Hbp Reviews

[athenamay3410]

All right, I'm getting the ball rolling.

I LOVED IT. Hands down the best by far. Perhaps it's because I haven't touched the books since 2007, or perhaps because I felt it was the first complete movie. I didn't feel like I needed to run home and fill in any voids with my books, it was all (mostly) there.

I loved the humour, Rupert Grint is incredible. He stole every scene "It's a creepy store, he's a creepy bloke". I liked the way the "hormones" were handled, it was almost campy and silly rather than trying to be an angsty teen romance.

The pacing was good. It didn't feel rushed to me, and I liked the flow. Loved the acting, really, okay, I just loved it all. It looked great, sounded great, I think you know where I am going with this.

Some specifics- SPOILERS AHEAD....

-Loved little creepy Tom Riddle. He'll give me nightmares.
-Slughorn was awesome.
-Cormack was a total jerk, but one of those jerks you can't help but still understand why 16 year old girls love them
-Bellatrix as usual is one awesome Death Eater.
-The Weasley house burning down was a nice addition, it broke my heart and was a good way to set-up the 7th movie for their future sadness.
-Ron/Hermione/Lavender was great. Lavender was the perfect insane teenager.
-The acting was stellar from everyone, although Malfoy was a bit much at times.
-LUNA I LOVE YOU. You rock.

Now the big one...

I felt DD's death was dealt with very well. I loved the wand tribute over a funeral that would have just made me cry even more. It was beautiful how it took down the Dark Mark. Gambon was excellent this entire film. I missed Fawkes' song, but I liked him leading the way into the next films. I just bawled my eyes out though when Harry bent down and moved his hairs. Just heartbreaking.

Some nitpicking...

-The Inferi (god I don't even remember how to spell it), were sort of Gollum-like and I did miss more of that scene, but not too much because it would have turned into almost a "horror" movie, rather than what the story is really about.
-I did miss the other memories, but understand why they aren't there and think we'll be OK without them.
-As I said, Malfoy was a bit over the top in his acting.
-Did miss other small parts, and not so small parts like the Quidditch finals and Harry & Ginny's big kiss, but I liked their "secret" kiss, although it felt kind of dirty. lol.

But on the whole, loved this film. Love love loved it.

[banker]

Overall, I'd say this one is my 2nd favorite film. I'm probably in the minority, but I really liked Order of the Phoenix.

This one again I felt that people who hadn't read the books would be able to minimally understand the basis of the story and where it eventually goes. I liked the tone of the movie. Tom Riddle was disturbing instead of...just kinda a pansy that he was portrayed as in CoS.


But, I don't understand why they always must add in extra bits of foreshadowing at the sake of something truly important to the storyline...


Why, why why why was the Burrow scene expanded to include an attack by Fenrir and Bellatrix? That was precious screen time that could have bee spent showing Harry and Snape having a knock down drag out fight while Snape was fleeing the grounds.

And there's nothing there to make us suspect that Snape is really good. He's supposed to be yelling instructions at Harry as he leaves. We see none of that. We see no DADA classes at all either. He just knocks Harry down, tells Bellatrix she can't kill him because he's Voldemort's, reveals he is the Half Blood Prince and leaves.

And there's really nothing made about the Half Blood Prince. We don't know why Snape calls himself that, Harry really only seems to use the book to his advantage twice. There's nothing about him deceiving everyone by keeping the old book and exchanging it for the new one.

Dumbledore just died. He died, they all raised their wands in a cheesy tribute and then that was that. We saw Fawkes flying around but there was no great lament, I wasn't even convinced he was leaving. There's no great white tomb on the grounds.

I don't know. I still need to process. Overall, as a stand alone movie, I enjoyed it. As an adaptation of the book, I was underwhelmed.

[banker]

The more I think about this movie, the more I need to revise my earlier post. As a movie, this is my 2nd favorite(and it's mostly all to do with the fact that this is the first movie where I didn't cringe over the acting and the cinematography took my breath away. I will most definitely be going to Scotland in short order). As an adaptation, it is by far my least favorite.

