DANIEL RADCLIFFE as Harry Potter in Warner Bros. Pictures’ fantasy “Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire.”
Photo: Courtesy of Warner Bros. Pictures.

 
What am I going to say about “Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire” that I wouldn’t have said about its predecessors? That’s what I’m wondering right now. As I’m trying to write this review, I’m having trouble separating this film in my mind from the others.

That’s not to say it’s a bad film. But they’re all essentially the same structure and same plot, with slightly different players. The regulars, of course, are back. The “accursed” Eton-typecast Harry Potter (Daniel Radcliffe), his bourgeois sidekick Ron Weasley (Rupert Grint) and the precocious and methodical Hermione Granger (Emma Watson), return to Hogwarts once again. Upon his return, Harry finds himself suffering from intense headaches relating to the jagged scar on his forehead. The scar, for the five people who haven’t heard by now, was the result of an attempt on Potter’s life, during his infancy, which also resulted in the death of his parents. The dark and wicked Lord Voldemort (Ralph Fiennes) is the sorceror who killed them.

Harry’s having bad dreams in which he witnesses strange goings-on, particularly a discussion between Voldemort, just out of view, and the sniveling Wormtail (Timothy Spall looking like a human-beaver hybrid) whom fans will remember as the elusive Peter Pettigrew from the last installment. Harry’s awakened by Hermione. She, Harry and Ron trek to the top of a hill to rendezvous with other Hogwarts students in an exercise that adults will notice is simply a plot contrivance. They come upon a boot that is a “port key”… it opens up a portal in time, or space, or both… I don’t know exactly, because it’s never quite clearly explained. But I suppose it makes perfect sense to the legions of “muggles” who have followed the books with passion.

Then the action shifts to the International Quidditch Tournament. It is rather fascinating to me that a private school focuses its attention on this one, and only, sport. But then, all of England would have my head for insinuating that there are things more important than a cricket match. The match takes place in a what looks like a gigantic salad bowl, filled to the brim with people instead of croutons. When the gang heads up to the nosebleed section, one of the instructors observes, “If it rains, you’ll be the first to know.”

The finals to the 427th Quidditch cup begin with an incredibly lively fireworks display, no doubt assisted by some magic, and the reigning international champion, Viktor Krum (Stanislav Ianevski) emerges–much to the delight of Hermione, who is quite taken with him. The campside festivities, however, are interrupted when a ghastly group of Death Eaters arrive in their cloaks and big, pointy hats to destroy the camp.

Shortly thereafter, Harry and company fire off a letter to Sirius Black (Gary Oldman) regarding the Death Eaters, who put on a foreboding display of their own “fireworks” in the sky, as it were. This ominous sign is the “Dark Mark” of Lord Voldemort. He is coming.

We return to Hogwarts where an ornate coach, powered by winged horses, descends from the sky, and a tall ship emerges from the water. Enter the Durmstrang Institute’s and Beauxbaton Academy’s finest, who have arrived to put forth their entrants for the coveted Triwizard Cup. The scene is staged perhaps as magnificently as the arrival of the elves at Helm’s Deep in “Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers.” The entrance of the handsome Durmstrangers resembles the choreography of the percusssion-driven musical “Stomp!” They’re dressed quite sharply in outfits closely resembling the traditional garb of Kossacks. By contrast, the Beauxbatons are outfitted in a cross between French couture and traditional Bavarian dress–splashed entirely in blue.

This is where the Goblet of Fire comes in… Like the magical hat in the first movie, its function is to select by intuition a student from each school to compete for the Cup. Viktor Krum, Fleur Delacour (Clemence Poesy) and Cedric Diggory (Robert Pattinson) are chosen to compete. But the goblet spits out a fourth name–which is unusual, we are told–and it is, of course, Harry Potter. Foul play is suspected, as Harry knows the rules. No student under 17 years of age may enter their name in the Tournament.

In addition to Krum, Delacour and Diggory, another new face appears at Hogwarts. Alastor “Mad-Eye” Moody (Brendan Gleeson with a mechanical eye) has replaced Severus Snape (Alan Rickman) as the Defense Against the Dark Arts teacher for the school. Like most of the other names in J.K. Rowling’s universe, Moody’s obviously reflects his character, and his nickname refers to his mechanical-magical eye. Mr. Finnigan (Devon Murray) observes, “The old codger can see out the back of his head.” He’s not kidding. Moody begins his lesson with a discussion of the three Unforgivable Curses, one of which is demonstrated with the help of the wiry, bucktoothed Neville Longbottom (Matthew Lewis).

