Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince Review

Hey, I have a good idea.  Let's take a bunch of horny teenagers and teach them how to use strong love potions.  That won't cause problems at all.  Seriously, though.  This installment of the Harry Potter story takes the same formula but then changes how it uses that.  There's the obligatory new year at Hogwarts with the new teacher that we have to learn about.  There's a self contained story that is used to move the much larger saga along.  But what is different about this one is that it is a bridge piece.  While they have the two levels of the story in this one, they were much more intertwined and reliant on each other than in the past movies which is what I wanted.

While all of the stories do bridge together the whole epic tale, I really got the feeling that JK Rowling didn't have the final pieces in her mind as to how the whole thing would unfold and end until the Order of the Phoenix.  I do believe that it was always going to have an end because Messianic stories of good vs evil have to.  There can never be a story like that without an end in sight.  Order of the Phoenix ended with basically a vow for the kids to defeat Voldemort.  Because these stories are so detailed and have fairly intricate plots with many characters, she couldn't just jump into the finale.  That would cause too many questions and holes.  So, this bridge story leading to the final battle had to occur.  And, as with most bridge stories, there seem to be more questions than before.  But now these new questions can be answered in an "all will be revealed" finale because they are questions that now have planned answers.

As bridge pieces go, this one is quite good.  Instead of using too many characters and plot points as they seemed to do in the previous movies, it seemed to be more focused on what I can only assume will be the more important people and themes in the finale.  After six stories, it seems like Harry Potter finally has some consistent direction.

Technically, the film is strong.  As with all of the others, the acting is very good and the effects are top notch.  The addition of Jim Broadbent was a really nice touch and he suited the role very well.  I would have like to have seen more of Robbie Coltrane but it would have probably distracted from the "Harry and Dumbledore" plot that was pretty important.  But what really stikes me after watching six of them is how well the film makers and Rowling have captured life in a boarding school.  I went to boarding school for three years and they are spot on.  There are cliques and awkward kids, superstars and every day joes, kids visiting late at night in dorm rooms and cacophony in the cafeteria.  But in this one, they do an awesome job of capturing the teen angst that comes with matters of the heart and seeing someone you want to spend time with enjoying someone else's company (something I experienced all too much in high school - but you're a blog reader, not my therapist so I won't dwell on that).  Let's just say that almost everything in all these movies that happens in the school is incredibly accurate when you strip away the magic.

See it.  Even though it can get a bit confusing and leaves you with questions, it is a fast paced movie with a really good story.  Next to Goblet of Fire, it is the best of the bunch so far.

Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix Review

When these films and books were current, I basically ignored any publicity surrounding them because I just didn't find it interesting.  Since then, I have not really researched what the public opinion was so I do not know for sure.  But there had to be some controversy surrounding censorship and possible banning of JK Rowling's work.  Because, Order of the Phoenix, she pulls out all the stops and doesn't even try to hide her political views on censorship.  Right from the start and throughout the whole movie, it is one big argument for freedom of speech and expression and allowing people to pursue who they are and their own path.

Do not get me wrong.  I am not complaining.  Even though I don't care for political agendas in my entertainment, this one is done very well.  The character development and story progression with this theme is done in such a way that it invokes the intended emotions from the viewer.  I wanted Dolores Umbridge to get what was coming to her and, by the time that is settled, I actually found myself taking pleasure in the fact that she was being dragged off by Centaurs into the dark forest (something I am not proud of considering how dark these movies are.  Who knows what they would do to her?).  In addition to that, they also do a good job of keeping a lot of it light through the story development montage and I found myself laughing out loud at some of the antics.  Most of the time, when you can make the viewer feel a lot of different emotions so strongly, I feel it is a good movie.

Order of the Phoenix is a lot like the Goblet of Fire though.  It follows the formula of the Harry Potter stories by having a self-contained main story that moves a bit slowly and weakly moves the overall saga along.  Then, with about 1/4 of the movie left, it wraps together and the overall good vs evil saga moves forward more.  For me, this makes the Potter movies a bit weak.  I would prefer if the self contained stories were more interwoven with the overall saga rather than have a movie then part of a bigger movie.  But that does not outweigh the all around great acting, superb effects and excellent casting.  I prefer the Goblet of Fire due to subject matter only.  Order of the Phoenix takes the same formula and produces just as good a movie.

See it.  It's a very good movie.

