Review: Half-Blood Prince (New Harry Potter)

[3113]

Just saw it. I imagine anyone who goes to see this film is already okay with the HP films if not an outright fan. As a non-fan who finds the films okay, I found this one to be among the better HP films. Goblet of Fire and Order of the Phoenix were, to me, pretty unmemorable and I'm not inclined to re-watch them. This one I'd be interested in seeing again when it gets to cable. It has some honestly funny moments, the actors got a chance to break out of those character boxes and prove they can act. As with all HP stories, there are clever, cute magic moments, though not many mysteries or surprises and no new characters of interest. Dialogue was often witty, and there were even some true "teenage" moments.

So overall, thumbs up. I even think the director did some very nice things with filming/ambience, etc. that probably made parts of the story work better on film then they might have in the book (like those teen moments)--though I can only surmise this because I did not read the book.

Most problems had to do with the book (don't they always?). That is, there are things that seem unexplained or underdeveloped, and likely they were explained/developed in the book, but the movie didn't have time. Also, the nature of Harry Potter in structure, etc. creates it's own problems. HP is, by nature, episodic, which is fine for a cliff-hanger kid's book/movie, but now that the story is taking itself more seriously, the episodes feel disjointed and jumpy. Not all of a piece or a world.

The fact that the book tries to keep one foot in its origins as a kid series (with things like good/evil sides to things), yet insists that it is also a serious, almost adult fantasy, causes the movie most of its problems. For example, it emphasizes some dark moments of serious harm done to certain people, yet the bad guy, and everyone who works for him, calls him "The Dark Lord" (who names themselves that? Outside of lead singers in Heavy Metal bands?) And what's with all the bad guys looking like 60's Batman villains and wearing only black? Do they all shop at Hot Topic? ("Holy goth wear, Batman!"). Malfoy looked like he was on his way to a Cure concert.

I still give it a thumbs up for its humor and some moments that rang true about being sixteen and such, but I swear, in my epic fantasy novels, all my villains are going to wear Hawaiian shirts and florescent green and yellow.

.

 

[Recidiva]

We went out to see it at midnight.

It was my favorite of all the movies because of the quality of the performances (Hermione made it through the whole movie without me wanting to slap her, a first!) and the sympathetic portrayal of...everyone.

The least black and white and full of those adorable touches that made me love the series without all the belaboring of certain plot points that makes me grit my teeth thinking "I GET it..."

Two wands up

 

[3113]

I'd like to add by the way, that I can't believe they've still got two movies to go! They'd better get a move on.

And yes, I know why most of you guys (and thesbians) will be going to this movie. You'll be happy to know that Emma Watson wears a lovely dress that shows off just how much she's matured. Given how much cleavage she displayed in this movie, my husband said that he's expecting full frontal by the last movie

 

[Recidiva]

I'd like to add by the way, that I can't believe they've still got two movies to go! They'd better get a move on.

And yes, I know why most of you guys (and thesbians) will be going to this movie. You'll be happy to know that Emma Watson wears a lovely dress that shows off just how much she's matured. Given how much cleavage she displayed in this movie, my husband said that he's expecting full frontal by the last movie

I actually think the guy who played Draco, who was always the second most slappable...was really, really good.

 

[3113]

I actually think the guy who played Draco, who was always the second most slappable...was really, really good.

I'd agree, except they didn't give him enough to do. I don't know if that's due to the actual story from the book or because the movie didn't have time to put in more, but I expected a much bigger pay off from him. In fact, I was really looking forward to that. It was because he finally got a chance to stretch those acting talents that I expected and hoped for more, and was disappointed when I didn't get it.

 

[Recidiva]

I'd agree, except they didn't give him enough to do. I don't know if that's due to the actual story from the book or because the movie didn't have time to put in more, but I expected a much bigger pay off from him. In fact, I was really looking forward to that. It was because he finally got a chance to stretch those acting talents that I expected and hoped for more, and was disappointed when I didn't get it.

