I curious about other factors. What day was each movie released? What part of the year? What other big movies were opening around it? What was the period of time between its release and the previous and next movie in the series. I think there can be a lot of factors beyond liking or disliking a movie that can go in to its final box office take.

Well, there's been a few of them but the best I can recall is they are released at midnight on Tuesday. They were typically being shown near Christmas time.

Either there were setbacks or they felt with the darker theme that the movies have taken it would best be fit for a summer release.

Sorcerer and Chamber were both released in min-November in '01 and '02 respectively, at which point they decided to push the schedule of films from 12 to 18 months. Prisoner of Azkaban came out the first week of June, '04 (and probably had a little more competition, being wedged between Shrek 2 and Spiderman 2). Goblet came out first week of November, 05, and Prisoner came out July '07. Prince was supposed to come out 11/21/08, but was pushed back because WB decided they had no other big summer tentpole for July.

Azkeban, for people who didn't read the novels, was rushed feeling and confusing. Artistically, it was amazing looking and had a great magical feeling on the movie but it was still a bit spastic.

Agreed.

I concur. I enjoyed it a lot, but for those who didn't know the backstory of the Marauders, the Shrieking Shack scenes were confusing. Just a little bit more padding could have made Prisoner of Azkaban a great film.

I have no knowledge of HP beyond the movies, and I'm not even a big enough fan of the movies to seek them out (usually catch them on DVD with my g/f's sister), but I had no problem following Azkeban. By far the best of the bunch IMO.

Azakan is my favorite of the Potter films, but yes, I agree you completely. I wish they had slowed down just a little, especially since it it is before the books grew into large novels.

Azkaban may have been the best book of the series - which means the movie had more to live up to - but I think it was still probably the best movie so far. I also recall enjoying the fourth movie - although I haven't seen it since it came out.

Azkaban was the refinement of the tone of the series (which I love) before she realized she could write whatever she wanted and created the huge massive tomes which while good, were simply to much. That's why so little happens in the last book, everything was set in place and there wasn't much else to tell.

Azkaban did have a lot of plot details that were just missing. Not left out, which I know is often necessary, but just MISSING. They were things that I felt should have really been explained out more, like the fact that Lupin and the gang were the Marauders. How else would he know what it is? Yet it's never explained.
That said, I still think Azkaban was a great film.

Prisoner of Azkaban is easily the best film, which just goes to show that the general public have no taste!

;)

Agreed that was my favorite all the others seems to have gone down hill since then, 4 was okay but I hated 5 so much it felt like a step backwards to the style of 1 and 2 and as it the same director the last 2 (I think) I won't be seeing them in the cinema unless 6 is fantastic.

My thoughts exactly! I loved Azkaban but the OotP really was incredibly bad.

The first two movies stuck to the books more than any of the other movies, so props to Columbus. However, Prisoner of Azkaban is my favorite. It's so beautifully shot, and Alfanso Cuaron is just an amazing director. He did a great job.

Wow, this is impressive...a graph with colors and everything.

I've enjoyed all of the films in the series in one way or another, but Goblet of Fire is my personal favorite. I thought it was really fun and it was the first film to actually strike the more "dark" and adult tones of the series. I thought the effects were great, the acting was pretty good, and the scene in which Harry brings back Cedric Diggory's body to his father had a great emotional impact and turned the tide of the series somewhat.

Alot of people seem to love Prisoner of Azkaban, which I thought was too crammed, felt long, and did a poor job of explaining that time travel plot device. I think that alot of people only claim to love Prisoner of Azkaban just to jump on that bandwagon of loving the one that was directed by Alfonso Cuaron, but that's just my opinion.

Well, I'm a fan of Cuaron - a big fan of Children of Men, but I wasn't familiar with his work when I first saw Azkaban. For me it was the best movie because Azkaban was my favorite book. If there were flaws or gaps in the movie my mind probably filled those in from the book. I'm not sure what the experience would be for others.

Well being that I hadn't read the books prior to seeing that film, it just really isn't explained or detailed well, even as I've re-watched it.

I thoroughly enjoyed Children of Men, but I'm just not understanding this "magic" or great "atmosphere" that many appear to think that Cuaron created in his interpretation. Those scenes in the beginning on the double decker bus are one of the worst in the entire series, at least to me. Those that are complaining about the effects in any other film, while praising Prisoner of Azkaban, really need to double check their standards, cause that scene, in particular, looked awful.

Hmmm, I was hoping for a bit more analysis on this, as opposed to a couple of charts.

