PDA

View Full Version : Harry Potter: HBP Movie



Pages : [1] 2

Leah_Michelle
06-13-2009, 01:31 AM
What is this blasphemy? I am searching around for a HP6 thread, only to find none? What? Might as well get the ball rolling, it's coming out in a month.

Personally, this looks like the best one yet from the trailers (http://www.apple.com/trailers/wb/harrypotterandthehalfbloodprince). Excellent cinematography, music is way better from the earlier ones.

I have a soft spot for these books. I literally grew up with them. Started reading when the second book came out when I was in 6th grade and continued reading them until the last one, when I was a freshman in college. They pretty much got me into reading and writing.

sassandgroove
06-13-2009, 01:35 AM
I know I've discussed it but it was probably in a thread about the book. :)

Leah_Michelle
06-13-2009, 01:53 AM
Yeah, I've mentioned it in a few different movie threads like Star Trek, which is predicting how well the movies this summer will do.

katiemac
06-13-2009, 07:33 AM
I know we had a thread some time ago when the first teaser trailer released last year. Ah well -- I'm sure it's lost in something else by now. But I only mention it because I know we aren't blasphemous! :)

I said I didn't want to see this one because I never really end up liking the movies (although I'm in the minority where I think the last one was actually pretty decent -- the "true book" fans seem to least like the ones I like the best). But still, I wanted to let this one slide because I love the sixth book and decided I didn't need to see it translated to film. The trailer, though, does its job pretty well and I'm starting to lean toward seeing it. This is one where if they put the focus right, it could end up being a phenomenal movie.

Sigh. So torn.

sassandgroove
06-13-2009, 07:45 AM
I am torn as well. I am one of those that likes the 5th movie the least (and the 5th book the best). I heard last year the 6th movie was going to be heavy on the teen dating and angsty romance. While that is present inthe book I think the main plot with oh, some kid called Harry and a guy called Voldemort, are much more interesting. so I don't know. Hubby likes spoilers and such so he'll read every review he can find and tell me if Ishould go or not.

AmandaAcidic
06-13-2009, 08:34 AM
I'm so excited for this movie. I loved all the best and only sorta liked the movies but the trailers make it look like it's going to be awesome. I have high hopes.

sassandgroove
06-13-2009, 08:42 AM
I'm trying not to get my hopes up. maybe that way I'll be pleasantly surprised. :)

childeroland
06-13-2009, 04:33 PM
My most anticipated summer film, next to Up. HBP is probably the best book in the series.

Kayley
06-13-2009, 07:26 PM
I'm so excited for this movie! I'm going to watch it on June 17, the day after I come back from a DECA camp, as part of a joint-birthday party with my friend. I'm so excited for it! :)

I was a bit disappointed with OotP when I first saw it, but I've grown to like it. Based on the trailers for HBP, it looks like I'll enjoy it the first time. But either way, it will be good since it's a Harry Potter movie.

AmandaAcidic
06-13-2009, 07:45 PM
I'm going to the midnight showing. A friend and I already planned it all out. Cause we're both really big nerds =]

mscelina
06-13-2009, 08:10 PM
Yep. Midnight showing for me and the hubby as well. The trailers look awesome, the sixth book is probably my favorite of the series and I can't wait to see Alan Rickman finally get to sink his teeth into the meat of Severus Snape's character.

Booyah.

maxmordon
06-14-2009, 01:41 AM
I oficially have the first HBP avatar! Yay!

About Harry Potter, Philosophal Stone is the first book I read completely. So, they are fundamental part of my life as well.

naimas
06-14-2009, 02:37 AM
I have the honor of saying that Uncle Vernon Dursley coughed on me while I was in London.

Cranky
06-14-2009, 02:41 AM
I.Cannot.Wait!

My mom and I will be going to this (though not a midnight showing), and we're excited as little kids, I think. I am, anyway. It looks awesome, and so far, with the exception of CoS, I've not been let down by any of the movies, speaking for myself. I've loved them, and I've loved the books.

*does happy dance*

robeiae
06-14-2009, 02:48 AM
*runs in*

Transformers rule, Potter drools!

*runs out, trips over Star Trek thread and bloodies own nose*

Cranky
06-14-2009, 03:46 AM
Totally serves you right.

*loads Robovowels into catapult, launches him into theater packed with Twilight fangirls*

robeiae
06-14-2009, 04:23 AM
Noooooooooooooo...

Leah_Michelle
06-14-2009, 10:27 AM
I'm going to the midnight showing. A friend and I already planned it all out. Cause we're both really big nerds =]

I'm thankful that I work at a movie theater.
Can anyone say free employee + guest screening? :tongue

bettielee
06-14-2009, 10:30 AM
I, too, eagerly await. I finally bought "HP/Order of the Phoenix" movie. I wasn't so hot on it in the theatre; I think they are going too fast in the last few movies, relying on the fact everyone has read the books, but I really liked it. I thought it was much heavier on the themes.

I'm glad they are splitting the last one into two.

Epiphany
06-14-2009, 10:31 AM
*hordes Draco/Snape cardboard cutout like a fangirl*

MINE I TELL YOU! ALL MINE!

*cackles*

Leah_Michelle
06-14-2009, 10:36 AM
*hordes Draco/Snape cardboard cutout like a fangirl*

MINE I TELL YOU! ALL MINE!

*cackles*

:eek: You've been stealing things from my closet again, haven't you! Give me my cutout back!!!11

Matt Willard
06-14-2009, 09:43 PM
I'll probably be seeing this in exchange for taking my sister and mother to Revenge of the Fallen. (Mom REALLY digs the Transformer movies, strangely.) Order of the Phoenix wasn't bad, but I still get jollies at the part where Harry's freaking out and seeing all those images, and then Voldemort just shows up in a suit and does that double-pointing kind of gesture. I could almost hear him clicking his tongue. "Hey, baby."

Blackest_Nite
06-22-2009, 05:47 AM
All of the trailers make me very excited for the movie; I am definitely going to a midnight showing.

Grrarrgh
06-22-2009, 06:42 AM
We're not going to a midnight showing, but we are definitely going to opening day. I can't wait!!! I'm currently reading the books over again in preparation. I just started OOTP, so I need to get a move on so I'm finished before the movie opens. I'm pretty excited that they're making the seventh book into 2 movies. I'm not looking forward to having no more HP to look forward to.

Leah_Michelle
06-22-2009, 01:27 PM
We're not going to a midnight showing, but we are definitely going to opening day. I can't wait!!! I'm currently reading the books over again in preparation. I just started OOTP, so I need to get a move on so I'm finished before the movie opens. I'm pretty excited that they're making the seventh book into 2 movies. I'm not looking forward to having no more HP to look forward to.

Lol, I agree.
By the end of the seventh book, not only was almost everyone dead, but I had no more to look forward to.
More tears ensued.

zaelyna
06-22-2009, 02:58 PM
I'm excited as well. I have some free tickets I "won" through my job last year and I've been saving them specifically for HBP. The teasers make me impatient, but with it being so close, I think I can manage. I get the feeling the teen dating will get annoying, but the major plot points look stellar--esp. the scene where Dumbledore and Harry are standing on that rock.

And omg, I'm in love with the score. Instrumental music's my fav. so when I first saw previews I turned to my friends and announced: I. Need. That. Score! O:]

jodiodi
06-22-2009, 06:06 PM
Not a big HP fan, but we do watch the movies sometimes. We'll likelly go see it, but won't make a big event of it. Just catch a matinee one afternoon when we have nothing better to do.

Don't get me wrong: we enjoy the movies, but as a confirmed anti-kids-in-movies person, the HP movies are more than a little painful.

Grrarrgh
06-22-2009, 07:05 PM
I just found out that the release of the Imax version of the movie has been delayed until 6/29 because of some deal Imax made with Paramount. Paramount signed a deal with IMAX to show Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen exclusively for four weeks if the movie used IMAX cameras, according to Slashfilm.com. So now I'm really ticked off. This movie has already been pushed back from November to June, and now the Imax version is being pushed back another 2 weeks. We always go see the Imax version on opening day. So now what? Do we wait 2 more weeks to go see the movie? Go see the non-Imax version on opening day, which will suck, but at least we'll get to see it? :rant: :rant:

sassandgroove
06-22-2009, 07:38 PM
I don't care for non -imax movies in Imax anyway.

I'm still not sure about it. I am going to wait and see what certain people say about it before I go.

katiemac
06-22-2009, 08:38 PM
Don't get me wrong: we enjoy the movies, but as a confirmed anti-kids-in-movies person, the HP movies are more than a little painful.

Oh geez. To their credit, the actors seem to get better with every movie [the kid who plays Ron I think has some real talent] but my goodness the first bunch of movies are downright painful to watch.


I just found out that the release of the Imax version of the movie has been delayed until 6/29 because of some deal Imax made with Paramount. Paramount signed a deal with IMAX to show Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen exclusively for four weeks if the movie used IMAX cameras, according to Slashfilm.com. So now I'm really ticked off. This movie has already been pushed back from November to June, and now the Imax version is being pushed back another 2 weeks. We always go see the Imax version on opening day. So now what? Do we wait 2 more weeks to go see the movie? Go see the non-Imax version on opening day, which will suck, but at least we'll get to see it? :rant: :rant:

Its original push from November to June is what caused the IMAX schedule conflict with Transformers. Somehow I doubt Warners is that upset about it, though, because it just means that the people who are in your position -- want to see the IMAX but can't wait -- will just see it twice. And I think the film only has something like 15 minutes in IMAX/3-D like Phoenix did.

ChunkyC
06-23-2009, 12:14 AM
I discovered the HP books when the frenzy around the release of The Goblet of Fire hit the media. I wanted to see what it was all about, so I got the first book and read it in a day. I then bought the other three and chewed through them in about a week or so. From then on, I pre-ordered each new book as it was announced. I think the longest it took me to read one was three days for The Order of the Phoenix.

I've been to each of the movies on opening weekend and have them all on DVD. I think they are great adaptations. So yeah, I'm really looking forward to this latest film, and I too was glad to hear they were going to do two films for the final book. Bring it on!

katiemac
06-23-2009, 12:37 AM
I discovered the HP books when the frenzy around the release of The Goblet of Fire hit the media. I wanted to see what it was all about, so I got the first book and read it in a day. I then bought the other three and chewed through them in about a week or so. From then on, I pre-ordered each new book as it was announced. I think the longest it took me to read one was three days for The Order of the Phoenix.


That's when I found them, too. My mom was reading them, actually, and bought Goblet of Fire when it came out. I was home on break or something and read the first three in two days and then I had to wait for her to finish with the fourth. Funny, though, I remember her trying to get me to read Sorcerer's before that time and I couldn't get into it. I think the hardest wait was between five and six, although five was the first one I had to wait for at all.

Leah_Michelle
06-23-2009, 02:06 AM
I just found out that the release of the Imax version of the movie has been delayed until 6/29 because of some deal Imax made with Paramount. Paramount signed a deal with IMAX to show Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen exclusively for four weeks if the movie used IMAX cameras, according to Slashfilm.com. So now I'm really ticked off. This movie has already been pushed back from November to June, and now the Imax version is being pushed back another 2 weeks. We always go see the Imax version on opening day. So now what? Do we wait 2 more weeks to go see the movie? Go see the non-Imax version on opening day, which will suck, but at least we'll get to see it? :rant: :rant:

Yeah, they did that because HP chose to put back the opening.
Transformers already had a contract for how long it was going to play in IMAX. Because they had the release scheduled for probably a year in advance, they got priority.
It is kinda sad, but I'm still excited to see Transformers2, just not as much as HP6.

Leah_Michelle
06-23-2009, 02:08 AM
I discovered the HP books when the frenzy around the release of The Goblet of Fire hit the media. I wanted to see what it was all about, so I got the first book and read it in a day. I then bought the other three and chewed through them in about a week or so. From then on, I pre-ordered each new book as it was announced. I think the longest it took me to read one was three days for The Order of the Phoenix.

I've been to each of the movies on opening weekend and have them all on DVD. I think they are great adaptations. So yeah, I'm really looking forward to this latest film, and I too was glad to hear they were going to do two films for the final book. Bring it on!

It got big at my elementary school after the second book came out.
I wasn't going to read them, but my friend insisted. He wouldn't leave me alone until I did. Glad I listened too him :D

ChunkyC
06-23-2009, 03:15 AM
I'm glad I got into them too, they're just bags of fun. I ended up enjoying them so much I gave my grandkids the regular editions I'd originally bought and ordered the whole set in the adult editions for myself.

My wife and I have begun watching the first five movies to help us get psyched for HBP, and I just began reading The Philosopher's Stone again. This'll be my second reading of the books -- I wonder how far I'll get by July 15th? :D

Exir
06-23-2009, 06:15 AM
but as a confirmed anti-kids-in-movies person

Just curious: why would that be?

robeiae
06-23-2009, 06:24 AM
Pure evilness, no doubt.

jodiodi
06-23-2009, 10:57 AM
Why, yes. I am evil.

I don't really like kids. I didn't even like them when I was one. Hence, I have none of my own. My stepkids are tolerable because they're well-behaved, they adore me, and most importantlly, I can send them back to their mama when I'm tired of them.

And kids in movies and on TV are just irritating as hell. Especially when they're so obviously trying to be 'cute'. The rare kid I can tolerate (like in Little Miss Sunshine) is the exception to prove my rule.

Don't get me wrong--I'd never hurt a child deliberately and abhor child abuse in any form. I'm just not into kids. Some people have a natural afinity and talent for enduring children. I'm not one of them and fortunately, I know that; hence, I have never birthed any nor adopted any.

I wouldn't wish myself on any kid.

Exir
06-23-2009, 12:49 PM
jodiodi: Ah, then, no worries. I thought you meant using kids in movies is immoral.

jodiodi
06-23-2009, 03:15 PM
Exir: Actually, I believe being forced to watch kids in movies violates the Geneva Convention and the Constitution clause on cruel and unusual punishment. ;)

maestrowork
07-14-2009, 05:39 AM
I might as well start it... ;)


So, how well do you think it will do? Will it break Transformers 2's record ($200M weds-sunday)? Or will it have a big weekend, then a steady stream of business like Pixar's UP? I predict the IMAX revenue would make up about 40% of its boxoffice take.

CACTUSWENDY
07-14-2009, 05:44 AM
Thought we had this thread a few weeks ago.

I think it will out do any of them. Kids will see it over and over.

Kathleen42
07-14-2009, 05:46 AM
Kids will see it over and over.

Kids? Heck, ever since PoA, I've been seeing them each three or four times in the theatre.

maestrowork
07-14-2009, 05:46 AM
Only kids? ;)

Cranky
07-14-2009, 06:00 AM
I'll only be seeing it once in the theater, but I'll be doing my bit to help the box office receipts in that small way. :D Me n' the moms have been looking forward to this with as much anticipation as any kid, I think.

But I'll do my rewatching on DVD, since I don't have the scratch to watch it multiple times in the theater. 'Sokay, though. Once will be awesome enough for me. :) I'm betting it'll outdo Transformers, but of course, I am a big fan, so what do I know?

katiemac
07-14-2009, 06:05 AM
I don't think it's going to beat Transformers 5-day opening. Domestically, anyway. The previous films all made a killing internationally, but stayed around $300 mil total for the domestic run.

But ... the sixth book was a big deal, and the rating has dropped back down to PG. Depends on how well they pull off the ending, I think, if the repeat viewings stick around for this one.

ETA: And IMAX doesn't open for another two weeks, so it'll boost again in repeat viewers. I don't know many people who are going to wait to see it just because of the IMAX release, but who will definitely go again a second time when it opens.

katiemac
07-14-2009, 06:10 AM
Just bumping this one so it will be easier to merge. :D

creamofmushroom
07-14-2009, 06:27 AM
there are some clips uploaded on youtube already...
there's a good quidditch tryout one there

sugarloaf10
07-14-2009, 06:38 AM
I am excited for this release. Having grown up with the books, Harry Potter holds a special place in my heart. I'm going to the midnight showing and look forward to being disappointed of the differences from the book! Currently rewatching all the movies now!

katiemac
07-14-2009, 06:40 AM
I am excited for this release. Having grown up with the books, Harry Potter holds a special place in my heart. I'm going to the midnight showing and look forward to being disappointed of the differences from the book! Currently rewatching all the movies now!

I love that you're looking forward to bemoaning the differences.

Personally, I don't mind the differences. The movies that were the most faithful to the books were the ones I liked the least, anyway.

I'm more afraid of it just all-around sucking, period. ;) Half-Blood Prince is my favorite in the series. I love it when shit hits the fan. And with a PG rating, I don't think it will be fanning enough!

childeroland
07-14-2009, 06:47 AM
It's doing 98% on Rottentomatoes right now, 85 on Metacritic.

mscelina
07-14-2009, 06:51 AM
I did hear from a reviewer that the PG rating must have been bought. His opinion was that HBP was way too dark and violent to merit that PG, and that a PG 13 was more appropriate.

katiemac
07-14-2009, 06:58 AM
I did hear from a reviewer that the PG rating must have been bought. His opinion was that HBP was way too dark and violent to merit that PG, and that a PG 13 was more appropriate.

Yesssssss.

I couldn't imagine, given the PG-13 on Phoenix (which could have probably done okay with a PG), what they could have possibly done to Prince to knock it down to PG. I figured it had something to do with the extra relationship humor, balancing all the bad stuff out.

Dark and violent is the way to go, man. They're kind of hinting at it in the previews, but they're not going all-out like I would have expected with this one.

mscelina
07-14-2009, 07:00 AM
*grin*

I was told the Inferi are scary as hell...

katiemac
07-14-2009, 07:01 AM
*grin*

I was told the Inferi are scary as hell...

I'm so twisted. The nastier it all gets the more I love it.

mscelina
07-14-2009, 07:02 AM
Same here. Some of the snippets I've seen involving Quidditch indicate that it's not just a kid's game any more too.

I'm getting excited. Twenty four hours from now, I'll be standing in line for the midnight showing...

katiemac
07-14-2009, 07:05 AM
Same here. Some of the snippets I've seen involving Quidditch indicate that it's not just a kid's game any more too.

I'm getting excited. Twenty four hours from now, I'll be standing in line for the midnight showing...

I don't have any plans to see it yet. You'll have to report back; I trust you guys to give it to me straight.

Sounds like they want to knock this one down to PG because I expect Deathly Hallows Part I could easily get a PG rating. Maybe Part II, as well, depending on how many people they actually kill on screen.

mscelina
07-14-2009, 07:08 AM
If it sucks and I'm bitterly disappointed, I'll certainly tell you straight out. My gut feeling is that it's going to be really hard to screw up Alan Rickman's first chance to sink his teeth into Severus Snape's character. Rickman is probably going to blow everyone else right off the screen. But I'm okay with that. :D And I'm looking forward to it.

katiemac
07-14-2009, 07:16 AM
If it sucks and I'm bitterly disappointed, I'll certainly tell you straight out. My gut feeling is that it's going to be really hard to screw up Alan Rickman's first chance to sink his teeth into Severus Snape's character. Rickman is probably going to blow everyone else right off the screen. But I'm okay with that. :D And I'm looking forward to it.

Good lord, if anything works about this movie it's going to be Alan Rickman, I guarantee that right now. That's where I love this book so much where it seems to be a lot of readers' least favorite. Snape Snape Snape.

jodiodi
07-14-2009, 09:20 AM
I LOVE Alan Rickman in everything he does. He makes Snape a sympathetic but scarey character. He's the only character I like in the HP saga besides Lucius Malfoy. Malfoy is so evil, I adore him. Snape is so sarcastic and dry, I adore him too.

Greenify13
07-14-2009, 09:34 AM
Not too excited about it and probably won't go to the movie theaters for it but I'll watch it, we have the rest so we have to continue. I am interested in how they'll do the last book though, considering the fact that they are doing 2 movies for the last book in the series I wonder how they will "split" it appropriately...

katiemac
07-14-2009, 08:26 PM
Apparently the Vatican has just given Half-Blood Prince its blessing. Interesting.

mscelina
07-14-2009, 08:36 PM
Not too excited about it and probably won't go to the movie theaters for it but I'll watch it, we have the rest so we have to continue. I am interested in how they'll do the last book though, considering the fact that they are doing 2 movies for the last book in the series I wonder how they will "split" it appropriately...

