Privet from the Crazy Russian! This is a bit belated, but in honor of the film’s IMAX 3D release (and the fact that I wrote this way before we launched the blog), I figured it was the perfect excuse to post it (and, really, Ace and Luke owe me a lengthy Potter post…one of many more to come!). So, bear with me, people, for a long (looong) look at the excellent new Harry Potter flick.
Review: “Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince”
My Rating: 3 1/2 bites [out of 5]
It’s too easy to give me a “Harry Potter” movie. Over the years, I tried to downplay my crazy love of J.K. Rowling’s boy wizard hero, but, in the end, I simply can’t (it’s just not worth it—the Potter obsession is just too big a part of me!). Harry Potter was and always will be the very reason I love to read—it was these books that first sparked my imagination, and every book and film release since the summer where I first discovered it was a major event for me. On the page, the series is pure, simple magic—one of the best recent examples of intelligent, imaginative storytelling. And, so far, the screen versions have all captured Rowling’s vision, managing to become (flaws and all) strong, stand-alone entities in their own right.
With that, as you probably guessed, I loved “The Half-Blood Prince,” although with some reservations. Series-wise, for me, this is near the top of the heap, underneath the brilliant “Prisoner of Azkaban,” and slightly edged out by “Order of the Phoenix.”
But, first, the positive stuff. I’m going to avoid major spoilers for non-Potterheads and newbies (but, come on, it’s high time you jumped on that bandwagon—you’re only denying yourself something awesome!), so work with me for the broad strokes. The sixth novel may just be my favorite, but it’s probably also the trickiest to adapt. Harry Potter matures greatly (as he should, for a boy like Harry experienced far too much pain and tragedy to live the normal life he dreams of) and starts to slowly understand there’s a greater destiny in store for him—that inevitable confrontation with the Dark Lord, Voldermort. Professor Dumbledore, perenially wise and always planning something, makes it his personal mission to set Harry on this path—but, of course, he knows far more than he lets on.
The book walks us through lengthy sessions of Harry and Dumbledore sifting through different memories of Voldermort, trying desperately to find a weakness within the Dark Lord. And there’s the catch: a good chunk of the “Half-Blood Prince” novel is dedicated to flashbacks (via people’s memories, made interactive through the magic of Dumbledore’s special Pensieve) and, to put it simply, not much actually happens, Voldermort-rising/fighting-forces-of-evil-wise. In fact, extended sequences in the novel just had Dumbledore and Harry sitting and talking about Voldermort’s history—riveting stuff on the page, but could you imagine that on screen? For me, though, that’s what made the novel so wonderful: Rowling raised her game as a storyteller, presenting a mature portrait of evil and its motivations (for, really, Voldermort was the character with the most development) and a much stronger focus on the burgeoning and awfully funny and endearing relationships, particularly between Harry’s closest friends, Ron and Hermione.
So how does the film fare? Well, ace “Potter” screenwriter Steve Kloves (every movie but the 5th one) proves up to the challenge (as always): as a time concession no doubt, most of the flashbacks were tossed out, but the engaging teen romance, with all its high emotions and stolen stares and awkward feelings is put straight to the forefront. Harry’s best friend, Ron, says at one point, right before fainting: “these girls…they’re going to kill me, Harry.” It’s a great indicator of the film: this is by far the funniest “Potter” yet. Sure, the film never forgets that these are dark, “mad times”—Voldermort’s armies are spreading, their havoc and murder toll steadily rising (they even attack Ron’s house, the Burrow, in an added scene for the movie), but Rowling was smart to keep those details as more of a looming presence (until the book’s climax, that is), and, like life inevitably gives way to, everyday things like secret crushes, friends, and, well, “snogging” (that’d be making out for all us non-Brits) take up all of our attention. Fortunately, following the book’s lead, the film deals with these teen emotions and raging hormones honestly, and, in many ways, quite poignantly. There’s one particular scene with Harry and Hermione—a quiet, intimate scene where they talk on the staircase—it’s a bit expanded from the book, and it’s just lovely—you’ll see what I mean in the final film. Returning director David Yates isn’t afraid to push these kids (or, really now, young adults), and, in turn, all three leads—Daniel Radcliffe (Harry Potter), Rupert Grint (the ginger-haired, wisecrack-prone Ron Weasley), and Emma Watson (the bright and Muggle-born Hermione Granger)—prove once again that their acting is on the same plane as their great adult co-stars.
