Please.

I was really looking forward to it, but it was a hot mess.

Come now! How is this line not cool: "You're a big man, but you're in bad shape. With me it's a full time job. Now behave yourself."

Especially with the gut punching and all.

Plus, bleak seventies ending.

How is this line not cool: "You're a big man, but you're in bad shape. With me it's a full time job. Now behave yourself."

The line is cool. The delivery, plotting, and mise-en-scene? Not so much.

What characterizes bad mise-en-scene?

What characterizes bad mise-en-scene?

Anything really, since mise-en-scene is almost everything (setting, costumes, lighting, staging, etc).

In Get Carter, I'd say my primary problem was the bad acting (which might have worked better if it had been more stylized) and how it was staged.

Megan reminds me of the thing that really bothered me about the HPB scene in the tower. In the book, it was gripping and tense, made so much more so by Harry being constrained from acting. His sense of helplessness and anger, both precipitated by Dumbledore's binding curse were so painful to read. In the film version, he just stood there, dumbly watching the action. Which seem so counter to what he will be expected to do as the story unfolds. Much less, how he has reacted in previous movies. Given his less than strategic thinking to that point, I can't imagine he wouldn't have jumped out and tried to fight, regardless of Dumbledore's admonition. In fact, in the book, the wise old man knew Harry couldn't be trusted to behave. So he took drastic measures.

It would have been so easy to include that element.

I liked the movie, but I agree... Harry should have been immobilized in the tower scene, and it wouldn't have been difficult to portray.

Loved Rickman's voice when he spoke the killing curse. It was perfect. I thought Felton did really well too.

It would have been so easy to include that element.

From a writer's point of view, you don't want to take agency away from a character.

On rewatch, I saw how much narrative emphasis was put on (a) Harry following Dumbledore's instructions exactly and without deviation (standard magical/fairy tale trope, really) and (b) the trust between Harry and Dumbledore.

The scene in the tower then becomes a continuation of the scene in the cave, and I can see Kloves using these to set up Harry's scenes of sacrifice and suffering while facing Voldemort in the last book/movies.

Harry is also learning that Dumbledore is playing "a long game" that may include losing some battles to win the war.

Finally, I think that Harry was a bit stuck by Snape's arrival, trusting in Dumbledore's admonition that Snape is the only one who can help.

ita, because I really despised what Jackson and company did with LotR and really like Ten Inch and McAvoy.

We are opposites! I thought the movies were highly entertaining and couldn't get past the first couple chapters of the first book.

I did read all of The Hobbit and thought it was an interesting story but the writing was just so bad.

Hmmm...could they have had Snape be the one to petrify Harry? Then you get Harry being allowed to make the choice, but still be restrained at the really critical moment?