It has been widely observed in advanced reviews that the Harry Potter film series has gotten better as it went along, the opposite of what usually happens with a chain of sequels. I think that is for the most part true. The actors have been better with every film, and the artistry is a little more refined each time. I still think that Prisoner of Azkaban was the best single film over all, but that's largely because I think that it was by far the best of the books. It just had the tightest, best constructed story. Moreover, it had the greatest influence on the subsequent storyline by its introduction or elaboration of the four basic charters, Padfoot, Moony, Wormtail, and Prongs. If you don't already know who those characters are, telling you wouldn't help much.
It has been less noticed that the basic problem of the filmssqueezing a lot of plot and subplots into two and a half hours of filmgot a lot harder after the third book. Everything after Azkaban is big enough to stand on and give a speech. The final book is going to be made into two feature length films. Would that they had had the courage to do that with previous three. So much wonderful stuff and so many fine characters are merely glanced at in these films that I have a hard time imagining that they could be more than half appreciated by someone who hasn't read the books, even if half is a lot.
But within the rules of that game, I think Half-Blood Prince is the best executed of the latter films. The three primary actors, Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, and Rupert Grint, have perfected their art and their characters. When Ron (Grint) sits down between Harry and his sister Ginny, and realizes it is an awkward moment, he holds up a plate of pastries with a priceless "how bout those Holyhead Harpies?" look on his face. I continue to be grateful for Michael Gambon's Dumbledore. As for Alan Rickman's Snape (may his name be praised) he couldn't improve if only for the reason that he began the role with a sinister perfection.
The sets become more articulate and elaborate with each film. The cinematography is breathtaking, leaping beyond the standards of Goblet of Fire, which is a high standard indeed. Every rain splashed building, every mist laden landscape, or sun on sodden moor for that matter, unforgettable.
A couple of characters deserve more mention. Jim Broadbent's Horace Slughorn is laid out as well or even better than in the novel. A man carrying a terrible guilt that keeps him from doing good, yet remaining free from the temptation to go over to the other side, that is a man worth watching. Meanwhile if Severus Snape (cue up the choir) doesn't change, anyone who has read the final book knows for sure what I was always convinced of, that… well, no spoilers here. But knowing it puts a new complexion on his dark features.
Half-Blood Prince is a triumph. But it carries with it the sadness that we are nearing the end of this production.
in my opinion one of the best interpreters and singers, soloists, composers active at the time, his best time is past but much of the still, I hope and do not show their talent and bring it to market something new or unpublished.
David P. Coleman
2983 Brown Avenue
Greenville, SC 29 607
Posted by: viagra online | Wednesday, May 26, 2010 at 12:11 PM
A couple of characters deserve more mention. Jim Broadbent's Horace Slughorn is laid out as well or even better than in the novel.
Posted by: buy viagra | Thursday, November 10, 2011 at 08:40 AM