Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince

[theworkingman]

QUOTE (Ya_Big_Tree @ Jul 21 2009, 01:27 PM)

QUOTE (rushgoober @ Jul 21 2009, 03:54 PM) QUOTE (Ya_Big_Tree @ Jul 21 2009, 12:25 PM) Also why was there nothing about Neville in this movie? He's a pretty important player in all this.. There were a lot of characters who either weren't there at all (Mad-Eye Moody (who incidentally is killed), Mundungus Fletcher, Kingsley Shacklebot, the Dursley's, Bill, Fleur, the Gaunt's, Hepzibah Smith, Voldemort's parents, the "other" minister, Rufus Scrimgeour, Kreacher & Dobby for the love of God!), or made at best make a quick cameo appearance. For example, Voldemort (the current day version) was in the movie for about 3 seconds. WTF?   What's the point of having Fenrir Greyback if they never even mention he's a werewolf? What was the point of having Luna Lovegood wear the lion costume if it didn't even roar? How does Hedwig appear at the Burrough when she's supposed to die escaping from the Dursley's? Does the Order of the Phoenix even exist in the movies other than as a vague concept?   And Draco spent the whole movie working towards letting the death eaters into the castle, only so he could point a wand at Dumbledore himself and have Snape kill him. Why even have the other death eaters there at all other than to break some glass and have Bellatrix giggle insanely? Yes dear, you killed Sirius Black, we know.   And some odd choices - why not cut the scene at Diagon Alley, or Harry at the diner, or some of the scene on the train, or the Burrough being burned and add in another couple of horcrux memories and the battle at the end? The horcrux memories especially are the most crucial scenes (and some of the best) in the book, aren't they? Or maybe I'm just f*cked up? Wait, don't answer that!   Alas, I still enjoyed it, but man! Yes they should have had more scenes with the Horcruxes in the movie. They were very exciting in the book. Oh yes KREACHER... how could they have NOT put him in the film... that was just so stupid. Now the next film isn't going to make any sense when they go searching for RAB. I really saw the battle is pretty anti-climatic and thought they could have done a much better job. TOOTP was a much better done movie IMO. Kreacher is an incredibly minor character. I don't see why they absolutely need to put him since he doesn't do anything particularly significant until Deathly Hallows where he really does pull through and also is much more likeable there. I'm sure he'll have a larger role in the next movies. Why wouldn't it make sense? They already introduced him in OOTP and it's not like it would take an hour to bring him back into the story. In the book, Kreacher comes and 5 seconds later he's gone. I don't see why that's so important to this whole story when there's a million other more important factors that need to be included and I wouldn't want to see him get even less screen-time than he did in OOTP.   People need to wishing for every absolute detail to be brought into the story. If you go in hoping that every aspect of the story line from the book is going to be there you're going to be disappointed obviously. Someone mentioned the burning of the burrow. First of all, I don't even remember that from the book but it was in the movie. I'll admit i'm disappointed about Bill and Fleur not being there. Some of the characters Goober mentioned are going to have quite a bit of screen time in the next films and Voldemort? The whole point of this book/movie is going into the PAST of Voldemort and finding out about the horcruxes and learning more about his memories and past. Greyback being brought in isn't a big deal because he generally is considered to be a Death-Eather (even though he isn't) and will be brought in with the Snatchers again in the next films. Hedwig doesn't die until the Deathly Hallows and neither does Mad-Eye. Is Dobby even in Half Blood Prince? Obviously he'll have a much much bigger role in the next movies also.   The point of having Draco and the Death Eaters and Snape is to show that Draco isn't a killer even though he spent all this time building up to it can't do it and Snape, as he promised he would, must kill Dumbledore. The Death Eaters are simply there to accompany Malfoy and escape from the castle and help him. They may or may not have been put in since they are supposed to be there for the final battle at the end of the movie but obviously the battle wasn't there because they didn't want it to be too repetitive with the final bloodbath that's going to happen in the final movie. Anyway, just adressing some things I noticed in a few posts. Carry on.

[theworkingman]

All in all, I think this film did the absolute BEST job of getting almost everything that is absolutely necessary to the storyline from the book into the movie without having to make it so long that it would have to be cut down. The films are nothing compared to the books and that's a given and the films are going to be different. You're never going to get every single little last detail you want from the book in the movie.

[rushgoober]

QUOTE (theworkingman @ Jul 21 2009, 04:45 PM)

Hedwig doesn't die until the Deathly Hallows and neither does Mad-Eye. Is Dobby even in Half Blood Prince?

 

oops, i forgot that battle isn't until book 7.

