| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| randall |
Posted - 07/15/2009 : 19:37:47
The newest Potter is maybe :15 too long, but it's as visually sumptuous as the others, and moves into a brand new area for our heroes: snogging.
The Potter books have always managed to draw in disparate demographics: magic and blowing things up for boys and forever fanboys, female empowerment [in the person of Hermione] in the literal sense for pre-teen and tween girls, and a solid sense of the implicit nobility of good over evil for moms and dads.
But now our kids are growing up [at one point, Dumbledore even tells Harry he needs a shave!], and the clear demos are showing up in the audience. At the screening I attended, a row of tween girls were popping-up-and-down thrilled at the slightest romantic hand about to be held. Another group of kids was strictly in it for magic and Death Eaters. And the picture was able to please everybody.
I think it's probably beyond a newcomer to the Potter ethos to join the story this far in. But for those who have followed along, screenwriter Steve Kloves does a pretty good job of underlining the necessary facts so that the two-year hiatus since the last film isn't an issue. As for cutting through J.K. Rowling's verbosity, he's the best at it, and I hope he's signed for the next two.
I think the kids are very much in command of their characters, and the star-studded supporting cast is uniformly brilliant. Jim Broadbent is new here as a Potions prof with an ugly secret, but Michael Gambon, Maggie Smith, Robbie Coltrane, and especially the delicious Alan Rickman all light the place up. Tom Felton as Draco Malfoy gets quality screen time and uses it. Direction is fine, though you're basically just following a template by now; there seemed to be much more zipping and swooping, but aside from the bombastic depictions of Death-Eater POV and Quidditch [shot and edited *far* better in the first film, dude], I didn't really notice the direction at all, which is exactly right.
Yes, a major character is killed off at the climax. [That's not a spoiler, for the author herself warned us this was going to happen before the book was published.] The scene is expertly handled, even more viscerally effective than reading it, which is extremely rare. And all is set up splendidly for the final adventure which is to follow, so voluminous that it will take two pictures to show. [Not that the extra few hundred million dollars will matter much to Warner Bros.*, but if I felt this one was overlong, imagine trying to tell the entire book #7 story!]
You either like the Harrys, or you don't. We're in darker territory here, both in the story and the lighting design. I'm sure the reviews will be all over the place. But I was pleased, and more importantly, pumped for the final two installments.
*Joke |
| 11 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Wheelz |
Posted - 07/29/2009 : 18:47:03
quote:
Originally posted by MisterBadIdea
In music criticism, you learn to differentiate between album artists and singles artists -- those who make record-length musical statements, and those who deserve to be listened to one song at a time. "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince" is very much the latter -- it's not a film, it's a collection of scenes. The film feels less like a whole movie than any of the other movies -- it never comes together. But somehow, I was in love with every single scene.
MBI, you hit my thoughts right on the head, albiet more succinctly than I would have. Even as I was watching and very much enjoying the film, I was aware that it didn't really seem to be going anywhere as a whole -- at least not until Harry and Dumbledore finally made their trip to the cave. Yet it all worked very well as far as keeping place in the series and setting up for the big finale.
I was a relative latecomer to the books, so when the first films came out, the books were still pretty fresh in my mind. But I read "Half-Blood Prince" shortly after it came out, over 4 years ago. This, I think, worked to the benefit of my movie-going experience, as I was less occupied by the inevitable comparisons between the versions, and simply let the film work on its own terms, which it did. (I wasn't even wondering what became of Percy Weasly until BaftaBabe alluded to him!) |
| Demisemicenturian |
Posted - 07/27/2009 : 07:29:08
quote:
Originally posted by MisterBadIdea
the movie confirms my impression that nothing fucking happens in Book 6.
It's crammed with stuff compared to the first half of Book 7 though!
quote:
It's not that Evanna Lynch is a bad Luna, but that she's a bad actress.
Well, she's definitely not a bad Luna. I agree that she probably isn't very versatile, but that's no problem.
quote:
As in the books, both the main romances seem to come out of nowhere
Agreed. I was never very convinced by any of the dalliances, but at least Rowling included them rather than trying to pretend that teenagers are chaste. |
| Sean |
Posted - 07/27/2009 : 07:18:33
I'll wait for the DVD.
I've seen the first five movies, and think the three main actors (Harry, Hermione and Ron) have become progressively less accomplished as actors over time, particularly Hermione. They all pale into nothingness next to the excellence of the adult talent. I don't think any of them would be picked if they were casting again now, but of course those three spots are not up for renewal.
I haven't read the books, but I also think the movies are becoming increasingly boring. The focus on ZAP!-ZAP!-ZAP!-with-even-MORE-powerful-wizardry has gone about 2-3 movies past it's ability to hold my attention. |
| MisterBadIdea |
Posted - 07/27/2009 : 05:44:41
Saw it. My thoughts are complicated.
