After watching Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, I’m
worried that a franchise that was building up some significant steam
could be heading for a disaster of Matrix proportions. While the
movie doesn’t commit an atrocity on the level of, say, the rave scene
in Matrix Reloaded, it is quite dull—and this far into the
series, that’s a bit disconcerting.
This is easily the least likable Potter film since the dull first
one (Sorcerer’s Stone). I liked the second one (Chamber of
Secrets), totally loved the third (Prisoner of Azkaban), was
OK with the fourth (Goblet of Fire) and really liked the fifth
(Order of the Phoenix).
The biggest surprise regarding the failure of Half-Blood
Prince is that David Yates, the same man behind the camera for
Phoenix, directed the film. He’s also in charge of the upcoming
two-part finale, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. If the
Deathly Hallows films are anything like this one, Harry’s
cinematic story will smash into the earth like a Quidditch broom that
has lost its soaring power.
Things start interestingly enough, with Harry (Daniel Radcliffe)
almost picking up a hot waitress in a diner, and Dumbledore (Michael
Gambon) spoiling the party. The old wizard needs Harry’s help in
recruiting former Hogwarts teacher Horace Slughorn (Jim Broadbent).
Dumbledore wants him back in the fold for some reason, and he needs to
use Harry as bait.
Dumbledore chooses to show Harry some rather disturbing memories of
a former student named Tom Riddle, a young kid who could talk to snakes
and who grew up to be a major troublemaker. Yates and the young people
he gets to play Riddle in these memories (one of them being Hero
Fiennes-Tiffin, a relative of Ralph Fiennes) make these scenes easily
the best of the film. Actually, I wish a larger percentage of this
movie had been flashbacks of the creepy kids. This aspect of the film
is engaging.
Sadly, the movie turns out to be, for the most part, a blasé
look at Harry and friends starting to notice the opposite sex. A
subplot involving Ron Weasley (Rupert Grint) and his emerging sex
appeal is nothing but silly. Even worse, the normally enjoyable
Hermione (Emma Watson) is left to do little but pout and whimper, and
she rarely raises her mood above somber.
A major character says goodbye near the film’s end—and Yates
bungles it. Given the importance of the character, I was expecting
something momentous. Instead, we get a scene that feels rushed and has
little emotional impact.
Yeah, I get it: The movie is supposed to be dark, disturbing and
foreboding. It’s supposed to act as a transitional film to the big
finale. I’m OK with the dark sinister stuff; hell, I welcome it. But
Voldemort is nowhere to be seen (unless you count cloud formations),
and the movie’s secondary bad guys are not given enough screen time to
really register. The whole thing lacks focus.
I haven’t read the books (with the exception of Deathly
Hallows). With every one of these movies, I have heard diehard fans
complain about key points in the books being left out, which is a
necessity, considering the lengths of the novels—but the
Potterheads I know are almost outraged by the omissions made in this
film. I also got a sense that something was missing.
While I’m mostly complaining here, the film is more of a near-miss
than a total failure. But given the quality of the four chapters
preceding it, this qualifies as a major letdown, especially after the
delay in the release date.
Part one of Hallows hits next year. Let’s hope Half
Blood-Prince is just a misstep for Yates, and that he steers the
franchise to a finish worthy of Harry and friends. And, please, no rave
scenes.
This article appears in Jul 23-29, 2009.
The thing I’m most worried about is that the 350-page scene of Whiny Emo Angst in the Woods from book 7 will be the main focus of the last two films. Rowling really needed an editor to sit her down and say, “Look, JoAnne, you have GOT to redact some of this crap.”
Thanks for your feedback…and thanks for not yelling at me for not liking a Harry Potter movie!
Mr. Grimm,
Two of your major criticisms are also true of the book: Voldemort is not in the book either! (except in those memories of when he was younger.) And much of the book was about the “romance”, including the “silly” subplot on Ron, which you didn’t seem to like either. Please remember one of Ms Rowling’s major themes is about love. As for the bad guys, they aren’t really in the book a whole lot either. I understand that one battle was removed from this movie to be replaced for an even bigger one at the end of the last movie. I’m guessing you wouldn’t have liked the book much either, (although perhaps better than you liked the movie) which might have carried over to the film. Personally I loved this movie because of the interaction of “the trio.”
There were several points during the film that could have been shortened considerably, either tightening things up, or leaving room for important material that got left out or reduced.
While I’m no fan of Rowling’s writing (she needs an editor desperately, and her prose is flat and tedious at best), she did have a solid climactic point in HBP, and a hell of a battle scene, and a movingly described funeral — both of which are bobbled excrutiatingly by the writer,the producers, and Yates — oh, and by Alan Rickman, who plays a highly intense scene as though he’s just let out a most disagreeable fart (those potions will do it every time.) We get a bit of energyless running about, and a scene of the kids doing the Hogwarts equivalent of holding up Bic lighters at a Moody Blues concert.
Mr. McDonald, you nailed it. While I enjoyed Rowlings earlier writing, which was clever and engaging, yet not dumbed down for children, it seems to have gone flat as the series progressed. I did enjoy the final book, though that could have used some cutting as well, and I was engaged largely because I wanted to see what happened. That said, I thought this film was a dissapointment not because the story was worse than previous stories, that is Rowlings’ fault. What bothered me about this film was that there was so much in it that was either not true to the story or not needed in the film that could have easily been replaced by much better material. The ending was the biggest letdown and in that scene at the end I actually scoffed “what are they, at a concert?” In the book the death and funeral scenes are completely different and could have been treated much differently in the films, replacing or making up for some of its slow, somewhat meaningless prattle.
I have to agree with the author of the article. I am really glad I went on ‘discount Tuesday’ to see this movie because that was really all it was worth! I was shocked and disappointed at how much this movie lacked — all two and a half hours of it. The way the movie centred around teenage love got really tiring, considering that not all HP fans are 17! Plus, the funeral scene was so emotionally lacking — seriously, it looked more like a concert scene rather than the funeral of a great character. It seemed like the movie editor took all the parts that he edited OUT of the final version and mistakenly threw out the actual movie. I thought the books were amazing literature, and if the last 2 movies are as bad as this installment, they will be such an incredible let-down.
Skip this movie. Wait for the DVD if you must see. It’s not worth the money.
I’ve read all the books at least twice.
All the other movies at least were able to convey the story, but this one only seemed to use about 1/8 of the story. The screenwriter and movie cutter need to be shot. So many interesting things happened in the book and they managed not to cover any of them.
They managed to make the few things they covered boring. I spent 1/2 the movie admiring the wardrobes because nothing much else was happening.
I’m worried now that Deathly Hallows will be just as dull.