 

dobby and kreacher keep an eye on malfoy for harry - it's an important plot point, though not as important as say the horcrux memories, which i think is virtually unforgivable to have cut some of those out...

 

[rushgoober]

QUOTE (theworkingman @ Jul 21 2009, 04:53 PM)

All in all, I think this film did the absolute BEST job of getting almost everything that is absolutely necessary to the storyline from the book into the movie without having to make it so long that it would have to be cut down. The films are nothing compared to the books and that's a given and the films are going to be different. You're never going to get every single little last detail you want from the book in the movie.

the horcrux memories and the battle at the end are not mere details - they're essential parts of the book.

[theworkingman]

QUOTE (rushgoober @ Jul 21 2009, 04:08 PM)

QUOTE (theworkingman @ Jul 21 2009, 04:53 PM) All in all, I think this film did the absolute BEST job of getting almost everything that is absolutely necessary to the storyline from the book into the movie without having to make it so long that it would have to be cut down. The films are nothing compared to the books and that's a given and the films are going to be different. You're never going to get every single little last detail you want from the book in the movie. the horcrux memories and the battle at the end are not mere details - they're essential parts of the book. Well like I said, I understand why they wouldn't put that battle scene in. They don't want it to be extremely repetitive with the last movie and I get that. I thought the whole Bellatrix destroying the hall/Snape and Harry confrontation was great. My only real major complaint about the movie and thing I was truly disappointed with was the fact that they left out the funeral. Other than that, I thought it was very well done.

[rushgoober]

QUOTE (theworkingman @ Jul 21 2009, 05:12 PM)

QUOTE (rushgoober @ Jul 21 2009, 04:08 PM) QUOTE (theworkingman @ Jul 21 2009, 04:53 PM) All in all, I think this film did the absolute BEST job of getting almost everything that is absolutely necessary to the storyline from the book into the movie without having to make it so long that it would have to be cut down. The films are nothing compared to the books and that's a given and the films are going to be different. You're never going to get every single little last detail you want from the book in the movie. the horcrux memories and the battle at the end are not mere details - they're essential parts of the book. Well like I said, I understand why they wouldn't put that battle scene in. They don't want it to be extremely repetitive with the last movie and I get that. I thought the whole Bellatrix destroying the hall/Snape and Harry confrontation was great. My only real major complaint about the movie and thing I was truly disappointed with was the fact that they left out the funeral. Other than that, I thought it was very well done. yeah, that too...   and i know, i know, my wife doesn't like it when i go on and on about what was left out - she wants me to enjoy the movies for what they are. i do, but it's hard not to lament what isn't there....   now book 7 - two movies - that's what should have been since book 4!

Edited July 22, 2009 by rushgoober

[Slime]

I saw it today

 

It's more of the same since movie 4...filming scenes of the book and editing them together rather than making a movie that can stand on its own.

 

It wasn't bad, really. It just left out a lot of the really important information and some of the best scenes. The funeral was the biggest omission in this regard.

 

I'm also used to Snape stealing the scene, and this movie didn't have as much of that. He was present, and his scenes worked really well. but they could have been ever better.

[goose]

Just saw it today. I thought it was pretty good, and like most have noted, better than the previous two. I talked to my duaghter avout the omissions and other changes to the story, and it seems like the decisions were good ones. For a long film, it flowed pretty well. I imagine much of the missing stuff will work it's way into the next film, including Dumbledore's funeral, which would be a likely opening scene.

 

I thought the silence during the film, after Dumbledore's death, was prety impactful. Or it would have been. In our showing, just as it got silent, someone farted out loud. My daughter and I spent the solemn moment fighting back tears of laughter.

[Mandalorian Hunter]

Saw it last night, loved it.

 

David Yates has done a tidy job making these films actual good films to watch, and he should be commended for it. The first four, maybe with the exception of Azkaban, stuck closely to the books and felt pretty much disjointed. Half-Blood Prince flowed really, really well and considering they only had 2 1/2 hours, I think they got the main essence of the book to film and the important storylines to advance the film.

 

The shortcomings of Goblet have been a blessing in disguise for this series.

Edited July 23, 2009 by Mandalorian Hunter

[Rush Cocky]

QUOTE (Slime @ Jul 22 2009, 04:36 AM)

I saw it today It's more of the same since movie 4...filming scenes of the book and editing them together rather than making a movie that can stand on its own. It wasn't bad, really. It just left out a lot of the really important information and some of the best scenes. The funeral was the biggest omission in this regard. I'm also used to Snape stealing the scene, and this movie didn't have as much of that. He was present, and his scenes worked really well. but they could have been ever better.

