Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince

[Rowland]

I've been nitpicking this in my mind and with others more over the last day or two, so I've accordingly lowered my grade a bit. Still, it remains smashing, gorgeously wrought entertainment for most of its running time.

[D_Davis]

I'm curious to see what of the missing bits disappointed you most. usually, I can forgive such things as "the price of adaptation" but sometimes this series baffles me...not because stuff is left out, but because of WHAT is left out.

When I watch these films it feels as though stuff is left out. That's my biggest problem with the HP movies: they don't seem to contain a natural narrative progression, but instead they feel like a series of loosely connected scenes. Are the books like this? I doubt it.

I don't mind when stuff is left out of adapted novels, but it bothers me when the film feels disjointed, or when I can tell stuff is being left out.

[thefourthwall]

When I watch these films it feels as though stuff is left out. That's my biggest problem with the HP movies: they don't seem to contain a natural narrative progression, but instead they feel like a series of loosely connected scenes. Are the books like this? I doubt it.

I don't mind when stuff is left out of adapted novels, but it bothers me when the film feels disjointed, or when I can tell stuff is being left out.

Have you felt that they've all been disjointed narratively? It's hard for me to judge accurately being very familiar with the source material, but I felt like the first three (maybe even four) presented fairly complete stories.

[D_Davis]

Have you felt that they've all been disjointed narratively? It's hard for me to judge accurately being very familiar with the source material, but I felt like the first three (maybe even four) presented fairly complete stories.

Yes. While the story is there, I feel like they lack proper transitions between the connected scenes. To me, they feel like television shows in which stuff happens that we can't see while the commercials are playing, but without the commercial breaks. I never get a sense of the world, or that it actually exists within the film. It feels like the only parts of the world that exist are the parts where the main characters happen to be at that moment. There is no context, no grander vision. This is in contrast to films like the original Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, or even something like Blade Runner, fantastic movies that feel as though they take place in a living, breathing world, a world that would continue to exist without the main characters or main narrative.

I've seen 1, 2, and 4. I always mildly enjoy them, but I always feel as though I've been shown a few best of moments from the books, and I never feel as though I've seen a really good movie.

[Sycophant]

I've seen 1, 2, and 4. I always mildly enjoy them, but I always feel as though I've been shown a few best of moments from the books, and I never feel as though I've seen a really good movie.

This is my main gripe with Columbus's films as well. (I've only seen films 1 through 3 and read book 1 and part of 2.) They felt a lot more like visual companions than films that stood on their own merit. Cuaron's film, on the other hand, seems to have been the most willing to sacrifice plot points and fan-favored scenes in an effort to make a film that was its own animal.

[Watashi]

Apparently Daniel Radcliffe is in the running for Bilbo Baggins in Del Toro's The Hobbit.

That would be something.

[D_Davis]

Apparently Daniel Radcliffe is in the running for Bilbo Baggins in Del Toro's The Hobbit.

That would be something.

He's a good actor. I wouldn't mind this at all.

[D_Davis]

This is my main gripe with Columbus's films as well. (I've only seen films 1 through 3 and read book 1 and part of 2.) They felt a lot more like visual companions than films that stood on their own merit. Cuaron's film, on the other hand, seems to have been the most willing to sacrifice plot points and fan-favored scenes in an effort to make a film that was its own animal.

yeah - it's funny that I haven't seen what is, to most film fans, the best of the series. I should remedy this.

[Sycophant]

yeah - it's funny that I haven't seen what is, to most film fans, the best of the series. I should remedy this.

I still think it's not that great a movie, but it's pretty good. Definitely the best of the first three.

[Winston*]

Apparently Daniel Radcliffe is in the running for Bilbo Baggins in Del Toro's The Hobbit.

That would be something.

I hope this doesn't hapen and they go for someone like 20 years older.

[ledfloyd]

the more i think about it the more there are alot of things in this film that just don't work.

the attack on the burrow is wonderfully shot and very suspenseful but completely unnecessary plotwise. their home burns down, where do they go? the film doesn't seem interested. no repercussions from the attack ever factor into the rest of the film.

there are no repercussions for harry almost killing draco, it just happens, and then it's over with. attempted murder is now just shrugged off at hogwarts? the film doesn't seem to give much weight to the fact that the half-blood prince became very dangerous at that point either.

the cave scene comes out of nowhere, you are never told why they are there or what exactly it is they're doing. how did dumbledore know to go to the cave? i suppose it could be cleared up in the next film. so i'll give that one a pass.

why doesn't harry do anything after dumbledore dies? he doesn't even yell out after it happens. it can't be that he's afraid of the death eaters cause afterwards he chases them down. i don't get it.

[lovejuice]

the more i think about it the more there are alot of things in this film that just don't work.

the cave scene comes out of nowhere, you are never told why they are there or what exactly it is they're doing. how did dumbledore know to go to the cave? i suppose it could be cleared up in the next film. so i'll give that one a pass.
unfortunately, no. the scene is there, i think, because rowling wants to experiment writing some zombies into her novel. the creatures thus never show up again.

[ledfloyd]

unfortunately, no. the scene is there, i think, because rowling wants to experiment writing some zombies into her novel. the creatures thus never show up again.
well, i meant they never explain the history of the horcruxes or anything so you're kind of at a loss as to what dumbledore is up to, and even after they get the locket you don't understand the significance of it or the cave, i'm assuming it could be expounded upon in the next film though since it will mostly be about the hunt for the horcruxes.