There was no development of Malfoy's character. I haven't reread the book since right before DH, but I remember the task really taking a toll, both physically and emotionally, on Malfoy. I remember him being panicked because he wasn't succeeding in the task and he was convinced Voldemort was going to kill him. We didn't see any of this in the movie. One scene showed Malfoy crying in the bathroom, but that's it. The rest of movie, he seems to be making wonderful progress on mending the cabinent.

I didn't like the way they did the Ginny/Harry relationship. This is supposed to be where they finally find their first/only great love. Harry moons over Ginny throughout the whole movie, but they never really end up getting together. We see one kiss in the RoR and that's it. On the other hand, we see Ron and Lavender snogging all the time. Which is fine, we need to see it so we can see Hermione's reaction, but they would have been better served to split the time between the 2 couples. They set nothing up for the loniless Harry experience in DH being the 3 wheel and in having to accept the fact that he has to sacriface his own happiness to make Ginny safe.

Why didn't we see the extra sessions Harry had with Dumbledore? Or, even, why didn't they at least reference the extra sessions with Dumbledore? They weren't having these sessions because Dumbledore was bored. These were important sessions to get to know Tom Riddle's history and personality so that Harry wouldn't be running around completely blind when trying to figure out the remaining horcruxes. How is Harry supposed to figure out that Voldemort is the descendant of Slytherin and that he used possessions of the 4 founders for 4 of the horcruxes? How???

Why does Harry run pell mell through the Department of Mysteries after Bellatrix kills Sirius? Why does he chase Bellatrix and Fenrir throughout the marshes during the attack on the Burrow in this movie? Because he's a reckless, headstrong teenager convinced of his own invinsibility, that's why. Just like all teenagers are. So, why, given that in the movie Dumbledore simply tells him to go hide without the added precaution of stunning him, does Harry simply stand there while Snape kills Dumbledore? It makes absolutely 0 sense. Yes Harry promised to obey Dumbledore, but there is nothing in past movies to make us believe his character is someone who would sit still while his mentor is murdered right before his eyes. And by one of this arch rivals to boot. It's completely senseless.

I seriously really did forget that I was watching HBP. When Snape said he was the Half Blood Prince I actually turned to my friend and commented that I had completely forgotten about that plotline. How was it a good idea to completely throw out the plot line from which the movie gets it's name? Why is the audience even supposed to care that Snape is the Half Blood Prince? Why not just call the movie Harry Potter moons over Ginny Weasley while Ron Weasley Gets Randy?

And my biggest peeve about this movie...where was the epic battle between the DA/OotP and the Deatheaters? Where was the drama of Harry trying to kill Snape while Snape was yelling last minute instructions to Harry? Why did they burn the Burrow down earlier in the movie, but Hagrid's hut was so short. Why didn't I get some darn closure over the death of a much beloved character? Was it really abridged so I could see Lavender Brown act like a completely spastic stalker? Everyone talks about how this one deals with the kids' burgeoning relationships, but Ron and Lavender were the only ones touched upon. Unless the couple going at it in the corner during the Lightening Struck Tower scene were Ron and Hermione. I couldn't tell. I'll have to watch more closely tomorrow afternoon when I go with some friends who couldn't make it on Wednesday.

And also, I really wanted to see a sign in Fred and George's shop declaring why would you be afraid of You Know Who, you should really be afraid of U No Poo. The constipation senstation that's sweeping the nation. :( Boo!

[aramantha]

Well -- I've got to say I think the third film has met its mate -- not match, but mate. This film is far better than I would have thought possible, and I thought the adaptation was just about perfect. The only thing I would have liked to see (or rather hear), and it would not have taken any extra time to work it in, was the phoenix song; but Fawkes never sang in any of the other films, I don't think -- he just kind of screeches in Chamber of Secrets while he battles the basilisk. It is clear that he is winging his way into the finale of the series at the end, vanishing along the loch, and that is very beautiful, reminiscent of the shot at the end of the fourth film as the winged-horse carriage rises and the haunted ship sinks into the water.

