized film
that stands on its own, apart from the series. Azkaban is where I fell in love with the films, apart from the books, because it was about trying to find its own voice. I understand a lot of book fans felt betrayed
by that, and I’m sympathetic to that emotion. But I think Azkaban is the film that started
preaching to people that weren’t book fans and say “there’s something special going
on here, and I think you should come look at it.” A bet that wasn’t paid off immediately. The lowest grossing Harry Potter film domestically
and worldwide was Azkaban, but before you say SEE I TOLD YOU, the second lowest grossing
film domestically and worldwide was Chamber of Secrets. Cause they hadn’t found their audience yet. (Also they both made like 800 million dollars) And it isn’t that much of a difference,
a hundred million or so between like 6 movies, excluding number one which is Deathly Hallows part 2, and it’s number one by almost 400 million dollars. More on that in part 3. BUT DID YOU KNOW: it is heavily implied in
some making of materials that the THWA BAP “I remember Tom telling her, if you want just hit me” (Rowling laughs uncomfortably) “What a hero” God, I hope she hit him for real. This was also the last Potter film that John
Williams did the music for and he went hard in the paint on this one. The score goes so many unexpected places but I still listen to this score when I write all the time, hell, I’m literally listening
to it right now as I write this sentence. also Azkaban built sets in real world locations
in Scotland extensively instead of building sets in a studio. Everything feels way more real and lived in,
which was something that Columbus was starting to explore in Chamber, but Cuaron brings it to a whole other level in this movie. Standing on eachother’s shoulders. Which is how I wanna look to the future. It’s not about how any one filmmaker did
their own thing cause that’s not what Harry Potter was. Here’s something you probably didn’t know. Chris Columbus, for the first time and last
time, was a producer on this film. On the first two he was executive producing and directing. There’s this beautiful symphony you can
feel them trying to create. and Columbus is there Rowling is there. It is how they all looked at what came before
them and found new ways to expand upon the film franchise and stand on each other’s
shoulders while collaborating on a massive scale. They evolve through fresh eyes which is something
we’ll be talking about a lot more in Part 2 But until then, mischief managed.

Only registered users can comment.

  1. 11:10 also to remember the movies loosened up and improved not just because of technical choices, but partly because the directors were dealing with actors with growing experience/expertise as they went along. All of the kids became competent <or better> actors, "good-on" the original casting director, really.

  2. Support support support!!! Engagement engagement engagement!!! Mikey! Your the best thing that’s ever happened to this YouTube genre!!! Thank you for taking on this HP Project! It has seriously made my YEAR!!!

  3. ending instrumental is so wonderful id love to know what it is if anyone can help me out with that id be eternally grateful

  4. I just found your channel yesterday as a reccomend from cinema sins and your essays are very smart and I really enjoy it. It is nice to know there's still people out there who just love movies and the stories and the art. A break from the usual cynicism is refreshing. Thanks for that.

  5. "Book elements don't always serve a movie plot." Somebody should be screaming this at JK Rowling concerning her writing for the Fantastic Beasts films. She should NOT be writing screenplays.

  6. I was horrified by the movies when I was younger, but that was due to my being a diehard fan of the novels. I’ve come round in more recent years, but still…I don’t think Radcliffe was the right actor for the job. The lil’ dudes who played Malfoy, Ron, and Hermione were fantastic, however.

  7. Prisoner of Azkaban is arguably my favorite Harry Potter film the first 3 movies are more my favorite than ANY of the films especially the first 2 I think they're much better they kept the whimsy and the enjoyable childlikeness that the later movies lost considerably because all though the books did get much darker and more gritty they still kept so much humor and whimsy that was just absolutely LOST in the later films
    And people say they just stood around and talked too much in the first film OMG did you even WATCH the romance scenes in the later movies they made such bright beautiful lively characters so dull in the later movies which I think further took away from the natural humor and magic that the books gave us
    Like I understand wanting the movies to stand on their own from the books in a way but they could have made so many better choices in some areas
    Some of the choices I applaud they did very well in some of the action but in others I just I'm dumbfounded with how much it took away the enjoyment from the later movies

  8. I'm just so happy that so many youtubers choose not to include spider/acromantula clips in their Harry Potter videos. Thank you.

