Lounge of Tomorrow - Harry Potter- round 6-who's ready?

Lounge of Tomorrow (http://74.208.121.111/LoT/index.php)

- Beatnik (http://74.208.121.111/LoT/forumdisplay.php?f=9)

- - Harry Potter- round 6-who's ready? (http://74.208.121.111/LoT/showthread.php?t=9712)

I really enjoyed it. Since I had forgotten most of the book I wasn't disappointed by the recreation of the last 50 pages.

I thought Draco was excellent, and Snape.

Terrific performances all around, even Michael Gambon was good this time. But, yeah, the last third wasn't anything as exciting as I was expecting. (It didn't help that I was really fighting to stay awake at 2 am, though) I'm tempted to repeat because I was so sleepy, but this did seem like an awfully "transitional" movie, with SO much exposition and flashback. And I'm kind of dreading the next movie (since I pretty much loathed the first half of Deathly Hallows).

Yes, I'll also grant that, at 3am, I was getting sleepy for the grand finale. But it was so much less grand than the book. Usually I don't quibble about the book comparisons, but this was such a big let down.

I also can't say it was a wrong decision to cut all but two of the pensieve sessions ... but that seemed to change the whole focus of the story. In reading the book, it seemed the story was ABOUT the pensieve flashbacks. In the movie, they were an afterthought.

To me, that left the movie about ... well, nothing. It was all filler. Some of it really enjoyable, funny, delightful, entertaining, and beautifully photographed filler. But all filler nonetheless. Until the end stuff. Which was shabby.

I was also disappointed that Snapes' increased importance to the tale did not give him any screen time in the middle of the story. All those years waiting to become Defense of the Dark Arts professor, and not one scene in that class! Were there any in the book? I can't remember. But that was disappointing as well.

One last disappointment for this morning. Re-using the musical themes from the last movie so pervasively. Gave the whole movie a sort of un-original feeling. Bleh.

Several of the reviewers I generally trust have mentioned that it is not a good movie for non-readers, that much is touched on that relies on the book to explain in full.

So I'm even less inclined but Lani said the other day she does want to see it so I probably will. But I'm so obviously down on it that I'll not report back until it is with a contrary experience.

I hope to see it with isaac over the weekend. He won't read the books until all the movies are done. So I'll ask him if he had a clue as to what was going on.

But I agree, this is the one film so far that seems absolutely incomprehensible without having read the book. Yes, this is when the books got absurdly long (readers thought the prior book was long until this one appeared, omg). I would have understood if they'd split this one into two movies as well, but I'm glad they didn't as it's my least favorite book.

Pfft, the last one's my next to least fave. They should have combined both books into two movies, using only the second halves of each.

I really liked Half-Blood Prince. In fact, I loved it.

The filmmakers took great care with this film. I don't think there were any scenes that didn't work for me. I thought about me liking this film alot carefully taking into consideration the enthusiastic first screening audience I was with. Despite the roar at the beginning when the WB logo came on, the audience was quite normal throughout. So that didn't color my viewing experience all that much.

Spoiler:

I thought this film featured the best acting of the series from Grint, Radcliffe, Gambon, Malfoy (I forgot his real name) and Watson. The Harry scenes after he took the luck potion were great.

Although I had pictured the Dumbledore death scene differently, I thought it worked well. There was a good amount of tension there.

There were a couple of moments that reminded me of LOTR: the Dumbledore falling scene, the flashes after Harry touches the ring etc. But it didn't bother me too much.

This movie is definitely a build up to the last two, but it can't very well not be given that the series is coming to a conclusion. The significance of the book and the film is bringing the entire series to the apex. I thought it did it very well. I think the numbers for the last two films will be astronomical. (To use a sentence they used on Sotomayor: outside of a directorial meltdown with the next two films, they will do well.)

Many of the scenes in this film were constructed well. The scenes in the swamp at the Weasley farm were edited wonderfully.

I am glad that the art direction of the 3rd film has carried through to the rest of the series. I like "that look".

I was disappointed that an explaination of what "Half-Blood Prince" means wasn't included in the film, but like it was said before this film is for the people who follow the books and they already know. However, I think there was a missed opportunity to discuss racism in the wizard world.

There was no funeral at the end. I'm thinking they might include it at the beginning of the next film, but who knows. And I could have sworn that the Weasley farm gets burned in the last book. But I could be wrong.

The acting (for the most part - see below), the direction, the script, the editing, the art direction were all good too me. I liked this movie a lot.

I'm still bugged by Helena Bonham Carter's depiction of Bellatrix. It still seems to me like she's acting nutters and not being nutters, if that makes any sense.

And, yes, there was a reason Rickman was cast as Snape. Whoever made that casting decision at the beginning deserves a pat on the back. Yes, we all laughed at his hair at first, but I no doubt believe he will blow us away even more during the next two films. He delivers the performance of a torn soul quite well. His reactions are obscure in the right places and him being the comic relief in certain scenes is quite brilliant.

Whoever played Lavender was great in her role too. She and the girl playing Luna were wonderful in all of their scenes. (I'm glad the lion head hat made an appearance in this film.)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gemini Cricket (Post 292175)

Spoiler:

I don't think the art direction continues in the same vein from the third movie, though I believe the production designer has been the same for many films, and his work was great in this one.

I also happen to think Daniel Radcliffe

Spoiler:

I disagree about Daniel Radcliffe. He is, however, a poor talk show guest and seems to favor questionable suits.

As to the movie,

Spoiler:

Well I disagree on that last one, iSm. I thought he did quite well. He was also quite good in Equus. I think he has definite talent.

While I think it had a few structural problems, I think that under the weight of so hefty a book, it becomes very hard not to have them. Under the circumstances, I think it maneuvered quite well without surpassing 2.5 hours.

I did think that it deserved a stronger ending/payoff/explanation in the last 20 minutes (and I saw a 7pm show so it wasn't exhaustion.)

But honestly, I enjoyed every minute of the film, and I look forward to seeing it again - lovely performances all around, some clever writing, and directing that, for the most part, kept out of the way. (Which I appreciate in a film based on a phenomenon like Potter.)