They really had to condense. I just think they did a much better job of condensing the action and story while leaving in the human and funny stuff. The performances were nuanced and subtle and a lot warmer and less dramatic than they ever have been.

My daughter went in a cape and had a lightning scar and Harry Potter glasses...She's 20

I think I'm just glad I was less antagonized than ever.

But I do know what you mean, there's a lot my daughter missed that she wanted to see...

(I'd forgotten a lot of the plot...and hadn't even remembered who the half blood prince was...husband had to tell me at the snacks stand 'cause I forgot)

 

[impressive]

Saw it this afternoon. My very first Potter (book OR movie). I was left with a big *shrug* and general for all the series hype. The special effects were cool, but I felt no affinity with any of the characters (Luna? was my favorite, if I had to choose.)

 

[Recidiva]

Saw it this afternoon. My very first Potter (book OR movie). I was left with a big *shrug* and general for all the series hype. The special effects were cool, but I felt no affinity with any of the characters (Luna? was my favorite, if I had to choose.)

I love Luna lots. She's one of my favorites and I think her dress was perfect.

My daughter and I have read every book and gone to every midnight book sale/movie opening together whenever we could, since she started reading the first book.

We sit down once a year and watch all the movies again.

I think for me it was the most fun to talk to her about the books as she was growing up and see how our perspectives on all of it were so very different. Or pointing out all the word play and foreshadowing.

The word play of the books was fun. Watching my daughter LOVE reading and loan her books out to kids whose parents wouldn't let them read the books or see the movies was fun-ner.

So I have lots of context, book and movie and reinforced by my daughter's devotion. She's moving away soon so this is our last Harry Potter Hurrah.

As kids books go...coulda done a lot worse.

I had Star Trek, she had Harry Potter. If you don't get it, that's cool, the contact high from being around someone who loves it as much as she does, to whom I get to hand tissues and swap trivia, is the payoff for me.

 

[sadangel]

I wouldn't mind seeing this when it comes to DVD. I won't pay the price the movie theaters want that's for sure.

 

[3113]

I wouldn't mind seeing this when it comes to DVD. I won't pay the price the movie theaters want that's for sure.

What? There's no half-price for early/first showings anywhere near you?

 

[sadangel]

What? There's no half-price for early/first showings anywhere near you?

I don't know. I've never gone to the movies in the town I moved to. *must check listings*

 

[Handley_Page]

To those for whom this is a first, I recommend you read all the books.
It will make more sense then.

 

[TheeGoatPig]

I only watch the movies when they come on HBO, so I am always a year behind on them.

I will say, I think they get better with each movie. While I don't enjoy the first half of Order of the Phoenix, that isn't because it is a bad movie. That is more because it is an exercise in character frustration. everyone tries so hard, but fails at their goals for the first 3/4 of the movie. Once they enter the Ministry of Mysteries though, I love the whole ending. The wizard battles at the end are exactly as they should be. They were all that I was expecting and more. Love them so much.

I do have to admit though. The more Potter movies I watch, the closer I get to seeing one of them in a theater.

 

[jomar]

I've read the books - very formulaic, but fun. I like the movies - quality stuff.

I find it a really fascinating thing. My 21 year-old daughter grew up on HP. It is part of the fabric of her teens and young adulthood. We all mark time with books, movies and music and the Rolling Stones are still alive, I think, but this particular phenomena has lasted 12 years and is quite unique. And we still have one more movie to see; hopefully before the actors are in their 40s!

Rowling hit a grand slam. Great story there, too.

 

[3113]

And we still have one more movie to see; hopefully before the actors are in their 40s!

Two, actually. They're splitting the last. I, personally, think they may be dragging it out too long. I know they want to hold onto that franchise with their fingernails (though, apparently, they've been losing like 15% of the DVD buyers with each movie and that means less to pay for the actual movies which have also been losing audiences), but this is not 007 where you can just swap out the main character and keep going.

