More Half-Blood Prince Reviews: Guardian Three Stars out of Five, More
July 04, 2009, 03:57 PM
Over the past few weeks, screenings for Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Place for the press have taken place world wide. A few more early reviews are beginning to trickle online, with articles from the Guardian and UK tabloid the Sun now online.
The Sun gives glowing, while sometimes vague remarks in their article, praising the use of comedy and romance (Hogwarts is Snogwarts!) and giving kudos to Bonnie Wright as Ginny, and Hero Fiennes-Tiffin (Young Voldemort). The piece summarizes "Rather than giving us a series of computer-generated action sequences (yawn
again), Yates has gone for careful character development, building to a
dramatic crescendo. And that is the biggest surprise of all - The Half-Blood
Prince is masterful."
While still generally postive, a more subdued review can be found in the Guardian which gave the film three stars out of five. The bottom line reads: "Putatively winsome all this [romance] may be, but what it actually does is throw
the series' biggest weakness into sharp relief: film-making can (and
does) control pretty much everything – except how the cute juvenile
leads grow up. Still, director David Yates knows how to play all the
cards. Although a touch ungainly, his film is solidly constructed, with
lots of fine effects. If, as Potter approaches his final confrontation
with Voldemort, the wizardly battles begin to resemble Lord of the
Rings, it's hardly a handicap; this is tried and tested cinematic
language, and does all it needs.
ok whatever the Guardian always give crap reviews- in fact for the guardian 3 out of 5 is pretty good!
I do not agree with Guardian. why would love-the essence of Harry Potter be the weakest point of the film? its not all in darkness,pain and cool special effects.
3 out of 5 isnt bad….
A movie review is just one person’s opinion. There was a really interesting report at Yahoo a couple days ago, about movie reviews and reviewers, and about how reviewers have lost sight of their purpose. Instead of writing a review they go into their personal angst and stuff, or focus on one aspect and make that the major point of their review. This all came about as a result of Transformers getting really bad reviews but within days going on to being one of the biggest blockbuster movies ever, & reaching the however-many-$billion within like four days or something. So yeah … grain, salt, take :D
I know. Film critiques are known for being generally snobbish but the guardian is notorious for this, more than any other paper in Great Britain and, perhaps, the world at large. The truth is the Guardian isn’t going to truly love any Harry Potter movie, no matter how good, because they see them as “main stream”. They like to belittle anything that is popular as much as they possibly can. While this disappoints me, I can’t say that I’m surprised.
I’ve seen quite a few “critics” posting on their blogs and twitters that they really like the film, and that some even agree with what Dergarabedian said a few days ago about it being Oscar worthy. After reading the entire Gaurdian article, I’m not even exactly sure why he’s giving it a 3 out 5 stars. However, it’s still a pretty positive review. If that’s the worst review we’ve seen so far, then we’re doing well.
you can tell that these people who have reviewed do not understand HP at all and probably haven’t even seen the other movies or anything.
The reviewer of the Sun really liked the movie and gave props to the more warm-hearted nature of the film, and The Guardian found it lukewarm, and going by what you have all said when it comes to how the Guardian reviews films, I think that means the film will be pretty good. I’ve read other small reviews from other fans who’ve seen it and they all thought it was brilliant and did a great mix. I keep hearing it’s the best character driven of all the films.
In response to starless again, I thought H/G was sweet in the books. She made him laugh, she comforted him when Dumbledore died, she comforted him after he saw his father in Snape’s worst memory, she told him he wasn’t possessed, which in turn made him feel better. She’s also one of the only ones who can deal with his crankier attitude. She provided him simple comfort of everyday life and made him feel normal. That’s all Harry wanted. Since the series isn’t a romance novel, this was portrayed fine.
Hermyone’s probably right. I agree… it’s just sooo vague!
I really do think they might be making me a bit more excited than I should be, the more they praise, the more I want to watch it to prove to my family that Harry Potter is a good film franchise. I don’t want to be dissapointed, so my hopes remain at a low level.
You should definitely NOT have to read a book to understand what a film is about…if you can’t understand the themes of the film, the filmmakers haven’t done their job.
And the lust of movie six is most certainly not love. In fact, none of the romances of this series (save moments of Ron and Hermione) have ever been believable. Harry/Ginny was awful, and I actually liked the idea of them getting together.
A review is always biased.
Anyway, from what I saw, the film is the best of the 6 that have been made.
I’m really looking forward to seeing it as I didn’t especially like the 5th one.
Don’t care what the critics say, I’m going to see it regardless. I have enjoyed all the movie,
though i’m upset with some of the cut’s in the movie I understand them. As much as I
love Harry Potter, I don’t a 4 hr movie.
I’m not sure the person from The Sun actually saw the film.
By the way, I checked Pulver’s review history for the Guardian, and he never gives more than 3 stars. So it’s really hard to judge what he considers to be a 4 or 5 star film.