In music criticism, you learn to differentiate between album artists and singles artists -- those who make record-length musical statements, and those who deserve to be listened to one song at a time. "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince" is very much the latter -- it's not a film, it's a collection of scenes. The film feels less like a whole movie than any of the other movies -- it never comes together. But somehow, I was in love with every single scene. Even through the film's missteps (the magic feather cliche, Ron's obnoxious clingy girlfriend, the lack of resolution about Potter's use of a very very dangerous spell), I was completely hooked.
I read the Harry Potter series without digesting it, but the movie confirms my impression that nothing fucking happens in Book 6. In fact, they excise some of the few things that did happen (notably, the undercurrent of terror has Hogwarts goes on lockdown and wizards, including some students' parents, get murdered by the Death Eaters). Somehow, it all still has real weight -- the teenagers' confused rush of hormones mixed with suffocating fear. Newcomer to the series Jim Broadbent is just fantastic, Tom Felton as Draco is great, the old guard maintain their high standards, and the three main child actors are excellent (and it's worth mentioning that I thought that they were all awful in "Goblet of Fire," Emma Watson especially).
As a side note, I wanted to point out that if I had to pick one weak link, it would have been (of course) Luna. It's not that Evanna Lynch is a bad Luna, but that she's a bad actress. She doesn't have the seasoning of Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint or Emma Watson. As in the books, both the main romances seem to come out of nowhere, but they sell it. Harry and Ginny's first kiss is one of the most wonderful moments this series has ever had. |
| Demisemicenturian |
Posted - 07/20/2009 : 22:23:40
quote:
Originally posted by Ro�k G01f, MD+
Loved Luna.
It's a good day to be noting her, of course.  I don't know whether Rowling really amended the character after the actress's first appearance, since she seemed the same to me in the first (fifth?) book. (She definitely did that with Ron though: the actor had a growth spurt before one film and then the character did in the following book!) In general, the books are great at boosting the self-esteem of more marginalised children and teenagers. There's a very touching exchange used in this film: (Luna) "It's almost like having a friend." (Harry) "I am your friend, Luna."
quote:
I suspect the 8th film will get a title of it's own.
Oh, I hope not. It already messes up the whole seven-year thing; I hope some semblance of that will be kept by tying the names together. |
| randall |
Posted - 07/20/2009 : 21:08:17
quote:
Originally posted by Ro�k G01f, MD+
The upcoming final acts, I suspect are the real reason for keeping this film back over 6 months. It reduces the time until the next film comes out. There will be a negligible cycle, in all likelihood, between the release of this film to DVD then PPV and boom Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, pt 1 will be in theatres.
I believe the plan is for film #7 to arrive for Xmas '10 [a shorter hiatus than the last one], then film #8 the following summer, fed indeed by the biggest home-video promotion ever mounted. |
| RockGolf |
Posted - 07/20/2009 : 18:19:57
Liked the movie a lot. Loved Luna. She is so perfectly cast that I suspect Rowling met her after casting then went back in time to make the character in the book more like the actress. She has a fairly significant role in the next film, IIRC.
However, much of this film just seems to be set-up for the finale. Unlike the other HP films, this plot does not have a one-line summary. It's just a series of events. Some very important events, to be sure, but really just events.
The upcoming final acts, I suspect are the real reason for keeping this film back over 6 months. It reduces the time until the next film comes out. There will be a negligible cycle, in all likelihood, between the release of this film to DVD then PPV and boom Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, pt 1 will be in theatres.
Sorry we didn't get to see at least one scene of Snape as Dark Arts teacher, tho.
I suspect the 8th film will get a title of it's own. |
| Demisemicenturian |
Posted - 07/20/2009 : 13:17:47
quote:
Originally posted by randall
And all is set up splendidly for the final adventure which is to follow, so voluminous that it will take two pictures to show. [Not that the extra few hundred million dollars will matter much to Warner Bros.*, but if I felt this one was overlong, imagine trying to tell the entire book #7 story!]
I don't agree on this point. As I've said in the thread for the last those two films, I just cannot see what could be in the first one. The first half of the last book is very far from plot-heavy.
As I said when the previous film came out (if that's the first one she was in), I totally agree about Luna being perfectly cast. I remembered her being spot on so vividly, in fact, that she was almost a disappointment this time, because there was no room for improvement. I also said then that her accent, which is not mentioned in the books (I cannot now remember that empirically, but I remember saying it when I had read them less long ago), is also exactly right. She's my friend's friend's cousin, or my friend's cousin's friend. I think it's the first, as my friend's friend was her chaperone on set in the previous film or something. Wow, I'm almost famous. 