As for Rowling hitting a grand slam...I don't quite see it that way. What I see is someone who hit the Zeitgeist just right. I'm not saying they're bad books, but I am saying that there have been stories of kid wizards before, some really excellent ones. This one was the right thing at the right time.

 

[Recidiva]

Two, actually. They're splitting the last. I, personally, think they may be dragging it out too long. I know they want to hold onto that franchise with their fingernails (though, apparently, they've been losing like 15% of the DVD buyers with each movie and that means less to pay for the actual movies which have also been losing audiences), but this is not 007 where you can just swap out the main character and keep going.

As for Rowling hitting a grand slam...I don't quite see it that way. What I see is someone who hit the Zeitgeist just right. I'm not saying they're bad books, but I am saying that there have been stories of kid wizards before, some really excellent ones. This one was the right thing at the right time.

It is VERY formulaic. The mechanism that bothers me the most is that the characters never appear to learn and they face the same problems every book.

Harry always has a miserable summer wondering if his friends hate him.

Nobody is capable of expressing clear, honest emotion, it's all coiled up into magical misfires.

Any trust that was forged in the last quarter of the previous book is lost by the beginning of the next.

But Dobby always makes me laugh, and now Dobby always makes me cry. That's something.

 

[3113]

It is VERY formulaic. The mechanism that bothers me the most is that the characters never appear to learn and they face the same problems every book.

Very true. Harry's magic, especially, seems to be limited to firing his wand like a laser gun. After five years of lessons you'd think he might be able to do a little more. Ditto with Hermione who's supposed to be so brilliant and Ron.

 

[TheeGoatPig]

And we still have one more movie to see; hopefully before the actors are in their 40s!

Well, the good thing about what Rowling did was age the characters as she wrote. Harry was a late teen, early 20s by the end of the last book? the main part of it, not the epilogue where she says what happens to everyone in the future. So the characters get older as the actors do, which works out just great for audiences.

 

[rgraham666]

When it comes to wizards I prefer Harry Dresden.

 

[3113]

Well, the good thing about what Rowling did was age the characters as she wrote. Harry was a late teen, early 20s by the end of the last book?

Actually, it was a year per book. The mistake the movies made was to go along with that and pick actors that were 11 years old, Harry's age in book 1 rather than 10 years old so the kids would remain youngish looking even if the movie-making fell behind a year--which it did.

Last book has Harry at age 17. The movies were lucky to have gotten kids with faces that haven't matured too much and still look school age, but they're just barely pulling it off (IMHO).

 

[DG Hear]

I wouldn't mind seeing this when it comes to DVD. I won't pay the price the movie theaters want that's for sure.

In our town they have a matinee for $2.00 for everyone. My wife took my 13 yr old grandaughter to see it today. Granddaughter loved it, wife didn't think much of it. Must be an age difference of opinion. LOL

 

[amicus]

I'd like to add by the way, that I can't believe they've still got two movies to go! They'd better get a move on.

