22
Courtney does Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince
Posted by Courtney
“Did I know that I just met the most dangerous dark wizard of all time? No.”
The Scoop: 2009 PG, Directed by David Yates and starring Daniel Raddcliffe, Rupert Grint and Emma Watson
Tagline: Once again I must ask too much of you, Harry.
Summary Capsule: Young wizard learns about evil guy’s past while his friends get all caught up in teen hormones. And somebody dies. Based on some book you might have heard of.

Courtney’s Rating: I do love the Harry Potter fandom and most of its members, but they can really aggravate me sometimes…
Courtney’s Review: (A preemptive apology for the length and scatter-brained-ness of this review. There’s so much I wanted to touch on a not nearly enough room for it!)
When HBP was first pushed back from November 2008 to July 2009, I was livid. I’d never been angrier at something so trivial in my life (several months later, this honor was awarded to VH1’s pop culture showdown the Great Debate for “officially deciding” that puppies are cuter than kittens. Hello? Puppies pee all over the place, and there is nothing cute about that. Kittens come potty-trained. And evil is inherently adorable.) So after an extra 8 months, the one thing everyone wanted to know was, was it worth the wait?
Let’s get right to it. I don’t care what you think about the movie vs. the book. Of course the book is better, but the two mediums are so different that they shouldn’t be compared. (Contrary to popular belief, there are some movies that are better than their books, but that’s a rant for a different day.) The movie, based on its own merits, is freakin’ awesome. It rivals Prisoner of Azkaban for being the most well-made film of the franchise (the two least well-made being Sorcerer’s Stone and Chamber of Secrets, which, perhaps coincidentally, are the “closest to the books.”) I know there’s a lot of good things to be said for movies that stay true to their source material, but let’s be honest – people do not watch movies the same way they read books. Changes should be more than welcome as long as the message and tone remaion the same. Here, I’m more than certain that HBP got it all right.
One thing that some Potterheads keep complaining about is that there’s too much focus on the romance aspect. I wonder if these people even read the book, as romance was kind of a big thing there, too. The whirlwind relationship between Ron and Lavender Brown is pretty important to the development of Ron and Hermione’s characters. And the Harry/Ginny kiss scene was very different from the scene in the book, but I thought it was sweet. I do wish more focus went to their relationship, but since so much of its development is internal, I guess it was bound to piss off die-hards no matter what the filmmakers did.
I know I’m one of few, but I liked the added scene at the Burrow. It was a cool way to show that there was a lot of danger outside of Hogawarts, and it showed us a little more of some favorite characters without forcing them in. And I fully support the decision to leave out the battle – save it for the big one in Deathly Hallows! But I was disappointed that they left out the funeral scene (you know what I’m talking about) because it seemed so beautiful in the book. I thought it would really look gorgeous and be mood-appropriate.
The acting in this film was by far the best it’s ever been for HP. Daniel Raddcliffe (D-Radd, if you will) is really becoming a strong actor, and Emma Watson didn’t completely annoy me this time, a huge compliment to her. In fact, I daresay she did a more than adequate job here. I loved seeing so much more of Bonnie Wright as Ginny. I think she’s fun and cute and it’s great to see that she actually gets to do more than stand there and recite a couple throwaway lines. I’ve always thought that Rupert Grint was the most talented of the kids, especially after seeing him in Driving Lessons. But as Steve Kloves returned to write the screenplay (he wrote all of the scripts for the series except Order of the Phoenix) Ron’s role was yet again relegated to comic relief and no more. Rupert does a great job with the comedy, but it’s unfortunate that he doesn’t get to show off his serious-drama chops.
The adult actors are all incredible, as they usually are. I’m seriously in love with Alan Rickman’s Snape and props to Potter newcomer Jim Broadbent as Horace Slughorn (and props to the special effects people who turned him into that armchair – how cool was that?) Michael Gambon’s performance has always been a topic of debate. However, I always feel that he gets the job done, and he manages to capture a certain youthful spring in his step that I think is so important to Dumbledore’s character. (SPOILER!) I cried quite a bit when he was drinking the protective potion in the cave. It’s very tragic if you know what he’s seeing in his mind, and I thought he was excellent in that whole scene. (END SPOILER.)
The standout performance was Tom Felton as Draco Malfoy. Up until now, Malfoy’s always just been this annoying, mean, Billy Zapka-esque jerk, but here we learn that his outward cockiness is just a facade. He’s really just an insecure teenager and a coward, but he doesn’t want to let his family down. Felton did a truly wonderful job at portraying the conflict within Malfoy, and, more impressively, he did it with as few words as possible.
I’m probably one of about 12 people in the world who will see a movie based on the cinematographer (I sure know Christian Bale doesn’t think much of the profession.) Bruno Delbonnel is absolutely my favorite director of photography, and when I watched the first trailer for HBP, I recognized his work. Every scene in this movie looked like a painting, but the colors and movement were so rich and alive that they also felt very real. If I had it my way, Delbonnel would definitely win an Oscar for cinematography this year. He is an artist.
In my opinion, the strongest (and most surprising) aspect of HBP was the comedy. I knew it was going to be funny, but I didn’t expect to be laughing quite as much as I was, and as genuinely. Jessie Cave’s Lavender and Freddie Stroma’s Cormac McLaggen had a lot to do with that, as well as Daniel Raddcliffe (D-Radd – I really want this nickname to catch on) and Rupert Grint.
But most importantly of all, I loved that this movie pumped me up for Deathly Hallows. I think that with this creative team and a studio expecting to rake in millions on opening weekend, we can expect two really fantastic movies, both for fans of the Harry Potter books and for film-lovers.
In summation, I guess I’ll answer the question posed at the beginning of this review: Was it worth the wait? Heck yes.