  9. Hi Mikey. Just letting you know that your videos are about 3 hours too short. Please make them longer. I will watch every second of your content. Thanks

  10. Dude. You have such a fucking passion for this work. I only hope I find something in my life I can get behind with such heart.

  11. As a fan of the books, I wasn’t pissed they changed the third film. Actually, I always say that the one film that I consider better than the book is Prisoner of Azkaban.

  12. 3:54 just watched your emperors new groove video and for some reason you said. the only thing tom jones was famous for was some film. but here he is!

  13. Cannot stress this enough.
    The fact that I'm only allowed to hit the like button on this retrospective saga – just once.

    Enrages me.

  14. AI was challenging on a textual level, trying to balance a bleaker sci-fi with a Spielbergian fairy tale. Harry Potter was challenging on a metanarrative level, for not being a single story, for having to span multiple films over a much wider timeframe. A much wider challenge, yes, but I don't blame Good ol' Uncle Steve for not seeing it before we all had that hindsight available to us.

    GOOOOD I remember being younger and critically comparing the movies to the books exclusively on the basis of what they changed. I'm so glad to go on this wild duo-toned thumbnail Instagram-filtered ride and see these films through a more complex lens: it's very satisfying. Thanks, Mikey.

  15. I understand changing things for the sake of a movie, but keeping a lot of the same things as the book but doing them vastly differently isn't something I enjoy. The dementors were just done so wrongly and I cant get over that. Most of the rest of it was fine, but I kind of wish they'd played the Firebolt bit closer to the book. I feel like the only reason they put it in at all is that Harry falling off his broom and it being destroyed was a needed plot point and he needed a new broomstick for GoF.

    That bits kind of whatever. It's really they way they screwed up the dementors that really bothered me.

  16. I'm sorry but the first film is the most magical shit I've ever seen! LoTR can suck a cock it's got nothing on that first film.

  17. Azkaban is an awful film adaptation that ditches massive chunks of book plot, regardless of how you value that plot, for gimmicky humor ("I'll come back later") and telling-not-showing (Whomping Willow transitions to point out hey it's winter now idiots). I don't feel betrayed by the shift in tone because the shift had to come, but it gets so bogged down in how different it's trying to be that it forgets what it was trying to do in the first place (tell a story).

  18. 7:58–8:12
    I'm sorry but, that entire did you know "fact" is highly misleading and disrespectful.

    Steven Spielberg did not choose A.I. over Harry Potter only to "challenge" himself. In fact, A.I. was never originally going to be directed by Spielberg. He took that job because the original director, Stanley Kubrick, had died the year before in 1999.

    Kubrick and Spielberg were very close friends for decades, who very much looked up to each other's work. Kubrick appreciated Speilberg for being an audience pleaser, while Speilberg admired Kubrick for his highly detailed artistic films.

    Spielberg took A.I. on as director in memory of his recently deceased friend. Previous to Kubrick's death, Speilberg was disinterested to direct, only wanting to produce while Kubrick directed, and they had that all settled before he died. Kubrick was super excited about retelling Pinocchio through a futuristic lens.

    The ending of A.I., that most people hated, when the aliens find Haley Joel Osment and bring his mother back to life was 100% Kubrick's idea. Speilberg knew that audience's would hate it and was urged by the studio to change it, but he fought hard to keep it true to Kubrick's vision. He wanted to do everything he could to bring his friend's story to life after his abrupt death. To say that Spielberg was dumb for not taking the job for Harry Potter is disingenuous and disrespectful to the memory of Kubrick.

    Kubrick is my favorite director and someone I look up to in my own directing. Speilberg may not have made a very good film but the fact he tried, did his best, and fought to keep the last story Kubrick wanted to tell alive and as close to what he wanted, is nothing short of amazing and absolutely touching.

    Speilberg did the right thing by turning down the Harry Potter job and doing the last thing he could for Kubrick. You might have done well to research the reason as to why Speilberg turned the job down. Just sayin.

