The Man Who RUINED Harry Potter

[@Arttective]

Thank you so much for watching! PLEASE READ BEFORE COMMENTING --> 1. I am not a "fan" of Mike Newell, I just think he is a better director than Yates 2. This video is my *personal* opinion. If you disagree, that is totally fine since we all have different tastes kzbin.info/www/bejne/a2bKe62qlJ2ilbs

[@paulwoodford1984]

Do you fancy Alfonso? 😏

[@Arttective]

@@paulwoodford1984 N-no, why do you say that? *nervously hides Alfonso fan poster*

[@paulwoodford1984]

@@Arttective 😂 Go and proudly put it back on your shrine to him.

[@Arttective]

@@paulwoodford1984 ABSOLUTELY

[@Acoustic_Screecher]

@Manzoor Roome what

[@culbycove4963]

Alfonso Cuaron had by far, in my opinion, the BEST cinematography of the series. Columbus did great filming all the best moments using the three camera setup of to compensate for the actors’ inexperience, but Azkaban’s camera has a life of its own, it feels like we’re being taken through the experience vs just watching it.

[@eugenio1203]

I totally agree with you! There’s a video from a Spanish KZbinr, Scarlew Harzac, called Harry Potter y los movimientos de cámara, if you know Spanish you must watch it, it’s a fantastic analysis of the film, if you don’t, I’m sure it must have subtitles

[@SammEater]

Seriously, those shots of the bird going through the school or when the camera 'enters the mirror' in that one scene with the class learning the Ridiculous spell is pretty cool, there is nothing like that in the other movies.

[@ct6852]

Azkaban was the best standalone movie in the franchise. Or the best made. Whether he would've been best for the overall arc, I'm not sure. But that movie is magical and weird and great.

[@theredstonebuilder1120]

Watching it, I could see the parallels in direction between Azkaban and his other movie Gravity from 2013. Like when hermione is swung by the whomping willow, looks similar to the space shuttle destruction. And the vastness of the landscape similar to that of earth in gravity. Great cinematography

[@eddielong8663]

I must be in the minority here. I absolutely hated the hyper-stylised direction of PoA. It was such a jarring change of filmmaking from Columbus's direction and it didn't sit well with me at all. Didn't think much of Newell's GoF either but it wasn't quite as bad as the 3rd film. Yates was indeed a poor substitute for Columbus's straight-forward approach, but it was better him than the other two.

[@MaxToThePower]

Another disappointing aspect of the franchise is the music. How Doyle, Hooper, and Desplat ignored ALL of Williams' work was really insulting. Imagine if Fawkes' theme reappeared when he leaves Hogwarts in Half-Blood Prince. Or if A Window to the Past was used during the resurrection stone scene. For me, musical continuity is just as important as the script and acting. It's another way to connect with the characters.

[@Arttective]

Yep. They also used a lot of temp music.

[@StevenOBrien]

@@Arttective One thing that specifically annoyed me was in the Prisoner of Azkaban, when Marge was blown up and floating out of the window, the score is a bad rip-off of a famous piece of classical music that was obviously used as the temp track. Why on earth, when you have JOHN WILLIAMS on your team, would you make him rearrange that instead of just letting him use his own themes that he's established over the previous two films?

[@basketskate1247]

MUSICAL CONTINUITY , perfect! that's in part what I missed the most. Thank you for your comment, not often do I encounter people with this view.

[@gromusodus1949]

I completely agree. However, I have to say that Doyle's new themes really hit it out of the park

[@jr1648]

@@StevenOBrienwhich piece did he quote?

[@obijaykenobi90]

I’d have loved to see what Cuaron could have done if he’d directed the two final films

[@toothless9081]

Omg yes

[@iancuneo1820]

The scene with Harry and lupin in prisoner on the bridge with Windows to the past playing in the background is so amazing and one of it not my favorite scenes in any hp movie

[@davidw.2791]

DH would have been one movie and it and Hbp would both be 130 minutes long.

[@thedrunkweddingphotographer]

100000000000%

[@lost4tseas]

I wish I lived in an alternate universe where Cuarón did all the movies after the third one. As a kid I always loved the third one and I had no idea what made it stand out to me but growing up I soon realized it was all about director’s vision. I could literally rewatch the third one constantly and I probably would never get sick of it.

[@tomasbrozek3026]

Exactly. That was the film that made me in love with cinema. I rewatched that movie so many times as a child and always noticed something new about it.

[@Chasling_]

It's such a good movie. One of the best books, and the best movie.

[@emaosmanbasic6882]

Sure visually it looked good, I like that it got darker, the dementors were awesome and Harry had the best hair style in this one but I honestly didn't like the changes made to Hogwarts, the landscape and characters. Also this was the movie that started not explaining certain plots. I remember every time I finished the film I had to ask my sister to explain how Sirius escaped and why he came to Hogwarts now (since I didn't start reading the books till movie 5 was out).

[@francisraud]

Its not just by far the technically best of the installments, it’s also structured with a vision and an intelligence - both emotional and physical - that exceeds even what you can possibly comprehend. Some correctly say it’s an experience, something you are put through and it vastly improves the material that was written for it. Directors often direct what they are given, and hardly write. Some get trapped in those boundaries, some break right through. Cuaron shaped what hogwarts not only looked but also felt like, from then on. Take the recent vgame, it’s exactly that castle, with some parts expanded but it’s all there. Same goes for hogsmeade and the tone overall. That sense of magic that is both colorful and gritty at times, light and dark, everything. And the music… John Williams gave his best entry of the three he scored with this one. You feel the fun he had, the might, the power, the freedom, the rage at times. You experience how deeply he felt immersed into this vision. And if a composer, even a giant of his kind pulls out all this it’s because the director worked well with him setting and explaining the tone in depth, the rest is magic. Sometimes composers exceed what directors ask and detail and sometimes they underperform. This was a perfect synch, despite some many thing getting written out of the script. A masterpiece that can perfectly stand alone, doesn’t need the other films to be understood. Pity they didn’t go on with him. With both.

[@Beautifullytragic6]

YES.

[@anonyme4881]

What make the most impact with Colombus is how the castle is a character. The whole castle feel alive

[@TheFranchiseCA]

Columbus isn't a great director, but he managed the child actors reasonably well, you can't tell they struggle to remember their lines to the point they genuinely cannot regularly do more than one or two in a take. And he understands the core sense early on is wonder. His two movies maintain a sense of creativity and exploration of a new world.

[@patriciaalvareztostado8170]

I think is was easier in the first to movies, we couldnt know how he would move to the more dark part of HP; for me the big problem in the last 3 movies, 6z book and 7 book is more the writing, they fail in a lot of parts, miss important things, make Ginny look the more dule charcter in the movies, and trying to make HP and Hermaionie the end,

[@lissandrafreljord7913]

Chris Colombus was good for the first 2 films, where Harry, Hermione, and Ron's characters were still kids. The vibe of these two films felt like a family friendly Christmas movie, much like other of Colombus' work like Home Alone and Mrs. Doubtfire. Eventually, the movie needed to mature, as the characters get more angsty and teenage-like, and the story gets darker and more serious. Alfonso Cuaron did a great job setting that dark atmosphere in Prisoner of Azkaban. But by far the worst director of all the Harry Potter franchise was Mike Newell. Yates was alright.

[@diabloakland]

@@TheFranchiseCA id argue he’s a great director when involved in children’s stories. He does well.

[@HordrissTheConfuser]

That, and his use of character movement through the frame. One the story gets going, Harry Potter is nearly always moving forward, whether being guided, forced, or under his own power.

[@Cloudipy]

I love Chris Colombus' aesthetic/color palette/wizarding world decors/magical ambiances which really made us fall in love with the Harry Potter universe, and I love Cuaron's filming and editing and the emotions it brings (Also Harry's hairstyle was on point). A combination of both would have been perfect!

[@joaoheleno100]

You really expressed all my feelings about this topic!

[@georgezee5173]

In my opinon Columbus' installments always looked quite outdated, with a cinematography that you would expect from a 1995 film, not late 2001. He nailed the tone of those two movies, though.

[@nahor88]

@@georgezee5173 Best thing about the Columbus movies is that they didn't feel like typical Summer blockbusters. He made a real effort to include as much of the books as possible, including fan service scenes. If you watch the extended cuts of his films, it's virtually the entire book. He even wanted Peeves included. It was truly "Harry's Wondrous World". Starting with GoF, they felt exactly like typical action blockbusters that happen to feature wizards and witches. I really wish they'd given him Order of the Phoenix; would we have gotten more of those world building scenes that aren't directly tied to the plot, but make it clear this is a whole other world Harry is living in. I'd happily sit down for 3 hours of that.

[@Sadoodi]

You nailed it! The man had no idea how to direct people. Every interaction felt awkward. He also made Ginny the most plain character in the movie series

[@bryanthealien6734]

Right?!

[@Seattletyy93]

There was no savings Ginnys movie adaptation after her awkward scenes in his movies. Such a damn shame since she was one of my favorite characters from the book.

[@hjer731]

The last scene between Harry and Hagrid was so disappointing in DH2. They barely said anything. Zero emotional register

[@jakelover1731]

Ehh, Radcliffe had his biggest quality jump from Goblet to Order. That's at least partly down to direction. Yates also reeled Dumbledore back in from the weird thing Newell was doing to him.

[@GabrielPassarelliG]

And the reason we find in the internet for WB to hire him was his previous success in another TV drama series directing teenagers in difficult emotion scenarios. How come that reason turns itself into 4 horribly acted and blocked movies?

[@3hutp]

No wonder Christopher Columbus is such a good director. It's an easy-peasy job compared to discovering America.

[@Arttective]

Haha!!

[@jamie1602]

Also far less mutiny and losing one of your ships... and bringing all of those old world diseases to the new world!

[@darthfloch6823]

@@jamie1602 ☝🤓

[@ifirespondiamstupid7750]

​​@@jamie1602 skillissue

[@mane53017]

​@@jamie1602Don't forget the massive genocide

[@HigherQualityUploads]

Yates seems to _really_ like group shots. Getting as many actors in the shot as possible. Once you realize this you can't unsee it!

[@vikingdragon7100]

I thought it was appropriate in Order of the Phoenix. One (Harry) vs many people was a recurring visual motif to reinforce Harry's isolation. Take a look at the scene on the bridge when he tells his friends he will go to save Sirius himself; he literally walks into his own isolated frame, while he was framed with his friends seconds ago. I found that rather clever, but moving forward the group shots didn't convey much other than awkward comedy in some instances.

[@nicoleackerman205]

Thanks I can't unsee it now.

[@DekuNEKO21]

Because if there would be less than 10 actors in yates shot it becomes unbearably boring.

[@faisalmemon285]

You’re wrong. Yates doesn’t know how to direct any scene.

[@nickbundt]

Yates only knows how to do a medium shot, especially in Order of the Phoenix

[@123Heitor321]

The thing I most hate about Yates films are the change on color pallet/mood in general. We got a Matilda kind of vibe with vibrant colors and adventuring score on the first movies, then Yates moved to a Twilight mood of green colors and teenage drama.

[@bcortens]

Yes! The way hogwarts was drained of all colour really bothered me as the series went on. It seems so lifeless when compared to movies 1 and 2 which have always been my favourite as adaptations.

[@Veloziraptor111]

I feel like that worked for the Half-Blood Prince, because that's the year Harry spends grieving for the closest thing he had to a parent. It feels almost as though the colors of the world directly reflect Harry's emotional state. For the other movies, not so much. Although Hallows spent so much time outside Hogwarts, the change in pallet arguably didn't matter.

[@TheRealBillix]

Hogwarts shouldnt have much color anyways

[@nazrulhaque5986]

I think the story required it get a bit darker

[@123Heitor321]

@@nazrulhaque5986 In my opinion there's a difference between making things a little bit darker and putting a color filter from the Twilight Saga.

[@jeidafei1165]

I've just re-read the books and I'm baffled at how the Order of the Phoenix scene in Dumbledore's office is so DARK. In the book, Harry returned to a brightly lit room filled with movement and wonder. As his rant and his talk with Dumbledore progress, the light outside changes and plays with the light of the room itself. Gold. Red. So much color. Harry saw the Quidditch pitch where Sirius once came to watch him play. Dumbledore's silver instruments gleam and twinkle. Portraits on the wall react to the events. Whenever I read the books, I picture the setting and characters after the Columbus films.

