--- title: "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire: the reviews" canonical: "https://film.one/film/harry-potter-and-the-goblet-of-fire/reviews" title_page: "https://film.one/film/harry-potter-and-the-goblet-of-fire" critics_score: 69 critics_reviews: 16 licence: "© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL." --- # Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (2005): what the critics said Critics' score 69 from 16 reviews: 12 positive, 3 mixed, 1 negative. Most critics welcome this fourth film as the darkest and most grown-up of the series so far, and the credit goes largely to Mike Newell. The reviews agree that he draws better performances from the young leads than his predecessors did, with Daniel Radcliffe and Rupert Grint singled out, and that Ralph Fiennes’s Voldemort and Brendan Gleeson’s new teacher are the strongest additions. Several critics find more feeling in the teenage awkwardness of the Yule Ball than in the tournament itself. The reservations cluster on length. Compressing a long novel into more than two and a half hours leaves the editing choppy and the plot hard to follow for anyone who has not read the book. Slant and Sight and Sound both find Newell has little gift for action sequences, and Screen Daily and Eye for Film think it lacks the distinctiveness of the previous film. The spread is wide: two reviews call it the best in the series, while Sight and Sound is the lone outright dissent. ## Los Angeles Times — Kenneth Turan Fi1m's normalised score 90/100 (inferred from the text). 19 November 2005. Newell finally gets the series right with a wire-to-wire satisfying adventure that captures the books' excitement, featuring convincing new cast members and a natural heroism from Radcliffe's Harry. [Read the review](https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/movies/la-et-archives-harry-potter-goblet-of-fire-review-20170626-story.html) ## The Telegraph Rating 4/5. The review hails the film as the best in the series to date for its greater depth, sorrow and fear factor, especially in scenes with Ralph Fiennes as Voldemort, crediting Mike Newell with revitalising the franchise while noting some dull stretches in its long runtime. [Read the review](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/films/2016/12/27/harry-potter-goblet-fire-2005-original-telegraph-review/) ## Empire — Angie Errigo Fi1m's normalised score 75/100 (inferred from the text). The critic praises the special effects action sequences, charm, and emotional depth brought to the young leads' performances while noting the director handles personal elements well. They criticize the challenges of compressing the lengthy novel, resulting in choppy editing and some unnecessary subplots. [Read the review](https://www.empireonline.com/movies/reviews/harry-potter-goblet-fire-review/) ## The AV Club — Tasha Robinson Fi1m's normalised score 75/100 (inferred from the text). 16 November 2005. The film is a well-acted, vividly executed special-effects extravaganza that pares the story to essentials while retaining momentum for fans. Newell and Kloves make reasonable cuts but the result still feels bulky at over two and a half hours. [Read the review](https://www.avclub.com/harry-potter-and-the-goblet-of-fire-1798201220) ## Evening Standard — Derek Malcolm Fi1m's normalised score 70/100 (inferred from the text). 10 April 2012. The critic highlights the film's focus on character and psychological insight, with strong performances from the young leads especially Rupert Grint, and notes it adds elements like sex and school memories. They express some skepticism about the source material's storytelling but conclude that fans will enjoy the sweep and intimacy of the adaptation. [Read the review](https://www.standard.co.uk/culture/film/harrys-greatest-challenge-7386190.html) ## RogerEbert.com — Roger Ebert Fi1m's normalised score 70/100 (inferred from the text). 17 November 2005. The film turns darker and more violent as Harry faces the Triwizard Tournament and Voldemort's return, balancing whimsy with ominous threats through strong performances and effective direction. [Read the review](https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/harry-potter-and-the-goblet-of-fire-2005) ## The Guardian — Peter Bradshaw Fi1m's normalised score 70/100 (inferred from the text). 