I was one of the crazy people sitting in a movie theater at midnight to catch Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince. Although I love movies, I don't as a rule love movies based on books. There are, of course, exceptions, but in general if I've read and enjoyed a book I make it a point not to see a film adaptation.
The whole Harry Potter experience has been a bit unusual for me, though. I wouldn't read the books for the longest time on general principle ... I have a kind of overly stiff-necked aversion to "the latest craze" when it comes to literature. However, I also take very seriously the component of book sharing in my relationships with my students. In other words, if a kid tells me to read a book, I do so (or at least I'll try really hard). I feel like, if I'm going to recommend books to students or assign them required texts, I should at least extend them the common courtesy of giving their recommendations a chance. However, I broke that rule when it came to Harry Potter ... I only started reading J.K. Rowling's masterpieces when Addie did. Naturally, I loved the books and I (somewhat shockingly) am a fan of the movies as well (except the third one, although it's my favorite of the books ... kind of weird).
All of which is way off base of the intended topic of this post, which is to share with you my thoughts on the film adaptation of Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince, a film I took in last night at 12:04 a.m. Oh, and I guess I should warn that there are spoilers here (albeit minor ones--I'm making a concerted effort not to wreck the movie for anyone).
In a nutshell, it was a good movie. If my entire Harry Potter experience had been of the cinematic bend, in fact, I'd go so far as to say it was great. I don't want to completely ruin the plot for anyone, so I guess I'll share my three main criticisms and repeat again that it was definitely worth the midnight thing and suffering what some are referring to as a "Harry Potter Hangover" today.
I thought the beginning of the movie was horrible. It was not remotely engaging, and in fact it showed the character of Harry in a light that I found kind of pathetic. Basically, Harry is hitting on a waitress in a little diner, going so far as to arrange what appears to be a casual hook-up when the waitress gets off shift at eleven. I'm certainly not a prude or anything, but it was just ... crass. Anyway, nothing happened because Harry was forced to accompany a suddenly-present Dumbledore to a creepy-looking house in order to convince a former Hogwarts professor to return to teaching duties. It was too long, too much, and too boring, particularly when you consider that a secret meeting between the enigmatic Professor Severus Snape and two Death-Eaters soon follows. The latter scene is fast-paced, interesting, and effectively sets up circumstances that are the very meat of the movie. Pretty waitresses and the magical cleaning up of a house seem pretty draggy when such a crackling interchange is waiting in the wings. As far as I'm concerned, that's where they should have started the movie.
I enjoy humor as much as the next person. In fact, I take heat from time to time about laughing at things that are really pretty stupid (at a meeting today, for example, the word "oral" kept coming up, and I just giggled like an adolescent every time). Furthermore, I realize that any accurate depiction of teenagers is impossible without dumb jokes, particularly of the sexual variety (Harry and Ginny go alone to a secret room to hide a book and, when they return to their friends, are asked, "Did you do it?"), and I laughed as hard as anyone at these little zingers last night ... but I know that if I see the movie again, I'll know the jokes already and will just find them stale and kind of a detraction from the story. Half Blood Prince is extremely plot-driven; I don't think you need excessive sophomoric humor to entertain your audience.
Finally, I noticed when leaving the theater in a huge throng of people that several people were saying, "So who was the half blood prince? How did Harry get his book? Why does this matter?" and so on and so forth. Since I've read the book I had a deeper understanding and, while I don't expect filmmakers to elaborate in a way that is far easier to do through the written word, it bugged me that several major parts of the story were glossed over as almost an afterthought. The half blood prince, his annotated potions book that serves Harry very well, and the explanation for why he took on that dubious nickname are the sort of details that make the book a rich, thought-provoking experience. Yeah,not so much in the movie.
Other than those three criticisms, though (and remember, those criticisms are solely my own and I freely confess to having a bias against film adaptations of books I loved), it was very well done. If you haven't seen it yet, definitely make it a point to do so. You'll be glad you did, and it might even look something like this ...
.JPG)
I thought it was excellent, but it displayed one of the things that has bugged me about all of the movies-leaving out things that may not be crucial at the time, but are futuristically important. For instance leaving quidditch out of the 5th movie...didn't the non-book audience wonder why Ron was suddenly on the team and had nerves that warranted the "felix slip"? How did Lupin know how to work the Marauder's Map in the 3rd movie? Didn't anyone wonder why Lupin and Tonks were suddenly married after never even sharing a scene? Not major problems, but I see 2 upcoming. Since they eliminated the other memories and pointed out that horcruxes can be anything, how is Harry going to know what to look for in the next movie? Is it going to be like Ron being the keeper, where he just suddenly knows and the readers have to explain it to the non-readers? My other problem is with the elimination of Dobby from the series. His important plot points (gillyweed and the Room of Requirement) were easily handed off to Neville in the movies and it worked, but I think the point of him (and SPEW) was to keep house-elves in the reader's mind. Dobby's important role in Malfoy's basement in book 7 can't be done by a wizard-it has to be a house-elf. From the moviegoer's perspective, house-elves are probably forgotten.
ReplyDeleteThat said, I did like the movie very much!
I just read another blog review who's comment was "Eh!". She also thought key parts were left out, but liked the movie over all.
ReplyDeleteYou can really tell when someone has read a book that a movie was adapted from because a reviewer on a local tv station said it was an "awesome movie". He couldn't say enough about it.
I went to the midnight premiere too, and I agree very much with your analysis. Although, the beginning didn't bother me much, it was the end. I don't want to spoil anything, but they cut out a pretty big chunk of the end. And I don't care if the movie strays from the book; I just thought the book ending in that case gave more closure.
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed the movie as a movie. As a film adaptation of a cherished book series, I felt the movie fell short. It forgot it's purpose. Where was the details of Tom Riddles life? You know, the important stuff that was supposed to help Harry learn to defeat Voldemort? They delved into only two memories, and then spent the rest of the time on the love aspect. I was slightly annoyed.
ReplyDeleteAlas, it will never be perfect. I did enjoy it and braved the "Harry Potter Hangover" too.
Thanks for sharing your review.
My yearbook students and I went to the movie last night after yearbook camp was over (what else do you do with teens in a strange town?)
ReplyDeleteI couldn't agree more. And all of them agreed to (they are all fans of the book...and I, like you, fought and fought reading them until my brother convinced me, and then loved them.)
I had these same issues. I missed all the "Half-Blood Prince" development too.