And yes, I know why most of you guys (and thesbians) will be going to this movie. You'll be happy to know that Emma Watson wears a lovely dress that shows off just how much she's matured. Given how much cleavage she displayed in this movie, my husband said that he's expecting full frontal by the last movie

~~~

Fear not, Emma suffered a 'wardrobe malfunction' during the London opening when the wind gusted...

ami (who else?) (Go ahead, bitch, see if I care)

 

[Trudy_Antone]

I'm sorry but I left the theatre feeling disappointed. I know the movies can never contain the details of the books but to me the director missed the most important emotional scenes. When Harry caught Draco in the bathroom there was barely 2 seconds of angst before the fighting started. That is meant to be one of the most powerful moments - Harry's shock at finding Draco crying, and Draco isn't just crying he is devastated, emotionally spent, terrified of the task he's been given, conflicted because deep down he admires Dumbledore. The fight begins because he's so angry at Potter for catching him in his moment of weakness. After using such a terrible curse why was there no retribution for Harry in the movie?

Another part that was glossed over was Dumbledore's complete and utter breakdown when he is forced to drink the liquid in the cavern. He cries for his sister (nicely setting up the next book/film) and it was missing from the movie! Instead they went for a Lord of the Rings/I Am Legend type battle.

At the end Dumbledore puts a spell on Harry, immobilising him so that Harry can not help him when the Death Eater's arrive. This IMHO was the worst directorial decision. Are we expected to believe that the Harry Potter we know, the boy who rushes in without thought to save others, tamely hid and watched Dumbledore die? There is no way the character we've come to know and love would've done nothing - hence why Dumbledore had to put a spell on him.

Finally, what was with the add on in the middle - Bellatrix arriving to lure Harry out and the Weasley's house burning down. It was as if Hollywood decided the movie was getting boring and needed a (completely unnecessary) special effects boost.

Did the film manage to convey the importance of the Potions Book, the Half-Blood Prince, the Sectumsempra spell, the search to find out who the Half-Blood Prince was? I think not. I would think that anyone not familiar with the books would be left a little confused.

As I said, disappointed.

 

[3113]

I'm sorry but I left the theatre feeling disappointed. I know the movies can never contain the details of the books but to me the director missed the most important emotional scenes. When Harry caught Draco in the bathroom there was barely 2 seconds of angst before the fighting started....After using such a terrible curse why was there no retribution for Harry in the movie?

Agreed. And I think, as we said that we WERE disappointed in what happened with Draco. That they clearly dropped the ball on that score.

Another part that was glossed over was Dumbledore's complete and utter breakdown when he is forced to drink the liquid

That might have worked well in the book, but frankly, I'd have been annoyed if they'd dragged out that scene. I hate it when I feel like the writer (or movie maker) is being sadistic to a character for the sake of being sadistic. Really, what would be the point outside of glorying in sadism? They did that in the last movie (and yes, it's in the book) with torturous pens and I got pissed enough to want to throw things at the screen. That or yell "Use your safe word!"

If I want to relish in BDSM I'll write my own or go see The Passion of Christ.

At the end Dumbledore puts a spell on Harry, immobilising him so that Harry can not help him when the Death Eater's arrive. This IMHO was the worst directorial decision. Are we expected to believe that the Harry Potter we know, the boy who rushes in without thought to save others, tamely hid and watched Dumbledore die?

Granted. Though the movie did make a point of that argument about trusting Dumbledore's faith in Snape. So Snape shows up, aims a wand at Harry, making him pause, then goes up, and both Harry and the audience might well think that Snape is going to come the rescue on the good-guys side. Then, before Harry can do anything, Snape has fired.

It's an excuse, yes, but not an entirely invalid one. Just a weak one.

Did the film manage to convey the importance of the Potions Book, the Half-Blood Prince, the Sectumsempra spell, the search to find out who the Half-Blood Prince was? I think not.

I would agree. And I'd agree that yes, it left viewers a bit confused. But hey, they evidently hadn't the money or time to invest in two movies, or extend this one to be even longer with more details. Again, I'll grant that I they probably could have trimmed the romantic problems down and gone more for that other stuff. But it's a Harry Potter movie. To me, it is what it is. I don't expect it to rise to any great heights in story, acting, character development or cinematic excellence, only to give me a satisfying couple of hours.

 

[jomar]

Two, actually. They're splitting the last. I, personally, think they may be dragging it out too long. ...

Huh. I wasn't aware they were doing that. They'd better step it up.

As for Rowling hitting a grand slam...I don't quite see it that way. What I see is someone who hit the Zeitgeist just right. I'm not saying they're bad books, but I am saying that there have been stories of kid wizards before, some really excellent ones. This one was the right thing at the right time.

What is a grand slam but hitting the ball out of the park at the just the right time? I agree she wrote the right books at the right time, but I say a billion dollar franchise from seven books and multiple movies, and getting a generation of kids excited about reading is a grand slam.