    Also I mean no personal offence to you, i just wish you woul have looked into things more. I get kind of salty when people make fun of A.I. or say Speilberg did a shitty job. I mean it wasn't a good film by any means, but people should take a step back and put themselves into Speilberg's shoes. If your long time friend died while working on a project they were passionate about and you decided to finish it for them, then got told you did a terrible job and made a mistake by trying, wouldn't that cut pretty deep?

  19. Don't ask me why, but I think Tom Felton and Aaron Paul should be in a movie together. Don't know about what it'll be about; I'd just want that in my life.

  20. I'm a book fan first and through and through and Azkaban not only one of my favourite HP adaptations but one of my favourite films (just because of the direction).

  21. I love watching video that tell me how much i love harry potter. I watched Harry Potter and the chamber of secrets like 20 times when i was a kid on a cable channel, i was clueless about the other movies and i didn't know that other parts even existed other than the first one and the third one.

    We don't have a lot of free cable channels that air movies and the channel i was watching only had the rights for the second movie so for like 5 years of my childhood i kept rewatching the second movie and never got bored, i always got so existed when i saw that the movie was airing on TV, i'll never forget those nights where i watched chamber of secrets with my little brother.

  22. Look, I know this sort of thing isn't the best for the algorythim, but I made the choice to wait until after the release of part 3 to start watching these. Personally I'm glad I did, it's great seeing these one right after another, this is really amazing work, Mikey. Thank you.

  23. As a huge fan of both Alfonso Cuaron AND the Prisoner of Azkaban… I had zero problem with his adaptation. It felt like a welcome pivot away from the conventional kid-friendliness of Columbus for me.

  24. I think Azkaban is a gorgeous film and really well made, but as I’ve revisited it I’ve realized how much it relies on the viewer having read the books. It doesn’t explain the history of the map, Remus, Sirius, James, and Peter very well at all. So I have problems with Azkaban as a film because it creates plot holes that the rest of the series suffers from. However it also boosts the rest of the series with the stylish and artistry of it so a major mixed bag for me. Awesome video!

  25. Came here from Gus and Eddy’s podcast after Edd shouted you out. So glad I decided to come and watch you! What a comprehensive overview of the films… binging all the vids in this series and then I can’t wait to see what else you do. X

  26. One thing I just had to say, Steven Spielberg dropped out of this movie to direct A.I because he was friends with Kubrick, like really good friends and he had promised him he would direct a film that’s “his” if it were. Not because it would challenge him

  27. My problem with Prisoner of Azkaban as a movie has very little to do with the books, and everything to do with the complete them change, right down to the music. It's basically a completely new series, cuz never mind the motifs that Williams spent 2 movies cultivating, never mind the bright colors of movies 1 and 2, never mind the rules of the universe as set up by Chris Columbus… we're going to break them all, and make it brand new. There was a middle ground that Cuaron failed to walk and it made me fail to connect to it

  28. 4:44 I do not remember that at all. Granted it's been awhile since I've read the books, but I'd think I'd remember Ron swearing in that last one! Maybe it was censored out of the copy I had (since it was a school one). Or maybe it was self censoring and I just don't remember that. Oh well.

  29. I pretty much agree with this guy, I love the first three harry Potters the most. I can watch them any time. And azkaban is amazing. Serious black just steals the show on these movies. I can't stand that he doesn't have more screen time, but azkaban is all about SB. Absolutely the shit movie!!

  30. Is it me or is there an awful lot of telecine judder on this? There's never been any on the others that I've noticed.

  31. What I liked about this was that the early movies were much more faithful to the story and the universe than most hollywood adaptions of books.

    I hate going to see "harry potter" and I get something completely different than the book I read because some damn "auteur" director with a fat head pastes their own ego all over the film.

    And I get the difference between that and a faithful adaption that also faces the reality that you can't fit an entire book into a movie.

  32. Yeah, Mikey….. You keep making them, I'll keep watching and savoring every little nuance and insight you share.

  33. "Azkaban was the film that started preaching to people who weren't fans of the book and say "there's something pretty special going on over here and I think you should come look at it.""
    This was exactly my experience.