On the Hogwarts front, Jim Broadbent joins the already stellar cast as Professor Slughorn, a jolly, loveable man (but somewhat conceited and obsessed with the wealthy and powerful), who nonetheless holds a dark secret that could reveal crucial information for Harry and Dumbledore. Slughorn was a lively, memorable character on the page, and Broadbent, always delightful, brings him to life like I imagined, although with a much greater (and sadder) humanity. This is a guy you think you know right away, what with that cheerful laugh, and Broadbent’s endearingly large eyes, but the film carefully picks apart those layers, bringing out something borderline tragic. It’s another very positive feature of the series—the “Potter” movies aren’t afraid to slow down, to dig deeper, show some genuine emotion—in the summer of the mindless action/giant robot-assault of “Transformers,” it’s really quite refreshing…and very much appreciated.
As said before, though, I think this one falls just short of the series’ high marks of “Prisoner of Azkaban” and “Order of the Phoenix.”
Look no further than the title, and you’ll find my biggest problem. In the story, Harry finds a mysterious old Potions book, signed and belonging to someone called “The Half-Blood Prince.” I get that important chunks of the novel had to be cut out (by all means I support it—it goes with the adaptation territory), but that entire thread is just not given the weight it deserves, particularly since it leads to a terrific, dramatic revelation of the Prince’s identity; here, it ends up seeming more perfunctory than the mad, fiery passion witnessed form the book. (You honestly get the sense that if the filmmakers weren’t stuck with “Half-Blood Prince” in the title, they would’ve gladly got rid of it). Trust is major theme in this movie—throughout the course of this story, Harry begins to realize what’s in store for him, and who he places his trust in is vital in the events to come. We know he has Ron and Hermione, but there’s a seeming betrayal near the end, which, while well-staged, is just not as emphasized as it should have been; a greater focus on the Half-Blood Prince would’ve given the movie a stronger thematic backbone, and transition very well to what’s in store for “Deathly Hallows”. Considering how zippy the 2 ½ hour run time is, an extra twenty minutes or so would’ve been just the trick for the sake of clarity and drama.
And, of course, much like the book, the movie still feels like an elaborate set-up for the final chapter. This wasn’t so much a problem with the book, but rather a downside, particularly since all of us insane readers knew we had to wait at least a year longer to find out what happens. While this movie can mostly stand on its own, deprived of many of the book’s added details, it can’t escape the feeling of treading water. Even the ending isn’t really a stopping point—it’s just a quiet cliffhanger before the final movie, which, judging by what this film left unsaid, will have a lot of concepts to fully explain to the audience.
And, on that note, here's a quick confession: I actually wrote a much more positive review of “Half-Blood Prince” initially. But, after a few more viewings, and some time to settle, I finally figured out why this film didn’t blow me away like the 3rd and 5th ones of the series did. “Prisoner of Azkaban” and “Order of the Phoenix” were confident, streamlined entries that had to sacrifice important details from the novel for the sake of a clear narrative on film. Both of them put Harry’s emotional journey—his maturation and growing confidence as a wizard—straight to the forefront, and it worked amazingly (for me, at least). Here, the filmmakers try this to the extent that they can, but to prepare audiences for “Deathly Hollows” next year, this film has a great deal of set-up it needed to accomplish. Which, inevitably, leads to a sort of awkward give-and-take between the great relationship and character elements it wants to squeeze in, and the vast amount of exposition for the final two films—we thus got good bits of both, but, in the end, neither the character arcs nor the necessary backstory were really given the exposure they deserved. As such, things like the poor, very ignored Half-Blood Prince got shortchanged, as does Harry’s slow embrace of his great destiny, and the Harry-Ginny flirtation and brief relationship (although, to be fair, I really liked the changes to that last area). The final product still works very well—it’s, as always, entertaining, engaging, and very well-made, but I think a stronger balance of all these story elements would have been possible, and, for me, would have raised this film even higher in the Potter series ranking.
My gripes aside, this is still a very good film. One of the great things about the entire franchise is that there’s never really a bad movie. True, the omissions from the novel are sometimes very disappointing, but the stories (and all that credit really goes to J.K. Rowling) are always solid, and the filmmakers always find some choice beautiful, emotional or, hell, just plain exciting moments to walk away with (case in point: Harry’s flight on the Hippogriff in the 3rd film, Dumbledore’s duel with Voldermort in the 5th, and, as weird as it sounds, that scene on the staircase with Hermione and Harry, as well as a tribute to a character’s death, in this film).