It may not matter to children, but as an adult I do find Rowling’s black-and-white view of good and evil a bit tiresome. In this kind of story, if you think someone looks evil, they probably are. However, as this work exists within a genre that deals less with the intricacies of human nature and more with the archetypes of Campbell’s The Hero With a Thousand Faces, I’d have to compare it to others of its kind. First to mind comes “Lord of the Rings.”

As adapted by Peter Jackson, the “Rings” trilogy is infinitely more fascinating, more detailed and imbues its archetypes with greater complexities than the facile treatments given the characters in Harry Potter’s world. This is partly due to the fact that J.R.R. Tolkien’s source material gave Peter Jackson far more to work with than Rowling’s material provided the various directors of the “Potter” series. It’s also because the inspiration for Lord of the Rings comes from Tolkien’s experiences in World War I–the “Great War”–an experience to which there can be no comparison.

To the extent that Tolkien’s work has become a mythology in its own right, much cherished by the English and millions of others, across several generations, around the world, it’s not at all a stretch to imagine that Rowling’s bearded wizard, dark lord and trio of meek heroes were all inspired by Gandalf, Sauron and the Hobbits of the Fellowship. The problem, in my mind, is that each of the “Potter” movies offers nothing truly new to progress the story. Aside from a barrage of character introductions and departures in each film, the main theme is repeated: Proceed to Hogwarts, participate in festivities, festivities interrupted by strange and ominous goings on, find clues leading to (albeit in an unclear and almost illogical manner) the culprit, discover culprit is yet another minion of Voldemort, move one inch closer to Voldemort’s return.

Suffice it to say, I’m not quite sure what was accomplished in four films and counting that could not have been covered sufficiently in one. But this series isn’t to be compared to the gargantuan story and myriad, fascinating subplots in the linear progression of “Lord of the Rings” (written as one story and broken into three by the publisher). The “Harry Potter” series is rather pedestrian in this regard. Does that mean it’s not entertaining? Not in the least.

Much of the imagery is fantastic, and the computer graphics have much improved since the first installment. When Harry whizzes around in the Quidditch Cup, or is battling monsters or his own fears in the course of tackling the Triwizard Tournament’s three monumental tasks, it does finally feel as though lives are at stake. Even with movies that involve magic that defies physics, there should always be some sense of physics being resisted. For example, let’s say a broom is your propulsion system. Propulsion systems are designed to resist gravity. Therefore, some sense of gravity being resisted should be apparent.

In the first movie, much of the action in the Quidditch sequences was too rubbery, the visual effects almost cartoony… as if gravity and the logical mechanics of human motion didn’t exist. Now computer graphics technologies, as well as animators skills at capturing the nuances of physics and human motion, have caught up with directors’ imaginations and the true sense of what was envisioned can be seen.

There’s a fine line between the fantastical and the absurd. However, “Goblet of Fire” manages to avoid absurdity with its action, its great set pieces, and even a very humorous, if rather suggestive, sequence involving the recurring character of Moaning Myrtle (Shirley Henderson)–one of several amiable, and helpful, ghosts haunting Hogwarts.

“Goblet of Fire” is rather formulaic, yes, but what’s interesting to see is not so much what happens, but how it unfolds… and that, I suspect, will be the primary relief for children and parents seeking their annual Harry Potter fix. Will Harry, Hermione and Ron make it out of this installment alive? Yes, of course. But it’s still suspenseful to see the various ways in which they defy fate.

Into what category does the “Harry Potter” series fall, then? It’s comparable to the simple-yet-reliable format of childrens mystery novels such as the Nancy Drew and Encyclopedia Brown series, and even Scooby-Doo (right down to the “meddling kids” speech by unmasked villain in every episode). While I’m not one to underestimate the intellectual standards of children, the purpose of seeing such a film as this is not intellectual engagement.

It’s entertaining to watch, but the downside is that you’re likely to forget what you saw rather quickly. Because the material and the direction don’t seem to carry much weight, there aren’t images or questions that will linger in your mind for very long. The upside of this, however, is that by the time you line up at the cineplex for the next installment of “Potter,” you’ll have forgotten you’ve seen this movie before. That is, until you reach the end and realize what you’ve seen seems oddly familiar.

Then again, kids are all about disposable entertainment… So, as far as they’re concerned, they will love it, and the next one, and the one after that, and…