'Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince:' Gorgeous, funny and unfaithful
Every time a new “Harry Potter” film is released, fans hold their collective breath. Will it do the book justice? Or will it trample over J. K. Rowling’s near-flawless story?
The results have always been a mixture of the two—though all five films have differed from the corresponding books, the vast majority of these differences have been minor, even negligible, making way for some very good—and great—films.
“Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince,” directed once more by David Yates, is perhaps the first film to diverge from the novel in ways that are central to the plot of the entire series. Though it is at times a superior film to the previous five, “Half-Blood Prince” will leave fans wondering how the two remaining movies can possibly clean up this mess.
To give credit where it is due: “Half-Blood Prince” contains some of the best character portrayals in the series. As Professor Slughorn, Jim Broadbent’s mannerisms are priceless and not only bring J. K. Rowling’s character to life, but improve him. Jessie Cave plays Lavender Brown, Ron’s lovesick caricature of a first girlfriend, perfectly. When Dumbledore (Michael Gambon) displays his first moments of weakness, it is appropriately heartrending. And Tom Felton nails the terrified, desperate, trapped Draco Malfoy— a feat, considering how one-dimensional Malfoy’s character has been up until now.
The first half of “Half-Blood Prince,” before the essential plot points are revealed, is more light-hearted than it should be considering the backdrop: Lord Voldemort and his posse of evil minions have just gone public and are sparing no one in their renewed havoc-wreaking. But Harry (Daniel Radcliffe), Hermione (Emma Watson) and Ron (Rupert Grint) still have time to laugh — and “Half-Blood Prince” is indeed funny, inspiring more genuine laugh-out-loud moments than any “Harry Potter” film yet.
The visuals, which are captivating, become more or less subdued according to the events that are unfolding on screen. Quidditch is vibrant, while memories of young Voldemort (played in turn by Hero Fiennes-Tiffin and Frank Dillane) are dull, shot primarily in tones of brown and gray.
And then the plot begins to thicken, in all the wrong ways.
The most grievous offenders of this are Voldemort and the Horcruxes. The latter are some of the most significant objects in the series, and by the end of the “Half-Blood Prince” book, it is clear that the fate of the Horcruxes will decide the fate of Harry himself.
But it is doubtful that an audience not well-versed in “Harry Potter” lore would understand the gravity of the situation based solely on the film. Horcruxes are mentioned, sure, and they are said to be important, but because such a small amount of screen time is devoted to them, their description isn’t all that convincing. (Neither is the fact that Dumbledore supposedly didn’t see this coming.)
Voldemort, for his part, gets a raw deal. While much of the novel is dedicated to fleshing out the Dark Lord’s enigmatic life, the film leaves it shrouded in almost as much mystery as it was at the end of the previous installment. We meet young Voldemort (known then as Tom Riddle) by delving into Dumbledore’s and then Slughorn’s memories, but only the bare bones of Riddle’s life are presented. His character is stripped of the complexity that makes him such a great villain in the novels.
One other difference is worth noting because in this rare case, it likely has a greater effect on those who have not read the books. That Draco Malfoy is up to something nefarious, and what exactly that is, is revealed to the viewer early on in the film, whereas in the book, getting to the bottom of Malfoy’s scheme provides much of the suspense of the story. When Malfoy finally succeeds, the big screen result is an anticlimax, which is puzzling—one would think that a gripping mystery and final battle would be the last thing removed from Rowling’s book for its film adaptation.
In the end, the only mystery remaining is how in the world Yates and company will wrap this up in a way that does justice to the books. Two movies remain — the seventh and final book will be divided into two films — but much of what defines the series’ end (the Horcruxes are only one example among many) has been altered beyond recognition.
As a film, “Half-Blood Prince” is gorgeous, witty and at times, moving. As a “Harry Potter” film, it completely misses the point.
Movie Review
“Harry Potter and the Half–Blood Prince”
★★½ (Out of four) ; Rated: PG
Daniel Radcliffe, above, Emma Watson, center, Rupert Grint, Michael Gambon, left, Tom Felton and Jim Broadbent in David Yates’ film adaptation of “Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince,” the sixth novel in the “Harry Potter” series by J.K. Rowling. Opens today.
Log into MyBuffalo to post a comment
MyBuffalo is the new social network from Buffalo.com. Your MyBuffalo account lets you comment on and rate stories at buffalonews.com. You can also head over to mybuffalo.com to share your blog posts, stories, photos, and videos with the community. Join now or learn more.
Reader comments