All of the returning vets, like Maggie Smith, Robbie Coltrane, Helena Bonham Carter, and MVPs this time around, Michael Gambon (as Dumbledore) and the amazing Alan Rickman (as Professor Snape, relishing each and every one of his twisted, delectable line readings) still find the right balance of pathos and humor to bring to their roles. And, as I mentioned earlier, all three leads are wonderful—selling us on their friendship, but with Grint and Watson getting more to do than in the last movie, “Order of the Phoenix”—Grint has some great comedy bits and very believably portrays romantic cluelessness, while Watson gets some touching moments, nicely conveying Hermione’s heartbreak. Finally, a special shout-out to Tom Felton, who, without giving too much away, finally gets to show more shades of Draco Malfoy than the pompous, sneering bully, and he proves himself a very capable actor (not to mention a far more interesting character).
I was very impressed with Yates’ work on “Order of the Phoenix”—it was a more self-assured and overall stronger entry than Mike Newell’s “Goblet of Fire”, and Yates displayed a real grasp of the character of Harry and a comfort with Rowling’s world. Here, he continues to show that he’s a good fit for the franchise; the actors respond well to him, and visually, it’s likely the most gorgeous film since “Prisoner of Azkaban.” We’re in for very good things as Yates takes on the two “Deathly Hallows” films.
There’s really much to like in the new “Harry Potter,” as my unnecessarily rambly and wordy review hopefully pointed out. Obvious confession: this franchise means a lot to me, and, on the viewer’s part alone, despite all minor problems, it’s so rewarding to see Warner Bros. take such good care of it. Very few studios have maintained this level of quality over six consecutive films (let alone gone this far for a large, interconnected story), and I’m positive that in 2011, when all is said and done and oodles more box-office records are broken, this is a series (just like the books) that will remain and continue to be important for many years to come.
Image courtesy of Warner Bros. Pictures.
Review: “Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince”
My Rating: 3 1/2 bites [out of 5]
It’s too easy to give me a “Harry Potter” movie. Over the years, I tried to downplay my crazy love of J.K. Rowling’s boy wizard hero, but, in the end, I simply can’t (it’s just not worth it—the Potter obsession is just too big a part of me!). Harry Potter was and always will be the very reason I love to read—it was these books that first sparked my imagination, and every book and film release since the summer where I first discovered it was a major event for me. On the page, the series is pure, simple magic—one of the best recent examples of intelligent, imaginative storytelling. And, so far, the screen versions have all captured Rowling’s vision, managing to become (flaws and all) strong, stand-alone entities in their own right.
With that, as you probably guessed, I loved “The Half-Blood Prince,” although with some reservations. Series-wise, for me, this is near the top of the heap, underneath the brilliant “Prisoner of Azkaban,” and slightly edged out by “Order of the Phoenix.”
But, first, the positive stuff. I’m going to avoid major spoilers for non-Potterheads and newbies (but, come on, it’s high time you jumped on that bandwagon—you’re only denying yourself something awesome!), so work with me for the broad strokes. The sixth novel may just be my favorite, but it’s probably also the trickiest to adapt. Harry Potter matures greatly (as he should, for a boy like Harry experienced far too much pain and tragedy to live the normal life he dreams of) and starts to slowly understand there’s a greater destiny in store for him—that inevitable confrontation with the Dark Lord, Voldermort. Professor Dumbledore, perenially wise and always planning something, makes it his personal mission to set Harry on this path—but, of course, he knows far more than he lets on.
The book walks us through lengthy sessions of Harry and Dumbledore sifting through different memories of Voldermort, trying desperately to find a weakness within the Dark Lord. And there’s the catch: a good chunk of the “Half-Blood Prince” novel is dedicated to flashbacks (via people’s memories, made interactive through the magic of Dumbledore’s special Pensieve) and, to put it simply, not much actually happens, Voldermort-rising/fighting-forces-of-evil-wise. In fact, extended sequences in the novel just had Dumbledore and Harry sitting and talking about Voldermort’s history—riveting stuff on the page, but could you imagine that on screen? For me, though, that’s what made the novel so wonderful: Rowling raised her game as a storyteller, presenting a mature portrait of evil and its motivations (for, really, Voldermort was the character with the most development) and a much stronger focus on the burgeoning and awfully funny and endearing relationships, particularly between Harry’s closest friends, Ron and Hermione.