SPOILER ALERT














I figure they'll split it in Godric's Hollow after the whole blechiness with the snake and Bathilda Bagshot. It makes sense to me that they'd split it there; it's a mini-plot resolution of sorts and it would make the movie go out with a bang.

Literally.

katiemac
07-14-2009, 08:45 PM
SPOILER ALERT - SEVENTH BOOK







If it were up to me, I'd split it right when Voldemort gets the Elder Wand out of the tomb. Then the entire second half takes place at Hogwarts and it's all-out madness for a couple of hours.

Sage
07-14-2009, 08:52 PM
SPOILER ALERT - SEVENTH BOOK







I'm rereading the seventh book right now, and the middle hits right when Ron takes out the locket. As that is a climax and resolution right there, I wouldn't be surprised if that's where the first one ends. If so, though, I wonder what they'd call it, since "Deathly Hallows, part 1" wouldn't really work, since they don't find out about them until later (this assumes things will go in the same order)

Kitty Pryde
07-14-2009, 08:59 PM
If it sucks and I'm bitterly disappointed, I'll certainly tell you straight out. My gut feeling is that it's going to be really hard to screw up Alan Rickman's first chance to sink his teeth into Severus Snape's character the furniture. Rickman is probably going to blow everyone else right off the screen. But I'm okay with that. :D And I'm looking forward to it.

There, I fixed it for you.

But yeah, seriously. I'm a borderline obsessive Rickman fan and I think he's gonna be great. Also Helena Bonham-Carter, though I think she's really hit or miss, was really great in the last HP movie, so I look forward to her special brand of craziness.

Also, I just needed to share this (http://www.neighborhoodies.com/whats-under-your-cape-severus-snape-p-159.html):

http://www.neighborhoodies.com/images//samples/severussnape_productimg.jpg

It can be yours for a measly $19.99! There are others (http://www.neighborhoodies.com/readymades-harry-potter-tees-c-39_73.html) if Slytherins just aren't your type...

Kathleen42
07-14-2009, 08:59 PM
Yesssssss.

I couldn't imagine, given the PG-13 on Phoenix (which could have probably done okay with a PG), what they could have possibly done to Prince to knock it down to PG. I figured it had something to do with the extra relationship humor, balancing all the bad stuff out.

Dark and violent is the way to go, man. They're kind of hinting at it in the previews, but they're not going all-out like I would have expected with this one.

I was puzzled as well.

Kathleen42
07-14-2009, 09:01 PM
I LOVE Alan Rickman in everything he does. He makes Snape a sympathetic but scarey character. He's the only character I like in the HP saga besides Lucius Malfoy. Malfoy is so evil, I adore him. Snape is so sarcastic and dry, I adore him too.

I really hope they do a good Job with the Snape and Lilly stuff in DH.

DavidZahir
07-14-2009, 09:30 PM
I'll be seeing HBP on Friday, as part of a birthday celebration (no, not my own).

For what it is worth, I'd agree with Sage about where to split DH in two. It is a climax in and of itself on lots of levels, while leaving everything "open" for Part 2.

Okay now...

S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S

You've been warned.

Since the whole business with the House Elves has essentially been cut from the movies (I regret but totally understand this decision), methinks what might inspire THE KISS is Ron showing quite a bit of cleverness. The obvious thing to use would be his figuring out how to get into the Chamber of Secrets and even the idea of going there in the first place. I personally imagine Hermione's eyes shining after she destroys the cup (with Ron's encouragement), then the two of them look at each other, then they LEAP!

And when Harry finds them in the Chamber, they're adjusting their clothing.

But that's just me. Maybe.

ginnyweasley777
07-14-2009, 10:27 PM
From the trailers that I've seen, HBP looks like it's going to be good. I reckon it'll be quite a dark film though, the book has a lot of dark stuff going on and I don't see how they could cut it all out.

katiemac
07-14-2009, 11:17 PM
Entertainment Weekly gave it an A-. Check out this snippet from the review:


In the meantime, Draco Malfoy (Tom Felton) is being groomed to do some major evil. And Prof. Severus Snape (Alan Rickman (http://www.ew.com/ew/allabout/0,,20001778,00.html)) appears to have Draco's back — as well as the most delicious ability to. clip. his. words.

And it's the same cinematographer as Amelie.


Damn it. I do NOT want to get excited about this, but it seems like I'll be seeing it at some point now.

Sage
07-14-2009, 11:21 PM
Have tickets for tonight!

Stew21
07-15-2009, 12:27 AM
Here are the other harry potter hpb threads:

http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=112777&highlight=trailer

http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=111075&highlight=trailer


Trish, proving we aren't blasphemous

childeroland
07-15-2009, 04:36 AM
A+ review from Collider.

http://www.collider.com/2009/07/14/harry-potter-and-the-half-blood-prince-review/

Greenify13
07-15-2009, 05:14 AM
SPOILER ALERT



I figure they'll split it in Godric's Hollow after the whole blechiness with the snake and Bathilda Bagshot. It makes sense to me that they'd split it there; it's a mini-plot resolution of sorts and it would make the movie go out with a bang.

Literally.
Ah, you may be right, you may be very right. My spoiler but I don't know how much of a spoiler:


The thoughts about splitting the book into two movies became a discussion in mid '07. They had also considered making Goblet of Fire, two movies as well. The films are planned to be shot back to back and therefore able to be released as closely together as possible. It was also noted that Part 1 is a "road movie", which is exciting/interesting seeing as everything is usually set in the same "scene". Breath of fresh air, in more ways then one. Also Bill Nighy is going to be Rufus Scrimgeour. There was something more, and pretty big, but I can't remember what it was that I was going to say about the movie...

childeroland
07-15-2009, 05:43 AM
Harry Knowles's review (http://www.aintitcool.com/node/41691), also positive. Spoilers.

Exir
07-15-2009, 07:29 AM
I'm gonna watch it this Friday. (Or maybe earlier) Whooo!

Toothpaste
07-15-2009, 08:28 AM
Can't wait! Seeing it tonight at 10:15pm (that is to say Wed)! Have my ticket all printed out and everything!

I always avoid trailers etc before the Harry Potter films, and it is just excruciating! I can't wait to finally see the images, and what's more not reach for my remote in a panic every time I hear that music: "Dum dum di da dum di dum dum, dum di da dum di dum". . .

xXFireSpiritXx
07-15-2009, 02:58 PM
If you love the book your going to be throwing your hands up in the air as this is probably the most loose adaption of a HP novel to date. Huge sections of plot were removed and I mean major sequences that impact the overall story in the next one. They also took liberties of adding their own sequences which will definitely impact how the 7th plays out. The entire film felt that JK Rowling was not consulted at all for this one.

I was in a theater where not one person clapped at the end, but BOOED. Pretty sad.

maestrowork
07-15-2009, 04:34 PM
I
I was in a theater where not one person clapped at the end, but BOOED. Pretty sad.

Ouch. The fans must have been really pissed.

I think the earlier movies were pretty close to the books. I wonder if it's because HBP is so long that they couldn't do it justice in one film, and maybe that's why they knew they had to split the final book into two movies?

Nakhlasmoke
07-15-2009, 05:32 PM
I dunno , there were things I missed

SPOILER









Snape's CAPSLOCK moment at the end, where he really loses it


but for the most part I thought it was a pretty good adaptation, certainly fun to watch, anyway.

Fans just have to accept that a faithful screen adaptation is going to be 12 hours long. Sucks, but there it is.

Besides, I can reread the book whenever I want to, it's not like the movie made the original story disappear.

HeatherOhio
07-15-2009, 05:54 PM
Went last night to a 12:01 showing at the Drive-In.

This HP movie was the best. Totally wicked! Maybe even one of the best movies I've ever seen.

When I read the HP books I have this sense of awe. How is it possible a mere human being could have created these characters, story, twists and turns. I finally had this same feeling watching a HP movie. This movie captured the book.

Heather

Kathleen42
07-15-2009, 05:59 PM
I dunno , there were things I missed

SPOILER









Snape's CAPSLOCK moment at the end, where he really loses it


But that's the clue to the revelations in DH :(

Okay - I need to stay out of this thread until I see it on Friday.

Sage
07-15-2009, 06:00 PM
SPOILER:






Okay, so I remember reading the book the first time and feeling like the time spent doing all the memories was so weird. I think this was b/c I didn't know where JKR was going with them. But then when I reread it last month, I was looking forward to seeing some of the memories in the movie, and knowing how they were keys to unlocking the end, as well as Voldy himself, I saw them in a totally different light from the first reading. So I was a little disappointed we lost some of those.

I thought the movie was actually not that bad about adapting the story to film (the only scene I can think they added was the battle during Christmas). Some things, like Harry being under the cloak and petrified would be less interesting to watch on film, so I can understand those kind of choices. And I loved Snape showing up and Harry letting him go up to Dumbledore.

The one gripe I have was how Ginny and Harry's relationship was handled. It is absolutely my favorite part of the book when Harry kisses her, but they changed up the romance a lot, and I lost that moment. To make things worse, I just didn't feel the chemistry between the two characters/actors. In fact, I think every significant scene with Ginny was new, and maybe that contributed to my feeling that half of them felt quite stiff and awkward (and not awkward in a teenage romance way).

Overall, though, I still thought it was a lot of fun, and other than Ginny and Harry, as close to the book as can be in a 2.5 hour movie.

katiemac
07-15-2009, 08:54 PM
If you love the book your going to be throwing your hands up in the air as this is probably the most loose adaption of a HP novel to date. Huge sections of plot were removed and I mean major sequences that impact the overall story in the next one. They also took liberties of adding their own sequences which will definitely impact how the 7th plays out. The entire film felt that JK Rowling was not consulted at all for this one.

I was in a theater where not one person clapped at the end, but BOOED. Pretty sad.

Hmm. This is one of those things where I absolutely adore the books, but I've liked the looser adaptation of the movies. The by-the-book adaptations I thought kind of sucked. I don't need every scene in the movie that's in the book, as long as what they DO include they do it right. With the exception of removing the Neville stuff from Phoenix - that was a big mistake in my opinion.

I know they added scenes - the bridge collapse, for one, which - not having seen it - I thought was a good idea. Gah.


I think the earlier movies were pretty close to the books. I wonder if it's because HBP is so long that they couldn't do it justice in one film, and maybe that's why they knew they had to split the final book into two movies?

Half-Blood Prince is shorter than Order of the Phoenix and Goblet of Fire. The content is also less action-packed to begin with - they should have been able to turn the book into one decent film.

The final book, on the other hand - when they first announced they were turning it into two films, I was disappointed they were just cashing in. But then I reread it and I realized there was no way they could put that on screen in three hours and make it decent.

katiemac
07-15-2009, 08:59 PM
But that's the clue to the revelations in DH :(

Okay - I need to stay out of this thread until I see it on Friday.

That's disappointing - that is hands down one of my favorite scenes [moments] of the entire series.

Nakhlasmoke
07-15-2009, 09:03 PM
That's disappointing - that is hands down one of my favorite scenes [moments] of the entire series.


THIS

I don't wanna go all hectic spoilery but they kept him way understated, when all I wanted to see was Snape totally losing it at being called a coward by this ...boy, who totes understands nothing.

Oh god.

I am such a fangrrl....

Bubastes
07-15-2009, 09:06 PM
They didn't do Snape going @pesh!t? Waaahhhhhhh!!! I wanted to see Alan Rickman do that scene!

Nakhlasmoke
07-15-2009, 09:10 PM
They didn't do Snape going @pesh!t? Waaahhhhhhh!!! I wanted to see Alan Rickman do that scene!


Hah. I am so glad I am not alone in this.

They did handle the astronomy tower scene really well though, I like how they tweaked the twist.

katiemac
07-15-2009, 09:12 PM
They didn't include that Snape scene? Waaahhhhhhh!!! I wanted to see Alan Rickman do that scene!

I know it's in there - the "Fight back, you coward" line is in one of the trailers. But I guess Snape doesn't go as crazy on Harry.

... which is completely nuts. That scene is the culmination of six years' worth of hatred and need for revenge on Harry's end, sixTEEN years worth of anger and grief on Snape's. Harry tries to use the Crucio curse on him, and Snape kicks his ass, ending in one of the best lines ever.

That would probably have been the one scene I would look forward to most. I probably shouldn't be reading this thread anymore ... ;)


Oh god.

I am such a fangrrl....

It's okay, me too. Obviously.

Nakhlasmoke
07-15-2009, 09:14 PM
Yeah the you coward line is in there...Snape's response, not so much... :(

Sorry am I killing the love for this movie here?

Kathleen42
07-15-2009, 09:17 PM
That would probably have been the one scene I would look forward to most. I probably shouldn't be reading this thread anymore ... ;)



It's okay, me too. Obviously.

I wanted that scene and the scene of Hermoine conjuring the canaries.

Nakhlasmoke
07-15-2009, 09:18 PM
I wanted that scene and the scene of Hermoine conjuring the canaries.


well 1 out of 2?

Toothpaste
07-15-2009, 09:18 PM
And see this is why I stopped reading the books just before the films. I used to re-read each book just before going to the movie and found myself disappointed each time. Then before number 4 I kind of ran out of time, and didn't read the book. I loved the movie. Talking with a friend afterward she went on and on about how they left this out, and this etc. And even though I am a fan, I truly did not remember the details, especially while engrossed in the film. Didn't read the book before 5 nor before this one. I think I stand to enjoy this a lot more than some.

So excited about tonight!!

Nakhlasmoke
07-15-2009, 09:21 PM
yeah, agreed with Toothpaste, the film is def better if the book isn't still fresh in your mind. I made a decision to not reread beforehand and I'm sure that added to my enjoyment of the film.

Kathleen42
07-15-2009, 09:24 PM
yeah, agreed with Toothpaste, the film is def better if the book isn't still fresh in your mind. I made a decision to not reread beforehand and I'm sure that added to my enjoyment of the film.

I did the same.

katiemac
07-15-2009, 09:24 PM
This makes me want to conduct a sociological experiment and take a massive poll. Who read the book within three weeks of seeing the film cross-referenced against who didn't like it.

mscelina
07-15-2009, 09:32 PM
True, but the way they've handled Snape in the movies is far different from the way Rowling handled him. Case in point--in Prisoner of Azkaban, look at how Rickman played Snape as soon as Lupin turned into the werewolf. He immediately dropped all of the hatred against Harry and moved to shield them all from the werewolf. I have a feeling that they've made a deliberate choice with Snape to keep that fact in the forefront of movie viewers' minds.

katiemac
07-15-2009, 09:36 PM
True, but the way they've handled Snape in the movies is far different from the way Rowling handled him. Case in point--in Prisoner of Azkaban, look at how Rickman played Snape as soon as Lupin turned into the werewolf. He immediately dropped all of the hatred against Harry and moved to shield them all from the werewolf. I have a feeling that they've made a deliberate choice with Snape to keep that fact in the forefront of movie viewers' minds.

Good point. And I actually really liked that difference, was just remembering that the other day.

Ugawa
07-15-2009, 09:45 PM
I'm watching it tomorrow. Woop.

:D
x

Wavy_Blue
07-15-2009, 11:09 PM
I'm a huge Harry fanatic, but I still loved this movie. Personally, I think it might be the best yet. It was extremely polished and well-thought out, and even if some of my favorite parts from the book were not included, I can still highly appreciate this as a work of film since that's what it is.

Did anyone else notice how all of Ron's outfits came from 1970? Awesome.

bagels
07-15-2009, 11:20 PM
I'm glad to hear I'm not the only person disappointed by the somewhat anti-climatic ending. I mean, really, you have Alan Rickman and that's all you do?

I'm unique among book lovers in that I don't demand a scene-for-scene recreation of the book - I'm more concerned that the tone and feel of the book translates. HBP did not translate for me. I was actually bored, but worst of all, I was having to try and remember parts of the book to connect all the dots with the plot.

The thing I remembering loving about HBP the book was the tension that built throughout the entire book and then exploded with that final adventure with Dumbledore and his death. The movie didn't have it. And the wizarding world version of waving lighters in the air? Am I the only person who found that unintentionally hysterical?

Also, Emma Watson is so, so attractive that it was really hard to buy into Ron not noticing Hermione.

AmandaAcidic
07-16-2009, 12:28 AM
I'm really torn about the movie. Parts of it I loved. It's was a lot funnier then I thought it was going to be. Some parts were really awesome.

But they punked out so bad with the ending. Soooo bad. I was looking forward to the huge fight and seeing Snape just furious and Harry chasing after him. And it was just... eh.

I think overall I liked it but the ending made me angry.

katiemac
07-16-2009, 12:33 AM
I'm unique among book lovers in that I don't demand a scene-for-scene recreation of the book - I'm more concerned that the tone and feel of the book translates.

That's how I feel.


Also, Emma Watson is so, so attractive that it was really hard to buy into Ron not noticing Hermione.

Aw, she's totally cute, but they grew up together as kids! It's okay if it takes him six years to get it. ;)

katiemac
07-16-2009, 01:58 AM
Wow! Half-Blood Prince beat the pants off The Dark Knight's midnight opening record - $22.2 million. Dark Knight made $18.2. Maybe HBP has a shot at beating Transformers' summer record after all?

dclary
07-16-2009, 02:59 AM
That's how I feel.



Aw, she's totally cute, but they grew up together as kids! It's okay if it takes him six years to get it. ;)


I could accept growing up as Ron if I knew I was going to have a hotbody uberwitch like Hermione in my arms at the end of it all.

Wavy_Blue
07-16-2009, 04:34 AM
http://news-briefs.ew.com/2009/07/harry-potter-and-the-halfblood-prince-breaks-midnight-record.html

Called it.

HBP is going to kick Transformers trash in the box-office. Number One grossing move of the year, easily.

People will go see HBP more than once because it was a good film and non-fans liked it, too. No one wanted to see Transformers more than once because it sucked.

If I had to guess, by the end of the year these'll be the top 5 movies, unless there are some significant releases I am forgetting...

1. Half-Blood Prince
2. Transformers 2
3. Up
4. Star Trek
5. New Moon or The Hangover

With this big of numbers for HP6, can you even imagine how high they'll go for Deathly Hallows?

Cranky
07-16-2009, 04:43 AM
Argh! Is it Sunday yet? *gnaws on fingernails*

katiemac
07-16-2009, 04:46 AM
I'm surprised it did so well for midnight release (wouldn't have thought it to beat Dark Knight), but it still has a ways to go before it can be the summer box office leader.

Transformers 2 is up to around $350 million. The highest grossing Potter film, Sorceror's Stone, only made $301 million domestically. HBP has to make up that $50 million somehow, $60 million if you compare it to the box office of Phoenix.

I think it can easily break the 5-day record, though, if these numbers hold. And the two-week delay in IMAX will only help the box office, so maybe that's what will narrow the gap between it and Transformers.

Kaiser-Kun
07-16-2009, 05:21 AM
Hehe, catfight. :p

http://www.leakylounge.com/uploads/photo-76965.jpg

maxmordon
07-16-2009, 07:58 AM
Awfully disappointed, the only thing that kinda saved the film to me was Horace Slughorn...

colettak
07-16-2009, 08:32 AM
I thoroughly enjoyed it! The cinematography was top notch, as well as the music. I really loved the teenage drama parts -- not because they were teenage drama, but because they were good for laughs.

I also think the young actors/actresses did a much better job this time. Ginny was a pleasant surprise to me (and I think the extra scenes helped a lot), and especially Harry. He seemed much more at ease with the role than with the older movies.

I do have to agree though, that it would have been nice to have a little bit more of a rising action. It definitely had the feel of a setup movie. I feel like they could have just added a bit more with Dumbledore and Harry to really excite you about what they are finding out. The conflict didn't really rise -- it just hit you.

Still, as I said, I enjoyed it.

not_HarryS
07-16-2009, 09:12 AM
Worst adaptation of the Harry Potter series to date.

I feel that if I hadn't read the book, I wouldn't understand the movie at all. There was a very serious lack of well-formed story arcs in HBP and, because of that, the only tension I felt was fighting the urge not to fall asleep.

I didn't even care when Dumbledore died, which is a hardcore failure for the director.

Epiphany
07-16-2009, 09:16 AM
Sure the ending was anti-climatic, but it sort of was refreshing after blockbusters such as Transformers, Terminator, etc. where the massive amount of fighting and explosions numbs you after a while.

I thought it was fantastic. Best Potter movie to date. The acting was so much better than all of the other ones combined.

not_HarryS
07-16-2009, 09:22 AM
I thought it was fantastic. Best Potter movie to date. The acting was so much better than all of the other ones combined.

With the exception of Harry himself.

I did like the young Tom Riddle, though; he was intense.

Exir
07-16-2009, 09:27 AM
I watched the movie having read the books many times before, but NOT anytime recent. I think it helped my viewing experience tremendously. I think this is a candidate for one of the best films in the series. It has the excellent cinematography, mise-en-scene and symbolism of HP3, while vastly improving on the character development. The director David Yates seemed to have hit his stride, learning to direct complex instead of simply angsty characters. And bringing Steve Kloves back in was a good move -- I don't think any other screenwriter would have done the job given the constrains of distillation. After all, the fourth and fifth movies really left out important stuff that now has to be shoehorned into the last two, and other things such as the botched characterization of Ginny in Pheonix, for example, so considering the narrative acrobatics necessary I think the screenplay more than succeeded. For example, the few scenes with Ginny really blasted the point across -- of course, it was sudden, but hey, blame the fifth movie. They did well with what the had.

I also liked what they cut and what they kept. Also, existing plot points were rearranged and the information revealed in a different order, which suits the motion picture format.

On the imagery, the use of monochrome or heavily single-color dominant scenes were done really well. I liked it better than the gaudy Chris Columbus and Mike Newell ones, and on the other hand I thought the touch was softer, more subtle and personal than the Gothic-style Alfonso Cuaron HP3.

I think (and I know this is a small, vocal minority of HP fans, and many fans who dislike the movie DO dislike it for objective reasons -- I also have a few beefs myself), but a lot of the sentiments shown on fansites are along the lines of "it's different now it sucks". I know this is not new, but I'd like to say it again -- capturing the broad strokes are more important when you find yourself with a totally different set of brushes. Trying to capture the same minute brush-strokes with a different brush only ends in failure. All the broad strokes are there -- all plants are paid off, and the story has a definite internal logic required of a good story. Some changes are just changes -- not improvements or de-provements, but just the personal stroke. After all everybody expresses things differently. Tarkovsky says a director not involved in actively creating his own story becomes an illustrator. Whether it is pretentious to think whether anything more than a mere illustration for such a project is required is debatable.

(CONT'D -- I know, I like ranting ;) )

Exir
07-16-2009, 09:31 AM
Acting: I thought everybody was solid. I would pick Lavender Brown, Horace Slughorn, Severus Snape (hey, he only had so little, and he took the most of what he had), and Luna Lovegood as being above the rest. Maybe it was Equus, but Daniel Radcliffe has now shed his OneExpressionForOneEmotion(TM) and Hammy acting. Solid, nothing spectacular. As in, no Heath Ledger or Michael Rourke style uber-brilliance.

(CONT'D)

Exir
07-16-2009, 09:34 AM
Symbolism -- huge improvement over other films (only HP3 matches it). It is consistent, part of the story (the bird and the vanishing cabinet), and has a clear closure in any case. I loved the part about Horace Slughorn and Lily Potter's goldfish, echoing the image of the bird in the cage.

(CONT'D)

Kaiser-Kun
07-16-2009, 09:35 AM
I went to the midnight premiere.

"No more tickets."

http://kingkongdoctor.files.wordpress.com/2007/05/pp30340sad-puppy-posters.jpg

Zoombie
07-16-2009, 10:03 AM
Saaaaaaaaad puppyyyyyy!

Toothpaste
07-16-2009, 10:12 AM
Loved it. Just got back. It's 2am. I'll expand on my thoughts further tomorrow. Needless to say, I thought Yates totally took ownership of this film and finally we had a real movie on our hands.

mscelina
07-16-2009, 10:13 AM
People were standing in line over twelve hours for tickets for the midnight showing here. The line (in Pickerington) stretched from the movie theater, all the way down in front of the strip mall (which is huge) and curved back around the outer edges of the parking lot. They had police there for crowd control. Totally nuts.

Exir
07-16-2009, 10:40 AM
Final good part (negatives come later)

Adaptation to a different medium: a film, compared to the book, removes exposition (telling of information outside of current action -- even during the flashbacks, the flashback is still an event and therefore a current action in its context) and introspection (unless voice over, which is frowned upon); it adds spacial relationships and direct visual cues. Visual cues in a written story is, by, its nature told. There are certain things that you can capture on film you cannot in a book. Example: A character can frown in a certain subtle way so that some muscles contract just so, other muscles relax just so, eyes beat at a certain speed, in conjunction with a slew of body language cues, most almost imperceptible. Try describing that on paper: "his left eyebrow twitched half a hair-length. His right eyebrow also cocked upwards and also sideways a little bit. His left thumb twitched inwards while he swung his right arm 5 times." Dude, that was painful to read. Yet all of that CAN be captured on screen. Granted, the actors probably don't think that way, but still the final result is that all of that little details ARE captured. Extreme example, but you get what I mean by film being more directly visual.

Spacial relationships -- again, this can be described in a book, but not to the extent of the film. Try writing a book where you specify whether each piece of furniture is left or right, whether each character stands to the left or to the right of another, whether they are level or one closer to the point-of-view character than another... you can't do that. You can only describe in a more general level, and each reader constructs their own spacial model.

Take the scene between Dumbledore, Draco & Co., and Severus Snape. In the book, Harry is separated from the action due to being stunned under the invisibility cloak. In the film, the filmmaker used the spacial nature of film to full advantage -- they made an empty area beneath the floor level of action. Harry was on his way to fetching Snape when he sees the standoff happen -- he is separated from the action, unable to help, due to a spacial barrier. That really increases tension both in terms of practicalities of battle AND as a symbol of the emotional helplessness Harry feels. I couldn't find better words to describe that, but I hope I made the point across.

I also liked how the bird in the cage was used to illustrate the vanishing cabinet -- forgoing expositional dialogue for a direct, visual conveyance of its purpose. In a book where exposition is fully available, such symbolism would seem heavy-handed and... wrong. That's the best I could describe it.

(CONT'D -- now the negatives)

AmandaAcidic
07-16-2009, 10:44 AM
People were standing in line over twelve hours for tickets for the midnight showing here. The line (in Pickerington) stretched from the movie theater, all the way down in front of the strip mall (which is huge) and curved back around the outer edges of the parking lot. They had police there for crowd control. Totally nuts.


And I thought here was bad, where the line only went out the door of the theater!

But that right there is why my dad and I bought our tickets two week in advance. And because we're both complete nerds.

Exir
07-16-2009, 11:01 AM
What I DIDN'T LIKE about the film.

First of all, there is a good point that the film would have been a struggle to keep up with for non-readers. Especially since the tight-packed nature of the film means there aren't many slow, wide nature shots where nothing happens where the confused non-reader viewer can stop, take a breath, and figure out some sticky points. (At least Alfonso Cuaron had lots of those, so I had time to explain stuff to my friend while he does a long take of Hedwig flying or something.) Of course, some of it is left-over mess from the previous HP movies, where lots of stuff were missed. However, I still feel that somehow, somehow, maybe Steve Kloves could have done a LITTLE bit more.

There were also some scenes that were bloopers. Nothing that has a lasting impression, but still blemishes. Dumbledore asking Harry what's going on with him and Hermione was a WTF moment -- he, wise old man, knows that they three have been best pals for SIX YEARS. And he asks now? And, it would've been best if Steve Kloves or David Yates didn't tempt that -- we know Harry and Hermione are like brother and sister, no need to provoke the viewer and make them go "oh yeah, what about them?"

Harry and Ginny putting the book where he can't find it in the Room of Requirements, while cute, is kinda contrived. The natural follow-up thoughts of a typical teenager (me): two teenagers at the age where the hormonal factory is at its freakiest. They have a room to themselves, which can take whatever form they want. And nobody can enter. Okay, stop staring at me. I was just thinking out loud. Oh, and while other Harry/Ginny moments were okay to good, the kiss... Harry was a statue (hail!), and Ginny was kissing a corpse. Didn't work for me.

I also didn't understand why the Harry/Hermione relationship was empathized so much. I feel, in that aspect, Ron was kinda marginalized. The three-ness of the trio was the whole point. Now three-ness becomes two-plus-one-ness.

The most literal example of that was the final scene between Harry, Hermione and Ron, talking about taking the journey of destroying Horcruxes ahead of them. Maybe two years ago I wouldn't have noticed a thing. Now, with a film critic's hat on and having watched and scrutinized many films, I notice one thing that screams "WTF" -- the blocking. The blocking of the final scene was "WTF". Harry and Hermione look out at the landscape ahead, talking -- while Ron sits quite a distance behind them??!!? What's up with the "two-close-plus-one-afar" arrangement? Why aren't the trio all sitting together? Why does what should be a three-way dialogue become Harry and Hermione talking and Ron listening? If one should be separated, it should be Harry. Show Ron and Hermione being more uplifted, talking away about the plans, while Harry listens silently, knowing the true burden of the task. I can beyond swallow that -- I might like it even better than the traditional "Harry in the middle, Ron and Hermione close by either side" blocking. Don't think little things like where the character stands don't matter -- they do.

All in all, I think the blemishes were more specific details, and didn't affect the overall quality of a very good (maybe great) film.

Exir
07-16-2009, 11:03 AM
Final Score: 8.5/10

If you just counted the pros and cons I listed, maybe something like 7.5/10 would be more accurate. But there was an intangible something that uplifted the film. Maybe I'll put a finger to it later on.

Whew -- that review was one big self-serving verbal diarrhea rant overenthusiastic spew.

Exir
07-16-2009, 11:09 AM
I did like the young Tom Riddle, though; he was intense.

Never will a creepy-calm monotone ever rival that of HAL 9000, but young Tom Riddle's creepy-calm monotone nevertheless comes close. It rings true and doesn't ring theatrical. Much better than the Chamber of Secrets Tom Riddle (good they didn't ask him back!).

not_HarryS
07-16-2009, 11:15 AM
Hey, I just saw that you're in Shanghai. I'm in Beijing :)

Did you notice the awkward cut when Dumbledore and Harry found the boat in the cave, and how they just immediately reached the island in the next scene? Do you think the trek over was censored out, or was it just a bad editing decision on the director's part?

I hate being in China when new movies come out >:O I missed the best sex scene ever in 300, and didn't find out 'til a year later that it even existed.

Exir
07-16-2009, 11:25 AM
Did you notice the awkward cut when Dumbledore and Harry found the boat in the cave, and how they just immediately reached the island in the next scene? Do you think the trek over was censored out, or was it just a bad editing decision on the director's part?

Definitely not censored out IMO -- they let the Inferi stand after all. I think it's a mistake on the editing, a result of trying to cram the film into the two and a half hours instead of letting it run a little bit longer if it had to serve the story. I would've thought the lake trek would be a perfect opportunity of a Tarkovsky-style long-shot. But maybe I'm dreaming, or being pretentious -- Harry Potter is nowhere near Tarkovsky's level :P Not Harry Potter's problem -- Tarkovsky is too up high. ;)

not_HarryS
07-16-2009, 11:30 AM
Haha. Seriously. It was a perfect opportunity to set the mood for that scene. Aside from Dumbledore's badass fire, I didn't get much from that scene at all. Dumbledore's reaction to the potion, the timing --everything-- I felt was done fairly poorly.

I know you really seemed to enjoy the thing, but I seriously walked away wondering if this film had an insanely small budget.

Exir
07-16-2009, 11:37 AM
Haha, to each his own not_HarryS. I do think I may be giving the film some leeway that I wouldn't have if I was just taking it as its own film, but I did take into accounts the different directors, change of character interpretations, shabby foreshadowing of later installments because the first films were made before all the books were out. Basically, the first five films were directors, writers and producers fooling around, and then they realize "oh crap, we left this and that out and Ginny and Ron's characterization is suddenly all wrong and how do we explain the two-way mirror". So the sixth film was kind of restricted in that it had to undo loads of previous mistakes, starting from the omissions in HP3, which slowly piled up.

I guess that's why I didn't so much look at the finished product, because they had so many things against them, and I really believe it was a giant juggling act. I was more impressed how they were able to solve certain plot problems to make sure HP7 ends without a plot hole, and also the fact that David Yates was able to use mise-en-scene and symbolism like the bird and the goldfish (both bound in a container, both signifying life, both finally set free -- one in life and one in death) to show things in a very direct, concise ways when other directors would've relied on clumsy dialogue. It was more the process, and how they were able to succeed despite the limitations.

I guess I was looking at it from a director's perspective, not an audiences. If I was David Yates, after I finished I would've been proud of it. "Whew, it thought it would be a real thorny tangle, but I didn't emerge too badly."

Sage
07-16-2009, 04:48 PM
With the Ron vs. Hermoine and Harry thing, they've been kinda edging Ron away from the center for the past few movies. I know the second movie/book was more Ron and Harry (Hermoine was petrified) and the third one was more Hermoine and Harry (Ron was in the hospital wing for half the climax).

I can forgive them Harry and Hermoine talking about Horcruxes while Ron sits off to the side, though, because if you're having an intelligent discussion about something, you're going to want Hermoine to be having it. That and Ron had kinda separated himself from the two of them for most of the movie. I think Harry hanging out with Hermoine during the Lavendar stuff was an effective way to show us how he didn't want to deal with Lavendar and Won-Won without going through even more of us seeing it with him.

This also might be a little foreshadowing for the next movie, if they're planning to emphasize Ron thinking there's something between Harry and Hermoine.

Delhomeboy
07-16-2009, 05:08 PM
Saw it yesterday, and loved it. Action, acting, everything.

Especially liked the whole puppy-love triangles between everybody...ah, high school. That's okay, Emma Watson, you can cry on MY shoulder...

The one complaint I would have is that final scene. Fell kind of flat with me. I don't usually pull the whole "oh they left this scene from the book out of the film and now it's ruined!!!!" thing, but I do think that the Dumbledore's Funeral chapter (book six's end) would have been better to do than the ending in it, and I don't think it would have taken much more time.

Exir
07-16-2009, 05:11 PM
I can forgive them Harry and Hermoine talking about Horcruxes while Ron sits off to the side, though, because if you're having an intelligent discussion about something, you're going to want Hermoine to be having it.

Yeah, but it's not like Ron can't participate in the discussion if there's intelligence involved. He may not be Hermione, but he's bright enough.


With the Ron vs. Hermoine and Harry thing, they've been kinda edging Ron away from the center for the past few movies.

A mistake, IMO.

neener
07-16-2009, 05:12 PM
Maybe I'm the only one, but I thought the movie was great except the astronomy tower scene. I just didn't buy Harry letting it all happen without shouting. Didn't feel genuine to his character. I thought Snape should've stunned him. Other than that, I was fine with the changes...liked 'em. Not disapointed!

Exir
07-16-2009, 05:14 PM
Delhomeboy: I liked the way the people of Hogwarts paid their respects to Dumbledore -- a thousand wands pointed to the sky, dispelling the Dark Mark -- very symbolic and beautiful. And the fact that there wasn't a proper funeral shown only accentuates the sadness of it all.

dclary
07-16-2009, 06:33 PM
The problem this movie had is the same problem that Order of the Phoenix had and Goblet of Fire had and Prisoner of Azkaban had:

JKRowling stretched these books and her plot points out soooooo very far, that NOTHING happens along the main plotline, and we're left in flux -- again!



Plotline 1: Harry Potter vs. Voldemort

Episode One: Harry learns he's the only survivor of a dark lord's assault in the past, and the dark lord's spirit survives.

Episode Two: Dark Lord's spirit also survives in artifacts like his diary.

Episode Three: Does anything happen along plotline 1 in episode three? Not that I remember.

Episode Four: The Dark Lord gets his body back.

Episode Five: Harry learns that either he or the dark lord or both must die.

Episode Six: The Dark Lord put his soul into artifacts.

Episode Seven: Harry destroys the artifacts, dies, comes back, kills Voldemort.

This is why the film endings to azkaban, goblet, phoenix, and this film feel so... (and in this film's case especially) ... anticlimactic. The resolution we've needed since book 2 has been stretched out for FOUR freaking episodes already.

Crowded movie theater was utterly silent as the credits rolled. Not a good sign, IMO.

maestrowork
07-16-2009, 08:10 PM
I agree. They are good movies, but it seems like since Azkaban it's been like a 7-movie miniseries instead of stand-alone. I felt particularly disappointed and "anticlimactic" with Order of Phoenix.

Fans are going to love them no matter what. But for those who have not read the books, they sometimes do seen a bit flat. Like something isn't quite finished. I enjoyed them, but they maybe better viewed as a 7-movie chunk instead of waiting 1 or 2 years for each.

Another problem I have with the series is that things that happened in the later movies didn't happen in the first few, or new stuff is revealed that could have happened in the first few movies (and problem solved). I think that's the inherent problems with series but to me, if they could do all that magic stuff in HP5, why didn't they do all that stuff in HP3? OK, so Harry Potter and his pals may not have known all those tricks, but obviously the teachers and adult wizards do. That's the problem with series -- Rowling keeps adding more and more elaborate stuff but that stretches my suspension of disbelief especially considering the earlier episodes. Sometimes it feels like suddenly they remember they could do the memory stuff, or teleporting, or this or that (granted, they do have consistent stuff such as the invisible cloak -- but my question is, why is there only ONE invisible cloak? Talk about convenience).

I do understand that's the nature of a long fantasy series -- they have to introduce more complexity, etc. but my logical brain sometimes just refuses to believe. Too convenient that some of these "new magic" would fix the problems but they never existed before? For example, the time travel watch in Azkaban.... how convenient and how cool. Great plot device. But then what? Suddenly it's as if it didn't exist anymore. Yes, we're told "time travel" is dangerous and they shouldn't use it. But it can also solve a lot of problems. And wouldn't V want to use that? Again, there's just a lot of this stuff that kind of bothers me. Plot convenience.

But I do like the stories and the movies. They're fun to watch.

Toothpaste
07-16-2009, 08:17 PM
Crowded movie theater was utterly silent as the credits rolled. Not a good sign, IMO.

I had an extremely enthusiastic theatre who appeared to love the whole thing. And yet at the end, no cheers. Why? The ending is super somber. To suddenly break out into whoops etc seemed just disrespectful. For me what was remarkable was how quiet the theatre was when they did the shot of the Great Hall, destroyed, with the sun shining through. Dead friggin silence, never heard anything like it in a theatre before. Not a sound. To me that is far more impressive than cheers at the end of a film. Especially cheers at the end of a somber film.

But I will agree that this movie in particular will confuse non-fans, as nothing actually happens in it. At the same time there is no way you could go straight from 5 to 7. Maestro you are right, this is more like a very long mini-series, than stand alone films. But, I mean, what's wrong with that?

I adored this film because it was about character and mood. And for the first time they actually got Dumbledore. It was beautiful to look at, and funny and dark and genuinely moving. This is not a film about plot, and probably would never have been made had it not been Harry Potter. Which I kind of think is wonderful.

Kathleen42
07-16-2009, 08:35 PM
But I will agree that this movie in particular will confuse non-fans, as nothing actually happens in it. At the same time there is no way you could go straight from 5 to 7. Maestro you are right, this is more like a very long mini-series, than stand alone films. But, I mean, what's wrong with that?

I adored this film because it was about character and mood. And for the first time they actually got Dumbledore. It was beautiful to look at, and funny and dark and genuinely moving. This is not a film about plot, and probably would never have been made had it not been Harry Potter. Which I kind of think is wonderful.

I read one review (can't see the movie itself to Friday) which said HPB is Harry Potter's Empire Strikes Back.

dclary
07-16-2009, 08:38 PM
This is not a film about plot, and probably would never have been made had it not been Harry Potter. Which I kind of think is wonderful.

And yet there's a 1000-post thread somewhere on this page calling transformers 2 the worst movie of the summer for the exact same reason.

dclary
07-16-2009, 08:38 PM
I read one review (can't see the movie itself to Friday) which said HPB is Harry Potter's Empire Strikes Back.

So was azkaban, goblet, and phoenix.

DavidZahir
07-16-2009, 08:49 PM
I feel compelled to point out that the story of Harry Potter is the story of Harry Potter not How Harry Potter Defeated Voldemort. Yes, defeating the Dark Lord is an important part of Harry Potter's life, but more than anything else it is the story of this boy growing up into the young man who could in fact do it. Or, perhaps a little more accurately, how he grew up into the lynchpin of the group that actually did bring down the Death Eaters.

And meanwhile, I have to answer this...
That's the problem with series -- Rowling keeps adding more and more elaborate stuff but that stretches my suspension of disbelief especially considering the earlier episodes. Sometimes it feels like suddenly they remember they could do the memory stuff, or teleporting, etc. (granted, they do have consistent stuff such as the invisible cloak -- but my question is, why is there only ONE invisible cloak? Talk about convenience).Having read the series and watched the movies methinks it clear you've simply missed out on some details. For example, while wizards can extract and keep their memories, not all wizards do so and evidently this cannot be done without said wizard's permission (as evidenced in HBP). Teleporting, as was made explicit in the books, cannot be done within the confines of Hogwarts save under very special circumstances and you cannot even learn to do it until you're a certain age. Thus, if a bunch of underage wizards (for example) need to get to London really fast they cannot simply teleport themselves there. Likewise in the very first film, the invisibility cloak was said to be "rare" and in the last book we find out a lot more about why this particular cloak is special and why Harry's father had it (as well as why he didn't have it with him when murdered). The time tuner thing in POA is tightly regulated by the Ministry of Magic and very dangerous--plus if you look carefully you'll see an entire room of the things was destroyed in OOTP!

I'm enough of a geek...er, fan...to have discussed all this in great detail. Rowling has also very graciously answered many questions about her world, which is very self-consistent. She spent years working out its rules and background in detail, even to the background and parentage of every single student in Harry's class. Some one asked once about using the truth serum on Sirius Black, for example, but she pointed out all kinds of ways a really good wizard could get around the stuff which is why testimony under truth serum is not accepted in Magical Courts of Law (not that Sirius was ever tried--they just threw him in prison).

I'm seeing the movie tomorrow! Part of a birthday celebration for a friend.

katiemac
07-16-2009, 08:58 PM
That's the problem with series -- Rowling keeps adding more and more elaborate stuff but that stretches my suspension of disbelief especially considering the earlier episodes. Sometimes it feels like suddenly they remember they could do the memory stuff, or teleporting, or this or that (granted, they do have consistent stuff such as the invisible cloak -- but my question is, why is there only ONE invisible cloak? Talk about convenience).

I do understand that's the nature of a long fantasy series -- they have to introduce more complexity, etc. but my logical brain sometimes just refuses to believe. Too convenient that some of these "new magic" would fix the problems but they never existed before? For example, the time travel watch in Azkaban.... how convenient and how cool. Great plot device. But then what? Suddenly it's as if it didn't exist anymore. Yes, we're told "time travel" is dangerous and they shouldn't use it. But it can also solve a lot of problems. And wouldn't V want to use that? Again, there's just a lot of this stuff that kind of bothers me. Plot convenience.

David touched on this, but Rowling is actually very good about keeping this stuff in control. She does make mistakes here and there, but not enough major ones to make me worried about it. Unfortunately, if you've only seen the films, they just don't have the need to go there and explain everything. The time travel being one of them - they don't, actually, exist anymore after book 5.

It's stuff like this - the details - that make me enjoy the books immensely. I get why the movies don't go there, but they always just, to me, turn out flat without all the pieces.

Delhomeboy
07-16-2009, 09:52 PM
And yet there's a 1000-post thread somewhere on this page calling transformers 2 the worst movie of the summer for the exact same reason.

I think the difference is HBP has a couple of things Transformers didn't, namely good acting, good writing, good directing, good Special effects, good humor, intelligence, understanding of its purpose, understanding of audience expectations, expectation of audience intelligence, understanding that there are more ppl in the world that 8-12 year olds, continuity, and sense.

And magic.

katiemac
07-16-2009, 10:06 PM
I can forgive them Harry and Hermoine talking about Horcruxes while Ron sits off to the side, though, because if you're having an intelligent discussion about something, you're going to want Hermoine to be having it. That and Ron had kinda separated himself from the two of them for most of the movie. I think Harry hanging out with Hermoine during the Lavendar stuff was an effective way to show us how he didn't want to deal with Lavendar and Won-Won without going through even more of us seeing it with him.

This also might be a little foreshadowing for the next movie, if they're planning to emphasize Ron thinking there's something between Harry and Hermoine.

This is how the book went, as well. Harry ended up on his own a lot, actually, because Hermione only talked to him when Ron was elsewhere, and he and Ron didn't spend a lot of time together because of Lavendar and the fact Hermione huffed a lot when the three of them had to be together for some reason. And yeah, not having seen the film yet, Ron gets jealous of Harry a few times, too, when Hermione compliments him.

Toothpaste
07-16-2009, 10:11 PM
I think the difference is HBP has a couple of things Transformers didn't, namely good acting, good writing, good directing, good Special effects, good humor, intelligence, understanding of its purpose, understanding of audience expectations, expectation of audience intelligence, understanding that there are more ppl in the world that 8-12 year olds, continuity, and sense.

And magic.


Agreed. I will hardly say Harry Potter is an Oscar worthy film, mostly in part because of the lack of plot for non-Potter fans. But Transformers was terrible not because of a lack of plot alone. It was terrible for all those reasons stated above as well. It isn't some equation: lack of plot = bad movie, it is far more complex than that.

not_HarryS
07-16-2009, 10:15 PM
I think the difference is HBP has a couple of things Transformers didn't, namely good acting, good writing, good directing, good Special effects, good humor, intelligence, understanding of its purpose, understanding of audience expectations, expectation of audience intelligence, understanding that there are more ppl in the world that 8-12 year olds, continuity, and sense.

And magic.

I don't agree about this last part! The more I thought about it, the more I feel that there was a glaring lack of magic in this film. Seriously think back... there was hardly any at all.

That makes not_Harry sad.

Delhomeboy
07-16-2009, 10:28 PM
I don't agree about this last part! The more I thought about it, the more I feel that there was a glaring lack of magic in this film. Seriously think back... there was hardly any at all.

That makes not_Harry sad.

Yeah, I was kind of being facetious in that last one lol.

But I think the lack of magic was a good thing. Sort of shifted the focus. The movie wasn't about spells and tricks the kids are learning, we already know about all that already. This movie was about the characters. Literally.

Book 6 had no real plot, as dclary has mentioned. Because, the only plot is the defeating Voldemort thing, and if that doesn't happen, there's no plot. So Rowling, brilliantly IMO, took the opportunity in Book 6 to a) fill in the info about the series's last big question mark (Voldemort) and b) completely fill out whatever spaces were left in her characters. All of them, including Neville, Ginny, etc. That way, we'd go into book 7 with little to no ambiguity about who, exactly, these people are that we've been reading about.

not_HarryS
07-16-2009, 10:44 PM
Book 6 had no real plot, as dclary has mentioned. Because, the only plot is the defeating Voldemort thing, and if that doesn't happen, there's no plot. So Rowling, brilliantly IMO, took the opportunity in Book 6 to a) fill in the info about the series's last big question mark (Voldemort) and b) completely fill out whatever spaces were left in her characters. All of them, including Neville, Ginny, etc. That way, we'd go into book 7 with little to no ambiguity about who, exactly, these people are that we've been reading about.

There's the problem, though. Because the characterization and reader-informing that took place in Book 6 are difficult as Hell to translate into movie format. I think the producers failed at the attempt this time around.

I felt that there was no subtlety whatsoever about the characters, especially concerning their romantic interest in one another. Harry is way too obviously enamored of Ginny, and vice-versa, to give the audience any feeling of hahaYES!!! when they finally kiss. And Hermione is way too obviously upset over Lavender's shenanigans with Ron, that her feelings for him become almost a caricature of real feelings and, thus, boring.

Delhomeboy
07-16-2009, 10:48 PM
I felt that there was no subtlety whatsoever about the characters, especially concerning their romantic interest in one another. Harry is way too obviously enamored of Ginny, and vice-versa, to give the audience any feeling of hahaYES!!! when they finally kiss. And Hermione is way too obviously upset over Lavender's shenanigans with Ron, that her feelings for him become almost a caricature of real feelings and, thus, boring.

Hmmm...idk, I think, if I can remember correctly, Harry's feelings for Ginny are introduced in more or less the same way in the book (I seem to remember a passage wherein seeing Ginny with Dean made Harry feel like he wanted to kill Dean or something)...And I think, also, that Hermione's feelings for Ron are played off subtly until Lavender's kiss, at which point, we find out.

The thing is, we KNOW what happens with Ron and Hermione, so there really can't be shock value in it, you know?

dclary
07-17-2009, 12:32 AM
I think the difference is HBP has a couple of things Transformers didn't, namely good acting, good writing, good directing, good Special effects, good humor, intelligence, understanding of its purpose, understanding of audience expectations, expectation of audience intelligence, understanding that there are more ppl in the world that 8-12 year olds, continuity, and sense.

And magic.

I'd only disagree with the ones in bold.

maestrowork
07-17-2009, 12:36 AM
I'd only disagree with the ones in bold.

On the other hand, you can't seriously think there's any good acting in Transformers 2, do you?

And I don't disagree with the 8-12 comment. OK, maybe up to 25. At the showing I went to, it did seem like only teenage kids and below raved about the film. Everyone else just kind of shook their heads. Yes, even die-hard robot sci-fi fans I went with.

katiemac
07-17-2009, 12:39 AM
Could we maybe not turn this into a Transformers discussion? It's just that there's already so much of this packed away in that 25-page-long thread ....

Delhomeboy
07-17-2009, 01:22 AM
I'd only disagree with the ones in bold.

Hmmm...Were we watching the same movie?

maxmordon
07-17-2009, 01:44 AM
Now to mention the things that bothered me

SPOILER!







The movie is hermetic to those who did not read the books and is unsatisfying to those who read the book not long ago (like me) or quite a while (like a lot of my group) everyone left the theater with a "meh" attitude, and not only mine but also the group before ours and that give us a bad sign from the beginning.

It tries to be too many things and just can't chose which side of this multidimensional book be: a teen love story, the insight on Voldermort's past and the mystery of the half-blood prince.

the teen love story felt a bit stiffy to me but was the most complete part of it. Voldemort's past was too abridged rising more questions than answers to those not familiar to the book and the mystery of the half-blood prince is only mentioned once or twice and never touched until the end, where it came out narmnistic to me and my friends since we all had forgotten the darn book.

I suspect they changed Rosemelda's twist-ending with Professor Fitwit but decided to drop it in the editing room to just being Draco changing the bottle and putting the necktie and leaving a plothole of the size of Montana making us wonder what were the use of the security system so much announced and what is even more odious, if they knew there was a closet like that in Hogwarts, why the hell they didn't do anything about it? And what was exactly the Death-Eaters plan anyway? Yes, granted, they killed Dumbledore, but what was the point of destroying the dining set without mmm... actually causing more human harm (as in the book) that would be at the end more lasting?!

I love Harry Potter, movies and films, I really do. Philosopher's Stone was the first novel I read from start to finish and I think Miss Rowling for my love to fantasy and literature as many others of my generation; but, God forbid me to say this, but I feel that this is the Batman & Robin of the series.

Yes, it has possitive points, I deeply enjoyed the performances of Jim Broadbent and the girl that plays Luna Lovegood (and the fact they use her more), the direction is great, the photography beautiful, the Quidditch scenes although short were well-done and the symbolism impressive. But if you have a trashcan made out of gold were delivered to you by a supermodel wearing nothing but ice cream and full of money and pistacchios, it would be still be a trashcan.

Sorry for the Zero Punctuationesque review.

jodiodi
07-17-2009, 04:21 AM
OK, it's settled.

We will NOT be going to see this latest Harry Potter movie. We know how the series ends anyway so it's a pretty pointless exercise, imo.

Besides, we've been pretty disappointed in most of the movies we've been to see in the last 6 years. The only reason we go nowadays is for the popcorn.

maestrowork
07-17-2009, 04:42 AM
But if you have a trashcan made out of gold were delivered to you by a supermodel wearing nothing but ice cream and full of money and pistacchios, it would be still be a trashcan.

But I'll keep the supermodel, ice cream, money and pistachios. Thank you.

Ugawa
07-17-2009, 04:51 AM
Just got back from watching the film. I have to say, I'm a bit disappointed. It was still good, just not like I thought it would be.

SPOILER:

Near the end when the hand jumped from the water, my friend jumped, crushed the drink cup in his hand and it went all over him. Ha! Lol. It was the highlight of the film. The thing was, 2 seconds beforehand he'd leant over to me to tell me that a hand was about to jump out because he'd just finished the book that day and knew it was coming. Ha, loser. Lol

x

dclary
07-17-2009, 07:16 AM
On the other hand, you can't seriously think there's any good acting in Transformers 2, do you?

And I don't disagree with the 8-12 comment. OK, maybe up to 25. At the showing I went to, it did seem like only teenage kids and below raved about the film. Everyone else just kind of shook their heads. Yes, even die-hard robot sci-fi fans I went with.

No, no. I just disagree that Harry Potter was well-acted.

Toothpaste
07-17-2009, 07:57 AM
No, no. I just disagree that Harry Potter was well-acted.

Wow. That's. . . well just wrong. Jim Broadbent's performance, his pathos mixed with absurdity, was perfectly nuanced. Michael Gambon finally, FINALLY, understood how to play Dumbledore, with that twinkle in his eye but still world weary. Helena Bonham-Carter's brilliant madness, and Helen McCrory's one scene where you could read every single thought and fear she had for her son in that one shot as she was entwined with Alan Rickman's ever fantastic Snape. Julie Walters watching her home burn down with an expression that said more than words ever could. Emma Watson, finally not overusing her eyebrows, Rupert Grint finally not hamming it up for the camera, and Daniel Radclffe finally relaxing and actually acting silly once and a while.

I'm sorry, but say what you will about the plot, about being let down that things weren't handled well, but you just can't put down the acting. That isn't a subjective thing. The acting of the adults was brilliant. The acting of the kids, much improved.

As to suggesting the direction and cinematography as less than stellar, I'm sorry were we watching the same film? The flashbacks were gorgeous and creepy, the editing shocking and yet subtle. The use of filters, which I feared would be overwhelming from the few glimpses of trailers I accidentally saw, was actually probably my favourite of choices.

I agree the writing wasn't perfect, and I felt like the Ginny/Harry romance was entirely mismanaged, but some other scenes were just fantastic. I also feel like some moments suffered from strange timing, mostly at the beginining (like when Luna fixed Harry's nose - seemed to take a little too long).

At any rate, everyone is allowed their opinion, and I suppose truly, you'll just think me mad that I consider (no, KNOW) the acting, especially of the adults, was just lovely. But I know good acting when I see it. I consider myself a wee bit of an expert in that regard. And I just cannot agree with your opinion.

Toothpaste
07-17-2009, 08:03 AM
OK, it's settled.

We will NOT be going to see this latest Harry Potter movie. We know how the series ends anyway so it's a pretty pointless exercise, imo.

Besides, we've been pretty disappointed in most of the movies we've been to see in the last 6 years. The only reason we go nowadays is for the popcorn.

That's a pity. In my mind it is the best film of the series, has a rating of 86% over at RottenTomatoes.com. Just because some people here don't like it, doesn't mean they are the be all and end all of opinions on this film. To be perfectly honest, I can't even understand some of the negative issues addressed here. lol, not that I am either the be all and end all of opinions on film, just that I am evidence that there are people out there who feel quite the opposite. And I do think I have pretty decent taste :) Here's a review, which to me encapsulates how I feel about this film: http://www.nowtoronto.com/movies/story.cfm?content=170394

(btw, if you want to see some good films check out Star Trek, Up, the lovely little romantic comedy Adam which hasn't come out yet . . .these are all well worth more than just the popcorn :) )

maestrowork
07-17-2009, 08:44 AM
(btw, if you want to see some good films check out Star Trek, Up, the lovely little romantic comedy Adam which hasn't come out yet . . .these are all well worth more than just the popcorn :) )

Seriously, go see Moon, folks, even if you're not science fiction fans. It's fantastic. Sam Rockwell is phenomenal in it. It deserves our support.

Toothpaste
07-17-2009, 08:45 AM
Ooh yes, Moon! Okay, so I haven't seen it yet, but people who I really respect have and they say it is utterly brilliant! (good one Maestro)

maestrowork
07-17-2009, 09:01 AM
Ooh yes, Moon! Okay, so I haven't seen it yet, but people who I really respect have and they say it is utterly brilliant! (good one Maestro)

Plus it's written and directed by David Bowie's son. Not that it means anything. Just an interesting trivia to augment the excellence of the film.

(sorry about the derailment... carry on)

AMCrenshaw
07-17-2009, 09:12 AM
I thought the movie was amazing.


good acting, a few moments of bad writing, great direction/art direction, good use of whimsy vs ominous tone. and a lot of quirky detail. good fun.

AMC

Cranky
07-17-2009, 09:37 AM
My mom and I decided not to wait until Sunday to see this, since we've heard such good things about it. We were already excited about seeing it, but now...oh boy.

Anyway, I always go into these movies prepared for an entirely different experience from reading the novels, and I'm almost always not disappointed. The exceptions being the first two Columbus films. (Sorry man...but damn, you really *can* be too faithful to the source material)

Anyhoo -- I'll go squee like a little girl somewhere off in the corner. :D

maestrowork
07-17-2009, 05:40 PM
I want to some day write books (or make movies) that make grown women squeal.

What is the secret?

Cranky
07-17-2009, 05:57 PM
I want to some day write books (or make movies) that make grown women squeal.

What is the secret?

What can I say? It appeals to the kid in me. Seriously.

Smish
07-17-2009, 09:12 PM
Wow. That's. . . well just wrong. Jim Broadbent's performance, his pathos mixed with absurdity, was perfectly nuanced. Michael Gambon finally, FINALLY, understood how to play Dumbledore, with that twinkle in his eye but still world weary. Helena Bonham-Carter's brilliant madness, and Helen McCrory's one scene where you could read every single thought and fear she had for her son in that one shot as she was entwined with Alan Rickman's ever fantastic Snape. Julie Walters watching her home burn down with an expression that said more than words ever could. Emma Watson, finally not overusing her eyebrows, Rupert Grint finally not hamming it up for the camera, and Daniel Radclffe finally relaxing and actually acting silly once and a while.

I'm sorry, but say what you will about the plot, about being let down that things weren't handled well, but you just can't put down the acting. That isn't a subjective thing. The acting of the adults was brilliant. The acting of the kids, much improved.


SPOILER ALERT

Okay, Toothpaste pretty much said exactly what I wanted regarding the acting. I only slightly disagree with her opinion that Dumbledore's character was finally portrayed correctly -- the actor did better in this movie than he has in the past, but it still wasn't quite right, in my opinion. However, I've been looking forward to this movie so I could watch him die, and wasn't disappointed there. :)

I enjoyed the movie overall. In fact, I think it's the best since Chamber of Secrets. It remained truer to the books than the more recent HP movies, and the acting has improved. The only cringe-worthy moment for me was when Dumbledore asked if Harry and Hermione were romantically involved; it was out-of-character and unnecessary.

There are a few things I wish they'd included in the movie. I was hoping Emma Thompson would return as Trelawny to share another prediction -- she's a fantastic actress and Trelawny is a wonderful character (I love how Rowling uses her to add both humor and spookiness in the novels).

Also, I thought the bathroom scene between Malfoy and Harry was fantastic -- one of the best scenes in the movie -- but I wish Moaning Myrtle had made her appearance.

As someone who would join Hermione in SPEW, I hate that the movies seem to discriminate against house elves -- there hasn't been an appearance since Chamber of Secrets. I'm sure it's not cost-effective to include them in the special effects, but still, I'd love to see Dobby, Kreacher, and even Winky.

My only major gripe is that Dumbledore's Army didn't fight in the end. The scene at the Burrow was interesting, but I would have preferred the DA versus Death Eater scene that's in the book. Oh, and throwing in the Lupin/Tonks relationship angle was just silly.

As I said, though, I actually really enjoyed the movie. I loved the portrayal of Slughorn, and no-one could play Snape better than Alan Rickman. The flashback scenes and the cave scene were terrific and true to the story. The bridge scene in the beginning was excellent, as was the lit-wand scene near the end. A few things could have been done better, but I've read the novels multiple times and am probably impossible to completely satisfy. This movie came very, very close, though.

:)Smish

dclary
07-17-2009, 09:39 PM
Wow. That's. . . well just wrong. Jim Broadbent's performance, his pathos mixed with absurdity, was perfectly nuanced. Michael Gambon finally, FINALLY, understood how to play Dumbledore, with that twinkle in his eye but still world weary. Helena Bonham-Carter's brilliant madness, and Helen McCrory's one scene where you could read every single thought and fear she had for her son in that one shot as she was entwined with Alan Rickman's ever fantastic Snape. Julie Walters watching her home burn down with an expression that said more than words ever could. Emma Watson, finally not overusing her eyebrows, Rupert Grint finally not hamming it up for the camera, and Daniel Radclffe finally relaxing and actually acting silly once and a while.

I'm sorry, but say what you will about the plot, about being let down that things weren't handled well, but you just can't put down the acting. That isn't a subjective thing. The acting of the adults was brilliant. The acting of the kids, much improved.

As to suggesting the direction and cinematography as less than stellar, I'm sorry were we watching the same film? The flashbacks were gorgeous and creepy, the editing shocking and yet subtle. The use of filters, which I feared would be overwhelming from the few glimpses of trailers I accidentally saw, was actually probably my favourite of choices.

I agree the writing wasn't perfect, and I felt like the Ginny/Harry romance was entirely mismanaged, but some other scenes were just fantastic. I also feel like some moments suffered from strange timing, mostly at the beginining (like when Luna fixed Harry's nose - seemed to take a little too long).

At any rate, everyone is allowed their opinion, and I suppose truly, you'll just think me mad that I consider (no, KNOW) the acting, especially of the adults, was just lovely. But I know good acting when I see it. I consider myself a wee bit of an expert in that regard. And I just cannot agree with your opinion.

We can agree to disagree on the acting -- you're right, the adult acting was awesome. The kids weren't (and haven't ever) been great. Clearly they're better than Jake Lloyd in Star Wars... but i didn't see better acting in HP than I did in Trans2. They were both very adequate.

No, I wasn't saying that HP's cinematog and direction wasn't great. I was saying that Trans2's cinematog and direction was just as good. The original comment was that HP had things that Trans2 didn't. My point here has been that some of those elements weren't as far off as the OP suggested.

dclary
07-17-2009, 09:44 PM
In my mind, the first HP was the best HP. It's the only one that truly doesn't expect the audience to come in with external knowledge to have any clue wtf is going on.


This movie, as a sequel, more than any other sequel I have ever seen in my life, requires the audience to have done a lot of due diligence in watching and reading previous material to be able to follow the plotlines.

Wavy_Blue
07-17-2009, 10:26 PM
There were several people in my group who have not read the books and are not familiar with the series' storyline. They had no trouble following what was going on whatsoever.

dclary
07-17-2009, 10:55 PM
So they had no questions about why the death eaters blew up a bridge for no reason?

They didn't care to know why a store front was blown up?

They weren't surprised to find Harry Potter invisible?

No questions as to why everyone in the film thought it was impossible that Draco was a death eater, despite all the evidence that he was?

The ginny/harry romance, because it was ignored in all the previous films, came completely out of the blue. And how, if she's just a 4th year student, could she fight the death eaters as easily as he could -- oh, unless they'd seen her train with harry in the previous film.

There are too many suspension of disbelief scenes in this film, too many plot elements taken for granted, that require knowledge of both the books and the films for this movie to work in any way but as a bridge between the last film and the next one. Which is very much a shame, because the episodic nature of the films lends the series a chance for each film to stand on its own, and I don't think this one does.

In other words...

What is the story of Harry Potter and Half Blood Prince? What is the character's primary goal? How is it achieved?


"Harry Potter strives to find out who the secret former student who wrote notes in his lab book are." --- oops, that's not it. And it doesn't even matter... Snape just volunteers it later.

Here's the plot of this film:

"Harry Potter attempts to acquire a memory from one of Dark Lord Voldemort's former instructors, in an attempt to find a way to defeat him."

That just sounds.... weak.

Toothpaste
07-17-2009, 11:01 PM
We can agree to disagree on the acting -- you're right, the adult acting was awesome. The kids weren't (and haven't ever) been great. Clearly they're better than Jake Lloyd in Star Wars... but i didn't see better acting in HP than I did in Trans2. They were both very adequate.

No, I wasn't saying that HP's cinematog and direction wasn't great. I was saying that Trans2's cinematog and direction was just as good. The original comment was that HP had things that Trans2 didn't. My point here has been that some of those elements weren't as far off as the OP suggested.

I . . . sputter . . . I . . . wow. The fact that you think the acting in HP is the same as in Transformers. The fact you think the direction and cinematography is the same as Transformers . . . wow. Just wow.

And that's all I have to say about that.

(oh and if you think the adults acting in Harry Potter did a good job, then maybe don't say blanket statements of "I just disagree that Harry Potter was well-acted." People might think, you know, you didn't think any of the actors were any good.)

Toothpaste
07-17-2009, 11:08 PM
"Harry Potter strives to find out who the secret former student who wrote notes in his lab book are." --- oops, that's not it. And it doesn't even matter... Snape just volunteers it later.

Here's the plot of this film:

"Harry Potter attempts to acquire a memory from one of Dark Lord Voldemort's former instructors, in an attempt to find a way to defeat him."

That just sounds.... weak.

Actually the latter plot line sounds way stronger than the former you suggest. Why should I care why Harry wants to find out who the Half Blood Prince is? Isn't the whole series about defeating Voldemort? And the fact of the matter is, the whole Half Blood Prince thing, even in the book itself, was never the main focus of the story. That plot point had little to do with the rest of the series, and has little impact on the story aside from a bit more character exploration into the Half Blood Prince. It's kind of, you know, meaningless to the overarching story.

If I was a screenwriter trying to adapt this book, I would find it very difficult to handle all the Half Blood Prince stuff considering it doesn't really matter in the scheme of things.

But considering you think the first film is the best, I am starting to understand your opinion. You want the movies to emulate the books to a tee. Personally I find the first two films the weakest because they were too slavish to the source material, and I find this one the strongest because it got across theme and story, without needing to be, "And then this happened, then this. . ." The director was able to make the film his own, and not just be JK Rowling's puppet (not that she ever expected any of the directors to be that). Interesting unique visuals, unique editing choices (which I'm sorry, to even compare either of those two to Transformers is laughable, there isn't a single unique shot that whole film). Clever, difficult story telling techniques. And scenes that weren't even in the book to begin with. Well done Mr. Yates.

However I agree with you that it would be tough for people who didn't read the books or watch the previous films to understand what was going on, but I still maintain these films are the exception to the rule. They are more of a mini-series than anything, or more like shows like LOST. Yup you need to have seen them all, they do not stand on their own. But that's okay because they allow for that. Most people have read the books or seen the films and those who haven't aren't interested in the first place. They make money, they are for the most part a success with fans. And there you go.

Sage
07-17-2009, 11:12 PM
What is the story of Harry Potter and Half Blood Prince? What is the character's primary goal? How is it achieved?


"Harry Potter strives to find out who the secret former student who wrote notes in his lab book are." --- oops, that's not it. And it doesn't even matter... Snape just volunteers it later.

Here's the plot of this film:

"Harry Potter attempts to acquire a memory from one of Dark Lord Voldemort's former instructors, in an attempt to find a way to defeat him."

That just sounds.... weak.
I think that in both the movie and the book, you'll find that that is the plot. Harry and Dumbledore search for the way to destroy Voldemort. That is the plot. You think that sounds like a weaker plot than Harry trying to find out who wrote in his book? That's a subplot, just as all the romance stuff was. Which plot has higher stakes?

katiemac
07-17-2009, 11:17 PM
All right, just got out of it myself. I still think Azkaban was the best film adaptation, but this one is good in second place. I didn't love it. There were too many off moments for me still to totally enjoy it, but for most part what they did they did well.

[Spoilers]
Things I thought were awesome:

- The Astronomy Tower. I loved, loved, loved that twist with Snape. Since they have generally wiped out most of the series' references to Snape being a good person, I thought it was fantastic that Harry chose, in that moment, to trust Snape. Plus the Draco/Dumbledore exchange went down pretty much liked I would've hoped.

- When Harry touches the ring in Dumbledore's office, he gets all those flashes of Voldemort and that twitch they used in Phoenix to show when he'd been possesed. Even though the ring, no longer a Horcrux, shouldn't have done that, I didn't care.

- Bellatrix taking out the Great Hall after Dumbledore's death. Yay symbolism.

- The actress who played Lavender was delightfully obsessive. Rupert Grint is the best actor of the three, and he was on target again.

- The added story about Slughorn's goldfish.

- The added scene with the Burrow, although a bit of a waste, I thought was a good way for Harry to burn off his rage about Sirirus. It was in character he would have chased after her that way, and it was the only time in the movie they hinted that Harry would still be terribly upset about the death of his godfather.

- The cave scene went down pretty nicely as well. I was ready to jump out of my skin when Harry was dipping the cup in the water, which nearly everyone in the theater did.

- A small thing, but the camera movement from Ron and Lavender kissing on the spiral staircase in the tower to Draco standing on the Astronomy tower. Also that shot of Dumbledore and Harry on the boulder in the middle of the ocean. It's in the trailers, but it looked incredible on the big screen.

Things I thought were not all that awesome:

- The whole beginning seemed to dive in a bit too quickly. I also, for the life of me, will not understand why they included the scene with Harry hitting on the girl from the coffee shop.

- Not sure why they brought in Fenrir Greyback when they didn't do anything with him?

- The Ginny/Harry romance was just ... bleh. I'm not a big fan of it in the books, either, but in the film it was off. I think someone upthread said "mismanaged." Yes.

- I hate to fault the movie for NOT including scenes ... but I was letdown that the scene with Harry and Trelawney was missing. It wouldn't have worked with the Snape twist they did on the Tower, so I'm contradicting myself a bit, but still.

- ... Which leads me to the whole Snape/Harry scene on the lawn of Hogwarts. Now that I've seen it, I'm fine Snape didn't rage all that much, especially since they didn't bring the actual prophecy into this film at all. But I think Harry should've raged more.

- Why no fighting in Hogwarts? Why bring in all those Death Eaters if they were just going to run away? It wouldn't have killed them to bring in the Order to throw a couple of curses around, I don't think, especially if they'd dumped the scene at the Burrow.

- Hence my overall disappointed with the films in general. There's always something missing. Not scenes, or anything big like that, but it's just ... flat. I don't find Harry that well-rounded of a character in the films.


Things I found neither awesome nor not awesome:

- No burial, but Dumbledore's wand was on his desk. Hmm...

- Did anyone see the bust and crown in the Room of Requirement? I was looking for it but I'm not sure they filmed it.

- Will be interesting how they have Harry figure out what the Horcruxes are for the seventh, considering Dumbledore didn't share his theory on what they actually were. I also thought it was interesting Dumbledore, in the film, went so far as to say "they could be anything."

maestrowork
07-18-2009, 12:17 AM
It'd be interesting to see the difference between those who have read the book recent, read the book a while ago, and never read it.

I haven't read the book, and I haven't seen the movie yet. I'll let you think what I think. Personally, I enjoyed Azkaban and Globet of Fire the most because they were great stand-alone pieces and also I felt like I didn't need to read the book to figure things out. And they had some of the best characters of the series.

Order of Phoenix and Chamber of Secrets disappointed me the most. OoP in particular felt really flat, and I didn't feel anything at the end. It was just really bleh.

I'll let you know what I think (from the perspective of someone who hasn't read the book) after Saturday.

katiemac
07-18-2009, 12:20 AM
Actually the latter plot line sounds way stronger than the former you suggest. Why should I care why Harry wants to find out who the Half Blood Prince is? Isn't the whole series about defeating Voldemort? And the fact of the matter is, the whole Half Blood Prince thing, even in the book itself, was never the main focus of the story. That plot point had little to do with the rest of the series, and has little impact on the story aside from a bit more character exploration into the Half Blood Prince. It's kind of, you know, meaningless to the overarching story.

Gah. We're not disagreeing here, because I know what you mean by saying Half Blood Prince wasn't the main focus in the book, nor was it crucial to the overarching storyline.

But I do think there's more credit due to the storyline, especially in terms of characterization, than "just a bit more." ;) We don't just explore Snape's background, but Harry's relationship with Snape. The phases he goes through ... loyalty to the Half Blood Prince because it makes him a better student and helps him save Ron's life, trusts the book because the Levicorpus spell reminds him of his father, all of it to backfire in his face when the Sectumsempra spell nearly kills Malfoy. All the while, moving in the background, Harry blames Snape for Sirius' death, Snape's making the Unbreakable Vow, Harry learns he took the prophecy to Voldemort, and then, finally, Snape kills Dumbledore.

And Harry finds out this book, this Prince he trusted so much, was actually the one guy in the world he really, truly hates just as much as Voldemort. And it's a huge blow. As a Snape Enthusiast, I totally love this plotline, especially when you drag in the Snape/Harry/Voldemort parallels.

And it's the layers into stuff like this where, even though the films capture a lot of scenes adequately, they haven't yet been able to capture all of this under-the-surface stuff that I love. And while it may not have been crucial to the overarching story, the fact it exists anyway is where I think Rowling stands out from a lot of other authors.

Toothpaste
07-18-2009, 12:41 AM
I guess for me the whole Snape fascination just isn't as big a thing as it is for some. I also think because many people fell in love with the character (either you know, they just adored it, or the many many women who actually are in love with Snape - like the love some have for Edward in Twilight) they put an extra importance on his role, sometimes even over other characters who might be more important. I think this is clearly demonstrated by the fact that in turning the books into film, a lot of Snape wound up being cut out. Because while yes, he is a very important character, especially thematically, he isn't really as important to the plot of the story as many wish he was. Not until this book. But even then, the movie was still about the Half Blood Prince. In fact this is what I think a lot of people missed about the title. It really isn't about the text book. The text book doesn't matter plot wise (yes, it matters character wise). What matters is Snape's role throughout the rest of the story, his protecting Draco, his killing Dumbledore, both of which I thought they established very well in the film. The title of the book refers directly to Snape, and not as Snape as through the text book.

Still, I do see what you are missing, but to me it is a personal taste thing, not actually an actual requirement in the film. I for example would always love to see so much more of the Lupin story because I am in love with him. But we simply can't put every backstory, every relationship into a film. It just can't be done. We can be disappointed that the characters we love aren't being represented as we would wish them to be, but as a fan of film I am very impressed with the decisions the screenwriters have had to make. You can't please everyone, and they aren't trying to. Which I respect.

What does Harry's relationship with Snape have to do with anything really? When you think about it. It is a great character builder, it is a great sub plot. But many many subplots are sacrificed in these films. In the end this isn't the story of Harry and Snape, but Harry and Voldemort, and fascinating character or not, as a screenwriter you have to keep your eye on the prize (and considering how well they did those flashbacks, how intensely creepy and well cast the young Tom Riddles were, I think they were doing just that).

Delhomeboy
07-18-2009, 12:54 AM
I guess for me the whole Snape fascination just isn't as big a thing as it is for some. I also think because many people fell in love with the character (either you know, they just adored it, or the many many women who actually are in love with Snape - like the love some have for Edward in Twilight) they put an extra importance on his role, sometimes even over other characters who might be more important. I think this is clearly demonstrated by the fact that in turning the books into film, a lot of Snape wound up being cut out. Because while yes, he is a very important character, especially thematically, he isn't really as important to the plot of the story as many wish he was. Not until this book. But even then, the movie was still about the Half Blood Prince. In fact this is what I think a lot of people missed about the title. It really isn't about the text book. The text book doesn't matter plot wise (yes, it matters character wise). What matters is Snape's role throughout the rest of the story, his protecting Draco, his killing Dumbledore, both of which I thought they established very well in the film. The title of the book refers directly to Snape, and not as Snape as through the text book.

Still, I do see what you are missing, but to me it is a personal taste thing, not actually an actual requirement in the film. I for example would always love to see so much more of the Lupin story because I am in love with him. But we simply can't put every backstory, every relationship into a film. It just can't be done. We can be disappointed that the characters we love aren't being represented as we would wish them to be, but as a fan of film I am very impressed with the decisions the screenwriters have had to make. You can't please everyone, and they aren't trying to. Which I respect.


This is a great post. I mean, there's a reason my dad always told me, "The book is always better than the movie," and this is why. Because you can put all the delicious subplots and character things in a book that you can't in a movie. I also would love to see Lupin, because I think he's a great character. But you have to read the books for that, because that's the only medium through with so much time can be taken to put him in. To ask the flimmakers to do that is, frankly, unfair. All movie adaptations are just that, adaptations.

katiemac
07-18-2009, 12:55 AM
It really isn't about the text book. The text book doesn't matter. What matters is Snape's role throughout the rest of the story, his protecting Draco, his killing Dumbledore, both of which I thought they established very well in the film. The title of the book refers directly to Snape, and not as Snape as through the text book.

Of course it's not about the textbook.

I'm not faulting the movie for not focusing on the potions book. In the time constraint, they shouldn't have. Which is why, in that one moment on the astronomy tower, when Harry chooses to trust Snape rather than curse Draco or a Death Eater, it's a big deal toward that overall choice of Harry's. But, and what I was getting at about any scene, Snape or no, is that I don't think the level of emotion is there in the films. The Snape stuff, as what I mentioned in the post above, is just one example where I don't think the movies work to adequately illustrate certain emotion.

Despite how they carried out the scene in the movie, I felt Harry and the other characters should've been much more suckerpunched by Snape's betrayal. Just as Harry should've been more distraught over finding out the locket was fake. And why I liked that they included Harry chasing Bellatrix in this one, one of only two times they hinted at how Sirius' death still haunts Harry. Again, that's a carry-over from the last movie, but I find it relevant to why he's willing to go after Voldemort and spend time getting memories from Slughorn.

Sometimes I feel like they get the level of emotion right, but many other times I'm left feeling very little. I wish they put more effort, in the screenwriting/acting, to bring the emotion forward, whether they do it how the book does it or not. Lots of going through the motions with very little impact.

Sage
07-18-2009, 12:55 AM
TP, I have never thought about how HBP was really about the "half-blood prince" meaning about Snape, as opposed to Harry's imagined hero through the book. Man, I appreciate the title more.

Katie, I know exactly where you're coming from because I think the reason I don't like the PoA movie as much is because all that under-the-surface stuff that ties so neatly together when we get to the end was skipped over.

Toothpaste
07-18-2009, 01:04 AM
And Katie, despite my long post sort of debating with you, I actually agree with your point there. I agree that they still don't quite get some of the emotions right in the Potter films in general (though I, unlike others, really did like the Snape/Dumbledore showdown). My biggest issue in this film (and again because it was my fav part of the book, not because it was utterly necessary) was the fact that we never saw the "Ah-ha!" moment when Harry realised he had feelings for Ginny. And I felt as if that entire subplot was mismanaged. Many people are like, "Why is Ginny suddenly so prominent?" And if the screenwriter had simply kept her in the background as usual until Harry had that "Ah-ha!" moment, and then made her a prominent figure, thus making the audience notice her for the first time in a similar way to Harry, then I think a lot more people wouldn't have found her presence so odd. Also I really missed the fact that she was a fantastic witch. To have Slughorn briefly explain why he had invited her to join the club was all that was needed.

Oh and I agree too about your feelings about the locket.

I definitely don't think the films are perfect, and I do think at times extremely odd choices are made that really impact negatively on the films. But for me at least, I felt Snape was handled wonderfully, I liked how he showed up in the tower, how Harry allowed him to go up. Personally I thought the death of Dumbledore was spot on, and I think it is possible some people didn't react to it the way they wished they had as there was no way to recreate that feeling as when you first read the book. Though I will say I thought it was brilliant that they kept returning to Dumbledore's face when they were all mourning him. It was like in the book when I kept saying to myself, "He's okay, he's okay", by constantly returning to his face you kept expecting . . . "And . . . now he's going to open his eyes . . ." Quite clever.

And I have always felt the last scenes in the Potter films far too lighthearted for what has just gone before, ESPECIALLY in movie 4. This one was at least a little subdued, but even then, it lacked that real gravitas of the moment. A real lingering sadness about Dumbledore, and pain at Snape's betrayal. So I do agree with that.

The emotions have never gone deeply enough for me in any of the films, especially with the kids. And that is a negative certainly.

katiemac
07-18-2009, 01:06 AM
I have never thought about how HBP was really about the "half-blood prince" meaning about Snape, as opposed to Harry's imagined hero through the book. Man, I appreciate the title more.

:D I totally love the title. I remember her talking about it before it was published, that she had a few different ones to choose from. I love she went with this one - thematically I think it's perfect.


Katie, I know exactly where you're coming from because I think the reason I don't like the PoA movie as much is because all that under-the-surface stuff that ties so neatly together when we get to the end was skipped over.

That's funny, because I think Azkaban was the best film they did despite the fact that all the neat tie-together stuff was cleared out. ;)

katiemac
07-18-2009, 01:13 AM
I actually agree with your point there. I agree that they still don't quite get some of the emotions right in the Potter films in general (though I, unlike others, really did like the Snape/Dumbledore showdown). My biggest issue in this film (and again because it was my fav part of the book, not because it was utterly necessary) was the fact that we never saw the "Ah-ha!" moment when Harry realised he had feelings for Ginny. And I felt as if that entire subplot was mismanaged. I agree too about your feelings about the locket.

Oh, unless I explained it incorrectly - I do agree the Snape/Dumbledore showdown was done very well. It's more the aftermath - the fact Harry should be all tortured that he let the murdering SOB pass him. Time constraints and things, I know, but just contributes to the fact I don't always feel the characters, especially the kids, like you say. And, oh man, the locket was such a punch in the gut to me originally, I felt how utterly devastating that was. Not so much in the movie. And it definitely would have been nice for them to showcase Ginny's abilities - I was actually waiting for Slughorn to say that and it didn't happen.

But yeah, despite what I wrote about the movies in general being a bit lackluster, HBP was hands-down one of the better ones. I feel good enough about it that I'll see what Yates will do for DH 1 & 2.

I did enjoy the subtle cinematography in this one; so dark and eerie.

katiemac
07-18-2009, 02:09 AM
Did anyone else think the kid playing Cormac looked like a little Ryan Phillipe?

dclary
07-18-2009, 02:28 AM
Let me start by saying the only Harry Potter book I've read in its entirety is Deathly Hallows.

The latter plot line is stronger because that IS the plot of the movie. The first was just a red herring in the film, completely inconsequential.


I don't want the films to emulate the books to a tee. I want each one to tell a complete story.

1: Harry Potter goes to Hogwarts, learns that he's a wizard, and that the evil wizard who killed his parents still exerts his power. With his innate skill and wonderful friends, he defeats the wizard's attempt to steal a powerful artifact.

2. Harry Potter's friend Ginny becomes possessed by the diary of a dark wizard. To defeat her, he must rely on his friends, and his own innate magical skill. Oh yeah: And kill a big-ass snake.

3. Harry Potter learns that he is being stalked by the man who betrayed his parents -- his own godfather. Now he must not only find and defeat this man, but defend himself against the demonic guardians who hunt his godfather -- for their power has a deadly effect on Harry.

4. For the sake of Hogwarts, Harry Potter strives to win the Tri-Wizards Tournament and acquire the fabled Goblet of Fire

5. With Dumbledore away and no one to teach them, Harry Potter takes it upon himself to train his friends in wizardly combat. Their training is pushed to the limits when Voldemort lures Harry into a battle between his Death eaters and Harry's friends.

6. What I said above: Harry tries to get a teacher to share a vital memory.

7. Harry Potter and Voldemort finally face off as the forces of evil hunt and pursue Harry's friends, killing several, and trapping the rest in Hogwarts, where a final battle is waged.




tell me 6 is not the weakest story there?




Actually the latter plot line sounds way stronger than the former you suggest. Why should I care why Harry wants to find out who the Half Blood Prince is? Isn't the whole series about defeating Voldemort? And the fact of the matter is, the whole Half Blood Prince thing, even in the book itself, was never the main focus of the story. That plot point had little to do with the rest of the series, and has little impact on the story aside from a bit more character exploration into the Half Blood Prince. It's kind of, you know, meaningless to the overarching story.

If I was a screenwriter trying to adapt this book, I would find it very difficult to handle all the Half Blood Prince stuff considering it doesn't really matter in the scheme of things.

But considering you think the first film is the best, I am starting to understand your opinion. You want the movies to emulate the books to a tee. Personally I find the first two films the weakest because they were too slavish to the source material, and I find this one the strongest because it got across theme and story, without needing to be, "And then this happened, then this. . ." The director was able to make the film his own, and not just be JK Rowling's puppet (not that she ever expected any of the directors to be that). Interesting unique visuals, unique editing choices (which I'm sorry, to even compare either of those two to Transformers is laughable, there isn't a single unique shot that whole film). Clever, difficult story telling techniques. And scenes that weren't even in the book to begin with. Well done Mr. Yates.

However I agree with you that it would be tough for people who didn't read the books or watch the previous films to understand what was going on, but I still maintain these films are the exception to the rule. They are more of a mini-series than anything, or more like shows like LOST. Yup you need to have seen them all, they do not stand on their own. But that's okay because they allow for that. Most people have read the books or seen the films and those who haven't aren't interested in the first place. They make money, they are for the most part a success with fans. And there you go.

Toothpaste
07-18-2009, 02:35 AM
Um, yes, I think we all agree that the plot of number 6 isn't that strong. I think everyone misinterpreted your post (not our fault really, if we all misinterpreted the same way, might have something to do with the way the post was written) that you were suggesting out of the two options the text book plot was more interesting than the memory plot.

We agree. 6's plot is weak. But that's not the point of 6. It is a film about character development, as well as a staging ground for the final showdown in 7. We also agree that these movies break all movie making rules in that none of them are complete stories in and of themselves. For me at any rate, that doesn't matter. For you it does. But that doesn't mean we don't agree. What we disagree on is the quality of filmmaking. I think it is high, you want to compare it to one of the worst films in recent memory.

But yeah, 6 has no plot. Totally.

dclary
07-18-2009, 02:56 AM
Um, yes, I think we all agree that the plot of number 6 isn't that strong. I think everyone misinterpreted your post (not our fault really, if we all misinterpreted the same way, might have something to do with the way the post was written) that you were suggesting out of the two options the text book plot was more interesting than the memory plot.

We agree. 6's plot is weak. But that's not the point of 6. It is a film about character development, as well as a staging ground for the final showdown in 7. We also agree that these movies break all movie making rules in that none of them are complete stories in and of themselves. For me at any rate, that doesn't matter. For you it does. But that doesn't mean we don't agree. What we disagree on is the quality of filmmaking. I think it is high, you want to compare it to one of the worst films in recent memory.

But yeah, 6 has no plot. Totally.

Well see, here we are again.

The quality of the filmmaking in HP is outstanding.

But honestly, so is Transformers. Both film crews did fantastic jobs with what they had to work with.

In the post that started this brouhaha, I merely pointed out that both HP and Transformers have awful plots. Someone pointed out the things that he/she thought HP had that transformers didn't, to explain why this might be... but the most likely reason is this:


you guys are HP fanboys.


Simple as that. Might as well fess up and accept it.

:tongue

mscelina
07-18-2009, 03:00 AM
Just got back from the movie. SPOILERS--DUH.




First off, let me say that in the hands of a lesser actor, the nuances of Severus Snape would have been entirely lost. That being said, Rickman's brilliance really carried the end of the movie. He was able to convey with just the merest flicker of expression the torment of the character as he did what he'd been ordered to do. The scene on the astronomy tower was awesome-particularly that moment under the stairs where Harry,for the first time in the series, lowers his wand and allows himself to trust Snape. People earlier in this thread were upset that Snape didn't 'lose it' at the end of the movie. I think that not losing it made the character choices stronger. All Snape needs to do, he does--he disarms Harry, removes his wand from his proximity, and gets the Death Eaters off the grounds without putting anyone else in harm's way. Harry, on the other hand, is obeying Dumbledore's command to him. He was not to interfere or reveal himself in any way. You know--Dumbledore's man through and through. There was no way they could have shown the silent petrificus totalus spell Dumbledore cast on Harry in the book; this was probably the best way to keep Harry a witness but not involved, and it set up that wonderful moment with Snape. All in all, it gave the scenes on the astronomy tower and the chase right afterwards a dark, brooding beauty that I think was actually lost in the book but established beautifully here.

I'm going to be interested to see how Yates and the screenwriters are going to handle the next two movies. Some of the things omitted from HBP were sort of essential to forward the plot as written in DH. (Things like Dumbledore's speculation on what the other Horcruxes are, for example, and the whole Fleur-Bill wedding at the Burrow--poor little house!) it's going to be a real trick to get all of those plot elements into the DH movies. I have a feeling (and read somewhere that this was the case) that Dumbledore's funeral was filmed but cut from this film due to time constraints and that Yates is planning to begin the seventh movie with that scene. If that's the case, then the wand will make it out of Dumbledore's office and perhaps his speculations about horcruxes will come to the kids as a result of Dumbledore's will. We'll have to see.

Overall, I really appreciated this movie. Interesting as well--the theatre was packed with families this afternoon (some who I felt were definitely too young for some of the darker scenes in the movie, like the Inferi attack in the lake) but they all seemed spellbound. I've noticed in previous HP movies the amount of noise and chatter during the films--not so this time.

katiemac
07-18-2009, 03:08 AM
Just got back from the movie. SPOILERS--DUH.

First off, let me say that in the hands of a lesser actor, the nuances of Severus Snape would have been entirely lost. That being said, Rickman's brilliance really carried the end of the movie. He was able to convey with just the merest flicker of expression the torment of the character as he did what he'd been ordered to do. The scene on the astronomy tower was awesome-particularly that moment under the stairs where Harry,for the first time in the series, lowers his wand and allows himself to trust Snape. People earlier in this thread were upset that Snape didn't 'lose it' at the end of the movie. I think that not losing it made the character choices stronger. All Snape needs to do, he does--he disarms Harry, removes his wand from his proximity, and gets the Death Eaters off the grounds without putting anyone else in harm's way. Harry, on the other hand, is obeying Dumbledore's command to him. He was not to interfere or reveal himself in any way. You know--Dumbledore's man through and through. There was no way they could have shown the silent petrificus totalus spell Dumbledore cast on Harry in the book; this was probably the best way to keep Harry a witness but not involved, and it set up that wonderful moment with Snape. All in all, it gave the scenes on the astronomy tower and the chase right afterwards a dark, brooding beauty that I think was actually lost in the book but established beautifully here.

After seeing, I'm glad I wasn't disappointed by this scene. Like you said, the fact Harry lowers his wand for Snape speaks volumes. And this Harry hasn't been as proactive as the book version, either, so the fact he followed Dumbledore's orders worked in place of the body-bind curse. I'm not as fond of the following chase scene - the fact this Snape doesn't push the fight wasn't the issue I expected, though, because Alan Rickman was great at subtlety - but rather it came on Harry's end.


I'm going to be interested to see how Yates and the screenwriters are going to handle the next two movies. Some of the things omitted from HBP were sort of essential to forward the plot as written in DH. (Things like Dumbledore's speculation on what the other Horcruxes are, for example, and the whole Fleur-Bill wedding at the Burrow--poor little house!) it's going to be a real trick to get all of those plot elements into the DH movies. I have a feeling (and read somewhere that this was the case) that Dumbledore's funeral was filmed but cut from this film due to time constraints and that Yates is planning to begin the seventh movie with that scene. If that's the case, then the wand will make it out of Dumbledore's office and perhaps his speculations about horcruxes will come to the kids as a result of Dumbledore's will. We'll have to see.

Before I saw this movie I wondered if they were going to just go ahead and cut the wedding. Now I'm pretty sure they will.

Toothpaste
07-18-2009, 03:11 AM
But honestly, so is Transformers. Both film crews did fantastic jobs with what they had to work with.




you guys are HP fanboys.





Yeah. This is the fallacious premise with which I take issue and I suppose we shall never agree on (though, I know I'm right ;) ). The biggest problem with Transformers, above the writing and ridiculous story - which I will be honest, did actually offer some decent moments, is the cinematography, editing, and direction. It is one of the worst put together movies I've seen in a long time.

Despite being an HP fanGIRL, I am still able to tell crap filmmaking from not. Being a fangirl only allows me to excuse the lack of plot in the movie, not the quality of the filmmaking itself. The filmmaking is fantastic in HP, even if I wasn't a fan, that I could not deny.

Toothpaste
07-18-2009, 03:14 AM
Before I saw this movie I wondered if they were going to just go ahead and cut the wedding. Now I'm pretty sure they will.

I feel like, though, I read somewhere that they will be including it. Hmm . . . I'm going off to do some googling . . .excuse me . ..

Toothpaste
07-18-2009, 03:16 AM
Am I good or am I good, the every reliable LeakyCauldron.org tells us yes, there will be a wedding: http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/2009/7/3/rehearsals-for-bill-and-fleurs-wedding-scene-in-deathly-hallows-underway

The comments section is interesting, with some speculating they might replace the wedding between Bill and Fleur with Tonks and Lupin. Though of course why it would be called "Weasley Wedding" in that case I have no idea . . .

Toothpaste
07-18-2009, 03:19 AM
Further investigation reveals that on the imdb cast list, Clémence Poésy is back, and an actor has been cast as Bill: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0926084/ so I guess it is indeed their wedding! If you google him, you'll see he looks just like a Weasley!

Sage
07-18-2009, 03:27 AM
I was going to guess Lupin and Tonks for the wedding, since they skipped the Fleur/Bill storyline.

But I guess they also need them for the Shell Cottage scenes.

katiemac
07-18-2009, 03:47 AM
Am I good or am I good, the every reliable LeakyCauldron.org tells us yes, there will be a wedding: http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/20...llows-underway (http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/2009/7/3/rehearsals-for-bill-and-fleurs-wedding-scene-in-deathly-hallows-underway)

The comments section is interesting, with some speculating they might replace the wedding between Bill and Fleur with Tonks and Lupin. Though of course why it would be called "Weasley Wedding" in that case I have no idea . . .

Interesting. I'm actually quite surprised, considering some of the scenes they'd taken out of the other movies, that they'd leave this one in. But I suppose, even with the two parts, they still have more time than I think they do. I wonder if they'll combine that will more stuff - like Dumbledore's will. Maybe Bill'll get mauled at his wedding instead. ;)


I was going to guess Lupin and Tonks for the wedding, since they skipped the Fleur/Bill storyline.

But I guess they also need them for the Shell Cottage scenes.

They could always lose Shell Cottage, though. Not the scenes, but I mean, they could just end up back at the Burrow instead. But if they include Bill and Fleur's wedding, then they might as well use Shell Cottage.

Toothpaste
07-18-2009, 04:12 AM
Oh and if anyone is interested, I did do a podcast for the website I work for (HardcoreNerdity.com) about the film. I went with the recorder to the screening, talked about it with the gang I was with pre and post watching the film: http://www.hardcorenerdity.com/profiles/blog/show?id=2239098%3ABlogPost%3A65487

Cranky
07-18-2009, 05:37 AM
So I got back from HBP this afternoon, and I was left with mixed feelings. Mostly, I liked the movie, only a few false notes. The things they chopped/trimmed/whatever, I was okay with. I find myself surprised to hear that it looks like they're still going to have Bill and Fleur's wedding...I don't think Bill has *ever* been mentioned in the movies....this will sort of come out of the blue. Still...I shall wait and see.

I think the lack of a plot really impacted the movie. It's definitely a bridge --an important one -- but a bridge nevertheless. And I was left feeling odd about the whole thing. I'll have to think about it some more, but overall, I was pretty pleased with the movie on an intellectual level. But it didn't get me in the gut the way I hoped it would, the way the book did. And I surprise myself with that, since I always approach these films from a different place than the books.

So, yeah. I feel weird about the movie, but excited to see how DH Parts One and Two end up working out.

Kathleen42
07-18-2009, 06:10 AM
Was it just me or was the ending music over the credits sort of bizarre? Don't get me wrong, I love Fireworks (it's one of my favorite bits of score in the series) but it seemed... annoyingly cheerful.

Rowan
07-18-2009, 06:14 AM
Was it just me or was the ending music over the credits sort of bizarre? Don't get me wrong, I love Fireworks (it's one of my favorite bits of score in the series) but it seemed... annoyingly cheerful.

I just saw it today and I agree! I was wondering why the song was so upbeat considering what happened...

Overall I liked the movie - great special effects, etc. - but agree with those who feel important elements were left out (and not even mentioned)... can't wait for the final two.

Wavy_Blue
07-18-2009, 07:18 AM
So I got back from HBP this afternoon, and I was left with mixed feelings. Mostly, I liked the movie, only a few false notes. The things they chopped/trimmed/whatever, I was okay with. I find myself surprised to hear that it looks like they're still going to have Bill and Fleur's wedding...I don't think Bill has *ever* been mentioned in the movies....this will sort of come out of the blue. Still...I shall wait and see.



Bill was mentioned very briefly in Sorcerer's Stone when Norbert was shipped off to him, IIRC. I believe Ron mentions he works with dragons.

katiemac
07-18-2009, 07:20 AM
Bill was mentioned very briefly in Sorcerer's Stone when Norbert was shipped off to him, IIRC. I believe Ron mentions he works with dragons.

Bill's the one that works at Gringotts. The only reason I can recall this piece of information is because that's where he and Fleur were supposed to have met. Charlie worked with dragons. (Yet I don't think Charlie's ever been in the films, just the Norbert mention like you say above? He could've appeared in Goblet of Fire. And they've all but dumped Percy as well.)

Wavy_Blue
07-18-2009, 07:27 AM
Bill's the one that works at Gringotts. The only reason I can recall this piece of information is because that's where he and Fleur were supposed to have met. Charlie worked with dragons. (Yet I don't think Charlie's ever been in the films, just the Norbert mention like you say above? He could've appeared in Goblet of Fire. And they've all but dumped Percy as well.)

Do'h! That's right. Charlie is the one that works with dragons. In that case, I don't think Bill's been mentioned at all, unless he was on the Weasley's clock in the second movie.

Gee, I really need to watch those early ones again...

katiemac
07-18-2009, 07:29 AM
Do'h! That's right. Charlie is the one that works with dragons. In that case, I don't think Bill's been mentioned at all, unless he was on the Weasley's clock in the second movie.

Gee, I really need to watch those early ones again...

Nah I used to mix them up all the time until I could remember which one married Fleur. Bill might have been mentioned in the first one, since I feel like it would have been natural for Ron to mention his whole family then.

[SPOILER - BOOK7]
I just noticed Bill Nighy's on the cast list as Rufus Scrimgeour for the seventh. I find that incredibly interesting, since they didn't include him in the sixth, and Scrimgeour gets whacked in the first couple of chapters of the seventh.

Sage
07-18-2009, 07:41 AM
I think Charlie got mentioned in GoF too, since that's how Ron knew about the dragons.

Spoiler - Book 7

Oh, but hopefully, they'll get to do the 2nd round of Harry being all "I must not tell lies" to him b/c I love that part. Anyway, they'll prolly have him there to deliver the items Dumbledore willed to Harry, Ron, and Hermoine.

jodiodi
07-18-2009, 07:43 AM
My husband and the kids want to see the movie tomorrow or Sunday. As I've said before, I couldn't care less. I know the basic story. It sounds like I'll need a scorecard to keep up with what happens to who in this movie and I don't like to think that hard when it comes to stories in which I have no emotional/intellectual investment.

Still, I'll probably go with them for the popcorn slathered in the Golden Elixer of Death, then nap until it's over.

katiemac
07-18-2009, 07:48 AM
Spoiler - Book 7

Oh, but hopefully, they'll get to do the 2nd round of Harry being all "I must not tell lies" to him b/c I love that part. Anyway, they'll prolly have him there to deliver the items Dumbledore willed to Harry, Ron, and Hermoine.

[Spoiler - Book7]

I think what strikes me as unusually weird about it is that they've cast Bill Nighy. Love the guy, don't get me wrong, but it seems like it will be essentially a throw-away role in Deathly Hallows. My guess is Scrimgeour interrupts the wedding to deliver the will, then the Death Eaters crash. Whacked.

DavidZahir
07-18-2009, 08:27 PM
Saw it. My thoughts...

We all know this is gonna be full of SPOILERS right?

I liked it for covering the bare bones of the plot with some nice character work here and there. Some really fine acting, often from people we frankly have every reason to expect such from--Jim Broadbent, Alan Rickman, Michael Gambon, etc. Our three leads do a good job with what they've been given, but in this one I do believe Grint and Watson upstaged Radcliffe (which is unusual--he's usually the best of the three). Really good stuff with a lot of the supporting cast as well, from Draco's mom to Tonks and most especially Lavender Brown (who stole nearly every scene she was ever in).

Both young Voldemorts were praise-worthy as well.

Gorgeous cinematography, really. Absolutely stunning. In particular the castle itself was used with great impact, the best IMHO since POA.

But...

The sense of this world was missing. Actually, that has been a chronic lack in the movies since number three and we are not the better for it. How I miss the talking paintings! And the ghosts! (Especially since both are pretty damn important in the next book!) For that matter, other than potions, we didn't see any classes taking place so we don't see characters learning anything while at school. Just thematically, this seems wrong.

I am a great believer in streamlining and adapting from one medium to the next--in fact I've had many a passionate debate about same, especially vis-a-vis LOTR. But certain things have gotten lost that frankly I miss and more importantly methinks hurt the story. The real insights into Tom Riddle, the boy who became Voldemort, that I miss most of all and is in many ways the whole point of the story. Not-really-different from that is the whole business of the title--why is it important that Snape is the Half Blood Prince and what does that mean anyway? I know, because I've read the book but how would anyone who hadn't? Besides, those two go hand-in-hand. Part of what is so important in the overall tale is understanding just how alike Harry, Snape and Voldemort really are. And how different.

I can understand (perhaps) but deeply regret the shortening of the interplay as Harry forces Dumbledore to drink the potion. Apart from setting things up for DH, this increases the power to the whole thing.

That said, I adored many of the brand spanking new "bits" unique to the film. Draco's experiments with the cabinet. Tonks and Remus as a couple already. Bellatrix and Fenrir's attack on the Weasley home. Hermione recognizing Harry's feelings for Ginny. The many wands of Hogwarts banishing the Death Mark. Harry overhearing the little snippet of argument between Snape and Dumbledore, then Snape's finger to his lips just before the climax. Knowing the books as I do, Dumbledore's line about "A boy who made all the wrong choices..." cracked my heart just a tiny bit.

And yeah--the closing credits began with a weirdly cheerful music set.

All in all, very mixed bag.

katiemac
07-18-2009, 08:43 PM
Dumbledore's line about "A boy who made all the wrong choices..." cracked my heart just a tiny bit.

I totally didn't put two and two together there. I hope for the movie they were actually meaning for Dumbledore to be referring to himself. Thanks for that.

childeroland
07-18-2009, 09:26 PM
Looks like it's not going to beat ROTF domestically.

http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.com/harry-potter-piles-on-20m-in-post-midnights/

katiemac
07-18-2009, 09:30 PM
Looks like it's not going to beat ROTF domestically.

http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.com/harry-potter-piles-on-20m-in-post-midnights/

It still has a shot, albeit a very small one, because Potter is not yet in IMAX. When it opens there in another week, Potter will have another spike in ticket sales whereas Transformers pretty much tuckered out after two weeks.

jodiodi
07-19-2009, 01:45 AM
Hubby and kids dragged me to see it today & it was OK. Not enough Snape, imho. Too much teen wangst I couldn't care less about as well. I loathe 'love storys' in my mahem, danger, death and destruction. Slows down the action. I'd give it a 6.5 out of 10. Hubby: 7.5; The Girl: 7; The Boy: 8. Average: 7.25.

Some characters seemed to appear out of nowhere. I don't remember some of them from earlier movies, yet here they were, apparently important to this one.

It was worth the matinee price just 'cause I got the Popcorn slathered in Golden Elixer o' Death.

Delhomeboy
07-19-2009, 03:18 AM
Hubby and kids dragged me to see it today & it was OK. Not enough Snape, imho. Too much teen wangst I couldn't care less about as well. I loathe 'love storys' in my mahem, danger, death and destruction. Slows down the action. I'd give it a 6.5 out of 10. Hubby: 7.5; The Girl: 7; The Boy: 8. Average: 7.25.



I guess you have to be a Twilight fan or less than three years out of high school to enjoy the teen wangst (I'm the latter, not the former, don't worry). Either that, or the person suffering said angst has to look like Emma Watson. I'm going to see it again tomorrow, and she's, oh, about 10 percent of the reason. Which is significant. :D

Toothpaste
07-19-2009, 09:04 AM
So disagree. I am not a Twilight fan in the least (nor just three years out of highschool unfortunately) which is why I think I love the teen wangst even more in Harry Potter (the books at any rate), it's so real - so messy, silly, and absurd. JK Rowling always got that part of her books note perfect.

Which is why, having just returned from my second viewing of the film I am even more frustrated at the mismanaging of Harry and Ginny. The rest of the film totally improved upon second viewing (and I already loved it), but the Harry/Ginny stuff really stood out as wrong therefore. Why they couldn't have used Rowling's brilliance and left well enough alone, I have no idea. Le sigh.

Exir
07-19-2009, 09:59 AM
but the Harry/Ginny stuff really stood out as wrong therefore. Why they couldn't have used Rowling's brilliance and left well enough alone, I have no idea. Le sigh.

As a die-hard JK Rowling fan, I have to disagree. Compared to the rest of the excellent story, the serious romance was one of her weakest writing. The "frivolous" romance, though... was made of awesome. Won-Won and Lav-Lav!

Mrs. Strange
07-19-2009, 10:19 AM
I liked the movie, wish the big fight scene at the end had been included (how are they going to work the Bill thread into DH?) and thought the cinematography was amazing. The problem I had was with the "Pause" after an hour (this was in Germany at a special English show) and it split the movie. The first half was funny and light and the second half dark and conflicted. I guess I'll have to wait until it comes out on DVD and watch it uninterrupted.

Cricket18
07-19-2009, 10:36 AM
Hmmm...I guess I'm in the minority...what else is new? ;)

Loved this movie...I thought it was the best yet because:

The script was so well written and funny as hell.
The three kids can all really act...something i haven't been convinced of in the previous movies.
James Broadbent is OFF THE CHARTS amazing.
Actually, all of the acting was great.

There are definitely things that didn't work...no doubt about it...especially the opening sequence. And really, I don't know many 16 year-olds who go to diners by themselves. And while the waitress is gorgeous, I thought Harry was in love w/ Ginny...? Also, I agree...where was all of the fun magic? Where were Peeves and Nearly Headless Nick?

As for the romance, I loved in the book that right after the Quidditch match, Ginny and Harry kissed. This seemed forced and...strange.

Still, I can't wait to see it again.

Wavy_Blue
07-19-2009, 10:47 AM
Also, I agree...where was all of the fun magic? Where were Peeves and Nearly Headless Nick?


I think one of the worst decisions made in the film series since movie one was the exclusion of Peeves. He's such a great character.

maestrowork
07-19-2009, 11:45 AM
Just saw it (midnight show, thus the time stamp). And here's a brief review from someone who's not read the book (but have seen the other movies).

By far it's my least favorite. Not that it's a bad movie - it's still a good movie considering the other stuff out there, but no way would I say it's the best or it deserves the biggest opening weekend of the series... if not for the fans' loyalty. To me, it's just not an "event" movie -- not this one, by its own merits, not the strength of the series or the love of the fants alone.

This is more like an exposition piece. Plotwise it's very thin, and as someone who hasn't read the book, I feel it's long -- it's about 3 hours long -- for such a flimsy plot. It seems like they're dragging everything out: the Malfoy plot, the Half Blood Prince reveal, Slughorn's memory with Tom Riddle, etc. Sure, Broadbent is terrific and Gambon finally owns the role of Dumbledore... but the rest of the cast doesn't get much to do, especially Snape, and that's why the ending feels really flat. To me, it's just ho-hum. No surprise there. No big fight scenes. No grand magic. Not even much struggle. It's very low key through and through.

The opening sequences didn't work for me either... artistically and cinematically they're arresting, but plotwise they don't go anywhere. The attacks in the Muggle world certainly foreshadow all the troubles, but then the whole thing is dropped. No idea why they were attacking the Muggles, and then there is no more mention after that. Yes, we get it -- it's gloom and doom for the world that the Dark Lord is coming, but I just don't think it fits very well with the rest of the film. It feels disjointed.

The character development stuff also feels off, when compared to the earlier films. What has always endeared me was the relationships and the adventures among the trio. But here, it feels like Ron and Hermione are just side characters, a little footnote here and there. The chemistry between them feels off to me. The whole teenage angst stuff -- the hormonal stuff -- also feels forced, trivial and dragged on. Surely, that stuff is part of the character development, but I expect more than that in a 3-hour movie.

Basically, while it's a good movie and I enjoyed it, I just didn't feel much for it, and wonder why people say it's the best of the series so far. To me, Azkaban remains my favorite -- at least as a stand-alone movie. Perhaps I'd have felt differently if I had read and loved the book, but as a person who haven't read the book, this just feels thin and stretched. Rather "bleh." Like a slow chapter of a miniseries, or a slow midsection of a novel. It could have been a 90-minute movie and much stronger that way, IMHO. Or I feel like I could have skipped this one and still get the rest of the story.

Again, it's the opinion from a person who hasn't read the book, so take it or leave it.

dclary
07-19-2009, 12:40 PM
Just saw it (midnight show, thus the time stamp). And here's a brief review from someone who's not read the book (but have seen the other movies).

By far it's my least favorite. Not that it's a bad movie - it's still a good movie considering the other stuff out there, but no way would I say it's the best or it deserves the biggest opening weekend of the series... if not for the fans' loyalty. To me, it's just not an "event" movie -- not this one, by its own merits, not the strength of the series or the love of the fants alone.

This is more like an exposition piece. Plotwise it's very thin, and as someone who hasn't read the book, I feel it's long -- it's about 3 hours long -- for such a flimsy plot. It seems like they're dragging everything out: the Malfoy plot, the Half Blood Prince reveal, Slughorn's memory with Tom Riddle, etc. Sure, Broadbent is terrific and Gambon finally owns the role of Dumbledore... but the rest of the cast doesn't get much to do, especially Snape, and that's why the ending feels really flat. To me, it's just ho-hum. No surprise there. No big fight scenes. No grand magic. Not even much struggle. It's very low key through and through.

The opening sequences didn't work for me either... artistically and cinematically they're arresting, but plotwise they don't go anywhere. The attacks in the Muggle world certainly foreshadow all the troubles, but then the whole thing is dropped. No idea why they were attacking the Muggles, and then there is no more mention after that. Yes, we get it -- it's gloom and doom for the world that the Dark Lord is coming, but I just don't think it fits very well with the rest of the film. It feels disjointed.

The character development stuff also feels off, when compared to the earlier films. What has always endeared me was the relationships and the adventures among the trio. But here, it feels like Ron and Hermione are just side characters, a little footnote here and there. The chemistry between them feels off to me. The whole teenage angst stuff -- the hormonal stuff -- also feels forced, trivial and dragged on. Surely, that stuff is part of the character development, but I expect more than that in a 3-hour movie.

Basically, while it's a good movie and I enjoyed it, I just didn't feel much for it, and wonder why people say it's the best of the series so far. To me, Azkaban remains my favorite -- at least as a stand-alone movie. Perhaps I'd have felt differently if I had read and loved the book, but as a person who haven't read the book, this just feels thin and stretched. Rather "bleh." Like a slow chapter of a miniseries, or a slow midsection of a novel. It could have been a 90-minute movie and much stronger that way, IMHO. Or I feel like I could have skipped this one and still get the rest of the story.

Again, it's the opinion from a person who hasn't read the book, so take it or leave it.



QFT, amen, and pass the ammunition.

jodiodi
07-19-2009, 01:30 PM
Add me to the Maestrowork Apostacy. He said, in a much more eloquent and elegant manner, what I was thinking.

ChunkyC
07-19-2009, 05:56 PM
My wife and I have begun watching the first five movies to help us get psyched for HBP, and I just began reading The Philosopher's Stone again. This'll be my second reading of the books -- I wonder how far I'll get by July 15th? :D
Just to follow up on myself here on my post from June 22 ... I finished the last book on July 15th. :)


I know they added scenes - the bridge collapse, for one, which - not having seen it - I thought was a good idea. Gah.
Actually, a bridge collapse is in the book, albeit anectotally. In the opening scenes where Fudge visits the Muggle Prime Minister, there is mention of all this bizarre stuff going on (hurricane in the south of England, etc.) that's caused by Voldy's supporters wreaking havoc.


I just noticed Bill Nighy's on the cast list as Rufus Scrimgeour for the seventh. I find that incredibly interesting, since they didn't include him in the sixth, and Scrimgeour gets whacked in the first couple of chapters of the seventh.
Since they're doing two movies, it may end up past the midway point of the first one, so including him in the movie is certainly worthwhile especially since he brings Harry, Ron and Hermione their inheritances from Dumbledore, which are incredibly important plot points.


There are definitely things that didn't work...no doubt about it...especially the opening sequence. And really, I don't know many 16 year-olds who go to diners by themselves. And while the waitress is gorgeous, I thought Harry was in love w/ Ginny...? Also, I agree...where was all of the fun magic? Where were Peeves and Nearly Headless Nick?

As for the romance, I loved in the book that right after the Quidditch match, Ginny and Harry kissed. This seemed forced and...strange.
Yes indeed. I really really didn't like the added bits. The beginning was totally wrong, not to mention I was so looking forward to seeing the Dursley's reaction to Dumbledore coming by to pick Harry up. Then they had Luna find Harry on the train instead of Tonks, the bit at the Burrow with Bellatrix and the other Death Eaters setting the Weasley's house on fire -- what the heck? That was the part of the movie that annoyed me the most. Sometimes I get the feeling screenwriters who do this stuff are indulging in a little fan-fic.

They could have left out all this crap that wasn't in the book, and put a lot more of the book in the movie. We lost all the stuff about Voldemort discovering who is parents were, why Snape called himself the Half Blood Prince (HELLO SCREENWRITERS, THE TITLE OF THE BOOK/MOVIE!!) -- all that stuff that tied Riddle, Harry and Snape together. They also cut all the fighting in the school that was going on around Dumbledore's death, Dumbledore's funeral....

Bottom line: I did like the movie and do think it set up the final pair of films reasonably well, but I didn't love it. There were parts I thought were great (the humour with Ron and Lavender Brown, for example). Unfortunately, there was enough about it I didn't like or that outright ticked me off that I'm thinking it might be the weakest of the series.

maestrowork
07-19-2009, 08:49 PM
We lost all the stuff about Voldemort discovering who is parents were, why Snape called himself the Half Blood Prince (HELLO SCREENWRITERS, THE TITLE OF THE BOOK/MOVIE!!) -- all that stuff that tied Riddle, Harry and Snape together. They also cut all the fighting in the school that was going on around Dumbledore's death, Dumbledore's funeral...

EXACTLY. I left the theater thinking: Well? Why the heck did Snape call himself Half Blood Prince -- do we have to wait until the next movie? THIS movie is called the Half Blood Prince! I didn't even know Voldemort finds out about his parents and that would have been interesting. Instead they just drag on and on and on about the reveal of the Horcrux. The ending feels flat and unfinished... I mean, the Death Eaters came to the school through the Vanishing Cabinet, and they trashed the dining hall... and they surrrounded Dumbledore... then zzzpppt... that's it. FLAT. They spent a 3-hour movie just running around, explaining things, showing teenagers snogging.... but they cut out the fights, the Snape/Voldemort stuff? Seems really misguided here. And I totally agree the thing between Harry and Ginny is mismanaged. It just feels very off.

The only thing that makes me think it ties Voldemort and Harry together (but Snape is completely left out of this) is that they are both special (the chosen one -- although Draco also says he's the chosen one, but it was really Snape the Dark Lord wants), and they are both "orphans." There are other details that link both together but right now I can't think of them -- that only meant they kind of just glossed over them. The switch for Snape to work for the Dark Lord also seems abrupt without any further explanation. And if Harry heard Snape and Malfoy and all that, why didn't he at least bring that up to Dumbledor's attention, especially when Dumbledore puts so much trust in Snape (I know, I know, Lupin convinced Harry that he must trust Snape... but still... after all they've been through, after all the betrayals, and after Harry suspected Snape from the beginning... it feels flimsy to me).

katiemac
07-19-2009, 09:43 PM
Actually, a bridge collapse is in the book, albeit anectotally. In the opening scenes where Fudge visits the Muggle Prime Minister, there is mention of all this bizarre stuff going on (hurricane in the south of England, etc.) that's caused by Voldy's supporters wreaking havoc.

Oh, yeah - what I meant was that it was a good idea to film that scene, rather than slip it in as the anecdote. But considering they didn't do anything with it afterward, well ...



Since they're doing two movies, it may end up past the midway point of the first one, so including him in the movie is certainly worthwhile especially since he brings Harry, Ron and Hermione their inheritances from Dumbledore, which are incredibly important plot points.

Two movies, though, should still see Scrimgeour whacked before the second part. The ministry is attacked during Bill and Fleur's wedding, and he dies then. But then it seems like they're going to switch his role up, maybe swap some scenes around. I was more commenting on my surprise they have Bill Nighy playing a guy who, by-the-book, should be dead with less than ten minutes on screen, not necessarily that they're including the character. Makes me think they've got something up their sleeve.


They could have left out all this crap that wasn't in the book, and put a lot more of the book in the movie. We lost all the stuff about Voldemort discovering who is parents were, why Snape called himself the Half Blood Prince (HELLO SCREENWRITERS, THE TITLE OF THE BOOK/MOVIE!!) -- all that stuff that tied Riddle, Harry and Snape together. They also cut all the fighting in the school that was going on around Dumbledore's death, Dumbledore's funeral....

The fight scenes at the end is what I missed most, especially since they could've included those at the expense of the Burrow scene. (And like I said above, why bring in Greyback if they don't even mention what he is?) You're right, of course, that Dumbledore in the beginning with the Dursleys would have been much better than the girl at the coffee shop, (Arghcisck.) especially since I think that scene shows very well how much Dumbledore cares about Harry despite their little interactions.

And yes, even though I said upthread I know why they didn't focus more the potions book (read: Snape), it did have the lackluster emotional revelation, and, left the non-book audience in a bit of a lurch - especially considering they didn't reference the fact Snape knew Harry had his old book.

katiemac
07-19-2009, 09:51 PM
And if Harry heard Snape and Malfoy and all that, why didn't he at least bring that up to Dumbledor's attention, especially when Dumbledore puts so much trust in Snape (I know, I know, Lupin convinced Harry that he must trust Snape... but still... after all they've been through, after all the betrayals, and after Harry suspected Snape from the beginning... it feels flimsy to me).

One of my favorite scenes in the book is when Harry accidentally finds out what it is that makes Dumbledore trust Snape so much, albeit without all the details. And then he and Dumbledore argue over it, as they'd been disagreeing the entire book about Snape/Malfoy being suspicious, as much as they would argue with each other, anyway. But in the end Harry still thinks Dumbledore's wrong to trust Snape but lets it go because he wants to go find the horcrux. Then Snap goes ahead and kills Dumbledore, and Harry, well - suckerpunched.

The movie version they couldn't have done it this way how they set up the astronomy tower scene. They needed to leave it open that Harry could still trust Snape enough to put down his wand and let Snape pass him. It worked for the sake of the movie only, because book Harry never would have stood by while all that happened. Movie Harry is much less proactive and rebellious.

maestrowork
07-19-2009, 09:59 PM
Movie Harry is much less proactive and rebellious.