[@farfaraway4285]

Try the audiobooks too, those are exactly what the movies should have been. I always imagine that it’s the movie, I only listen to it and imagine what would be on screen.

[@Knightmessenger]

The MAD Magazine parody illustrated that scene better and more acurrate to the book description.

[@akmonra]

Most of the scenes in the Yates films are extremely dark for some reason.

[@juliafa6562]

One of the things I hate the most about Yates' films is the horrible and dull blue palette of the screen, which makes everything darker... I understand books 5-7 are darker in tone, but all of the magic seemed to disappear from the movies

[@Knightmessenger]

@Julia FA it's become a stupid trend to give movies an unnatural color tint since about 2005. I hate it because 35mm film can look like so lifelike and make you wish your video camera got that type of result (see Harry Potter 1 & 2 or even Ella Enchanted) and they just lazily make it look like something shot with a tiny miniDV camcorder.

[@MR-xv1sr]

ok, but imagine, IMAGINE, how amazing the half blood prince would have been had it been directed by Cuaron? The oppressive atmosphere without having to establish a sepia colour palette that makes it difficult to see anything, voldy’s BACKSTORY of which we were robbed (not sure how much of that was the fault of the screenplay tbf), seeing the relationships develop and strengthen instead of having blank faces stare at each other, ginny with a personality.. THE POSSIBILITIES!!

[@May04bwu]

And if they left the story untouched - included the battle, Bill being injured, Harry being actually sassy. HBP is my favourite book. The movie makes me cringe.

[@charles3840]

I saw the movies first. I remembered being really bored by the HBP movie. I was shocked by how dynamic and emotional the book was in comparison when I finally read it.

[@davi7940]

Ok but the palete of the 6 film is amazinh indeed

[@resathe6760]

@@davi7940no it's not. It's sepia throughout the whole movie

[@davidw.2791]

@@May04bwuThat’s a big “If” because Cuaron is just as guilty of axing plot.

[@ricksterdrummer2170]

The funniest thing to me is how Yates failed at making his movies scarier than the first ones beside having scarier moments. Y’all gotta admit the scenes with the basilisk going around the castle saying: “Kill! KILL!!” Is a hell lot scarier than any scene from 5-8. haha

[@Arttective]

Exactly! He had a lot more powerful scenes but even they were ruined. Expect for last film which I feel is genuinely brilliant

[@brendalewis2835]

Exactly, there is a scary essence that the books and first four movies had that lack in the Yates movies

[@brendalewis2835]

@@Arttective The last film has lots of problems for sure but it is the best out of his four movies

[@zorrow_]

@@Arttective in my opinion, mike newell was the worst.

[@stephenp2174]

The Department of Mysteries should have been way scarier. The memories that were left out of HBP should have been there and done properly. The lake in HBP was scary, pretty well done, but the Inferi on the book looked like corpses and not shriveled water demons. In the book Harry sees one floating face up below the water and there are even children Inferi. Godric's Hollow in DH was done pretty well. But they're all still missing something. Yates has a formulaic, bland style, he doesn't know how to pace anything to create tension. Although I did like when Harry goes after Bellatrix, the creepy sound effects start and Voldemort says "you've got to mean it, Harry..."

[@rd010123]

I can remember everything from the first 4 films. The last 4 just blur together in my memory.

[@Arttective]

You can't remember the "first" 4 and the "last" 4 are a blur? Meaning you didn't care for any of the films. Sorry, just trying to understand what you said.

[@rd010123]

@@Arttective The first 4 films all have a similar tone and whimsicalness that feel like they evolve and get more epic with each film. Then 5 hits and its drab and stale and feels uninspired. Like the love for the world of Harry Potter was lost. Yates definitely has his own style, which is fine, but its so drastically different from the first 4, I can't stand what he did with the franchise. When I think of scenes from his films, I couldn't tell you which scenes are from which of his films. Give me a scene from the first 4 and I can accurately tell you which film they belong to.

[@Arttective]

Totally agree!

[@tomatosoup1304]

5th still works due to Umbridge who completely carried that film but past that I don't remember what happens in which film

[@rishabhaniket1952]

It’s called growing up😂.

[@singingknightengale]

I felt like I spent years saying David Yates couldn’t block a scene for shit and felt like I was speaking to a brick wall. And here you are highlighting it and emphasizing how even the camera work was failing the story. Thank you. So much.

[@juhuu13579]

It’s not bad filmmaking that makes people angry, I think it’s the feeling of lost potential. The grief that you feel watching something that could have been great, but is instead decent at best

[@LoneWolfDion]

lost potential equates to bad film making surely?

[@cheeks7050]

agree@@LoneWolfDion

[@jakubswatowski1007]

thats why im a little excited about the series. i know we dont really need it but they might make justice to the 4-7 books

[@nahor88]

I honestly feel with any film franchise of a popular series, you NEED superfans of the material in a position of power. The LOTR movies benefitted greatly from Christopher Lee being a huge fan of Tolkien. We already saw how Star Wars suffered when George Lucas stepped down, and how much better the quality became when Dave Filoni began taking the helm.

[@StefanWinchester]

Like the star wars sequals

[@madelinelipscomb3453]

the hate crime he committed against ginny weasley: unacceptable

[@Arttective]

Yep!!

[@medalgear654]

snd Ron as well.

[@stephen-dfc]

Her acting was pretty woeful to be completely honest, but that’s the risk you take when taking on actors and actresses so young, we were very lucky that Dan, Rupert and Emma along with the like of Tom Felton and Matthew Lewis played their parts perfectly throughout the series.

[@joevictor53]

The Half Blood Prince was one of my favourite books in the series just because of Ginny. I never cared for her character before that but that book made me fall in love with the character and understand why Harry would too. Then the film ended up being so blah and that "romance" seems to come out of nowhere and doesn't feel the same

[@justjoannak]

*THIS!* Only reason I genuinely dislike the movies

[@Orciwan548]

Wow I never realized why I liked the first few movies more than the latter but now I see it. The movies felt alive and personal. The slow zooming camera literally drew me in as a kid even though I never understood why. Seeing these scenes reminded me why I liked the franchise at first and it sorta fizzled near the end.

[@Orciwan548]

That’s not to say I don’t like the movies now days I enjoy a lot of pieces more but as a kid the feel was just different.

[@sofia4586]

I wish Chris Columbus or Alfonso Cuarón could have directed the rest of the series

[@Arttective]

Same. Unfortunately, they said no :(

[@cashewnuttel9054]

@@Arttective Why? Were they not paid enough?

[@Arttective]

@@cashewnuttel9054 No. They just weren't interested.

[@forcecaptainoverlordsuprem2964]

Sad

[@spirittammyk]

@@Arttective I heard it's because both J.K. Rowlings and WB studio heads were control freaks. When you are a director, you know what will work and move an audience and what won't. I think they were drafting the next movies and fighting so much that they left. David Yates was such a yes man, it's why he stayed.

[@PumpkinMozie]

This is so on-point. I completely agree! But also can we add how annoying it is that Yates’s films are so over-the-top dark? You literally can’t even watch them during the day unless you have black-out curtains because the screen is so dark! Ugh

[@Arttective]

Lol. True. This reminds me of that episode of Game of Thrones where it was literally too dark to make things out.

[@SUNFlower-tt9zv]

The movie scenes have no lighting

[@georgeskate78]

The third film did the best mix between the light and dark scenes

[@noaaa7]

Oh my god THANK YOU! I felt like I was the only one who couldn't bear Yates's characters just standing still in every scene, it was driving me insane!

[@Arttective]

^that's not a fair response man. You seem to be taking a lot of these comments way too literally and giving a counter example that is deliberately made to sound the other person absurd.

[@Wierdgirl5834]

Thank you finally someone said it! David Yates lost the heart and soul of the characters. Also hated how the characters always were whispering and super quiet. I mean how in the world can you manage to make Harry Potter boring?!

[@Arttective]

Thanks for the comment. And I completely agree

[@Kasino80]

His movies are horrible!

[@SUNFlower-tt9zv]

Boring like hell

[@MegaKnight2012]

Wouldn't it have been fun to see some bombastic Harry Potter movies done by Edgar Wright and Guy Ritchie? Hot Fuzz combined with Scott Pilgrim with wands

[@Luke101]

Garbage take

[@wintergirll]

I never realised how much david yates pissed me off until this.

[@Arttective]

Don't worry. There are million others like us that share the frustration!

[@AtypicalAdventurer]

The first two movies will always hold a special place in my heart. Not just because of nostalgia and the childhood innonence those films portray, but also because of Columbus' directive vision for the movies. They truly feel magical, like being transported into a completely different world. Movies 5-8 (and if I'm honest, Goblet of Fire too) felt like a modern, realistic world that just happened to have a sidelined magical element.

[@epicredits]

oh my god... thats what i felt too! thank you!

[@User53857]

Agreed!!!

[@longboarding0713]

I feel like a big part of this is the use of practical effects vs. CGI in the later films. Columbus tried to use practical effects for everything that he possibly could making it feel much more magical.

[@Corpselordx]

What I want to know is who the hell at WB decided to let an inexperienced film director of TV soaps direct some of the important movies of the generation.

[@Arttective]

One word: Money

[@kazuhachi952]

Ohh you can ask Zack Snyder...

[@98999899]

@@Arttective The tragedy began when Chris Columbus was heavily critised by diehard fans of the HP novels for not following the original materials word by word in the first 2 HP films. So WB made sure the films after him visualized every scene and dialogue in the novel "faithfully" to avoid controversies. As such, the later HP films were made under a complete bureaucratic approach: correct background, correct people, and correct dialogues awkwardly slammed together... David Yates did that religiously.

[@sjneow]

​@@98999899 Yates film still inserted a lot of original lines that are drastically different from the books so I dont buy that. IMO the real reason is the Harry Potter films runs on a very tight schedule so that actors dont overage their roles so the good movie directors in the 1st 4 films are not used to that. They are more used to taking 2-3 years between films. Chris Colombus was thorough burned out for directing 2 films back to back. A TV Soap director, who shoots on a weekly schedule so that their episodes can air on time, offers the correct skillsets to produce these films at the schedule that Warner Bros wanted.

[@revengeofthesith.]

@@98999899that’s makes 0 sense since the first 2 are the closest to the source material out of all 8 films

[@Elemtree]

I’m also not a fan of the colour pallets with some of the later films, though I understand it’s to emphasis the tone of the films I still feel it could’ve been done better or had looked more interesting.

[@Arttective]

Yeah. The cinematography also suffered a downfall

[@Theriot6592]

If the only way to communicate a darker tone is to literally just turn the brightness setting on the camera down, you're a talentless hack. Besides the fact that he did it to all scenes, even the ones that weren't supposed to be dark.

[@ladynatalie4081]

Same here! That’s actually why I don’t watch the later films as often, because draining the color drained some of my interest in and attraction to what I was seeing on screen.

[@ricksterdrummer2170]

Oddly enough, the only thing I felt was better in the later movies were the cinematography. But, that’s just my personal preference.

[@abcdoooabcd]

I couldn't see shit

[@naly202]

i dunno if it was Yates or not, but whoever decided to cast Imelda Staunton as Umbridge , well that person was a frikkin genius!

[@GameyRaccoon]

Thats the job of a casting director

[@naly202]

@@GameyRaccoon absolutely. ;)

[@faisalmemon285]

I hate Umbridge’s actress so much I find it difficult to watch her in other things.

[@siberiasian]

​@@faisalmemon285 i understand the character, but why hating an actress?

[@faisalmemon285]

@@siberiasian I don’t know. It just makes me angry that she is one of the reasons that ruined Harry Potter especially Order of he Phoenix, that when I see her in other things my blood just boils in rage.

