Loaded Couch Potatoes

Time for a confession: there’s something about the Harry Potter franchise — be it the novels or the movies — that just doesn’t connect with me.  I’ve enjoyed it, overall; I read the final three novels as soon as I could get my hands on them, and I’ve seen each of the movies at the earliest available opportunity.

But they’re not sticking with me, for some reason.  I can remember a few details here and there, and the broad strokes of the stories are still more or less present in my head … but I spent a large portion of the sixth movie thinking to myself, “Man, I don’t remember much of this.”

Is that a problem with me or a problem with the movie(s)?

Either way, it’s definitely a big part of the reason why I can’t quite summon up any love for them.  I definitely like them, and I’d guess that at some point a few years down the line I’m going to be shelling out a couple of hundred bucks for a big, fat Blu-ray box set of all eight movies.

But do I love them?  I just can’t honestly answer that question with a “yes.”

Spoilers from this point forward.

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince is a movie that is full of tiny, subtle emotion, and while it’s dealing with this sort of thing, it’s terrific.  Take, for one example, most of the scenes between Harry and Ginny.  There is a surprising sexuality to these scenes that is both serious and funny, and also manages to be quite suggestive without sacrificing even a little bit of the chasteness that must necessarily come with a PG-rated film.  It works almost completely.  (As do Hermione’s scenes with Ron.)

Thing is, when the movie gets to what has got to be considered the most emotional development of the series thus far — Dumbledore’s murder at the hands of Snape — the movie drops the ball.  Right at the goal line … just fumbles it right out onto the grass.

Dumbledore’s death ought to be the kind of thing that milks tears out of every eye in the house.  Never seen a Harry Potter movie before?  Too bad, it’s time for you to cry now.  Seen ‘em all nineteen times each?  Time to use those napkins, coated though they may be in theatre-butter fingerprints.

If Star Trek could manage this in its first ten minutes with a character we’d never even seen before, why can’t Half-Blood Prince?  Dumbledore is by now one of the more famous characters in all of fantasy fiction; how come his death doesn’t have the resonance of, say, Gandalf’s fall at Khazad-dûm?  It’s inexcusable, really, and while it doesn’t kill the movie (not even close), I think it keeps it from being the great film some critics have insisted it is.

Some of this, I think, is down to the choice of composer.  Nicholas Hooper, hand-picked by director David Yates, began his affiliation with the series on Order of the Phoenix, for which he turned in a score that is, at best, serviceable.  His work here is similarly uninspired.  Compare it to John William’s work on the first three films; admitted, J.W.’s music was occasionally overbearing, but it also created a terrific atmosphere (I defy you to listen to “Hedwig’s Theme” and not feel a bit as if you’re on the Hogwarts Express).  It established an emotional connection to the world that, had he been present on the fourth, fifth, and sixth films as well, could have worked wonders.

But it need not have been Williams, specifically.  Any genuinely good composer could have turned the trick.  Go take a look back at the Khazad-dûm sequence in The Fellowship of the Ring, and pay attention to Howard Shore’s work.  It’ll slay you.

Now, granted, that’s probably one of the best scores ever written for a film, so it’d be a bit unfair to expect something as good in Half-Blood Prince, or, really, in any movie.  But, again, let’s look a short ways back at Star Trek, and at Michael Giacchino’s music during George Kirk’s sacrifice onboard the U.S.S. Kelvin.  I’d stop well short of claiming that this is one of the best sequences of film scoring in movie history, but there’s no need for superlatives; it’s enough to say simply that it’s a remarkably well-scored scene, and one that takes full advantage of what film music can do.  Film music, used properly, works to emotionally link the viewer with the movie, and to tie those connections together tightly; good music in a movie will tip it over the edge from being something an audience is enjoying to being something the audience is, while watchint it, living and breathing.  Good film music, used properly, turns a movie from an entertainment into an experience.

Half-Blood Prince does not take advantage of what film music can do.  It’s just that simple.  I don’t want to be too harsh on Nicholas Hooper, who is probably doing his best, and simply may not be capable of better.  Instead, this is where I start blaming David Yates, and the film’s producers, who ought to have realized Hooper’s relative inability after the last film and hired somebody who could do a better, fuller job.

And that’s not where I stop blaming Yates, a director whom I know only from his work on the Potter series; based on those two films, I think I can safely say that while he obviously possesses a keen visual sense and a remarkable affinity for directing actors, he doesn’t have the world’s best sense of storytelling in terms of the broad strokes.  He’s good within a scene; he knows how to visually convey information.  However, I don’t think he’s great at piecing an overall story together.  I was captivated for the entirety of this movie, and yet when it was over, I felt hollow, as if nothing I’d just seen had quite managed to add up.  It’s like I’d had a six-course meal, but was still hungry.

