View Full Version : Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix
Frymaster
07-11-2007, 03:39 AM
Just got back, personally I thought it sucked. Or, let me put it this way: I enjoyed the book better. The 2 hours and 18 minutes flew by extremely quick, there were a few funny parts but it was mostly boring.
Who else saw it?
sweetxnightmare
07-11-2007, 04:11 AM
I'm going to see it on Saturday. The books are always going to be better but I hope they don't completely slaughter my favourite book in the series.
Dr. Zombie
07-11-2007, 04:20 AM
Yeah, I just got back from seeing a past midnight showing. I thought it was incredible! It is definitely one of my favorite one of the films for sure. So many amazing things went on, so well directed and acted. Lots of good story and action. It will be exciting to see what happens in the next two, especially after seeing certain things in this one.
jbellew
07-11-2007, 05:05 AM
I loved the movie, but from a readers perspective, it was seriously lacking at most points in the film...
It was way too short.
SIKKENT
07-11-2007, 08:22 AM
^agreed, if i hadn't of read the book, i wold have loved it. id go as far as saying theres about 1/3 of the book that was completely ignored
Fungus Amungus
07-11-2007, 01:56 PM
I was thinking the same thing, but you have to think from their side... who would watch through 3-4 hours of movie.
Mr. Heskey
07-11-2007, 02:19 PM
I haven't seen the movie yet, but what I can tell so far:
This movie looks like the best out of the 5 that have been made. It's curious that the 5th book was actually the worst out of the first 5.
Kazimierz
07-11-2007, 02:27 PM
For sure it didn't match up with the book, but as a reader, i had a great time at the movie. It was a bit boring, but from what i remember, the book was too. This one was a lot more story oriented. If you're a fan of the series, then you'll likely be happy with the film.
BiGDaNMan
07-11-2007, 03:14 PM
Yeah, I just got back from seeing a past midnight showing. I thought it was incredible! It is definitely one of my favorite one of the films for sure. So many amazing things went on, so well directed and acted. Lots of good story and action. It will be exciting to see what happens in the next two, especially after seeing certain things in this one.
I will agree its the best out of the 5 and i def like the fact that this one had some pretty damn good magic fighting, which is the one thing I wanted but I would not go as far to say that it is well acted. The adults are good but holy shit harry cant act for shit along with all the other kids. i dont even like half the scenes potter is in hes always breathing alot and looks god awful nervous and shakes. The kid almost ruins the movie for me everytime I see him in a seen were hes got to act with emotion.
DylerTurden
07-11-2007, 04:05 PM
Even if they wouldn't have made a lot of money, they should have at least made it about 15 minutes longer with a more developed ending and more action.
They better make Half-Blood Prince longer than 2 1/2 hours.
Mysterio
07-11-2007, 04:50 PM
So what parts do they leave out?
Junkman
07-11-2007, 05:55 PM
1. There was no mention of Ron and Hermione being prefects.
2. The scene at Sirius's house was about 5 minutes long, there was nothing there.
3. Sirius never gave Harry that communication device or whatever it was that he tried to talk to him with after he went through the veil.
4. After Arthur Weasley got bit by the snake, they never went to the hospital. It was completely forgotten and about 10 minutes later they were eating at Christmas and Arthur was there with bandages on his face.
5. After Proffessor Trelwrany (or whatever it is) got sacked, there was no mention of a centaur replacing her.
6. There was no mention of Kreacher going missing and giving infos to other people.
7. The Department of Mysteries was incredibly stripped. There was hardly anything there.
There's numerous other things, but those are the things I think they could have included with an extra 15 minutes that would have made the movie more full.
Bullet
07-11-2007, 06:01 PM
Crap movie. Jesus. The acting and everything was just horrible. First 5 minutes in, I thought, "Well, this is the beginning... it might get better." It hardly got better.
And I agree with Junkman. Atleast the 4th movie was mostly loyal to the book. This movie had nothing going on... seriously. It seemed that scenes ended way too fast... and others came up randomly...
NO QUIDDITCH?! THAT'S TREASON!
It did start getting better near the end though... where they didn't friggin randomly add scenes. There were some connected parts, which I liked. Otherwise, seriously, each scene was like 1 minute long.
Junkman
07-11-2007, 06:18 PM
Oh yeah, that's right. What the hell happened to Quidditch? It wasn't in the last movie because of the Triwazard Tournament, but there's no excuse this time. Remember Harry not being able to play Quidditch cause he was writing lines in Umbridge's office? Did Ginny die or something? What the fuck!
Personally, I didn't really like the movie. It was disjointed and moved way to fast for the most of it. Especially the beginning.
DylerTurden
07-11-2007, 06:24 PM
The only parts that I really liked were the Dumbledore's Army training and the fight between Dumbledore and Voldemort.
AnimeChicky69
07-11-2007, 06:38 PM
I would have loved to have seen more Tonks also but le sigh they had to fit so much in. Chopping such large books into a movie sucks.
TurbulenceXM
07-11-2007, 07:02 PM
Went to the midnight movie. I would have loved it, but watching it was a nightmare that wouldn't stop.
First, They had way to many coming attractions. Most of it werent even for movies. Than when it finally said feature presentation, the film was cut off and we were looking at a white screen for 10 minutes. Than when the guy who was working there got the film to work, it gets cut off again in like 2 seconds, waiting again for another 10 minutes. He gets the film working again with no problems at all. BUT, when we got around where the kids go back to the station, the film starts to move down. There was a black line going across the screen. We were watching the top of the screen on the bottom, and the bottom of the screen on the top. Than once Voldemort disappears and the Ministry sees him. The film cuts off again.
Everyone left yelling at the only guy working there. We all got a free movie pass.
Mysterio
07-11-2007, 07:48 PM
Wow Junkman they left out alot. The hospital scene was a good one where you see nevilles parents and lockheart. That sucks. Did they at least mention Fred and Geoerges joke shop in this? THey left it out at the end of the 4th.
Junkman
07-11-2007, 07:57 PM
They had a small scene with Fred and George giving out and testing treats on the 1st years, that was about it. And when they left the school on their brooms, they didn't say it was to start a joke shop... at least I don't think. Their reason behind it was sort of unclear.
Bullet
07-11-2007, 08:03 PM
The 2nd movie was 161 minutes. The 5th one only 138... they surely could have added more... and cut some other crap out.
Seriously, the movie was so gloomy. I don't think Harry laughed once.
SIKKENT
07-11-2007, 11:23 PM
aother thing. the secrecy of the order of the phoenix wasnt realy mentioned at all. when they meet up in public, they pretend the dont know each other (true to the book) but it never explains why, that wold have confused people who hadnt red the book.
and that scene with kingsley where he says "he got style" wasnt needed. i thought kingsley was african, they had some curry playing him
BiGDaNMan
07-11-2007, 11:46 PM
I have a question for those that have read the books. I never read any of the books but enjoy the movies and was wondering, in the order of the phoenix movie Harry reads snapes mind and pretty much sees that his dad was a dick when he was in school but they didnt focus on that at all. It was just there for a sec and then it was never mentioned again. If anyone can give me more information about this I would appreciate it.
Junkman
07-12-2007, 12:13 AM
Okay, well in the book, Snape always drained a memory into his pensieve (which, if you haven't read the books, is a memory storage glass ball thingy) at the beginning of every training session so that if Harry gets into his mind in the training, he can't see that memory. One time Snape leaves Harry alone in his office, and curiosity takes him over, and he sees the memory. The memory plays out nearly exactly the same as in the movie, except it starts with him writing his OWL, and Lilly Potter is there, and remarks her disgust for what James did. After the memory is done Harry snaps back into reality right as Snape bursts into the office. He has a total shit fit at Harry, and kicks him out.
The way his father behaved really concerned harry (for about 200 pages), so he talked to Sirius about it. Sirius said that James really chilled out over the next couple of years and became a better person.
Just another thing in the movie which if you hadn't read the books doesn't make any sense at all.
BiGDaNMan
07-12-2007, 12:16 AM
Okay, well in the book, Snape always drained a memory into his pensieve (which, if you haven't read the books, is a memory storage glass ball thingy) so that if Harry gets into his mind in the training, he can't see that memory. One time Snape leaves Harry alone in his office, and curiosity takes him over, and he sees the memory. The memory plays out nearly exactly the same as in the movie. except Lilly Potter is there, and remarks her disgust for what James did. After the memory is done Harry snaps back into reality right as Snape bursts into the office. He has a total shit fit at Harry, and kicks him out.
The way his father behaved really concerned harry (for about 200 pages), so he talked to Sirius about it. Sirius said that James really chilled out over the next couple of years and became a better person.
Just another thing in the movie which if you hadn't read the books doesn't make any sense at all.
oh ok got it, thanks for filling me in i appreciate it.
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
edit: Oh and 1 more thing, near the end sirius gets killed and his body goes through that little portal thing, so 2 questions.
1. What was that portal?
2. Did black really die?
stampede_dude
07-12-2007, 12:41 AM
More Crock of Hoop:
1-Dobby is once again left out-WTF??? He is crucial...
2-Neville found the room of requirement?
3-The Room of Requirement was totally messed up. How they broke in, how they knew it was there before they broke in, etc.
4-Cho Chang got fed veristasium to rat them out? Marietta wasn't even shown, and alot of that scene in the book was Kingsley modifying her memory when she ratted them out and got pimples on her face. Dumbledore also didn't stun them, and why did they replace the fight with Ron giving them Weasley candy?
5- Harry didn't shout at Dumbledore, and Harry didn't confront Nearly Headless Nick about Sirius
Some parts of the story were contorted way too much...Tonks was hot though :cool:
To answer your question BiGDaNMan:
Sirius has been assumed dead, but hints have been made that some connection will be made with him in the last book. From what I know and have read, it's a portal for the afterlife.
Joey-Clemenza
07-12-2007, 12:41 AM
1. There was no mention of Ron and Hermione being prefects.
2. The scene at Sirius's house was about 5 minutes long, there was nothing there.
3. Sirius never gave Harry that communication device or whatever it was that he tried to talk to him with after he went through the veil.
4. After Arthur Weasley got bit by the snake, they never went to the hospital. It was completely forgotten and about 10 minutes later they were eating at Christmas and Arthur was there with bandages on his face.
5. After Proffessor Trelwrany (or whatever it is) got sacked, there was no mention of a centaur replacing her.
6. There was no mention of Kreacher going missing and giving infos to other people.
7. The Department of Mysteries was incredibly stripped. There was hardly anything there.
There's numerous other things, but those are the things I think they could have included with an extra 15 minutes that would have made the movie more full.
That's why it's called a film adaptation.
FuNkYFreSH
07-12-2007, 01:00 AM
I want to rape J.K. Rowling
Junkman
07-12-2007, 01:10 AM
That's why it's called a film adaptation.
Those were actually huge parts of the book. I didn't go whining my ass off about little things that didn't matter. All the things I listed were huge parts of the original story. They really could have added just 15 minutes to the movie and have put those things in to make it at least make a little sense to the non-reader.
I understand them taking out Hagrid's story about the giants, the EXTENDED detentions with Umbridge, and the heavy preparation for the OWL's, as these things are good for making a book richer and flow better; but for a movie just convolute things and take up time. But there's no excuse for having no Quidditch, no excuse for not including the hospital (deepens the character of Neville GREATLY) , and ultimatly, having Harry discover after Sirius died that he just could have communicated with him anytime. The last thing was the thing that stuck out most about Sirius's death, and really deepened the sorrow of the ending. Could they not have taken the thirty seconds to include that?
Frymaster
07-12-2007, 01:32 AM
I was reading on Wiki about the movie (yeah yeah, unreliable, whatever they list sources) and in an interview, J.K. Rowling told the director? or producer of the movie to include Kreacher, because he hadn't been apart of the original script. They didn't want to, but she said something like (go to the page to read it exactly) "if you ever get a chance to make the 7th movie, you'll regret not putting Kreacher in this one".
Leads me to believe that he is a little more evil than the books perceive him to be (not the movie though, since like someone said it wasn't even shown that he was spying).
mesaywee3
07-12-2007, 01:34 AM
Im fucking go to see it just becasue that hot piece of ass emma watson.
SIKKENT
07-12-2007, 05:17 AM
i just noticed in the movie how big her five-head was, still, I'd give her one
thermopyle
07-14-2007, 05:09 PM
Thought this was a vast improvement over movie #4. Might have even been bettern than #3.
Kazimierz
07-14-2007, 11:21 PM
Im fucking go to see it just becasue that hot piece of ass emma watson.
It's all been downhill after the first one.
annalmary
07-15-2007, 06:44 AM
Hi,
I have to watch the movie.I saw the trailer and it is good.The graphics were just simply marvelous.I think Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix would be a great movie.It is also the much awaited movie I believe.Has anyone seen the movie.Please say the reviews about the movie.
Mysterio
07-15-2007, 12:51 PM
oh ok got it, thanks for filling me in i appreciate it.
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
edit: Oh and 1 more thing, near the end sirius gets killed and his body goes through that little portal thing, so 2 questions.
1. What was that portal?
2. Did black really die?
Not sure about the portal cant remember but im ugessing it just sucked him in. And yes he is gone.
The Jokeshop played an important part in the 6th book they shouldent have left that out.
Most imporntatn is Cho Chang hot?
elpee
07-15-2007, 01:52 PM
they should have made harry potter into a tv show
Lance Uppercutt
07-15-2007, 08:24 PM
Just saw it and I thought it was pretty good. Best one since number 2. It stayed true to the book, to an extent. You have to remember that they can't put everything in the movie that was in the book. You could tell they tried to get as much in as possible. But I thought they did a good job and didn't butcher it, like they did with number 4.
There were some things that could have been better, like the twins departure. I didn't mind so much that they changed the look of Hogwarts because it looked cool and it worked. But things like having the kids dress in school robes instead of normal people (or muggle) clothes really adds something. You wouldn't see a movie about the Roman empire with people wearing shit from the Gap. There were some other small things, but not big enough to ruin the movie.
I give it a B+.
Junkman
07-15-2007, 08:33 PM
Here's to add to my point of the movie moving too fast:
Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets:
Book: 251 Pages
Movie: 161 Minutes
Harry Potter and the Order of the Pheonix:
Book: 766 Pages
Movie: 140 Minutes
There's something very, very wrong here.
Lance Uppercutt
07-15-2007, 08:37 PM
Here's to add to my point of the movie moving too fast:
Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets:
Book: 251 Pages
Movie: 161 Minutes
Harry Potter and the Order of the Pheonix:
Book: 766 Pages
Movie: 140 Minutes
There's something very, very wrong here.
I think it's easier to make a longer movie with a shorter book. With the bigger books you have so much more to add and it's easy to cut shit out and meld things together, which is what they did with this one.
Slid3r
07-15-2007, 09:13 PM
The way I see it, the books will go down as being classics, books for all time. But these movies will be forgotten, they were merely a complement to the movie, an extra money maker that provided unnessesary visuals. I had a perfect picture of hogwarts and the characters in my head that i was content with, then I saw the movie and everything became distorted. If Harry Potter was supposed to be the book that stirred the worlds imagination and got us to read, why do we need these visuals to ruin it all. Do we really need a re-telling of the story, minus all the sub-plots that made it great? If someone wants to be immersed in the story, get the book on tape. Im actually gonna watch a bootleg of this now, i saw it uploaded on one site.
im not really a hard core loser fan, but i just dont like seeing great stories put aside in favor of making a shorter movie so more tickets can be sold.
goatwalker
07-15-2007, 09:24 PM
Here's to add to my point of the movie moving too fast:
Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets:
Book: 251 Pages
Movie: 161 Minutes
Harry Potter and the Order of the Pheonix:
Book: 766 Pages
Movie: 140 Minutes
There's something very, very wrong here.
Thier is nothing wrong, they just cut out all the unnecessary stuff.
Junkman
07-15-2007, 09:30 PM
I think it's easier to make a longer movie with a shorter book. With the bigger books you have so much more to add and it's easy to cut shit out and meld things together, which is what they did with this one.
That's like saying that if there are two friends who are trying to lose weight, one friend fatter than the other, the bigger one will eventually become the skinnier one because there's more fat to lose. No, he'll just lose more fat than the other one.
Lance Uppercutt
07-15-2007, 09:52 PM
That's like saying that if there are two friends who are trying to lose weight, one friend fatter than the other, the bigger one will eventually become the skinnier one because there's more fat to lose. No, he'll just lose more fat than the other one.
No. It's nothing like that at all. Your analogy sucks.
The only way to make the last three movies as true to the story as the first two they would have to be like 4-5 hours long, at least. So you make cuts to the story line, and once you do that it's over. You end up with a 2 hour piece of crap. But with the first couple of books it was easy to put everything in, because there wasn't as much to put in. Though it may take a little more time to get right. It's not that hard to understand.
