Sorry. I wrote that without knowing that 'The Half-Blood Prince' wasn't the one that was divided in two.
I'm pretty astonished at the choice to do this movie like they did. For all its meandering, and it does that quite a bit, I have to stand firmly and say that this was the first movie to actually make me care about the characters. I want to clarify what I did say that you responded to:
but really the fact that it's so overlong and inexplicably faithful to source material BEGGING for a looser adaptation is unforgivable.
Faithful to the book? I would say quite the contrary.
I have no way of knowing that it's faithful to the book. In fact, I know so little about that that I assumed this was the first half of it. What I will say is that no matter how much was left out, clearly not enough was changed. So that it became a movie. My chief criticism derives from the lack of alteration, not too much adherence to source material, which, now that I know the back story of which I'd made a conscious decision to avoid all year, makes more sense.
Faithful to the book? I would say quite the contrary. It left out a large number of character developing stories, include some rather silly segments that don't further the story.
Wesley Lovell
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin
I did. And there's only one reason: it's the longest first act I've ever seen. I actually I enjoyed this film once I got past a certain stretch of introduction, but really the fact that it's so overlong and inexplicably faithful to source material BEGGING for a looser adaptation is unforgivable. On the other hand, I like this one enough to go see The Order of the Phoenix so...yeah, can't give it a 6.5. More like a very pleasantly surprised B- because the typical Harry Potter nonsense plot is barely existent.
More in my review, but this is the weakest entry since Sorcerer's Stone, IMO. Not nearly as atmospheric as I was hoping, had a lot of completely superfluous scenes and took 2 and a half hours of good pacing to give you about 1 hour's worth of story.
Wesley Lovell
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (David Yates) - 6
Yup. I actually enjoyed it. But far too violent and dark for children! I don't think they'll mind that this doesn't make a lot of sense. They're just enjoy watching their favorite characters on the screen appear to talk about things that matter.
The Midnight Meat Train (2008) Ryuhei Kitamura 1/10
Righteous Kill (2008) Jon Avnet 2/10
Mother (2009) Joon-ho Bong 8/10
Edited By Precious Doll on 1247571804
"I want cement covering every blade of grass in this nation! Don't we taxpayers have a voice anymore?" Peggy Gravel (Mink Stole) in John Waters' Desperate Living (1977)
Wow. What a triumph. I watched this on hulu on a whim and was totally engrossed from frame one. This is textbook screenwriting proficiency and a director who knows exactly the nature of this hokum. Every performance seems perfectly calibrated of the Hitchcock era, especially the performances by Jacobi and the hilariously poker-faced Branagh. Wisely, nobody really asks too many questions about why any of this is happening. Excellent score, cinematography, editing, et al. The movie doesn't seem to know what to do with itself at the very end but it's a hugely entertaining piece of work.
You just don't see this kind of stage business anymore. The double time towards the end was kind of ridiculous, though. Probably my second favorite Jimmy Stewart movie so far, behind Harvey.
"It's the least most of us can do, but less of us will do more."
"I want cement covering every blade of grass in this nation! Don't we taxpayers have a voice anymore?" Peggy Gravel (Mink Stole) in John Waters' Desperate Living (1977)