[thefourthwall]

the more i think about it the more there are alot of things in this film that just don't work.

the attack on the burrow is wonderfully shot and very suspenseful but completely unnecessary plotwise. their home burns down, where do they go? the film doesn't seem interested. no repercussions from the attack ever factor into the rest of the film.

there are no repercussions for harry almost killing draco, it just happens, and then it's over with. attempted murder is now just shrugged off at hogwarts? the film doesn't seem to give much weight to the fact that the half-blood prince became very dangerous at that point either.

the cave scene comes out of nowhere, you are never told why they are there or what exactly it is they're doing. how did dumbledore know to go to the cave? i suppose it could be cleared up in the next film. so i'll give that one a pass.

why doesn't harry do anything after dumbledore dies? he doesn't even yell out after it happens. it can't be that he's afraid of the death eaters cause afterwards he chases them down. i don't get it.

The Burrow burns: Since that scene wasn't in the book, it doesn't seem as well integrated, but I guess it suggests the real eminent danger all members of the Order are in.

Harry about to kill Draco? Does anyone besides Snape see that? I don't remember. If it's just Snape, then he recognizes that Harry isn't trying to kill Draco, but Harry doesn't know what the spell will do since it was just something he found scribbled in the margins of his book.

Cave scene: They're looking for a horcrux, which contains part of Voldemort's soul, this is revealed when Slughorn finally gives up his memory. While we don't know exactly how Dumbledore knew to go there, we saw a postcard of it in Tom's room in the orphanage, so I doubt that it'll be explained beyond that in the next film.

Why Harry doesn't do anything: Good question. The end of the film is what spoiled this one for me. In the book, Harry's petrified, under Dumbledore's spell, so he literally can't. And then there's a big battle between Death Eaters and students/staff, etc. which I was totally missing. Makes the climax, rather anti-climatic.

[ledfloyd]

The Burrow burns: Since that scene wasn't in the book, it doesn't seem as well integrated, but I guess it suggests the real eminent danger all members of the Order are in.

Harry about to kill Draco? Does anyone besides Snape see that? I don't remember. If it's just Snape, then he recognizes that Harry isn't trying to kill Draco, but Harry doesn't know what the spell will do since it was just something he found scribbled in the margins of his book.

Cave scene: They're looking for a horcrux, which contains part of Voldemort's soul, this is revealed when Slughorn finally gives up his memory. While we don't know exactly how Dumbledore knew to go there, we saw a postcard of it in Tom's room in the orphanage, so I doubt that it'll be explained beyond that in the next film.

Why Harry doesn't do anything: Good question. The end of the film is what spoiled this one for me. In the book, Harry's petrified, under Dumbledore's spell, so he literally can't. And then there's a big battle between Death Eaters and students/staff, etc. which I was totally missing. Makes the climax, rather anti-climatic.
yeah, i've read the book, i was just trying to criticize the film on it's own terms without making comparisons to the book.

and i realize snape knew harry wasn't trying to kill draco, but when has snape ever passed up an opportunity to get harry in trouble? also i recall from the book a "where did you learn that!?" type scene or something. i can't remember how that bit was resolved in the book though. it just felt like a non-event in the film

[Fezzik]

yeah, i've read the book, i was just trying to criticize the film on it's own terms without making comparisons to the book.

and i realize snape knew harry wasn't trying to kill draco, but when has snape ever passed up an opportunity to get harry in trouble? also i recall from the book a "where did you learn that!?" type scene or something. i can't remember how that bit was resolved in the book though. it just felt like a non-event in the film


This entire plot thread was glossed over and that is my biggest issue with the film. There needed to be more about the HBP.

It succeeds much better as a film than as an adaptation, thats for sure.

[kuehnepips]

Is the film worth seeing?

No.

[number8]

yeah, i've read the book, i was just trying to criticize the film on it's own terms without making comparisons to the book.

I never read the book and I didn't have that problem. Dumdledore explicitly explained the horcruxes before they went to the cave.

[Qrazy]

It give me a chance to sound pompous, so it's not so much a "dumb" thing as it is a "birthday present."

:lol:

Equus, for those who haven't read or seen it, is actually a really brilliant play about a psychologist and a teenage boy who has a hyper-religious erotic fixation with horses, which leads to a very violent and disturbing act.

Radcliffe freaked out his fan base when he agreed to be in the West End revival of the play, which then moved to Broadway last year. He not only got to curse and mutilate horses and simulate sex on stage, but he wandered around completely naked for several scenes.

So, if you're curious to google, you can find many blurry photos of Radcliffe's peen.

Lumet's adaptation is crap though.

[Qrazy]

This is my main gripe with Columbus's films as well. (I've only seen films 1 through 3 and read book 1 and part of 2.) They felt a lot more like visual companions than films that stood on their own merit. Cuaron's film, on the other hand, seems to have been the most willing to sacrifice plot points and fan-favored scenes in an effort to make a film that was its own animal.

Some of the plot points he cut were fairly crucial so the narrative stumbles a bit but the filmmaking as a whole is superior.

[Qrazy]

Apparently Daniel Radcliffe is in the running for Bilbo Baggins in Del Toro's The Hobbit.

That would be something.

They haven't fucking cast that yet? Jesus.

