July 21, 2009

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince Review

4C60AA4A-5354-4478-B9C1-6C11D90BCD35.jpgHarry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince

Starring: Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, Emma Watson
Directed by David Yates

This is what happens when you expect too much from something that won't deliver.

I remember reading the book. I remember being rather disappointed yet fascinated about it, and that must be because this book is more of an establishment of Tom Riddle's backstory more than anything. True, there were still times when the actual "now" in the timeline progressed, but mostly, it was a book dedicated to the villain, and ironically, not the "Half-blood prince" himself. After reading the book, I succinctly said, "This book will make the worst movie of the bunch."

Fast forward to now and I get frickin' excited for it. Why? I watched the epic trailer. Who wouldn't get excited by the fast editing and the awesome Dumbledore fire magic thingy? Add to that the initially sky-high rating of the movie in Rotten Tomatoes and you get impossibly high expectations.

While the movie didn't get to meet my expectations, that's not to say that this installment was necessarily the "worst" movie. Not even close. It was actually nearly the same vision I had for the movie when I was reading the book, minus the admittedly repetitive Pensieve scenes. Right now, I think returning screenwriter Steven Kloves strikes a balance of what to omit and what not to omit (unlike in HP5 when a lot of stuff was omitted), and it makes for some rather entertaining, if not talky, fare.

Oddly enough, it also is one of the more intelligent summer movies right now. True, the only time the movie makes you think is the cliffhanger at the end (I forgot who the hell R.A.B. is!) especially since the movie seems to focus a lot more on the awkward teenage moments for the bulk of the movie. But the subtle comedy that comes along with these moments are executed nicely, which is actually quite a nice change of pace for the film!

Fine, there's a little bit of action, but I never really thought of them as anything particularly satisfying. Draco fights? Sectumsempra-ed. Snape fight (as seen in the trailer)? Somewhat non-existent. When you've read the books, you probably wouldn't feel as disappointed since the film's just following the major events in the book, but if you're one of those who just follow the film franchise without reading the book, you might be disappointed. Want proof? My brother. He felt as if the movie was boring and "bitin". I think that it did lack a bit of oomph, but then again, the source material is the one to blame here.

Hell, most of the faults of the movie can actually be attributed to the style of the novel. It's hard to work with without making it episodic. As fascinating a villain Voldemort is, you can't just cram that detail about his parents and stuff, it wouldn't work!

Fans who got disappointed will be glad later, because Half-Blood Prince is a warm-up to the epicness that will occur in Deathly Hollows more than anything. The final important mystery that forms the backbone of the 7th and 8th movies is actually to be found here, so at least any form of exposition in the next movie, will be exposition that probably occurs in the book itself. To those critics who say that all Harry Potter movies are bad because they can't stand alone and newbies won't understand them because they become incomprehensible without prior viewing, suck it. If you wanted to make all of these movies stand alone, they should've made the series a TV show in the first place! Too much exposition would be required before the actual movie would gain steam!

So to make a long story short, this new Harry Potter is visually stunning, funny, but decidedly lacking in a way. It's still nonetheless well-directed, adequately acted, and delicately adapted from the pages of the book. Hell, just adapting the thing alone is an achievement, really.

Rating: 7.5/10

No comments:

Post a Comment

Elegant de BlogMundi