[@felixoesinghaus]

I couldn't agree more. I always have the urge to rewatch HP 1-3 but 5-8 always feel like a chore to get through just to finish the series. One of the main appeals of Harry Potter is escapism. Hogwarts is a place you would want to escape to. But Yates suceeds in making the world completely boring and devoid of any magic. Everything is grey, brown and blue. And it's not due to darker source material, he even does it in scenes that are meant to be light-hearted and fun because it's his idea of making the world gritty, adult and 'real'. But this is the total opposite of the appeal of Harry Potter. He even made the magic less magical and basically turned it into gunfights. When McGonagall fights Snape in the book, she turns a attacking black serpent into smoke, transform them into daggers which dart to Snape. He then blocks them with a suit of armor. Any able director would jump at the chance to do something likes this. What does Yates do? He takes the Great Hall, turns down the saturation and fills it with depressed looking students that stand around awkwardly. A wide shot of McGonagall doing a few wand gunshots, Snape waves his arm and leaves. Does Yates even want to be director? He seems to be so bored by even the most exciting source material. He was just going through the motions delivering the most basic barely acceptable retelling of the story posssible.

[@vikingdragon7100]

I think the scene you mentioned, realistically, was changed due to budget issues. You can't spend the entire budget on a fairly unimportant scene as Snape fleeing when you have a movie filled with dragons, statues coming to life and large battle scenes. In my humble opinion the scene delivers on the emotions. I also like how Yates shows Snape taking down the Carrows intentionally during the fight without the audience realizing. But that's just me.

[@felixoesinghaus]

@@vikingdragon7100 My point was that even in exciting scenes, Yates completely underutilizes the source material because in his mind wands = gunshots. In simple dialogue scenes the lack of movement is even worse, as shown in the video. Also Budget? Give me a break, this was the finale to world's most successful movie franchise and they made over 1 Billion at the box office. They could have doubled the budget and it would still have been approved by the studio. This was entirely due to lack of vision by the director. Also if you're gonna cut anything, cut the carrows. The only noteworthy interaction in the book is in Ravenclaw tower, which wasn't in the film, so why would the viewer care about the carrows? They had this habit of characters barely making it into the film but cutting out their entire story in which case why even include them. It manages to both piss off the fans of the book and makes no sense to a viewer who hasn't read the books. I guess some of the blame goes to the screen writer but the choices are just baffling. Oh look how sad Tonks dies - what a devastating loss after a screentime of 30 seconds. Almost as sad as seeing Dobby die when he went missing for more than 3 movies. But of course it is vitally important we include the Grawp scenes which serve no purpose and we have to make them as awkward as possible. I hate to say it because I love the books and the first 3 movies but the later movies are just bad adaptations.

[@vikingdragon7100]

@@felixoesinghaus Regardless of Yates' vision and whether we like his movies or not, they didn't have an unlimited budget. Like any other company WB's main concern is making as much money as possible. That's for instance why they insisted on turning the last movie into 3D when it really didn't have to be. Also why do you think they hired someone as cheap as Yates (I'm not saying he is bad) in the first place? There is no way they would have doubled the budget for such a director, not even an auteur like Cuaron if he'd directed it. As for your other points, no one is arguing the movies are perfect, but I feel I like them better than most people who comment on this video, but that's not surprising considering the content of the video. I have a different perspective, but none of us are going to change our mind about the movies, and that's fair. We like what we like.

[@Arttective]

I think the budget constraints are a fair point. Yates only had a majority of his experience in TV so it seems Warner went for someone cheaper for the later movies. I'd still argue that things like blocking, mise en scene, cinematography are a product of talent, not budget. Even the most low budget films like Hereditary knock your socks off because of the way the films are directed dynamically. Look at how Kurosawa made classics with limited budget, struggling after the Second World War. The way he makes his characters move in a scene still inspires generations of film makers, including me. Yates still had way more chances than this and he blew it with static film making.

[@vikingdragon7100]

@@Arttective I agree that things like blocking and cinematography mainly are a product of talent, not budget. However removing a spectacular flight scene from the last book, which would've cost the same as the duel between Dumbledore and Voldemort in the fifth movie, is probably a budget decision. But I think the movie is better for it actually; there are enough magical fire creatures in the movie, and they actually play a somewhat integral part to the plot when they are used in the Room of the Requirement. I'm a bit tired of all the hate thrown at Yates all over the internet for changing such insignificant details. Colourful CGI spells/magic does not necessarily equal a vision; it would probably look messy in those huge battle scenes. So while some might argue the grey/blue spells look boring, it's probably designed that way to make it easier for the audience to pay attention to the main characters in the action scenes. That sort of spell design was largely set up by Cuaron as well so it's partly about keeping consistency too. I think the wand magic is decent enough from Azkaban until the end (it's an improvement over the first two movies, especially the sound design), and those basic spells certainly allow for grand wizards like Dumbledore and Voldemort to shine with their unique magic in a way they wouldn't if all the magic was flashy. In my opinion that scene in particular also proves that Yates is not merely going through the motions; he's far more capable of directing action scenes than some give him credit for.

[@Lukehis]

Just started rewatching the series, got to order of the phoenix and went "wow they really let this dude direct every movie going forward??" glad to know I'm not alone in that thought!

[@Arttective]

Yes!!

[@clairegamble3918]

That to me always felt like the most energetic of the books. They form a rebellion at the school! Perhaps my favourite of the books yet I'm not sure I've watched it since the cinema.

[@Killerbee4712]

I think Order of the pheonix is still a very solid movie. The casting and directing for Umbridge was incredible, the duel between voldy and dumbledore was exciting and unique in the franchise, and the overall montage-like Room of requirement scenes really drove the story forward visually. Only shit part was the relationship doing, but I would consider Pheonix the strongest entry in the Yates series.

[@At_Amsterdam]

I agree Order of Phoenix was very solid. It’s the most movie-like of the HP films. Scenes don’t feel rushed. Themes are concise and don’t feel like they were botched for the runtime. There’s proper set up and pay offs. Plus the fight of Voldemort vs Dumbledoor is incredible. It’s very grounded. They set up wizard battles like gun fighting with refined swordsmen. But then when Dumbledoor and Voldemort fight it’s with the elements. And these elements have ties to their personalities. Water vs Fire / a glowing aura vs glass shards. Not even the MCU could top that with their lofty wizard battles

[@Killerbee4712]

@@At_Amsterdam Yeah many movies just use the "flash of light magic bullshit attack!" Rarely does magic use real world elements to strengthen their attack. Dumbledore using the water from the fountain to drown Voldemort, with voldemort then using the glass he broke from the windows as weapons, its creative application of real-world items using magic that makes this fight better than "green beam strike red beam very hard"

[@MrsUzumaki]

Picture this: an alternate universe where Christopher Columbus and Alfonso Cuarón directed all the Harry Potter films _together_ Columbus has done an incredible job at world building and Alfonso's vision is stunning. The entire franchise would've been amazing.

[@roshanfey]

this is my roman empire

[@luneluna307]

Oh what a dream

[@mechajay3358]

Columbus doesn't get enough credit for bringing the Harry Potter world to life

[@nidhig2644]

After so many years of wincing at the last four movies, looking for a platform to release all that pent up anger- finally found a resonating platform that echoes my frustrations. What you described is my exact problem with David Yates. Always was. While the way he left out grave plotlines- horcruxes, Dumbledore's back story and the lack of explanation about the elder wand at the end being the most important ones - that is not the absolute reason for my disgust. It is the pathetic lack of emotions and feelings in every film he made. Stony, expressionless faces, emotionless sequences - he killed the heart of the series. He murdered the message of love. Harry and Ginny's relationship, Dumbledore's funeral, him telling her he was gonna go away and that presumed last kiss, exploration of Voldemort's past- hell he turned them into dead films. Nagini attacks them in Godric's hollow - nothing. Silent background. Hell Voldemort dies and evaporates after a punching match - deafening silence. Nope nobody is thrilled and voldy didn't go mouldy. Even a puppet show has more adrenaline and excitment. For a book that made my heart crash and soar with it's twists and turns and eureka moments - the movies were soulless, dumb and an outright insult to this great work of writing.

[@Arttective]

It's really something when books (that are technically written words on paper) can sometimes be better than films. The way Rowling stirred the imagination is way visceral than an actual VISUAL film.

[@raining_trees]

@@Arttective This is why I'm so excited for the re-adaptation coming out!

[@Fatsaver]

Imagine an alternate universe where Christopher Columbus directed all the 8 Harry Potter movies

[@Arttective]

OH BOY. I always wonder how he would have directed Prisoner of Azkaban.

[@stephenp2174]

I don't understand the worship of Cuaron. PoA was visually stunning, but it felt incredibly rushed, and it's also where they started destroying the characters. It should have been Hermione Granger and the Prisoner of Azkaban, featuring a plank of wood as Harry and a blubbering coward as Ron.

[@Iamheredealwithit2008]

The better timeline

[@ManSeekingMeaning]

@@stephenp2174 Harry was his most dynamic in PoA both as a character and for Radcliffe as an actor. What?!

[@monkpool]

That would’ve been a complete hassle for him because he didn’t want to direct anymore Harry Potter movies

[@leeeun404]

I loved the first 2 movies the most. Azakban had amazing cinematography and a beautiful tone, but the first 2; especially The Chamber Of Secrets will be my forever favourite HP movie. The styling, the mystery, the horror - everything is just perfect in the 2nd movie.

[@ramkaluri7615]

It was a good start coz it did really well with kids. But as I rewatched the films as a grown up i thought it was too childish. And the way they showed voldemort was laughable. I can see why Chris columbus never did another HP film . He built the world and introduced us too it but his style was not suitable as the series was about to become more dark and voldemort being kind of the central character as important as Harry.

[@spiritloa]

The first 2 have the best atmosphere and they feel so alive. 3rd is also amazing, but through the director change it doesnt connect good to the previous movies. Chamber of secrets is also my fav along with GoF. I also love the first but i watched this movie so many times that it got less interesting over time

[@aitakemi]

After watching this video, I realized now I never really cared for Yates's films that's why I never give any of them critical reactions. They're nothing special. I thought I have a strong dislike for Newell's GoF but at least his film is engaging (over the top even if I could describe it that way). That film left a lot of impression on me thanks to the cinematography. But with Yates's last 4 films, they're just... sort of there. They're just that forgettable. Just like you said, they have no personality. Everything was so perfect up to 2004. I can't see Cuarón directing the first two films, just as I can't see Columbus directing the third film onward because of all the tonal change. It's a regret. I had hoped Cuarón would continue directing all the later films. PoA with no doubt, the best Harry Potter film.

[@Arttective]

Wow glad we could agree on everything!

[@acdragonrider]

4 has some problems in terms of inaccuracy and Dumbledore is a glaring mess and the maze was not what I wanted it to be. I also wanted them to include more Sirius, and the Quidditch World Cup since that was one of my favorite parts in the book. But the rest of the film was so much fun. The Horntail was as good in terms of CGI as Cuaron's Buckbeak in my book and the final Voldermort Harry fight was so intense especially with the ghosts arriving. Minus "I can touch you now!"

[@MademoiselleRed1390]

@@acdragonrider THIS. I know this film suffers as an adaptation but as a film on it's one it's one of the most fun HP movies. My brother and I couldn't stop watching it.

[@Joe0707]

Chamber of Secrets is so underrated! Definitely in the top 3 HP films.

[@Arttective]

Yep!

[@erenjaeger6125]

I watched Chamber of Secrets sooo many times when I was a kid… even though the basilisk terrified me! But that was kind of the point right? 😂

[@jamesben1]

My favourite film of the series. Even though I know Prisoner Of Azkaban is technically superior, Chamber is still my favourite. It tells a complete story from beginning to end. Its got great drama, great comedy, great action, Richard Harris as Dumbledore. The child actors aren't as self-conscious in their performances as they would later become. John Williams' score is timeless. Most importantly I think, the film is comfortable just being what it is, a kid's fantasy film. A tone which would admittedly be difficult to maintain in the later films once everyone starts getting murdered.

[@RabiyaRavenclaw]

And most importantly it potrays the golden trio exactly like how they are in the books, The later films made Ron a comedic relief, Harry Boring, and Dull, and Hermione an infallible Mary Sue ​@@jamesben1

[@-XStream237-]

definitely my favorite of all of them, very book accurate aswell

[@Alran109]

Chris Columbus was by far the best director for this entire series and they should have let him direct every single one.

