"Harry Potter & The Half Blood Prince"

Wow, that sucked. It was confusing and unresolved. The love interest between Hermione and that dude was unconvincing. I guess they are setting up for another movie, but I just feel used.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I keep hearing that it's a kids movie, and if this is the case, why all the references to "balls" and absolutely NO action which is a mainstay for entertaining kids. All talk. No action. BORRRRRRING.

~String

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Seen Bruno yet?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

All the references to balls? in what context?

Well my oldest one never had any interest in the Harry Potter movies at all. My youngest one likes them but isn't crazy for them. He will watch them but, you're right it will only keep his interest if there is lots of action. That is what makes watching movies on the big screen more interesting for kids. Like Spiderman and Bat Man..those were great to see on the big screen.

I guess from your reviews we will watch this one at home.

BTW: String, did you happen to see Public Enemies with Depp? I really want to see that one.

 

I am so behind that only recently did Nietzsche bring it to my attention that Bruno was the same guy from Borat. I didn't have a clue.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

No. Any good? I laughed so hard at "Borat" that I nearly pissed myself. In fact, it's one of only THREE movies that I've laughed at hysterically in my life ("Mrs. Doubtfire" and "There's Something About Mary" being the other two).

"Dragon Balls..." and I thought there was another. Hmmmm. Maybe I was so bored that I just invented things to be angry about because it was the only way to entertain myself.

Was there a part where two hot young wizards were having passionate gay sex? I might have made that part up too, out of boredom.

The boyfriend, who is a consummate Depp fan, said it looks horrible and refuses to see it with me.

~String

 

you've got it the wrong way round, except the book is only good.

 

I saw it online. I was actually excited for this movie, and that doesn't happen very often anymore with me. Somehow I found the movie mediocre...

 

They did it for extra profit. The cost is nearly the same since they are already filming it, but they will have double the profit...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

ill agree with you IF its not 2 3hour movies. as im one of the people who complain about how much was cut out of the movies (to the point of making them impossable to follow if you havent read the books) it would be a bit hypocritical to complain they split the last one to increase play time

 

Yesterday I was sitting out with my friend. Her husband and son age 16 came in from just seeing this movie. I asked how they liked it and the husband thought it was really good and the son said pretty good.

I said I heard it wasn't so hot and lacked action. They disagreed and said there was lots of action. :shrug:

They said that there was a lot of teenage making out and stuff. I definitely know that my 8 yr won't care for this movie then even though he thought the other ones were ok. I am going to guess this movie is more of a hit with the teens? and a 45 yr old man...LOLOL He is a geek though, an avid Star Wars fan too!

 

That about covers the gist of the movie.

 

the goblet of fire is thicker than the last one. And the one before the last one.

Any fan would know.

pfffft.

 

I agree.

I never "got" the whole Potter craze, but I enjoy the films for what they are -- fun, adventure stories with a bit of whimsy and humanity thrown into them. This film was a clunker.

Perhaps, like String, my expectations were just too high. I thought the last film was excellent and could stand on its own against many other films with larger ambitions.

But this one?

How many scenes does it take for the audience to understand they are gawky teenagers? Apparently, about a dozen.

Sometimes these films also suffer from getting to geeky and too insider-ish. I think this was the case here. I neither totally knew or cared about half of the going-on's in the film.

 

Most of the people who bought the books when they came out, at least on the two separate occasions when I worked in a bookstore and Potter stuff came out, were much older than this.

Really? Who were they made for, if not the legions of fans who wanted to see them, most of whom were not "kids"?

Those movies sucked no matter who you are.

 

I've read the series at least 5 times.

And I am old.

 

And this matches my experiences.

At the store, most of the customers were 18 to 35. Heck, they were even the people who dressed up. It was the same sort who frequent Renaissance fairs and the like. I imagine many of them are hooked on that Twilight crap now.

 

and I cried when dumbledore died.

but not in the movies because some kids were sitting next to me. didn't want to freak them out.

 

Well given that I know what happens, I think his death is silly and trite and little more than a cheap cliffhanger by Rowling.

 

I found the movie okay (in fact I thought it was better than the last one, also directed by David Yates). Of all the Harry Potter movies so far, this one follows the book most closely – so if you feel nothing much happens in this movie, it’s probably because nothing much happens in the book.

The book itself is not bad, nonetheless. There are plot issues to be developed (e.g. details of Voldemort’s Horcruxes) which are crucial to developments in the final book. The Half-Blood Prince story is thus merely setting up the material for the dramatic events of the final book.

Don’t worry if you find the latest movie boring. The final book will indeed have much more action and excitement – and we are going to have two movies’ worth of it.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!