GlassFire Magazine
Home Editorial Fiction Poetry Nonfiction Reviews Submissions Contact Us
Spoilers Below--If you haven't seen the film or read the book, turn back now!
So another Harry Potter movie has come and gone. With six out of the way and the last one (er, two—movie seven will be split into two movies since it has so much to cover), Harry Potter has become somewhat like that cliché saying about sex: even when it’s bad, it’s still good. That’s really how I feel about Half Blood Prince. It’s a Harry Potter movie, so of course it’s entertaining. However, it’s certainly not the best in the series. In fact, I would say it’s one of the weakest HP movies.
Let’s start with the changes the film made to the story. Of course, any movie based on a novel is going to have to make some adjustments to the storyline. J. K. Rowling’s huge novel was simply much too long to be perfectly adapted to the screen. However, I was disappointed in some of the changes. The beginning attacks on the Muggle world were very visual, and I think they got the movie off to a good start. The attack on the Weasley home, however, seemed rather odd. It didn’t really fit in with the story, and I was especially sad to see the Burrows burn down. I was also a bit confused about this—don’t these wizards know any spells to put out fires? True, it was a huge blaze, but I couldn’t help but wonder why they didn’t do something instead of just stand there and watch their beloved home burn.
The ending of the film fell very flat, as well. I’m not certain why the director (if it was he) chose to leave out the funeral and the final battle at Hogwarts. From what I’ve read, the official line is that the funeral didn’t fit with the rest of the movie and the battle of Hogwarts would make the ending of this film too much like the ending of Deadly Hallows. I can somewhat see the reasoning about the battle, but I think Dumbledore’s funeral was absolutely necessary. As it is, the concluding scene, while establishing Harry, Ron, and Hermione’s willingness to fight Voldemort to the end, still seems a bit abrupt. The film overall felt like it had no true conclusion. The same is somewhat true with the novel as well, but Dumbledore’s funeral did at least give us a sense of closure at the end. Here, we don’t really get that.
The acting from Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, and Emma Watson was, as always, very solid. I also thought Evanna Lynch did a great job as Luna Lovegood—in fact, a lot of people agree that she stole the show. Warwick Davis, one of my absolute favorite actors, got a few scenes as Flitwick, and even though it wasn’t a huge part, I was still happy to see him on screen.
The only actor I felt came in a little short was Michael Gambon as Dumbledore. Don’t get me wrong, he wasn’t absolutely horrible, but he seemed to be phoning in his performance in a few scenes. He came alive in the scene where he and Harry find the locket and battle the lake creatures (and did anyone else expect to hear them hissing “my preciousssss” during that scene?), but some of the other scenes weren’t quite as well done.
I also have issues with the casting of Helena Bonham Carter as Bellatrix Lestrange, but that’s no fault of hers. In fact, as a crazy, demented Bellatrix, she’s perfect. I just never pictured the character like that. I saw her more as a cold, calculating woman. This isn't really an issue with the movie...more an issue with the viewer, I think.
It may sound like I’m really nitpicking the movie to death, but I did really enjoy HBP. It’s one of the weaker Harry Potter movies, but it is an entertaining movie. Of course, you do need to have read the books to really understand what's going on. Like most of the HP movies, the film assumes you know the basic plot and characters. If you don't, you will probably be very lost, especially if you haven't seen the previous five movies. If you have, though, you'll enjoy the movie.