[@srilujvn6078]

Alfonso and chris

[@gasset8084]

Columbus was great in the first two, but Cuarón elevated the narrative, also, the series took a dark turn from the third book onwards si Cuarón suits better for the style. Just my opinion, i love both

[@kyleimcdermott]

Columbus was hired to direct all 7 (before they decided to split the last one into 2), but he pulled out after two because he didn't want to spend that much time away from his family and/or move his family that much, and didn't want to deal with that much stress and pressure. I respect his decision but it makes me sad every time I think about it.

[@thepartydontstoptilliwalkin]

Yeah I gave up when he prioritized teenage angst over the actual plot of "The Half-Blood Prince" Oh, David Yates. Who ever recommended him? On the other hand, I respect Chris Columbus choice of leaving so that he could spend more time with his children but he is one of the reasons why the first two movies are the only ones I can always rewatch. I believe "magical" is the word that describes them best. Everything felt new and fantastic, Richard Harris, may he rest peacefully, was a perfect Dumbledore, I had him in mind when I finally read the books years later. But the one thing that really put me off aside from abysmal writing was the choice in lighting. Who told Yates that a darker tone must equal literal bleakness. They removed all the colors aside from grey, white and black. There is a scene in the last movie where Snapes flees Hogwarts and McGonagall ignites the torches in the great hall. I was thinking, maybe now they would add some colors. Nope. Still dark. I could go on all day (by that I mean, I'm running out of stuff to complain about) but you have summarized it perfectly. "boring, lackluster and unimaginative" indeed

[@Arttective]

Totally agree

[@razgarcia]

I totally agree with this! I always rewatch the 1st and 2nd. Chris Columbus is the best!

[@jaquitavulpix3418]

For me the third one captures that magic, too. It's more a"gothic-fairytale"-aesthetic than the classical magic of the first two, but the gorgeous score just adds so much to the whole melancholic tone. 4 was okay (entertaining at least^^), but they went downhill very fast from there.

[@ericyoung1478]

@the party don't stop till I walk in I'll admit I love the flight over London scene in Order Of The Phoenix, directed by Mr Yates--so I'll give him credit for that amazing scene. With that said, yeah, I agree I kinda did give up starting on the 6th film.

[@SUNFlower-tt9zv]

The Yates direction includes( actors staring,standing lack of emotion) As if they see with their eyes Harry potter charm died in front of them.

[@SuperHeedictator]

The thing i so admire about the scene in the prisoner of Azkaban, when Dumbledore was saying his speech during the dinner: the camera work, the suspense, how the words of the character and emotions of those who listened to him were so perfectly showed, and him saying"even in the most darkest moments you can find some light" and magically removed and returned the light on the candle. That was so magical and impactful for me when I watched, that I remember the scene and even the words up until now. At the same time in the half-blood prince....I can't even remember the scenes not gonna talk about the words saying cuz they just didn't have any impact neither visually nor emotionally. The main problem with David is that all of the characters are just standing there!! Why to do all those broad shots where everybody standing still and doing shit nothing either with their body movements nor with their words or actions. So boring that I don't have any desire to watch those films again(6-8). The only one good from his was Order of the Phoenix, but mostly due to the color correction and the acting. Still half of the time there is static and no movements whatsoever from the characters.

[@Arttective]

I agree with you so hard.

[@SuperHeedictator]

@@Arttective thank you for this essay~ the analyze and jokes as well as the editing was top👍 thanks~~~

[@Arttective]

@@SuperHeedictator :) Please do share my essay(s) if you wish, it helps my channel grow! Thank you for watching.

[@chingizzhylkybayev8575]

Even though Alfonso Cuaron was the one who normalized muggle clothing for the main characters, which I hate, PoA is still my favorite HP movie by far. It's just so beautifully shot and the pacing is just right.

[@2222bxnzbz]

Fr and they add so many characters like the books and really felt like u were reading the books I only hate how whiny and whimpy he made ron and how perfect and dramatic hemrione was harry was like books harry tho he looked right was sarcastic had some humour some anger issues

[@JustinProper]

I always felt like Order of the Phoenix & Half Blood Prince were just going through the motions as opposed to doing anything special. Now I have a better understanding why. Great job!

[@Arttective]

Thanks 🙂

[@vikingdragon7100]

I agree about Order of the Phoenix. Just average all over. I think Half Blood Prince is attempting something unique visually in the sense of being inspired by Rembrandt. But it's an uneven film narratively.

[@aishat6838]

I agree. Anytime I rewatched the films, I always watched movies 1-4 but never really watched 5-8 and I see why now. The last four movies, (ESPECIALLY The Deathly Hallows) were just so boring… I didn’t know what it was but I could never watch those movies without skipping certain scenes or thinking, “well that’s depressing… a bit TOO depressing…” and the colour pallet in particular practically killed the wonder of magic that had already been woven into the movies. I didn’t get the same, “oh that’s really cool” vibe during the HBP when they showed us the Twins’ joke shop because the feeling just wasn’t there anymore… it all felt super bland and the actors just stood around and stared at each other (I’m looking at you, Ginny and Harry!) and all in all, it was just a snooze-fest. Because of David Yates 😭

[@MegaKnight2012]

Half Blood Prince was one of the most boring films I watched... until I saw Deathly Hallows Part 1. Whoo boy. I had to pee due to boredom

[@TheSuperNats]

If it wasn’t for the fight Or Imelda’s absolutely incredible performance as Umbridge that movie would be extremely forgettable

[@jovanym2931]

Someone should tell David Yates using a green Snapchat filter for half blood prince was stupid and unnecessary. That doesn’t make you a great artist or filmmaker .

[@Arttective]

That film was nominated for an Oscar for cinematography. I still don't know how.

[@jacobdrenick]

Arttective because the cinematography was actually really really good, Delbonnel is a fantastic DoP. Cinematography is way more than colors, and what HBP does exceptionally well is use of light.

[@jovanym2931]

Jacob Drenick I know but In my opinion it was very bland the cinematography was way better in 3 here it was too dark in some places you couldn’t see what was going on

[@Arttective]

Jacob Drenick yep cinematography is of course more than color. That's why I detest the lack of interesting composition and blocking as the actors just stand in a place with the camera remaining in one place. That's one major reason I don't see the appeal.

[@bingyang3805]

The main problem is the lack of the imagination

[@stephaniem6482]

The sixth one was so bad that I didn't even see the last two in theaters, and I didn't even get around to watching them until 2 years later... and this is coming from someone who stood in line to watch the first four on opening day. You're completely right about the lack of camera movement and dynamics between actors. It's just so... static and awkward. Cuaron made you feel like you were actually flying through the great hall, whereas the later films make you feel like you're awkwardly waiting around in someone else's house with people you don't know. Not to mention the lack of colour and lighting. Even when I watch the later movies in a completely dark room, it's hard to know what's going on. There's no magic. And then there are small moments that completely miss the mark.. for example, Draco and Harry are supposed to give each other a nod of acknowledgment at the train station during the epilogue, and that doesn't even happen in the movie... Draco looks over, but Harry doesn't seem to even make eye contact with him. Small but important story beats like that are completely missing and that's what's frustrating.

[@Renzoluis99]

Same. I didn't watch the later ones in theaters. I almost fell asleep during Half Blood Prince. Now, I have watched the whole series many times bc I love Harry Potter. But at the time when they came out I definitely lost enthusiasm and plain did not like the last 3 movies. I wish Columbus made all of them. Cauron was excellent, too.

[@benneidl9336]

I agree with almost everything here except that I don’t cut Yates any slack on Deathly Hollows because I think a few of his worst fumbles are in that one. In the book, Molly Weasley taking out Bellatrix (Not my daughter you b****!) was such a rousing moment I actually pumped my fist in the air and exclaimed “Yes!”-not something that happens often when you’re reading. In the movie, though, the pacing and blocking of that moment is dead on arrival. Flat, static, muted. It’s ridiculous: Molly and Bellatrix are just standing there looking at each other, and the Molly just points and shoots, with Bellatrix doing nothing really. That should have been so much more of a dynamic last minute intervention scene. And the final battle with Harry and Voldemort is blown, too. The book gives us that great, personal showdown in the great hall with Harry finally in charge, dramatically lecturing Voldemort in front of the whole cast. The movie replaces that with a stupid, effects-laden series of avid farts in and around the courtyard, with the dialogue stripped and nobody else there. What an idiotic choice.

[@Arttective]

I know right? It's a great film imho but it still has that stale, static look in many scenes

[@lukesguywalker]

wow. you put word to some feelings i've had about these last few movies for a bit. my sister once joked to me that after goblet of fire, you "never see sunlight again" in harry potter movies. but i think what she meant (whether she knew it or not) was that they're kind of lacking in life. in my opinion each of them have some great moments, but they're more like moments that were stumbled upon instead of put together with any kind of deliberation. it's such a shame, because book wise, these stories have moments packed with a lot of passion.

[@Arttective]

Thank you so much. I'm glad we are on the same page. Also your sister, imo, is both literally and figuratively correct 😉 I mean the cinematography too got way too dark, especially in Half blood prince.

[@daniellichtenstein7541]

Oh my gosh! I have felt this same way for YEARS! Thank you for putting it all into words. The fact that they stuck with David Yates for this long communicates to me that they were no longer interested in making interesting adaptations of Harry Potter, but more interested in a more safe and bland product that would still guarantee them the most money in the end. And so they went with David Yates, the most bland and sterile director of the franchise. The worst offending scene to me is the last scene of young Harry Ron and Hermione standing on the bridge after Harry breaks the Elder Wand and throws it away. I would have loved if they would have done something like gather around each other in a hug, or something more human than what Yates went with. What did Yates go with? Them standing, holding hands, and looking out past the camera in the most robotic looking ending shot I have ever seen in my life! Worst Blocking EVER!!! This franchise deserved better than this. EDIT: Looks like I was 3 years late watching this. Hahaha!

[@juanin200]

Something tells me out of Newell, Columbus and Cuarón, Yates was also the cheapest director to hire. I agree on them just banking on a "safe" product, and sadly from a corporative point of view, it makes sense. The first ones HAD to be as polished as possible, for they had the mammoth of a task of laying the ground for a franchise, they had to make people crave for more HP movies, but once the franchise got stablished, once people was convinced of going into the theater just by hearing "Harry Potter", executives had no need to risk it... Or spend money on improving/keeping the quality up. At the end of the day, steady shots, cero facial expression, cero blocking, cero need to practice all these complex shots, means less production time, less money spent in production, faster release dates, faster cash.

[@mr.shyryhud1659]

I hate how he normalized wearing Normal clothes for the wizards, and normalized NOT saying spells out loud.

[@madinp1177]

Yes! Speechless spells were extremely difficult to master in the books. In the films, you just point your wand in someone's direction and there's a non-specific bang that happens. And all of the death eaters were super overpowered in the films, all flying from the fifth film onwards. Only Voldemort could in the books and it was a bone-chilling revelation for Harry when he saw this for the first time at the beginning of the Deathly Hallows.

[@mr.shyryhud1659]

@@madinp1177 making every bad guy fly was a mistake. Not saying spells out loud is actually very very boring to watch

[@Synthesyn342]

@@madinp1177 Snape could fly too, but still they are the only ones.

[@ahhinchannel3390]

You know guys? I do love Chris Columbus's Harry Potter👍He is a good director.

[@Arttective]

Yes!

[@ahhinchannel3390]

@@Arttective You are right! I found David Yates' Harry Potter is definitely more boring and embarrassing part. He totally ruined it.

[@chrisb6943]

Agreed with ya brother. Columbus verison of Hp films are making you feel like you are into the book unlike boring Yates one. Yates ditched out too much important scene that shouldve been added in films instead adding unnecessary part and something thats NOT even in the book. Chris Columbus had all the great skills on directing and screenwriting first and second one. Colombus movie for first and second one is also recommended even for those who havent read Harry Potters yet unlike Yates one....

