(Here's my original opening to this review, which is no longer accurate - figured I'd include it for the sake of posterity and disclosure. Also, the intent was pure. Some day I will post a review within hours of seeing something new. Someday...)
This is an impromptu review, composed on the fly not an hour after I've seen the movie. That being the case, it will likely be unbalanced, hastily composed and given to frequent derailments of my always steady train of thought. Really, it'll be like every other review I've ever posted here, except minus the two-week lag between release and review.
This is easily my favorite of the Potter films thus far. While it doesn't hit the levels of perfection that Alfonso Cuaron's Prisoner of Azkaban did, it is by far the most engaging and human of the series. It also boasts a career best performances from Rupert Grint, Emma Watson and in particular Dan Radcliffe, but more about them later.
First, let me praise the welcome return of Steve Kloves. Kloves was responsible for the intelligent and efficient scripts for the first four films; his instinct for theme and character (teens especially) was always a boon to the films, never more apparent then when it was absent from the rushed and muddled fifth installment. Equally important was Kloves' skill at adaptation; he always knew what to keep, what to abridge and what to cut, and I'd say that, barring one exception, he was always right.
Still, this Potter is more assured in it's storytelling than last time. The scenes play out longer (with more character packed into each one) and that cumbersome montagey feel is gone. And again, Kloves can write terrific teens (better than Rowling does). Scenes of horny Hogwarts students eyeing each other up in the halls and nervous pre-sexual encounters populate this movie and make for several of its best moments. Among my favorites is Harry and Ron, while each laying in bed, discussing girls they like; it ends with Harry abruptly ending the conversation and switching off his light, though it's scripted and played just right to suggest (in a PG-appropriate manner, of course) that he'll be polishing his wand momentarily.
Y'know. Jerking off. Of course that's all played very discreetly so as not to offend the kiddies with "mature content." The film's actual on-screen maturity is displayed by Daniel Radcliffe, who more than exceeds expectations this go around; the dude is fantastic in this movie. He isn't just the star because he's playing the title character, he's an honest to Gods movie star here, more than holding his own with sage actors Gambon, Smih, Rickman and Broadbent. Radcliffe has developed into a very, very talented young actor. He handles the drama with more gravity than in previous installments (his go-to affectation for conveying heavy emotions was usually to just get louder), but his comic abilities are what surprises the most. While Grint has previously been the series' funniest young actor, Radcliffe steps up his game in this installment. I was howling with laughter during a scene when Harry's high as a kite on a good luck potion. Seeing Harry Potter stoned (played beautifully by Radcliffe) in a PG movie was a real subversive delight. Kids growing up with these movies are going to discover so much more burried within in them when they get older.
Like its audience and protagonists, the Potter franchise is getting older. This movie defies audience expectations of a summer movie by ending quietly and slowly. What follows is a vague and minor (though what's blacked out is specific and major) spoiler, even for those familiar with the books. Yates and Kloves opted to excise Rowling's climactic battle scene from the film, instead allowing Dumbledore's death to be, as it should be, the climax of the film. I was stunned that there was no epic wizard fight in the halls of Hogwarts afterward (the largest cut from the book); after a brief chase and a fizzle of a reveal (to a somewhat abandoned plotline that really functions only as a subtitle), the movie winds down with what must be the longest and most satisfying denouement to any recent summer blockbuster. I applaud director and writer for trimming what wasn't necessary, even though what they trimmed would certainly have been a rousing, spectacular and crowd-pleasing action scene, in favor of character, tone and emotion. I'm sure the decision, which makes more sense in the context of the movie's original winter '08 release date, will cost them at the box office, but it was the right move.
Posts
