Jason KingThe Debate of Half Blood Prince: Pick Your Sides - Student of Hogwarts or a Deatheater?
July 19th 2009 01:34
:
It is foreseen - Deatheaters Die :)
Category: No Category
Most of you are aware of my thoughts on the matter of the latest Harry Potter film and if not clickety click right here. The love or hate of people's opinions is so strong that I had considered not being friends with people who liked the movie because I still think it is reason for mental instability that you could like something so ridiculously made that ruined everything we know and love about the books - the institution created by JK Rowling.
Well, it would appear that occasional writer for Salty Popcorn, Dave Longo, is one of those mentally unstable people who really enjoyed the film and has used his abundant free time to put his uni student of film thoughts forward on Facebook in an open letter to haters of Half Blood Prince. Dave, in my opinion, represents people that don't care for the books or how they are represented on film. I am grouping him with the majority of US and other interntational film critics who all seem to love the film and have gone as far as calling it the best in the series - to me this signals the end of the world as we know it. To Harry the death of the holy one, Dumbledore, signals the end of the world as he knows it. For this reason, and so I do not have to hate David I decided on a friendly article that could start a debate and keep from war our differing thoughts. So Dave, representing the evil people with no respect for the storyline will be the head of the Death Eaters (Voldermort himself if you choose) and I will be representing the students of Hogwarts (Harry Potter if you choose). So wands to the ready........................ ...
Below in black (evil) writing will be Dave's complete article from Facebook (I have his permission to use it and commence everyone's thoughts) - I will have my comments written along with his in the text color of blue. I do apologise if Dave's article is quite long - we are both quite passionate in our thoughts. Now this is all in good fun and in no way personal so no getting upset Dave.
A formal address to the haters of HARRY POTTER AND THE HALF BLOOD PRINCE written by Dave Longo. A NOTE BEFORE READING:
-okay this is long, and is argumentative. I have had enormous amounts of problems with emails and things i've written to them in the past. People, when they read my stuff, think I am personally attacking them. So i just wanted to say, If you have heard me talk about films before (which I'm sure you have) you know it only comes from passion about the subject. In this article I want to open up a discussion not frighten people away. So here be your warning. If you hated the movie, that is cool. Dave - I think people take it as though you are attacking them because the majority of the time you are arguing your point - with so much passion and not listening to their opinions that this is taken that way. Like I said - I am so passionate on my opinion for this film I would consider not being friends with you for liking it - I don't understand how someone educated could have such a differing opinion on something that left me emotionally scarred after watching - for this reason I think you are a Death Eater
-Also I use capital letters a lot and people before have thought this is to spell it out for them. It's not. Just ignore them, I only do it because I write so quickly, if i want to go back and figure out what i've written I can skim the capital letters, and figure out where I am. So yeah, it's not me going. "hey I HATE you. I H-A-T-E you. Incase you can't S-P-E-L-L". I will also put a significant word in a sentence in capitals for dramatic effect sometimes.
-Phew, that made me feel incredibly condescending and patronizing. But trust me Friendships have nearly been ruined because of this, I felt it necessary. Choose your side Death Eater
-It's late, I want to stare away from this screen, so I haven't spell checked or edited. Get on with it already
-there are GIGANTIC SPOILERS inside, for both 'Half blood prince' and 'Deathly Hallows' books/films. You have been duly warned.
-I'm serious about the spoilers. Deathly sirious. Don't use Potter humor you Sirious murderer you
-So...lets roll on with the pre-ambling:
A FORMAL ADDRESS TO THE HATERS OF 'HARRY POTTER AND THE HALF BLOOD PRINCE'.
by David Longo.
Please. Please. PLEASE. Debate me seriously.
Firstly the books aren't high art. No matter what you will say, these story-lines are for children as well, any piece of art that can be enjoyed by adults and children together on different levels is an achievement. I think art is like beauty - it is in the eye of the beholder - to about a billion people you just insulted their intelligence - a true trait of the Death Eater
I do have as much respect for the books as a die hard would. I'm not a huge, huge fan of books (I wouldn't cry in them, or dress up to go see the movies), but i did grow up with them. Death Eater
And to be told repeatedly I do not have respect for Rowling because I liked this film, is enough to drive me batshit. No respect Death Eater
I'm a diehard fan of film, which is why I have written this insanely long near novel: When film is slandered as a medium, I go into meltdown. Here for you readers is a most insane of a meltdown: Is the Death Eater being as passionate but from the other side of the coin. People have massively differing opinions, to me the people who love and respect the books dislike the film and the people that don't care much for the books seem to love it (Death Eaters).
Okay. Before we roll: A little bit more on the books of Harry Potter... I do truly enjoy the books, I bought everyone after the third one (Fourth one was about to come out when I got on the Potter train) on opening day; I even waited in line for the last one... but I love them enough that no film adaptation in the world could wreck them. And by god this film comes NO WHERE NEAR close enough to wrecking the novel it is based on. I don't think it wrecks the books in anyway (we can reread them over and over) - what I think it wrecks is the people's passion for the film adaption. In quoting the director here : "J.K. Rowling supplied us with the book, which I think the advantage we have over so many other franchises. I mean with the Bonds, they have to invent new stories each and every time. We don't have to do that. We have JK's books." But to me they didn't use JK's books they created a different story by placing in scenes that weren't in the book and trashing a pace set by Order of the Phoenix. To me this film stalled the flow and stability of the entire film series. I am sure it is "the calm before the storm" I have written so many times but Phoenix set a pace and that was the building of action and the hints of the commencement of the war. WE (The Students of Hogwarts) would not stand by why our school and headmaster were being attacked, we would do what our creator intended and battle to the death. Harry does not idly standby and watch his hero get slaughtered, (more on that later).
I understand completely that the half blood prince was never going to be the book before going in, so I treated the film as a "film"...otherwise I would have just gone and read the damn hardback. I think every film adapted perfectly - Phoenix was by far the longest book so had the most removed from it yet it contained the essence of Harry Potter throughout - this did not, it came across as a montage of Potter imagery and lacked it's soul that we all went to see. It's explanation of tone was majorly lacking
1. DUMBLEDORE AND THE HALF BLOOD PRINCE, AND THE STATE OF CINEMA
It's not called "dumbledore and the half blood prince". The film focused on Harry, and all that teenage angst "stuff" (which is what should be called "story") is what was there in the book and what was hugely entertaining in the film.
In nearly every movie this year, there has not been a single MAIN character. If a movie has a main character all they do is either 'really really want to go to college' or 'have to blow up a building before the movie ends'. The shitty writing all throughout this year (When a supporting character is so good, say for example sam worthington in Terminator- whom everyone comes out loving- people tend to overlook how shitty the main character was ie. Christian Bale as John connor) It's put film down as an art form, all this lazy writing. Exactly thankyou Steve Kloves (screenplay writer for Half Blood Prince)
In two and half hours (which is now standard time for a movie - get used to it) there is only so much you can do. Smart movies develop and properly flesh out one or two characters, all supporting characters do (Their structural job) is further along the main character). It's a misunderstanding of fundamental film criticism that is so common today because SHITHOUSE screenplays are now the expected norm. It's happening all throughout the art world. Why have they managed to do it in 5 out of the 6 Potter films so far?
The state of film at the moment is akin to this. You the viewer have been drinking Coca cola for fifteen years. You love the taste. you are so used to it. You have never drank pepsi. One day you drink pepsi and are you truly surprised you don't like it as much as coke? But imagine if coca cola goes, and all there is is pepsi. After fifteen years of Pepsi, when you finally get coke again you won't like it. Pepsi sucks Death Eater - I would go for Lift or Fanta
In cinema the damage is done. A movie that costs 150 million dollars , needs to make a profit. And when all the movies that earn profit are horrible, the standard drops. Because unfortunately for more movies to come out, more money needs to come in. If people didn't settle for crap, and actually went to the dendy, more dendy type films would get made. I am studying film at the moment, and god forbid any of them would see more than two films a year outside of the blockbusters. They are making the product, and unfortunately the product is just of such a low standard. Violins are playing in the background
2. THE STANDARD SET
So the standard is at a level in which the movies people want to see are of just shit blowing up, or a vampire story that isn't about vampires at all. Based on the lack of film criticism in peoples response to Harry 6, my only conclusion is that nobody has actually gone to watch this movie because it is a movie, ONLY because it is a book they liked. All the negativity is based on how it is not the book. And because people are so used to this low standard, any thing that is on a higher level gets shunted. And if you have bothered to read this far congratulations.
If you have hated Harry potter 6 because it is not your favorite book, then I really can't imagine anything I will continue to write swaying your opinion. Maybe, it is possible that people went to see it because they love the books - it is THE ONLY REASON these films are popular at all, Rowling created a universe that is as good, to many people, as the Universe created by Tolkein or George Lucas. Of course it is going to create negativity when the story does not represent the actual tale created, just look at Toklein Jnr trying to sue the LOTR makers and writing the films off as rubbish. And saying
In all this rambling my point is, I do not want to debate continually THE BOOK VS. THE MOVIE. Because that is not criticism. It's not fair to 200 or so people that worked so tirelessly for over two years for you to see this. It's not fair to Rowling, because she of all people would advocate reading over film and would not want you to forget that she did put blood sweat and tears into her books. Rowling interestingly enough, thought this film was the best adaptation so far, and she also sat as a script advisor to the screenwriter steve kloves. And ultimately it's not fair to yourself. It may not be fair to ourselves but it is honest in our beliefs - Rowling has enough of herself to blame - she signed off on it. It might have been truer to how she saw it but not to how, we the fans and Students of Hogwarts interpreted it. Also, the 200 or so people that work on every film they ever make know the film will be judged - it just depends if they are more interested in appealing to the Death Eaters or the Students of Hogwarts.
So if you chose to reply to me here or in person, and wish to have a serious conversation I am more than happy to. I live to talk films, and never ever really get to do it seriously. But please have some sense and criticize this movie as a film. And not because this pepsi doesn't taste anything like coca cola. Like I said Pepsi sucks
3. THIS FILM IS SMARTER THAN IT GETS CREDIT FOR. Yawn
"all this movie had was talking. There was no action, there was one really good action scene in the book, and it wasn't even in the movie. I was just really bored." The lady next to me mumbled freaky comments to herself through the entire film and after wanting to jam my wand up her nose I started seeing and agreeing with her. The romance came across as the quality in Neighbors and to be honest when they all raised their wands after Dumbledore died I actually laughed - this is not something you want in a scene this pivotal. David Yates even siad it was the hardest thing to remove the funeral scene. To me it was needed immensely - no fans got the closure of Dumbeldores death except a pantomine farewell. The action WAS needed immensely and was part of explaining the characters (all of their) journies how now come to no longer sitting back and hiding behind Hogwart's walls - this was it - the battle had now come into their home and they were no longer protected by Dumbledore - so as opposed to sitting in bed all the students became defenders of their holy grail - the right to freedom - when you remove this from the film you destroy its soul.
It was a nice change to see a blockbuster that had the balls to remove a huge action scene (which does not change the outcome of the story- therefore dramatically useless) in favor of letting us see our characters develop as people. It may not change the outcome of the sotry - Dumbledore dying but see above - it changes a lot more. Harry would NEVER stand there regardless of your claim to him trusting Snape - RUBBISH - he never trusted Snape - the only person who never did. If anythin his trust for Dumbledore - but he himself states in the film "Dumbledore himself says he can be wrong" - Harry's entire essence through every film is to battle for good and fight against wrong, evil and Deat Eaters.
After all the final battle adds nothing to the emotional journey and would chew up another 20 minutes of screen time. Why do we need shit blowing up in our movies so much?
The scene in which the burrow burns was a waste of screen time really. The film-makers know that people get bored easily so they wrote that scene specifically to satisfy everyones "shit blowing up" need and then continued with the story line afterwards.
I keep hearing everyone whinge on about how they loved the addition of that scene and then they immediately complain about the screenwriter making other scenes up. (all of which involved "talking"). I did enjoy the Burrow scene but would have much preferred it kept the original scene in the end which is part of the story - I also did not like how the Burrow looked so bloody different from other films. We, the Students of Hogwarts would have much preferred to battle for our beliefs in the foretold story than watch something become invented for the sake of satisfying the needs of "shit blowing up". It was pointless and well, there's your 10-20mins needed for the correct scene to be included.
The dinner scenes that were not in the book, were oddly my favorite parts. All these people do to you reader, is say how you and I are idiots for not respecting the books, then after that all they do is make fun of the books for two minutes. Call Harry potter a homo, and make shitty wand cracks. A lot of people, I realize, think Harry Potter is nerdy, but when there is a movie out it's all of a sudden cool to like it. I suppose if everyone else is seeing it...sigh...anyway... Now Harry is a "poof" maybe I have a chance haha
4. THEY CALL THEMSELVES "FANS" Be very careful Dave - there is close to a billion of us
I think this film is smarter than it's being given credit for.
The huge complaint by the fans of the book is the treatment of dumbledore's death. If the character's death didn't do anything for you I don't know if thats this film or it's makers' fault. Definately the film or film maker - it lacked the scope, detail required and not hard to accomplish and it also lacked credibility - this is the penultimate scene that makes Harry a man and a fighter and besides the score of the film it was all kind of lame and bordering on B grade. This needed to equal the "I am your father" scene from Star Wars.
There has been five books/ films prior to this one. That all have negative/ positive aspects to them. But they all had (what this film does indeed have) is incredibly well written characters that are consistently fleshed out. OMG - I have to agree
After all these characters have been developed through five films before and you should know a fair enough about them already...not to mention all the "extra stuff in the book". You shouldn't have to rely on two minutes of screentime, this is why the film is very smart, it knows you know the characters in and out, so it pushes them further, and unfortunately for some the action HEAVY aspects of the last films were removed... You keep comparing the film to the book - I thought we weren't doing that anymore and
The moment that really explains that this movie is in many ways smarter than the book is dumbledore's death. Harry isn't charmed, he isn't 'forced' into doing nothing like the book. He lets dumbledore die because of his trust of snape, now the guilt he will have in the next film will be far greater. It is shown entirely visually. David Yates was perhaps a little to trusting of his audience, he knows you have grown up with the series, and any true fan of the book has grown along with them as well. He also should have known that fans would be mortified at what he did - appalingly so - Harry Potter is the ONLY person who NEVER trusted Snape - from the very first film when he gives Snape the evil eye you know he does not believe a word that comes from his mouth. He does however trust Dumbledore and Dumbledore told Harry to trust him - something Harry would normally do under any circumstances but not in DEATH. Harry has seen people and family die or be hurt all around him - it has made his character what it is - the person who is the chosen one, the one person that will always stand up to evil. Harry would NEVER EVER stand there and watch someone die - especially Dumbledore.
And if you haven't read the books it is no excuse, because you HAVE to have seen FIVE films to understand this, it's a long drawn out 7 part storyline, (People's reactions to this film show that they believe that Dumbledore's death is the conclusion of the entire series) I guess people need to be reminded that it is Harry Potters storyline, and the repecutions of Dumbledores actual death are TRULY FELT in the NEXT book/film).
What I am trying to say is David Yates, the director, trusts that you know the characters enough to be able to read their body language, and identify visual cues that address their characters. Otherwise you just have another blockbuster in which characters announce through dialogue "im sad" or "im upset because I really want to go to college".
It's patronizing, and condescending. It really annoys me because film is a visual medium, and when a film-maker finally uses it the correct way people dismiss it because they only want shit blowing up, or that it didn't have their five favorite pages from the book it's based on. As you said earlier this film and books are made for adults and children alike - if you treat everyone as needing an explanation they will understand it. Do you think a 12yr old is going ton understand the nuances of these characters? The film is not made for uni students - it is made for fans.
5. DAVID YATES SERIOUSLY NEEDS SOME CREDIT
The amount of foreshadowing, turncoating, relationships...all these little moments of life that were conveyed visually in every shot what was impressed me. From the position of the camera, to the proximity of the actors within frames, to even the constant useage of parrallel walls. Does this inclue a film that looks so bleak it comes across with a pallate of grey, I do feel he lacked the explanation as to why a Quidditch game has no flags or banners flying or why there was only a handful of people watching, the commencement with the Death Eaters flying though London was a great opening but a stupid one - it was only created to be a an opening that sold more tickets in IMAX - it is the only scene in IMAX 3D then you take your glasses off for the remaining 2.25hrs. Sure you and I know it is a commencement of war, and that this greying of the pallate is a visual explanation of the deterioration of society caused by your pals, the Death Eaters, but not many people will understand it. Hogwarts has always been the safe place - it should have maintained its brightness and color and then lose it with the battle at the end, which was missing, as this represents the end of safety to one and all and highlights the day all students became warriors in a fight to the death.
All the detail and attention. If there was attention to detail where is the end scene of the book??
David Yates constructed a movie about people living life admist a war. You complain about the weasly twins only having one scene. It's not about the twins, it's about how they are some of the few people who can bring any sort of color to a weary dreary world, in which shops gets blown up and people die. there was so much of this contextuality that i loved. Maybe I read too much into it.
6. HARRY, RON, HERMIONE and DRACO
The removal of Voldemort from this film is a misconception. Just because Ralph Fiennes looked cool and scary in the last movies, does not mean he needed to be here. The villian of this film was Draco Malfoy, who had been developed SPECIFICALLY for his actions in the film in the last five books/films. Draco parrallels Harry. Not only is he a great character in this, he is incredibly complex, he is a fully fleshed person, yet he conveys all these themes about manipulation, inheritance, racism etc. And as it's a kids film too this stuff is conveyed mostly visually or discreetly. Draco is a chump compared to Voldermort - the pace of the film was set with Phoenix and the pending war. I think Voldermort was definately needed to show the pure evil he is. Even a scene at the start with Draco being told his mission and the reasons he received it and of the uselessness of his father.
The main characters are RON, HERMIONE, and specifically HARRY. It's their story, anything else including other characters and settings only serves to further their development. we should be so lucky that everything else is done so well and fleshed to the point that it is. The film-makers focus on this because it is what is important, without focusing on them, the movie loses what little the die hard haters of the movie claim they wanted. The movie lost more than what we claimed we wanted - it lost a little bit of our love. Seriously, I could have done without many of the relations scenes, is some guy hitting on Hermione that important or could the love blossoming between Ron and Hermione been achived differently. It is war - so start it already.
Of note is the lack of complaint about Hagrid's lack of scenes. In many ways the forgetting of Hagrid by the fans showcases the hypocrisy. Why is it okay for the screenwriters to remove one thing you hated, but unfair for them to remove one thing you liked and everyone else hated. Because Hagrid had way more book time in the story - where is Hagrid in the end scene - Harry thinks he is in the hut - Hagrid is the first one on the scene to help Harry!! And yes we love Hagrid of course we want more
it's not about scenes it's about the entire thing. Thats what I'm trying to say. And here the entire thing includes the last five movies/books that came before. The only criticism of this new movie, sounds like either criticism of the book itself (in the end, and all the fans know it, the half blood prince serves only as a bridge to the last book, it's the classic calm before the storm, we all know what is coming, and boy do we get a lot of dread in the last book/2 part movie. So do we all really want it know. The death of dumbledore was meant to prepare you for what is to come. Quite true but this book, while a bridge, is the phsychological explanation of who Voldermort is - the film only mildy deals with this and it comes off more as an afterthought.
Dumbledore is harrys only savior, he helps harry out everytime. All the other witches and wizards (even the bad guys) are afraid of him because they know he is the most powerful wizard.
nnow with him gone, what hope does Harry have? thats what it is meant to do. Also true but remember it is not just about Harry, it is about all the students and how they are all dragged into the war and now all believe Harry and will fight for and with him. Harry would never stand by and let this happen
The fact that the funeral wasn't shown (for the love of god i wish people would stop saying the funeral was deleted- it shows how stupid you are) just because the funeral is off screen does not mean it does not happen in the story. It's cloverfield all over again. WHAT IS IT?! YOU NEVER GET A GOOD LOOK AT THE CREATURE! Do you really need to have something so simple and obvious indicated to you. He died, they all loved him. OF COURSE he was going to have one!) shouldn't even matter. If you want a debate Dave you need to stop insulting other people's opinions - you have just called everyone who does not like this film stupid - me included. The funeral provides closure and also sets the scene for things to come. With this missing alot of fans will be angry - they did not get to grieve Dumbledore's death and it feels like the driector lacked respect for that. I love Cloverfield by the way.
The overall picture/ storyline is intact. So why are all these fans of the book so upset? Because it is not intact at all! The word intact as explained by the dictionary states: untouched especially by anything that harms or diminishes and we both know the film was not intact
The insane hypocrisy is that the people that "HATE" this movie, they are the ones that will see it twice, go and buy it on dvd because it has to be in the collection, and then they will wait in line for the midnight session on the next Harry Movie. Absolutely, but most of us fans will watch it again to try and find something we like about it to change our opinion because we still cannot believe they made a bad Potter film. Of course I will buy it on DVD - I am not going to have Eps 1-5 then 7 and 8. And yes we will be waiting in line for the next one in the high hopes it betters this piece of trash
If these movies hurt you as a fan so much, you should stop 'allowing' them to 'ruin' the book for you. If you disliked the film or the book would it diminish your passion in your opinion?
7. READING IS NOT FILM
This is mainstream cinema and to see all of what this movie does in a mulitplex was a refreshing drink to have.
This year has just been shit blowing up for two hours every single time I go to movies. I spoke to a good mate I trust about this last week, When the fuck will a blockbuster actually attempt to make any sort of discussion. Not all people want to sit through a film that requires abundant thinking Dave - we are not all trying to study it. It's the same reason we all love rollercoasters - strap in and enjoy the ride. If you put your mind to it you could study the death out of Terminator Salvation or Transformers 2 but you don't see it as intelligent and write it off as shit blowing up. The direcotrs of these films would wipe the floor with you explaining their motives and reasons behind scenes. It's all about perespective and life as to how you see a film.
Fair enough hermione didn't cry in a hallway, but a classroom in the book...big shit. When making a movie of a massive book, it's perfectly understandable to remove unnecessary stuff. I too would have loved to have seen harry drop to his knees and scream NOOOO into the sky with the camera dollying out to the ceiling when albus dies. But thankfully we didn't get that, because it wasn't in the book. Nor was a lot of stuff
8. THE BOOK HAS NOT BEEN ERASED
I don't really see why everyone HATES this movie. I didn't think it was perfect . I have heaps of problems with it, but none are because of an adaptation issue.
It was beautifully shot. And it was great to actually see a film that used the frame as if it was a tool, composing moments. Instead of shaking around the camera like mad for ten edits a second. David yates CAN direct a movie. The style (subjectively people don't like it) But i thought a lot of planning and design went into this picture and it paid off. I would personally like to gut the art director for making the film so bleak - I think he went way too far. Some scenes were shot ok but to be honest the film came across as though producers said "you can make the film but on one third the budget" it looked cheap and lacking. Phoenix, same director - looked sharp and stunning.
But most importantly... when criticizing Half blood prince as an adaptation it should be treated only on how it captures the overall storyline and themes and significantly the characterization within it's two and a half hours. But this is a film, and all these people who HATED the movie, and it's HATE that is thrown around, it's not "it was average" or "three stars" or even "disapointing". It's "Hate". Absolutely - hate is as passionate as your response to everyone's hate. And as film is an art form everyone's interpretation is their own and not what you believe it should be. Hence why you are defending it and I am hating it. Die evil Death Eater.
Not a single person I speak to can give me decent criticism on it as a movie. I've spoken to over thirty people. I've overhead more than a hundred ( I work in a movie theater). It's unanimously negative. (And I have heard some truly great arguments) That is why I have written about this.
Please somebody give me an actual review of this movie. Jason King has been the only person that I think has made any decent, albeit negative, analysis of this movie for what it is: a movie. Thanks Dave - with such large portions of fans or viewers disliking or hating it why do most critics seem to like it. My theory is they don't care for original source material and how it has effected people. I don't believe most of them have even read it. For films based on books this famous of course the original source material must be considered.
All everyone seems to give a shit about is how they removed their favorite five pages, and how their was no action. I guess I felt the need to vent out this frustration and I thank you if you managed to actually read this far. But the incredibly low standard people have today when they go and watch cinema...cinema, the only think that actually keeps me bothering with my life...it fucking hurts when they treat it like this. When those favorite five pages are pivotal and the director takes his vision beyond that of the source material then of course we are entitled to "give a shit". Standards of films are all based on our individual likes and dislikes - I am still baffled at how my mum loved Angels and Demons.
It fucking hurts so much, that people want nothing more than average in a movie.
The thought that maybe todays film-makers only want to make this kind of standard of film makes me want to kill myself. But thankfully that is not true...
I hope. Kill yourself Death Eater - it will save the arguments that will continue after the next one comes out People don't want average - they want to like what they see - people just have a differing opinion to yourself - no need to go all suicidal on us.
We live in a world where this film gets compared to Transformers 2, Twilight & terminator salvation... and loses. In this world nobody wins. Transformers sucked just as bad as this one, Twilight is for fans of the book and Terminator kind of sucked but to me is the start of a triolgy and is going to be a bit lame and will not make sense until they are all made - something all fans are hoping will come to fruition with the release of the next Potter films.
I guess i'm just a wanker. No argument here
In conclusion I think this film appeals to some and not to others - I hated it and what it did to the overall storyline of this book alone. I hope it comes across as a great bridging film once the others are made but so far I am not impressed. Now this debate is all tongue in cheek response - please do not commence a wall of insults to each of us - if you have a great opinion then please present it - and my final words - Death Eaters suck
Our Holy Leader
Well, it would appear that occasional writer for Salty Popcorn, Dave Longo, is one of those mentally unstable people who really enjoyed the film and has used his abundant free time to put his uni student of film thoughts forward on Facebook in an open letter to haters of Half Blood Prince. Dave, in my opinion, represents people that don't care for the books or how they are represented on film. I am grouping him with the majority of US and other interntational film critics who all seem to love the film and have gone as far as calling it the best in the series - to me this signals the end of the world as we know it. To Harry the death of the holy one, Dumbledore, signals the end of the world as he knows it. For this reason, and so I do not have to hate David I decided on a friendly article that could start a debate and keep from war our differing thoughts. So Dave, representing the evil people with no respect for the storyline will be the head of the Death Eaters (Voldermort himself if you choose) and I will be representing the students of Hogwarts (Harry Potter if you choose). So wands to the ready........................ ...
Below in black (evil) writing will be Dave's complete article from Facebook (I have his permission to use it and commence everyone's thoughts) - I will have my comments written along with his in the text color of blue. I do apologise if Dave's article is quite long - we are both quite passionate in our thoughts. Now this is all in good fun and in no way personal so no getting upset Dave.
A formal address to the haters of HARRY POTTER AND THE HALF BLOOD PRINCE written by Dave Longo. A NOTE BEFORE READING:
-okay this is long, and is argumentative. I have had enormous amounts of problems with emails and things i've written to them in the past. People, when they read my stuff, think I am personally attacking them. So i just wanted to say, If you have heard me talk about films before (which I'm sure you have) you know it only comes from passion about the subject. In this article I want to open up a discussion not frighten people away. So here be your warning. If you hated the movie, that is cool. Dave - I think people take it as though you are attacking them because the majority of the time you are arguing your point - with so much passion and not listening to their opinions that this is taken that way. Like I said - I am so passionate on my opinion for this film I would consider not being friends with you for liking it - I don't understand how someone educated could have such a differing opinion on something that left me emotionally scarred after watching - for this reason I think you are a Death Eater
-Also I use capital letters a lot and people before have thought this is to spell it out for them. It's not. Just ignore them, I only do it because I write so quickly, if i want to go back and figure out what i've written I can skim the capital letters, and figure out where I am. So yeah, it's not me going. "hey I HATE you. I H-A-T-E you. Incase you can't S-P-E-L-L". I will also put a significant word in a sentence in capitals for dramatic effect sometimes.
-Phew, that made me feel incredibly condescending and patronizing. But trust me Friendships have nearly been ruined because of this, I felt it necessary. Choose your side Death Eater
-It's late, I want to stare away from this screen, so I haven't spell checked or edited. Get on with it already
-there are GIGANTIC SPOILERS inside, for both 'Half blood prince' and 'Deathly Hallows' books/films. You have been duly warned.
-I'm serious about the spoilers. Deathly sirious. Don't use Potter humor you Sirious murderer you
-So...lets roll on with the pre-ambling:
A FORMAL ADDRESS TO THE HATERS OF 'HARRY POTTER AND THE HALF BLOOD PRINCE'.
by David Longo.
Please. Please. PLEASE. Debate me seriously.
Firstly the books aren't high art. No matter what you will say, these story-lines are for children as well, any piece of art that can be enjoyed by adults and children together on different levels is an achievement. I think art is like beauty - it is in the eye of the beholder - to about a billion people you just insulted their intelligence - a true trait of the Death Eater
I do have as much respect for the books as a die hard would. I'm not a huge, huge fan of books (I wouldn't cry in them, or dress up to go see the movies), but i did grow up with them. Death Eater
And to be told repeatedly I do not have respect for Rowling because I liked this film, is enough to drive me batshit. No respect Death Eater
I'm a diehard fan of film, which is why I have written this insanely long near novel: When film is slandered as a medium, I go into meltdown. Here for you readers is a most insane of a meltdown: Is the Death Eater being as passionate but from the other side of the coin. People have massively differing opinions, to me the people who love and respect the books dislike the film and the people that don't care much for the books seem to love it (Death Eaters).
Okay. Before we roll: A little bit more on the books of Harry Potter... I do truly enjoy the books, I bought everyone after the third one (Fourth one was about to come out when I got on the Potter train) on opening day; I even waited in line for the last one... but I love them enough that no film adaptation in the world could wreck them. And by god this film comes NO WHERE NEAR close enough to wrecking the novel it is based on. I don't think it wrecks the books in anyway (we can reread them over and over) - what I think it wrecks is the people's passion for the film adaption. In quoting the director here : "J.K. Rowling supplied us with the book, which I think the advantage we have over so many other franchises. I mean with the Bonds, they have to invent new stories each and every time. We don't have to do that. We have JK's books." But to me they didn't use JK's books they created a different story by placing in scenes that weren't in the book and trashing a pace set by Order of the Phoenix. To me this film stalled the flow and stability of the entire film series. I am sure it is "the calm before the storm" I have written so many times but Phoenix set a pace and that was the building of action and the hints of the commencement of the war. WE (The Students of Hogwarts) would not stand by why our school and headmaster were being attacked, we would do what our creator intended and battle to the death. Harry does not idly standby and watch his hero get slaughtered, (more on that later).
I understand completely that the half blood prince was never going to be the book before going in, so I treated the film as a "film"...otherwise I would have just gone and read the damn hardback. I think every film adapted perfectly - Phoenix was by far the longest book so had the most removed from it yet it contained the essence of Harry Potter throughout - this did not, it came across as a montage of Potter imagery and lacked it's soul that we all went to see. It's explanation of tone was majorly lacking
1. DUMBLEDORE AND THE HALF BLOOD PRINCE, AND THE STATE OF CINEMA
It's not called "dumbledore and the half blood prince". The film focused on Harry, and all that teenage angst "stuff" (which is what should be called "story") is what was there in the book and what was hugely entertaining in the film.
In nearly every movie this year, there has not been a single MAIN character. If a movie has a main character all they do is either 'really really want to go to college' or 'have to blow up a building before the movie ends'. The shitty writing all throughout this year (When a supporting character is so good, say for example sam worthington in Terminator- whom everyone comes out loving- people tend to overlook how shitty the main character was ie. Christian Bale as John connor) It's put film down as an art form, all this lazy writing. Exactly thankyou Steve Kloves (screenplay writer for Half Blood Prince)
In two and half hours (which is now standard time for a movie - get used to it) there is only so much you can do. Smart movies develop and properly flesh out one or two characters, all supporting characters do (Their structural job) is further along the main character). It's a misunderstanding of fundamental film criticism that is so common today because SHITHOUSE screenplays are now the expected norm. It's happening all throughout the art world. Why have they managed to do it in 5 out of the 6 Potter films so far?
The state of film at the moment is akin to this. You the viewer have been drinking Coca cola for fifteen years. You love the taste. you are so used to it. You have never drank pepsi. One day you drink pepsi and are you truly surprised you don't like it as much as coke? But imagine if coca cola goes, and all there is is pepsi. After fifteen years of Pepsi, when you finally get coke again you won't like it. Pepsi sucks Death Eater - I would go for Lift or Fanta
In cinema the damage is done. A movie that costs 150 million dollars , needs to make a profit. And when all the movies that earn profit are horrible, the standard drops. Because unfortunately for more movies to come out, more money needs to come in. If people didn't settle for crap, and actually went to the dendy, more dendy type films would get made. I am studying film at the moment, and god forbid any of them would see more than two films a year outside of the blockbusters. They are making the product, and unfortunately the product is just of such a low standard. Violins are playing in the background
2. THE STANDARD SET
So the standard is at a level in which the movies people want to see are of just shit blowing up, or a vampire story that isn't about vampires at all. Based on the lack of film criticism in peoples response to Harry 6, my only conclusion is that nobody has actually gone to watch this movie because it is a movie, ONLY because it is a book they liked. All the negativity is based on how it is not the book. And because people are so used to this low standard, any thing that is on a higher level gets shunted. And if you have bothered to read this far congratulations.
If you have hated Harry potter 6 because it is not your favorite book, then I really can't imagine anything I will continue to write swaying your opinion. Maybe, it is possible that people went to see it because they love the books - it is THE ONLY REASON these films are popular at all, Rowling created a universe that is as good, to many people, as the Universe created by Tolkein or George Lucas. Of course it is going to create negativity when the story does not represent the actual tale created, just look at Toklein Jnr trying to sue the LOTR makers and writing the films off as rubbish. And saying
And because people are so used to this low standard, any thing that is on a higher level gets shunted
- this is your opinion not everyone's, to the billions of Potter fans this is of a lower standard and you just insulted every other Potter film Death EaterIn all this rambling my point is, I do not want to debate continually THE BOOK VS. THE MOVIE. Because that is not criticism. It's not fair to 200 or so people that worked so tirelessly for over two years for you to see this. It's not fair to Rowling, because she of all people would advocate reading over film and would not want you to forget that she did put blood sweat and tears into her books. Rowling interestingly enough, thought this film was the best adaptation so far, and she also sat as a script advisor to the screenwriter steve kloves. And ultimately it's not fair to yourself. It may not be fair to ourselves but it is honest in our beliefs - Rowling has enough of herself to blame - she signed off on it. It might have been truer to how she saw it but not to how, we the fans and Students of Hogwarts interpreted it. Also, the 200 or so people that work on every film they ever make know the film will be judged - it just depends if they are more interested in appealing to the Death Eaters or the Students of Hogwarts.
So if you chose to reply to me here or in person, and wish to have a serious conversation I am more than happy to. I live to talk films, and never ever really get to do it seriously. But please have some sense and criticize this movie as a film. And not because this pepsi doesn't taste anything like coca cola. Like I said Pepsi sucks
3. THIS FILM IS SMARTER THAN IT GETS CREDIT FOR. Yawn
"all this movie had was talking. There was no action, there was one really good action scene in the book, and it wasn't even in the movie. I was just really bored." The lady next to me mumbled freaky comments to herself through the entire film and after wanting to jam my wand up her nose I started seeing and agreeing with her. The romance came across as the quality in Neighbors and to be honest when they all raised their wands after Dumbledore died I actually laughed - this is not something you want in a scene this pivotal. David Yates even siad it was the hardest thing to remove the funeral scene. To me it was needed immensely - no fans got the closure of Dumbeldores death except a pantomine farewell. The action WAS needed immensely and was part of explaining the characters (all of their) journies how now come to no longer sitting back and hiding behind Hogwart's walls - this was it - the battle had now come into their home and they were no longer protected by Dumbledore - so as opposed to sitting in bed all the students became defenders of their holy grail - the right to freedom - when you remove this from the film you destroy its soul.
It was a nice change to see a blockbuster that had the balls to remove a huge action scene (which does not change the outcome of the story- therefore dramatically useless) in favor of letting us see our characters develop as people. It may not change the outcome of the sotry - Dumbledore dying but see above - it changes a lot more. Harry would NEVER stand there regardless of your claim to him trusting Snape - RUBBISH - he never trusted Snape - the only person who never did. If anythin his trust for Dumbledore - but he himself states in the film "Dumbledore himself says he can be wrong" - Harry's entire essence through every film is to battle for good and fight against wrong, evil and Deat Eaters.
After all the final battle adds nothing to the emotional journey and would chew up another 20 minutes of screen time. Why do we need shit blowing up in our movies so much?
The scene in which the burrow burns was a waste of screen time really. The film-makers know that people get bored easily so they wrote that scene specifically to satisfy everyones "shit blowing up" need and then continued with the story line afterwards.
I keep hearing everyone whinge on about how they loved the addition of that scene and then they immediately complain about the screenwriter making other scenes up. (all of which involved "talking"). I did enjoy the Burrow scene but would have much preferred it kept the original scene in the end which is part of the story - I also did not like how the Burrow looked so bloody different from other films. We, the Students of Hogwarts would have much preferred to battle for our beliefs in the foretold story than watch something become invented for the sake of satisfying the needs of "shit blowing up". It was pointless and well, there's your 10-20mins needed for the correct scene to be included.
The dinner scenes that were not in the book, were oddly my favorite parts. All these people do to you reader, is say how you and I are idiots for not respecting the books, then after that all they do is make fun of the books for two minutes. Call Harry potter a homo, and make shitty wand cracks. A lot of people, I realize, think Harry Potter is nerdy, but when there is a movie out it's all of a sudden cool to like it. I suppose if everyone else is seeing it...sigh...anyway... Now Harry is a "poof" maybe I have a chance haha
4. THEY CALL THEMSELVES "FANS" Be very careful Dave - there is close to a billion of us
I think this film is smarter than it's being given credit for.
The huge complaint by the fans of the book is the treatment of dumbledore's death. If the character's death didn't do anything for you I don't know if thats this film or it's makers' fault. Definately the film or film maker - it lacked the scope, detail required and not hard to accomplish and it also lacked credibility - this is the penultimate scene that makes Harry a man and a fighter and besides the score of the film it was all kind of lame and bordering on B grade. This needed to equal the "I am your father" scene from Star Wars.
There has been five books/ films prior to this one. That all have negative/ positive aspects to them. But they all had (what this film does indeed have) is incredibly well written characters that are consistently fleshed out. OMG - I have to agree
After all these characters have been developed through five films before and you should know a fair enough about them already...not to mention all the "extra stuff in the book". You shouldn't have to rely on two minutes of screentime, this is why the film is very smart, it knows you know the characters in and out, so it pushes them further, and unfortunately for some the action HEAVY aspects of the last films were removed... You keep comparing the film to the book - I thought we weren't doing that anymore and
unfortunately for some the action HEAVY aspects of the last films were removed...
to the detriment of the entire film.The moment that really explains that this movie is in many ways smarter than the book is dumbledore's death. Harry isn't charmed, he isn't 'forced' into doing nothing like the book. He lets dumbledore die because of his trust of snape, now the guilt he will have in the next film will be far greater. It is shown entirely visually. David Yates was perhaps a little to trusting of his audience, he knows you have grown up with the series, and any true fan of the book has grown along with them as well. He also should have known that fans would be mortified at what he did - appalingly so - Harry Potter is the ONLY person who NEVER trusted Snape - from the very first film when he gives Snape the evil eye you know he does not believe a word that comes from his mouth. He does however trust Dumbledore and Dumbledore told Harry to trust him - something Harry would normally do under any circumstances but not in DEATH. Harry has seen people and family die or be hurt all around him - it has made his character what it is - the person who is the chosen one, the one person that will always stand up to evil. Harry would NEVER EVER stand there and watch someone die - especially Dumbledore.
And if you haven't read the books it is no excuse, because you HAVE to have seen FIVE films to understand this, it's a long drawn out 7 part storyline, (People's reactions to this film show that they believe that Dumbledore's death is the conclusion of the entire series) I guess people need to be reminded that it is Harry Potters storyline, and the repecutions of Dumbledores actual death are TRULY FELT in the NEXT book/film).
(People's reactions to this film show that they believe that Dumbledore's death is the conclusion of the entire series)
- I have never heard of this before - it is only the death of the greatest influence on Harry's lifeWhat I am trying to say is David Yates, the director, trusts that you know the characters enough to be able to read their body language, and identify visual cues that address their characters. Otherwise you just have another blockbuster in which characters announce through dialogue "im sad" or "im upset because I really want to go to college".
It's patronizing, and condescending. It really annoys me because film is a visual medium, and when a film-maker finally uses it the correct way people dismiss it because they only want shit blowing up, or that it didn't have their five favorite pages from the book it's based on. As you said earlier this film and books are made for adults and children alike - if you treat everyone as needing an explanation they will understand it. Do you think a 12yr old is going ton understand the nuances of these characters? The film is not made for uni students - it is made for fans.
5. DAVID YATES SERIOUSLY NEEDS SOME CREDIT
The amount of foreshadowing, turncoating, relationships...all these little moments of life that were conveyed visually in every shot what was impressed me. From the position of the camera, to the proximity of the actors within frames, to even the constant useage of parrallel walls. Does this inclue a film that looks so bleak it comes across with a pallate of grey, I do feel he lacked the explanation as to why a Quidditch game has no flags or banners flying or why there was only a handful of people watching, the commencement with the Death Eaters flying though London was a great opening but a stupid one - it was only created to be a an opening that sold more tickets in IMAX - it is the only scene in IMAX 3D then you take your glasses off for the remaining 2.25hrs. Sure you and I know it is a commencement of war, and that this greying of the pallate is a visual explanation of the deterioration of society caused by your pals, the Death Eaters, but not many people will understand it. Hogwarts has always been the safe place - it should have maintained its brightness and color and then lose it with the battle at the end, which was missing, as this represents the end of safety to one and all and highlights the day all students became warriors in a fight to the death.
All the detail and attention. If there was attention to detail where is the end scene of the book??
David Yates constructed a movie about people living life admist a war. You complain about the weasly twins only having one scene. It's not about the twins, it's about how they are some of the few people who can bring any sort of color to a weary dreary world, in which shops gets blown up and people die. there was so much of this contextuality that i loved. Maybe I read too much into it.
6. HARRY, RON, HERMIONE and DRACO
The removal of Voldemort from this film is a misconception. Just because Ralph Fiennes looked cool and scary in the last movies, does not mean he needed to be here. The villian of this film was Draco Malfoy, who had been developed SPECIFICALLY for his actions in the film in the last five books/films. Draco parrallels Harry. Not only is he a great character in this, he is incredibly complex, he is a fully fleshed person, yet he conveys all these themes about manipulation, inheritance, racism etc. And as it's a kids film too this stuff is conveyed mostly visually or discreetly. Draco is a chump compared to Voldermort - the pace of the film was set with Phoenix and the pending war. I think Voldermort was definately needed to show the pure evil he is. Even a scene at the start with Draco being told his mission and the reasons he received it and of the uselessness of his father.
The main characters are RON, HERMIONE, and specifically HARRY. It's their story, anything else including other characters and settings only serves to further their development. we should be so lucky that everything else is done so well and fleshed to the point that it is. The film-makers focus on this because it is what is important, without focusing on them, the movie loses what little the die hard haters of the movie claim they wanted. The movie lost more than what we claimed we wanted - it lost a little bit of our love. Seriously, I could have done without many of the relations scenes, is some guy hitting on Hermione that important or could the love blossoming between Ron and Hermione been achived differently. It is war - so start it already.
Of note is the lack of complaint about Hagrid's lack of scenes. In many ways the forgetting of Hagrid by the fans showcases the hypocrisy. Why is it okay for the screenwriters to remove one thing you hated, but unfair for them to remove one thing you liked and everyone else hated. Because Hagrid had way more book time in the story - where is Hagrid in the end scene - Harry thinks he is in the hut - Hagrid is the first one on the scene to help Harry!! And yes we love Hagrid of course we want more
it's not about scenes it's about the entire thing. Thats what I'm trying to say. And here the entire thing includes the last five movies/books that came before. The only criticism of this new movie, sounds like either criticism of the book itself (in the end, and all the fans know it, the half blood prince serves only as a bridge to the last book, it's the classic calm before the storm, we all know what is coming, and boy do we get a lot of dread in the last book/2 part movie. So do we all really want it know. The death of dumbledore was meant to prepare you for what is to come. Quite true but this book, while a bridge, is the phsychological explanation of who Voldermort is - the film only mildy deals with this and it comes off more as an afterthought.
Dumbledore is harrys only savior, he helps harry out everytime. All the other witches and wizards (even the bad guys) are afraid of him because they know he is the most powerful wizard.
nnow with him gone, what hope does Harry have? thats what it is meant to do. Also true but remember it is not just about Harry, it is about all the students and how they are all dragged into the war and now all believe Harry and will fight for and with him. Harry would never stand by and let this happen
The fact that the funeral wasn't shown (for the love of god i wish people would stop saying the funeral was deleted- it shows how stupid you are) just because the funeral is off screen does not mean it does not happen in the story. It's cloverfield all over again. WHAT IS IT?! YOU NEVER GET A GOOD LOOK AT THE CREATURE! Do you really need to have something so simple and obvious indicated to you. He died, they all loved him. OF COURSE he was going to have one!) shouldn't even matter. If you want a debate Dave you need to stop insulting other people's opinions - you have just called everyone who does not like this film stupid - me included. The funeral provides closure and also sets the scene for things to come. With this missing alot of fans will be angry - they did not get to grieve Dumbledore's death and it feels like the driector lacked respect for that. I love Cloverfield by the way.
The overall picture/ storyline is intact. So why are all these fans of the book so upset? Because it is not intact at all! The word intact as explained by the dictionary states: untouched especially by anything that harms or diminishes and we both know the film was not intact
The insane hypocrisy is that the people that "HATE" this movie, they are the ones that will see it twice, go and buy it on dvd because it has to be in the collection, and then they will wait in line for the midnight session on the next Harry Movie. Absolutely, but most of us fans will watch it again to try and find something we like about it to change our opinion because we still cannot believe they made a bad Potter film. Of course I will buy it on DVD - I am not going to have Eps 1-5 then 7 and 8. And yes we will be waiting in line for the next one in the high hopes it betters this piece of trash
If these movies hurt you as a fan so much, you should stop 'allowing' them to 'ruin' the book for you. If you disliked the film or the book would it diminish your passion in your opinion?
7. READING IS NOT FILM
This is mainstream cinema and to see all of what this movie does in a mulitplex was a refreshing drink to have.
This year has just been shit blowing up for two hours every single time I go to movies. I spoke to a good mate I trust about this last week, When the fuck will a blockbuster actually attempt to make any sort of discussion. Not all people want to sit through a film that requires abundant thinking Dave - we are not all trying to study it. It's the same reason we all love rollercoasters - strap in and enjoy the ride. If you put your mind to it you could study the death out of Terminator Salvation or Transformers 2 but you don't see it as intelligent and write it off as shit blowing up. The direcotrs of these films would wipe the floor with you explaining their motives and reasons behind scenes. It's all about perespective and life as to how you see a film.
Fair enough hermione didn't cry in a hallway, but a classroom in the book...big shit. When making a movie of a massive book, it's perfectly understandable to remove unnecessary stuff. I too would have loved to have seen harry drop to his knees and scream NOOOO into the sky with the camera dollying out to the ceiling when albus dies. But thankfully we didn't get that, because it wasn't in the book. Nor was a lot of stuff
8. THE BOOK HAS NOT BEEN ERASED
I don't really see why everyone HATES this movie. I didn't think it was perfect . I have heaps of problems with it, but none are because of an adaptation issue.
It was beautifully shot. And it was great to actually see a film that used the frame as if it was a tool, composing moments. Instead of shaking around the camera like mad for ten edits a second. David yates CAN direct a movie. The style (subjectively people don't like it) But i thought a lot of planning and design went into this picture and it paid off. I would personally like to gut the art director for making the film so bleak - I think he went way too far. Some scenes were shot ok but to be honest the film came across as though producers said "you can make the film but on one third the budget" it looked cheap and lacking. Phoenix, same director - looked sharp and stunning.
But most importantly... when criticizing Half blood prince as an adaptation it should be treated only on how it captures the overall storyline and themes and significantly the characterization within it's two and a half hours. But this is a film, and all these people who HATED the movie, and it's HATE that is thrown around, it's not "it was average" or "three stars" or even "disapointing". It's "Hate". Absolutely - hate is as passionate as your response to everyone's hate. And as film is an art form everyone's interpretation is their own and not what you believe it should be. Hence why you are defending it and I am hating it. Die evil Death Eater.
Not a single person I speak to can give me decent criticism on it as a movie. I've spoken to over thirty people. I've overhead more than a hundred ( I work in a movie theater). It's unanimously negative. (And I have heard some truly great arguments) That is why I have written about this.
Please somebody give me an actual review of this movie. Jason King has been the only person that I think has made any decent, albeit negative, analysis of this movie for what it is: a movie. Thanks Dave - with such large portions of fans or viewers disliking or hating it why do most critics seem to like it. My theory is they don't care for original source material and how it has effected people. I don't believe most of them have even read it. For films based on books this famous of course the original source material must be considered.