I loved the idea of Harry running around picking up Muggle girls at the beginning, very much as if he knew what to do with one, instead of another turn at the Dursleys. (We got a PG because Americans don't know what a "tosser" is, I suspect.) There was a beautiful chemistry with Harry and Dumbledore through that opening sequence too, very easy and mature, like a friendship. It made the parting at the end more believable, or set it up in some way. They are doing some of that for people who don't know the books maybe; but at some point Harry has to move toward that last conversation with Dumbledore between equals in book seven, in the space between life and death, and this moves that way.

Harry and Ginny find each other in no uncertain terms -- she claims him in the room of requirement, with that treacherous little birdie singing that came through the cabinet, and them not suspecting, didn't that chill you? and it's a done deal -- its just done delicately, so it doesn't interfere with the grief and the loss. I am actually glad they cut the business about his leaving her as soon as they hook up, to save her from his fate, and if they cut it from the last films that's OK with me. It doesn't work anyway, and it's frankly a bit of a cliche.

I'm glad they didn't try to put in the funeral at the end, much the same way as the Scouring of the Shire would have been anticlimactic in film form and would have spoiled the proportions at the end of the Rings trilogy. The little ritual with the wands that erases the Dark Mark, and the fact that McGonigall begins it, was very moving, and a good proportional substitute for the funeral. I had just about mopped my eyes after Harry weeping over Dumbledore and Ginny leading him away, when that went off, and I figured "Oh, the hell with it, just cry." Again -- what can those tiny, fragile bee-lights do against that awful deathshead thundercloud? and they do it. It's their promise to do it, or die trying.

I also didn't miss the Bill and Fleur subplot, or the pitched battle at the end. It made sense for Snape to just appear and shush Harry at the end, because Dumbledore had asked for Snape, and for Harry to go get him. They could have made more of the scene of their duel, but the fact is Harry was just getting trounced anyway in the book. You could only see him getting picked up and slammed so often -- I think the point was made.

They compressed the dark stuff at the beginning well too -- the unbreakable oath. I wasn't sure when they cast Helena Bonham-Carter for Bellatrix how she would be, and I'm still not sure I totally like her crazy "perilous erotic child" interpretation, but she really can move a scene and keep you on edge. The bit with her running down the table of the great hall smashing glasses, and then putting out the floating candles in one burst, was a great choice visually for how destructive and malignant she is -- that room, those tables and especially the candles are like the heart of the school. Again, how fragile.

The acting on all the kids was all in focus, maybe for the first time. Also, it all felt very natural and real, not "here are my lines" like so often before. The Felton kid deserves a higher place in the credits -- he turned in a heartbreaking performance, I thought. One thing in the books I have found irritating is the attention given to the eternal snogfest and its emotional accoutrements, clashing with the main drama and (forgive me) quest archetype, as dark and gnarly as it is. Here they actually made it fit in: spending some time on the pathos of their entanglements made them seem fragile and hopeful, and also a little bit trapped, not just cute and basically childish. The bit with Harry and Hermione consoling each other was just splendid and very delicate.

Substituting Luna for Tonks finding Harry on the train with his face bashed in worked better than I would have thought too -- and gave her a little credit she doesn't usually get, in a sly way. I mean, she's daft, but she's a Ravenclaw just the same. He's invisible, but she sees SOMETHING flitting around him like fruit flies with her weird glasses on, that nobody else could see, and it works, the little blue-light fruit flies ARE real, and she CAN see them, and so she rescues him. Wrackspurts! what else? It cracked me up.

The score is wonderful -- did you notice that Fred and George have their own theme? It's the same music as the Great Escape scene from OotP, and they also used it for the inkswirl part at the beginning of the closing credits. I thought the two of them looked fantastic.

Did you notice how real the quidditch scenes were? There was more of a sense of how the space works and how the people move and interact and are positioned in play than any I remember. Two scenes! Wonderful!

There's no words for the camera work. It's as much artistry as the third film, but so different! Magic is there, but the whole eye of the film is not on all the flitting and sparkling any more, it's on the incredible oldness of the castle, the coldness of the snow, the visual layers of everything. That shot of the Weasley house at the beginning with all the structural wooden layers going up the stairs, and their heads popping out, took my breath away. If you hold that image, it makes the burning of the house later all the more poignant, as if all that wonderful complex layering was no more than an elaborate stacking of firewood, and it feeds that undercurrent of how fragile they all are, and all their way of life, in the face of the menace. That was under everything, and they used the camera work tremendously well to get it.

Well, I give it two thumbs and four hoofs up.

[Godric]

A Huge step back in the right direction. Sorry, Banker, but I really thought OotP was a dreadful adaptation. Watched all the movies last weekend, and was reminded just what a missed oppurtunity it is.
Now I'll be seeing this movie again soon, so I'm open to self-correction but I'm largely going along with what people are saying, overall I enjoyed it very much. The Felix Felicis scene was brilliant (when did Daniel Radcliffe learn to really ACT?) Rupert Grint was, again, perfect. Most of the adult cast were nothing short of sterling as usual, Jim Broadbent was an amazing Slughorn, I maintain he's the best realised character in the series. Yer wan from Turminfeckin was great as Luna, I felt she was badly directed in Order (that pesky skipping), no lines for Seamus Finnegan, who has become a worse actor with each film. Alan Rickman, superb. My one gripe was that RObbie Coltrane's heart didn't seem to be fully put into this one. Tom Felton was remarkable, and the young lady playing Lavender is another great find. Most of the other kids were adequate. Emma Watson was a brilliant drunken Hermione, and cries well, but the scne in the burrow at the start where she laughs at Dumbledore's age, was just as bad as her laughing at the emotional depth of a tea-spoon line in Order. One of the trickiest things to do as an actor is laugh at one of your own jokes (without being an asshole making fun of others) and she ain't there yet.
The Ginny-Harry thing. I felt it wasn't as well handled in the books as the Harry-Cho tension, and the films have unfortunately stayed true. No breaking up with Dean, just loads of near snogs, and then a real one, and then they're going out, and it's not like no-one saw it coming. And what the hell was the shoelace scene? Did anyone else nearly start singing Tangled Up in Blue in the cinema? "I must admit I felt a little uneasy when she bent down to tie the laces on my shoe.... Tangled up in Blue." Not that these things were bad, just a little carelessly done.
As for the Half-Blood Prince. I maintained after the book that I was annoyed that the identity of the Half-Blood Prince made no impact on the plot whatsoever, if not for the title of the film that storyline may well have been entirely left out and not have been missed.
The inferii were very Gollumy. Helena Bonham-Carter has yet to really impress me as Bellatrix. NO explanation for Fenrir given at all, the entire Horcrux theory left out. Although DD does show Harry his store of Voldie memories, so it is a line which will be easy to follow.
However, most things were well handled. The Unbreakable vow scene, the capture of Olivander, the Quidditch, which now looks more like rugby on brooms than basketball on broom, but hey. I'm still undecided about the attack on the Burrow scene.
My big gripe is with the end. Dumbledore has died, let's do a rock concert scene, get those lighters up in the air everyone! It's power-ballad time. If you're going to drag on without being sure how to end the movie, end it with something meaningful, not something corny. Although DD's funeral could be a great way to open DH1. Scrimgeour meets Harry and it could be attacked instead of the Weasley wedding forcing the trio to action.
Also would have like to have seen more of hte Dursleys.
More later!

[banker]

I will admit that the movie gets better on a second viewing. But I still maintain it's my 2nd favorite of the movies but my least favorite in strict adaptation terms. I think the other films did a better job at balancing the plot whereas this one really only fully focused on the hormones. My complaints still stand. I just hope this means they were saving up to do the battle for Hogwarts up right for the final installment of DH.

[frida_wolf]

Happiness is a thread of review for the (finally!) new Harry potter film

I liked a lot about this movie. So many of the visuals were stunning.
The acting was great, as mentioned, Dan was fantastic, and I've been a big fan of Mr. Broadbent for years.

I concur with Athena about the inferi - it looked like the attack of the Gollum creatures. I thought the film in general made quite a few cinematic references to the LoTR movies, The Ring reacting to Harry's touch being perhaps the most egregious one.

Also, Draco's repeated de-draping of the cabinet kept reminding me of the first Narnia film (why did he have to keep dramatically de-draping it anyway? Once the camera was gone, did he then re-drape it with a flourish?)

It may not be "canon" but I loved Dumblesdore's handwave of the Hogwarts apparition restrictions.

[bangzoom]

I've waited until I've seen the movie twice before I decided to weigh in on this review. When I view the film for the first time it's too difficult for me to really separate the story that's in my head (from reading the books) and the film that is unfolding before me on the screen . No matter how hard I try, I always find myself mentally saying, "o.k.....they've changed this........and they left out that.....and they ADDED that". So, to really appreciate the film as just a film I always have to see it twice. The first time to get rid of the wrakspurts in my head trying to make comparisons. Once that gets squelched, I can sit back for the second viewing and appreciate the movie for what it is.

As a film adaptation, I thought this one was really good. I completely understand the cuts that they made. To try and compress a book as richly detailed as one of JK Rowlings is a gargantuan task. I am glad that Steve Kloves has taken back the reins as screenwriter. It's not fair to say that the last guy did a bad job. OOTP had to be the hardest of all the books to adapt for the screen. It was a weighty, detail laden book that had to be compressed into 2 hours. Well, DH will not be easy either, but splitting it into two films will help. Anyway, since Kloves has been there from the beginning, and has conferenced extensively with JKR herself, I just think he has a better feel for the tone and focus of these stories.

I thought Jim Broadbent as Slughorn was a brilliant bit of casting. He played him so differently than the Slughorn I imagined while reading the book, but he made the character his own and played him with humanity. I loved the look of conflict on his face when Harry was persuading him to hand over the real memory of Tom Riddle.

Both the young and teenage Tom Riddle were good with extra kudos going to the teenage actor. He really brought out the creep factor to his character.

Although I've felt that Dan Radcliffe and Rupert Grint have steadily improved with each film as actors, up until now I've been extremely disappointed with Emma Watson. Her overacting-with-eyebrows style has irritated me since the third film. Honestly, as a little kid she did a much better job. I don't know if it's maturity or if David Yates has finally made an impact on her but she vastly improved in this film. (I do agree that her laughing scenes need a lot of work). Dan and Rupert had great comic scenes and made the most of them. I also liked the casting for Cormac McClaggen. He portrayed a great "player" and a bit of a jerk without crossing over into creepy. Lavendar Brown was the perfect love-crazy teen. She was irritating as hell, but she was supposed to be.

Gambon's Dumbledore was spot-on this time. I've always been partial to the original Dumbledore but this time Gambon got it right. He was wise yet vulnerable and anxious to impart as much knowledge to Harry as he could.

Rickman, as always, is brilliant as Snape. After having all the great Snape scenes cut in film after film, it was nice to see him get some significant screen time. The silent finger-to-the-lips *shush* was perfect. It put just enough doubt in Harry's mind whether Snape was trustworthy or not to explain why Harry just stood there as the tower scene unfolded.

I thought Tom Felton did an excellent job. The emotions required for this character were not easy to portray. Fear, anger, obligation to his father, cowardice and at heart, still a boy. He did a great job at brooding and then breaking down in the end. It will be interesting to see his character in the next films.

Helena Bonham-Carter plays a great Bellatrix teetering on the edge of sanity. You're never quite sure what her reaction will be. Raging anger or maniacal laughter. She keeps you interested.

Probably my only beef would be with Narcissa Malfoy's hair. She is supposed to have long, blond hair, just like Lucius and Draco. What's up with the bride-of-Frankenstein 'do?

I don't get too twisted about the scenes that were cut or the slight changes in the storyline. The cuts they made were mostly scenes that did not advance the story. The film stands well on it's own. No, they will never be like the books......but that's why the books are so great. I do feel sorry for anyone who is only following this story through the films. They are missing out on a much fuller and richer story. But I do enjoy seeing the characters I like so much from the books personified on the screen and the awesome sets and special effects they've created for these films. In the end, the story will get told on film even though it's abbreviated. But we'll always have the books to immerse ourselves in if we want to get a full dose of the magic.