First, let me say I loved it.
It was a visual feast, exciting, funny, tragic and delightful, but…
I just don’t understand some of the changes, omissions and additions that were made to this film.
Starting at the beginning, what was the idea of having Harry sittining in a grimy cafe in Surbiton train station late at night? The whole wizarding world now knows Voldemorte is out to kill Harry, so why is he left to wander aimlessly, unprotected, in the railway?
Why didn’t the movie stick to the scene where Dumbledore visits the Dursleys and takes Harry with him from there? I felt cheated out of the beautifully written book scene where Dumbledore, oh so politely and with eloquent sarcasm, tells Vernon and Petunia what he really thinks of them and gives them a lesson in manners.
The there is Tonks and Lupin. What happened to that sweet love story? When we see them at the Burrow they are clearly a couple, so we miss all of Tonks’ lovelorn angst and Lupin’s noble sentiments that he is too dangerous for her to love and will ruin her socially.
Back to Harry’s security again - what was Dumbledore thinking leaving him in a bog somewhere close to the Burrow and the Weasleys not knowing to expect him? Clearly Dumbledore is a busy man, but dumping Harry in the middle of the night and not even seeing if he made it safely to the Burrow seems, well, irresponsible at best.
But strangest of all was the fight at the Burrow. It’s not in the book and it makes no sense, unless it is a device to tie in another plot point in one of the later movies.
Just how was it possible for those Death Eaters to attack the Burrow, and why could Harry and Ginny get through that ring of fire when Tonks the Auror, Lupin the brilliant wizard and Molly and Arthur, both brilliant too, could not get through?
I’m not sure how many Death Eaters attacked the Burrow; I only identified Bellatrix and Fenir Greyback, but I think there were more. But once they got Harry alone out in that bog again, why did they hide from him? Why not attack? Sorry, but that scene makes no sense whatsoever!
Another thing that irks me is that the book was called Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince. The major focus of the book is on Harry, Ron and Hermione wondering who the Half Blood Prince could be. Is he a brilliant former student or is he dangerous?
Yet the movie barely mentions it. We get very little indication that the potions text book is helping Harry achieve great grades. We get almost no dialogue wondering about the identity of the Prince. We don’t even see Snape using his occlumency powers to deduce that Harry has his old potions text book. In fact, there is nothing in the movie to suggest that Snape has a clue Harry might have his old book.
So when Snape says during their final fight “I am the Half Blood Prince”, it’s not so much a revelation as a moment when the audience is reminded that this was what the novel was all about.
I’m sad that neither Chrlie or Bill Weasley have made an appearance in the movies and would have loved the “post Dumbldore’s death” scene in the hospital wing with Fleur and Molly to be included. It also means there can’t be a wedding at the beginning of the next film which is sad.
And what about the Horcruxes?
If the information that Harry has learned in this movie is all he has to go on, how on earth is he going to know how many horcruxes to look for or what they might be?
I’m sure we all noted that scene where Dumbledore looked curiously at Harry’s scar, but that clue was only for the audience, not for Harry.
At he end of this movie all Harry knows is that Voldemorte may have made some horcruxes, Dumbledore had an unexplained ring that was one, the Riddle diary was one, but the locket was a fake.
Harry has no clue what to look for. The locket is never mentioned as being Slytherin’s, the ring is not identified as Marvolo’s. So just what information does Harry have to start his horcrux quest? None! Not even the clue that the items may be related to the Hogwarts founders.
Ho hum, well maybe the next movie will just have to open with a letter from Dumbledore telling Harry all that he needs to know.
But overall it is a great movie and a fair adaptation from the book. It’s just that, for any diehard Potter fan, the movies can never be the complete tapestry that the books are; stuff gets left out and plots need to be simplified and modified to suit the movie format.
I do so desperately hope that there are lots of deleted scenes that will eventually make it into the “directors cut” version of the films. Frankly, if there aren’t then Warner Bros would be neglecting another Potter goldmine.
Things I Loved
Rupert Grint!!!! Gorgeous, kooky, geeky and just adorable. It was great to see him able to flex his comedic muscles in this role. I think he has a huge talent and the sort of shy/adorable that made Hugh Grant so famous. I expect to see him in many future romantic comedies.
Jim Broadbent as Slughorn is exceptional! An actor whose thoughts you can read on his face. Breaking off Aragog’s fang was an amusing touch.
Daniel Radcliffe - gorgeous as ever, and what a relief to see him in a silly mood for once when he took the Felix Filicitus!
Hermione (Emma Watson) so smart with the books but so confused by love - aww!
Harry and Ginny - except that the anticipation was missing with that kiss, but then Ron saying “so did you and Ginny do it?” - well the audience just hooted with laughter!
McGonagall and the students pointing their wands to the sky - sigh!