SyfyFreak:

Fourth Installment of the Harry Potter movies has Harry having horrible nightmares about Lord Voldemort. Harry competes in the Goblet of Fire tournament with this cool fire-breathing dragon in this year. Harry really gets into it with Voldemort. Each one of these first four keeps getting more sinister and darker in nature making for good adult entertainment but not really suitable for young children. 11.26.08

ykf 483620:

The visuals in this movie are incredible. Incredible. By far surpassing anything done in any of the previous Potter films. The acting is also top notch with the young actors maturing into their roles nicely and a few splendid additions to the cast. (Specifically Gleeson and Fiennes who steal the movie in their short scenes.) But the problem with this movie is the story is not all that strong. I enjoyed it very much but my wife that went with me (who doesn't read the books, I know sacrilege!) summed it up like this, "So, basically it was two and half hours to tell me that Voldemort is back." When I thought about it, that's really all the story that is in this film. While the book had all sorts of interesting personal stories and other plots going on, the movie focuses on the Tri-Wizard Tournament and the burgeoning love lives of the character (Much more in regards to the tournament.) I still liked the film very much. But I will say that with the caveat being I brought a lot more into the theatre with me in regards to knowledge of the characters and story and someone who doesn't have this knowledge might not like this movie... but then again I'm not sure why someone who doesn't love Harry Potter would see this movie, unless they're being dragged there by their goofy husbands. I highly recommend this for families and special effect freaks.

VJ Purplequeen:

I really like these kinds of created world fantasy movies, and I have enjoyed all of the Harry Potter movies that I've seen so far. They all make great movie watching experiences because the world set up is so original and fresh. In this movie, I loved the magic, the dragons, the other-worldly spirits and the flying. At the bottom of all the stories is the question of how to be good, or brave, or do the right thing in the midst of evil, or scary things, or corruption. I enjoy the acknowledged understanding that all the HP movies I've seen so far have in common, which is that there is so much grey area around the evil vs. good dynamic. Unlike lots of people want to believe, most things are never either black or white. In Rowlings movies, just like in real life, the experiences, feelings and thinking of the characters are fraught with so many complications, layers and complexities, which makes always chosing the "good" hard to figure out. Rowlings has created some extremely interesting characters, who are basically good and innocent, but who then have to negotiate an imperfect world where it is never an absolute certainty who or what the bad/evil people or things are. This 4th look at that eternal (also internal) question is certainly more violent and darker than I remember the others being, but I think Rowlings had to move on from the deliciously created world she set up in the first 3 movies. She had to let go some of the silliness that the previous movies had in them in order to delve more deeply into the heart of this good vs. evil struggle, and in order to keep the saga interesting. The characters have to grow, and as Harry affirms for Hermione, yes things do change. I think I enjoyed this movie the most, but only because I had already seen the others, so the foundation was laid. I liked watching how the characters had matured. I am eagerly awaiting the next installment of this amazing saga.

crewark:

J.K. Rowling said that the fourth Harry Potter book was where the series turns darker, but I thought that Alfonso Cuarón crossed over to the dark side by the end of the third Harry Potter movie. Things get pretty dark by the final act of "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire," but this film from director Mike Newell ("Four Weddings and a Funeral") also has the most laughs of any Harry Potter movie to date, which explains why I think this 2005 film is the best of the four.

hjx 3914:

I really was disappointed by this movie--I went in expecting it to be great, as the fourth book was one of my favorites in the series, but it disappointed. I think, because the book was so long, far too much important information was left out, and it was just sort of boring. I found myself falling asleep. I'm glad I saw it, but I won't be watching it again.

BlueVoid:

The fourth film in the series, and the best up until this point. The young actors, who marred the previous chapters so much with their poor acting, are starting to come around. They've developed their talent and feel comfortable with their characters, allowing the director to put more focus on them, creating richer scenes. Normally, I take issue with the amount of material they leave out of the films, but this time around they managed to compress the essence of the book very well into an entertaining movie, despite axing a few of my favorite characters completely. My biggest problem with the translation from the page to the screen in this case is the way that Professor Dumbledore is played. In the books he is always very calm and put together, but in this film he is played very angry and frantic which was distracting in every scene he was in. This film does take a much more ominous tone and is full of dark imagery and themes which seem to only make this into a more compelling movie. The film succeeds at capturing the magic of the books and transitioning them into a movie, and is without a doubt an improvement on the franchise.

Toire:

Of the four Potter movies out this is my second favorite, my favorite being Sorcerer's Stone. In some ways I'd say the Goblet almost surpassed the first. The Sorcerer's Stone had the luxury of being the first with nothing to be held in comparison. However, Goblet did compare and it shined. This book was twice the size of the first and the film was just a little over the first one's length. In every screen adaptation some things inevitably get lost, but I was mostly satisfied with what made it into the final cut. There are just certain nuances that a film would be hard pressed to capture from a book. The young actors have better mastered their craft. I enjoyed the special effects better in this film, they were more appropriate and less invasive. Overall the story was much tighter than the last film. Other than making this movie even longer than it was, I say there was little to be done to better it.

Peter Olafson:

The series gets back on track after the uneven Azkaban. Along with its successor Order of the Phoenix, Goblet of Fire is the most grown-up of the Harry Potter films in ways obvious (Harry's now 14 and showing a little interest in girls) and less obvious. (It's the first that doesn't show Harry as the unwanted stepchild at the start.) It's the first movie made at least as much for adults as children and, for me, it's the most exciting in the series. It doesn't exhibit the occasional weak links and creative wobbles of Azkaban and the addition of a raft of new young people (competitors in a wizard tournament that gives the movie its finest moments) shakes things up just when they needed shaking up. It's a lively mix -- though there are some silly scenes -- and I think you'll like it.

