25 August 2009

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, 2009

I am torn if I would elect to see this movie a second time or not. Usually this is what I use to determine between my "blacklist" and "whitelist". I thoroughly enjoyed the movie and found it entertaining, but would I see it again? I think not.

The movie's special magic is really appreciated in the larger scope of the story, since it cannot possibly stand on its own (just like the books). I am a visually-oriented person, so seeing the book played out on the big screen is very satisfying to me. I grant the obvious alterations Hollywood chose, and for the most part, I am just going to ignore them. However, how the movie portrays spell-casting (and subsequent spell-based battles) is a bit perplexing. How is it that some spells come out of the wands like streams from the GhostBuster's guns, even to the point that such streams can meet in the middle and war with each other? That's not what spells do. Some spells have special affects (the obvious green of Voldy's fav "Avada Kedavra"), while most spells get to their targets with no affects. Some (all?) spells can be deflected somehow and produce a visible white flash as if they hit a shield. I thought spells had to be counter-spelled, not merely deflected with a flick of the wand.

I like how the characters mature (physically, emotionally and not to mention the actors themselves are growing professionally and literally). The movies (and the storyline itself) get darker and darker, proving that these are not kids stories. I find it frightening that parents are brining young children into the the theatres to see this.

The special affects are well done, and the color/lighting is pretty good throughout. While I appreciate that there is only so much they can put into the movie, I do kinda wish there was more on Tom Riddle's background. I think.

No comments: