If there is an inferiority curse that struck the odd-numbered installments of the Star Trek movies (a jinx that reversed itself after number 6), then surely there is a correlating and inverse malediction for the Harry Potter features. Perhaps the argument can be made that J.K. Rowling had only sufficient material to load four novels and padded it out to seven. Whatever the reason, this latest chapter is a disappointment exceeded only by the misfire that was Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire.
The story begins portentously enough, with a daring mid-day raid on Diagon Alley that foreshadows darker events. Yet the repercussions of the raid are hollow, as the audience never fully learns who or what the raiders were after, and more unpropitiously, never learns why. Even the rather momentous destruction of the Millennium Bridge by the maleficent Death Eaters is forgotten the instant it occurs, as though its effect on the hitherto unaware muggles of the non-magic world is entirely inconsequential. If it is, why bother showing it? This opening scene is the perfect harbinger of what follows, as the diegesis never climbs out of the desultory rut in which it finds itself so immediately.
The triumvirate of teenage titans in Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince.
The story doesn’t unfold so much as oddments of it get thrown at the screen in the hope that a coherent tapestry will form. It’s the first Harry Potter movie in which nothing seems to actually happen. A prime example comes at the midpoint, when an attack on our heroes arrives out of nowhere and departs in the same direction. Even the budding romances of the hormonal Hogwarts adolescents seem to materialize with little or no prelude, and have all the meaning and insight of a direct-to-DVD John Hughes knock-off. And in the final act, when the Half-Blood Prince is revealed, it is neither revelatory nor meaningful. Despite knowing his identity, one is left wondering exactly what is a Half-Blood Prince and why being one is salient to the story.
Perhaps director David Yates has himself to blame for setting the bar so high in the brisk and bountiful Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. Following that, he was perchance destined to dissatisfy.
That’s not to say the movie doesn’t have the occasional gem. Emma Watson has never been better as Hermione Granger. Trading in the eye-brow raising, carping disapproval she’s worn for most of the series, here she is in rare, raw form as a nascent, lovelorn woman. She gets to show a vulnerability — and a dangerously brewing fury — that one hoped would eventually emerge. Tom Felton, having been diminished to little more than a background player in the previous film, is a revelation here as Draco Malfoy, a conflicted juvenile less than eager to fill the vacancy left by his baleful father. He displays some of the finest acting in the entire series by any of the young performers.
The climax is also quite satisfying, as two seasoned actors bring to head the import of years of battle-weary experience and intrigue with nary a word spoken between them. It’s a credit to both and sadly serves to highlight what is so desperately missing from the remainder of the picture.
So, if an alternating-chapter-curse is plaguing the Harry Potter films, it’s a mixed blessing that there’s only one more story to tell, as that story has been bisected, leaving the final theatrical release to its even-numbered fate. Here’s hoping it’s mere happenstance.
From most to least satisfying, a ranking of the Harry Potter films:
- Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone (2001)
- Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix (2007)
- Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (2004)
- Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (2002)
- Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (2009)
- Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (2005)
Disagree? That’s fine by me. Share your thoughts below.
I loved the movie and don’t agree with your review with the exception of the performances of Emma Watson and Tom Felton. They were amazing. I think the movie took us through all the emotions and continued the story of good vs. evil brilliantly.
A very erudite review of the film even though I believe it leads to a highly incorrect assessment of the film. Your point about the beginning couldn’t be more correct. Yet despite a very clumsy opening, this chapter is possibly the strongest in the entire series (trailing just slightly behind Azkaban).
Cogent narrative in the Potter series has never been its strong suit. If that’s what you’re looking for–you’re bound to be disappointed. Many of the movies have a paint-by-numbers feeling–trying to cram all the plot points from the novel into the film. The end result tends to be a very disjointed storyline. Audiences in the middle of the films often ask, “wait…how did we end up here?” Rowling’s plot twists are probably less arbitrary in her novels (just a hunch, although I’ve never read them).
Azkaban overall is the best film for the simple reason that it has a very well integrated theme. It’s a film that can stand on its own for this reason. While we’re dorking out here; this is also why Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan is the best of its series.
Sorcerer’s Stone, being that it was an origin story, could have had this capability too, but by contrast it’s narrative was driven primarily by novelties which lost their luster on repeat viewings. (I only watch it now to see John Hurt in the wand store–has John Hurt EVER had a bad performance?)