With the details left out , it makes me wonder if we'll be seeing a director's cut somewhere down the road.

[rushgoober]

QUOTE (Rush Cocky @ Jul 23 2009, 07:06 AM)

QUOTE (Slime @ Jul 22 2009, 04:36 AM) I saw it today It's more of the same since movie 4...filming scenes of the book and editing them together rather than making a movie that can stand on its own. It wasn't bad, really. It just left out a lot of the really important information and some of the best scenes. The funeral was the biggest omission in this regard. I'm also used to Snape stealing the scene, and this movie didn't have as much of that. He was present, and his scenes worked really well. but they could have been ever better. With the details left out , it makes me wonder if we'll be seeing a director's cut somewhere down the road. that was a huge bonus with the LOTR movies - the theatrical releases were great, and you could also by the expanded editions on DVD each with like 45 minutes or so of extra footage which is even better. that has not been the case with the HP movies...

[goose]

QUOTE (rushgoober @ Jul 23 2009, 11:37 AM)

QUOTE (Rush Cocky @ Jul 23 2009, 07:06 AM) QUOTE (Slime @ Jul 22 2009, 04:36 AM) I saw it today It's more of the same since movie 4...filming scenes of the book and editing them together rather than making a movie that can stand on its own. It wasn't bad, really. It just left out a lot of the really important information and some of the best scenes. The funeral was the biggest omission in this regard. I'm also used to Snape stealing the scene, and this movie didn't have as much of that. He was present, and his scenes worked really well. but they could have been ever better. With the details left out , it makes me wonder if we'll be seeing a director's cut somewhere down the road. that was a huge bonus with the LOTR movies - the theatrical releases were great, and you could also by the expanded editions on DVD each with like 45 minutes or so of extra footage which is even better. that has not been the case with the HP movies... The extra LOTR footage is cool, but do you really think it helps the movies themselves? While I enjoy them by themseles, most of the extras I've ever seen from a movie leave me with the thought that they were better left out of the work as a whole.

[rushgoober]

QUOTE (goose @ Jul 23 2009, 09:56 AM)

QUOTE (rushgoober @ Jul 23 2009, 11:37 AM) QUOTE (Rush Cocky @ Jul 23 2009, 07:06 AM) QUOTE (Slime @ Jul 22 2009, 04:36 AM) I saw it today It's more of the same since movie 4...filming scenes of the book and editing them together rather than making a movie that can stand on its own. It wasn't bad, really. It just left out a lot of the really important information and some of the best scenes. The funeral was the biggest omission in this regard. I'm also used to Snape stealing the scene, and this movie didn't have as much of that. He was present, and his scenes worked really well. but they could have been ever better. With the details left out , it makes me wonder if we'll be seeing a director's cut somewhere down the road. that was a huge bonus with the LOTR movies - the theatrical releases were great, and you could also by the expanded editions on DVD each with like 45 minutes or so of extra footage which is even better. that has not been the case with the HP movies... The extra LOTR footage is cool, but do you really think it helps the movies themselves? While I enjoy them by themseles, most of the extras I've ever seen from a movie leave me with the thought that they were better left out of the work as a whole. for LOTR, it's not the same as "deleted scenes," which can be interesting like "bonus tracks" on a cd, but usually you realize what a wise choice it was to leave those scenes out.   with LOTR those scenes were always meant to be included in expanded editions, so it's not just material that the producers/director just thought didn't work for the film and decided to leave out.   that said, the scenes in the expanded editions of the LOTR movies are NOT essential, meaning that the theatrical releases work fine on their own, but for people who are fans of the movie or overtly geeky fans of the movie like me, those extra scenes are a lot more than just material that should have been left on the cutting room floor. they're all great to have IMHO...

[goose]

QUOTE (rushgoober @ Jul 23 2009, 12:10 PM)

