The Half-Blood Prince

[poliphilo]

The earlier movies are too reverential towards the books- and move too fast (at the expense of pacing and texture) because they feel bound to cram in as much of the plot and incidental detail as they possibly can. Half-Blood Prince doesn't make these mistakes. It takes a strimmer to what is possibly the weakest book in the series, foregrounds a handful of its huge cast, makes good use of Jim Broadbent, handles the theme of burgeonng sexuality better than Rowling does, gives Ginny Weasely something interesting to do and establishes a glooming atmosphere of suspense.  Considered simply as a piece of movie-making, it's  the best so far. It doesn't overdo the CGI. And if you narrowed your eyes and overlooked the silly costumes you might even think you were watching a straightforward (or not so straightforward) romantic thriller in the vein of Hitchcock's Rebecca.

Comments

[mamadar.livejournal.com]

I just watched HBP last weekend and then went to see Deathly Hallows part one last night. I have to agree that HBP might be the best movie of the lot, and Broadbent is very good and very important as
Slughorn.

DH is an excellent movie, engaging, affecting, with some beautiful landscapes and plenty of moments to weep over, particularly toward the end. After not having read the last three books, I found myself caring about the characters again. And I adore Luna Lovegood.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

I haven't seen Deathly Hallows yet. I don't get to the cinema these days, so I'm always playing catch up.

Luna is my favourite character. I wish Harry had ended up with her instead of the bland (though not so bland in the movies) Ginny Weaseley.

[mamadar.livejournal.com]

Ha, I said much the same thing about Harry and Luna over dinner after the movie last night.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

Ginny Weaseley is one of Rowling's failures. She's like a Victorian heroine- entirely sweet and null. Rowling never gets us to understand what Harry sees in her.