Harry Potter and the not very Satisfied Viewer
I watched Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince tonight. Behind the cut are some bullet points, listing things that came to my mind. It's neither a full summary nor a full review. I only read the book once shortly after it had been published, but I don't think I'm misremembering too many things.
1. There were times when I thought I could imagine two much more interesting films based on the book than the one I was actually watching.
a) First, a kind of action film that just concentrates on the main plot. I enjoyed the scene in the cave very much and wouldn't have minded a few more intensive scenes like that. In comparison I thought that e.g. the scene when Katie Bell is cursed was unfortunately comical.
b) Second, and I never expected to ever say that because I don't like Draco Malfoy, but I would have liked to watch a character study of him instead. It would be interesting to see how an adolescent tackles such a horrible task, how he struggles with his conscience, how he despaires, how he fights on.
2. I understand that a film never can contain all the details of a book, but I'm never going to understand how the screenwriters of the HP films manage to leave out crucial details that are necessary in order to understand the plot, but scenes that are totally useless for furthering the plot aren't cut. I really could have done without the Quidditch try-out and the game, and for my taste there definitely is too much teenage love.
3. I'm afraid I think that Alan Rickman exaggerates. I know that Snape has a very distinctive way of speaking, but even J K Rowling didn't come up with as many descriptive adverbs for his way of speaking than Alan Rickman brings to life. This clipped voice, and the way he pauses where no one else would ever make a pause. He probably always did it like this, but it never struck me as much as it did now. Perhaps it has to do with the fact that he now has a few more scenes than usual.
4. What's the point of Snape telling Harry, „I'm the Half-Blood Prince“, when the one scene when Snape confronts Harry and that would have shown that Snape actually knows that Harry uses his old potions book isn't included?
5. When I read all that backstory about the Gaunts, I was rather bored by it, but it seems to me now that it contains one very important detail that people don't know about who just watch the film, namely that Voldemort is a Half-Blood himself. Or am I misremembering something, and we knew it before?
6. At the end, when Harry, Hermione and Ron are standing on the tower, Hermione says something along the lines of them accompanying Harry on his quest for the Horcruxes because he wouldn't be able to do it on his own. But am I not right in saying that during this film Hermione and Ron don't help Harry at all? Are they as passive as that in the book as well?
7. I really liked the moment when Dumbledore first tells Harry that he again has to ask too much of Harry, and then there's the cut to Dumbledore and Snape, and Snape says that Dumbledore is asking too much of him, Snape. It says a lot about Dumbledore.
1. There were times when I thought I could imagine two much more interesting films based on the book than the one I was actually watching.
a) First, a kind of action film that just concentrates on the main plot. I enjoyed the scene in the cave very much and wouldn't have minded a few more intensive scenes like that. In comparison I thought that e.g. the scene when Katie Bell is cursed was unfortunately comical.
b) Second, and I never expected to ever say that because I don't like Draco Malfoy, but I would have liked to watch a character study of him instead. It would be interesting to see how an adolescent tackles such a horrible task, how he struggles with his conscience, how he despaires, how he fights on.
2. I understand that a film never can contain all the details of a book, but I'm never going to understand how the screenwriters of the HP films manage to leave out crucial details that are necessary in order to understand the plot, but scenes that are totally useless for furthering the plot aren't cut. I really could have done without the Quidditch try-out and the game, and for my taste there definitely is too much teenage love.
3. I'm afraid I think that Alan Rickman exaggerates. I know that Snape has a very distinctive way of speaking, but even J K Rowling didn't come up with as many descriptive adverbs for his way of speaking than Alan Rickman brings to life. This clipped voice, and the way he pauses where no one else would ever make a pause. He probably always did it like this, but it never struck me as much as it did now. Perhaps it has to do with the fact that he now has a few more scenes than usual.
4. What's the point of Snape telling Harry, „I'm the Half-Blood Prince“, when the one scene when Snape confronts Harry and that would have shown that Snape actually knows that Harry uses his old potions book isn't included?
5. When I read all that backstory about the Gaunts, I was rather bored by it, but it seems to me now that it contains one very important detail that people don't know about who just watch the film, namely that Voldemort is a Half-Blood himself. Or am I misremembering something, and we knew it before?
6. At the end, when Harry, Hermione and Ron are standing on the tower, Hermione says something along the lines of them accompanying Harry on his quest for the Horcruxes because he wouldn't be able to do it on his own. But am I not right in saying that during this film Hermione and Ron don't help Harry at all? Are they as passive as that in the book as well?
7. I really liked the moment when Dumbledore first tells Harry that he again has to ask too much of Harry, and then there's the cut to Dumbledore and Snape, and Snape says that Dumbledore is asking too much of him, Snape. It says a lot about Dumbledore.