This is also why Chamber of Secrets failed so badly–both films 1&2 finally get around to an actual plot only after two hours of eye candy and sight gags. 4 & 5 are a bit more focused, but the performances and aesthetics are still lacking.
Potter 6, is a refreshing improvement in both performances and aesthetics–returning it back to the quality and gravitas that Cuaron brought to Azkaban (despite the anxiety this brought to the original eye-candy enthusiasts that loved the first two blunders of the series).
One of Yates’ best moves with this new film was to replace the dreadful Soap-Opera-TV-Closeup cinematography of Slawomir Idziak in 5 with the breathtaking camerawork of
Bruno Delbonnel.
Delbonnel’s camera dances beautifully and, unlike Idziak, knows when to move in for the closeup. Between the talent of Delbonnel and Stuart Craig’s production design, Half-Blood Prince is a feast for the eyes without having to introduce a new creature or magical whatchamacallit every five minutes.
Potter 6 also manages to breathe under the weight of its adaptation. The 90210 moments, although somewhat indulgent, manage to lighten the mood and allow some gem moments from the supporting cast.
Bonnie Wright as Ginny, Jessie Cave as Lavender Brown or Tom Felton, as you astutely pointed out, are all wonderful. Evanna Lynch as Luna Lovegood is simply adorable. And the comedy works because despite it’s specificity, it’s relaxed. Potter 5 was almost rendered unwatchable due to the dreadfully forced humor of Imelda Staunton as Professor Dolores Umbridge.
And speaking of cameos…the real treat of this film (and I am shocked that no mention was given at all in your review) is Jim Broadbent.
Broadbent steals the show as Professor Horace Slughorn and deserves no less than an Oscar for Best Supporting Character. (Yes, another one–he already received one for Iris). I savored every moment Broadbent was on screen. From his voice, to his facial expressions and movement–the embodiment of his character was a delight to watch.
The Harry Potter series has done well since 3 by stealing from Mike Leigh’s pool of British talent–David Thewlis & Timothy Spall were fantastic in Azkaban, and now Broadbent! Who knows? Perhaps we’ll get to see Eddie Marsan in the next film!
Let’s hope that the performances and aesthetics remain top notch and that the story of the next two films are…dare I say…coherent? “The binding is really fragile.”
Mark, it’s interesting that you brought up the performances of Jessie Cave and Jim Broadbent as I thought they were the weakest in the film. I have to admit I’ve never been the biggest Broadbent fan. I can’t say that I’ve seen him in a wide range of films (and I haven’t seen Iris) but what I have seen is variations on the same doddering-old-fool character. The only notable exception would be his fine turn as William “Boss” Tweed in Gangs of New York.
As for Ms. Cave, her obsessive teen drama-queen grew tiresome very quickly.
I’m astonished at your reaction to Imelda Staunton in Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. Her performance is one of the most delightful of the entire series and I thought it was disgraceful that she was overlooked by the AMPAS. Her chilly-sweet Umbridge virtually carried the entire movie. She displayed more conflicting emotions with a single look than the young Ms. Cave or experienced Mr. Broadbent did with their exasperated hamminess and droll facial quirks.
I can’t say that the cinematography particularly charmed me. Just about the only noticeable thing about it was how it managed to take a traditionally colorful production design and virtually wash it out. The blue monochrome worked well for the chilly events of the previous film but here they look simply exaggerated.
And the final book will be made into two movies. I saw this film at 9am on Thursday. It was o.k., but I found myself looking at my watch. I felt that Helen Bonham Carter was just a replay of the Jonny Depp movie. But, in spite of it all, I liked the movie. Maybe because I sat through 10 hours of Harry Potter movies on Wednesday to replay the entire set to bring myself up to speed again.
Every book should have been made into 1 1/2 hours. They are ALL too long (especially considering that there is no intermission). I’ve never seen a Potter film in the theater without at least 10 people going out to the bathroom and back in the middle of it…Hollywood, get a clue.
(Every book should have been made into two 1 1/2 hour films)
[...] the replacement of Slawomir Idziak with Bruno Delbonnel was indeed an aesthetic improvement in Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, series newcomer Eduardo Serra brings voguish, shaky-cam hackery to the proceedings, giving editor [...]