So how does the film fare? Well, ace “Potter” screenwriter Steve Kloves (every movie but the 5th one) proves up to the challenge (as always): as a time concession no doubt, most of the flashbacks were tossed out, but the engaging teen romance, with all its high emotions and stolen stares and awkward feelings is put straight to the forefront. Harry’s best friend, Ron, says at one point, right before fainting: “these girls…they’re going to kill me, Harry.” It’s a great indicator of the film: this is by far the funniest “Potter” yet. Sure, the film never forgets that these are dark, “mad times”—Voldermort’s armies are spreading, their havoc and murder toll steadily rising (they even attack Ron’s house, the Burrow, in an added scene for the movie), but Rowling was smart to keep those details as more of a looming presence (until the book’s climax, that is), and, like life inevitably gives way to, everyday things like secret crushes, friends, and, well, “snogging” (that’d be making out for all us non-Brits) take up all of our attention. Fortunately, following the book’s lead, the film deals with these teen emotions and raging hormones honestly, and, in many ways, quite poignantly. There’s one particular scene with Harry and Hermione—a quiet, intimate scene where they talk on the staircase—it’s a bit expanded from the book, and it’s just lovely—you’ll see what I mean in the final film. Returning director David Yates isn’t afraid to push these kids (or, really now, young adults), and, in turn, all three leads—Daniel Radcliffe (Harry Potter), Rupert Grint (the ginger-haired, wisecrack-prone Ron Weasley), and Emma Watson (the bright and Muggle-born Hermione Granger)—prove once again that their acting is on the same plane as their great adult co-stars.
On the Hogwarts front, Jim Broadbent joins the already stellar cast as Professor Slughorn, a jolly, loveable man (but somewhat conceited and obsessed with the wealthy and powerful), who nonetheless holds a dark secret that could reveal crucial information for Harry and Dumbledore. Slughorn was a lively, memorable character on the page, and Broadbent, always delightful, brings him to life like I imagined, although with a much greater (and sadder) humanity. This is a guy you think you know right away, what with that cheerful laugh, and Broadbent’s endearingly large eyes, but the film carefully picks apart those layers, bringing out something borderline tragic. It’s another very positive feature of the series—the “Potter” movies aren’t afraid to slow down, to dig deeper, show some genuine emotion—in the summer of the mindless action/giant robot-assault of “Transformers,” it’s really quite refreshing…and very much appreciated.
As said before, though, I think this one falls just short of the series’ high marks of “Prisoner of Azkaban” and “Order of the Phoenix.”
Look no further than the title, and you’ll find my biggest problem. In the story, Harry finds a mysterious old Potions book, signed and belonging to someone called “The Half-Blood Prince.” I get that important chunks of the novel had to be cut out (by all means I support it—it goes with the adaptation territory), but that entire thread is just not given the weight it deserves, particularly since it leads to a terrific, dramatic revelation of the Prince’s identity; here, it ends up seeming more perfunctory than the mad, fiery passion witnessed form the book. (You honestly get the sense that if the filmmakers weren’t stuck with “Half-Blood Prince” in the title, they would’ve gladly got rid of it). Trust is major theme in this movie—throughout the course of this story, Harry begins to realize what’s in store for him, and who he places his trust in is vital in the events to come. We know he has Ron and Hermione, but there’s a seeming betrayal near the end, which, while well-staged, is just not as emphasized as it should have been; a greater focus on the Half-Blood Prince would’ve given the movie a stronger thematic backbone, and transition very well to what’s in store for “Deathly Hallows”. Considering how zippy the 2 ½ hour run time is, an extra twenty minutes or so would’ve been just the trick for the sake of clarity and drama.
And, of course, much like the book, the movie still feels like an elaborate set-up for the final chapter. This wasn’t so much a problem with the book, but rather a downside, particularly since all of us insane readers knew we had to wait at least a year longer to find out what happens. While this movie can mostly stand on its own, deprived of many of the book’s added details, it can’t escape the feeling of treading water. Even the ending isn’t really a stopping point—it’s just a quiet cliffhanger before the final movie, which, judging by what this film left unsaid, will have a lot of concepts to fully explain to the audience.