Azkaban was the first film released during the summer and in June not too long after Shrek 2 and not to long before Spider-Man 2. Phoenix, the only other summer release, was released soon after Transformers but had nothing major after except arguably The Simpsons Movie which went after a different audience anyway. Half-Blood Prince should do very well because it is the last major release of the summer (besides District 9 which I'm sure will be a sleeper hit and Funny People but again, different audiences)

Order's huge sales was due to the Pottermania coming from the seventh books release AND the fifth movies within one week of each other. The novel came out five days after the movie or something like that.

Well analyzed, sir. After I finished book 7, I went to see OotP four more times because I didn't want the series to be over. I'm sure that happened a lot.

I guess I'm living in the Twilight Zone, though, because OotP was my favorite of the films. Azkaban is certainly a close second, but I think David Yates got the feeling of the books (at least how I read them) perfectly. While it's the longest of the books and a lot had to be cut out, I think that the moments between the characters are the most genuine of any of the movies. I also think the film looks gorgeous and is shot with real vision. While the film making doesn't constantly draw attention to itself like Cuaron's work, it is lush and magical without losing the grounding in the real that Cuaron injected into the series.

I know that the viewpoints are subjective, but I'm curious to know why people didn't like OotP. Were we watching the same movie?

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince is currently the best reviewed movie of the series both with critics and the mainstream public. It has 90% on rottentomatoes.com and a 8.5 rating on IMDB. With advanced sales on Fandango surpassing that of Transformers 2 and HP5 expect a large opening and a potential box office total of over $1 billion.

Prisoner of Azkaban was the best book of the series, & was the best film of the franchise- even if it left stuff out. Cannot wait for the next film as I enjoyed Half Blood Prince. Last book was pants.

Curious that the box office reciepts are inversely proportionate to the critics' rating. Not that one causes the other, they just seem to flow with each other.

I have not read the books, but I definitely agree that that the Prisoner of Azkaban is best Harry Potter film by far. The last two films are completely incoherent, I imagine because they are cramming much larger books into a 2 1/2 hour running time. Because of this they come across as disjunct series of major events instead of well-plotted narratives. The Prisoner of Azkaban flows through the narative quite well in my opinion and the style is fantastic. I've heard it is the least faithful to the books, but I could care less. A film should stand on its own and I think that The Prisoner of Azkaban does that the best.

Preferred Prisoner of Azkaban and Order of the Phoenix, i'm not really interested in how faithful the films are to the books just whether they work on they're own. People will always be arguing that they're favourite bit was left out. I felt the Goblet of Fire felt the most rushed, especially that opening forty minutes.

People always comment on Azkaban making the least but it was up against Spider-Man 2 and the juggernaut that was Shrek 2. This summer feels odd in terms of films, it feels like its almost over rather than gathering pace, i can't think of major releases after the Half Blood Prince, perhaps the effect of the Writer's strike?

Azkaban was my least favourite of the films. It felt too rushed and disjointed. I wanted to like it, but I just couldn't.

OotP has been my favourite so far, which is odd, considering it's my least favourite of the book series. I'm fully expecting HBP to surpass all my expectations and become my new favourite though. I'm pretty sure HBP is my favourite novel of the series (that or Goblet of Fire).

Incidentally, the HMV in Canada was selling the Harry Potter Blu-Rays for $20 a pop, with a $10 voucher towards admission to Half Blood Prince. I picked up the last two, so I could have a voucher for both myself and my girlfriend. Pretty sweet deal if you haven't picked them up yet. It's essentially $10 a movie.

Hmm, I felt OotP was rushed and disjointed. I also felt they sacrificed wayyy to much to make Umbridge the villain of the story. And the ending, particularly the fight between DD and Voldemort was highly unsatisfying.

Whatever dude. The Dumbledore Vs. Voldermort fight was WAY better then I was expecting... considering all I wasn't expecting anything at all (the book just has them throwing a few spells and then Harry convulses etc. etc.).

And they did a good job with Umbridge and the plot was not rushed at all. There was a bit where I was wondering when we were going to move it along. But then again... the 5th book didn't have too much plot to explore.

Finally, a little bit of OotP love. Seriously, that battle was bad ASS, the flame serpent, the shattered glass....It was definitely a notch up from what was written in the book.

And Umbridge is one of the best villains ever. She deserved (and earned) all the screen time she got.

What program did you use to make those graphs? I haven't seen them look that good on Excel.

I think he's using iLife Keynote.

Azkaban was easily the best of the Potters so far, so it seems fitting in this world where Transformers 2 becomes the highest grossing film of the year, that it makes less money.

Why put effort in when all people want is some 'plosions?

i only liked Order of the Fire Bird.......

*stands alone*

My favorite by far was Prisoner of Azkaban, then is Order of the Phoenix. I can't wait for the new one it looks amazing.