Junkman
07-15-2007, 11:36 PM
No, my analogy's perfect, fuckface. You act as if they didn't even need to make any cuts for the first 2.
All I'm trying to say is they could have made the movie make a lot more sense by adding 15-20 minutes. Why is the longest book in the series the shortest movie? You seem to be trying to say that makes MORE sense than it being longer than the rest.
Lance Uppercutt
07-15-2007, 11:57 PM
No, my analogy's perfect, fuckface. You act as if they didn't even need to make any cuts for the first 2.
All I'm trying to say is they could have made the movie make a lot more sense by adding 15-20 minutes. Why is the longest book in the series the shortest movie? You seem to be trying to say that makes MORE sense than it being longer than the rest.
Oh is that how I acted? You're fucking dense.
It's called condensing. The more you condense the shorter things are. There is no need to condense the short book, just trim some shit out and your good. With the longer books you must condense and rewrite or it will be far too long for a movie. It really isn't hard to comprehend.
Junkman
07-16-2007, 12:01 AM
OK OK, let's just say I won and move on.
Lance Uppercutt
07-16-2007, 12:07 AM
OK OK, let's just say I won and move on.
Translation:
I realized I was a moron and I'm trying to save face.
temp100
07-16-2007, 12:16 AM
I thought it was a bit average. Simply put... longest book, shortest movie. It clocks in at 138 min.
Acting was spot on though. Snape's lines were delivered well, and they absolutely could not have chosen a better actress for Luna Lovegood. She's cute too.
The one thing that bothered me most about it is that all of it, except for the last scene at the ministry, was composed of mini-scenes (all about 4 minutes long) cut together with no transitions whatsoever. This destroyed any sense of time or continuity that the film could've possibly had and left me painfully aware that I was watching a movie the whole time. I felt as though I were watching random videoclips from Harry's life cut and pasted onto the screen.
The movie is just that: the movie. It's not the book. In order to make it enjoyable, they need to stop trying to cram all the action of a 700-page book into a 2-hour film, which will never be possible, no matter how hard they try. Instead, the characters need to be developed better so that the audience can feel empathy towards them; for example, when Sirius died, I couldn't have cared less, although it was supposed to be one of the most emotionally touching scenes in the storyline. It's okay by me if this comes at the cost of cutting additional scenes because if you want the whole package, read the book.
The acting, by the way, I thought was okay, except for Harry (Daniel Radcliffe) of course.
temp100
07-16-2007, 01:48 AM
The one thing that bothered me most about it is that all of it, except for the last scene at the ministry, was composed of mini-scenes (all about 4 minutes long) cut together with no transitions whatsoever. This destroyed any sense of time or continuity that the film could've possibly had and left me painfully aware that I was watching a movie the whole time. I felt as though I were watching random videoclips from Harry's life cut and pasted onto the screen.
The movie is just that: the movie. It's not the book. In order to make it enjoyable, they need to stop trying to cram all the action of a 700-page book into a 2-hour film, which will never be possible, no matter how hard they try. Instead, the characters need to be developed better so that the audience can feel empathy towards them; for example, when Sirius died, I couldn't have cared less, although it was supposed to be one of the most emotionally touching scenes in the storyline. It's okay by me if this comes at the cost of cutting additional scenes because if you want the whole package, read the book.
The acting, by the way, I thought was okay, except for Harry (Daniel Radcliffe) of course.
I agree about the continuity.
I'm not saying that they should cram the whole 700 pages. But they could have put in more without ruining the movie.
Junkman
07-16-2007, 07:30 PM
Translation:
I realized I was a moron and I'm trying to save face.
No, I personally think the movie should have been longer than it was to include more content from the book, and to let the non-reader in on some things that they wouldn't get otherwise (such as Harry seeing Snape's memory, if they weren't gonna follow up with that scene, why even bother including it?). I just don't wanna argue pointlessly about something stupid.
C'mon Lance. I love you. Give me a hug.
Lance Uppercutt
07-16-2007, 10:54 PM
No, I personally think the movie should have been longer than it was to include more content from the book, and to let the non-reader in on some things that they wouldn't get otherwise (such as Harry seeing Snape's memory, if they weren't gonna follow up with that scene, why even bother including it?). I just don't wanna argue pointlessly about something stupid.
