I also posted this on the OOTP board.

Michael Goldenberg achieved with OOTP what Steve Kloves has been stumbling with - and that is writing a coherent screenplay. I give Steve Kloves a lot of credit and I have a lot of admiration for the work he does in trying to compress books into movies. The first two HP were faithful, coherent adaptations of the books. But things started falling apart with POA, and GOF was a complete mess. I almost shudder when I think that he's returning for the final 2 (now 3) films. Steve Kloves' problem seems to be that he writes for the fans - he writes screenplays as if we've all read the books so nothing needs to be explained. Or included.

Such as:

Lupin doesn't explain how he knows the Marauders Map is what it is, how to work it, and that he was a co-writer. But we already know that, right?

Dumbledore can just say "Priori Incantatem" and leave it at that.

We already know about the twin cores from the books, so who needs to explain why they reacted as they did in the graveyard, even though it serves as a major plotpoint in the movies to come.

etc. etc. etc.

I could go on and on, but do you see what I'm getting at? The films should stand alone and you should be able to watch them straight through without scratching your head trying to figure out what's going on. My mother saw OOTP with me - never having read the books or watched any other HP movie, and she could actually follow the story. Afterwards she tried watching POA and GOF and was completely lost. Goldenberg still glosses over things and leaves things out, but I think nowhere near as badly as Kloves does. At least Goldenberg was able to rectify in OOTP at least one part that was missing from GOF: Fudge's denial. I accepted what was left out and rearranged from OOTP, and the movie worked well enough.

I might also add that POA still stands as the best HP film for me, because it was just that - a film, not a movie. For the life of me, I still can't figure out why so many people are banging on about how bad POA was. POA right now is probably the only film that had a director with a vision and a point of view, who brought a wondrous sense of magic to the screen, who wasn't just mechanically churning out another Harry Potter Production. It is the only HP film I could view repeatedly and never tire of. Despite Steve Kloves' sometimes-frustrating screenplay, I watched POA and said, "Finally, they got it right." I watched GOF and I ached for Alfonso Cuaron. For Christ's sake - Cuaron was the only director who got Michael Gambon to act like Dumbledore! Before everybody blames Michael Gambon for his portrayal of the character, don't forget that Mike Newell and David Yates also hold a share of the blame. And Steve Kloves - what was he thinking putting some of those lines in Dumbledore's mouth!? I agree with others that OOTP is not a repeat viewer, but probably because the book is plot-heavy and so is the movie. GOF is more excitable, and despite its many flaws, it continues to grow on me.

I get frustrated with the HP films the same as everybody else, and despite my acceptance of artistic license, nobody frustrates me more than Steve Kloves.

Two cents, anybody?

And on a side note, who else was disappointed that we didn't get to see Harry go apesh't in Dumbledore's office?


UPDATE: And now I've heard that not only will be there be no Dumbledore funeral scene in HBP, but now they're adding a scene where the Death Eaters attack the Burrow during Christmas. WTF!? I don't care even if it has JKR's blessing, the fact that Steve Kloves is involved does not inspire confidence. But we'll see...

And you people need to give it a rest already with the Weasley swamp and Quidditch and everything else...