Half-Blood Prince Movie Reviews v.2

[Phrozenone]

There are so many ways Half Blood Prince could have been taken. That's what I do love about this particular story. You either focus on Harry and his doubts/concerns/etc or you focus everyday school life (basically Ron/Hermione/Lavender) and they chose to do the latter which isn't a bad thing.

I can sort of see why Yates would want to do something different. Order of the Phoenix was sad and gloomy throughout and it isn't uncommen for a director to want to do something different. He chose to put the darker aspects of Half Blood Prince to the side and focus more on the romance. This film could've been so many things but I've grown to really like what we have.

I still wish we would have had atleast one more memory. There's just to long of a stretch between the first and the second. Snape's DADA class should've been in and if they did a few things differently with the Burrow scene it would've been amazing.

I've grown to love this movie though. I hated it at first and it's really grown on me. Yates is good with actors and it's just nice to enjoy the year with these characters. Maybe that was his whole purpose. Do I wish there were more of the parallells between Voldemort/Harry. Of course. One more memory (the one where Tom Riddle comes back for the job imo) and a scene where Dumbledore tells Harry that he trusts Snape would have done wonders.

The Half Blood Prince is a beautiful piece of work though and I'm still not tired of watching it yet. Draco's journey was wonderful and Slughorn was humanized in a way that suprised me. I love Broadbents potrayal and is probably one of my favorite things about the film. If they put as much time into Snape/Harry as they did Harry/Slughorn it would've been AMAZING.

[cour7]

Originally Posted by mrfutterman

Welcome but... you can only speak for yourself. I like the books, but do not consider that the details make the books "so good". And I consider that one of the films (PoA) is better than the novel.

Good point...i thought the first three movies were pretty good..i really liked the first movie...but im going to have to disagree with anyone who says that the movies are better than the novels....reading takes you somewhere a movie cant..reading is your imagination as well as the authors..thats the joy in reading it can be interpeted in all sorts of ways but im just saying for me it doesnt work ...i just think the characters over all attitudes and personality are dipicted badly in the movies ,the animation is great and the overall plot... its like listening to your favorite song get butchered by a kiss cover band

[mrfutterman]

Originally Posted by cour7

....but im going to have to disagree with anyone who says that the movies are better than the novels....reading takes you somewhere a movie cant..reading is your imagination as well as the authors..

This is as incomprehensible (to me) as saying that opera is "better than" a novel; or a short story is "better than" a play. They are all forms of storytelling. Different people have different preferences of course, but I don't see how any of these forms is "better than" any other. It could be argued that the forms which use many tools - music, other sounds, visuals, the skill of actors - have the power to enthral us more.

Perhaps you haven't seen many great films? They are out there, waiting to be discovered, if you don't reject them as incapable of moving your imagination.

There are very few great novelists at work today, but many great film-makers.

[Hes]

Please do not turn this into a Books v Movies thread. You can discuss that in among others the following thread Do the movies ruin the books? or the general Cinema discussion forum.

Let's keep this thread about the HBP movie reviews.

[jeffski]

I was fine with the movie until dumbledore apparated out of hogwarts.It kinda made the whole scene of harry chasing snape because he murdered dumbledore, pointless. It is too big a clue that dumbledore LET himself be killed. He obviously could have apparated away from snape , bellatrix. or whoever else. Harry heard albus say "being me has certain priveleges"., harry has got to be wondering why albus did not apparate. Harry's a bright boy, he should have been able to figure that out. But alas, he didnt, and Thank god! Knowing that snape didnt actually "murder" dumbledore, would kinda ruin the plot of the next 2 movies. Ignorance is bliss.

I think the screen writers made an awful choice.

[snapes_witch]

Originally Posted by jeffski

I think the screen writers made an awful choice.

Among many: Hermione not finding out that Snape is the Half-Blood Prince, necessitating his lame comment while fleeing Hogwarts; no skirmish between the DEs and staff and instead an attack on the Burrow. I don't understand why in this age of CGI Harry couldn't have been shown petrified under his IC rather than another lame scene of Snape hushing Harry while on his way to kill DD.

[SiriusBlack101]

Originally Posted by snapes_witch

Among many: Hermione not finding out that Snape is the Half-Blood Prince, necessitating his lame comment while fleeing Hogwarts; no skirmish between the DEs and staff and instead an attack on the Burrow. I don't understand why in this age of CGI Harry couldn't have been shown petrified under his IC rather than another lame scene of Snape hushing Harry while on his way to kill DD.

I thought Snape giving Harry the "shh" sign was an excellent addition to the film, personally. I wasn't expecting it at all, and it makes his "betrayal" all the more potent. Yes, it would have been nice if Dumbledore had said at some point that he trusts Severus Snape, but it still felt like a powerful moment.