All everyone seems to give a shit about is how they removed their favorite five pages, and how their was no action. I guess I felt the need to vent out this frustration and I thank you if you managed to actually read this far. But the incredibly low standard people have today when they go and watch cinema...cinema, the only think that actually keeps me bothering with my life...it fucking hurts when they treat it like this. When those favorite five pages are pivotal and the director takes his vision beyond that of the source material then of course we are entitled to "give a shit". Standards of films are all based on our individual likes and dislikes - I am still baffled at how my mum loved Angels and Demons.
It fucking hurts so much, that people want nothing more than average in a movie.
The thought that maybe todays film-makers only want to make this kind of standard of film makes me want to kill myself. But thankfully that is not true...
I hope. Kill yourself Death Eater - it will save the arguments that will continue after the next one comes out
People don't want average - they want to like what they see - people just have a differing opinion to yourself - no need to go all suicidal on us.We live in a world where this film gets compared to Transformers 2, Twilight & terminator salvation... and loses. In this world nobody wins. Transformers sucked just as bad as this one, Twilight is for fans of the book and Terminator kind of sucked but to me is the start of a triolgy and is going to be a bit lame and will not make sense until they are all made - something all fans are hoping will come to fruition with the release of the next Potter films.
I guess i'm just a wanker. No argument here
In conclusion I think this film appeals to some and not to others - I hated it and what it did to the overall storyline of this book alone. I hope it comes across as a great bridging film once the others are made but so far I am not impressed. Now this debate is all tongue in cheek response - please do not commence a wall of insults to each of us - if you have a great opinion then please present it - and my final words - Death Eaters suck
| 89 |
| Vote |
Add To: 
subscribe to this blog
Comment by Jason King
Sydney Table
Salty Popcorn
Total Randomness
Comment by Putty
Comment by Morgan Bell
Deep Pencil
Business News
Movie Train
a friend of mine who has read all the books said he was disappointed that the character of the half-blood prince was glossed over
i have not read the books, nor have i seen this most recent film
TheAmaxingAtheist on YouTube said this was the best Potter film so far, he has read the books . . . he was the one who hated Transformers 2, i posted his video on 20/20
side note re: the font, maybe blue would show up better?
Comment by Jason King
Sydney Table
Salty Popcorn
Total Randomness
I started the site because I am opinionated so I could get my opinion across so thank you. There were some scenes I found funny yes but on the whole lacked all sense of synergy the others have in bucketloads. I did like the scene they added but would have mouch preferred the proper ending in its stead. To me the ending is the most important part of this book so to me yes it does ruin the rest of it.
Thanks for your comments.
Death Eaters 2
Students of Hogwarts 1
Comment by Jason King
Sydney Table
Salty Popcorn
Total Randomness
Your friend, the Amazing Atheist is one of the mentally unstable Deatheaters
Will look at the font now.
No change to score!
Comment by Sean Lander
But I do have to pose a question. Who liked No Country For Old Men? Coen Brothers made that pretty much page for page. Why couldn't they attempt that with Harry?
I k ow the booms are big but in 2 and a half hours they could have stuck closer to the story. And as for "shit blowing up", I love that. I want to make films like that. It sells. People enjoy it. Jason brought up roller coasters. People love them because it gives them a rush, a thrill that try otherwise can't experience in everyday life. Explosions in films do that too.
Comment by Wilson Pon
Health 2 Know
Adventure Toes
boxing sound
Business Rope
Fun Places 2 Travel
The Harry Potter: Half Blood Prince had let me down once, and I don't want the similar thing to be happened in the new series...!
Comment by Jason King
Sydney Table
Salty Popcorn
Total Randomness
To be honest I never knew No Country.... was even a book to begin with - I will have to track it down.
2 Death Eaters
2 Students of Hogwarts
Comment by Jason King
Sydney Table
Salty Popcorn
Total Randomness
2 Death Eaters
3 Students of Hogwarts
Comment by Anonymous
P.S. I remember reading/hearing somewhere that they were putting the funeral of dumbledore in the next film, since they are making the last book into two parts or seprate films, this would sound like a wise choice, although, it could leave the first part of the 7th book very depressing, as it starts off with a low and never reaches a fulfilling and happy ending (this all depends where they finish the first part and start the second part).
P.S.S. I liked the film for the film, but hated the destruction of the important parts of the film such as the memories of Tom Riddle's grandparents and uncles demise (in the curation of slytherin's ring to be used as a horcrux)
Happy Posting!
Comment by Wynona Lavota
Generation Y Life
The previews look good, but I remember how crapola a last movie was, and I really hope this one is better.
Comment by Bryn
Horrorphile
I don't know how well The Half-Blood Prince holds up as a novel on its own since I haven't read it. Nor do I know how well it holds up against the other six novels of the series, since I've not read any of the others.
The Half-Blood Prince movie did however feel like a kind of bridging narrative. But essentially they're all bridging narratives as they are part of a serial, the ongoing adventures (and misadventures) of Harry Potter as he tries to seek peace of mind and perhaps a little revenge over the death of his parents, and in the process also become a powerful wizard through his learning at Hogwart. There's a momentum that carries his story through all seven novels, and each novel sets up the next. One could argue, I'm presuming, that The Deathly Hallows will be the most satisfying novel/movie of the series as it brings all the pieces of the ongoing main narrative to a whole, and finally a sense of closure. I'm guessing here. The characters that are now so well etched from the six previous novels/movies that they need no more exposition. I can't believe I'm spouting so much about Harry Potter. I think you need to detach yourself from your passion as a diehard fan Jason and look at the movie simply as a movie, which apart from being overlong and a little talky provides amply intrigue, drama, action - even horror - comedy, and romance. Sheesh, it's a veritable feast of sub-genres in one movie!
Comment by Bryn
Horrorphile
Comment by Jason King
Sydney Table
Salty Popcorn
Total Randomness
Wynona - I can't help it - I am an obsessed Harry fan. Love your name. Thanks for popping in. Will leave you as neutral - come back and let us know your thoughts after you have seen it if you want to.
Bryn -
For something that waffles on so much I have managed to receive quite a few readers to it - if they read it all or half of it - that's up to them. This was a debate between me and a friend that I thought was interesting enough to share - something a lot of people on Orble and Facebook have mentioned.
I like a lot of your points on the film but I will not detach myself from my passion of the stories as it is my passion that makes me do this and my passion is what drives my intelligence and need to debate the matter.
Comment by Rix
PS: Bryn, its Harry Potter, read the books and then you will realise why people will read this article
Comment by Jason King
Sydney Table
Salty Popcorn
Total Randomness
2 Death Eaters
3 Students of Hogwarts
Comment by Jason King
Sydney Table
Salty Popcorn
Total Randomness
I grew up on Star Wars, Superman and Indiana Jones films - in these if shit ain't exploding people will fall asleep
Fingers crossed for the next film.
3 Death Eaters
4 Students of Hogwarts
Wow - we nearly have a wand duelling team or enough for a half quidditch battle hahaha
Comment by Bryn
Horrorphile
it was patronising, and I apologise. I'm not sure where it came from either. Weird mood this morning. Enough said. I appreciate there'll be plenty of people keen to wade through your post. I wasn't one of them and I should've kept my mouth shut. Point taken.
Comment by Jason King
Sydney Table
Salty Popcorn
Total Randomness
Tha Bad Omen - I have no idea what you are talking about and will leave you as a crazy person locked up in Azkaban in regards to you being on sides for this debate thing.