Box Office Review: American Teens Are Morons
Will This Go to Trial and Move to L.A., too? BART Cop Smashes Drunk Guy's Head through Window
Books for L.A. Nerds: Saints of California
Map of the Day: Outdoor Skating Rinks in Los Angeles
Stout, Stout, Get it Worked Out!
I'm a Harry Potter fan. I've read all the books and have enjoyed watching them come to life one by one on the big screen. Still, I'd sooner re-read any of the books than watch one of the movies a second time. The Harry Potter movies have somehow lacked that magical element that transports you right into the Wizarding World, as well as much of the wit and humor that make the books so much fun. But with Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince -- Merlin's Beard! -- I think they've finally got it right!
The elaborate sets and detailed costumes that we've come to expect are there, but this time, on top of all of that, we've got a quick moving plot and snappy dialogue. The cinematography has you moving through the Halls of Hogwarts like a Maurader up to no good and never standing still, while the action scenes are intense without dragging on too long. Helena Bonham Carter is wickedly destructive as Bellatrix Lestrange and kind of makes you want to go and break something just for the fun of it.
We catch up with Harry Potter (Daniel Radcliffe) as he gets ready to begin his sixth year at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry. Voldemort has been raising hell and the magical war is exploding into the Muggle World. Inside the heavily guarded gates of Hogwarts, though, school must go on. Harry gets some extra guidance from Dumbledore (Michael Gambon), when he isn’t curiously absent for long stretches; Professor Slughorn (Jim Broadbent), now out of retirement and once mentor to a young Voldemort; and the mysterious Half-Blood Prince, who influences Harry through notes in the margins of an old Potions textbook.
Harry is on a mission to learn all that he can about the boy Voldemort back when he was known as Tom Riddle (eerily portrayed by at 11 by Hero Fiennes-Tiffin and 16 by Frank Dillane, and who I can’t believe are not brothers). He’s got his friends by his side to help him along the way. Ron is hilarious when intoxicated by a love potion and Hermione has her hands full trying to keep her two best friends egos in check, though she’s beginning to realize she has more than just friendly feelings towards one of the boys.
Luna Lovegood is back and delightfully dippy. Lavender Brown emerges from the chorus as an admirer of Ron Weasley and her over-the-top performance is funny because, as anyone who has spent time around a group of preteen girls will tell you, it’s so spot on. Draco Malfoy is on a dark mission on his own, which both Harry and Professor Snape find themselves trying to thwart.
One criticism I heard on the way out of the theatre was that there was no resolution. This movie, like the sixth book, isn’t meant to be a complete story. It’s a bridge, but as bridges go, it’s like the Ponte Vecchio. It’s going to take you to the other side, but you’ll certainly enjoy admiring all of the treasures on display along the way.
Review by Courtney Quinn
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
Id say that "one" criticism spurned a lot of non harry potter readers. I heard at least 5 people bitching about it when i walked out of the theater at 1am mind you.
I liked it quite a bit. I love the third film the best thought. Perhaps because I just love Alfonso Cuaron's directing style, and because it's my favorite of the books.
I accept that film is a totally different medium than book. If one wants a faithful adaptation, listen to the audio book. J.K. Rowling herself has said that she doesn't mind what was taken out of the films, since she has unlimited space and the visuals in the books are limited only to her and her readers imaginations, whereas films have things like time, budgets and feasibility to consider. Hence why they cut a good amount out of this film, including Voldemort back story and a lot of the ending. But again, I accept that it's a film based on a story I love. Not the exact same thing.
It's interesting that -- according to the Potter fans I know -- the consensus favorite two movies are Azkaban and Half-Blood Prince. Those are the two that don't directly feature Voldythingie. Not sure what that means -- if anything -- but there you have it.
My take on the Half-Blood Prince was that it was superb right up until the last 15 minutes. I really think that Yates outsmarted himself by not showing Dumbledore's funeral. It would have been a cathartic moment that the film series had completely earned.
I really think that Yates outsmarted himself by not showing Dumbledore's funeral. It would have been a cathartic moment that the film series had completely earned.
I knew before seeing the film that the funeral wouldn't be included. The ending was almost anti-climactic without the funeral, but I saw a reviewer put it this way - they would have had to pay a TON of well-known actors (Miranda Richardson as Rita Skeeter, for instance) to make brief appearances with no lines, and blow their entire special effects budget with Grawp, the centaurs, the mermaids, and Fawkes. So it makes sense that it wouldn't be in the film. Don't rule out a memorial of some sort in the first scenes of the seventh movie, either.
I think HBP and PoA are, by and large, fan favorite books. Interestingly, until HBP (and arguable even after), Voldemort is really a pretty one-dimensional character. It's the other people who are interesting, and I personally love the marauders (Harry's parents/Sirius/Remus) back story that we're introduced to in the third book. It makes the entire series, and the whole world Rowling created, much more than just "the adventures of the boy wizard." It creates depth.