Speaking of additional Snape scenes, I really liked showing his conversation with Dumbledore atop the Astronomy Tower before the journey to the cave. It'll be nice to see it as part of the flashbacks in DH2 that show Snape's true allegiances.

[lcbaseball22]

Originally Posted by jeffski

I was fine with the movie until dumbledore apparated out of hogwarts.It kinda made the whole scene of harry chasing snape because he murdered dumbledore, pointless. It is too big a clue that dumbledore LET himself be killed. He obviously could have apparated away from snape , bellatrix. or whoever else. Harry heard albus say "being me has certain priveleges"., harry has got to be wondering why albus did not apparate. Harry's a bright boy, he should have been able to figure that out. But alas, he didnt, and Thank god! Knowing that snape didnt actually "murder" dumbledore, would kinda ruin the plot of the next 2 movies. Ignorance is bliss.

I think the screen writers made an awful choice.

Hmm, I suppose that is a good point. You know, I think you're the first to bring this up and I didn't even realize this could be problematic (well, not really...just ruins a twist) until now. I wonder if any one of the movie only audience picked up on this if hardly any of us did.

My guess is perhaps a few, but not many. I mean, we all have a leg up on them and nobody before this has pointed it out far as I recall.

[GinnyPotter15]

Originally Posted by jeffski

I was fine with the movie until dumbledore apparated out of hogwarts.It kinda made the whole scene of harry chasing snape because he murdered dumbledore, pointless. It is too big a clue that dumbledore LET himself be killed. He obviously could have apparated away from snape , bellatrix. or whoever else. Harry heard albus say "being me has certain priveleges"., harry has got to be wondering why albus did not apparate. Harry's a bright boy, he should have been able to figure that out. But alas, he didnt, and Thank god! Knowing that snape didnt actually "murder" dumbledore, would kinda ruin the plot of the next 2 movies. Ignorance is bliss.

I think the screen writers made an awful choice.

Well for the movie it wasn't a problem. After all Dumbledore didnt know that Harry was still listening because as far as he knew he was getting Snape. He thought Harry was gone probably. And the only ones Snape and Dumbledore had to pretend for were the deatheaters, who probably didnt know Dumbledore could Apparate inside Hogwarts. For the book it's entirely different of course, but this is a thread about the movie..

[Lilleby]

Originally Posted by GinnyPotter15

Well for the movie it wasn't a problem. After all Dumbledore didnt know that Harry was still listening because as far as he knew he was getting Snape. He thought Harry was gone probably. And the only ones Snape and Dumbledore had to pretend for were the deatheaters, who probably didnt know Dumbledore could Apparate inside Hogwarts. For the book it's entirely different of course, but this is a thread about the movie..

Dumbledore did know Harry was there; he ask Harry to hide, when they hear noises from down stairs.

[Noldus]

Originally Posted by jeffski

I was fine with the movie until dumbledore apparated out of hogwarts.It kinda made the whole scene of harry chasing snape because he murdered dumbledore, pointless. It is too big a clue that dumbledore LET himself be killed. He obviously could have apparated away from snape , bellatrix. or whoever else. Harry heard albus say "being me has certain priveleges"., harry has got to be wondering why albus did not apparate. Harry's a bright boy, he should have been able to figure that out. But alas, he didnt, and Thank god! Knowing that snape didnt actually "murder" dumbledore, would kinda ruin the plot of the next 2 movies. Ignorance is bliss.

I think the screen writers made an awful choice.

That's interesting. Here are my thoughts on this:

In the screenplay Harry asked if Dumbledore was praying, but he answered he was closing the window that allowed them to apparate within Hogwarts.This was apparently cut. To me it's not a problem in the film. Harry probably felt too stressed in the situation to to think that apparation could save Dumbledore and didn't consider it as an option afterwards because he was angry on Snape. It's not sure the possibility even crossed the minds of the non-readers. If it did they might assume Dumbledore was too weak to apparate or needed his wand to do it or they might think it wasn't necessary because Dumbledore thought Snape was there to save him. I am sure some non-readers figured out that Dumbledore's death was planned and Snape is on the good side since the film gave away some clues. But they can still be tricked seeing how Snape pretends to be a Death Eater in the Deathly Hallows 1 and in the beginning of part 2

[SiriusBlack101]

Originally Posted by Lilleby

Dumbledore did know Harry was there; he ask Harry to hide, when they hear noises from down stairs.

Correct. Also, Dumbledore gives Harry one final glance through the floorboards after he asks Snape to kill him.

