Harry Potter 6 Movie

[OldDog]

yeh see i was thinking the same... end the first half with the... tragedy that follows without giving out any spoilers

 

[The Procrastinator]

I just saw movie 6 and I have to say I was both impressed and disappointed. Firstly, some of the stuff showing the relationships between the kids was very well done, and the "lightness" or normalcy perhaps of these interactions went a long way towards making the Half-Blood Prince one of the my fave Potter books. But really its the balance that does it - the lightness of the teenage soapie stuff, balanced out by the darkness of the Dumbledore/Harry/Voldemort stuff and the Malfoy stuff. The movie, I feel, while lovely in sections (I liked all the Malfoy stuff for instance), failed to hang the whole story together with any sense of balance. So mostly, to me, it came out feeling like enjoyable fluff without much bottom.

The ending, however, was dire. Boring actually. No real emotion. It was done so much better in the book - why on earth couldn't they have done more with it? Minimalism is all very well, but who wants the feelings surrounding Dumbledore's death and aftermath "minimalised"? Not I. I think I need to watch it again, but while I enjoyed it as a "ride" (mostly) I fear I will end by thinking of this film as unsatisfying where it really counted...

 

[Cayal]

While I think it should have been called Harry Potter and the Battle of the Raging Hormones, I quite liked the movie (I was particularly fond of the harp music playing when Harry and Ginny were in the Room of Requirement).

Although I do agree the ending was quite nothing. It was just 'kill Dumbledore and flee', there was no real fighting.

 

[A.Ryan]

wow, totally disagree w/ paranoid marvin. I think the movies got way better after the second one. Love the darkness of them. There are plenty of fluffy kid movies out there. The sixth one though was a little too light for me - it mostly followed the one little plot line about love potions and love triangles - awkward to watch when it's about such young kids.

 

[Culhwch]

I saw it on the weekend, and quite enjoyed it, but I had forgotten about the fighting and the funeral until I read this thread through. I had thought after I came out that the ending had been somewhat abrupt and light on. At three hours as it was they'd have been hard-pressed to do much more, but those scenes were key, so you'd think they'd have worked them in. But maybe they are holding things over for the epic two-part conclusion. I am eager to see what they do, for certain.

Oh, and they definitely got better after the second film. Azkhaban remains the high-point for me.

 

[KESpires]

I'll agree, though I think they should have extended the scene in the Shrieking Shack.

I am on Goblet of Fire in my reread of the series, and my oh my, Goblet of Fire was absolutely butchered.

It has been years since I read it. They made mincemeat out of that book.

I still enjoy the movie, but as I'm reading it, I'm consistently amazed at the amount of things that the movie couldn't get to.

 

[Culhwch]

I've just started a reread too (from Azkhaban - I couldn't do the first two, I'm afraid...) after seeing the new one! Haven't read them in so long, and I've only ever read the last two the once. I'm eager to get that far along and compare the new movie to the book. I never thought Goblet the fim was much chop - the dancing introductions for the Durmstrang and Beaxbatons kids was just too much.

 

[Grimward]

*****Minor spoiler!****






Saw the film Friday night as Grimlet the Younger's birthday party (actual birthday was last month, but cobbling together a date when her friends could all make a movie proved to be a bit of work!). This group consists of 8 nine-year-olds. Half of them have finished the books (not started, not read a couple; finished!). Wasn't too intense for them, and other than the scene where Harry is grabbed trying to get water for Dumbledore, none of them so much as squeeked! As they all had a sleepover at our house afterwards, I can attest to the fact that none of them had bad dreams, either. Accordingly, I think we can dismiss the possibility that the film is "too dark" for kids (I will, at least...). I admit to having concerns going in, but they handled it without batting an eye.

 

[Arwena]

Hal-Blood Prince was pretty good. I'd give it a 7.5 out of 10. The setting of the scene, the rise of Voldemort, those death-eaters flying all atound didn't seem to have any follow-up. A lot of romance going on, maybe showing that love still flourished in crises, or maybe because of crises. The cave creatures seemed a bit odd and overdone to me. Dumbledore's end was swift, even knowing that it would happen, like "I didn't see that coming," but it is the climax and turning point for the final scene. Every human story is about how we have to sactifice our lives for a greater good.

 

[PTeppic]

This group consists of 8 nine-year-olds. Half of them have finished the books (not started, not read a couple; finished!). Wasn't too intense for them, and other than the scene where Harry is grabbed trying to get water for Dumbledore, none of them so much as squeeked! As they all had a sleepover at our house afterwards, I can attest to the fact that none of them had bad dreams, either. Accordingly, I think we can dismiss the possibility that the film is "too dark" for kids (I will, at least...). I admit to having concerns going in, but they handled it without batting an eye.

And I know adults who DID squeak...

Dave: they'd be 16 going on 17, rather than 15, if that helps your concerns.

Finally: I happened to be sat at the movies (on my second watching) a row or two in front of someone who seemed to have "audio descriptions" blaring out of (presumably) headphones. And although I've read book 7, had forgotten one or two things. So it was interesting to hear and note that items such as the Elder Wand were explicitly named, possibly more clearly than in the text of book 6.

 

[MJRevell]

The movies went downhill after number two , the novels after three imho. Childrens novels can be dark , nothing wrong with that - but the darkness should be tinged with a least a modicum of humour; Dahl knew how to do this perfectly,I'm not so sure about Rowling or the film directors are Chris Columbus. Sales figures obviously dismiss my opinion , but I would ask this question; would the series have been as popular if the first novel had been written in a similar dark style to that of Goblet Of Fire?

The series has always been as dark as Goblet of Fire.

In fact, apart from the graveyard scene at the end of the 4th book, I would argue that Philosopher's Stone was more dark. Goblet started with a murder, Philosopher's started with a double murder. Philosopher's has possession, scary forests, dead unicorns and dark hooded figures drinking blood. It's dark stuff.

There is no doubt that the series is getting grittier and edgier, and as much as I enjoy it......do the kids?

Yes, they certainly do. Kid's aren't as fragile as some people think. Anyone aged 11 or over (and probably younger than that, too) want to have these things, want see and read and watch these things. They like it when books have swear words in, they like all the dark stuff, because it's what they want to see -- and over time, this is only going to be more true, and true for younger kids as well.

True, i guess i am a little biased since its my favorite of the books, i just hope they do a good job of the last book

It was a good call doin it in two films but i just aint sure where theyr gonna make the split

I can see them doing a Lord of the Rings style, friendship-trio-heading off on their own against the world style ending.

 

[KESpires]

The theater I was in screeched when that hand came out.

I saw it coming and was paying very close attention, wondering how many people were going to get shocked.

It was awesome.

 

[MJRevell]

Even though I knew it was coming, I still jumped the first time.

It was well done -- delayed, almost, to catch you off guard.

 

[Lenny]

I jumped like a man possessed at that point - I was expecting it, but not in quite that way!

Anyway, I finally saw it tonight, and I must say that I rather liked it. After a book that didn't live up to itself (though I expect a re-read of everything is in order, and would change my mind), the hype and then a film that apparently didn't live up to that either, HBP has to be my favourite HP film, just about edging itself in front of PoA.

I don't know whether it's down to David Yates, the actors having matured, or the fact that after all the bad reviews, and a book that was a letdown, my expectations weren't that high, but I really enjoyed it. Out of everything (even the romance - I hate romance in films and books. Why is it there? It's almost as if it's as key a part of a book as words and paper!), the only part I disliked was the send-off for Dumbledore at the bottom of the tower - was the entirity of the school at a rock concert, with a power ballad playing in the background as they looked on at a boy crying over a mangled corpse?

I find it interesting that some of the effects have been redone - in particular, Quidditch and the Penseive were totally different to how I remember them from previous films.

---

Just to throw my thoughts in for other bits of dicsussion:

Nine y/o reading the series - if I'm ever a father, I'd let my nine year old read the entire series in a week without thought. I've never been held back in terms of reading things (though I doubt my parents know the first thing about some of the things I've read!), and I wouldn't want my child to be. We mustn't forget that a child of nine probably won't understand half of an adult book, so anything terrible will pass them by - they just don't have the imagination or awareness for some of the things that the books will cover. Sectum Sempra, for instance - how many of us, at the age of nine, knew or could imagine a spell that sliced a person? They might get that it's a bad spell, but they won't realise the effects.

EDIT: I think that, even seeing what Sectum Sempra does on-screen, a vast majority of nine year olds still won't understand it. Yes, it wasn't explicitly shown (a flash and Draco flew behind some cubicles), which works in the favour of confusion, but I'd still doubt that nine year olds would know the severity of the wounds. If they did, I might be somewhat concerned. Having said that, I can't expect children of nine to be as innocent as I was at that age. The number of them that watch 18-rated films at their age, these days...

Two-half last film - why not? Sure, it'll be annoying to stop halfway, but if so much is cut out of films for previous books which relates to the story, there's a good argument for a five hour film (albeit in two parts) that covers as much as the conclusive novel as possible. It is, after all, the final book of the series, and one that ties up most loose ends. It's either that, or a three and a half hour film that still misses things out.

 

[DuchessaIbby]

I'd agree that the films have always been pretty dark, but the books, not as much. I saw the first film years after it came out, when I was eight. I found the end where Voldemort's head appears out the back of Quirrel's really disterbing. Personally, I think the films have emphasised the romance aspect to much, which has left less room for what actually matters. In HP6 there wasn't enough attention put on Harry's lessons with Dumbledore, and too much put on the romance.

 

[alexx7]

The romance wasn't even well handled. Sure, some of it was funny and that pretty good at least because it was an amusing change to the actual story. I just don't feel there was any reason to handle the Harry/Ginny relationship in that way. What exactly was the issue with doing it the way it was written? Now they seem like almost strangers because they never bothered to really build that relationship. It just seems very shallow. *SMALL SPOILER* When he sees everyone at that crucial moment as he's going to meet Voldemort, it won't have the same effect when he sees her *END of SPOILER*