MIJ:

We suffer today from a constant and relentless barrage of information. This is definitely a movie of the times. The movie was way too fast and choppy, not enough character development, no feeling whatsoever. Mike Newell took what Cuaron had given him as a gift and trashed it. I understand that there were a few challenges thrown at this movie. First the book is something like 700 pages. Fine, make a longer movie or make it into two, don't cut as much as what was cut out. Second the actor playing Dumbledore was replaced after Richard Harris died. Harris was a wonderful Dumbledore, wise, circumspect. Michael Gambon took the Dumbledore's getting senile a lot too far and a little too fast. I think they should have merely hinted at that. We got nothing of his upcoming fight with the ministry. I got no feeling of strength and wisdom from Gambon at all. I think I got fixated the above and started imagining that everything was poorly done, so I'll stop there, because it was still epic movie, and had I not read the book, probably would've been an entertaining one for me. It would be impossible, but they need to keep some kind of uniform aesthetic for the movies. I believe Cuaron's job on Azkaban to be by far the best attempt yet.

ayy 1299075:

I absolutely LOVE the Harry Potter books. I think they are extremely well written and present an excellent story as well as outstanding character development. I have also been impressed with the film translation of the books and this film is no exception. From the very beginning of this film you are shot through at an excellent pace that kept me from checking my watch until the credits rolled, amazed that two and a half hours had passed. Mad Eye Moody is incredible in this film and adds so much. I have a few issues with this movie however. At the beginning of the movie, we are introduced to Viktor Klum and the return of the Deatheaters at the Quidditch World Cup. If the director felt that he wanted to include the Quidditch World Cup as part of this movie that's fine, however I felt that the 15 minutes used for that could have been much better spent improving the character development of Cedric Diggory, Viktor Krum and especially Fleur Delacour. Fleur becomes a fairly important character later in the series and it would have been beneficial to let us know her a little more. **SPOILER** The fact that Cedric's character was not fleshed out at all made me feel little to no sorrow when he was killed. He was no more an important character to me than the twins Ron and Harry took to the ball. The same can be said for the 2nd challenge where Fleur's sister is tied underwater. I didn't even realize who she was until later. **END SPOILER** That being said, the graveyard scene is absolute perfection. Lucius Malfoy is an excellent villian that is one of the best in the series. I would have also liked to see more flashbacks in the Pensieve as there is more in the book.

Coldplayer:

As I've said before, there's not enough time to cover every detail found in the books. Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire transitions wonderfully from the chilling creepiness found in The Prisoner of Azkaban into a mature dramatic darkness. The movie forgoes the happiness and frivolity of the previous movies and replaces it with teen problems, epic action sequences and hilarious British humor. Looking for a trouble-free year at Hogwarts for a change, Harry Potter finds himself unwillingly entered in the brutal TriWizard competition, up against a fellow Hogwarts student and two others from visiting schools. With the assistance of loyal friends Ron and Hermione, and the new Defense Against the Dark Arts teacher, Mad-Eye Moody (Brendan Gleeson), Harry seeks to reveal who has put him in harm's way yet again. As Harry struggles to stay alive during these brutal contests, his investigations and dreams lead him to Lord Voldemort (Ralph Fiennes- hissing and raging as evil incarnate), who is making new efforts to rise again and exact his revenge. The returning cast continues to improve and mature, growing into their roles.

Rigel:

When I go see a Harry Potter film, I can be guaranteed several things. I know that I'm going to see a good movie. I know that several times during the film, I'm going to be smiling, even giggling, at the visually unique and creative inventive fantasy visualized on screen. I know that I'm going to see characters that I remember and have grown to look forward to seeing again. And I know that I won't be let down. So far, all these have been proven true. This fourth film is a wild adventure, filled with zany and well-fictionalized characters, an exciting story, and lovable familiarity. It even utilizes recurring characters from earlier films to forward itself, which is greatly appreciated. Despite the injection of teen drama and a little too overused three-trials plot, it advances the story in hand with the previous films so that I eagerly await the next installment. Don't miss Hagrid's giant polka-dot tie, it's a strikingly silly visual.

TT 1305129:

This is a movie that will live up to your expectations. Having just seen a 10:30 showing on opening night, I am very satisfied. The new director, like Cuaron in the Prisoner of Azkaban, keeps the movie going at a very fast clip. The result is a movie that doesn't seem nearly as long as its predecessors, yet still remains true to the novel. Yes, there are a few changes--mainly characters whose parts were cut or shortened (like Ludo Bagman and Dobby), but the movie keeps about as much of the book as it can and still be shorter than Gone with the Wind (if only barely). My only two complaints are that the finals scenes are overly-shortened, especially the duel with Voldemort, and that Ralph Feinnes seems somehow wrong for the part of He-who-must-not-be-named. I imagined Voldemort as a deliberate, methodical, collected villain. His anger should be cold, his voice calculating. Feinnes--more in the style of the rest of the movie--plays a fast-moving, snarlingly angry Voldemort who doesn't seem nearly as menacing as he should. And doesn't Voldemort have red eyes? Ah well. Overall, the Goblet of Fire is fast-paced, engaging, and quite enjoyable. Recommended for all Potter fans and even those who aren't.

NS 1141538:

Ok, I'm writing a short, snarky review. It lost 2 stars just for the actor/ producers/ screenwriters/ director's interpretation of Dumbledore. If they had read one page of the books, they would not have him pushing Harry against a wall with hatred in his eyes; let alone yelling all the time. Can you tell I'm a book fan? :) I usually let everything go, but my blood seriously boils at every Dumbledore scene.

geetha:

Good. Watch once. Gets bogged down by growing up pains and loses focus on Voldemort. Updated Sep 1, 2009