I personally think Daniel Radcliff is fine as Harry Potter, the first movie you could obviously tell they were new to acting... if they went and redid it with the same actors I think it would be much better.
Emma Watson, I think is wonderful. The first movie was really good. She was just stuck up enough and just a nerdy little no-account... then they ruined it by making her pretty in the third movie and not during the Yule Ball as it was supposed to.
Rupert, good ron, hair is a little too long for me to picture as ron though.
The twins... they do alright in the movies I suppose... they remind me too much of the guy who played shaggy in the scooby doo movie.
Draco Malfoy, what a snotty little brat, I think Tom Felton is quite good in it. I didn't like the third movie though, with his long hair not gelled back. Wasn't Draco-ish.
The movie... they shouldn't have cut out the sirius thing, at least to that extent because that's basically the next movie. Doby, didn't like him in the second movie [not what I pictured] but to cut him out completely?!?
And what about George and Fred getting Harry's tri-wizard winnings?
It seems like this movie could have been a really long preview for the real movie.
If the real movie was 5+ hours long I'd sit down and watch it [as long as it had timed breaks <img src="i/expressions/face-icon-small-tongue.gif" border="0">]
It seems like the really get this movie you'd have to have had to read the book.
I felt like it sometimes jumped and unless you read the book you'd have no clue where it was at or what was going on.
but that's just me.