[mrfutterman]

Originally Posted by jeffski

I was fine with the movie until dumbledore apparated out of hogwarts.It kinda made the whole scene of harry chasing snape because he murdered dumbledore, pointless. It is too big a clue that dumbledore LET himself be killed. He obviously could have apparated away from snape ...

The circumstances were radically different though. When Dumbledore and Harry apparated out of Hogwarts, they were leaving a place of safety, apparently well protected, and flying into danger. When they return, the ability to apparate is beside the point, as Hogwarts had become a place of danger. Dumbledore couldn't conceivably leave the school, and Harry, at the mercy of a bunch of DEs who had just got in by means that no-one had forseen.

For non-readers, Dumbledore could have been pleading with the trusted Snape for his life, and for Snape to turn against Draco, Bellatrix, etc., only to be betrayed (that is Harry's interpretation of events, after all).

Later, after DH2, audiences will realize that Dumbledore's trust in Snape was not misplaced: Albus was not pleading for his life but begging Snape to do that very distasteful deed that they had already discussed. Furthermore, Snape could be trusted with safeguarding the school and its inhabitants.

But audiences cannot be given that info at this point. They have to believe what Harry believes.

[MasterOfDeath]

Well, they needed to make it more clear that HARRY was the one who apparated them both back since Dumbledore was so weak after drinking the potion in the cave.

That's my answer every time to my non-book reading family whenever they ask why Dumbledore let himself open so much on the tower. "He was so weak from the potion." It works because of how excellent Gambon played the potion drinking scene. You see this great powerful parental figure wizard become this weak whimpering little child. It's frighting.

[ccollinsmith]

My vote is C. I'm a latecomer to Harry Potter, so I was actually half-way through reading The Half-Blood Prince when Netflix delivered the blu-ray to my house. Since I'd seen all of the other movies before reading any of the books, I decided to go ahead and watch the movie, then read the second half of the book.

I didn't enjoy the movie much at that time because I was comparing it to the book and seeing all the omissions of things that I loved from the book, and seeing changes (like the attack on the Burrow - which I still don't get at all).

Then I went back and watched the movie again the other night, about a week after finishing The Deathly Hallows. That time, I was able to enjoy the movie. It's quite entertaining in its own right, even if there's plenty that's different from the book. I do love the way Alan Rickman plays the Avada Kedavra and Half-Blood Prince scenes - even though I also feel that he's tipping his hand a little by putting so much heartbreak into his voice. Of course, if you hate Snape, you probably don't hear the heartbreak. If you're hoping, as I was, that he'd turn out to be Dumbledore's man all along, then you just might. And the Unbreakable Vow scene is just haunting.

Also the scenes with young Tom Riddle are just fabulous. I wish they'd included more of the Riddle scenes from the book, but those kids playing Riddle were absolutely great. I just found out that 11-year-old Riddle was played by Ralph Fiennes' nephew. Well, the kid's got some skill, that's for sure. He was ueber-creepy.

And Jim Broadbent is terrific. I especially love the scene in Hagrid's cabin. Wonderful acting all around.

[cour7]

Originally Posted by mrfutterman

This is as incomprehensible (to me) as saying that opera is "better than" a novel; or a short story is "better than" a play. They are all forms of storytelling. Different people have different preferences of course, but I don't see how any of these forms is "better than" any other. It could be argued that the forms which use many tools - music, other sounds, visuals, the skill of actors - have the power to enthral us more.

Perhaps you haven't seen many great films? They are out there, waiting to be discovered, if you don't reject them as incapable of moving your imagination.

There are very few great novelists at work today, but many great film-makers.

Im not saying that every movie is terrible im saying that the jk rowling books are better than the films....of course they are all forms of storytelling but that wasnt my point....perhaps i havent seen a great film, but that wasnt what i was talking about..i was only discussing the potter book to film... not opera or other short stories, which being blessed with a brain of my own know that yes, there are many.

[gertiekeddle]

Guys, there was already a moderator's in-thread asking to stop the baiting. If you have a problem with a post, please always better report it than leading a thread any further off-topic. Thanks!

[GinnyPotter15]

Originally Posted by MasterOfDeath

Well, they needed to make it more clear that HARRY was the one who apparated them both back since Dumbledore was so weak after drinking the potion in the cave.

But Harry cant apparate into Hogwarts..

[DML1991]

Originally Posted by GinnyPotter15

But Harry cant apparate into Hogwarts..

Yes he can. Dumbledore left the window open for when they'd apparate back.

[lcbaseball22]

Originally Posted by DML1991

Yes he can. Dumbledore left the window open for when they'd apparate back.

Are we talking a literal "window" here? I noticed Noldus said something about a window too...

Note I haven't read the screenplay he mentioned, so that might be the reason for my confusion.