At this point, I feel I should address the controversy with Christianity surrounding the Potter story.  (I did hear a lot about this because I don't live under a rock.)  (You must also know that I am a Christian and firmly hold my beliefs close to my heart.  But I also live objectively and understand that not everyone shares my beliefs.)  I do see some similarities between the two with the impending apocalyptic struggle between good and evil and a young "messiah" given the task to defeat evil.  But that is where the similarities end.  In Christianity, there is no metaphysical connection between Christ and the devil.  Yes, the devil has minions and Christ has followers and Christ had a crisis of fulfillment of purpose that Potter feels.  But I do not believe Christ struggled with who he fundamentally was at any time.  Christ knew His purpose right from the beginning and had no confusion about how to go about fulfilling His destiny.  He did have an issue with whether or not He was able to go through with it or if He could just give up. While both heroes struggle, they are struggling in very different ways.  Honestly, if the parallel was intended by Ms. Rowling, she did a very poor job of portraying it.  The differences are just too numerous.

The Potter movies are just stories of good vs evil.  Nothing more.  And these morality plays have been told over and over.  Some have been controversial and some have been well received.  Nobody I know attacks the Chronicles of Narnia even though they are actively a retelling of the Great Controversy using magic and fantasy and are not just a parallel of the same overlying theme.  If anything, the Potter movies (especially Order of the Phoenix) are a retelling of Star Wars.  The movie poster (see above) even calls it the Rebellion.  In this film we even get the Obi Wan vs Darth Vader fight while Luke watches.  And they talk about people having both dark and light in them and what they choose is what matters.  This is a struggle that many people believe in.  Whether you think it is two metaphysical forces in the universe (Star Wars and Harry Potter) or a greater struggle between intelligent beings that we are caught in the middle of (Christianity) is up to you.

The Potter saga isn't original.  This story has been told since we were able to communicate.  It also isn't an attack on Christianity or any other religion.  It is just another way to tell the morality story in a way that children and other young people can relate and will pay attention.

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire Review

If you're going to have to raise up this child prodigy wizard to defeat the most evil wizard the world has ever known, you should maybe try some consistency with your Defense Against the Dark Arts teacher.  That seems like it might be an important skill to develop.  It appears that these movies are going to have the formula of a new one each time.  To me, that takes a bit away from the flow of the entire story and makes it a bit too predictable.  Going in, you know that the new teacher is going to be a problem for Harry and there's really no surprise.

But that's really the only thing wrong with the fourth movie in the series.  Because Harry and his friends are growing up, they (thankfully) have gotten rid of all the little tidbits that children will titter over (like "all exams are cancelled" and "eating chocolate helps").  Instead, they have focused more on the growth of Harry and his own personal struggle with good and evil.  You can see him developing a crisis of conscience.  He's a teenager with incredible power and he seems to take some pleasure in using that power regardless of the consequences to other people.  This makes it a much more enjoyable movie for an adult to watch.  There really is no kids element to this one.  It is way darker and adult oriented than I thought it would be.  As the target audience for Potter grew up though, so did the themes of the stories.

They've still made the same mistakes in adapting such long books to the big screen.  I'm assuming that the books take a long time for character introduction, descriptions and story progression.  They are keeping a little too much of that in the movies and the film slows down.  However, this was needed in the first one to set the stage.  They kept it in the second and third ones which was a mistake.  They've kept the slow story progression in the fourth but they have dropped a lot of the introductory and extraneous stuff and made a much tighter movie with some really good suspense.  In fact, the last 30 minutes or so of this film are very, very tense and fun to watch.  The drawback though is that the two elements of the story are not woven together well.  They have the whole Tri-Wizard cup story and then they have the bigger Voldemoort story that is the plot of the entire saga.  They keep these a little too separate and it makes the film feel a bit disjointed.

But the bottom line on this one is that the tension and effects keep you riveted and it doesn't feel as long as it is.  The technical aspects, while nothing to write home about, are all solid enough to not distract you.  But the most compelling aspect of this movie is that the tension keeps building.  It doesn't start to taper off so your adrenaline builds a lot to the climax and you come away from that scene with the "wow" factor.

See it.

Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban Review

The mind of JK Rowling: "OK.  I've got to get this twit of a wizard child out of his abusive extended family and on his journey to Hogwarts again.  How shall I do it?  I know!  A bus.  But ... I'll make it ... a TRIPLE decker bus!  Oh, my.  How delightful.  And I'll include a shrunken Jamaican head just for shits and giggles."  Once you get past the eye rolling and ridiculous opening, the movie settles in like the two before it.  It is very episodic and takes forever to get going.  Each time, they waste a good 15 minutes reintroducing everyone and getting them on their way to the same place for the same stuff.  It works in books to do this re-exposition.  But in the movies, re-write it and, by the third one, assume your audience has had the sense to get themselves caught up.

Unlike the first two, though, when this one gets going, it actually doesn't get going.  When you make a movie that is over two hours long, you really need to make it entertaining to keep the audience's attention. In this one, by the time we figured out what the hell was going on, the end credits were starting.  It's so convoluted and indecisive that I just gave up halfway through and decided to just enjoy the scenery and effects.

Those are really the only redeeming qualities for Prisoner.  Visually, it is a very beautiful movie.  The effects are nearly flawless and the CGI and set design are great to watch.  And Alan Rickman and Robbie Coltrane deliver their usual strong performances.  Those flying wraith things (Dementios or something like that) are bone chilling and remind you that these really aren't kids movies.  But then, they claim that eating chocolate helps when you encounter one and it becomes a kids movie again.  And I think that may be my biggest beef with these stories.  Make up your mind.  Is it a dark fight between good and evil or is it a delightful little romp of adolescent wizards making mischief and experiencing these little anecdotes and tips for how the viewer/reader should live and enjoy life?  For all three so far, they go back and forth.

Finally, I was very disappointed to find that Gary Oldman didn't show up outside of the wanted posters until it was over half done and I had lost interest.  I thought they were really going to add some Hollywood clout to this with a tremendous actor.  But, instead, he comes late and gets very little screen time which is a shame.  I know: that's what the character is and they needed to stick to it.  But it was still a disappointment.

I will continue to watch them though because I want to give them a chance and I've been told that they get progressively better.  But, in my own experience, while they are getting better visually, they are getting worse in their story telling.  Hopefully Goblet of Fire will get us back on track.

Don't see it.  Obviously, if you want to do the whole gamut, you'll have to.  But I really cannot recommend it.

Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets Review

If you're going to steal a character from the Star Wars movies, why would you steal the annoying one that absolutely nobody liked?  Man, that Dobby was annoying just like that idiot, Jar Jar Binks.  And he really set the stage for me in this one. From the outset, it seemed kind of ridiculous.  It was as if they were saying, "hey, look at all the cool new magic things we've added to this."  I know it's based on a book so I cannot blame it solely on the film makers.  But I don't know how much of it is JK Rowling's fault because I have not read the books.  I can only critique it as a movie.  So, rather than just tell a story, they keep all of this other, superfluous stuff and wind up with a movie that is really about 40 minutes too long.

Once they finally get the story moving (which, after two movies, would appear to be a common thing with these), it moves pretty slowly.  But I could have handled the slower pace if it had made any sense.  For the most part, this story is really convoluted and confusing.  As a result, there are times when they seem to have painted themselves into a corner.  Then, there's a way too convenient fix for the problem (ie. Phoenix tears).

I have yet to understand why Christian groups got their nuts in a knot over these stories.  Yes, I will concede that the magic goes against most Christian beliefs.  But there's no underlying attack on Christianity or religion that I can detect yet.  Maybe as the movies go on, I might piece some of that together if it exists.  But, if it isn't there, I won't try to force an analogy.  The religious groups need to start realizing that not everything is an allegory.  Sometimes this stuff is just a story.  Nothing more, nothing less.  I'd actually be more concerned about some of the action and story points being aimed at kids.  These stories seem to be pretty dark.  It's not the magic theme.  It's the giant talking spiders and evil snakes, etc.  In fact, I am finding that I will forget I'm watching a "kids" movie until Dumbledoor says something like "all exams are cancelled."  Then I just roll my eyes and try to remind myself that, when I was 12, I enjoyed things like the Hardy Boys and the Judo Yell (look it up) and thought they were mature reading.

I will say this though: the kids all grew as actors from the first one.  The effects were much better too.  It seemed like they took a bit more time and effort to make everything seem much more realistic.  But that is all overshadowed by, not a weak story, but a very poorly told one.

Finally, I just have to say that JK Rowling should have researched more what would make a good sport.  Quidditch makes absolutely no sense and, in the movies, it is just an excuse to have the kids fly around on brooms and flex the film maker's CGI muscles.  It's chaotic to the point of Aussie Rules Football.

