Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince

Like all Harry Potter fans I have read all of the books and seen every film so far. I would have to say that this film is not my favourite so far and leaves you feeling that some vital parts of the book are missing. However this is worth watching and I feel this will only disappoint the most hardcore Harry fans!

With all of the films you can notice that the acting is improving with the maturity of the characters. You can tell that there is a close bond between the actors of which all pull of their roles well. The directing and visual effects, like all of the films to date does not disappoint.

In all a great family film, a pleasure to watch and I would recommend this film to most people. I am glad that the final film will be split into two parts, to be honest they could have done it with this film!

*** For people who have never seen any of the films or read the books I took my friend with me who has not seen or read any of the books and he was completely lost throughout the film (Although he still enjoyed it!). If you wish to see this I would recommend you need to see Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix first. Otherwise you may find this film a little confusing.

Let me say this. Half Blood Prince as a movie alone was very good. It stands it's ground as a film better than any of the others of the series. But only as a film. And only because there are so many parts to a film. This installment obviously stepped everything up a notch: the cinematography, the special effects, the darker score, the improved acting, etc... But the key element which was boosted this franchise into world-class fame, is the story. And in this one, it's just not there. As a fan of the books and having had no SERIOUS gripes with any of the other films, I must say i HATED the screenplay for this one. Everything that made the book amazing was ripped from the film, and instead replaced by annoying large quantities of romantic subplot. Yes, there is romance in the sixth book but not shoved down your throat. JK Rowling masterfully crafted a novel that was perfectly balanced. The romance was there although it didn't detract from the main plot and at times was intertwined with the larger goings-on at hogwarts. In the movie the romance takes up most of the screen time. Not to mention the ending of the film was brutally butchered.

So much time could have been detracted from the silly romances to focus on more important things which were completely ommitted or deliberately changed. The ending is extremely anti-climactic and once it's over it'll leave you in your seat thinking "it's over?"

My final gripe with this movie is that it really should have been PG-13. If you've read the novel then you know the subject matter is MUCH darker and the story would have been done greater justice with just a higher rating(and a better screenwriter, yes i'm looking at you Steve Kloves).

Overall as a movie i'd give it an 8 out of 10.

But as a HARRY POTTER movie it gets 4 out of 10. And that's pushing it.

Well heres to 2010 to see how they screw up the finale. Oh wait, they already did. I didn't know there were 8 years at hogwarts...

If you don't know the book (like me), but watched the trailer before you watched the movie, you could be excused for feeling a bit cheated. The trailer actually promises something that doesn't really happen (real world). But try to free your mind of that. I was a bit confused, but it didn't really throw me off the movie.

Of course, it goes without saying that you should watch the other Harry Potter movies before you watch this. While there is pretty light humor to be found here (and some love stories), it all gets spiced up, by some really dark undertones and some things that happen. I wouldn't say that Harry Potter is getting into an adult phase, but he definitely gets wiser with every movie. Which can't be said, for all his friends. But then again, some are there for comedic relieve, which is pretty obvious. And not a bad thing at all. The effects are great (not that you should have expected less) and the story moves along "fast" (the running time doesn't seem to be a problem or a drag). Of course some might say that he is still too childish (or the whole feeling is childish), but that would be beside the point. The movie does not hide what it's intentions are ...

I have always been a big fan of Harry Potter, both the books and the films. Half-Blood Prince is my favorite of the first 6 books, and now I can say that the film is as well. First off, the film does cut a lot of things out. It cuts some of the Horcruxes that are talked about, and some of the memories of Tom Riddle, but even without them, this is an incredibly powerful film. The opening sequence I loved and I was glad that the writers would include such a scene. It shows the danger of the world that everyone lives in now that Voldemort is back. David Yates is back directing the 6th film after the fantastic Order of the Phoenix, which I thought he created a much more moodier and grittier Harry Potter adaptation. In Half-Blood Prince, Yates directs with much larger confidence and maturity, one that is shown much throughout the film. This Potter film is the first to actually make me smile and laugh along with it. It has a lot of whimsical, light and genuinely funny moments, which I thought were brilliant and stayed true to the book. When the film requires it to, it gets darker and more menacing, which I also thought was balanced very nicely with the tone of the book. I like judging the Harry Poter films more as films, not always as adaptations. There will always be some people who are disappointed, but I am grateful for the things that were in the film, that they were well-made and stayed true to what I imagined while reading the book. This film succeeds in that. Steve Kloves is a very talented writer, to cut all those things out of the book but for it to stay with that same tone that J.K. Rowling marks on them.

What helps this film are the performances to a great extent. The adult cast as always is great. Michael Gambon, Jim Broadbent, Alan Rickman, and Helena Bonham Carter all deliver high-worthy performances. They should all be considered for Oscar consideration come the end of the year. The young cast is brilliant. Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, and Emma Watson have all grown very comfortably into their characters, and they know their strengths and weaknesses. Bonnie Wright also becomes more important in just the right time, since she is also very good as Ginny. Evanna Lynch is fantastic again like in the last film. The young kids playing Tom Riddle are spot-on. But the biggest surprise for me had to be Tom Felton. His character is more important here than in the other films, but Felton really was masterful. He portrays everything about Draco Malfoy that was intended by Rowling: his fear, his anger, his remorse. Malfoy is in a very dark place, and Felton goes up and beyond what I would have expected from him. The strongest of the young cast.

The other aspects of what make this film brilliant are the technical aspects of course. The cinematography must be what is most amazing. It is so well-done, captures every shot right and with powerful meaning behind it. The different color textures and lighting really are beautiful. Also, Some truly amazing shots in this film. Like always, the set designs are wonderful. The visual effects are strong, but not to a point that they detract from the film. If the Academy does not recognize at least the technical side, then what can they recognize?

Overall, I simply loved Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. Yes, the ending was shorter here than in the book, but I thought it still worked well, and certainly not anti-climactic. The death was very well done, and I thought was handled better than in Order of the Phoenix (while still a great film, lacked the emotion for Sirius dying). The ending was perfect, left me feeling sad and happy at the same time, and cannot wait for Deathly Hallows! The best Potter film yet.

I was lucky enough to see a preview of Half-Blood Prince three days before opening day. I saw it a second time with my son who is not quite ten, but who is generally mature for his age and doesn't scare easily. The two viewings give me the unique advantage of both the adult and the child perspective on the movie.

I only recently started counting myself a true Harry Potter fan after my son introduced me to the movies a couple of years ago. I finished the last book only three weeks before seeing the movie adaptation of Half-Blood Prince the first time.

With all the book details very fresh in my mind, I had high expectations of the movie. And Yates, the production crew and the cast definitely delivered. The movie impresses on many levels from an artistic point of view. The stripped landscapes and washed out colors convey a constant feeling of dread and foreboding. The standard train trip to Hogwarts was particularly stark, seen against a landscape scorched by a hot summer sun and dotted with dark pools of water. The usual lush greenery and joyous train ride are nowhere to be seen.

Personally, I felt the pace was spot-on and that the movie elegantly made time for all key plot points. But only if you enjoy a plot line driven by character and emotion. For the younger lot, looking for frightening wizard duels and attacks by magical creatures, the first hour and a half of the movie drags on a bit. My son certainly became fidgety, and didn't appreciate the finesse and sophistication of the plot and cinematic approach.

Most of the threatening and darkening tone of the movie was also lost upon him, whereas I reveled in the finer details contributing to a general sense of ever-encroaching darkness. There are worse things in life to be afraid of than big hairy spiders. My son missed seeing those - I was a lot more intrigued by the ominous undercurrents made palpable by the indomitable trio of David Yates (director), Steve Kloves (screenplay) and Delbonnel (photography).

Some people feel that the romantic comedy aspects played too large a role in the movie, but I felt this aspect added some much-needed lightness and human drama to the movie. Harry (Daniel Radcliffe), Hermione (Emma Watson) and Ron (Rupert Grint) all find themselves dealing with the vagaries of young love - from dealing with unwanted advances to finding love in unexpected places. The romance was aimed perfectly at the young teen market, and I found myself cringing ruefully at some of Lavender Brown's love-obsessed stunts and smiling wistfully at the tenderness between Harry and Ginny. Haven't we all been there at some stage of our lives?

All in all, Harry Potter is growing up. And so is the market for these movies. If you've seen all the movies up to now or read all the books, and your are at an age to appreciate the adult themes and movie techniques, this movie should fall pitch-perfect on your ear. You are likely to leave the cinema filled with a heart-wrenching sadness for innocence lost.

Purist fans will most certainly complain bitterly about numerous sub-plots, events and characters that were cut from the movie and the odd scene that doesn't exist in the book. But Yates' truly gutsy adaptation really works and brings a depth and clarity to the main themes of the book that is quite extraordinary. He manages to capture the lingering lightness of that time before the serious business of adulthood sets in, alongside the relentless buildup to the final showdown between The Dark Lord and The Chosen One. And the lack of closure at the end of the movie is no accident, I believe. Just like the book, this movie leaves you aching to see how it all ends (never mind the fact that you already know).

I must also commend the acting. The young leads have all matured in pace with the maturing content of the books and their acting shows it. Rupert Grint shines brightly in the somewhat Shakespearean love comedy he finds himself in, and makes the most of his new-found sport hero popularity. Emma Watson hits the spot, portraying Hermione's emotional vulnerability with gentle confidence and softness.

As for Radcliffe, it's easy to miss the evolution he's undergone as Harry, since there are other actors ostensibly given more to do in this outing, like Tom Felton and Bonnie Wright, both of whom get the opportunity to take their characters to a new level. Tom Felton, especially, does a remarkable job. But Radcliffe's task of playing the steadfast and courageous, yet not flashy or arrogant hero, remains a difficult one. Especially on second viewing, it becomes clear how his understated and controlled performance speaks very much to the type of man Harry Potter is shaping up to be. A man who is left with a tremendous responsibility at the end of this movie and takes it up without flinching. The boy-wizard is no more.

Of the older guard, Alan Rickman's Snape was a consummate performance, ... obviously. And Michael Gambon's portrayal of Dumbledore never felt more right than in this movie. Jim Broadbent's Slughorn is deliciously played with just the right mix of off-putting sycophancy and endearing pathos.

All in all - a triumph all around!