Posted on 07/20/2009 7:29:41 AM PDT by ccmovrwc
Battling the dark forces takes a back seat to romance and Quidditch
By Alonso Duralde Film critic msnbc.com contributor updated 4:25 p.m. ET, Tues., July 14, 2009
Call it the calm before the storm, but “Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince” goes out of its way to balance its own dark doings — to say nothing of the dire events to come in the two upcoming movies based on “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows” — with more character and atmosphere than we’ve seen in the last few movies.
If you’ve been missing Quidditch matches, love triangles, hanging out in the Gryffindor common room and general Hogwarts-iness, you’ll have a great time with this latest sequel.
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...
They may, if he were still alive, I don’t know.
You’re right, I’m not an author, but I still think she and her staff got paid well for her books and the movie rights. I’m thinking her multi-millionaire status sort of makes it look like business.
Movie discussion ping!
Somehow, I imagine Rowling has already paid back more in taxes to Her Majesty's Government than she would have collected in 10,000 years of welfare.
HP ping
Looking forward to seeing this one.
Let me know, and I'll see it here so we can discuss it.
Hi EG!
I don’t know if I’m just getting crabby in my old age or what, but it wasn’t my favorite HP movie. I thought it’s pacing was too slow. But this wasn’t my favorite HP book either.
BUT, I agree with everyone else that Gambon’s Dumbledore was finally likable. There were quite a few sniffles in the theater at the end.
I also am looking forward to the 7th and 8th movies. Alan Rickman needs much more screen time and his part in the final movie should be excellent.
Also, there is a preview for “Where the Wild Things Are” before HP. I don’t know why, but there is something so moving about seeing those characters on screen for me.
moar funny pictures
We plan to see it. I'm sure my sister will be drooling over Alan Rickman and all.
I agree that some deviations are necessary. I didn't understand the scene with Bellatrix and Fenrir Greyback attacking the Burrow, though. What do you suppose was the point of that?
Speaking of Orson Scott Card, what books would you recommend for a new reader of his works? Thanks!
SPOILER ALERT:
I enjoyed the movie. The omissions and changes that irritate me are the ones that change important sub plots.
There was supposed to be a wizard battle in Hogwarts, between the dark wizards and Dumbledore’s Amry, summoned by Harry with the coin, though only a handful show up (Luna, Ginnie, Neville, Ron, Hermione, I think). It’s a bummer we didn’t see that.
We also completed missed that there is a new Minister of Magic, and that Harry is already on-the-outs with he new minister.
Most importantly, plotwise, to me, on the omission of #12 Grimwald (and “Creature”) belonging to Harry. This affects the main plot line of the horcruxes, the fake locket, the real locket and R.A.B.
My “guess” is that the funeral for Dumbledore will happend at the beginning of the next movie.
Oh, yeah... It’s be hard to start #7 where it normally would, at the Burrough during Bill and Fleur’s wedding, on account of they blew up the Burrough and have completely skipped Bill and Fleur altogether so far.
It doesn’t make sense for the powerful protections around the burrough to fail because of the fall of the Ministry, if it never really had any protection at all.
Nonetheless, I really enjoyed the movie.
I am also very academically interested in what completely fabricated non-Rowling story inventions they will have to concoct in order to repair the violated plotlines. Arguably, the only one that -must- be repaired is #12 Grimwald and Creature. However, the transition to the fall of the Minsitry will have to be changed a bit.
I wondered about that, too. Perhaps, since Hedwig was in the house at the time, that's how they are going to take care of her departure?
I thought it did an excellent job streamlining the important events from the books, taking some liberties with the order of events in order to tell a story on the screen. It didn’t feel rushed, nor did I really miss any of the excised material (except no Dursleys... *sigh*).
To me, the only jarring thing was the “reveal” at the end about Snape being the Half-Blood Prince. Maybe they plan on pushing that into the first half of #7, but I think they could have spared one minute to go into Snape’s background a little bit more, as it’s an important clue into his character and motivations.
A lot of movies are pitched at children (or adults) with a mental age of 8. Some folks in the audience haven't read the book, didn't pay attention to the first 6 scenes of the movie, and haven't decided yet if Harry Potter is supposed to be the good guy or not. So, the director has to "help these viewers" along. How to do so?
Have the Death Eaters show up at someone's house and set the whole thing on fire for no reason at all. This establishes that the Weasleys are good people being victimized by bad people. And it establishes that the Death Eaters are (wait for it...) actually bad guys.
I'm sure I'm over-stating this, but I swear some directors really try too hard to make sure everyone "gets it".
“Regarding Dumbledore, Michael Gambon has not been nearly as good of a Dumbledore as Richard Harris...until this movie. I had always felt a little sorry for Michael Gambon having to follow up on the excellent Richard Harris, it wasn’t Gambon’s fault that Harris was so much better. In this movie, for the first time, I thought, wow, I really like this Dumbledore as much as the first one.”
I respect Gambon, he is a good actor.
However, if he had been stuck playing the same “lame” Dumbledore as he did in #3, there might very well have been cheering at the climax of this movie instead of grief.
Hats off to Gambon and the director.
I am grateful I did not have to cheer at Astronomy Tower Scene.
1. It give Bellatrix more screen time. Always a good thing, as she's delightfully fun to dislike.
2. It emphasizes once again Harry's rashness and the ease in which he can be lured into a trap. So little of this movie is about Harry, it's nice to have that point hammered home.
3. It shows that no-one, not even the Weasleys, are safe from the Death Eaters at large. They cut a lot of the material in the book about students whose families are suffering under the attacks, so this illustrates the issue without the distractions from the main storyline.
4. To a lesser extent, it reinforces the whole harry/Ginny thing in that it's not just one-sided from Harry's side.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.