18 November 2005. The critic finds the film a handsomely made, good-natured family entertainment driven forward by director Mike Newell, who elicits stronger performances from the young cast than his predecessors. The Triwizard Tournament provides spectacle, but the story is hampered by its length and school-bound setting. [Read the review](https://www.theguardian.com/film/2005/nov/18/harrypotter) ## The New York Times — Manohla Dargis Fi1m's normalised score 70/100 (inferred from the text). 17 November 2005. The film marks Harry's transition from childhood with a darker tone and strong direction by Newell, highlighted by impressive effects and Ralph Fiennes' villainous turn as Voldemort. [Read the review](https://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/17/movies/the-young-wizard-puts-away-childish-things.html) ## Time Out — DA Fi1m's normalised score 70/100 (inferred from the text). 15 November 2005. Newell makes a fine job of the screenplay, making the film deliciously dark, wickedly funny and superbly mounted with strong performances. The main issue is the source material's length, leaving the plot confusing for non-readers. [Read the review](https://www.timeout.com/movies/harry-potter-and-the-goblet-of-fire-2) ## Variety — Todd McCarthy Fi1m's normalised score 70/100 (inferred from the text). 9 November 2005. The darkest Potter yet delivers intense storytelling and emotional reality under Newell's direction, with standout work from Radcliffe and Gleeson amid streamlined plotting and impressive effects. [Read the review](https://variety.com/2005/film/awards/harry-potter-and-the-goblet-of-fire-1200520391/) ## Slant Magazine — Jeremiah Kipp Fi1m's normalised score 65/100 (inferred from the text). 15 November 2005. Goblet of Fire is a workmanlike effort with an underlying sweetness in its approach to young love, though Newell shows no talent for action sequences. The best sequences involve the teens figuring out emerging sexuality rather than the conventional fantasy plot and effects. [Read the review](https://www.slantmagazine.com/film/harry-potter-and-the-goblet-of-fire/) ## Screen Daily Fi1m's normalised score 50/100 (inferred from the text). 10 November 2005. It is a solid but mostly uninspired melding of adventure and fright, neither as singular as the previous film nor as kid-pleasing as the first two. Newell juggles the tonal shifts and new characters with mixed success. [Read the review](https://www.screendaily.com/harry-potter-and-the-goblet-of-fire/4025125.article) ## Sight and Sound — Jonathan Barnes Fi1m's normalised score 30/100 (inferred from the text). 1 January 2006. The film never quite delivers on its promise despite a more distinctive tone than earlier entries. Newell excels with character moments and the emotional arc of adolescence but falters in the action sequences. [Read the review](http://old.bfi.org.uk/sightandsound/review/3088) ## Digital Spy — Daniel Saney Fi1m's normalised score 90/100 (inferred from the text). 21 November 2005. Mike Newell has produced the best Harry Potter film yet, funnier, more thrilling and more moving than predecessors, with strong direction, improved acting, and impressive visuals. The critic praises the adaptation's pacing and emotional depth, singling out Daniel Radcliffe's performance and the Yule Ball cameos. [Read the review](https://www.digitalspy.com/movies/a26505/harry-potter-and-the-goblet-of-fire/) ## Den of Geek — Mark Harrison Fi1m's normalised score 70/100 (inferred from the text). 12 July 2011. The film is an action-packed but somewhat undisciplined adaptation that preserves the book's intrigue and features some of the series' best action and one of the best endings, though it feels jumpy and pedestrian compared to the previous film. The critic highlights the terrifying Voldemort return sequence and strong performances like Brendan Gleeson's as standout elements. [Read the review](https://www.denofgeek.com/movies/looking-back-at-harry-potter-and-the-goblet-of-fire/) ## Eye for Film — Scott Macdonald Fi1m's normalised score 55/100 (inferred from the text). 17 November 2005. The film is a slightly frustrating, uneven experience with an anti-climactic finale, though still entertaining enough overall. The critic singles out the Yule Ball scenes as the best and most human moments, while noting missed opportunities and a lack of cinematic magic compared to the previous installment. [Read the review](https://www.eyeforfilm.co.uk/review/harry-potter-and-the-goblet-of-fire-film-review-by-scott-macdonald) --- © Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL. Our review: https://film.one/film/harry-potter-and-the-goblet-of-fire.md