C'mon Lance. I love you. Give me a hug.
That's right bitch, acquiesce. Quien es tu papi?
I didnt read the book.
I was wonder what the hell?
They drag that bitch lady to the woods. She actually followed them, no hesitation, then some fucking animals from the first book came and took her away. wtf?! i expect to hear from her in the next movie.
About the movie
It was good. Not as good as the previous ones. There wasnt really any plot. There wasnt no main scene where some good guys face off in a war against the bad guys as i expected, maybe in the next movie. 7/10
hole in the sky
07-17-2007, 12:21 AM
my girlfriend made me sit through all of the harry potter movies including this latest one. i haven't read the books, but the movies are ok.
we went to the midnight showing to see 'phoenix' and christ was that an annoying theater. nothing but high schoolers making the most unfunny comments towards the screen, trying to impress their little girly friends who just giggle mindlessly at anything. i have no tolerance for kids/teenagers.
that being said, the best part of the series so far has definitely been crookshanks. i love those persian cats with the fucked up faces, i'm probably going to get one in the near future. he's going to be all hefty, too. his name will be 'fattius herenius hestia' and i'm going to call him 'fats' for short.
cuba06
07-18-2007, 04:17 PM
the levicorpus incantation was used in the 5th movie, but Harry doesn't learn about it until book 6, when he is reading the half-blood Prince's copy of advanced potions.
temp100
07-18-2007, 10:02 PM
the levicorpus incantation was used in the 5th movie, but Harry doesn't learn about it until book 6, when he is reading the half-blood Prince's copy of advanced potions.
They are a bit liberal with the movies; for example, in the third book when Harry sneaks into Hogsmeade with his invisibility cloak, he throws mud at Malfoy and Hermione isn't present. In the movie, it's snow that he throws and Hermione is present.
They drag that bitch lady to the woods. She actually followed them, no hesitation, then some fucking animals from the first book came and took her away. wtf?! i expect to hear from her in the next movie.
In the book, as in the movie, Umbridge and the Inquisitorial Squad corner Harry and Hermione along with the rest of Dumbledore's in her office. Hermione obviously knows Harry was trying to see if Sirius was still present at Number 12 Grimwald Place, but she comes up with a quick plan to lead only Her, Harry, and Umbridge into the Forbidden Forrest because she says "Dumbledore's weapon" is stowed inside there (thus saving Sirius, because the Ministry is still after him, and Umbridge is part of the ministry.) Umbridge believes her, and because she doesn't want to share the weapon with the Inquisitorial Squad (Draco, Crabbe, Goyle, etc.) she decides to go along with Harry and Hermione, on the pretext that both of them are wandless. Hermione hopes to lead her to the Forbidden Forrest for the main reason of scaring her off by Grawp, but luckily they run into Centaurs first. The Centaurs are in an uproar already due to the fact that Firenze turned over to work at the hands of humans, and they attempted to kill him for his treason, but Hagrid had saved him. And on top of this, Umbridge absolutely hates Half-Breeds (just look how she treats Hagrid), and how she acts towards the Centaurs only shows that further. Grawp interferes of course, and due to the fact Umbridge claimed that the Centaurs had "almost human intelligence" (which pissed them off), and she produces a Body Bind on one of them, they carry her off screaming into the Forrest. So, in conclusion, Hermione's plan worked, but they are still left with the almost impossible task of heading to the Ministry to save Sirius.
Read the books. They rape the movies.
Fungus Amungus
07-19-2007, 01:39 AM
It's sad that Jk Rowling is the one writing the screenplay, but meh. "Book" movies never turn out to be the exact excitement you get from the books. Infact there is probably no way to do it.
Mr.Willypopples
07-19-2007, 09:16 AM
Wow, im really surprised by everyones posts. It seems you're all proud harry potter fans. I thought everyone would just be ripping on the film.
SheBear
07-19-2007, 10:44 PM
It was a piece of shit. And the only good things were the actress who played Luna was really good in the role and Emma Watson was hot. Other than that it was a travesty.
YankeesSuck
07-20-2007, 12:43 AM
I wasnt gonna go but someone asked me to see it tommorow, then I though oh yeah Emma Watson lool.
vBulletin® v3.8.4, Copyright ©2000-2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.