[@MOVIESNARD4731]

I m agree bro Chris Columbus must need to bring back now if the want to expand more Harry Potter Universe

[@conserztasfia0078]

@@ahhinchannel3390 yeah me too i wished chris directed all hp movies

[@philosopher_sage_07]

Unlike others who are perfectly happy with movies 3 and 4, I felt that the magic was there only in the first two, the plots were both linked to a continuous story and complete within themselves. Warm and whimsical. The third movie was good as well, but strange in that Harry seemed to get attached to Sirius really fast. It made more sense for him to grow closer to Lupin given the amount of screen time they had together. I also felt the mood change from gold and warm to silver and cool-- the grim scene and the doubledecker bus scene. Fourth movie put me off because everyone was massively awkward already... Harry became sort of passive and the interactions made him look like a complete snob, the rest of the people hating him or doubting him all the time. Dumbledore who is such a whimsical and mysterious character in the book just not being himself. And then the last 4 movies were just plain boring. They took us out of the mood of the magical, warm fantasy world and pushed us into some cold, young adult dystopian story with magic as a side. Everything is linear and the viewer can no longer engross in it but just go through it all passively.

[@wancheng89]

I agree! I can’t sit through any of the movies other than the first two!

[@philosopher_sage_07]

@@wancheng89 Glad to find agreement here!

[@melaniesjournal8998]

The later films always bugged me for some reason and I could never explain why, apart from deviations from the books. But your explanation now makes so much more sense. Perhaps even more confrontational 😂

[@Koryn_99]

My biggest beef with the later movies is that they couldn't convey a sense of fun and wonder in addition to the darker moments the way the first three could. The quidditch field when Ron is trying out for keeper in 6 just looks depressing. Hogwarts looks cold, grey, and dingy, indoors and out. It doesn't look like a place you want to go to. There's also the fact that they shied away from the fantastical elements of the Wizarding World. In the first two movies, all witches and wizards of all ages wear wizard robes and would look out of place in the muggle world. Starting from 3 onward, it feels like the only characters who still wear weird distinctly magical clothes are Dumbledore, McGonagall, and students during school hours. Trelawney could easily pass for just a weird crackhead hippie. Every kid and every adult wears muggle clothes outside those times. From 3 onward, besides the iconic looks of Dumbledore, McGonagall, and the Hogwarts uniform, all three of which were so distinctly established that changing them would be very jarring, "wizard clothes" became "muggle clothes sometimes with a trench coat." I had no desire to visit this wizard world while watching the movies from Goblet of Fire onward, sparing 3 simply because I liked the spooky atmosphere and the top notch music while they kept those moments of whimsy and wonder such as flying on Buckbeak, Hogsmeade, most of the boggart scene, saving Sirius, and the firebolt scene. Another huge problem is changing things to save money on CGI for Dobby to where he comes out of nowhere and all a moviegoer would remember is that it was the house elf who made a lot of trouble for Harry in the second movie. Also not introducing Bill until movie 7 because they didn't think he was important enough before the later books came out. Do they ever mention again that "hey, this is Fleur, the girl from the fourth movie." Bill's introduction couldn't have been more crude if he'd looked directly at the audience and said "I'm a character who's been talked about in several if not all of the books and was introduced directly in the fourth book, and I'm going to marry Fleur, the french girl from Goblet of Fire, and I got bitten by a werewolf during the death eater's attack on Hogwarts, and I wanna get my revenge on him." There were many things that were hamfisted and don't make much sense to someone who didn't read the books. Harry Potter 1 and 2 were whimsical but could also be dark and dire. Their presentations are the heaviest inspirations for what I picture when I'm reading all 7 books. I especially liked the clothes you saw everyone wearing. It felt like fashion broke off into two distinct lines when the wizarding world separated from the muggle world and they went into hiding, bearing aspects of historical dress that I could easily imagine someone wearing during the medieval period, and later ones such as the 1800's like what Olivander and Cornelius Fudge are wearing in the first two films, respectively. The sweaters and stuff weren't too jarring, as they were worn during the Christmas holidays and contributed to the cozy feeling of Hogwarts, or beneath wizard robes. Prisoner of Azkaban leaned a little more into the dark but had some lighter moments and did a good job conveying all the important elements of the books that would come into play later in the series. While I enjoyed it, it was far less "magical" and a lot more "mad" or eccentric in the same way Alice and Wonderland is mad. The eccentricity and madness can be seen with the Knight Bus, the maid in the Leaky Cauldron, Trelawney, the weird jack in the box form the boggart took, the change they made to the Fat Lady from a dignified and serious woman to a weirdo who forces the students to listen to her awful singing, etc. It also shied away from the world-building elements such as Quidditch, wizard robes, while also introducing a few new ones that I like such as Azkaban's wanted posters, the idea of the Knight Bus. I liked Prisoner of Azkaban very much, despite it being the first step the series took away from whimsy and toward focusing on the dark, negative aspects of the wizarding world. Goblet of Fire was the last Harry Potter movie I was excited for, and the one that I was the least fond of of the first four. I liked things like Harry's robes from the first task, like they had wizard robes for more athletic pursuits. I didn't like them stepping back from Quidditch again by skipping through the World Cup. I liked the Death Eaters because of the strange costumes they wore with the spiky hoods and skull masks, which are what I picture while reading all the books they appear in. I saw those and could easily have them coexist in my imagining of what wizards wear. I saw them and thought "yes, that's what an evil wizard might dress like to frighten people." I didn't like Harry's clothes during the third task, as they were yet another example of putting wizards in very normal-looking clothes. Krum's sweater and pants didn't clash as much because they wore things like sweaters and vests beneath their robes in the first two movies. Fleur in her tracksuit complete with zip-up hoodie just felt out of place to me. Voldemort was very spooky that first moment when his skin was slimy and his eyes opened, but he quickly lost that monstrous snakey look and became just a guy in makeup or with CGI changing his face to me. The Yule Ball started out like what I might expect, even if I wasn't fond of the music as it didn't feel like Harry Potter to me, but then they brought out the Weird Sisters and they just looked like an ordinary rock band with no magical elements, a consequence of stepping away from wizard clothes. Also cutting out Dobby. It's not like he'll be important later and require those bonding scenes with Harry to provide impact to his potential death, right? Also not-calm Dumbledore. Order of Phoenix is my least favorite movie of all, and possibly even tainted my vision of the fifth book as well, making it not stand out much among the 7. This was when the normal clothes plus trench coats seems to have become what wizard robes looked like now. This was the first time where I was watching the movies and thought "Why does Harry even want to be there anymore?" It's depressing, grey, wet, cold, and always dangerous. The music again didn't feel to me like Harry Potter, and continued on this track through the rest of David Yates' movies. When I visited Diagon Alley at Universal Studios, the music from the first three movies always hooked me, while the rest were forgettable or felt like they clashed with what I was seeing around me, which seemed to me to be inspired mostly by the magical, whimsical depiction of Diagon Alley in the first two movies. I enjoyed Half-Blood Prince a little bit more because it's my favorite of the books, since it felt like the first time Harry got to be confident and enjoy himself as a maturing teenager. The movie however botched Ginny because in the movies, I never saw her as anything more than Ron's little sister from the second movie, because that's how all the directors saw her too. She just has an awkward bathrobe scene with Harry on the stairs at her house, then kisses him later. No chemistry at all and it made it even less satisfying that she was the one Harry eventually ended up with at the end of Deathly Hallows part 2. During Quidditch tryouts, she's suddenly there and the audience just has to think "oh, I guess that red haired girl from the second movie is good enough at quidditch to tell people what to do?" My favorite scenes were Harry's interactions with Slughorn and the Tom Riddle memory scenes, though the new teenage Riddle actor looked very different and clashed with what I pictured when reading, which was Christian Coulson who was of course too old to play him by that time. The Felix Felicis scenes I think were my favorite part of movies 4-8, getting to finally see Harry being genuinely happy without a worry at the back of his mind which is a much more frequent occurrence in the books than the later movies. By Deathly Hallows, I was checked out and went to them because it was an event and the end of an era. The scene where Harry danced with Hermione to cheer her up was very charming and did a good job connecting to what I felt while reading the book where it seemed like Harry and Hermione were getting very close by necessity with Ron walking out on their mission. At least where the movies were concerned, it was much more believable that Harry should end up with Hermione than with Ginny, which seemed only to have been done (in a very rushed way) because it had to catch up to the books which did a better (but still not great) job of building up Harry and Ginny's relationship. Also, Harry's kid has Beiber hair. I don't like their attempts to make the wizarding world look more like the real world. The biggest thing that comes to my mind for movies 5-8 is forgettable. They killed my interest in the franchise going forward, as to me, Fantastic Beasts just looks like David Yates minus Harry Potter and the other characters I love, which were the only reasons I watched his movies. I've recently gotten back into Harry Potter through the audiobooks and they made me want to play each of the video game adaptions of BOOKS 1-3 on all platforms, which largely adhere to the Harry Potter brand as established by Chris Columbus in the first two movies while remaining truer to the first three books, but I have no interest in finding the games for MOVIES 4-8 which began using the undeniable likenesses of the actors and had far less soul put into them and became just another lame series of movie tie-in games.

[@masterknife8423]

I 100% agree with everything you said. I also hate the fact that no one wears robes and actually dress like witches and wizards in the later films too. The films ultimately became "mugglefied" after the first two

[@kevinmaestroful]

I couldn't agree more with everything you said ..my thoughts EXACTLY 💯

[@juliandelapena4293]

Finally red all, I mostly agree with you and I recommend you play Hogwarts legacy to get that WIZARDING world feel back to you! It’s worth it

[@unkownearth11.11]

Even though I find your view about the clothes and general appearances fascinating, it appears a bit dull that this makes the most of your likings towards Harry Potter. Is this literally so significant? I mean, it is an unique standpoint from what others write, still... I doubt your range of intuition and imagination is suited to like Harry Potter in the first place.

[@tikusblue]

I agree with so much of what you said. Also, I think it makes sense for them to wear certain things like knitted sweaters etc. They are historically significant in the UK and have been worn for a long time. Plus they've shown how wizards and witches enchant knitting needles to make garments. And it fits with the overall, slower living vibe we see from the wizarding world & rejection of more modern technology. I found it jarring seeing them wearing clothing with zippers etc. At Hogwarts because of that. The wizarding world is quite separate culturally from the muggle world. I get that harry and Hermione lived as muggles for many years, but Hermione was always described as fascinated by the wizarding world and as fairly nerdy and unconcerned with her appearance. so her pink hoodie with jeans ensemble felt strange to me in the third film. And with Harry it might make more sense if when we see him in muggle clothes, they look old worn and possibly I'll fitting because they are hand me downs from Dudley. Other than that, when is he even going shopping in the muggle world? He would be buying things at hogsmeade if anything, and his wardrobe would likely expand to be more wizard leaning. Especially seeing as he has negative associations with the muggle world and feels more connected with the wizarding world. I can't see him caring to buy trendy tshirts and jeans etc. at h&m to wear back at school or over the summer.

[@RedCaio]

the worst parts are 1) the costumes got boring. no whimsical wizard robes. just formal suits like its the Prom dance. 2) the desaturation, no color in the the films, basically black and white movies, 3) The abandonment of John Williams' various iconic themes :(

[@stephaniem6482]

In Deathly Hallows part 2, they're in Gringotts and the security guards are literally dressed like New York City cops, lol. Like... why??? Why are they dressed like muggle cops? It's so bad.

[@jahntheisen]

it blows my mind how i never actually thought of the importance of good shots, cuts and editing and just took it for granted. Allthough i always loved the first few films the most (especially the third one) i never knew why. I Always considered it to be the less serious atmosphere or that the first few films were more emotially linked to my childhood. But you made me figure out the dense atmosphere was created by the excellent directors catching emotions or simply a great scenery to feel like hogwarts really exists. Considering it the last 4 films feel more like a theatre than a real movie. Thanks for your breakdown.

[@rc4780]

He stripped all characters of emotions and it really felt like he was trying to finish the movies as quickly as possible.

[@dmb1745]

I thought I was the only person who had noticed how in Yates' films the characters just frequently stand there doing nothing while saying their lines! I am glad someone else has pointed this out.

