'Goblet of Fire' movie stills! (Pic heavy, dur)

Post by **Zaia** » 2005-08-23 09:23am

Ace Pace wrote: This is ALL good except for the music.

The music...

Ace Pace · Post by **Ace Pace** » 2005-08-23 09:26am

Well, not that its bad, I really liked it, but its not Williams.

And I now have a high quality version of the trailer with french subs(don't detract) available Here

Kernel, if this kills the server, tell me

Elheru Aran · Post by **Elheru Aran** » 2005-08-23 11:17am

Regarding the music-- it's the trailer, they're not exactly going to use the quality stuff on what's basically just a preview...

Ace Pace · Post by **Ace Pace** » 2005-08-23 11:18am

No no no...They don't have Williams.

Dahak · Post by **Dahak** » 2005-08-23 02:26pm

I liked the music...

neoolong · Post by **neoolong** » 2005-08-23 05:28pm

Ace Pace wrote:They are in seperate location, that dosn't excuse the quiditch area(look at it and compare it to the former locations) being in a bloody mountain.

It's magic, they can move it wherever they want.

Besides, didn't Hogwarts end up looking different in the third movie anyway?

I thought the music was good for a trailer. I don't think it's going to be like that for the movie.

Crown · Post by **Crown** » 2005-08-29 10:32am

neoolong wrote:
Ace Pace wrote:They are in seperate location, that dosn't excuse the quiditch area(look at it and compare it to the former locations) being in a bloody mountain.
It's magic, they can move it wherever they want. Besides, didn't Hogwarts end up looking different in the third movie anyway?

I thought the music was good for a trailer. I don't think it's going to be like that for the movie.

I don't remember the Quidditch area being used for the first task; only the third task (the maze) in the book.

As for movie three, yes, Hagrid's hut location was changed (for the better if you ask me).

EDIT :: Oh and a high quality, non French subtitled preview, can be found here for those who want it.

Ace Pace · Post by **Ace Pace** » 2005-08-29 11:29am

I have both the movie/trailer website trailer which has mostly the cast growing up and a few snippets and the full trailer, the full trailer is uploaded at the previous link(non french subtitles now), the growing up trailer is going up at the same location soon.

Crown · Post by **Crown** » 2005-08-29 12:03pm

You know what pisses me off about this trailer? Not one single peep of the graveyard. No Voldemort, no stone cauldron, no Wormtail, no dead Cedric, nothing, nadda, zilch.

Annoying.

Ace Pace · Post by **Ace Pace** » 2005-08-29 12:16pm

There was 2 peaks, one of Harry inside a DARK portkey, the second was a flash of harry in a dark area, or I could be hallucinating and it was from the second trailer, which will go live 40 minutes from now Here

Crown · Post by **Crown** » 2005-08-30 03:44pm

Ace Pace wrote:There was 2 peaks, one of Harry inside a DARK portkey, the second was a flash of harry in a dark area, or I could be hallucinating and it was from the second trailer, which will go live 40 minutes from now Here

Regarding the latter; that is Harry inside the third task (the maze), you can see hedges.

Regarding the former; I'm not sure as to what you're refering to, but I think you mean that scene where there is sort of a 'bright' flash and Harry is plumeting down a wooden shaft of some kind (around 1:15), but that can't be the portkey to Voldemort since Harry is wearing 'muggle' clotes and not the uniform for the third task. Best guess it's Harry's dream from the start of the novel where he sees Voldemort kill the old gardener.

The only thing that I could grant as a possible scene from the graveyard is at 1:16 where we've got a 'Sergio Lione' close up on Harry - and that can hardly be proven one way or the other.

So unless I got your DARK portkey thingie wrong, then yes you are hallucinating.

Honestly though, I'm not too suprised that there wasn't any Voldemort in the trailer, some people have gotten to see 'test screenings' of a rough cut for the movie, and they've all said that the CGI for Voldemort hadn't been done yet, it's just Ralf Fiennes with a few 'dots' stuck to his face, and the SFX for the cauldron weren't finished yet - and then you add to the fact that the Props/Arts Department and the Director got it wrong and wrote Tom Riddle Jnr on the grave as well as Tom Riddle Snr (they've since said that they will be rectifying the mistake with CGI wizardry) - it is understandable. Altough it still irks.

Ace Pace · Post by **Ace Pace** » 2005-08-30 03:48pm

AH, thanks for the clearup.

El Moose Monstero · Post by **El Moose Monstero** » 2005-08-30 04:08pm

Is the latter definately authentic? The opening carriage CGI was awful, it looked like something out of shrek... it couldn't be something someone's just chopped together could it?

Crown · Post by **Crown** » 2005-08-30 04:12pm

No worries!

Anyyyyyyyway, since this is a picture thread, time to add some pics!

Cho lookin' smokin' hot for my money!

Dumbledore wants you! For his Army!

Dumbledore using the pensive, now two things; his wand is rather funky (in a good way),
and that 'black ring' isn't meant to appear for TWO MORE MOVIES damit!

Goyle, Draco and Krum for all of you Draco shippers.

Some people aren't happy with Harry being chosen, is it just me, or is Krakoff just a little too ... thin

Harry hard at work ... as usual.

I believe some people were complaining about scars on Moody earlier ...

I don't know, I mean the face is fine, it's just that I always pictured him to be a little more 'frumpy' ...

Anyone else spot the collosal fuck up?

"Tell me Harry, was he angry at the other Death Eaters for not being faitfull?"

'Vicky'

Yes, but does it come in purple? (Weasley tent and anyone else find it strange that their tent is better than their house?)

