|
Harry Potter: HBP Movie Review |
|
|
|
|
|
|
One of my favorite Harry Potter characters, besides Luna and Bellatrix, as we all should know is Severus Snape. Unsurprisingly, my favorite book is Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (in addition to PoA and OotP). Now I'm not normally a big fan of the Harry Potter movies, but seeing as the HBP was my favorite book, I was dieing to see this film. (The book was about Severus, in a way).
It was like the previous 3 movies (PoA, GoF, and OotP), beautifully filmed with all the jokes in all the right places, but unfinished and vague; it was made under the assumption that everyone in the audience has read the books, which a surprisingly large number of people haven't.
(On a different note, the Lord of the Ring movies were well done. I've never read the books, but I was able to understand everything in the films).
Don't get me wrong, Half-Blood Prince had some amazing cinematography, especially the cave scene where Tom Roddle hid the locket, and the skin jokes were "win". Luna was great as ever and Bellatrix came back in all her pyromaniac craziness (which includes running around, cackling like an evil little girl and setting things aflame). They did a good job at merging certain scenes together as well to make the action flow better.
ie: Towards the end of the movie, instead of having Dumbledor and Harry travel to Hogsmead before Appearating to the rock, they Disappearated directly from the castle. It was more dramatic, and Dumbledor made the excuse as to why he can Disappearate from the castle--because being Headmaster, he has certain privileges =P
The vanishing cabinet was wonderfully explained. Instead of giving us a boring lecture on it, they showed us how it worked.
ie: They showed the vanishing cabinet in Burgin and Brookes. Later, they showed the cabinet in the Room of Requirement. Then, they showed Malfoy putting something into the cabinet, closing it, saying an incantation, and opening it to find nothing inside. He repeated the process to find the item back in the cabinet. All this was done at intervals throughout the movie and was a great way at explaining the whole thing while keeping the audience's attention.
Lastly, I just love what they did with Harry and Hermione--they really showed how much they suffered when they saw those they love snogging someone else... They also emphasized on their close friendship.
However, despite all these wonderful things, the movie had a lot of holes in it.
My greatest issue was the added scene that was not in the book; it held no importance in the movie.
My second biggest issue was the movie making a big deal out of something early on in the film, but never returning to it to better explain it.
My third biggest issue is that they left out some important facts--but this is why they have to divide the 7th book into two movies, isn't it? To catch up on all the things they missed.
So. First point.
There is a scene during Christmastime at the Burrow, where Death Eaters come by and set the entire house on fire. Harry runs after Bellatrix, and after a long chase, starts to duel with her. He is later joined up by Ginny, Mr. Weasely, Lupin, and Tonks.
Err... Was this even in the book?
Nope. Not at all.
Okay, so what was the point of this nighttime chase?
Nothing.
It was never brought up again in the movie nor did it affect any of the characters (ie: Ron never showed remorse at his entire house having been burned down, even through acting, and Hermione never rushed up to Harry when he returned to Hogwarts, saying: "Ohmygosh, I heard there was a fire, are you okay?" wink
All it was, was a filler action scene because they needed to follow the mushy Harry/Ginny scene with something exciting to keep the audience's attention.
True, it did show how much Ginny cares for Harry, but they showed that several times in the movie already.
Fenrir Greyback also appeared in that scene--I knew he was a werewolf, because he looked wolfish and I read the books. However, those people who never read the books would have seen a big, creepy, and hairy man and wondered who the hell he was--they never mentioned his name. He had no point in the move--He didn't attack Bill nor did he try to attack/bite any children (something which he is famous for).
Now they made a big deal out of several things in the movie, only to never bring them back up again. There were two that stood out to me.
Okay. First one.
So in the Pensive, Harry sees young Tom Riddle take out of his wardrobe a little box filled with items that he stole. This was significant because they centered on that moment.
But they never brought it up again, not even after Dumbledor and Harry left the Pensive and Dumbledor started to talk/explain things.
You see... Tom Riddle liked trophies and he was attracted to history, hence his reason for choosing the items that he did for his Horcruxes.
In the books, there were a few known Horcruxes:
- Hufflepuff's cup
- Slytherin's locket
- Slytherin's ring
- Riddle's diary
Dumbledor also suspected another item of being a Horcrux and made a guess as to another one:
- Nagini (sp?), Voldemort's snake
- Something of Ravenclaw's or Gryffindor's, though most probably Ravenclaw's, because Gryffindor's sword is apparently untouched.
They could have had Dumbledor explain to Harry that Riddle liked his trophies, and tell Harry his suspicions as to what the Horcruxes were. But I guess that fire-chase scene, which had never appeared in the books, was too important to spare a few seconds for this important bit of information that was repeated constantly in the last two books.
But I guess this is why they need to make that 7th movie in two parts--to better explain all this. -_-
Secondly... They made a big scene/mystery out of Katie Bell getting cursed by that necklace... but they never brought it up again, except for when Harry asked Katie who gave her that necklace.
Katie said that she didn't know.
Ooooo, mysterious...
Who could have given her that necklace?
Well, to find out, read the book!
We only have Harry's suspicions of Malfoy because "he just knows it."
He just knows it.
Boy, that's a strong piece of evidence.
Why did they make the whole necklace business so mysterious if they never even went anywhere with it or conclude it by saying who really gave Katie that package?
They also left out a few important facts. They could have included these instead of that pointless Weasley-fire scene.
1) Voldemort was the heir of Slytherin. Isn't this kind of important?
2) Snape unknowingly betrayed Lily and James to Voldemort. You may think this is trivial, but it is very important.
One: It feeds Harry's hatred and mistrust of Snape.
Two: This is partly WHY Snape is a good guy. He told Voldemort of the prophecy he overheard without realizing that it pertained to Lily. So of course Voldemort killed Lily, which just about ripped Snape's heart apart. Hence... The reason Snape turned good. The other reason why Snape joined the Order is because he loved Lily and decided to help protect her son as a kind of honor to her (the "whole I couldn't help her, but I can help her son" thing).
3) WHY WHY WHY WHY Snape called himself the Half-Blood Prince. Snape just told Harry that, yes, he was the Half-Blood Prince. To those who haven't read the books, they'd think that young Snape had been an egotistical git who saw himself as royalty. To those who have... they'd know that Snape gave himself that title because he was proud of his mother, Eileen Prince, who had been a witch (father was a Muggle), thus making him a half-blood... thus half-Prince. It was a clever play on words. What would it hurt to have smart Hermione say towards the end of the film: oh, btw... I studied this Prince of yours. He's actually Severus Snape. His mom was Eileen Prince and his father was a Muggle, blah blah blah blah. I mean... It's the title of the movie, isn't it? They could have honored the Half-Blood Prince a little more.
Hm...
Oh! And WHAT was the title of this movie again?
Wait...
Wait...
Harry Potter and the Horcruxes, right?
...
No?
Oh right.
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince.
Right.
...
...
You know, if I hadn't read the title before seeing the movie, I wouldn't even have known that. The book, nor the Prince, were very important in this movie.
Yes, it helped Harry cheat his way through one potions class, and it taught him the Sectumseptra spell which he later used against Malfoy, nearly killing him... but other than that, the book didn't really resurface in the movie again.
It didn't even teach Harry about bezoars... So in the scene where Ron gets poisoned and Harry shoves something down his throat, you go: WTF?
Really...
It would have taken just a few seconds to have the camera focus on a page in the book about antidotes, with "Just shove a bezoar down their throats." I mean... It's just a page of the book--only a few seconds. Harry could have looked at it while reading the book in bed.
(You do hear Slughorn mention bezoars in an earlier scene, but he never said what they were, so you're still lost as an audience member who hasn't read the books).
The reason as to why Harry had to hide the book was vague as well. Okay, it was different from the book (Snape didn't ask Harry for his copy of Advanced Potion Making) but at the same time... They didn't explain it. They just showed Ginny saying "We have to do it," taking the book with Harry into the Room of Requirement, and hiding it for him.
They could have had one of the characters say: You know, this book really is evil, Harry. You should hide it before someone finds it and you get into trouble... or before it hurts anyone else."
Again, I have no objection to how they played the scene out, but they should have explained it a little bit more, to make it less abrupt, random, and "wtf?" Maybe Ginny felt that this book was becoming dangerous, like Tom Riddle's diary, and decided that it needed to be hidden, and Harry agreed because he loves Ginny.
They also did a terrible job at explaining Fred and George's shop. They just took you from one scene... and into this big, cheesy, confusing, chaotic scene with a big crazy shop and... wtf? It took even me a few minutes to get that this was the joke shop. They should have had the characters say something about it being their shop... or...
"Wow Fred/George, you guys really did start up that shop you were always going on about. Good job."
I personally think it would have been better if they led you into that shop/scene instead of plunging you right in the middle of chaos-overload, but that's just me. It's not one of my biggest issues with the film, though.
All in all, it was a good movie. I did NOT like the actor who played Professor Slughorn however; his acting was weak and unconvincing compared to the other characters. Harry, Hermione, and Ron improved so much since their first two movies! It's amazing to see how much they've grown as actors. Severus Snape was great--I don't know how Alan Rickman did it.... but in the final scene,you could see that Snape did not was to kill Dumbledor.
The guy who played Dumbledor was amazing too; he was really convincing.
The cinematography was amazing, and the scene were Harry and Dumbledor Appearated on the rock was just amazing.
However, they should have explained certain things further--such as what the other Horcruxes were, and ideally, why Tom Riddle chose them (referring back to Tom Riddle's little stash of stolen trophies). This would leave more time for action in the 7th movie, as opposed to having explain everything.
They also could have put a little more emphasis on the Half-Blood Prince and explained about bezoars a little bit (especially the fact that they are a poison antidote) so as that Ron-poisoning scene wouldn't have been so "wtf just happened?" I mean... It's the title of the movie!
On a last note....
I really really really hope they do a better job of explaining the Horcruxes, Voldemort's past, and Snape's past in the last movie...
But seeing how these movies are coming along... I fear that they will omit the entire "Prince's Tale" chapter and just have someone wave at Harry and say: "Oh yeah, Snape was really a good guy, lol."
 Dead_Chimera · Thu Jul 16, 2009 @ 06:55pm · 0 Comments |
|
|
|
|
|