QUOTE (goose @ Jul 23 2009, 09:56 AM) QUOTE (rushgoober @ Jul 23 2009, 11:37 AM) QUOTE (Rush Cocky @ Jul 23 2009, 07:06 AM) QUOTE (Slime @ Jul 22 2009, 04:36 AM) I saw it today It's more of the same since movie 4...filming scenes of the book and editing them together rather than making a movie that can stand on its own. It wasn't bad, really. It just left out a lot of the really important information and some of the best scenes. The funeral was the biggest omission in this regard. I'm also used to Snape stealing the scene, and this movie didn't have as much of that. He was present, and his scenes worked really well. but they could have been ever better. With the details left out , it makes me wonder if we'll be seeing a director's cut somewhere down the road. that was a huge bonus with the LOTR movies - the theatrical releases were great, and you could also by the expanded editions on DVD each with like 45 minutes or so of extra footage which is even better. that has not been the case with the HP movies... The extra LOTR footage is cool, but do you really think it helps the movies themselves? While I enjoy them by themseles, most of the extras I've ever seen from a movie leave me with the thought that they were better left out of the work as a whole. for LOTR, it's not the same as "deleted scenes," which can be interesting like "bonus tracks" on a cd, but usually you realize what a wise choice it was to leave those scenes out.   with LOTR those scenes were always meant to be included in expanded editions, so it's not just material that the producers/director just thought didn't work for the film and decided to leave out.   that said, the scenes in the expanded editions of the LOTR movies are NOT essential, meaning that the theatrical releases work fine on their own, but for people who are fans of the movie or overtly geeky fans of the movie like me, those extra scenes are a lot more than just material that should have been left on the cutting room floor. they're all great to have IMHO... I did love the Mouth of Sauron scene. Haven't seen the extras from Two towers, but hear they're pretty good.

[Rush Cocky]

QUOTE (goose @ Jul 23 2009, 12:56 PM)

QUOTE (rushgoober @ Jul 23 2009, 11:37 AM) QUOTE (Rush Cocky @ Jul 23 2009, 07:06 AM) QUOTE (Slime @ Jul 22 2009, 04:36 AM) I saw it today It's more of the same since movie 4...filming scenes of the book and editing them together rather than making a movie that can stand on its own. It wasn't bad, really. It just left out a lot of the really important information and some of the best scenes. The funeral was the biggest omission in this regard. I'm also used to Snape stealing the scene, and this movie didn't have as much of that. He was present, and his scenes worked really well. but they could have been ever better. With the details left out , it makes me wonder if we'll be seeing a director's cut somewhere down the road. that was a huge bonus with the LOTR movies - the theatrical releases were great, and you could also by the expanded editions on DVD each with like 45 minutes or so of extra footage which is even better. that has not been the case with the HP movies... The extra LOTR footage is cool, but do you really think it helps the movies themselves? While I enjoy them by themseles, most of the extras I've ever seen from a movie leave me with the thought that they were better left out of the work as a whole. I could care less if they helped the movies really. The more the better! The book was friggin 1000 pages, so it is justified to extend the three movies to almost 12 hours in length.

[Agent By-Tor]

i saw "Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince" on the 15th. I liked it better than the 5th one. the way they made this one made it, to me, the best of the movie's yet. also made me change my fav movie (not book

) char to Bellatrix.

 

10/10

[Kudzu]

QUOTE (PuppetKing2112 @ Jul 19 2009, 09:04 PM)

QUOTE (rushgoober @ Jul 19 2009, 01:12 PM) QUOTE (Presto-digitation @ Jul 16 2009, 04:16 AM) QUOTE (yaoi_myantidrug @ Jul 16 2009, 02:33 AM) I also hated the scene where the burrow was burned, and something that hasnt been mentioned:why no Dumbledore explaining to the Dursleys that Harry would have to come back over the summer? You sound like every Lord Of THe Rings fan dissecting any given scene...WHY? HOW COME? etc.   Books and movies....two different mediums. Except the Lord of the Rings movies were exceptionally well done. My complaints about the LOTRF movies in terms of things they left out from the books were VERY minor and nitpicky, and the movies were absolutely incredible.   While the Harry Potter movies are very well done, there's just no comparison. In terms of book to movie adaptations, LOTR is in a completely different league... I agree, the LOTR movies truly are the benchmark for how a book-to-film adaptation should be done.   The HP movies are good, but with some of them I get the feeling that if someone hadn't read the books they wouldn't know what the hell was going on. I saw the movie with such a person, and she was asking questions of me and the other person I saw it with the whole way home. Eventually I just gave up and said, "You should read the book, way better than the movie."   The Harry/Ginny and Dumbledore's funeral abridgments were among the most egregious desecrations of a novel I've ever seen put to film. And I loved the book, mainly just because those two scenes (along with the cave scene, which was executed faithfully, much to my relief) were so powerful and moving and crucial in Harry's coming-of-age - and isn't that really what the series is about?   Felt like watching the Cliffnotes of the book as written by someone who hadn't read it in a couple of years.

[goose]

QUOTE (Kudzu @ Jul 23 2009, 01:52 PM)

The Harry/Ginny and Dumbledore's funeral abridgments were among the most egregious desecrations of a novel I've ever seen put to film.

Did you catch "Love in the Time of Cholera"?

