"Harry Potter & The Half Blood Prince"

superstring01

superstring01

Moderator
Horrible. To say the least.

Okay. They're kids books. But honestly, they've all been pretty good; progressing steadily from "okay" (the first movie: "Sorcerer's/Philosopher's Stone") to downright fantastic (the last movie: "The Order of the Phoenix").

Considering that the same production crew was present on this movie as from the last movie, my expectations were high. But, this movie was totally anti-climactic. Nothing happened. The sixth book was supposedly one of the best (so says my boyfriend and sister-in-law). But all the good parts (the first battle of Hogwarts, most notably) were cut out of this movie and replaced with lengthy banter, extended love stories, goo-goo nonsense & inconsequential plot twists.

For some reason I kept remembering that Southpark episode where Cartman talks about the "Sundance Movie Festival" and states that the only movies that win (or somesuch) were the ones about "gay cowboys eatin' puddin'". I couldn't fathom how this movie could have been any more boring than that.

~String
 
They took out the Hogwarts battle scene at the end, because a large battle at the school is also the climax of the final book and, by extension, the whole series.
 
Adaptations are different interpretations of the books - it gives you a new angle.

Or take Twilight as an example: I've never read such utter crap in my life, but the film is pretty damn good.
 
Cellar_Door said:
They took out the Hogwarts battle scene at the end, because a large battle at the school is also the climax of the final book and, by extension, the whole series.
Click to expand...

Rubbish. People go see these movies because of the battle scenes and wizardry. Two battles of Hogwarts would not in any way distract away from eachother.

This movie was utterly anti-climactic. It lacked everything that the sixth book had and included pointless drivel that was totally un-necessary.

~String
 
Cellar_Door said:
Adaptations are different interpretations of the books - it gives you a new angle.

Or take Twilight as an example: I've never read such utter crap in my life, but the film is pretty damn good.
Click to expand...

You thought the film was pretty damn good? You might want to get your brain checked. Crappy book=crappy movie in Twilight's case. I had no desire to see this movie, I think I've outgrown Harry Potter. But I'll go see it anyway just because I feel like I've started something and need to finish it. Just out of principle.
 
Syzygys said:
In other words: "New Harry Potter movie sets world opening record"
Click to expand...

Well, that was inevitable.

They could have made a movie of water running and grass growing, titled it "Harry Potter and the Really Boring Tale" and people would have waited in line for days to see it.

Which is both sad, and telling.

Damn my boyfriend for dragging me.

~String
 
I am fairly sure the target audience for the Potter books is somewhere between 6-18 years. So anyone who is older than that and posted in this thread complaining (pretty much everyone) considere yourself to be too old.

It is like when grown ups complain about the Star Wars prequels. They weren't made for them!!! It doesn't mean they can not enjoy them, but again, it wasn't tailored for their taste.
 
I've noticed that many of these movies have come out for free on TV within a year of there release. I watched the first one but when I saw the second one , I just gave up on them. Not for me but the kids will like them, at least SOME of the kids.
 
CutsieMarie89 said:
You thought the film was pretty damn good? You might want to get your brain checked. Crappy book=crappy movie in Twilight's case. I had no desire to see this movie, I think I've outgrown Harry Potter. But I'll go see it anyway just because I feel like I've started something and need to finish it. Just out of principle.
Click to expand...

If you've read the books and know what happens at the end, haven't you already finished what you started? Why the need to go and see the films as well if you feel you've already 'grown out' of it all?

Originally Posted by superstring01

Rubbish. People go see these movies because of the battle scenes and wizardry. Two battles of Hogwarts would not in any way distract away from eachother.

This movie was utterly anti-climactic. It lacked everything that the sixth book had and included pointless drivel that was totally un-necessary.

~String
Click to expand...

Well to be fair it's the penultimate film, so it needs to leave you wanting closure. I think the worst part of it was Harry/Ginny, but that's entirely the book's fault.
 
Cellar_Door said:
Why the need to go and see the films as well if you feel you've already 'grown out' of it all?
Click to expand...

One good reason only:

emma_watson.jpg


By the way according to this, the movie gets the 3rd highest ratings out of the 6 films, so not the worst at all:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Potter_(film_series)#Reception

As usual, people (including critics) didn't agree with String...
 
I do have a bit of a girly crush on Emma Watson. I want to be that posh :D

Although I also quite fancy Rupert Grint, so my opinion isn't reliable.
 
actually though its the second last book its the third last movie. because the last book is a) so large and b) the last book (and there for important in tying everything up) they decided to split it into 2 movies
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top