It's too bad Azkaban has the lowest revenue, because it is my favorite film as well. And the fact that I think it is an inexcusable exclusion to leave out the Marauder's backgrounds, but still love it, shows me how good that movie is.

OotP was a huge letdown. They focused far too much on Umbridge, and made the final fight much less memorable than it should have been.

Hopefully the sixth will be great.

My favorite is the first. Might be because it was when i was in middle school and being immersed in the magical universe on the big screen just as i had imagined it was one of my great cinematic experiences at that point. I think Chris Colombus set the tone, both visually and thematically, that would continue to make the Harry Potter movies so good in terms of presenting such an immensely imaginative and magical world. Also amazing music. One of the most memorable and catchy movie tunes of my generation. And I think the first two are fantastic fantasy movies for both adults and kids.

I feel like the last two have kind of lost the magic from the first three (not literally, of course) but are still quite good. My favorite Potter director is probably Columbus although I am much more fond of Cuaron's body of work. Unfortunately Columbus seems to be going the John Hughes route except in a very bad way with the new Panetierre vehicle. at least he got her topless on camera.

I thought it was quite interesting that the critics ratings were higher than the public's. The public opinion hovers around 70% but the critics nearly give 2 of them 90%. I would have thought that it would be the other way around. Maybe there aren't many HP fans on IMDb.

Azkaban is my favorite because I acutally feel like it is a movie. I felt like 1,2, and 4 are good but they don't feel like movies to me they feel like reinactions of the book. 3 took the liberty to leave a lot of stuff out but have a more cinematic appeal. It's also the movie where I feel that Harry isn't just a kid anymore. Phoenix has a lot of the qualities that three has as well, I just feel that 3 is better made. Plus - lots of Gary Oldman. That's why 4 wasn't as good! I do love the end of Goblet of Fire though - that's when shit starts to get real.

Hated Prisoner of Azkaban the most of all the books and films, though definitely not because of Cuaron's direction. I can understand why people really like it, but to me I just could never, ever get over the time travel component. Sure it's a magical world, but any time you introduce a device like that (and it's really just that and resurrection) you're opening a can of worms in terms of its use and common sense.

Loved the first movie though, regardless of Chris Columbus and his lack of finesse with SFX. Everybody remembers stepping into that world the first time. My money is on the idea that everybody started with the first book/film, and if you fell in love with it then the first story is crucial to capturing your attention and imagination (much like the reverence for the original Star Wars even though everybody can argue about how Empire Strikes Back topped it).

Honestly Azkaban is my favorite, but I completely understand your point with the time-traveling aspect of the movie. I blame it on Rowlings more than anything else. Time travel should have never been introduced to the magical world, in my opinion. I think Cuaron did the best you could possibly do with the source material.

Dammit Peter, I was expecting paint-by-numbers! You've fooled me again! *shakes fist*

The best Harry Potter grossed the least. Unfortunate.

For me, a big fan of the books, my favorite of the movies is Order of the Phoenix. It felt like the first of the movies to really adapt the book into its own separate film. It leaves a lot of the detail that I love out of the movie, which is unfortunate, but they also decided to focus on one particular story line and really develop it and dig deep into it. I appreciated that as a viewer. I felt like Goblet of Fire and Prisoner of Azkaban, as enjoyable as they are, are really just collections of scenes from the book or inspired by the book and don't really work as a cohesive whole. That being said, I'm coming from this as a reader of the books, so what works as a cohesive narrative to me, might seem disjointed and rushed from the perspective of someone who doesn't have the background of the book...

I have enjoyed all these films to be honest. The third one really took it in a new direction, but the time travel plot I didn't care for (in the book either) as time travel doesn't really make any sense. Although I loved the introduction of Sirius and Lupin.

The latest one was maybe the first one I enjoyed more than the book it was based on. I felt the book was way too long, and this really shortened it up while keeping the important things. I thought the battle between Dumbledore and Voldemort was awesome btw. And just some little things they threw in there....like the cat plates, and Mr. Weasley's fascination with the Tube turnstiles.

I saw the latest trailer for HBP this past weekend, it looks fantastic.

It's funny how the the third one was by far the best one, and it made the least amount of money....ughh people people.

Alfonso Cuaron is the man.

The best Harry Potter book is the least profitable movie, and the longest Harry Potter book is the shortest movie. Looks like the number for the HP series is 1/x.

i liked the third best, it felt like an evolution of the first two, which were very magical but had a hard time establishing any kind of danger. I know a lot of people (chicks) who liked goblet of fire because of rob pattinson, but almost everyone else will admit that goblet was the weakest of the bunch.