 

Back on topic, I haven't read beyond the first two books, and have followed the films just fine. My daughter fills me in on the missing details, and I don't see how they would have helped move the story along at all. Like Presto syays, different mediums.

 

Personally, I'd rather fill in the holes on my own for most on-screen characters anyway.

[Kudzu]

QUOTE (goose @ Jul 25 2009, 01:33 AM)

QUOTE (Kudzu @ Jul 23 2009, 01:52 PM) The Harry/Ginny and Dumbledore's funeral abridgments were among the most egregious desecrations of a novel I've ever seen put to film. Did you catch "Love in the Time of Cholera"? Almost. I got it from Netflix and ended up sending it back unwatched because I didn't have time. I've heard unflattering things.

[MCM]

I tried to stay away from this thread until I finally got to see the movie, it was very good, better than some of the others but to echo some of the other comments - What about Dumbledore's funeral?!?!?! They could have done so much with that! I can only hope that it may be, as suggested above, an opening for the next one.

 

Where did the burning of the Burrow come from? I just re-read the book and i don't remember that or anything like that?

[Rush Cocky]

[Xanadu93]

I read the book during my trip. Excellent, now I know what you guys mean by the movie lacking the funeral. I'll still catch it, I thought it would make more sense if I read the book.

[Der Trommler]

QUOTE (The Owl @ Jul 15 2009, 02:35 PM)

Might as well start this thread...... Who's seen this? I went to see a midnight screening last night and enjoyed it very much..... MUCH......MUCH better than 5, 4 or 1.....but not as good as 2 but about on par with 3. as far as trueness to the books go...this is one of the most faithful adaptations yet....not much changed... Who else has seen this?

Just saw it. I was dissappointed in only one thing - IMax. DO NOT watch this in 3D. It's a waste of $$$. It's only the first 15+ minutes of the movie which really is a waste. Aside from that, I haven't read the books yet. I refuse. I won't be able to enjoy the movies because I will always compare them to the books.

I thought the movie was very decent. A worthwhile go see. I can't say much more without having spoilers. Good film. Can't wait for the next one.

[Mandalorian Hunter]

QUOTE (Der Trommler @ Aug 5 2009, 04:35 PM)

QUOTE (The Owl @ Jul 15 2009, 02:35 PM) Might as well start this thread...... Who's seen this?  I went to see a midnight screening last night and enjoyed it very much.....  MUCH......MUCH better than 5, 4 or 1.....but not as good as 2 but about on par with 3. as far as trueness to the books go...this is one of the most faithful adaptations yet....not much changed... Who else has seen this? Just saw it. I was dissappointed in only one thing - IMax. DO NOT watch this in 3D. It's a waste of $$$. It's only the first 15+ minutes of the movie which really is a waste. Aside from that, I haven't read the books yet. I refuse. I won't be able to enjoy the movies because I will always compare them to the books. I thought the movie was very decent. A worthwhile go see. I can't say much more without having spoilers. Good film. Can't wait for the next one. It's possible to enjoy both. I certainly do!   It's important with these to either seperate the two, or accept they can't put everything in and use the chapters/storylines that weren't included to film as still going on, just not in picture. It's enjoyable that way.

[LakesideMaiden]

QUOTE (rushgoober @ Jul 15 2009, 04:00 PM)

i kind of look it as being two harry potter series - the books, and the movies.  while i think the books are far, FAR better (people who have only seen the movies really have no idea what they're missing), the movies are enjoyable as reader's digest versions of the books.  this one has received pretty stellar reviews all around and i am looking forward to it.  my excitement level is maybe 10% of what it was every time a new HP book came out, but still it'll be fun.  the book was pretty stellar so i can't imagine they could mess it up too badly. perhaps with the 7th installment, since they're making it into two movies (what they should have been doing since Goblet of Fire to really do the books justice), it'll really be something special.  did i mention how incredible the harry potter books were?

I'm in complete agreement, Goob. I LOVE the books. I've read and reread them numerous times, and made the mistake of re-reading Half-Blood Prince about 2 weeks before going to see it....it really bugs me the things that are left out, and subtly changed....while I enjoyed the movie (and cried at the end just like I did when I read the book), I still bitched to Dave on the way out and all the way home about the parts they left out that I felt really should have been in the movie....I can't wait for The Deathly Hallows 2 movie release - hopefully they won't leave anything out this time!

 

*edited* to include that the 3D experience was not worth the extra $$....although it was much better than the 5 minute 3D portion that they added to Order of the Phoenix!

Edited August 6, 2009 by LakesideMaiden