Liked it
Harry Potter and The Half-Blood Prince
Does the new Potter flick live up to the hype? Can the sixth installment reawaken my interest in the family-friendly fantasy franchise?
Let’s get one thing straight right from the start: I am not a Harry Potter fan. Nor am I particularly a “Harry-hater”. When I was still in primary school, I thought the first couple of books were quite fun, even if they were simply a more masculine version of “the Worst Witch”. The idea of a book being published a year was part of the appeal; Harry, a seemingly ordinary lad at the time a few years my senior, would go through his years at Hogwarts and we, as readers, would age with him. But as the series became more popular and the increasingly wealthy Ms Rowling started spending longer and longer on producing her child-friend doorstops, I overtook Harry and his wiz-kid wizard pals. With the protagonists now considerably younger than me, and with Rowling’s work staying consistently formulaic and frankly mediocre, I lost interest. My interest waned all the more with the production of the film series. Sure it’s fun watching a parade of British character actors camping their way around Arundel castle in cloaks, sure John Williams’ over-the-top score was rather rousing, and yes, the child-actors weren’t exactly bad, but they were hardly to match the visual and emotional treats of contemporary fantasy epics along the lines of Lord of the Rings.
Image via Wikipedia.I’m sure he hates posing with that wand by now.
Still, on a rainy August afternoon, a few hours of family fantasy is still more distracting than watching the ice in my slush puppy melt, so maybe what I’m trying to work towards here is a sort of recommendation. It’s not a great film, by any means, any reviewer claiming otherwise clearly wasn’t paying attention, or perhaps they saw a different film to me! It largely keeps to the formula of the previous entries; there’s some pre-Hogwarts scenes involving failed attempts at romance and equally failed attempts at suspense, there are the scenes in Hogwarts that play out like a mix of Brideshead Revisited and Tom Brown’s School Days, there’s some rather predictable semi-horror nonsense; all topped off with a rather disappointing ending, clearly leading up to the next (and final) instalment. Of course our troupe of character actors do their best to breathe life into their caricatures: Alan Rickman hisses around in a gown far too long for him, Maggie Smith digs her Miss Jean Brodie accent out of the closet, Robbie Coltrane mooches around in the background, and Jim Broadbent has a lovely time pretending to be an Oxford don without the Oxford, not to mention everyone else from Julie Walters being more mumsy than a mother hen, to Helena Boham Carter hamming up the Cockney Goth vibe. But, ah, they’re fun to watch aren’t they? The kids are improving too: Daniel Radcliffe has very little to do with only a few variations on “reluctant hero” (generally along the lines of “total berk” or “awkward kid” but this is the fault of the script), but at least poor Tom Felton finally has a chance to give Draco Malfoy a facial expression that doesn’t involve that carefully practiced sneer (at least he’ll be ready for a lovely career being typecast as yet another bleach-blond villain), and Rupert Grint continues to shine despite being little more than comic-relief. Most of them look a little too old by now (Felton is the same age as me, and I’m just out of university…although this makes me feel considerably less guilty for finding him quite attractive) but at least the Phelps twins, playing the Weasley twins, don’t have to pretend to be schoolchildren anymore (both now 22).
Image via Wikipedia He can do more facial expressions, but can he wear any colour but black?
If it seems that I am dwelling on the cast, there’s a reason for that, as the actors are really what holds these films together. The script isn’t bad, the endearingly awkward romances and everyday scenes are really quite entertaining, but the more magical sequences can be lacklustre, though to be fair a little compensation is probably needed for the unfortunate writer having to make room for so much cod-Latin and pseudo Dickensian surnames. The direction is watchable, if you like your camerawork to go for the most obvious shots available; POV shots in a chase sequence, sweeping shots of CGI settings, my how novel! The special effects have improved considerably; in the first few films we had to endure monsters that seemed to be lit by an entirely different source, at least now the CGI beasties at least scratch on the accuracy of physical effects. Nicholas Hooper’s score is nowhere near as intrusive as Williams’ work on the first three films either, no longer hogging the audience’s attention, but is sometimes a tad too dull.
Then there’s the plot. I’ve never been a fan of Rowling’s writing style, but at least her doorstops had good, exciting overall plots. Or so I though. Unfortunately this film is riddled with not only the predictable and formulaic plot “twists” of its predecessors (there was something in the water? Gosh I’d never have guessed) but its also plagued with plot holes. Why, for instance, does Dumbledore have Harry investigate the new teacher then, when a revelation is reached, announce that he knew this all along and was trying to sort it out already? And why, for that matter, does he look so shocked when said revelation is discovered? In the film’s favour it does at least have more courage than previous films, finally letting characters get into actual danger, finally killing off someone whose name I remembered, instead of just hinting at darkness then blowing it all on Ralph Fiennes wandering around with no nose, possibly the least threatening villain in cinema. The darkness is a plus but is badly conceived; scary sequences are pedestrian, darker plot twists are shakily realised. I would love to see the dark heart of the franchise revealed, but once again there doesn’t seem to be one.
