That’s my rating for Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, which released to U.S. moviegoers earlier this week. If you haven’t yet watched the film and you don’t wish to be spoiled, then I suggest you find another blog to read because I’ve got loads to say here.
…
So, let’s clear the negatives out of the way first. Two and a half hours is enough time to tell a good story and there were plenty of scenes faithful to J.K. Rowling’s sixth installment of the (brilliantly written) book series. And yet the omission of two vital portions of the story made the film seem a bit off. I can’t believe that the movie left out the entire Gaunt-Riddle family history. Not a single mention of Marvolo and his children, Morfin and Merope! Apparently the filmmakers thought it enough to just present young Tom Riddle as a freaky paranoid orphan who likes to make “bad things happen to people”. Moviegoers not savvy with the books never learned about how he ended up in an orphanage to begin with. A shame, since I thought that part of the story was most enlightening.
Now, I understand time may have been a factor in omitting the House of Gaunt Pensieve scene, but really, they could’ve at least have Dumbledore tell Harry a bit of that family history. Right before he dives into the orphanage memory? To set up the context? Hmm???
The other glaring omission? The big fight scene at the foot of the tower between the Death Eaters and the Order of the Phoenix. What a shame to rob the good guys, Neville in particular, of some very exciting action! (By the way, Neville was virtually absent in this film. Never mind that he was once considered by Voldemort as a potential threat because he and Harry share a birthday) I thought it was interesting that the movie showed Aurors at Hogwarts but failed to show them actually protecting the school grounds. Death Eaters sneaking around at will, being led by Malfoy to the tower to kill Dumbledore – and not a single Auror stood in their way? Ridiculous. A very bad omission, in my opinion.
Anyway, I still gave the film a largely positive 4 out of 5. Acting played a large part in that.
Tom Felton deserves praise for adding depth to Draco Malfoy. The character was always a subtle threat in the book series, and in The Half-Blood Prince we see him emerge as a sort of wild card. Someone to keep an eye on. Felton played Draco faithfully and believably. By the way, I liked how the movie confirms suspicions that Draco was recruited to be a Death Eater. That revelation helped to explain Draco’s actions throughout the story.
Hats off to Jim Broadbent for his portrayal of Professor Slughorn. The book made much of Slughorn’s indulgence but Broadbent added a melancholy tinge to the aged professor. Watching him on screen, I couldn’t help but notice that hidden inside the proud old wizard was a man ashamed of some deep, dark secret. Perhaps that was why he surrounded himself with upstanding witches and wizards? That was never mentioned in the book, and yet Broadbent’s performance hinted so greatly at this theory. It was brilliant.
And what can I say? I’m a big fan of Helena Bonham-Carter and I was actually glad that the filmmakers tweaked the story a bit to show more of her maniacal character, Bellatrix Lestrange. Helena will always creep me out when she plays evil characters. Don’t get me started on the reasons why. I could write a treatise on how amazing this actress is when she gets a role as a sly, taunting foil.
For the rest of the young actors, Radcliffe, Watson, Grint, Bonnie Wright’s breakout performance as the headstrong Ginny Weasley, and Evanna Lynch’s adept spaciness as Luna Lovegood – I tip my hat to them all. They’ve really grown into their roles so well.
So there it is. My big write-up on the sixth Potter film. I think I’m going to watch it again in the upcoming days. The Half-Blood Prince was my favorite volume in the series and one can never indulge too much on a favorite.