Swimming suite contest!

Crown · Post by **Crown** » 2005-08-30 04:15pm

El Moose Monstero wrote:Is the latter definately authentic? The opening carriage CGI was awful, it looked like something out of shrek... it couldn't be something someone's just chopped together could it?

Which part mate? The screw up with the Gravestone? See for yourself; Tom Marvolo Riddle is still very much alive (sort of).

As for the 'test screening' yes, it is.

The opening CGI looked fine to me though, not Buckbeak good, but pretty good. What didn't you like?

Ace Pace · Post by **Ace Pace** » 2005-08-30 04:17pm

Fleurs suit sucks

Yes, I found the fuck up.

And Moose, thats authentic AFAIK but it may be from an earlier version.

Post by **Zaia** » 2005-08-30 04:29pm

I wouldn't call it a fuck-up until you see it in context.

Verrry nice photos. Thanks for sharin'.

El Moose Monstero · Post by **El Moose Monstero** » 2005-08-30 04:35pm

Crown wrote:
El Moose Monstero wrote:Is the latter definately authentic? The opening carriage CGI was awful, it looked like something out of shrek... it couldn't be something someone's just chopped together could it?
Which part mate? The screw up with the Gravestone? See for yourself; Tom Marvolo Riddle is still very much alive (sort of).

As for the 'test screening' yes, it is.

The opening CGI looked fine to me though, not Buckbeak good, but pretty good. What didn't you like?

It was mainly the CGI, the pull back from the flying carriage with the hippogriffs flying in, that looked rather CGI, but the following scene with all the kids watching looked like the graphics team couldn't be bothered to put another LOD in. It won't detract from the film, I know, but it looked almost like something a fan would have done and not what I would have expected when compared with the dragon.

Other than that, and the ku klux klan in black, I'm really looking forward to this.

Crown · Post by **Crown** » 2005-08-30 04:41pm

Zaia wrote:I wouldn't call it a fuck-up until you see it in context.

Errr, context?

Zaia wrote:Verrry nice photos. Thanks for sharin'.

Anytime.

El Moose Monstero wrote:It was mainly the CGI, the pull back from the flying carriage with the hippogriffs flying in, that looked rather CGI, but the following scene with all the kids watching looked like the graphics team couldn't be bothered to put another LOD in. It won't detract from the film, I know, but it looked almost like something a fan would have done and not what I would have expected when compared with the dragon.

Other than that, and the ku klux klan in black, I'm really looking forward to this.

I don't know what LOD is, so I'm perfectly happy in ignorance, oh and they weren't hippogriffs.

Post by **Zaia** » 2005-08-30 04:44pm

Crown wrote:Errr, context?

Sorry, I meant maybe the dates would be explained in the movie.

El Moose Monstero · Post by **El Moose Monstero** » 2005-08-30 04:51pm

Yarghhhhhhhh.

Nuts to the non hippogriffs then, it's been a while since I've read the book.

LOD is level of detail, I wasn't sure whether to explain it or not as I wasn't sure whether a) I would be being patronising and b) whether I'd be talking out of my arse. Basically, the faces look minimally detailed, which is fine if you're going past in a hurry as noone notices and it saves money I think as well, but the shot was too slow so you could tell it was CGI rather than a crowd of kiddie wizards.

Crown · Post by **Crown** » 2005-08-30 04:53pm

Zaia wrote:
Crown wrote:Errr, context?
Sorry, I meant maybe the dates would be explained in the movie.

The dates are iffy 43-46 is about right (46 being the absolute latest, 45 is the generally agreed upon prior to HBP), but Tom Marvolo Riddle shouldn't be there, in any way shape or form.

Here is what Muggle.net had to say about it;

WB to fix 'grave' error
After being originally published in the July 29th issue of Entertainment Weekly, a picture of Harry in front of a gravestone has sparked quite a bit of controversy among Potter fans. The dates on the stone are incorrect and Voldemort's name is etched onto it.

An article in the Sunday Mail reports that producers are "said to be considering altering the tombstone with the latest computer wizardry," and that WB insists "it will be accurate in the final film."

Crown · Post by **Crown** » 2005-08-30 04:55pm

El Moose Monstero wrote:Yarghhhhhhhh. Nuts to the non hippogriffs then, it's been a while since I've read the book.

LOD is level of detail, I wasn't sure whether to explain it or not as I wasn't sure whether a) I would be being patronising and b) whether I'd be talking out of my arse. Basically, the faces look minimally detailed, which is fine if you're going past in a hurry as noone notices and it saves money I think as well, but the shot was too slow so you could tell it was CGI rather than a crowd of kiddie wizards.

Explain away mate, but now I'm confused. Which 'crowd of kiddie wizard' scene do you refer

Post by **Zaia** » 2005-08-30 04:57pm

Crown wrote:...but Tom Marvolo Riddle shouldn't be there, in any way shape or form.

I know. If it actually shows up in the movie like that, it could be explained through magic--Voldemort fucking around with Harry just because he can, because Voldemort thought he had everything with Harry all sewn up at that point in the story. From what your article has to say, it's just in the rough draft of the effects, but if it appears in the movie, it could be explained somehow. But I doubt it'll be there.

El Moose Monstero · Post by **El Moose Monstero** » 2005-08-30 05:03pm

Actually, on third or fourth viewing, it seems I am talking out of the proverbial. It's just the effect of the video itself that makes the kids watching the flying horses look unreal and blurry. Hah, now my face is red.

Tell you what, why don't I go over there and hide in the corner and let the rest of you get back to actually discussing the film...