This, I think, is the difference between a competent director and a great director.  A great director — a Spielberg, Hitchcock, Gilliam, Jackson, Eastwood, Kubrick — will have his eye on the movie as a whole.  He might occasionally fail, but more often than not, he won’t.  Maybe Yates will yet prove to be a great director, but in that regard, Half-Blood Prince proves to be a setback.

Enough focusing on the negatives.  This is too good a movie to dwell on the less successful aspects.  I’m frustrated that it’s not a classic, but a movie doesn’t need to be a classic in order for me to enjoy it, and I certainly enjoyed this one.

First of all, the acting is great.  Daniel Radcliffe has grown more comfortable in the role of Harry with each successive film, and this one is no different. I’m not convinced Radcliffe will have much of a career outside of the Potter movies, but he’s going to be forever a star based on those movies alone, and maybe that’s enough.

Emma Watson, who in some of the earlier films was doing extremely mannered work that felt more than a bit lifeless (almost as if the director was acting out what he wanted her to do and then having her replicate it beat for beat), has really grown over the past few films, and she’s great here.  In some ways, it’s a thankless role in this particular movie, since Hermione is doing little more than yearning for Ron and providing moral support for Harry.  However, both of those elements are crucial to making the events of the final book seem inevitable, and that’s likely why they’re given such weight in this film.

It’s hard to say too much about how funny Rupert Grint is as Ron.  He’s hilarious, and while I’d sympathize with someone who said the comedy here is a bit too broad, I wouldn’t agree.

I was also impressed by Bonnie Wright, playing Ginny.  She’s been with the series as long as the rest of the cast, and it appears that the producers struck a bit of gold when casting her.  I’d be curious to know how much weight they put into finding an actress to play Ginny; I’d be willing to bet the answer to this question is entirely dependant upon how much of the story J.K. Rowling knew at that point in time, and whether she indicated to the producers one way or another how important Ginny would become.  Either way, Bonnie Wright was a find.  She’s marvelous.  She hasn’t done a great deal of film work outside of the Potter films, but I’d be willing to bet she’s going to do a lot more.

I’ve got similarly nice things to say about Jessie Cave, who plays Lavender Brown.  Cave, I would argue, steals almost every scene she’s in.  It’s, again, fairly broad comedy, and in some ways it doesn’t quite fit in with the rest of the movie.  It’s also hilarious, and my take on the broadness of the Ron/Lavender subplot is that it helps keeps Hermione’s reactions from seeming too maudlin and melodramatic.  And that helps us stay emotionally invested in Hermione’s character arc; as such, Jessie Cave’s role in this film is fairly crucial, and she knocks it out of the park.  I’d love to know how many hours were lost due to people cracking up over her shenanigans as Lavender.

The also-crucial role of Draco Malfoy is also pretty well served in the film, with Tom Felton doing good, troubled work as the young prince of darkness.  Malfoy’s actions — and inactions — in this movie will have serious repercussions over the last two films, and if Felton hadn’t been up to the task, the entire series would have suffered.  But again, it looks as if the producers did well in the extensive casting sessions all those years ago.

As for the adult cast, well, what needs to be said about it other than that it is outstanding?  Michael Gambon leads the way, providing a calm center of wisdom as Dumbledore.  I’m sure the last two films will feature him in some way, but I think they’re going to be notably poorer without his frequent presence.

Alan Rickman, of course, does great work as Snape, and that’s nothing unusual.  Rickman has killed in this role for nearly an entire decade now, and I look forward to seeing some of the meaty scenes he’ll get in Deathly Hallows.

Finally, let’s save some glowing words of praise for Jim Broadbent, who is simply awesome as Horace Slughorn.  Like, Oscar-nomination good.  If one has nothing else kind to say about the Harry Potter films, I think it can at least be said that they’re given some great supporting roles to some very deserving actors, from Rickman to Brendan Gleeson to Imelda Staunton to Broadbent, and those just for a start.  I enjoy the movies for many reasons, and these performances are near the top of the list.

In most other regards, Half-Blood Prince is also top-notch.  It looks great, with lovely cinematography and state-of-the-art visual effects and nice costumes.  “Sumptuous” would probably be a good word to use to describe this film, and the series as a whole.  If I had a complaint, it would be that the movies too often feel a bit too insular; I’d love to get more looks at the broader world — wizarding and muggle alike — of this particular universe.  But that’s a small complaint, and a mostly unfair one; what’s there is one of the best-realized fantasy worlds ever put on film, and it’s one any fan of the genre should probably be thankful for.

My final thoughts on my first viewing of this film is that it’s well worth one’s time.  Maybe not quite the classic it might’ve been, but hey, that’s no crime.  It’s certainly better than most of the competition.