Half-Blood Prince: The best movie yet, or a little half-brewed?
So I came home yesterday and saw this newspaper lying on my table waiting to be read. It has a huge picture of PGMA of the front page, apparently regarding the State of the Nation Address (SONA) that will take place on Monday. Err.. but that's what not what I want to talk about on this post, lol. Not that I don't like her or that I don't care about the country but.... Sheesh, don't let me explain. Haha Fine. I am not fond of politics. :D
Moving on, what interests me are these Potter film reviews that I found! Good read, really.
One from a teen writer and the other I guess is from a pro, or sort.
The first one says: "While I realize that it's impossible to squish every little detail of HP6 into a two-hour movie, I do know the story well enough to discern which parts matter, and which parts can understandably be omitted for filming purposes. That being said, the movie in itself isn't a complete waste of time." Of course, it isn't a waste of time. And just like before, we can't expect, well it is really impossible for the movies to stick with the whole book.There are these disappointment but fortunately, somehow some part of it gives us satisfaction. Both the reviewers showed disappointment with the lack of focus on Snape-is-the-Half-Blood-Prince thing. But said that Alan Rickman gave a very splendid performance.
As for the individual performances, the younger reviewer mentioned how Daniel Radcliffe's acting "doesn't evolve beyond the emotional range of a teaspoon", and Bonnie Wright gave a "sup-par depiction" of Ginny Weasley and that the HP veterans really did well, Gambon, Rickman, etc.
"Rupert Grint did a stellar job of capturing Ron Weasley's sardonic sense of humor and bumbling lack of subtlety, with Jessie Cave milking Lavender Brown's over-enthusiastic advances for all it was worth." How I love reading praises for Rupert, lol. But indeed, they really did a great job on it.
There's also a deeper explanation given by the other reviewer as he elaborated on the movie's "pluses and minuses." He even said, "Yates succeeds for the most part in condensing the first several chapters of the book in a few minutes of screen time. In some instances, he even improves on Rowling, avoiding the more implausible devices she resorts to, to create or resolve plot difficulties."
"He arranges elements in a scene with the eye of a still-life painter, juxtaposing images to good effect. In an early scene, for example, Harry and his friends Hermione and Ron have a laugh. The laughter echoes as the camera slowly closes up on a picture of an unsmiling Draco printed on a page of the Daily Prophet, its edges on fire." This is actually one of those few Trio moments on HBP that I loved. Awesome.
What I kind of didn't agree on was when he said that the Non-Potter readers who has watched the movie was left befuddled and disoriented when I think that it is a Muggle-friendly movie. For my friends anyway.
"There is on departure from the book, however, that is especially felicitous. And it is a scene that Yates invented. Harry spends the holiday with the Weasleys, but he gets an unexpected visit from the Death Eaters... ...the scene affords viewers a brief but exciting wizard battle and economically obviates the one that Rowling puts in the end of the book, which had it been filmed would have been predictable and even clunky. But the scene does more than that. When, in the last 20 minutes of the movie, Dumbledore creates a protective ring of fire around Harry and himself as they cross a lake infested with Gollum-like creatures, the scene with the Weasleys is recalled as an ironic counterpoint." I think Yates has already explained the need for the addition of the Burrow's Attack scene in the movie on a recent interview that has surfaced online and can be read here so I won't elaborate much on that.
In the end, it's just their opinion, what matters most is what we think about it, ourselves. Did we like it? Was it the best or in the reviewer's term, a little half-brewed? (Me, again, I LOVED IT.)
This last one, we might all agree on.
"You can hate it or love it, criticize or praise it - either way, it's a movie that shouldn't be missed. On principle, I mean. You know, just because it's Harry Potter."
Moving on, what interests me are these Potter film reviews that I found! Good read, really.
One from a teen writer and the other I guess is from a pro, or sort.
The first one says: "While I realize that it's impossible to squish every little detail of HP6 into a two-hour movie, I do know the story well enough to discern which parts matter, and which parts can understandably be omitted for filming purposes. That being said, the movie in itself isn't a complete waste of time." Of course, it isn't a waste of time. And just like before, we can't expect, well it is really impossible for the movies to stick with the whole book.There are these disappointment but fortunately, somehow some part of it gives us satisfaction. Both the reviewers showed disappointment with the lack of focus on Snape-is-the-Half-Blood-Prince thing. But said that Alan Rickman gave a very splendid performance.
As for the individual performances, the younger reviewer mentioned how Daniel Radcliffe's acting "doesn't evolve beyond the emotional range of a teaspoon", and Bonnie Wright gave a "sup-par depiction" of Ginny Weasley and that the HP veterans really did well, Gambon, Rickman, etc.
"Rupert Grint did a stellar job of capturing Ron Weasley's sardonic sense of humor and bumbling lack of subtlety, with Jessie Cave milking Lavender Brown's over-enthusiastic advances for all it was worth." How I love reading praises for Rupert, lol. But indeed, they really did a great job on it.
There's also a deeper explanation given by the other reviewer as he elaborated on the movie's "pluses and minuses." He even said, "Yates succeeds for the most part in condensing the first several chapters of the book in a few minutes of screen time. In some instances, he even improves on Rowling, avoiding the more implausible devices she resorts to, to create or resolve plot difficulties."
"He arranges elements in a scene with the eye of a still-life painter, juxtaposing images to good effect. In an early scene, for example, Harry and his friends Hermione and Ron have a laugh. The laughter echoes as the camera slowly closes up on a picture of an unsmiling Draco printed on a page of the Daily Prophet, its edges on fire." This is actually one of those few Trio moments on HBP that I loved. Awesome.
What I kind of didn't agree on was when he said that the Non-Potter readers who has watched the movie was left befuddled and disoriented when I think that it is a Muggle-friendly movie. For my friends anyway.
"There is on departure from the book, however, that is especially felicitous. And it is a scene that Yates invented. Harry spends the holiday with the Weasleys, but he gets an unexpected visit from the Death Eaters... ...the scene affords viewers a brief but exciting wizard battle and economically obviates the one that Rowling puts in the end of the book, which had it been filmed would have been predictable and even clunky. But the scene does more than that. When, in the last 20 minutes of the movie, Dumbledore creates a protective ring of fire around Harry and himself as they cross a lake infested with Gollum-like creatures, the scene with the Weasleys is recalled as an ironic counterpoint." I think Yates has already explained the need for the addition of the Burrow's Attack scene in the movie on a recent interview that has surfaced online and can be read here so I won't elaborate much on that.
In the end, it's just their opinion, what matters most is what we think about it, ourselves. Did we like it? Was it the best or in the reviewer's term, a little half-brewed? (Me, again, I LOVED IT.)
This last one, we might all agree on.
"You can hate it or love it, criticize or praise it - either way, it's a movie that shouldn't be missed. On principle, I mean. You know, just because it's Harry Potter."
Nox.
Review excerpts from:
The Philippine Star
Friday, July 24, 2009
Sections E-1, G-1.
(Thank you.)
HOW ADORABLE ARE RUPERT AND EMMA IN THAT PIC? VERY.
ReplyDeleteof course I focused on the most important aspect of this blog entry. lol
ReplyDeleteLOL! but I have to agree, they are VERY ADORABLE in the pic! :D
ReplyDeleteHahaha. Reacted on the pic!
ReplyDeleteReaaaally cute. Haha! Good times.
ReplyDelete