I also noticed that Hagrid seemed actually much larger than the others for once. When the first film came out I was frustrated that he was so small.
I enjoyed it. It was fairly long, but didn't feel too long to me, even though I was in a crowded, over-warm screen with a bad back. Stuff was going on all the time; it all fitted what I remembered. The Inferi looked too much like Gollum, though.
A happy 4/5. |
| randall |
Posted - 07/16/2009 : 10:46:42
quote:
Originally posted by BaftaBabe
Overall it's not a bad effort and certainly the target audience in the packed cinema enjoyed it thoroughly and it sure shut them up - always a good sign with tweenagers.
I agree Kloves did a fine job with story and structure, although there's a significant Weasley plot-point that remains blowing in the wind. But as the books are so pathetic about character, it's what the actors can bring - or not - that keeps you intrigued from scene to scene.
Most of the old guard are up to the task - especially Gambon [NOT Chabon, Randall!!!!] managing to bring a certain suggestive ambiguity in his scenes with Harry. Rickman tries to keep a lid on his notorious mannerisms, but those pesky critters tend to escape. But he can combine a fascinating darkness and levity which is always appropriate to the moment.
I thought Felton's Malfoy was the weakest - and, in acting terms, he had the most challenge of the kids. He really blew it in the scene of his greatest vulnerability. His conflicted emotions should have been his sub-text, not his top layer. It would have helped if we'd been shown more the effect on him when he failed with the cabinet.
The audience kids found nearly all their joy in the romance scenes, every sidelong glance - whether real or potion-induced - producing peals of laughter.
For the 1st time the sfx convinced me that Hagrid was much bigger than everyone else, though poor Coltrane had precious little to do. And he's a v. talented bloke!
Some of the sfx - e.g. opening scenes of mysterious maliciousness, water and fire fx with Harry and 'Dumbo' - really show craftspersons on top of their game. Plus it proves what a long way we've come from staircases that change direction.
Golly - we're in the home stretch!
Sorry, fixed. I like 'em both!
I didn't see a lid on Alan Rickman's mannerisms at all; he's reading more pauses than a Pinter play. But for me, that's the fun of it! Obviously we disagree on Felton's job, but that's what makes horse races.
Baffy, far later I thought about another poor victim of screenwriting plot compression: what LORD OF THE RINGS movie fan has ever heard of Tom Bombadil?
EDIT: Josh, you are so right: I forgot to mention Evanna Lynch as Luna. She is absolutely perfect, spot on from my mind's eye whilst reading the books! |
| BaftaBaby |
Posted - 07/16/2009 : 08:32:33
Overall it's not a bad effort and certainly the target audience in the packed cinema enjoyed it thoroughly and it sure shut them up - always a good sign with tweenagers.
I agree Kloves did a fine job with story and structure, although there's a significant Weasley plot-point that remains blowing in the wind. But as the books are so pathetic about character, it's what the actors can bring - or not - that keeps you intrigued from scene to scene.
Most of the old guard are up to the task - especially Gambon [NOT Chabon, Randall!!!!] managing to bring a certain suggestive ambiguity in his scenes with Harry. Rickman tries to keep a lid on his notorious mannerisms, but those pesky critters tend to escape. But he can combine a fascinating darkness and levity which is always appropriate to the moment.
I thought Felton's Malfoy was the weakest - and, in acting terms, he had the most challenge of the kids. He really blew it in the scene of his greatest vulnerability. His conflicted emotions should have been his sub-text, not his top layer. It would have helped if we'd been shown more the effect on him when he failed with the cabinet.
The audience kids found nearly all their joy in the romance scenes, every sidelong glance - whether real or potion-induced - producing peals of laughter.
For the 1st time the sfx convinced me that Hagrid was much bigger than everyone else, though poor Coltrane had precious little to do. And he's a v. talented bloke!
Some of the sfx - e.g. opening scenes of mysterious maliciousness, water and fire fx with Harry and 'Dumbo' - really show craftspersons on top of their game. Plus it proves what a long way we've come from staircases that change direction.
Golly - we're in the home stretch!
|
| Josh the cat |
Posted - 07/16/2009 : 07:39:12
Randall that's a fine summary, we went to the cinema yesterday morning and although we both enjoyed it, more than Order of the Pheonix, I agree it was too long.
The books do get darker as you go thru thankfully this film was not as dark as the last, it was naturally more enjoyable to watch for us.
You can see the aging of the cast well, but they have taken steps to ensure that all puils grow at the same stageso in the crowded coridor screens they do not stick go heads and shoulders above the rest.
I would have liked a bit more focus on the additional characters such as Neville etc, although Luna comes across very well and for me matched to books depiction very well.
Most certainly worth a visit to the cinema!
Josh the cat |
|
|