And, on that note, here's a quick confession: I actually wrote a much more positive review of “Half-Blood Prince” initially. But, after a few more viewings, and some time to settle, I finally figured out why this film didn’t blow me away like the 3rd and 5th ones of the series did. “Prisoner of Azkaban” and “Order of the Phoenix” were confident, streamlined entries that had to sacrifice important details from the novel for the sake of a clear narrative on film. Both of them put Harry’s emotional journey—his maturation and growing confidence as a wizard—straight to the forefront, and it worked amazingly (for me, at least). Here, the filmmakers try this to the extent that they can, but to prepare audiences for “Deathly Hollows” next year, this film has a great deal of set-up it needed to accomplish. Which, inevitably, leads to a sort of awkward give-and-take between the great relationship and character elements it wants to squeeze in, and the vast amount of exposition for the final two films—we thus got good bits of both, but, in the end, neither the character arcs nor the necessary backstory were really given the exposure they deserved. As such, things like the poor, very ignored Half-Blood Prince got shortchanged, as does Harry’s slow embrace of his great destiny, and the Harry-Ginny flirtation and brief relationship (although, to be fair, I really liked the changes to that last area). The final product still works very well—it’s, as always, entertaining, engaging, and very well-made, but I think a stronger balance of all these story elements would have been possible, and, for me, would have raised this film even higher in the Potter series ranking.
My gripes aside, this is still a very good film. One of the great things about the entire franchise is that there’s never really a bad movie. True, the omissions from the novel are sometimes very disappointing, but the stories (and all that credit really goes to J.K. Rowling) are always solid, and the filmmakers always find some choice beautiful, emotional or, hell, just plain exciting moments to walk away with (case in point: Harry’s flight on the Hippogriff in the 3rd film, Dumbledore’s duel with Voldermort in the 5th, and, as weird as it sounds, that scene on the staircase with Hermione and Harry, as well as a tribute to a character’s death, in this film).
All of the returning vets, like Maggie Smith, Robbie Coltrane, Helena Bonham Carter, and MVPs this time around, Michael Gambon (as Dumbledore) and the amazing Alan Rickman (as Professor Snape, relishing each and every one of his twisted, delectable line readings) still find the right balance of pathos and humor to bring to their roles. And, as I mentioned earlier, all three leads are wonderful—selling us on their friendship, but with Grint and Watson getting more to do than in the last movie, “Order of the Phoenix”—Grint has some great comedy bits and very believably portrays romantic cluelessness, while Watson gets some touching moments, nicely conveying Hermione’s heartbreak. Finally, a special shout-out to Tom Felton, who, without giving too much away, finally gets to show more shades of Draco Malfoy than the pompous, sneering bully, and he proves himself a very capable actor (not to mention a far more interesting character).
I was very impressed with Yates’ work on “Order of the Phoenix”—it was a more self-assured and overall stronger entry than Mike Newell’s “Goblet of Fire”, and Yates displayed a real grasp of the character of Harry and a comfort with Rowling’s world. Here, he continues to show that he’s a good fit for the franchise; the actors respond well to him, and visually, it’s likely the most gorgeous film since “Prisoner of Azkaban.” We’re in for very good things as Yates takes on the two “Deathly Hallows” films.
There’s really much to like in the new “Harry Potter,” as my unnecessarily rambly and wordy review hopefully pointed out. Obvious confession: this franchise means a lot to me, and, on the viewer’s part alone, despite all minor problems, it’s so rewarding to see Warner Bros. take such good care of it. Very few studios have maintained this level of quality over six consecutive films (let alone gone this far for a large, interconnected story), and I’m positive that in 2011, when all is said and done and oodles more box-office records are broken, this is a series (just like the books) that will remain and continue to be important for many years to come.
Image courtesy of Warner Bros. Pictures.
Rusty, if you haven't already, you should check out my most recent blog post. We did discuss this all while you down here, but even so it appears me are more on par with our thinking of the series as a whole than I thought. My entry feels slightly rushed and abbreviated looking back on it, but I decided to provide at least marginal analysis on all the HP films so far to explain my point, and if I did anything more in-depth it would be its own Harry Potter novel and Rowling might sue me. Bravo on this entry.
ReplyDelete