Dumbledore and Harry: an evil-fightin’ duo.
(out of 4)
There are basically two philosophies for adapting books to film, filmmakers attempt either a point-for-point replication on screen, in which each point of the book is seen on screen, or a major points interpretation, in which scenes are added and subtracted but the book’s major plot points are retained. The former only works with certain kinds of books (see Cormac McCarthy’s No Country for Old Men) and the latter, due to length of book or difficulty in filming, requires added scenes, subtracted scenes, and merged scenes. The first couple Harry Potter films attempted a point-for-point adaptation and as a result they felt tedious and often boring, because, among other things, book pacing and movie pacing are different. However, the most recent films in the Potter franchise have been forced away from the point-for-point adaptation model because of the increasing lengths of the books on which they’re based. So it was expected that the sixth installment of J.K. Rowling’s beloved series, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, would follow that trend and it does not disappoint.
By leaving out some of the less important subplots from the novel (Potter fans, get your stones ready), director David Yates and company have been able to make a strong film that focuses on the main plot points (which won’t be discussed in this review) of the book while retaining its mood and tone. Many fans consider Half-Blood Prince to be the darkest volume in the series and the movie captures that well. And in a smart move, they slice the darkness with just the right amount of comedy, which reminds us that our heroes are still teenagers and keeps the film a family friendly affair.
Speaking of our teenage heroes, the acting is much better this time around. While the adult acting, relying on many talented British actors, has always been fine in the Potter films, the youth actors have often turned it stiff performances, this has been particularly noted in the past regarding Emma Watson’s portrayal of Hermione. Watson is much improved this time around, as are most of the young actors. It might be overlooked, however, because Half-Blood Prince is practically stolen by the terrific Jim Broadbent who brings to life one of the funniest and saddest characters in the Potter series, Professor Horace Slughorn. With a single facial expression he elicited laughter from the entire audience in the theater.
Yet, not all will look as favorably upon this film as I have. Many fans of the book will be displeased with the changes made to certain crucial scenes (particularly near the end of the film). Though other scenes, like the creepy cave scene, are so perfectly captured from the book that I felt as if I had seen them before. Though there were a few changes I wish hadn’t been made (like the laughably short amount of time given to explaining the film’s title), the risks taken have made Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince into a strong film, one that fans and newcomers alike can enjoy on hot, summer afternoons.
I suppose it’s only fitting that the best Harry Potter novel would also become the best Harry Potter film (so far). But who knows, with David Yates at the helm for Potter installments 7.1 and 7.2, fans of this endearing series can hope for something perhaps even more magical in the fall of 2010 and the spring of 2011.