[@oltimer3159]

I love the freestyle comedic approach to these video's, sometimes people attempt to be overly deliberate, and come off as extremely shallow. Love the analysis.

[@Arttective]

Thanks man. I was unsure if the comic bits will be hit but I'm glad it worked :)

[@Pmccaff2009]

Lets just say it, Alfonso should have directed every film after 3. It’s the best for a reason.

[@Arttective]

YES

[@saimatabassam-uj8uz]

Just cause he made the best one doesn't mean he would have done a good job on the others.

[@emilioaramalvarado3402]

​@saimatabassam-uj8uz I mean have you seen the other Cuaron films? They're just fantastic, probably could have carried the series but I'm glad he didn't

[@agoodday9247]

I've never known anyone to hate colour and saturation as much as David Yates. It's like the man has a vendetta against vibrancy.

[@drewcollier1138]

Another issue with David Yates is his music choices. The producers let him choose his television collaborator Nicholas Hooper instead of John Williams and Patrick Doyle, the composers of the previous ones. This led to less musical continuity and Hooper's restrained style hurt the story. Even when Nicholas Hooper dropped out after working on two films, Yates still refused to hire Williams or Doyle back. He also hurt Deathly Hallows and Fantastic Beasts by using excessive temp tracking (temporary music that the director wants the composer to copy) for their respective composers to follow. FB composer James Newton Howard said that he had to rewrite the opening music from a memorable statement of the FB main theme to something more generic sounding that we hear in the final product.

[@Arttective]

Temp music is such a abomination. This is exactly also what ruined the Marvel movies.

[@MesserMusic]

As a musician, this hurts me

[@pumpkinjuice430]

I'm no musician, but I love the music for all the films.

[@CodyJMinor0620]

Well, Patrick has said in an interview that he does concerts as well and would’ve been too busy to continue the musical journey of Harry Potter beyond Goblet and I don’t hate Nicholas Hooper, personally I think his score for HBP was one of the stronger elements of that particular movie, and I loved Desplat’s scores to both Deathly Hallows movies, I think he was more in tune with John’s style than Patrick and Nicholas were

[@lucasrodrigues9880]

@@Arttective I am actually interested in seeing a video about this

[@j__h9221]

Brilliant analysis. I've always found something off about the way Yates block scenes. The way he has his actors standing still in flat locked-off shots. It is, as you say, very unimaginative. However, I agree that his filmmaking comes to life in the last film, and I do quite enjoy HP6 as well for it's somber tone and Rembrandtesque look (the lighting and colour grading).

[@Arttective]

Completely agree!!! Thank you for the awesome comment.

[@j__h9221]

@@Arttective You’re welcome, thank you for the awesome video. :)

[@r.c.c.10]

I understand, but perhaps, not all blame should fall on Yates. The editor exists, the cinematographer exists and over all of them, the producers exist. We don't know from who came each idea. Yates certainly has a subtle directing style which lets the script with the images talk by themselves. This isn't either good or bad. About the editing he mentions, sometimes it isn't necessary to make 30 cuts by scene, sometimes the best is to let the camera relax. If not, tell that to The Godfather. However, overall, although I think Yates unifies very well the visions for his films, I agree that sometimes his films feel a bit too lifeless in a certain way.

[@randomdoofy]

I will never forget Yates for cutting Tom Riddles past from the movie and making HBP a romantic comedy.

[@scottylewis8124]

And for turning DH part 1 into a boring soap opera

[@ilqar887]

@@scottylewis8124he was a soap opera director

[@daft_j]

dude could've brought christian coulson back for the scene where voldy tries applying for defense against the dark arts

[@xAlexHDx1]

What a great video, hopefully more people will see this in the future. Just imagine how amazing the series would have been if Cuarón stayed on.

[@Arttective]

Thank you and yeah that would have been amazing ❤️😍

[@brendalewis2835]

I wouldn’t have minded Mike Newell either. I know part four has mixed opinions but I thought it was great

[@chancexedward]

​@@brendalewis2835absolutely not.

[@Casutama]

@@brendalewis2835 I'd have to disagree. Mike Newell is the one who started the tradition of wanting to make action films with some love drama in between instead of actually telling the actual story.

[@simbelmyne7767]

@@brendalewis2835 my top pick is definitely Cuarón but I like seeing people stick up for 4! I think 4 and 5 both suffered from the books being Far too long to condense into one movie, but 4 still feels Alive to me in a way 5 doesn't. There's still parts of 5 I really like, and I hate how much had to be cut from 4 (rip maze sphinx 😔 and the trio banging down Hagrid's door after Rita's article about him) -- But my point is, there's just something about movie goblet of fire that works, even if it's missing stuff. It has this kinetic energy, not the stiffness that starts in order of the Phoenix and just gets worse. It still feels like the actors were connecting with the camera. (in my opinion, the director's #1 job) so we get great moments like Cedric asking how Harry is and Harry just goes "spectacular" lol it gets me every time Not to go off on a ramble about it but yeah, I do actually enjoy 4 quite a bit. My criticisms don't get in the way of that, but with Yates' films sometimes i just get pulled right out of the story :/

[@Ronin3453]

Lets also not forget the fact that death eaters becoming literal dark clouds (in place of apparating) started in the 5th film.

[@kartik3995]

Is it good or bad?

[@sweetsymphony3519]

@@kartik3995 it is bad

[@Lena-dear]

I agree wholeheartedly. I remember when I came out of the cinema after Order of the Phoenix and then after Half-Blood Prince, I was so disappointed and shocked. It didn't feel like I've just seen a Harry Potter movie, it felt like the magic was lost. Everyone was so still and awkard, there were hardly any emotions portrayed, even the castle felt "dead". Everything was so dark and green, I hated it. To this day, I only rewatch the first 4 films. Even Daniel Radcliffe said he wasn't satisfied with his acting in the last films, that he didn't progress as an actor. I also didn't like how Yates portrayed magic, it suddenly felt like they had guns that only have to be pointed at the opponent to shoot him with either red or green light, and the effect is almost always the same. I agree that the Prisoner of Azkaban was the best, I can still feel the danger outside of the castle, even though I know Sirius is a good guy, it takes a really good director to get this effect.

[@TheSuperNats]

Alfonso Curan was by far the best director imo. The 3rd movie has so much personality in its film making and editing

[@lingricen8077]

one of the few directors who pushes the medium

[@Casutama]

He put his artistic vision too much above what was actually described in the source material for my taste. It was "Alfonso Cuarón's take on Harry Potter" more than "Harry Potter".

[@MetalxLicaxPP]

@@Casutama All of the movies did that, though. Not a single one was true to the source material.

[@Casutama]

@@MetalxLicaxPP That's true, but I was specifically talking about his artistic vision in terms of design, and nobody else departed from the source material in that sense to anywhere near the extent he did. All directors made decisions that contradict the source material to some extent, but Cuarón made the most blatant departures from the source material stylistically in a way that breaks something about the inherent way that world is supposed to work. He had them run around in Muggle outfits, designed a werewolf that looked more like a horrific creature rather than one where you need to pay close attention to little details to distinguish it from a normal wolf, and came up with the idea of custom-decorated wands, an idea that you find no basis for in canon.

[@muhammadharisbinmunir5379]

I was exactly thinking that all the time that how can one make a movie at level with 1st 2 with the story of 3rd. 3rd movie made me reimagine the novel (which imo was the dullest in the whole series)

[@patrikiosvatemanopoulos]

Great job! The prisoner of Azkaban is my favourite of the series. I have no idea why they didn't have Cuaron direct another one.

[@Arttective]

Thank you. I think the reason for that maybe that Azkaban made the least money out of all Harry Potter films. Which is shocking given it is the best Harry Potter film.

[@kapitan7357]

It was actually cause he wasn't ready to do Goblet of Fire yet and wanted a break before doing another one, but then they felt Yates did good enough to keep bringing him back and he wanted to keep going.

[@jovanym2931]

Arttective He was going to do IT but Warnerbros did not want to wait too long . But I think the reason that it made the least amount of money since it had a different release date . It was released in summer instead of winter .

[@LordSidious066]

@Ryan Shadpoor He also didn't read the book saying it was too long while Christopher Columbus read the books and wrote a screenplay before he was hired and Alfonso actually had Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint and Emma Watson write essays on their character although Rupert didn't do it. This shows Newell didn't have a clue what he was doing really.

[@iknoweverything4959]

Columbus was the best director, they should have had him direct the entire series.

[@mbanerjee5889]

Chris Columbus is what I most associate with the "feel" of Harry Potter. He perfectly captured the magic of the world. I understand that the books got darker but the movies got less colorful. For example, Lord of Rings didn't just desaturate everything to makes things seem more serious. Or consider the use of color in Breaking Bad. I hated how boring and washed out HP 4-8 looked.

[@marissasturzaker3483]

I’m so glad to finally hear someone talk about this

[@Arttective]

🙂

[@JamesMC04]

I think the film with the camerawork I appreciate most is Prisoner of Azkaban, with Chamber of Secrets a close second, then Half-Blood Prince. POA has an open, sunny feel, with a great variety of scenery to take in, and plenty of surprising camera angles. Most of the last 4 films are a bit drab or dark in colour.

[@Arttective]

Agreed

[@SUNFlower-tt9zv]

Last four films were actors are like mourning..

[@TEMSproductions]

I always rewatch the first 3 HP movies year after year because of how much unique style and heart each one had. Such a shame it can't be said for the rest.

[@rickblaine9670]

What I think we were robbed of more than anything else, and in large part because of the Yates movies, is a proper adaptation of Voldemort. The dude is supposed to be a walking nightmare, a creature so wicked and accursed that even the Dementors should pale in comparison. A cold, venomous snake disguising itself as the monstrous parody of a man. And the fact that he WAS once a man, and still vaguely resembles one, should make him all the more terrifying. Yet all we got from the fifth movie onwards was a cackling lunatic. Although, to be fair, he wasn’t that great in the fourth movie either.

[@bingyang3805]

Lack of imagination Ridicolous thought of characters Losing control of teel Some expression of the adaption totally be contrary to the book Cant find the main idea of the book He made the exciting stories become boring journal accounts

[@Arttective]

THANK YOU

[@inazumaelevenv8064]

@@Arttective bro your embarrassing yourself lol he's joking

[@Arttective]

@@inazumaelevenv8064 Oh my gawd I'm so embarrased gaahh

[@inazumaelevenv8064]

@@Arttective what are you doing man?

[@Arttective]

@@inazumaelevenv8064 I'm joking. Can't you tell?

[@DaDunge]

1:00 I would disagree I would argue the worst thing that happened to Harry Potter was Steve Kloves. Though Mike Newell was also thoroughly uninspiring.

[@26IME]

Hmm 50/50 Yates lit directed half the franchise. Kloves, altho wrote the entirety of it, also has other 2 competent directors in charge... Maybe he's the one to blame for not including the marauders arc 🤔

[@tremblind]

Yates sucked the magic out of the Harry Potter films.

[@Arttective]

Yep. You could say that again!

[@gaming13x97]

yes his style is very cold and dark

[@davidd4696]

Yes Voldemort's rise to power is a magical time..

[@ericyoung1478]

@tremblind For the most part, he did. On the other hand, Order Of The Phoenix had pretty decent cinematography, & I also love the flying over London scene in said film.

[@srehh5529]

@@davidd4696 Well he's a wizard who wants to get rid of non-magical people... And Cuaron shows it's possible to make a visually dark film with the magicalness. Cuaron makes HP look like a dark magical fantasy while Yates just makes it look like a boring real world.

[@Teebiscuit12345]

I'm somewhat of a director myself, and I love the Harry Potter movies, but I never considered them to be cinema if you know what I mean. However, when you described the angles and mannerisms of the Dumbledore's office scene, it really changed my thinking. Chamber of Secrets is my favorite movie in the series and is up there in my top 10, so now I'm gonna rewatch it and look through a lens I never had before, trying to spot the angles and mannerisms I never paid attention to before. Thanks for that, man.

[@Arttective]

Thank you for the amazing comment. I'm glad you love one of your favorite films even more now. Also, I'm curious what you think of Prisoner of Azkaban? You don't think that film is cinema?