"And if these movies don't work out, I'm auditioning for a role as a Hammer Bros. in Super Mario!"
Didja Notice?
- Lots of mirrors! There’s a nice visual motif involving mirrors and mirror images.
- There’s also a lot of nice foreshadowing. For example, Malfoy mentions something about jumping off of the Astronomy Tower early in the film, and you know what happens later.
- How much do you want to go to the Weasley Wizard Wheezes shop? It’s like Wonka’s factory, but without all the Oompa Loompas trying to kill you.
- Arnold the pink Pygmy Puff looks like he’d eat your face off while you were sleeping…
- How high you jumped when the Inferi started attacking?
- So at the end of the movie, Harry and Hermione have this really nice conversation, and Ron just sits there the whole time? He says nothing and Hermione gets to speak for him? Kloves, you are truly shameless.
- How did this get a PG rating? I’m still trying to figure that out.
This is an actual photo from Wizstock '69.
Intermission!
Jessie Cave beat over 7000 girls to win the role of Lavender Brown, Ron’s “love-interest” from the book.
Helen McCrory had been cast to play Bellatrix Lestrange in Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, but had to back out because she was pregnant. She plays Bellatrix’s sister, Narcissa Malfoy in this film.
Groovy Quotes
Harry: Did you know, sir? Then?
Dumbledore: Did I know that I just met the most dangerous dark wizard of all time? No.
Tom Riddle age 11: I can make things move without touching them. I can make bad things happen to people who are mean to me. I can speak to snakes too. They find me… whisper things.
Ron: I’m in love with her!
Harry: Alright, fine, you’re in love with her! Have you ever actually met her?
Ron: No… Can you introduce me?
Professor McGonagall: Why is it that, whenever anything happens, it’s always you three?
Ron: I’ve been wondering that for six years, Professor.
Ron: How much are these?
Fred and George: 5 galleons.
Ron: How much for me?
Fred and George: 5 galleons.
Ron: I’m your brother!
Fred and George: 10 galleons.
Dumbledore: Horace, could I have this?
Slughorn: What? Oh, of course.
Dumbledore: Thank you, I do love kitting patterns.
Harry: Fight back you coward!
If You Liked This Movie, Try These:
- Prisoner of Azkaban
- Order of the Phoenix
- Just read the books!

I’m still a bit disappointed that the scene with the Whateley-like Gaunts was excised.
A film which was better than the book it was adapted from is Kind Hearts and Coronets. The book was a trite and lame little melodrama with a total arsepull of an ending. The film corrected these flaws. It also has Alec Guinness in eight roles.
These two statements seem to be a bit at odds with each other:
“I don’t care what you think about the movie vs. the book. Of course the book is better, but the two mediums are so different that they shouldn’t be compared.” and “One thing that some Potterheads keep complaining about is that there’s too much focus on the romance aspect. I wonder if these people even read the book, as romance was kind of a big thing there, too.”
Should we consider the book while watching the movie or not? Seems like you want it both ways here.
I catch a lot of flack for this from Harry Potter fans, but I think that aside from the first two, I find pretty much all the movies more fun (not superior, because you can’t compare books and movies). There is so much filler and useless fluff in the books, I have no problem with losing maybe two or three good bits among all that stuff that I have no desire to see on screen. The entertainment per minute factor is just higher for me.
I did appreciate it basically being horror for kids. That one scene with the girl who got cursed (forgot her name) was straight out of J horror. I saw an afternoon showing filled with kids, some of them started crying! At that age I was watching Nightmare on Elmstreet (yeah, and that didn’t scar me for life).
A side note, people need to start complaining about the Christian Bale rant. I’ve been on movie sets and honestly, he wasn’t that out of line.
Nice review, Courtney! I with you about the Burrow scene- unexpected, but I like what it accomplished.
Poor Rupert Grint. A local morning show was saying, and I can’t disagree, that guy has the worst luck with names. Bad enough his given name- I can’t speak for England, but “Rupert” would get him beat up on any schoolyard in America, and “Grint” sounds like a facial expression you make in the bathroom. But even when he’s acting, he gets stuck with the name “Ronald Weasley.” Poor bastard.
An author (I don’t remember who) once said that out of a 400 page novel, only about 40 will end up on screen. I don’t have a problem with adaptions as long as they stick to the spirit of the book(s) and/or take the story and improve it (it does happen). *
I only have two real hang-ups:
Taking all the emotional bite out of the “You coward!” scene/complete nonexplanation of the whole Half Blood Prince thing (I mean, hello – Title).
The really confusing inclusion of Fenrir Greyback. Considering they cut all his subplots, it’s a distracting head scratcher.
Technically and visually I think it’s one of the better HP movies, but it just lacked that certain something for me. I think it’s how the ending just fizzled out: The lack of the funeral, the lack of Ron, and the pacing that comes with being a set up piece for the next two… I dunno it just isn’t satisfying on its own.
*Good adaptation: Lord of the Rings movies; The Prestige. Bad Adaptation: Blood and Chocolate (my eyes! it burns!)
Good adaptation: The Resurrected (though the setting is made contemporary and a Requisite Female Character was added in, it was a good take on The Case of Charles Dexter Ward and didn’t deserve to be direct to video)
Bad adaptation: Dune (the Lynch version, as the Harrison miniseries was fairly tolerable and as good a Dune adaptation as we’ll ever get)
So horrible you’ll want to claw your eyes out adaptation: Howl’s Moving Castle (it makes the Bakshi Lord of the Rings look faithful in comparison, I kid you not)
An example of an adaptation being too faithful would be the BBC adaptation of The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe. Though the crappy production values didn’t help matters.
The cartoon from the ’80’s BBC Lion,Witch, and the Wardrobe was awesome!
In this case, I was referring to the live action version with that horrible pantomime Aslan.
Add A Comment