[Qrazy]

He's a good actor. I wouldn't mind this at all.

I would.

[Fezzik]

I would.

I like Radcliffe, but I agree. First of all, seeing his face would take a lot of people out of the movie. It'd be "Harry Potter as a hobbit" - they need someone whose face isn't plastered everywhere.

Also, I'm still not convinced he's a good enough actor.

[number8]

I like Radcliffe, but I agree. First of all, seeing his face would take a lot of people out of the movie. It'd be "Harry Potter as a hobbit" - they need someone whose face isn't plastered everywhere.

Wouldn't that be true of every movie he's going to be in?

[Fezzik]

Wouldn't that be true of every movie he's going to be in?

Yes, but this is a very iconic role in a huge production. He needs to step away and do smaller movies for a bit, in my opinion, if he has any chance of escaping the Mark Hamill syndrome.

[monolith94]

If he wants to avoid Mark Hamill syndrome, he needs to step away from motorcycles.

[Fezzik]

If he wants to avoid Mark Hamill syndrome, he needs to step away from motorcycles.

Zing!

[transmogrifier]

I've been nitpicking this in my mind and with others more over the last day or two, so I've accordingly lowered my grade a bit. Still, it remains smashing, gorgeously wrought entertainment for most of its running time.

Haven't you dropped it three times now (70 something to 69 to 68 to 64)?Jeez, it's going to be in the 20s by next week!

:)

[Rowland]

Haven't you dropped it three times now (70 something to 69 to 68 to 64)?Jeez, it's going to be in the 20s by next week!

:)Yeah, and I remain iffy about my final grade. I could see myself going up or down a couple points from where I've settled my decreasing score. Attribute my initial grade to how effective its immediate pleasures are (visuals, performance), so that only later did matters like writing and thematic coherence begin to press on my mind to a greater degree, even if I'd argue that they aren't quite as problematic as the picture's more ardent detractors argue.

[Amnesiac]

Did anyone see the new trailer for Where The Wild Things Are?

[number8]

Wasn't new.

[Sxottlan]

A glorious film that about halfway through starts to commit some seriously questionable moves and completely let me down with the ending.

Watching this, I was reminded of my take on the book, which was that it was a complete slamming of the brakes when the story was finally picking up speed at the end of book 5. The most mind-boggling thing to me is the ending, which scaled way back on the action. Whereas we finally see a duel between two wizards at the end of OotP, here the film just sort of peters out, even when the darn book had more action. I just cannot comprehend why they cut back here. To make room for the new-for-the-film attack on the Weasley home halfway through to punch up a sagging middle? An attack that is then never mentioned again? That and the ending without anyone from the OotP there fighting it out with the Deatheaters make the good guys look completely flatfooted here.

While the tone would shift rather suddenly between humorous and dire, I otherwise loved the film, but just when we needed it to end strong it doesn't.

[Morris Schæffer]

Yes, but this is a very iconic role in a huge production. He needs to step away and do smaller movies for a bit, in my opinion, if he has any chance of escaping the Mark Hamill syndrome.

I agree. I don't want too famous of a name to appear in The Hobbit. I want zero distractions when I'm going to be seeing what should be a colossally epic time at the movies.

[monolith94]

Good:
Cinematography — !!!
Acting (with a few overactors excluded. I'm looking at you, HBC)
Set/art design and costuming

Bad:
Pacing
Direction
Editing

Haven't made up my mind yet:
Script.

[ledfloyd]

A glorious film that about halfway through starts to commit some seriously questionable moves and completely let me down with the ending.

Watching this, I was reminded of my take on the book, which was that it was a complete slamming of the brakes when the story was finally picking up speed at the end of book 5. The most mind-boggling thing to me is the ending, which scaled way back on the action. Whereas we finally see a duel between two wizards at the end of OotP, here the film just sort of peters out, even when the darn book had more action. I just cannot comprehend why they cut back here. To make room for the new-for-the-film attack on the Weasley home halfway through to punch up a sagging middle? An attack that is then never mentioned again? That and the ending without anyone from the OotP there fighting it out with the Deatheaters make the good guys look completely flatfooted here.

While the tone would shift rather suddenly between humorous and dire, I otherwise loved the film, but just when we needed it to end strong it doesn't.
i agree completely. nice point on the good guys looking ill prepared as well. i hadn't thought of that.


Good:
Cinematography — !!!
Acting (with a few overactors excluded. I'm looking at you, HBC)
Set/art design and costuming

Bad:
Pacing
Direction
Editing

Haven't made up my mind yet:
Script.
i loved the pacing up until the end.

[Wryan]

This was goddamn great. Broadbent and Delbonnel added immeasurably. I had hoped they would have kept Delbonnel for the final two, as his assistance in the tone and shape of the world here is just how I imagine the last one to be. I'm sure Eduardo Serra will be up to the task, though.

I loved it. A lot. The romance stuff is about what I expected; seemed fine. Yeah some parts were given short shrift, but still felt all right to me overall. I hope to see this again in theatres.

[Watashi]

Was I the only who thought the cinematography was only merely good, and not great? Azkaban had much better visuals, not just in the framing, but in the art and set designs.

[monolith94]

Azkaban did have better visuals, perhaps, but this film's cinematography was still far superior to anything else in the series, Azkaban excluded.

[Ezee E]

Damnit, when is Cuaron going to do a new movie?