    I was pretty indifferent to Harry Potter when it first came out – just dismissed them as kid's books and never took a closer look.
    Somewhere between the second and third films, I was staying with a friend who had Philosopher's Stone (sorry 'Muricans) and Chamber of Secrets on DVD. I watched them both, and thought they were okay but they didn't really grab me.

    About a year later and my girlfriend at the time was a Potter fan, and super-excited to see Azkaban on its release. I went with her, expecting more of the same.

    I left the cinema having had a genuinely awesome time. It was like I finally saw the appeal and understood what they were aiming for, for the first time.
    I promptly read all of the books that were out at the time, and the last few I read as soon as I could. I saw every movie after Azkaban in the cinema on release.
    In short, Azkaban the movie converted me.

  34. Spielberg believed AI would challenge him more and Stanley Kubrick also asked him to direct it. Kubrick was originally going to helm the project.

  35. I love your videos, but Rowling sounds like bowling, not howling. That information has kind of been out there for years.

  36. The Prisoner of Azkaban, both the book and the movie, are my favorite of the series. I even watched the Behind the scenes from the DVD so many times, showing so many love and details from the film makers. I sometimes fail to tell others why, but now I can just show them your videos.

  37. Mikey, I came here because of Cinema Wins. I stay here watching for you. I love every single one of your videos. I would love to see you talk about Lord of the Rings movies, as well as the Kingdom of Heaven (you mentioned it in a previous video but I'd love to hear you really talk about it at length.) I love your videos and I love the idea of you doing this forever, you're a gift to the internet.

  38. The Stones where Malfoy gets clocked by Hermione are fake (and, in fact, were airlifted in by helicopter).
    But when the cast came on set they asked why they filmed there, with "those rocks obstructing the view" because they fit in so well.

  39. Appreciate the conversion rates for Pounds to Doritos but what's the conversion from the British Pound to Doritos to American Lbs.?

  40. I think you could make an entire film length documentary on the cinematography in Prisoner of Azkaban. The framing of nearly every shot in that movie is so intentional as to be noticeably, yet subtly wonderful.

  41. After watching this I am now incredibly sad I didn't get to see seven Harry Potter movies directed by Terry Gilliam.

  42. You can't change the past with a Time-Turner.
    Hermione should have had the Time-Turner.
    It wasn't "universe-destroying power".
    Dumbledore isn't dumb. You thinking that makes you a fucking idiot.

    No, that isn't "code for don't over-analyse it". They're saying that because it's difficult to explain single-timeline time travel.
    There is only one timeline. Sirius was never Kissed, Buckbeak was never killed.

    You can't change the past. Everything happens on one timeline. This is clear in the PoA film; you first see Harry in Hagrid's hut, and a stone hits him in the head, out of nowhere. Later, we see it from FutureHarry and FutureHermione's perspective, and learn that FutureHermione is the one that threw the stone.

    That means FutureHermione was always there, meaning it all happened on the same timeline. We see the same events from the perspective of regular Harry and Hermione, then FutureHarry and FutureHermione.

    Consequently, this means the future version of whoever goes back in time both has and doesn't have free will, at the same time. They do have it because they're choosing their own actions, and so determining what they're doing in the past, but they don't have it because they're obviously going back in time after the event, so everything they will do has already been done, by their self that had already returned to the past, when the past was the future version's present.

    Time travel is fascinating.

    No. They don't consistently lie to kids.

    Dumbledore doesn't withhold information for the fun of it. First, the intent of the Time-Turner was originally solely for Hermione to attend more classes. At the end, Dumbledore gets them to think about what they're doing, rather than blindly follow instruction. That's an incredibly valuable lesson, and helps them and others massively in the future. You just have no interest in thinking when someone else can do it all for you.

    No, Gambom doesn't portray the dark side of Dumbledore, where you don't know whose side he's on. You don't half talk shit.

  43. At 2:50 Don't reference David Heyman's future movies while trying to give context on him as a producer. All three of the movies are things he got because he was the producer of Harry Potter. What movies or TV got him the Harry Potter job?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *