Tue
Jul 21 2009 10:15am
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince

Harry Potter 6Note: This review contains spoilers, but only if you haven’t read the book.

When I saw the first trailer for Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, I was struck by how creepy and dark it was. It reminded me more of a horror trailer than one for a kids movie. But then, Harry Potter hasn’t been for kids for a while now, and the movies have tried to grow with the books and the audience. In some ways they’ve succeeded—Goblet of Fire and The Order of the Phoenix didn’t shy away or sugar-coat the death and darkness of the books. Thus, I was tentatively excited for Half-Blood Prince and would have been pleased with a movie that was more horror than fantasy.

The movie does deliver the creepy and nicely balances the lighter scenes with the dark. Unfortunately, Half-Blood Prince falls down where it matters most: the moments of intense emotional impact. This is nothing new—since The Prisoner of Azkaban the Harry Potter movies have struggled to capture the intensity of Rowling’s crunchier scenes (the fault may lie in the amount of exposition crammed in there—it doesn’t work all that well in book form and it takes a Kevin Smith for such things to even approach working well on film). The climaxes in particular tend to fall flat, and this was also true for Half-Blood Prince.

Many scenes felt just on the cusp of working and delivering the emotional punch they should have—Harry’s first meeting with Slughorn; Snape and Narcissa Malfoy making the unbreakable vow; Ron’s accidental poisoning; the retrieval of the locket from the cave; Dumbledore’s death; Harry and Snape’s final confrontation. These scenes usually began with promise but fell flat in the end. Whether this was the fault of the director, the actors, or the script it was hard to tell. Missed or misplaced beats, poor delivery, wrong tone—there were a host of problems.

As with all of the longer Harry Potter books, many, many elements of the story had to be dropped or cut back to keep the movie at a reasonable length. It takes a masterful screenwriter and director to balance necessary cuts and inclusions to make a movie true to the book that makes sense on its own. Writer Steve Kloves and director David Yates fall short of being “masters,” though I acknowledge that the task is pretty hard given the source material.

Some of the best scenes in the Half-Blood Prince were the Voldemort backstory memories. The one utilized in the first trailer—wherein Dumbledore first meets young Tom Riddle in the orphanage—was just as creepy and effective as I hoped it would be. Unfortunately, someone made a seriously bad decision to only include two of these memories (the other one being Slughorn’s about the Horcruxes). This element was, I feel, crucial to the book and should have been crucial to the movie as well. Half-Blood Prince is about Voldemort just as much as it’s about Harry, and the movie should have built the story more around this element.

I also felt that the potions textbook (that plays such a central role that the original owner of it is in the title) doesn’t get enough play in the film. The book is there, of course, and we’re shown and told how much it helps Harry in potions class. Beyond that, though, the book doesn’t make as much impact as it could have within the story. When Snape stands over a defeated Harry and says: “I am the Half-Blood Prince,” I just rolled my eyes and wondered why I or anyone else should care. There wasn’t enough There there, as the saying goes.

But there were a few elements that worked really well. Almost well enough to save the movie (but not quite). The trips Harry takes into memories through the pensieve are jerky and disconnected in a dream-like way that makes sense for memories. In the book memories are often unrealistically smooth and complete. The film’s approach added to the creepy horror movie tone of the memories and made them very effective—another reason I was disappointed so few of them were included.

Draco Malfoy’s continuing efforts to kill Dumbledore and fix the vanishing cabinet are shown from his perspective. In this Half-Blood Prince sets exactly the right tone—Malfoy isn’t exactly a sympathetic character, but he can be a compelling one. Tom Felton delivered a performance that showed him to be a mean little man in his father’s image and also a scared teenager in far over his head. I’ve never been a huge fan of Malfoy (and an un-fan of fanfiction Malfoy), but Felton impressed me with the range he gave Draco that was only hinted at in the book.

Alan Rickman has always turned in a fantastic performance as Severus Snape, this movie not being the exception. Given how important Snape’s role is in the book, I was glad to see that it wasn’t much diminished in the rush to cut this story down to under 3 hours. Though the scene where he kills Dumbledore didn’t deliver the oomph that it needed to, Rickman wasn’t the culprit. For that I blame the director, because the whole thing was blocked, filmed, and edited in a way almost designed to take all the dramatic and emotional tension away.

Though Jim Broadbent’s turn as Horace Slughorn isn’t anything to get excited about, there was one scene that was written and played so perfectly I was shocked at how much it affected me (I cried, yes). It occurs when Harry finally succeeds in convincing Slughorn to give him the true memory of Tom Riddle. The monologue Broadbent gives was not in the book (that I remember) so I won’t spoil it here. It was a rare example of an emotional moment well-played in Half-Blood Prince and served to make all the other not-on-target moments look even worse in comparison.

Overall, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince is worth seeing, but perhaps not paying full-price for. Now that we’re into the 6th movie the main thing keeping me interested is momentum (and an appreciation for CGI). Hitting that sweet spot where a movie based on a book transcends the source material and utilizes the best of the visual medium is certainly a hard task, but I would hope that the franchise had figured out how to do it by now.

Still, Harry Potter fans are going to see it eventually no matter what. Fans who’ve only seen the films and never read the books may find themselves confused—but this won’t be new for them since almost every movie since the second has been a confusing mess plot-wise.

I suspect this won’t be a problem for many because, for all its story faults, Half-Blood Prince is beautifully filmed and doesn’t skimp on the special effects. The balance of light and dark, both visually and tonally, is one of its best features. Too bad the cinematographer can’t carry a whole film.

21 comments
Amir Yoeli
1. Betterthenyouknew
I have to say I agree fully with this review of the film.
I went and watched it this weekend, and thought it could have benefitted from an additional 20-30 minutes to add umph to all the characters in the story, and more of the actual story into the movie.

If Peter Jackson can make millions (Or is it billions?) by seating people in a movie theater for 3+ hours, - 3 times, no less - I think the makers of this film could have made it to the 3 hour mark easily, without losing viewers. Instead, or because of other reasons we'll never learn, the movie stops at two and a half hours, and I came out feeling like I was missing a lot.

One thing not mentioned above, which bears noting is, Kudos to Helena Bonham Carter on a fabulous Narcissa.

A.
Richard Fife
2. R.Fife
Tempest, you encapsulated my feelings exactly. I felt that the movie was a good visual aid the novel, but if I didn't have the back-knowledge of the book already, I think I would have found it jerky and disjoint between all of the subplots they gave 2-3 minutes of screen time to. I could ignore the jumps as I knew what was going on behind the scenes, so to speak, but I have to wonder what a person who hasn't read the book would feel.
Ben Harrison
3. Ben Harrison
I personally couldn't believe they cut the entire battle for Hogwarts! When reading the book for the first time, I remember that being one of the stand out moments of the novel. I mean come on...you had STUDENT FIGHTING DEATH EATERS!!! I realize that they had to make cuts somewhere, but that was a big one to completely leave out...

Also, I agree 100% with the back story on the Half Blood Prince...not enough there.

FWIW.
Jason Henninger
4. jasonhenninger
Absolutely agree on all points. Well said. So much missing material, so many beautiful visuals. Not entirely a fair trade.

The scene that bugged me the most was Dumbledore drinking the poison. It's one of the harshest scenes in the entire series, but barely translated to the screen.

Anyone who has seen the Singing Detective knows how much power Michael Gambon can put into portraying pain. He could have slain with this scene, but it felt as if the director pulled back from the intensity (in other scenes as well).

I thought the scene where Harry comforts Hermione as she cries over Ron was well done. I've never been a huge fan of her acting, but she pulled it off in that.

So yeah, worth seeing but hardly a great adaptation.
Ben Harrison
5. Pabba
This seems to be the first review I've read of many that doesn't mention snogging. I'm guessing you're secretly not a 13-year-old girl? :P
Ben Harrison
6. Snoggle
You are all seriously delusional and obviously have no idea what makes a good adaptation or a good film. Good luck sounding intelligent when you decide to open your mouths.
Ben Harrison
7. Lsana
I think I'm going to wait for DVD or maybe even for cable on this one. HBP was one of my least favorite Harry Potter books, and the reviews have not been good. Fans and non-fans alike have been saying, "Meh," and even the positive reviews haven't left me wanting to see it.

I'm glad to see, though, someone else who isn't a fan of Malfoy. In almost all the reviews I've read, I keep reading comments about how Malfoy and Snape were the real heroes and should have been the focus of the books, and I keep thinking, "What are you people talking about?"
Irene Gallo
8. Irene
I'll jump in to agree as well.

I remember thinking, "Wait! Dumbledore is dead!? I can care about that. Really. Give me a sec and I'll care about that."

And for the non-HPreader, the plot felt confusing without much actually happening.
Ben Harrison
9. Rand Al'Todd
I greatly abhor the usual filmwriters's rewrites of great stories when they try to convert them to the screen. At least Half Blood Prince was recognizable as being based on the book. (Try saying that of any Bond movie after Thunderball.)

But, as others said above, they cut and pasted so much of the story that it hardly made any sense.

The snogging scenes were worthless to the story (but no doubt the teens loved them). As also mentioned above, the presentation of the textbook and the mystery behind the identity of the "Prince" became totally meaningless.

And considering the importance given in the final book to Draco's victory over Dumbledore with respect to the wand, the scene had NO visual foreshadowing impact. Viewers that had not read the final book would attach no significance to the scene at all other than the simple fact of Dumbledore's death.

Given how much they did cut, all they really needed were A) a couple of the scenes setting up Draco's dilemma and the function of the transport cabinet, B) Slughorn's revelation, C) Harry and Dumbledore going to the cave, and D) the "Battle of Hogwarts" as described in the book (not just Snape kills Dumbledore). That could have improved the movie 1000 percent, but that would have involved even more CGI and expense.
James Goetsch
10. Jedikalos
You are right that the book was as much about Tom Riddle and the effect of the book on Harry as anything, along with the memory moments in the pensieve; and then the other two things that stand out for me are the battle for Hogwarts with the students fighting, and then Dumbledore's funeral. These seems to be the things the movie downplays or ignores--just the heart of the thing. Oh well.
Ben Harrison
11. Amal El-Mohtar
Totally agreed. I was really disappointed by the film: the lack of Snape, the jerky pacing, the utterly appalling editing. Snape tells Harry at Slughorn's party that Dumbledore's "travelling," and we see him two scenes from there? What?

When Snape stands over a defeated Harry and says: “I am the Half-Blood Prince,” I just rolled my eyes and wondered why I or anyone else should care.

This was my reaction exactly.

Ultimately for me it was a film made up of good moments and very, very bad moments that didn't amount to a cohesive whole.
Genevieve Williams
12. welltemperedwriter
I enjoyed it a lot, but I also saw it at a theater that has its own bar and seatside service, and I consumed two pints of Mac & Jack's African Amber during the movie. This may--MAY, I say--have impacted my critical judgment.

I do recall especially enjoying Felton and Rickman's performances, though. Both were real standouts.
Ben Harrison
13. swmdilla
@ 1 Betterthanyouknew - Helena plays Belatrix

I agree with the review. However, I would go see it again. the movie deffinitely could have been longer though. Things they could have expanded on include; greyback, the book of the half-blood prince (which feel completely flat for me), and a nice climatic fight scene at the end, like the one in the book. oh well, i guess nothings perfect.
Ben Harrison
14. swmdilla
@ 1 Betterthanyouknew - Helena plays Belatrix

I agree with the review. However, I would go see it again. the movie deffinitely could have been longer though. Things they could have expanded on include; greyback, the book of the half-blood prince (which feel completely flat for me), and a nice climatic fight scene at the end, like the one in the book. oh well, i guess nothings perfect.
Ben Harrison
15. swmdilla
@ 1 Betterthanyouknew - Helena plays Belatrix

I agree with the review. However, I would go see it again. the movie deffinitely could have been longer though. Things they could have expanded on include; greyback, the book of the half-blood prince (which feel completely flat for me), and a nice climatic fight scene at the end, like the one in the book. oh well, i guess nothings perfect.
Michael Ikeda
16. mikeda
Rand Al'Todd@9

About "Draco's victory over Dumbledore with respect to the wand."

That aspect of the scene isn't SUPPOSED to have any visual foreshadowing impact. It isn't given any particular importance in the book at the time it happens, and we aren't really intended to recognize its importance until much later.
Ben Harrison
17. paintedfoot
Your review is spot on.

I have to say that the Draco - Dumbledore scene reminded me of the part of the Sound of Music when Christopher Plummer is trying to convince the boy that he is not a Nazi.

The director et al completely screwed up Dumbledore's death. Cedric Diggory's death in Goblet of Fire had so much more emotional weight (the sudden music stopping, the horrified realization, the father's anguished wail). I also didn't think it made sense for Harry to be the only one over Ddore's body especially with his oldest friends there. I wanted to see more of the teacher's responses given what this would mean for the school and the fight against Voldermort.

Snape's admission that he was the Half Blood Prince seemed tacked on. Like "Oh we forgot to resolve that bit. Make sure to mention it at the end of the film."

Though the moment when he tells Dumbledore that he doesn't want to be a double agent anymore was very compelling. Ddore's idolized so much in the books as this infallible figure... I'm glad they showed how he uses people, even though he does it for noble ends.

I can't believe they left off the fight for Hogwarts. I wanted to see Neville fight. He's one of my favorite characters. He has such low self-esteem, but is always brave when he needs to be.

The septum sempra scene was amazing. It was the first time I truly pitied and felt for Malfoy.
Ben Harrison
18. Bonny Soy
I'll bring up the snogging then -- I don't know, Harry and Ginny's first kiss in the movie was just, er, blah. The one in the book, while out of left field, provided a giddy rush that reminded me of the joys of that first, true kiss. Haha!

And why the movie ditched Harry's confrontation with Scrimgeur in favor of the senseless Death Eater attack on the Burrows is beyond me. Give me quiet affirmation of valor ("Dumbledore's man through and through") anytime over black, smoke-belching flying bad guys... And here I thought that flying without a broom was Voldemort specialty.
Jason Henninger
19. jasonhenninger
@17
Yeah, it dissed Neville. Not cool. He's my favorite character in the series. Not famous, not powerful or particularly adept, but always tries, always fights. Heart of gold, that guy. In many ways more heroic than Harry. And the backstory with his parents, which had such emotional weight in the books (like the heartbreaking hospital visit) gets swept under the rug in the films.


@18

His meeting with Scrimgeur definitely should have been in the movie. And yeah, I'm totally with you on the flying death eater thing. They make a big deal of Voldemort flying without a broom in the books, but the movie makes it look like standard magic for bad guys.
Ben Harrison
20. domminic
watched the movie...even wrote a review on it
read it here:
http://thedaily-blog.blogspot.com/2009/07/harry-potter-and-half-blood-prince.html

in short, it was disappointing. i expected much more from the team. they left out a whole lot from what was written in the books. especially the fight for Hogwarts!

though david yates did a splendid job, it was disappointing nonetheless

guess i`ll just stick to the books for now...
Ben Harrison
21. drewoftherushes
I agree with @6 completely.

It's really easy to beat up on a movie based on a book. Listen, this is NOT a book, and it's intended to be a replica of the book in film form. These novels don't allow that to be possible. A third-person limited point of view inherently means that a great deal of the story occurs in the central character's head, and without ridiculous voice-over, this is impossible to turn directly into a film.

Think of No Country For Old Men. Read the book -- the structure allowed the Coens to simply shoot (nearly) every scene in the book, because the book is comprised of almost completely visual components.

With a book like Harry Potter, this is not possible. So what do you do? You take a story and the characters in that story, and make a movie out of them. It's a different medium, with different rules.

I think it would be more useful to pay attention to a review by an actual film critic, someone with a background in film studies.

Subscribe to this thread

Receive notification by email when a new comment is added. You must be a registered user to subscribe to threads.
Post a comment