If you want to follow the whole Harry Potter saga, you'll have to see it.  But, if you just want a decent fantasy movie, don't see it.  There's other fantasy movies out there that are better.  And I have to assume that, out of six more to go, there will be better ones in this series.

Slipstream Review

There is only one redeeming quality to this film.  The performance by Bob Peck is passable.  That is it.  The writing is incredibly bad.  The acting is pretty terrible.  That second one is surprising given that it has some fairly decent names in it.  But even the scenes with F Murray Abraham and Ben Kingsley were below what you would expect from them.  The effects and filming made it look like it was made around 1981 or 1982 but it was actually made in 1989.  That tells you how bad that part of it was.

They were trying to make a post-apocalyptic movie with some moral message about the fall of man and such but they never really fulfill that.  Right from the start, the movie is nothing but sad attempts at one liners from Bill Paxton and Mark Hammill.  The plot, if there even is one, is confusing and goes absolutely nowhere.  They wander around in these desolate wasteland settlements where there is no law and then, for some inexplicable reason, the group finds itself in a bit of a society with some order.  For the life of me I cannot remember how they got anywhere in the movie.  Granted, I was doing a lot of wisecracking with Karl during it.  But even when I do that, I can usually follow a movie this thin.

Don't see it.  There is really no reason at all to see it.  It isn't even entertaining for camp value.

Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone Review

A friend of mine once said that she couldn't watch Twilight because if she liked it, she'd have to admit it.  I felt the same way about Harry Potter and whenever people asked me if I liked Harry Potter, I would respond with, "No.  Because I'm neither 12 years old nor a dork."  I will admit it here:  I was wrong.  Normally, I am not a huge fan of fantasy but this is a very good movie.  Don't get me wrong.  I'm not going to rush out and buy the books (especially because I can borrow them from my brother if I ever change my mind and want to read them).  But I do think JK Rowling is a genius.  She took what I can only assume is going to be a very complex saga and made it relevant to kids ("kids" for the purposes of Harry Potter includes about ages 10-15 I would think).  Not only is it relevant to kids but the books are long and so are the movies.  If you can keep a kid's attention during all of that, you've done something significant.  But, as an aside, I do think some of the subject matter is a bit dark for kids.  But the world has changed a lot since I was 11.  That, and I'm a bit of a wimp when it comes to scary stuff.

The most successful kids movies are the ones that can keep the attention of the adults as well.  Philosopher's Stone does that.  And for being the first in a series of 8 movies, that is saying something.  The movie is over two hours long and the real plot to the whole thing doesn't occur until there's only about 45 minutes left.  This is because it is an introductory piece.  They have to introduce all of the characters, the sport of Quidditch (or however the hell you spell that), the school, the concepts in wizardry, etc.  In this, I think they took a little too much time but they still keep you entertained.

The movie is now almost 11 years old and the effects show it.  There's still a lot of jerkiness in the flying around and the CGI is a bit dated.  But, for it's time, it was probably fantastic.  That being said, it did age OK.  I was looking for those things.  I think if you just sit back and enjoy it, you may not even notice. What really impressed me though was the casting.  I'm not at all familiar with the books so I don't know if the characters on screen are accurate at all.  But I do know that they were all very believable.  While I do think you could put the oversized John Lennon glasses on just about any 11 year old with a bowl haircut and they would pass for Harry Potter, the rest isn't that easy.  Alan Rickman and Robbie Coltrane are fantastic in their parts but that's expected from two very good actors.  The kids are all quite good given that their acting skills haven't developed fully.  The one I was least impressed with was Emma Watson but I'm sure I'll be able to see her improve in the next ones.  The most impressive choice though was Rupert Grint.  His facial expressions were absolutely perfect and I'm looking forward to seeing more of the three and how their relationship develops.

The only issue I had isn't really an issue but more of an observation.  The dynamic between Harry Potter, Ron Weasley and Draco Malfoy was so obviously a parallel to Maverick, Goose and Iceman from Top Gun.  If Emma Watson had become Kelly McGillis, I was going to start rolling my eyes.  Thankfully, that didn't happen.  I also thought the whole goblins as bankers had a bit of an air of anti-semitism to it.  But I'll let every viewer decide that for themselves.

Most of you have probably already seen it.  But I'm sure there's a lot of holdouts like me.  For those, I say see it.  Just know you are getting an introduction into the whole saga and not a self-contained movie.