"Harry Potter And The Half Blood Prince" . . . Sorta.

(Originally posted 7-17-2009)

Yes, I'm going to talk about "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince." Deal with it.

Why bitching? It's my favorite of the "Harry Potter" books so I'm bound to be more critical about it than the others. When this movie succeeded, it succeeded amazingly but when it failed, I heard my brain go "clunk."

First of all let me say that the best thing about this movie is Draco Malfoy.

That's a line I never thought I'd write.

I don't like him. Until the sixth book I didn't see him as a valid antagonist. I thought he was immature and his presence bothered me. I also, have never found him good-looking to make up for this.

But that's one of the many reasons why I like the sixth book a lot. Malfoy goes from being a stereotypical one-dimensional bully to a genuinely complex and interesting character and the movie portrayed this perfectly.

In the movie, Malfoy is no longer the taunting bully. His behavior towards Harry has progressed from mocking to physically violent, breaking his nose and attacking him in the bathroom when Harry catches him crying. Which is another thing: Malfoy shows emotion and lots of it. He is overwhelmed by the task he must do, his cries out of failure and fear for his life and disappointing everyone counting on him, and yet, he still tries to put on a smug, brave face to everyone when inside he is tearing apart. It's awesome.

Malfoy losing his shit in the bathroom after realizing that Harry suspects him.

Malfoy crying in the face of having to carry out his task.

Right when the movie was over the only thing I could say was, "God, I feel bad for Malfoy" while my brother responded with, "Yeah, he's my favorite character in this movie."

While I'm on good things, let me say that the most enjoyable parts from a comedic standpoint were any time a character was drunk or high. Slughorn, Hagrid, and Hermione (wha?! I know!) all get drunk at some point and Ron and Harry are high (on a love potion and luck potion) and these parts were all hilarious.

A wasted Slughorn extracting his memory for Harry.

I really like the character of Horace Slughorn and Jim Broadbent did a great job with him. I was quite pleased (even if I pictured him much fatter). Oh, and I had to IMDB Broadbent to figure out why I know his name and face and he has been in a LOT of random movies I've seen but I mostly know him because he played Harold Zidler in "Moulin Rogue!" Talk about different characters.

He wants to eat your children. . . in a fabulous manner.

All the usual actors were good but there were little details that stick out to me (mostly in characters I particularly like).

Snape showing a distinct but subtle sense of fear and regret when making the Unbreakable Vow and killing Dumbledore. It really shows his human side without giving his plan away too easily.

Bellatrix being Bellatrix in the scene where she breaks shit for no reason other than it's fun. She's so damn cool.

Luna. She should be in every scene. She's fantastic.

Dumbledore "badassing his way out of another sticky situation" especially when he can, at the beginning of the movie, take a Muggle magazine with him because he is "fond of knitting patterns."

Unfortunately, I have a lot to say about my favorite character and not much of it is good but I'll get there last.

Side Notes:
* The movie had a very dark mood throughout it that I liked very much.
* Vomit on Snape's shoes = comedy.
* I dig the Twins new haircuts.
* The scene with Dumbledore drinking in the cave was really powerful.
* Cormac McLaggen sucking his finger while staring down Hermione = creepy in a great way.

Next I want to talk about things I am stunningly neutral on.

This movie capitalized a lot on the romantic relationships amongst the teenagers and I don't know how I feel about this. On one hand, some of it was quite entertaining, like Ron's relationship with the clinically troubled Lavender Brown.

I love you forever . . . or else.

However, there sure was a lot of awkward glances (Harry and Ginny were victims of this a lot) and pettiness (with Hermione and Ron trying to make each other jealous/emo Hermione) and I don't know how I feel about this. Especially when there is so much emphasis on these relationships and yet the two important ones Harry/Ginny and Ron/Hermione are never really solidified. Harry and Ginny kiss but are they together? Did she break up with Dean? Does Ron remember saying Hermione's name in his sleep? Are they together? Why are Hermione and Harry holding hands in the last scene while Ron sits far away from them staring into space?

I also found it kind of funny how every five seconds the movie was reminding you that Harry and Hermione are JUST FRIENDS even though they have way more chemistry than Harry and Ginny do. Especially since Ginny has no personality.

Also strange was that Malfoy's girlfriend, Pansy, and him never actually acknowledge that they are together when everyone else's relationships are right in your face. In the book she's always hanging on his arm and stroking his hair and stuff.

One more important romantic relationship in this movie that was glossed over was that of Lupin and Tonks. They skipped all the preliminary scenes with Tonks being emo and went straight to them being at Christmas at the Weasley's and having Tonks call Lupin "sweetheart." Are there deleted scenes I'm being deprived of?

Holy crap. They're standing next to each other and stuff.

Bill and Fleur were omitted entirely from this movie and I see this as leading to issues in the next movie particular because "Deathly Hallows" starts with their wedding. There is also the weird issue that Fenrir Greyback is introduced into the story because he turns Bill into a werewolf and had also turned Lupin back in the day.

Instead they added a scene that I go back and forth on whether or not I am okay with it.

The scene involves Bellatrix and Greyback attacking the Burrow and burning down the Weasley's home. I can see how this scene is good for emotional impact (Molly watching her house burn was very sad) but it didn't really provide much and didn't even property introduce Greyback who is important in the next book.

Rawr! I evil.

Now, allow me to move onto things that I was disappointed in.

Where do I start?

Harry Potter hitting on the waitress in the beginning? I was personally a little creeped out but that's probably heavily dependent on the fact that she looked a lot older and a whole lot taller than him. Harry could not get that girl unless she knew who Harry Potter was.

Neville's part has been mitigated so much. Why is he a waiter? Why was the fact that he was one of the first in the Slug Club not acknowledged? Where's the D.A. unity? The Harry/Ron/Hermione/Ginny/Luna/Neville fighting from the fifth movie? I miss it.

Where were Crabbe and Goyle on the train? They were only in the background while Malfoy sat with Pansy and Blaise. In the book, they're all together.

Does Seamus have to blow something up in every damn movie? Then again, I don't really mind the running joke.

Why did the NEWT potions class consist of people from different grades and people who would never get into NEWT potions? Also, did they run out of Hufflepuffs?

Why is the whole description behind Snape being the Half-Blood Prince gone??? The scene literally plays out as, "B.T.dubbs, I'm da Half-Blood Prince, bitch. Laterz." Well, I'm paraphrasing but you get it.

Who the hell is Leanne? Was she in the book? (Apparently, yes)

Was Cho Chang in the movie? She's credited on IMDB. How come there was never ANY resolution on her and Harry?

....

okay

....

Now we have reached my uber-rant moment.

There are a lot of reasons I liked "Half-Blood Prince" the most: it's dark, it's got twists, it's got more character development, it's violent, oh, yeah, and it has frequent appearances and analysis of my favorite character, Tom Riddle.

Oh wait.

Not in this movie.

The thing that captivated me most about the book was the psyche of the villain (a particular fascination of mine in every medium) and the descriptive process that analyzed just how Tom Riddle became Voldemort by way of memories and Dumbledore's guesswork.

In the book, unless I am mistaken and I believe I am not, there are six memories that Harry and Dumbledore examine: Riddle's parents, Riddle at the orphanage, Riddle's encounter with his uncle Morfin, Riddle asking Slughorn about Horcruxes, Riddle and the old lady, and a half Riddle/half Voldemort requesting a job from Dumbledore.

The movie only included the orphanage scene and the horcruxes one.

Obviously, if I were making the movie, I would put them all in there but aside from upsetting me, there are other reasons why deleting these memories is detrimental to the plot.

The main scene deletion that was harmful to the plot was the scene with Riddle and the old lady and here's why: this scene is the key to finding three of the Horcruxes. In the scene, Riddle goes to the house of a rich descendant of Helga Hufflepuff to charm her into selling Burke of Borgin and Burke's her goblin-made armor. Because she is so charmed by him, she shows him two of her most prized possessions: a cup that belonged to Hufflepuff and Slytherin's locket. These items were both stolen by him and it is reasoned by Dumbledore that Voldemort's love of Hogwarts is what lead to him wanting to possess these items and make them Horcruxes. This logic also leads them to Ravenclaw's diadem. Without the scene, it kind of leaves Harry at a dead end at the end of the movie.

Also, in the scene with Riddle's parents, his mother is wearing the necklace which connects the scenes. And in the scene with his uncle, his uncle has the ring that is then clearly seen on Tom's finger in the Horcrux scene (they did include that in the movie).

The movie barley explained the ring and didn't go into the locket at all. Even more peculiar, in the movie Dumbledore didn't even say where they were when they went to find the locket. The book says it was a place that the orphans used to go on vacation and the cave in particular was used by a young Riddle to torture other kids.

Plot holes!!

Deleted scenes? *hopeful face*

Okay, now let's move onto casting.

Hero Fiennes-Tiffin is the cutest kid ever.

Awwww.

The 30s/40s outfit only makes him cuter. I want to have a kid that looks like him.

If you couldn't tell, I was happy with this casting decision. He was definitely the right choice for the role.

Here's where I start to get unsure.

I already knew that they would not be casting Christian Coulson as Tom Riddle again because he's pushing 30. Aside from having a beef against recasting characters, I can understand the age issue but . . . look how pretty!

Unfortunate how they had to recast the hottest guy in "Harry Potter" (although to be fair, Robert Pattinson was hot too but obviously he isn't anymore with his vampire whiteface and bad hair and not bathing and shit but at least he openly admits he hates "Twilight" and for that I'd give him a hug even if he smells, well, maybe not but a high five for sure).

Anyway, they recasted him with this kid, Frank Dillane:
[I really shouldn't refer to people my own age as "kids" (like pretty much every actor in these movies) but then again I have a tendency to do it with everyone under the age of 35.]

Oops, I accidentally made the mistake of posting a picture of his good side that the director felt the need to never show.

This is more like how he looked in the movie:

Gah!

Did that picture make you recoil in terror? Me too.

The peculiar thing about this kid that makes me so unsure actually has nothing to do with him. He was very good in the role. I got that tingly feeling of joy when he made intimidating statements and asked sneaky questions so in that sense he was very successful.

The issue was, the director chose to shoot him using camera angles and lighting that would make him look scary as hell, like the bottom picture, as opposed to well, Tom Riddle-y like in the top picture.

Tom Riddle is supposed to be intimidating in his superior intelligence, charm, and good looks. That's how he got so much information from people. With the camera angles in the movie, you can't help but think, "Well, clearly he's going to go on to do evil things! There's nothing innocent about him! He's clearly plotting people's deaths right now!"

Every other camera angle made me jump and sink into my seat. It was like I had some specific form of Tourette's.

Oy.

Too bad there's no more Tom Riddle so this mistake cannot be fixed.

I'm gonna go cry and read "Half Blood Prince."

Big-eyed powerpuff Tom Riddle and his snake are sad too.