ladynorbert | Half-Blood Prince (Reply)

I think it's well-known by at least half of you that I love Harry Potter. Really, really love it. I enjoy the movies, for the most part, but I always think I would enjoy them more if I were completely unfamiliar with the books. I get somewhat distracted by what's missing or changed. Still, the movies are dazzling enough in their own right that I can appreciate them for themselves.

This entry is FULL OF SPOILERS. READ AT YOUR OWN RISK.

First, though, my thoughts on the trailers which preceded it.

2012 -- if you like disaster movies, you'll probably like this. I'll be skipping it. The trailer alone kind of freaked me out.
The Princess and the Frog -- Disney returns to its classical roots, this time in 1940s New Orleans. I'll definitely be seeing it.
Where the Wild Things Are -- looks so cute!
Aliens in the Attic -- looks so stupid!
Sherlock Holmes -- I refuse to acknowledge that this movie is happening. I had some hopes when I first saw posters that maybe it would be all right, but I was appalled by the trailer. Holmes is not a womanizer. Watson does not secretly despise him. Most personally distressing of all, Watson would never punch Holmes in the face. Guy Ritchie has run roughshod over my hero and I will never forgive him for it.

Right, so, the film itself. Overall it was pleasing. The parts that got left out, though, disappointed me deeply.

Things that I liked:

As has been the case with all of the films, the music was wonderful.
Instead of having Fudge explain things to the Muggle Prime Minister, they chose to illustrate the Death Eaters running amok and doing things like destroying a bridge. It was really good. The kidnapping of Mr. Ollivander in particular made me forget to breathe for a few seconds.
All of the performances were, I thought, excellent. The actors were at the top of their games. But I especially have to say that I loved Tom Felton as Draco Malfoy in this. He did a beautiful job of showing the tortured aspect of the boy. Props also go to Jim Broadbent (the Professor from the first Narnia film), who was a flawless Horace Slughorn.
Weasley's Wizard Wheezes was gorgeously rendered. The twins had very few lines/scenes, but that one was perfect.
The flashback scenes with the young Tom Riddle were deliciously creepy. The kids (I know the younger one was Ralph Fiennes's nephew) they got to play him were brilliant. And the sepia tone they used in those scenes had a slightly greenish cast, which really enhanced the creepy aspect.
The scene where Harry and Dumbledore recover the locket from its hiding place was awesome. The effects rocked.
The romance between Ron and Lavender was absolutely nauseating. But it was supposed to be, so that was fine. Hermione being hurt by it was beautifully depicted, and the scene in which Harry consoles her was too. (And yes, the canaries of doom are in the film, so yay.)
Ron being poisoned and Harry saving him with the bezoar was spot-on, as was the funeral of Aragog the spider.
The subplot of Tonks being in love with Lupin was jettisoned, but this was a rare case of my being able to understand why a subplot was dropped for the sake of time. And they did, at least, have her address him as "Sweetheart," so it wasn't completely ignored. They just cut out the unrequited aspect and put them together earlier than Rowling did.
Only a little bit of Quidditch, but it was, as it always is, a lot of fun to watch.

Things I didn't like (or in a few cases, outright hated):

If you've read the book, you know that the second chapter involves Dumbledore coming to visit the Dursleys, explaining to them about how Harry needs to be able to come back to Privet Drive the following summer and also giving Harry the news that he's inherited all of Sirius's things. Don't expect that to appear. Harry's apparently spending the summer before his sixth year of school...riding around on trains. And flirting with train station restaurant waitresses. It was very WTF to me.
Poor Neville had...all of two lines. As a waiter at Slughorn's Christmas party. He appeared in a few other scenes, but didn't speak.
On the other hand, at least he was in the movie. Know who isn't? Bill Weasley and Fleur Delacour. So there's no gut-wrenching scene where Bill fights with Fenrir Greyback and may or may not be a werewolf. No tearful reconciliation between Molly and Fleur when Molly realizes that Fleur really does love Bill. Nothing. They and their engagement are never even mentioned, let alone seen.
In the book, there's a spectacular battle toward the end between the school staff (and some students) and the Death Eaters after they infiltrate the school. I was really looking forward to that. Guess what? THEY CUT IT. Dumbledore's death happens exactly as it does in the book, but then the Death Eaters leave, pausing just long enough for Bellatrix to set Hagrid's hut on fire for no discernible reason. (Of course, it's Bellatrix, she doesn't really need a reason...)
The worst crime, in my opinion? The book gives Dumbledore a lavish, emotional funeral. Hagrid carries the purple silk-draped body to a marble tomb on the shores of Hogwarts Lake, while the merpeople sing and the centaurs fire arrows into the air. It was a gorgeously rendered scene, and it broke my heart. THEY CUT THAT TOO. The end of the film was just totally anticlimactic -- Harry, Ron and Hermione, up on the Astronomy Tower, with Hermione telling Harry that they won't let him find the horcruxes by himself. In a typical Steve Kloves moment, Ron's just sitting there, saying nothing.

Overall, Kevin gave it 2.5 stars out of 4. I'm a little more generous; I'll say 3 stars out of 4 because the list of things I liked is longer than the list of things I didn't. But the things I didn't like were intensely disappointing.