Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince: the movie (my review)
I was disappointed.
I was disappointed that it was slow moving, that it took half the film to dive into the guts of the story, and that the two most pivotal scenes from the book weren't as dramatic as they should have been in the film.
In one of the scenes, a character had to be forced to drink vile liquid. In the book he was in agony, crying, begging and pleading not to have to drink it. It was a horrible scene. The scene in the film was barely dramatic. I kept waiting for the actor to go all out and wail and scream, give an amazing performance, and blow my mind. But it never happened.
In the other scene, a main character was murdered. There was meant to be a battle and a struggle, but instead, a bunch of people just stood around talking.
People who haven't read the book wouldn't have noticed this.
The ending was very anti-climatic.
Daniel Radcliffe's acting is also very stilted. Maybe that's just his character, but it is getting annoying.
I really loved Helena Bonham-Carter in this. She is always great to watch. Jim Broadbent was excellent and hilarious. He had the perfect cocked-eyebrow. Tom Felton, who played Draco Malfoy, was also brilliant. He played the 'slicked-haired, well-groomed enemy who gradually lost his composure' character really well.
The movie spent way too much time focused on the love triangles forming amongst the students at Hogwarts, which was where most of the jokes were found. More time should have been spent on telling the actual story. There was one scene that was totally not given justice. It seemed pointless in the movie, and in the book it was something major, and very scary.
That said, the humour was quite clever and I was laughing a lot at the quirks of the different characters.
The film's visuals were absolutely stunning. They sure put the US$250 million budget to good use.
I recall at one point nearly tearing up, and I was reminded of The Lord of the Rings. This movie was something similarly epic, but it just didn't give its all in regard to performances of the actors who played main characters.
This is such a shame considering how HUGE the Harry Potter films are, and considering how far they've come since the first one. The Harry Potter film-makers should have worked out how to blow people away by now.
I've read other reviews which say the film was very emotional... And, compared to the previous films, it was. But it was incomparable to the intensity of the novel.
Overall, the film did the book justice, of course, and was very entertaining.
As a reader of the books who gets totally drawn into the story, the film totally fell short of having as much effect as the book did.
I was disappointed that it was slow moving, that it took half the film to dive into the guts of the story, and that the two most pivotal scenes from the book weren't as dramatic as they should have been in the film.
In one of the scenes, a character had to be forced to drink vile liquid. In the book he was in agony, crying, begging and pleading not to have to drink it. It was a horrible scene. The scene in the film was barely dramatic. I kept waiting for the actor to go all out and wail and scream, give an amazing performance, and blow my mind. But it never happened.
In the other scene, a main character was murdered. There was meant to be a battle and a struggle, but instead, a bunch of people just stood around talking.
People who haven't read the book wouldn't have noticed this.
The ending was very anti-climatic.
Daniel Radcliffe's acting is also very stilted. Maybe that's just his character, but it is getting annoying.
I really loved Helena Bonham-Carter in this. She is always great to watch. Jim Broadbent was excellent and hilarious. He had the perfect cocked-eyebrow. Tom Felton, who played Draco Malfoy, was also brilliant. He played the 'slicked-haired, well-groomed enemy who gradually lost his composure' character really well.
The movie spent way too much time focused on the love triangles forming amongst the students at Hogwarts, which was where most of the jokes were found. More time should have been spent on telling the actual story. There was one scene that was totally not given justice. It seemed pointless in the movie, and in the book it was something major, and very scary.
That said, the humour was quite clever and I was laughing a lot at the quirks of the different characters.
The film's visuals were absolutely stunning. They sure put the US$250 million budget to good use.
I recall at one point nearly tearing up, and I was reminded of The Lord of the Rings. This movie was something similarly epic, but it just didn't give its all in regard to performances of the actors who played main characters.
This is such a shame considering how HUGE the Harry Potter films are, and considering how far they've come since the first one. The Harry Potter film-makers should have worked out how to blow people away by now.
I've read other reviews which say the film was very emotional... And, compared to the previous films, it was. But it was incomparable to the intensity of the novel.
Overall, the film did the book justice, of course, and was very entertaining.
As a reader of the books who gets totally drawn into the story, the film totally fell short of having as much effect as the book did.