[@Teebiscuit12345]

@@Arttective To be honest, I'd have to watch it again to give you an educated answer. It's difficult to explain, but I didn't pay attention to the directing of any of the movies until very recently. However, I did enjoy the story and soundtrack. Also, the camera work during the Harry/Lupin scene on the wooden bridge was great.

[@Teebiscuit12345]

@@vikingdragon7100 Can you give me some examples? I'd like to have my mind changed about it.

[@Teebiscuit12345]

@@vikingdragon7100 Good point. I did enjoy the occlumency. I never really thought about it that way, and I guess that's a good thing because it's just so seamless. I agree with you on the source material as well. It is rare for movie adaptations to tell the same story while also successfully making changes. That's another example of how I never thought about something because it fit so seamlessly. As for Rowling's story herself, I think I might consider it cinema. There are a ton of visual foreshadowing moments in the books: Slytherin student (Marcus Flint?) gets put in the Vanshing Cabinet a year before it's introduced, Fred and George throwing snowballs at the back of Quirrel's turban, things like that.

[@vikingdragon7100]

@@Teebiscuit12345 Rowling is great at developing a plot. I think the third movie took most advantage of her visual foreshadowing by repeatedly showing important elements like the clock tower and the Whomping Willow whenever the seasons changed.

[@Rodytur10]

Wow, great explanation of what you feel during the films. The lack of urgency and pace. It all felt static and goofy, while the story we knew from the books was gripping.

[@Bad_At_Parties]

It's hard to put into exact words, as it's mostly just by feel that the work of Yates stands out disappointingly to the rest, specifically with Columbus and Cuaron. The best of Harry Potter in film, which I hold to be the first three entries, just stand head and shoulders above the rest for many reasons. More inventive filmmaking, more tense and riveting drama and action, a greater immersion to a moment in time, the ability to share the dread or joy of the characters, and a truly more measurable impact of the magic of the world they were all existing in. Granted, the movies Yates made were when the stories themselves got much darker, which would already organically move them away from the feeling of those of old, but I don't see this as a true defense. Even with the less dark stories, lower stakes and not as pivotal dramatic outcomes as the later books to rely on, Columbus and Cuaron were able to create moments that remain truly iconic and unforgettable in their ability to make you feel the highest of highs and the lowest of lows, where you could be convinced that a beloved character could die any second or that the magic you were seeing was real. And only talent can create that impact.

[@Arttective]

You literally took words out of my mouth. The film making is so incredible. I literally stop watching after the third film. Although I do think the last film is brilliant and the only Yates film I've ever loved.

[@__Krystal__]

YES, THANK YOU!! I've hated Yates ever since I first saw the 5th film. Not only does he not know how to relay emotion (or even know how emotion works), but he has to make every scene awkward af! Plus, he ruined the chemistry (that was supposed to be building up every movie) between Ron and Hermione and ginny and Harry. AND added extra Harry and Hermione scenes cause he had an agenda to make them seem better together. He ever got rid of the best ginny x Harry scene in the book because he hates ginny x Harry. He made Ron a background character who just moped around, and gave most of his lines to Hermione. He made Tom riddle look like a pubescent child (HE WAS SUPPOSED TO BE HOT AS HELL LIKE HE WAS IN THE 2ND MOVIE). And I will NEVER forgive him for ruining the scene I was looking forward to the most: Snapes memories. It was a jumbled up mess where you couldn't even tell what was happening, and that was all I wanted to see done right, and he couldn't even do that right. A lot of people like his films cause they were "dark, and looked high budget" but even if it looks flashy, it's all hollow on the inside. I cried more over Cedric diggors death than any death Yates filmed. You wanna know what the worst thing he did though was? His films affected jk rawlings way of thinking after the movies came out. More people watch movies than they read the books they were based on, so because of Yates' films, people saw the chemistry between Harry x Hermione so much (which is what Yates wanted) that movie only hp fans couldn't understand why Hermione would end up with Ron and ginny with Harry. So much so that they voiced their beliefs all over social media and to jk Rowling and the actors themselves. Now a whole generation of movie only hp fans are determining who should've ended up with who, all because of Yates fucking up (though that was his agenda and he won). Sorry for this long rant, I JUST HATE HIM SO MUCH for ruining my favorite books/characters, and I'm so happy to have found your video! It's easy to feel like I'm the only one who hates him so much because of his films, cause nobody else seems to understand or care about why I don't like him, but YOU are a breath of fresh air and I'm so glad you made this video!! 💜 Ok... rant over 😅

[@theCrownofSympathy]

To be fair, I think the relationship dynamics ruined in the movies had to do more with the screenwriter Steve Kloves (he openly admitted to favoring Hermione). Although, the director(s) could have made the attempt to improve upon it, so I don't disagree with you. I would have liked to see the book trio (and characters in general) on screen instead of what we actually got.

[@Arttective]

Thank you for the comment and sorry for responding so late. I wholeheartedly agree with you, especially on the point that "his films got dark". Haha right. It did get so dark that you couldn't see them lol.

[@PumpkinMozie]

@@theCrownofSympathy exactly. Kloves was a big H/Hr shipper haha. You can see them having moments throughout all the films; it really wasn’t Yates’s doing at all.

[@IOANNA333]

Don’t feel sorry.We hate him as well.Steve Kloves and Michael Goldenberg didn’t do him any favours as well.

[@nadimls3672]

Sosad that he had to delete draco scene where scream POTTAH with courage when harry is still alive and voldemort doesn’t know.

[@tilaNmanx]

THANK YOU The 5th book is my favourite because it's the most emotional one, with raw and explosive emotions from Harry that some find annoying, but it's such an important book for Harry's growth as a person. The conversation with Dumbledore at the end about loss and how Dumbledore handles Harry's rage and grief with such calmness was so therapeutic to me, someone who was also in deep turmoil and was prevented from showing or handling or talking about it. I was so excited to go see the 5th film and left so disappointed. Yates hated magic and fantasy and wanted everything to be "muggle-like" and without colour or emotion. In the Fantastic Beasts films everyone's wearing muggle clothes. His films that are supposed to be more "mature" ironically feel more immature than the earlier films that are more "kid friendly", Chamber of Secrets is essentially a horror movie with blood and corpses and murder, with Castle in warm yet dark-fantasy like orange colour and the Chamber is wonderfully coloured to be both odd vibrant green and still bleak and terrifying, and Prisoner of Azkaban had a very electric dark blue following the dementors. And the fckin flying with the broomsticks in London, in full view of muggles because "it's cinematic"... fckkkkkk offffff. Same with Harry's grief. He talks with such hackery and is so in love with himself how he filmed that one silent scream from Harry at the end of the movie, while the scene is essentially what a film-student would do and it tastes like fckin cardboard. And don't get me started on 6th film, I can't understand how he can fck up Dumbledore drinking the poison that badly... it's built up in the book, I literally couldn't put the book down even though it was like 3AM and school day, in the film there's zero emotion about the whole situation (there's attempted emotion but it's not convincing, like watching those "Ghost Hunter" things where people pretend to be scared, it comes off as almost awkward to watch, and these are professional actors ffs). And how Voldy's backstory is largely sacrificed for teen romance, which is also emotionless (Ginny no what did they do to you). Oh and the overuse of (not that great) CGI. You can literally see through McGonagall in 6th film because her green robes against a green-screen. The films at times feel cheap, with a more expensive TV-Series (well sht 14:27 that explains it) vibe... and yeah yeah the early movies had some dated CGI, but there were also more SETS, BEAUTIFUL sets. I will give him the baby-Voldy, that was disturbing and well shot, kinda like the scene in Exorcist where it just cuts to something so unexpected (the priest's mom) your heart jumps a bit. He is also rather good with scenes where characters don't emote, like the trio camping and chilling in silence. Also because those scenes are literally more "muggle-like", where Ron is the most at disadvantage. 7th and 8th films are definitely his better films, and Yates' films aren't "worst movies ever" by any mile, but they're the Hobbit trilogy to previously seen Lord of the Rings which makes them so frustrating. And Harry not fixing his own wand at the end of 8th... fcckkkkkkkkkkk. Ok thank you for this therapy session, great video.

[@pumpkinjuice430]

Rewatching the scene in Dumbledore's office from Chamber of Secrets reminds me of Columbus' fondness for cutting to close-ups of both objects and faces. I mean real close-ups that take up the whole frame. When he cuts to the sword you really get a sense of its importance and majestic reputation -- almost to a fault with the zoom-in. Columbus knows what points to emphasize and he certainly makes sure the viewers don't miss them. It's interesting because it made me reflect upon how different Yates shot the conversation between Harry and Griphook in the last movie. The sword can be seen in the background, but Yates refuses to give us a close up when Griphook refers to it. Instead he cuts to a medium close up of Harry, but the composition of the shot draws your attention to the sword. It's a completely different approach than cutting directly to a close up. You may not think it makes much of a difference to the flow of a scene, but in my opinion it's a subtle approach to emphasize a prop organically within the surroundings in a way that doesn't break the flow of the conversation. It seems effortless (or even plain, some might say), but in reality a lot of thought goes into the composition of such shots. On a similar note I also noticed the deliberate blocking choices from Umbridge's office. It was used as an example in your video for basic filmmaking without the need for cutting... and you are right to an extent: When all the players are framed in the same shot the drama is highlighted in the composition more so than in the editing. However in my opinion it brilliantly conveys the power play in the scene with Umbridge being center stage, standing over Harry and threatening him while his friends are all powerlessly watching in the background. That doesn't mean you don't need good editing, but you are correct that Yates' approach doesn't always rely on cutting to close-ups or reactions shots to convey the beats of a scene, as opposed to Columbus or even Newell who loved to showcase magical objects in glorious close-ups, whereas I find Yates to be more inspired from Cuaron's style of long takes and wide shots post Order of the Phoenix, while adding his own stylistic touches for good (and bad). I'm not saying one approach generally is better than the other as my examples above go to show that different filmmaking styles can be effective in their own ways.

[@Arttective]

I have nothing against any type of film making. Whether it be a calculated film editing or just letting things play out, there really isn't any right or wrong way to film a scene. Hell, two of my all time favorite directors, Tarkovsky and Tarr, use extremely long takes that can even be very painfully boring for those who aren't very used to that kind of film making. The real issue comes when you use the those techniques in a wrong way. The Yates vs. Columbus comparison I made was only a sort of suggestion on my part, like Yates could have done something similar to what Columbus did to make the scene interesting. The Umbrigde scene you describe sounds very powerful in words but when I actually watch it, I cringe looking at how stiff everyone appears in the scene. Again what you described isn't wrong, it's just that it doesn't feel well executed. So yes, totally agree that different film making styles can be effective in their own ways but it's also the execution that matters. And eventually it also comes to how we perceived it subjectively :) (The Griphook example you used is actually a case of powerful film making. One can argue that the very sparse use of complex cinematic techniques also reflects how the magic of the world of Harry Potter is waning. But that only seemed to work in case of the very last film in my opinion.)

[@patatedouce9000]

So interesting. It helps me to understand why i feel awkward watching some scenes and why the 4 latest films feel slower to me (and even boring sometimes).

[@dontalox]

Really interesting! I always thought the Yates movies were lacking something, but I could never explain in words why.

[@konstantin9303]

The "coffee break" after the the battle of Hogwarts was totally depressing. Totally lacking of emotion...

[@Arttective]

Lol

[@pumpkinjuice430]

Factually wrong dude, it's anything but depressing lol. But is it a great scene? Not necessarily in conveying all the post-battle reactions you'd expect, but it's great in the sense it mirrors the previous Great Hall scene of Harry seeing the dead bodies. Notice how it's shot in a similar fashion, but this time it's peaceful as opposed to dark and depressing.

[@MissManasi]

Wow! This video is on point and more people should see it. I really liked the way you compared the technical aspects. And not to mention the character depiction of Ron, Hermionie, and Ginny in the later movies. I've been on my marathon re-reading of HP books to go back and find that the movies have been unjustifiably mean to Ron's character on countless occasions, made Hermionie a messiah by giving too much to her credits, and totally lacked showcasing Ginny's aura as a popular, fiercely independent woman.