[Raiders]

Damnit, when is Cuaron going to do a new movie?

I was just about to say he had his small-scale Mexican heritage film coming out (think it was called Mexico '68), but that has completely disappeared. A Boy and His Shoe, due next year, seems much more concrete.

[Ezee E]

I was just about to say he had his small-scale Mexican heritage film coming out (think it was called Mexico '68), but that has completely disappeared. A Boy and His Shoe, due next year, seems much more concrete.
Ah. Seems like Y Tu Mama tambien in Europe. I remember he said that he wanted to do a smaller scale movie after spending so much time on Potter and Children of Men.

[Henry Gale]

I saw it on Friday and would personally fall in with those saying it's the best since Cuaron's film. I haven't seen Prisoner of Azkaban since theatres, but strictly as a fan of the films (who only read the first two books as a youngin) I was extremely impressed with what Yates did here. Him and Delbonnel create such a beautifully detailed, grand atmosphere to the entire picture is enthralling in a way I felt hasn't really been there with the last few entries. I also love the return of the day-to-day stuff in Hogwarts and the impossible camera movements through and around the castle that join those parts. Plus the actors, young and old, old and new, all seem to be perfectly comfortable and effective with their roles more than ever. Steve Kloves being back after skipping out on Order of the Phoenix also really seemed to map out all the emotionally high or low, comedic or serious points better than he has with any of them no matter how closely bunched together or constrasting they were.

So no matter what I feel about the series on a whole, I just found Half-Blood Prince to be such an exciting film, if a bit emotionally draining by the end. But if this is the way Yates & co. are tackling the final story in the next two films, then I am quite excited for the series for the first time since... ever I guess.

****

[Qrazy]

Wouldn't that be true of every movie he's going to be in?

Well first off I see no reason at all he'd be good as Bilbo. Secondly I don't think an individual should play two iconic lead role fantasy characters unless they're an exceptional actor and probably not even then. He can take another role, an entirely new character and make it his own... but this would just be The Hobbit starring Harry Potter.

[number8]

Both Lon Chaneys reject that implication!!

[Qrazy]

Both Lon Chaneys reject that implication!!

Versatility is key. Ian McKellen pulled it off but he wasn't the major lead either.

[lovejuice]

a hit and miss with perhaps more of the latter. love their interpretation of slughorn. totally and significantly improve upon the book. also i like that they do not dwell too much on voldy's past which is boring and takes the center stage in the novel.

agree with all who say they spend too much time on the lovely dovely stuff. it's weird too since i don't remember the novel being too much about that. the rom-com is charming in goblet of fire, but at this stage of the story, quite stupid and distracting. besides, ginger, the character and the actress, are weak. yet the biggest problem, as many point out, is that events seem to be there without serving anything. the extra corn field fight is a perfect example.

unlike most people, i like its non-climatic ending. very befitting the penultimate movie that will send off to the climax. in fact, i prefer this to the semi-climatic battle in the book which i think rowling puts it there so the ending doesn't look too bleak.

and omg, they don't freaking explain anything at all about snape being the prince? that's lame.
i don't understand that yates did a fine job extracting the essential from a gargantuan order of phoenix, but can't find his way in a much slimmer half-blood prince.

[Dead & Messed Up]

Just got back. Tremendous fun. It's such a joy to return to this cast, both the young and the old, and see Hogwarts again. The romances were delightful, they bowed out at the right time for the main story to kick in, and I was genuinely affected by the ending. It's been a complete pleasure for me watching these films, and though I have quibbles with each one, they remain a lovely, charming fantasy series, great for kids, great for adults.

Seriously, I'm just really happy to have seen this. Can't wait for the next one.

:)

[Wryan]

The more I think about it, I realize that Broadbent was just so perfect. When Harry quaffs the luck potion that leads to a battle of the wacked-out baffled people between Broadbent and Radcliffe, I was lovin it.

[lovejuice]

The more I think about it, I realize that Broadbent was just so perfect. When Harry quaffs the luck potion that leads to a battle of the wacked-out baffled people between Broadbent and Radcliffe, I was lovin it.
yes. that scene alone almost validates the movie in my eyes. besides, the touching conversation about lily is not even in the book.

[Dead & Messed Up]

The more I think about it, I realize that Broadbent was just so perfect. When Harry quaffs the luck potion that leads to a battle of the wacked-out baffled people between Broadbent and Radcliffe, I was lovin it.

Yeah. I love how Radcliffe starts matching Broadbent's posture and cadence.

[Mara]

besides, the touching conversation about lily is not even in the book.

Sure it is.

[chrisnu]

I hope this doesn't hapen and they go for someone like 20 years older.
I agree wholeheartedly.

[lovejuice]

Sure it is.
really? it has been a while but i watched the movie with a friend who just recently finished the book. and we concur in the book they just sort of drunk themselves silly. finally slughorn breaks down, and just gives harry the memory.

[Mara]

really? it has been a while but i watched the movie with a friend who just recently finished the book. and we concur in the book they just sort of drunk themselves silly. finally longhorn breaks down, and just gives harry the memory.

It's quite a poignant moment in the book. I'll see if I can find it when I get home.

[Mara]

Yuppers. I found it-- from page 488-490 in the book. Sad stuff, when Harry is describing her death.


"That's enough!" said Slughorn suddenly, raising a shaking hand. "Really, my dear boy, enough... I'm an old man... I don't need to hear... I don't want to hear..."