In short, it’s not a bad film as such. Bits are slow but it doesn’t feel overlong and retains attention even in more irritating moments. Overall, it’s an enjoyable bit of lightweight fluff but a flawed one, painfully flawed. If you like the series you’ll probably overlook these problems, if you don’t this film will not convert you. If like me you neither like nor dislike the franchise anymore, this will leave you with an overwhelming sense of “meh” but one distracting enough that you won’t notice it until you walk out of the cinema.
13 Comments
Good writeup, I saw it recently and was fairly impressed but I totally agree with you on the “meh” feeling upon leaving the cinema
I thought the movie was disappointing.
I think it was SO disappointing too. It was all just a big antiqlimax =/
Great article anyway.
Best regards,
- Anders
I haven’t seen the movie yet, but my daughter has. She seemed to like it, but didn’t have a whole lot to say about it.
Well. It is good.
It was too short. The book had way more content that needed a showing in the movie. And the ending sucked.
Interesting to get to know what HP contemporaries think about this phenomenon. Very good piece, good analysis!!
)
Thanks for sharing your opinion – I’ll try not to have very high expectations when I go to see the film coming weekend!
While I agree with most of the points you raised I will say this: This film is a relief compared to what they have done to some of the others, especially the third one which was complete butchery! One huge issue I have with most of the films though is the mysterious case of Harry Potter and the missing scar.
While this isn’t the best movie, the francise is great. The books are great fun, and you need to get an attitude adjustment! You must be a hugh wet blanket! (And how dare you criticize John Williams, who writes GREAT scores!!!!!)
Haha (: Great article.
Reading through your post, I had a lot of random feelings. Why choose someone like you to review it, for instance? If you don’t even really LIKE the story, how can you review the movie well?
The reason I say that is that apparently you have no idea what’s missing from the movie. My biggest complaint about the movie is that they skip so much of the book, the plot line is confusing. As to why Dumbledore had Harry speak with Slughorn, it was to get Harry into Slughorn’s confidence. Harry’s presence convinced Slughorn to come to Hogwarts. Dumbledore needed the full memory, and the man wasn’t going to give it up outright. The movie does not cover that point well at all.
While I like the visuals the movies bring, I have disappointed in every one since the 3rd. I enjoy bits of the movies, but they do not show anyone’s character well enough. Am I looking forward to parts 7 and 8? Yes; I’m a Potterhead. Can’t help it. But when I have to explain a lot of a movie to my husband because he hasn’t read the books, the screen writer and director are not doing their jobs. If I were Rowling, I would never have approved of this script.
So, do I agree that the movies are not all that? Yes. Do I think Jo’s stories are crud? No. I love her writing, her plot lines, her twists, her ability to wrap so many people up in each other and make so many characters mature in believable ways. I DO find it interesting that you seem ticked she’s gotten rich off her books, and you therefore seemed to have had to wait to read the rest until you were beyond Harry’s age. That’s a bunch of blarney!
It’s quite alright that you don’t like the story, but honestly, why have a Potter Meher review a movie they could never like anyway? Next!
There are some decidedly silly comments appearing here.
Cheryl, the use of the phrase “huge wet blanket” is rather ironic considering you are referring to a 21 year old, tattooed fan of shocking cinema. As for John Williams, he writes good themes but I find his work overpowering for cinema.
JenniMikki, I don’t think you quite understand the point of a review. A reviewer gives an honest account of their reaction to a film whether they liked it or not. Besides that, I never said I disliked it, I simply said it was flawed. The plot point you’re talking about was not the part I was referring to (and the plot is rather basic, not, as you claim, confusing, beleive me). I was instead referring to the business with the memories and the splitting of souls.
Please remember when you’re commenting that this is a REVIEW and thus a statement of opinion. My opinion is no less valid than yours simply because there are a lot of Potter fans out there. If you can’t cope with my pointing out flaws in your pet favourite franchise, please don’t comment. I have different tastes to you, it doesn’t make me wrong.
Rowling does have a rather simplistic writing style. And while I’ll support the fact that she came up with an endearing story, I’m also quick to point out that she followed every stereotype and motif of the fantasy genre. In short, she wasn’t as original as people believe.
My main issue with the 6th movie is the ending. It was completely changed. Where was the battle? And the funeral? They basically changed the story with that ending.
And as someone already said, The Case Of Missing Scar. Did no else notice Harry didn’t have his scar until Dumbledore did magic at Slughorn’s house? The scar is vital to the story people, let’s not forget that.