[@Arttective]

Thank you so much! And I totally agree

[@Gaijins]

The worst thing that happened to the Harry Potter franchise was the screen writer that made Ron a comic relief character. And gave Hermione his book pesonality and feats.

[@Arttective]

YES. It's befuddling how dumb they made Ron, in literally all of the films. The screenwriter himself admitted that Hermione was his favorite character.

[@samlerf]

But Ron in the books was so rude, primitive, insensitive and mean spirited. I actually liked the movie version more, though to each their own. That's the nice thing about art.

[@IG7799-c4u]

@@samlerf He stood up for Hermione though in the books. In the films, he didn't. I think you have them mixed up.

[@kiddykatnesscorral4613]

You nailed it! Love that ending quote, in his case, "OK is never good enough", truer words were never spoke.

[@Arttective]

Thank you!

[@JuxtapositionRed]

Imagine if Chris Nolan directed the last four movies instead of Yates 😦😀

[@Arttective]

Lmfao. Then we wouldn't hear any dialog and there would be exposition every five seconds.

[@Arttective]

I'm just joking. I love Nolan too.

[@JuxtapositionRed]

@@Arttective Lol I think it'd be amazing

[@Arttective]

That thought is actually amazing!!

[@JuxtapositionRed]

@@Arttective You better believe it bro

[@REECEM92]

What I noticed in David Yates' Harry Potter films is that when he starts a HP film, there was no introduction or a "starting point", the films just start and you have to get in the story straight away without any introduction or whats really going on. I think the only movie that had a bit of a introduction was Deathly Hallows Part 2, has it took the audience time to see whats going on and see the situation rather then just getting on with it and starting immediately.

[@Abigail_0-0]

Thank you, thank you, THANK YOU for making this critique. It is so long overdue. I always felt that the Harry potter films took a nose dive off a cliff after the 4th movie, and what's the common factor? Oh yeah, its David Yates! You did such a great job illustrating his unfortunate shortcomings in comparison to the other directors, it really makes it crystal clear why I felt so disappointed watching the latter half of the series. And P.S, excellent editing 🔥

[@Arttective]

And Thank YOU for such an awesome comment! It means a lot when someone shares the same views but even more when someone recognizes the effort I had to put in to make the video, which was not at all easy! Glad you liked it. Also please considering subscribing, it really helps the channel.

[@Abigail_0-0]

@@Arttective No worries! And yes, I can tell alot of work went in to this. You've got yourself a new subscriber!

[@euler4273]

I feel the exact opposite. I think films 5-8 are easily the best films, that showcase the wizarding world far better than the previous films did. Columbus, Cuaron, and Newell don't understand Harry Potter, and their representation of the world is completely incorrect and just feels so wrong. The cinematography and the depiction of the wizarding world improved dramatically with 5 onwards. I wish Yates had directed all the films, they would have been so much better!

[@modem9056]

It is probably one of the first cases when I see a detailed criticism of later films, and not only that they are weak because they are bland. Personally, I love all the parts, and each one has a unique atmosphere and visions, yet it's still magical. I heard that David Yates, when he directed the Order of the Phoenix, was primarily focused on making the actors feel the emotions of the characters. He wasn't too interested in visual issues. He was also hired because of his earlier political films to add something of this style to Harry Potter. I think this movie has such a dynamic editing, among others because during the post-production the creators noticed that this style of filming does not suit. So I agree that blocking scenes is something that Yates does not do well, and several scenes did not work well, but I think the overall vision is very good and fits well with later parts. This can be partly defended by giving up the cartoon effect that high-budget productions often have (that doesn't mean I'm criticizing that style). In addition, although in the Order he offered many new ideas that were not in the previous parts - editing experiments, flashbacks, newspaper effect, visual entry into the mind of the character. From the Half Blood Prince, blocking the scenes in my opinion is already well thought out and they build the atmosphere and style of these films, and these static shots are beautiful. And when it is needed it is dynamic. I've always had light associations with Wes Anderson's cinema. The exception is the scene when the characters are locked in the basement, here it was extremely weak. Overall, however, I think that Yates's style, as it evolved, has become a fairly unique approach to fantasy cinema. And I think all of four last shoots in video have somet hing interesting I wrote using google translate, so sorry if something is incomprehensible.

[@Arttective]

Thank you so much for your detailed thoughts. David Yates is a good guy but, like I said, personally his cons are greater than his pros. I still think the static shots are boring but hey that's just a personal preference.

[@pumpkinjuice430]

I read once that Yates said he storyboarded Order of the Phoenix, but you may be right that he was primarily focused on the actors on his first movie. I agree he got better visually with the last three. There are some beautiful symmetrical shots that do have light associations with Wes Anderson. Yates seems quite fond of straight lines in some of his shot compositions.

[@Onmysheet]

There's character depth in POA than any of Yates films combined. OOTP & HBP Daniel Radcliffe has this mopey look on his face in mostly every scene. And don't get me started on his chemistry with Bonnie Wright. That's all Yates's doing.

[@sparksfly5877]

This is the best job google translate has ever done, you must write very well.

[@TheEtherny]

I never understood why the other films felt so bland in comparison to the first 4 but seeing the camera work compared to David's still shots really did make me realize how something so small can totally change a scene, I always thought the writing was what mattered and those films were fine...but they could've been so much better had they switched to a more artistic director!

[@Booderot]

Can you send me the cut of the fourth movie that you watched and is good? The official one is the worst

[@salmanedy]

I love how even though Chris Columbus is often touted as a rather bland filmmaker, his Harry Potter films actually have a dynamic feel to it and is definitely more competently put together than Half Blood Prince. As a matter of fact, I can tell you what David Yates' style is. It's like David Fincher, but... not as competent.

[@Arttective]

Interesting way to put it!

[@salmanedy]

@@Arttective Because compare the work of David Fincher to David Yates: 1) Dark lighting. 2) Creepily smooth camera movement except for a few hand held shots. The difference between them is that David Fincher's edit is tight and it doesn't feel like some shots were taken over by the second unit crew.

[@nia-tl7wp]

We just finished our yearly Christmas HP binge and it is always eye-opening to watch them back to back. Something we discussed was that in PoA, every single scene has meaning and adds to the character and plot development. There are no filler scenes, even the funny scene with the boggart lesson quickly turned dark. The acting is excellent, some of my favorite HP characters are introduced like Sirius and Remus. The atmosphere is foreboding and the dementors were terrifying. We understand how high the stakes are for Sirius and Buckbeak. Truly a masterpiece. The final 2 movies had some great scenes but I also felt like important plot points were left out from the books that explain so much. Great analysis!

[@Jasandiz]

4:27 this scene in the books shocked me when I first read it as a child, I could feel totally Harry's anger, it was written in capital letters... in the movies it was just like... did that scene already took place, that was it?

[@Arttective]

Yeah Harry looks like "omg how could you do this to me reeeeeee" in the movie lol

[@Anvekeen]

Most people overlook it, but to me it's amongst one of the worst changes in the movies. I read HP5 A LOT when I was younger, and I was having a tough time and could not only relate to Harry's anger, but also feel amazed that this character that I would look up to would get this angry, especially towards Dumbledore !! No wonder I hated the movie. Among every changes it made, this one was the nail in the coffin. Pretty much a character assassination, remove himany kind of strong emotion, yay.

[@patrikhelis8235]

Man i love you this is exactly what I'm talking about. David Yates is the worst thing that has happened to harry soot. they could no longer find a more sterile director. after the fourth part, harry potter can't be watched at all. Visually and directorally, Yates is the most boring director of all time. I don't understand that they still gave him space with fantastic beasts. you explained it beautifully. I hate Yates' both visual and acting presentation. Great video. Great

[@Arttective]

Thanks so much man! I love we can see eye to eye!

[@SUNFlower-tt9zv]

Yes absolutely. How Yates have so much energy to direct all four HP Movies,unlike other directors who were exhausted after directing one or two HP movies.

[@jaderawkins1946]

Christopher Columbus is my favourite director of the potter series 😊

[@Arttective]

Beautiful choice!

[@КатеринаЮрченко-х9ц]

Me too)

[@justthereed5593]

Yikes

[@PhilWill903]

the 4th movie adaptation remains by far the worst of all. So many storylines were skipped, and Dumbledor's character is so off.

[@xoler2167]

I always thought I was one of the few who felt this way too. I also really didn't like how pale the scenery and colors in the later films became. I get they were trying to deliver a more mature tone but I think they could've done that without taking away the colors and lightings that bring the magical world to life like in the first two movies. It also bugged me how useless Yates made Ron and rushed Harry and Ginny's relationship. I also didn't really like his portrayal of Voldemort or his design. Even though his official design started in the goblet of fire I kinda wish they would've stayed more accurate to his book design and get a different actor to make him more terrifying and truly menacing presence in the films. I understand that movies will need to make changes from the books due to stuff like the runtime but I think the examples I listed could've still worked along with small things like Grindelwald not telling Voldemort where the elder wand was. It seems like Yates was slightly improving with the fantastic beasts films especially with the villain Grindelwald but now that Johnny is no longer in the role I've lost all interest in the story even if the second one wasn't that good the main reason I can still tolerate it is because of Johnny's performance

[@Arttective]

I don't believe a book is ever going to have a faithful adaptation due to time constraints. But the complaints you have are just. The cinematography was just weird and dark. The relationship between Harry and Ginny was something I never liked, even in the books. But Yates made it worse with cringey romance. Voldemort didn't have certain features like his red glowing eyes which would have definitely been so damn terrifying.

[@xoler2167]

@@Arttective I agree that a book will never be truly faithful in a movie due to runtime, budgets etc. so I definitely understand that some changes will need to be made. However, I think that changes can still benefit the movie such as jurrasic park or the shining. However, I think we can both agree that the changes Yates made weren't good. Like you said with Voldemort, I really wish they had kept the red eyes, snake tongue, nose and teeth design along with a different actor instead of the one from the goblet of fire. I also kinda wish he had a deeper and somewhat serpent accent or tone in his voice and whenever he screamed it would be something similar to the scream from the basilisk to give him a more chilling vibe. Part of me wishes that Chris Columbus had directed all of them along with John Williams scoring the rest because the only good additions I really found after Chris left was cooler designs for each characters wands. Even they would get repetitive with spells while I feel like Chris had the characters explore a more wide range of different spells

[@brendalewis2835]

Thank you, finally someone who agrees with me. Once Yates took over, the series took a sharp left turn. They’re not terrible movies but they could have been much better. They were way too rushed with little character development with the supporting characters. In short, they felt nothing like books like the first four movies did

[@Arttective]

Totally agree. I don't like GOF but it's still a lot memorable than Yates' films

[@euler4273]

Once Yates took over, there was such a massive improvement in quality.

[@patrickkanas3874]

I consider Goblet of Fire to be the worst movie in the series. Did you know that the director didn't even finish reading the book before making the movie because it was too lo g for him?

[@Arttective]

What has direction got to do with adaptation? And by that logic OOTP and HBP cut out out a lot of stuff too! Why not critique those films too?

[@patrickkanas3874]

@Arttective directing had a lot to do with adaptations. Christopher Columbus and the guy who did the third movie (I'm not even gonna try and spell his name) both read the books they adapted multiple times because they wanted their movies to be also faithful to the source material as possible. Newell was not as devoted to that as they were, which is why he didn't read the book fully. This resulted in many of the complaints fans had, such as out of character performances, important characters being nothing more than background bodies, not filming scenes that fans wanted, leaving out important information, and sometimes making things up. Now, from a movie only standpoint, it's better than the Yates films. But Yates' films are more faithful to the books, which is the most important thing in an adaptation

[@Arttective]

Um. No Yates' films are not that faithful. He literally also added an action scene where Ron's house is attacked in the sixth movie and half of the memories of Voldemort are cut. He did way more cuts than Newell. The complaints you gave are valid but again, I am talking about direction alone (even if it is not faithful to the books). I don't count adaptation as a valid criticism since books and films are separate mediums and there are always going to be stuff cut out or changed. Besides the guy who wrote majority of the harry potter films made so many changes to the characters eg: making Ron dumb and literally giving some of his lines to Hermione (and this is in just the first three movies)