"I forgot," lied Harry, Felix Felicis leading him on. "You liked her, didn't you?"

"Liked her?" said Slughorn, his eyes brimming with tears once more. "I don't imagine anyone who met her wouldn't have liked her... Very brave... Very funny... It was the most horrible thing..."

[Henry Gale]

This is very minor, but something I remember being said as a joke by myself and others when Rowling revealed she had always written Dumbledore knowing he was gay was that they would now pull ill-advised retcon moves and camp him up for any of the following movies. I never thought it was something that would actually happen...

So when in this film the character magically re-decorated Slughorn's house ("Well that was fun!"), grabbed the Home & Garden magazine and talked about how he loved knitting patterns in the span of maybe two minutes, most of my audience was chuckling but also sounded kind a bit baffled. It was clearly in there to make reference to the fact (and I was assured by a few friends that the scene wasn't at all that way in the book), but it just felt like such an awkward and irrelevant thing to be in there. Though in an odd way it does show that the films are also responsive to the culture of the books while still being their own storytelling entity as adaptations and using that advantage wherever the filmmakers see fit. I quite like that, but I also wish other sorts of creative liberties were used instead of just throwing in a few comic relief bits that would be strange without knowing their real-world context.

[Dead & Messed Up]

This is very minor, but something I remember being said as a joke by myself and others when Rowling revealed she had always written Dumbledore knowing he was gay was that they would now pull ill-advised retcon moves and camp him up for any of the following movies. I never thought it was something that would actually happen...

So when in this film the character magically re-decorated Slughorn's house ("Well that was fun!"), grabbed the Home & Garden magazine and talked about how he loved knitting patterns in the span of maybe two minutes, most of my audience was chuckling but also sounded kind a bit baffled. It was clearly in there to make reference to the fact (and I was assured by a few friends that the scene wasn't at all that way in the book), but it just felt like such an awkward and irrelevant thing to be in there. Though in an odd way it does show that the films are also responsive to the culture of the books while still being their own storytelling entity as adaptations and using that advantage wherever the filmmakers see fit. I quite like that, but I also wish other sorts of creative liberties were used instead of just throwing in a few comic relief bits that would be strange without knowing their real-world context.

I don't think those little gags depended on knowledge of Dumbledore's sexuality, although I suppose they are cues. I didn't even think of it at the time, except as an indication that, despite his wizardry, he gets some pleasure out of the upper-middle-class lifestyle.

It reminds me of how Monty Python would give us towering knights who demanded twin shrubberies so there's a nice little two-tiered effect.

[Ezee E]

Wanted to see Public Enemies, but showed up late and went to this instead.

Really enjoyed it.

I'm not a huge Harry Potter follower, so I'm still confused at a lot of the things that went on, but it may be my favorite Potter film now. The way they're developing the relationships of the young wizards, the fascinating technical approach (easily the best shot film of the series), and being downright creepy at times makes me really look forward to the final two.

Absolutely loved Slughorn.

[Mara]

BY THE WAY, Frank Dillane who played teenage Tom Riddle, is quite creepy/beautiful and was doing some pretty interesting acting. He had a mouth-twitch that was freaking me out.

Apparently, he's Stephen Dillane's son.

[Morris Schæffer]

BY THE WAY, Frank Dillane who played teenage Tom Riddle, is quite creepy/beautiful and was doing some pretty interesting acting. He had a mouth-twitch that was freaking me out.

Apparently, he's Stephen Dillane's son.

Ralph Fiennes' nephew is in there somewhere also.

[Mara]

Ralph Fiennes' nephew is in there somewhere also.

Found him. Hero Fiennes-Tiffin, played the 11-year-old Riddle. He was pretty good, too.

[ledfloyd]

BY THE WAY, Frank Dillane who played teenage Tom Riddle, is quite creepy/beautiful and was doing some pretty interesting acting. He had a mouth-twitch that was freaking me out.

Apparently, he's Stephen Dillane's son.
i noticed the mouth thing. it reminded me of another child actor and i can't remember who. it's still driving me nuts.

[lovejuice]

Yuppers. I found it-- from page 488-490 in the book. Sad stuff, when Harry is describing her death.
finally i found a copy in a bookstore and check the passage, and mara, i beg to differ here. the actual dialogue is different. movie version with the goldfish is more touching. i am not even sure if rowling meant the scene to be sad. more like harry tries to freak slughorn out by the gory details of his parents' death. (i know, weird thing to do, but he himself is drunk with felix felicis.)

in the movie, slughorn mentions that he knows why harry is here, but in the book, harry knows that slughorn is too drunk to remember anything by tomorrow. that he's willing to give harry the memory adds depth to his character.

also during the school attack of book 7, slughorn is still ambivalent, being a coward that he's, which side he should join. broadbent's slughorn, on the other hand, will surely take his first chance blasting away death eaters.

wow, i'm pretty nerdy considered i am not even that big a fan.

[Mara]

I'd forgotten about the goldfish story. Yeah, that was really moving.

[Rowland]

I rewatched Harry Potter 2 yesterday for the first time since its DVD release, and yep, it remains my least favorite entry in the series. Still positive, albeit barely, because of the introduction of darker elements that enrichen the fabric of the series, some deft performances (primarily from cast newbies Branagh and Issacs), and an intricate mystery that wraps itself up in a fairly neat fashion. It's just a shame about the dull direction, excessive action set pieces, stuffy tone, and all-around lousy pacing. The middle act in particular proves exceedingly difficult to sustain interest during, but the film picks up with its best action sequence, being Harry's menace-steeped encounter with the snake in the secret chamber. This is a passable attempt by Columbus at maturing the texture of the series before more talented directors upped the ante. He seemed more at home with the relatively meaningless yet charming introductory chapter.

[Ezee E]

Chamber of Secrets is pretty awful.

[Winston*]

All these positive reactions to this and the fifth one make me I think I should watch the rest of these Potter movies just to complete for myself the narrative of the books (which I gave up on in the sixth since they basically got steadily worse after the first one).

[lovejuice]

All these positive reactions to this and the fifth one make me I think I should watch the rest of these Potter movies just to complete for myself the narrative of the books (which I gave up on in the sixth since they basically got steadily worse after the first one).
the last book is very fun though. in my ideal world, i will get rid of the fifth book entirely. compress the sixth. and separated seven into two books.

[monolith94]

:( The fifth book is my favorite of the series.

[Rowland]

:( The fifth book is my favorite of the series.The books all kinda bleed together in my memory now, but the fifth is my favorite movie so far.

[lovejuice]

:( The fifth book is my favorite of the series.
color me extremely surprised. so you enjoy reading pages upon pages of stuffs with no consequence except that it's there to make the book thicker and more epic?

[Mara]

:( The fifth book is my favorite of the series.

Me too.

I think it's the most character-driven and least plot-driven of the books. And I love the characters.

The one scene in the books that made me cry the hardest was in the fifth book. And it wasn't Sirius' death. And it wasn't in the film.

I will not say more. Guess.

[Morris Schæffer]

Me too.

I think it's the most character-driven and least plot-driven of the books. And I love the characters.

The one scene in the books that made me cry the hardest was in the fifth book. And it wasn't Sirius' death. And it wasn't in the film.

I will not say more. Guess.

Something with the house elves? Having regained their freedom?

[Mara]

Something with the house elves? Having regained their freedom?

No... and isn't that the second book? Or third?

[Ivan Drago]

No... and isn't that the second book? Or third?

It might be in Goblet of Fire, but the book - not the disaster of a movie. But then again after I saw Half-Blood Prince, it needs a rewatch.

[transmogrifier]

No... and isn't that the second book? Or third?

Remember when Wats went nuts at me because I said I couldn't keep the movies straight? Good times. :)

[Mara]

What kills me in Book 5 is when Molly is trying to get rid of the boggart in Sirius' house and it keeps looking like her children, husband, and Harry. Just devestating.

[monolith94]

I love the scene in book 5 near the very end when Luna is just talking with Harry about death.

[Mara]

I just reread Book 7 this weekend for kicks. And it's always those quiet, human moments that get me. I cried (again) when:

Hermoine explains that she has "protected" her parents by making them forget that they have a daughter.

And my favorite moment in, possibly, the entire series is at the end of the book:

Molly, to Bellatrix: "GET AWAY FROM MY DAUGHTER, YOU BITCH!"

[lovejuice]

two things that i like about book 7.

1) the use of snow motive. in fact, the series are best during scenes with snow. rowling has a hidden knack for that.

2)
the back story about the three brothers. this mythological thingy has always been what's missing from the series.

[Qrazy]

Saw the film, liked it. Although I will say that while I think the cinematography was solid it's really the editing transitions and the effects work that I think is worthy of special praise (memory scenes). The cinematography is an aspect of this but not really the primary one.

[transmogrifier]

So, I made fun of the previous films in the series for being a series of searches for random MacGuffin's that had little to nothing to do with anything except as something to hang the random series of "magic!" on and as a way to deliver one or two random facts about the throughline story.

HPATHBP at least plays with the formula by not focusing on the search for a MacGuffin, but instead spending 150 minutes setting up the search for MANY MacGuffin's in the next film. And it is as boring as that sounds. Far too repetitive and far too long for the amount of ground it covers and recovers, it seriously drags. Also, it should be called Harry Potter and the Purple Sheet Being Ripped Off the Vanishing Cabinet.

The good news; even my wife seemed bored by it al, and so I may not get dragged to the next one.

[BuffaloWilder]

trans, I've come to the conclusion that you are medically unable to like any film. I think it has to do with your serotonin levels.

[transmogrifier]

Still, not as weird as you being clinically unable to read signatures on messageboards :)

[BuffaloWilder]

Those ratings are dubious, at best.

[B-side]

As a Potter fan, I was disappointed. Might be my least favorite of the series since the first two films.

[transmogrifier]

Those ratings are dubious, at best.

How so, pray tell? Assume a movie > 60 is worthwhile, and > 80 is brilliant....

[BuffaloWilder]

How so, pray tell? Assume a movie > 60 is worthwhile, and > 80 is brilliant....

Because
http://outlandinstitute.files.wordpre ss.com/2008/09/pewterschmidt.jpg
that's why.

[Kurosawa Fan]

Oy. I was really impressed by the first hour and a half of this, but the third act couldn't have been worse. Totally limp and unaffecting. Barely a passable grade. These movies just aren't very good.

[Watashi]

I liked this a LOT more on a second viewing. Weird. I had the same reaction to Goblet of Fire as well.

I just love the way this movie is shot.