And that's another thing. After all the stuff he's been through, and he's now what, 17? and he still feels passive to me. I would have LOVED to see Harry being proactive and rebellious, at least in this movie. He IS the main character -- but instead everyone else seems to be having more fun, even Ginny is more gutsy. There are a lot of missed opportunities. The book lovers may have special insight I don't have, but judging from the movie alone, it feels really bleh.

katiemac
07-19-2009, 10:04 PM
And that's another thing. After all the stuff he's been through, and he's now what, 17? and he still feels passive to me. I would have LOVED to see Harry being proactive and rebellious, at least in this movie. He IS the main character -- but instead everyone else seems to be having more fun, even Ginny is more gutsy. There are a lot of missed opportunities. The book lovers may have special insight I don't have, but judging from the movie alone, it feels really bleh.

That's funny that you got, from the film, Ginny is more gutsy than Harry. She's tough, for sure, but that's something I felt was missing from her character in the movie, obviously knowing how she is from the books.

There was one scene in particular that stuck out to me as Harry being too passive - when Katie Bell gets cursed, he just stands there and Hagrid shows up. In the book, he and Ron are grabbing at her, trying to get her down, catch her when she falls. He tells Katie's friend to go to the school to get help, and then he goes to pick up the necklace without anyone telling him to.

It's just one of those things where, as I mentioned before, there are a lot of emotions left out of the films - flat, as you say, Ray - and Harry's character suffers that most from that. He's supposed to be quick-thinking, courageous, makes a lot of active choices (the biggest one being to accept the prophecy on his own terms, not because it's 'destiny'), and in the movie he does really just let most things go by.

maestrowork
07-19-2009, 10:16 PM
Yeah, there's just a lot of things they could do to make Harry more proactive and heroic, but most of the time he just sits around and lets things go by, or stares ahead like "what am I supposed to do?" And with Hermione he's acting more like the "gay best friend" than someone who's in charge of his destiny. He's 17 and he acts like he's scared of girls. Very frustrating. And if I could feel that way without reading the book, I'm surprised the book lovers are not more up in arms about how neutered Harry's character is in the movie.

katiemac
07-19-2009, 10:23 PM
I'm not up in arms. I'm just not going to buy the DVDs. :)

ETA: I mean, Harry is the most passive in HBP, anyway, since he's more dependent on Dumbledore than he ever was before, and he keeps getting shut down by everyone around him when he tries to find out what Snape and Malfoy are up to. But he still has his own plans and his own opinions, even if he keeps most of it under the surface to appeal to Dumbledore. But there are still ways in the film they could've made him more active, simple things like when Katie was cursed. Luckily, he stayed active when Ron was poisoned, and when he went running after Bellatrix/Snape.

Forbidden Snowflake
07-20-2009, 05:00 AM
If you just want to see a comedy about teenagers, fine, it's good.

But as a movie that is supposed to be based on a book? Horrible.

And why was it called halfblood prince? Why? We see the book belongs to the halfblood prince, then Hermione tries to figure out who he is during two seconds, no such luck. Then Snape shows up and declares it's him. And that was it. 2 minutes of a nearly three hour movie.

It should have been called Harry Potter and the snogging. Or HP and the horny teenagers.

Also, what's with the comedy? It ain't a comedy, so, that I didn't like so much either. It wasn't accurate at all.

And nearly no Snape and where was Voldemort?

Cranky
07-20-2009, 05:32 AM
I'm not up in arms. I'm just not going to buy the DVDs. :)

ETA: I mean, Harry is the most passive in HBP, anyway, since he's more dependent on Dumbledore than he ever was before, and he keeps getting shut down by everyone around him when he tries to find out what Snape and Malfoy are up to. But he still has his own plans and his own opinions, even if he keeps most of it under the surface to appeal to Dumbledore. But there are still ways in the film they could've made him more active, simple things like when Katie was cursed. Luckily, he stayed active when Ron was poisoned, and when he went running after Bellatrix/Snape.

I think they *really* missed the boat on the Harry/Malfoy, Harry/Snape, Voldemort backstory stuff. So much of that is important (IMO) for the last part of the series. I mean, in the book, Harry is positively OBSESSED with what Malfoy is up to...in the movie, it's hinted at so obscurely that if I hadn't read the book, I wouldn't know he was supposed to be obsessed. And that says something about Harry's instincts, which, IMO, are important, especially since everyone including Dumbledore (and this is important, imo) dismisses. Voldemort's backstory? HUGE. Leaves a gaping hole. And the whole thing about The Half-Blood Prince is that it is the beginning of understanding Snape, and also explains later on some of the stuff Ray felt was missing.

The more I think about the movie, the more it disappoints me, which is unusual for me on this series. *sigh*

katiemac
07-20-2009, 06:35 AM
I think they *really* missed the boat on the Harry/Malfoy, Harry/Snape, Voldemort backstory stuff. So much of that is important (IMO) for the last part of the series. I mean, in the book, Harry is positively OBSESSED with what Malfoy is up to...in the movie, it's hinted at so obscurely that if I hadn't read the book, I wouldn't know he was supposed to be obsessed. And that says something about Harry's instincts, which, IMO, are important, especially since everyone including Dumbledore (and this is important, imo) dismisses. Voldemort's backstory? HUGE. Leaves a gaping hole. And the whole thing about The Half-Blood Prince is that it is the beginning of understanding Snape, and also explains later on some of the stuff Ray felt was missing.

The more I think about the movie, the more it disappoints me, which is unusual for me on this series. *sigh*

I know, I'm trying to keep the book/film separate and look at it from the point of this film pushing the rest of the films along. But for Harry to have suspicions about Malfoy and not act on them, or tell Dumbledore, and accept Lupin's explanation just turned this version of Harry into a passive character. Rather than, like you said he is in the book, so obsessed with it that he irritates not only his friends, but also Dumbledore. It's also a bit of a game changer for Harry to know that, after he screwed up so badly over Sirirus' death, he's still right and he can move forward on Dumbledore's orders with his own instincts. He can - you know - be that leader he needs to be to take down Voldemort.

And yeah, the Snape stuff maybe isn't so necessary to the direct plot as is the straight Voldemort/Harry storyline, but it's more important than Harry/Ginny, for one. And I already said it adds all those layers to Snape/Voldemort/Harry that I love. When I read the book, I wasn't upset because Dumbledore died. I was devastated, though, that Harry was losing another family figure, that Snape was so obviously upset about the whole thing, and worst of all that Harry wasn't going to understand anything he just saw, including the fact Dumbledore would rather die himself than see Draco (Draco!) die or become a murderer. So in the movie, rather than me feeling all of that, Dumbledore was just dead. I thought a lot of the repercussions of his decision were pretty much lost, which is a shame about Dumbledore's character, let alone Harry's and Snape's.

But for us to move on to Deathly Hallows? I guess we don't need to know all that. It would've been nice if they played more into the Half-Blood Prince theme, though, since so much of that builds into the climax and is why that piece of the story is the Half-Blood Prince and not, you know, Harry and the Horcruxes.

I'm starting not to remember too much of the movie, but I still think they did some things right for the movie's sake. Others not so much.

maestrowork
07-20-2009, 07:13 AM
But for us to move on to Deathly Hallows? I guess we don't need to know all that.

That's the thing as I mentioned. I felt like I didn't need to see this film to get into the next one (well, two, since it's split into two movies). The whole thing could have been explained in 30 minutes instead of 3 hours, and we could move on to DH.

I also agree with Dumbledore's death -- I didn't feel the emotional devastation, given that he's a major character since the first film. He was a father figure to Harry. I had the same meh feeling with Sirius's death as well. It seems like they have a problem making these deaths as devastating as they should, or as they are in the books.

Very disappointing in that regard.

dclary
07-20-2009, 07:56 AM
That's the thing as I mentioned. I felt like I didn't need to see this film to get into the next one (well, two, since it's split into two movies). The whole thing could have been explained in 30 minutes instead of 3 hours, and we could move on to DH.

I also agree with Dumbledore's death -- I didn't feel the emotional devastation, given that he's a major character since the first film. He was a father figure to Harry. I had the same meh feeling with Sirius's death as well. It seems like they have a problem making these deaths as devastating as they should, or as they are in the books.

Very disappointing in that regard.

Sirius' death in the film was as WTF and anticlimactic in the book as it was in the book. They both read/viewed very odd and passive.

katiemac
07-20-2009, 08:53 AM
That's the thing as I mentioned. I felt like I didn't need to see this film to get into the next one (well, two, since it's split into two movies). The whole thing could have been explained in 30 minutes instead of 3 hours, and we could move on to DH.

Realistically speaking, we probably could have moved on to Deathly Hallows without HBP in the book series, too. But despite all of that, HBP is still my favorite in the series (I know it's often everyone else's least favorite for that reason). But I don't enjoy the series just because of the Voldemort/Harry plotline, and, when it's pared down as such it's more like I enjoy the series despite the main plot.

The main thing I would've thought was necessary for DH to go smoothly was eliminated from HBP (where to actually find the rest of the horcruxes), but I guess they'll go after that in DH as they go along.

maestrowork
07-20-2009, 03:36 PM
They probably are going to put those things, such as Voldemort's background, Snape's identity, how to find the rest of the horcruxes, etc. back into the first movie of DH. But to me, that's why this movie fails because they could have easily cut out a lot of the teenage things to accommodate the other stuff.

CaroGirl
07-20-2009, 04:30 PM
I enjoyed the movie. Granted, I've read the books and seen all the other movies (fangirl here) so I know precisely what's missing, what's added, and what they chose to emphasize/de-emphasize. I'm mostly satisfied with the result, mainly because you can't please all the people all the time.

The special effects at the beginning were fabulous. Both the more subtle effect of Slughorn being an armchair and the epic effect of the bridge collapse. Exhilarating opening. I also thought the inferi scene was very well handled, just as I pictured it (perhaps slightly less scary).

I actually like how awkward the Ginny/Harry romance was and it felt as if it were handled awkwardly on purpose. Teen love IS awkward. I did, however, think they spent too much time on the Lavendar/Ron "romance". In the grand scheme, who cares? I'd rather have seen more of Neville (who becomes v. important in DH).

Overall, though, I enjoyed the ride and am looking forward to the final two in the series (although, if they take out all the waiting around in the forest, I'm sure it could be one).

Sage
07-20-2009, 04:47 PM
Spoilers for book 7

I was thinking about the horcruxes yesterday, and I wondered if the locket won't lead Harry into figuring out what would be the other horcruxes. If he gets it and sees the sign of Slytherin there, maybe he'll go, "Oh, let's check out something of the other Hogwarts founders too."

And when you think about it, it's Bellatrix who really tips him off about the cup in the vault, so even if he didn't know by then that the horcruxes were items from the founders, he could potentially figure out there's a horcrux in that vault from the goblin or at Malfoy manor. Then from there, having the cup and the locket, it REALLY wouldn't be hard to go, "Okay, so what is there from Ravenclaw?" Plus, that's when Voldy starts showing Harry where the other Horcrux is and thinking about them. Harry goes to Hogwarts and has the same type of search he had in the book, and then figures out that Voldy has kept Nagini safe for a reason.

I could see this working even if there's no flashing sign for Harry to seek out the founders' items.

katiemac
07-20-2009, 08:44 PM
They probably are going to put those things, such as Voldemort's background, Snape's identity, how to find the rest of the horcruxes, etc. back into the first movie of DH. But to me, that's why this movie fails because they could have easily cut out a lot of the teenage things to accommodate the other stuff.

Nah, Snape's and Voldemort's backgrounds are just gone from the films. The horcruxes, well, they'll have to include that, but if they were going to include the background info it would have happened in the last movie. There's too much stuff going on in DH to squeeze that in, too, unless it's a couple of random lines.



I could see this working even if there's no flashing sign for Harry to seek out the founders' items.

That's all true - but how would he even get the locket, is what I'm wondering. I guess Kreacher can help with that one if they go back to Grimmauld Place. RAB shouldn't be hard to figure out from there. And I just realized they didn't include Mundungus stealing Harry's inheritance from Sirius in HBP, so I wonder how they'll explain Umbridge has the locket? Assuming, of course, that's the plotline they'll follow. Wouldn't be difficult to throw Mundungus in the seventh, though I guess - but did they include him at all in Phoenix? I want to say no.



Overall, though, I enjoyed the ride and am looking forward to the final two in the series (although, if they take out all the waiting around in the forest, I'm sure it could be one).

This is what I originally thought, too, but if they want the final battle at Hogwarts have any kind of significance (ie: lasting longer than five minutes), it should be two movies. Especially if they're going to move Dumbledore's funeral and keep the wedding in the beginning. There's the escape from the ministry, the break-in at Gringotts, the scenes at Malfoy Manor, Godric's Hollow, the Silver Doe in the forest, etc - all of which is more action than the last few films. The movie including all those scenes PLUS a final battle at Hogwarts wouldn't do any of the moments justice.

ChunkyC
07-21-2009, 02:35 AM
One of my favorite scenes in the book is when Harry accidentally finds out what it is that makes Dumbledore trust Snape so much, albeit without all the details. And then he and Dumbledore argue over it, as they'd been disagreeing the entire book about Snape/Malfoy being suspicious, as much as they would argue with each other, anyway. But in the end Harry still thinks Dumbledore's wrong to trust Snape but lets it go because he wants to go find the horcrux. Then Snap goes ahead and kills Dumbledore, and Harry, well - suckerpunched.

The movie version they couldn't have done it this way how they set up the astronomy tower scene. They needed to leave it open that Harry could still trust Snape enough to put down his wand and let Snape pass him. It worked for the sake of the movie only, because book Harry never would have stood by while all that happened. Movie Harry is much less proactive and rebellious.
Right you are.

I also thought it was a mistake to change the ending like they did. In the book -- as most of us know, but I'll put it here for Ray -- Dumbledore puts a paralyzing spell on Harry, who's under his invisibility cloak. Harry is then forced to watch Dumbledore get killed by Snape right before his eyes. This is most important because it shows that Dumbledore did not want Harry to interfere with what was about to take place, which means Dumbledore might well have known he was about to be killed. Talk about a holy shit moment for Harry, and they completely gutted it by changing it around the way they did.


ETA: I mean, Harry is the most passive in HBP, anyway, since he's more dependent on Dumbledore than he ever was before, and he keeps getting shut down by everyone around him when he tries to find out what Snape and Malfoy are up to. But he still has his own plans and his own opinions, even if he keeps most of it under the surface to appeal to Dumbledore. But there are still ways in the film they could've made him more active, simple things like when Katie was cursed. Luckily, he stayed active when Ron was poisoned, and when he went running after Bellatrix/Snape.
Yah, in the book Harry is constantly pushing against Ron and especially Hermione for not buying in to Harry's obsession with what Malfoy is up to. He seemed much more driven in the book than in the film.


Realistically speaking, we probably could have moved on to Deathly Hallows without HBP in the book series, too. But despite all of that, HBP is still my favorite in the series (I know it's often everyone else's least favorite for that reason). But I don't enjoy the series just because of the Voldemort/Harry plotline, and, when it's pared down as such it's more like I enjoy the series despite the main plot.

The main thing I would've thought was necessary for DH to go smoothly was eliminated from HBP (where to actually find the rest of the horcruxes), but I guess they'll go after that in DH as they go along.
I think HBP reveals a tremendous amount that is vital to how Deathly Hallows plays out. Again, for Ray -- in the book, Harry sees much more from the past than they show in the movie. He finds out that both Snape and Voldemort had one muggle parent and one pureblood parent, just like himself. All three of them are half-bloods. Also, Harry finds out that Snape's father was the muggle, who abandoned his family, and that Snape's mother's last name was Prince. Hence, Half Blood Prince.

And what about Snape's near lifelong friendship with Harry's mother Lily? How he loved her from afar almost from the day he met her? All of that is vitally important to Snape's motivations throughout the series and especially how Deathly Hallows plays out. In fact, without that info, the moments before the final confrontation between Harry and Voldemort are impossible.

Then there is the all important revelations about the nature of the connection between Harry and Voldemort, which is also of vital importance in the decisions Harry makes leading up to the final fight between them.

They completely gutted everything from Half Blood Prince that made it an essential lead-up to Deathly Hallows, which makes me very upset since I think all the other movies did a good job in that regard.

And then there was Dumbledore's hand and what it meant.... gah, I could go on all day about how I wonder if they even read Deathly Hallows to check on what needed to be in HBP.

ETA: and they barely touched on the fact that learning about Horcruxes meant that Harry now knows that it might actually be possible to defeat Voldemort. That alone was the most important part of the book, IMO.

katiemac
07-21-2009, 03:59 AM
And then there was Dumbledore's hand and what it meant.... gah, I could go on all day about how I wonder if they even read Deathly Hallows to check on what needed to be in HBP.

Yeah, they didn't really give his hand much significance. I had a big "ruh roh" moment when I realized that, and when Harry drank all of the Felix Felicis to interrogate Slughorn (although, admittedly, I liked that the Felix essentially made him drunk.)


Yah, in the book Harry is constantly pushing against Ron and especially Hermione for not buying in to Harry's obsession with what Malfoy is up to. He seemed much more driven in the book than in the film.

One neat thing I thought Rowling did to keep Harry active was keep him involved in the memories. Essentially he's still watching the past happen, but there's one scene where Harry's watching Marvolo Gaunt strangle Merope with Slytherin's locket. And before he realizes he can't do anything to stop it, he goes for his wand. No innocent person - even Voldemort's mother - gets bullied without Harry trying to do something about it. (Unless, you know, it's Malfoy getting turned into a ferret.)

Another thing, in terms of Harry being more active in the book ... I completely love the scene where he and Dumbledore as discussing the prophecy. And it's all Dumbledore can do to drill it into Harry's head that, yes, he has a choice, but his choice will ultimately end up fulfilling the prophecy anyway. Not because either one of them believes in destiny, but because Harry wants to see Voldemort finished, and he wants to do it. The line is something about Harry realizing it's the difference to being dragged into a fight and walking into it with your head up. They could have brought this idea into the film as well, albeit in a different way - plus it shows Harry actually growing up and taking leadership for what is about to happen.

One of the bigger themes in the Potter series - choice - is incredibly difficult to handle on screen. The more I think about the film, though, they could have done better in keeping the romance to a back burner and saving some time for these other revelations.

maestrowork
07-21-2009, 04:04 AM
Wait. I thought both James and Lily Potter were wizards. What am I missing?

I thought Hermione was half blood.

Delhomeboy
07-21-2009, 04:20 AM
Okay, saw it again yesterday, and purely from a technical standpoint, I was really impressed with the cinematography. The lighting done is absolutely awesome.

As for all the criticisms...I guess everyone has a pertinent point. But, I suppose I'm overly optimistic, I do think that even the "weakest" parts of the move...character building, scene setting, could have been done a lot worse. But it makes me realize how important reading the book first can be, because the movie doesn't have to make the point that Harry's brave, because I already know that. If you haven't read the book, though, I could see where there'd be a problem.

Delhomeboy
07-21-2009, 04:21 AM
Wait. I thought both James and Lily Potter were wizards. What am I missing?

I thought Hermione was half blood.

They were. And Hermione is a muggle-born.

katiemac
07-21-2009, 04:28 AM
Wait. I thought both James and Lily Potter were wizards. What am I missing?

I thought Hermione was half blood.

Hermione is Muggle-born witch, no wizarding blood at all in her family.

James was a wizard from a pureblood family. Lily was a Muggle-born witch, like Hermione, no wizarding blood in the family.

Because Lily was Muggle-born, Harry's still considered a half-blood. Snape and Voldemort were "true" half-bloods, each with a completely Muggle (not a witch) mother and a pureblood wizard father.

(Harry being a half-blood is kind of relative; they refer to him that way sometimes, because pureblood prejudice is picky, but technically speaking he probably should be a pureblood.)

Kathleen42
07-21-2009, 04:42 AM
Nah, Snape's and Voldemort's backgrounds are just gone from the films. The horcruxes, well, they'll have to include that, but if they were going to include the background info it would have happened in the last movie. There's too much stuff going on in DH to squeeze that in, too, unless it's a couple of random lines.


If they cut out Snape and Lily from DH I will be full of rage and wrath.

katiemac
07-21-2009, 04:44 AM
If they cut out Snape and Lily from DH I will be full of rage and wrath.

That I think they will keep, because it hasn't happened yet. I don't, however, think they're going to backtrack and fill in stuff left out from HBP.

I think they know the fandom will explode.


...Now I'm second-guessing it. I hope they don't leave it out, either.