In this newest instalment of Harry Potter, Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry is host to an interna- tional magic tournament involving three wizarding schools. Throughout the year, Harry must face three magical tasks: win back his best friend, take a girl to a ball, and try and stop the evil Lord Voldemort from rising again. Reeve: I didn’t see this movie. I have not seen a single Harry Potter movie. I will never see a single Harry Potter movie. As has been noted many times in the pages of this paper, I hate the little wizard, his little friends, and the whole damn empire built around this one silly little series. Is it good? Maybe. It is original? Not really. Is it deserv- ing of all the success it garners? Certainly not. So, in hon- our of my least favourite film franchise, I present the top- ten things I did instead of seeing Harry Potter: 10) Read a book intended for adults. 9) Got a life. 8) Had sex, or at least remembered what it was like. 7) Walked down Granville Street dressed as a wizard for legitimate wizarding purposes. 6) Watched a movie containing original characters, crea- tures, and plot ideas. 5) Drank several cups of tea. 4) Wrote this snappy article. 3) Remembered how cool of a wizard Gandalf was and how he could kick Harry’s scarred little face in. 2) Mote appropriately, spent the $12 it would have cost me to see the movie by wiping my butt with it after a mean case of the runs. 1) Angered several Harry Potter nerds by delivering any criticism of their sacred cultural artifact. These are touchy, touchy people I tell you. Good night folks. Smith: This week Mr. Reeve again did not join me for the film. This is mostly because he has a strange, inexplicable, and oddly intense hatred of Harry Potter and wouldn’t touch it with a ten-foot clown pole. So, I was my own this week for the review. I start it off by stating that if members of the bands Pulp and Radiohead can be “in” the freaking film and still be everyone’s indie art-rock gods, then certainly, I am permitted to enjoy watching the movie. If you think otherwise, piss off! The book the movie is based on is very long, and as a result, a lot of content was cut for the film. Entire sub- plots were left out due to time constraints. In the first ten minutes of the film, roughly five chapters worth of materi- al is glazed over, however, aside from the aforementioned beginning bit, the pace was excellent. Unlike in Prisoner of Azkaban, the film didn’t seem to skip by too quickly. This was the first Potter film to garnered a PG-13 rat- ing, and rightfully so, as it was much darker than all its predecessors. Even I was creeped out at some of the scenes, and I am rational adult who has been watching quote unquote horror films all my life. I can’t even imagine how a six-year-old kid is going to react to Lord Voldemort, as he was particularly creepy. As with the other films, the calibre of acting is raised to a new level. The kids get better every time around and this was no exception. More emotional and more intense, the trio really shone. Brendan Gleeson joined the cast as the incredibly paranoid Mad-Eye Moody, and Ralph Fiennes joined the cast as Lord Voldemort. Both actors were incredible. Mad-Eye Moody was funny, frightening, and quirky, and right on par with how I view him in my head when I read the books. On the other side, Ralph Fiennes was per- fectly cast as the incredibly frightening and horrific Lord Voldemort. The sets, costumes, and cinematography were fantastic. It was a good halfway-point between the styles of the first two films and the third. It was not as visually bland as the first two, but also not as visually crazy as the third. It was the same Hogwarts you started to love in the first two films, but suitably darker and more sinister, and not to the extreme that left many people disappointed as with the third film. My only complaints were that the film could have bene- fited from another 20 minutes added to the beginning. Also, the alterations to the storyline left plot holes that will need to be filled for the storyline in the later movies. All in all, it was a fantastic film, and I am a crazy super nerd for loving it as much as I do. ARTS & ENTERTAINMENT Smith & Reeve at the Movies: Goblet Of Fire Iain Theodore Reeve and Stephanie S. Preston Esquire, OP Wyld Stallions I found it on teh interweb! Iain W. Reeve, Superdickery Fan Superdickery.com For this week’s installment we bring you a little piece of comic mischief that has repeatedly tickled my funny bone over the last few months. The site, www.superdick- ery.com, was initially devoted to a disturb- ing trend the site’s author noticed: Superman is a raging asshole. | The site began as a collection of actual comic book covers and panels that dis- played Superman being a total jerk. Cases of “superdickery” range from neglecting to use his powers to do good, to making out | with other people’s wives, to killing or framing his close friends and allies. While “superdickery” is certainly the crown jewel of the website, it has since expanded to include such sections as “weird science,” “comic propaganda,” and “the seduction of the innocent.” The final section is a long list of unintentional sexual references and innuendos, including a wide range of sec- tions suggesting there is more to Batman and Robin’s relationship than is immediate- ly obvious. Delicious. While a natural delight for any comic fan, Superdickery.com is a sure fire laugh fest for any fan of low brow, unintentional humour. Send your submissions for “I Saw In On The Interweb” to aeditor@gmail.com.