[Ezee E]

I liked this a LOT more on a second viewing. Weird. I had the same reaction to Goblet of Fire as well.

I just love the way this movie is shot.
Best shot movie this year.

[Wryan]

Oy. I was really impressed by the first hour and a half of this, but the third act couldn't have been worse. Totally limp and unaffecting. Barely a passable grade. These movies just aren't very good.

The third and fifth are still great, I think.

And Delbonnel's work on this is painterly-pretty. In a way that worked.

[Bosco B Thug]

Some quick opinions:

- Impressive craft. Visually compelling and competent, with alternating moments of thrill and moments of charm keeping one engaged throughout. But one just has to accept these are foremost adaptations for fans, and as stand-alone movies, they are complete and utter lost causes - and it can't really help it.

I do remember being unduly positive about Part 5, though.

- You do really have to know the books well to like these movies, because I didn't know what was going on half the time. Or what half of everything was. It's pretty ridiculous.

- I don't remember anything about the books, so is it understandable that I feel like NOTHING HAPPENS in this movie? Because nothing does.

- Drama and character work is unfailingly artificial. Yates creates some good moods and textures of student life, but the screenplay is laughable.

- Radcliffe is the only one who makes an impression. He's pretty funny sometimes, actually. The other two are still lead weights. Ginny's pretty bad, as well. I really hope she acts better in the next one, because I like that she's not some typical super-conventionally-cute-looking love interest, and that her attractiveness has to come from a place outside of a tween-star face. I think she's perfectly nice-looking, but all signs point to she can't act, and it's too bad. Broadbent is super.

[[ETM]]

- I don't remember anything about the books, so is it understandable that I feel like NOTHING HAPPENS in this movie? Because nothing does.

They have always worked completely on internal logic. Once you apply rational thought to what happens, it falls apart.

[StanleyK]

But one just has to accept these are foremost adaptations for fans, and as stand-alone movies, they are complete and utter lost causes - and it can't really help it.

Actually, the HP fans I know claim that the first two films were the most faithful to the books and that the film series has been in decline since.

[number8]

Actually, the HP fans I know claim that the first two films were the most faithful to the books and that the film series has been in decline since.

Coincidentally, they are the worst.

[[ETM]]

Coincidentally, they are the worst.

Definitely. I've started reading the first book, and it's almost all in the film. I'm finding the book about as much fun as the film, too.

[Mara]

The first two books are good, but they are the most immature ones. (Which makes sense, they are written for the youngest audience.) The third and fourth are improvements, and with the fifth it really becomes more adult entertainment.

[[ETM]]

Rowling did actually learn how to write throughout the series. I guess the first book is good, coming from an almost complete amateur.

[Yxklyx]

Whoa, what happened! I only read the first five books before I lost interest. The first five movies felt like a reader's digest version of what I had read - but I really like this one. I loved the shots, the editing and I felt that this one breathed whereas the others hyperventilated.

[Dukefrukem]

I wanted to finish this franchise over the weekend. I could barely get through this movie. God these are the worst "blockbuster" movies/franchise ever.

I've never known a series famous for having NOTHING happen in every 120 minute movie.

[EyesWideOpen]

I wanted to finish this franchise over the weekend. I could barely get through this movie. God these are the worst "blockbuster" movies/franchise ever.

I've never known a series famous for having NOTHING happen in every 120 minute movie.

Boo!

HP is better then any "blockbuster" franchise you like. :P

[Bosco B Thug]

But Part 6 really is the worst.

[Henry Gale]

I don't know, this one easily fits into my top three favourites of the series along with Prisoner of Azkaban and Deathly Hallows Part 1.

Definitely some of the least rushed character work, driven by a lot of great, tangible emotional elements, plus it's just a lot of fun, effectively creepy, and probably one of the most visually interesting blockbusters of the last five years too. Gambon, Broadbent and the main three kids are also really good in it.

If there's any installment I really don't care all that much for, it's Goblet of Fire. People seem to hate the first two as well, but last time I saw them I was pretty young so my memories of them are pretty favourable and nostalgic.

[Rowland]

But Part 6 really is the worst.Worse than the first? Even if 6 has its share of issues, it's gorgeous enough, and blessedly free enough of excessive exposition compared to some installments, that I think it's far from the worst.

[Bosco B Thug]

Worse than the first? Even if 6 has its share of issues, it's gorgeous enough, and blessedly free enough of excessive exposition compared to some installments, that I think it's far from the worst.
I meant "worst" in the party killer/Buzz Killington/Britta Perry sense. Duke vindicated my notion that nothing happens in the movie. I can only groan thinking of sitting through Harry and Dumbledore's random journey to get a something from a lake or something. But I'm sure it is better than those early Columbus ones.

[Dead & Messed Up]

I'm surprised I reacted so positively to this when it came out. That business with the Weaseley house getting destroyed and nobody giving a damn ten minutes later is really sloppy stuff.

[Qrazy]

I meant "worst" in the party killer/Buzz Killington/Britta Perry sense. Duke vindicated my notion that nothing happens in the movie. I can only groan thinking of sitting through Harry and Dumbledore's random journey to get a something from a lake or something. But I'm sure it is better than those early Columbus ones.

...

Someone wasn't paying attention to the story.

[DavidSeven]

The Sorcerer's Stone - **
The Chamber of Secrets - *1/2
The Prisoner of Azkaban - **1/2
The Goblet of Fire - ***
The Order of the Phoenix - ***1/2
The Half-Blood Prince - **
The Deathly Hallows (as one film) - ***1/2

I watched all of the films for the first time in the span of about two weeks late last year, so I think the individual ratings are pretty reliable in relation to the entire series. The Half-Blood Prince really does suck about as much as Columbus's efforts.

[Bosco B Thug]

...

Someone wasn't paying attention to the story. Cluelessness played up for effect. I'm well aware they were after Very Important Thing in "lakey area" where Arbitrary Evil Charm causes Dumbledore to almost rape Harry.

[Dukefrukem]

I don't know, this one easily fits into my top three favourites of the series along with Prisoner of Azkaban and Deathly Hallows Part 1.

Definitely some of the least rushed character work, driven by a lot of great, tangible emotional elements, plus it's just a lot of fun, effectively creepy, and probably one of the most visually interesting blockbusters of the last five years too. Gambon, Broadbent and the main three kids are also really good in it.

If there's any installment I really don't care all that much for, it's Goblet of Fire. People seem to hate the first two as well, but last time I saw them I was pretty young so my memories of them are pretty favourable and nostalgic.

Prisoner of Azkaban is the only one I'd ever consider watching again. I love the Time Travel aspect combined with the werewolf stuff. That's my love for the horror genre.

I was also told by a co-worker that DH Part 1 was fairly solid. It's next on my viewing queue so I hope it's at least on par with Prisoner of Azkaban.

[Dukefrukem]

The Sorcerer's Stone - **
The Chamber of Secrets - *1/2
The Prisoner of Azkaban - **1/2
The Goblet of Fire - ***
The Order of the Phoenix - ***1/2
The Half-Blood Prince - **
The Deathly Hallows (as one film) - ***1/2

I watched all of the films for the first time in the span of about two weeks late last year, so I think the individual ratings are pretty reliable in relation to the entire series. The Half-Blood Prince really does suck about as much as Columbus's efforts.

Your Half-Blood Prince grade aligns with my viewing of the first three movies. But Goblet of Fire and The Order of the Phoenix are both weaker films than Prisoner of Azkaban with the exception of both their endings. (movies with a REAL climax)

Prisoner of Azkaban is the only movie in the franchise that balances excitement with the ongoing story and I'm not just saying that with my love for Gary Oldman in which this movie has him on screen the most.

Even the trailer is the best;

TY-L_z93oy8

[number8]

Goblet of Fire is like the worst of them all.

[Dukefrukem]

Did you read all the books 8?

How many people here did read them all? Just curious.

[Kurosawa Fan]

*raises hand*

There were only seven books, but I read them all. They were... good. Differing levels of "good." Nothing exceptional, and instantly forgettable.

[Mara]

How many people here did read them all? Just curious.

Read them all with something between "enjoyment" and "worship and tears" (5, 6 and 7.)

They are fantastic children's literature.

[Bosco B Thug]

Goblet of Fire is like the worst of them all. I also remember being narratively tortured by Part 4.

[Qrazy]

Cluelessness played up for effect. I'm well aware they were after Very Important Thing in "lakey area" where Arbitrary Evil Charm causes Dumbledore to almost rape Harry.

That very evil thing was a Horcrux, which is part of Voldemort's soul. Destroying the Horcrux they got there is what gave Dumbledore a death sentence, is what had him convince Snape to kill him, is what precipitated the entire last act of the series (last three films give or take).

[Qrazy]

Personally I think all the films in the series are roughly the same quality with a handful of peaks and valleys. They are all fairly competent adaptations of a fairly competent original series. The films can never be great because the material isn't great. They are well produced though and when they stumble (the films) it's usually a result of pacing issues or acting. The third one is probably the most visually successful (the latter few films are solid as well) but it also cut out a few central plot points from the third book that severely harm it's narrative import.

I scratch my head at those who argue that one film sucks and another is great though. They all seem about the same to me, they aren't operating on phantom menace-esque levels here.

[Mr. McGibblets]

I scratch my head at those who argue that one film sucks and another is great though. They all seem about the same to me, they aren't operating on phantom menace-esque levels here.

I think the first two films feature such horrible child-acting, that they are terrible regardless of the story or direction. The fourth film is based on such pointless source material that it also is terrible.

The other movies are all about the same quality.

[Qrazy]

I think the first two films feature such horrible child-acting, that they are terrible regardless of the story or direction. The fourth film is based on such pointless source material that it also is terrible.

The other movies are all about the same quality.

The fourth one is where Voldemort is reborn, not sure what's so bad about it's source material versus any of the others.

I'd have to rewatch the first two to comment on the acting, saw them when they came out.

[Mr. McGibblets]

The fourth one is where Voldemort is reborn, not sure what's so bad about it's source material versus any of the others.

The excuse to have Harry participate in and win the tournament is incredibly tenuous. Why make the trophy into the portkey? Couldn't Crouch/Moody just make another portkey and hand it to Harry?

[Qrazy]

The excuse to have Harry participate in and win the tournament is incredibly tenuous. Why make the trophy into the portkey? Couldn't Crouch/Moody just make another portkey and hand it to Harry?

Ah yeah, that's dumb, I feel like there's a lot of that throughout the series though. If you pick it apart I find much of the time travel narrative in three fairly tenuous as well.