[Bigfish]

My wife and I watched Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince on Saturday Morning.  For those of you who have already seen this movie or will go it is because you seen the previous movies.  It is a typical Potter Movie in that it is well done but this particular movie tells the story so very slowly.  There were 15 minutes of trailers before the movie started and it lasted a full 2 and 1/2 hours.  My wife liked the movie a lot and I thought it was just okay - certainly not the best Potter Movie for me!  Maybe 3 out of 5 stars rating from me and that would be gracious!

Ken

[zybar]

I saw it the other day and found it very enjoyable.

It was pretty much exactly what I expected and did a favorable job in representing the book.  I found its pace to be good and never once did I glance at my watch to see what time it is or how long has the movie been playing.

I also think this movie set the stage perfectly for the last two films and the climatic struggles that occur in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hollows.  While I understand why this last book has been split into two movies, it stinks knowing that it will be basically be two+ years before I get to see it all end.

If you or your kids are Harry Potter fans, it is a no-brainer to go and see this.

To a casual movie goer, I can see somebody appreciating many aspects of the movie, but ultimately getting lost.

3.5 out of 4 stars.   

George 

[fsimms]

I haven't read the book, but it was easy to tell that it was just 1/2 of a story.  It was very disappointing to have the movie abruptly stop.  I like movies that have an ending.  The rest of the movie wasn't as good as any of the earlier movies.

Bob

[ecramer]

Sounds like when i took my sister to see first lord of the rings she had never read the books and had no idea that is was in three parts. She was mad as hell when the ended the movie where they did I bet she bitched about that for a week 

I haven't read the book, but it was easy to tell that it was just 1/2 of a story.  It was very disappointing to have the movie abruptly stop.  I like movies that have an ending.  The rest of the movie wasn't as good as any of the earlier movies.

Bob

[zybar]

I haven't read the book, but it was easy to tell that it was just 1/2 of a story.  It was very disappointing to have the movie abruptly stop.  I like movies that have an ending.  The rest of the movie wasn't as good as any of the earlier movies.

Bob

Bob,

What do you mean half of a story?     As I said above, the movie is very true to the book.

It is book six in a series of seven...what do you mean by ending abruptly - it ends where it should, based on the book.

George

[rydenfan]

I found this movie to be the best of the series. It faithfully conveyed the story of the book and truly built the emotion and suspense visually, which is difficult to do. I loved the use of lighting and shading to help display emotions and feelings. I will likely even see it once more before it leaves the theater.

[mjosef]

3/5 stars.
Never read the books, and cannot remember if I saw the previous movie, but have seen the first three(?) or two films.
while it was entertaining for the duration, I felt it was somewhat slow but later saw the need for the long 'build-up'.
Not something I would need to see again.

[zybar]

3/5 stars.
Never read the books, and cannot remember if I saw the previous movie, but have seen the first three(?) or two films.
while it was entertaining for the duration, I felt it was somewhat slow but later saw the need for the long 'build-up'.
Not something I would need to see again.

Mjsoef,

Not picking on you...but if you didn't read the books and can't remember if you saw the previous five movies, why go see this one?  How did you expect to follow and enjoy it?

This is a series of movies, based on a series of books.  Each movie builds on the previous movies, just like the books.  This really isn't a stand alone movie IMHO.

Given your perceived lack of familiarity with the Harry Potter series, I am surprised you could enjoy and follow the film well enough to give it a 3 out of 5 rating.

George

[Philistine]

Just got back from my local IMAX with my 9 and 12 year old - we all enjoyed the movie, it was well paced, technically perfect and no slow sections.  My 9 year old wasn't at all restless, so this says much about the ability of the movie to capture his sustained attention for so long.  We enjoyed the trailers - being in 3D made them more enjoyable.

It's interesting that, as the characters age and mature, the movies follow them with the emphasis moving away from special effects to more atmopsheric and darker mood.

I give it 3.8.

[mjosef]

First off, any movie released to the public should be able to convey a story line whether its a slice of a story arc or whatever...failing to do so is a failure of the film-maker(s).
 Dunno where you saw I said I didn't enjoy it  and if you inferred from my lark of eagerness to see it again for that assumption...if I didn't enjoy it I would have given it 2/5.

I usually take a little 11year old to see these movies (and most movies in the cinemas), and even he (and he read all the books) felt it was just 'OK'.   
And FYI, I followed the story alright, thank you.
So you need to keep your "persleptions' close-er.

[pardales]

I've read all the books and seen all the movies. Here is my two cents:

1) Even if you have seen all the movies (but not read the books), i'm not sure you would have any idea the significance of horcruxes. Previous movies have seemed more complete in their telling of the core elements of the story, such that if one did not read the books you would still have what you need to understand the story.  It is also possible that the previous book's plots were more self-contained--not sure about this though.

2) They ADDED a scene in this movie that was NOT IN THE book! The scene where Lestrange and Greyback attack the Weasley's while the kids are on break -- I saw no reason for this other than to add an action sequence at a slow point in the film. I found this unforgivable. Why not use that time to include more of what was ACTUALLY IN the book.

3) The ending was weak. To not show some part of the funeral scene and the white tomb was a missed opportunity.

These criticisms aside, I enjoyed it.

[funkmonkey]

I dunno about this one.  I thought that it followed the basic story line of the book, but many details were left out and altered (I am sure to keep the time down).  I could roll with the changes up until the end.  I really think they blew it by reducing the ending from a climactic event that fleshes out several semi-key characters, to a nearly private moment...  and they should have included the funeral.  I do think that the film had good pacing, and managed to capture the dark foreboding sense of the book.  I think that this one should have been split into two films as well as the last book.  It's hard for me to judge if someone could follow the story coming in blind, because I have read the books, but our friend enjoyed it while not having read any of the books, and he had only seen one or two of the earlier films.

I'm looking forward to it's release on DVD, and would give it  + (out of five).  Could have easily been a four to five star film if they didn't butcher the ending as much.  And I agree with pardales about the added scene.  I saw no point in it, and that time could have been used to beef up the end.

[nathanm]

I am so glad I decided not to read the books, none of this dual medium emotional baggage necessary!  Ahhhh, sweet ignorance!  I am going to see it tonight. 

The thing that bugs me is not necessarily how the films have gotten darker, but rather how the picture has gotten darker and darker.  I mean, the post-processing is just so over the top.  That pretty much goes for a lot of stuff coming out these days.  Ever since film 3 Potter has been heading into this high contrast, crushed blacks, ghostly skin tones, super gloomy look.  I like gloomy, but geez, turn a light on every now and then fer cryin' out loud!

[pardales]

I am so glad I decided not to read the books, none of this dual medium emotional baggage necessary!  Ahhhh, sweet ignorance!  I am going to see it tonight. 

The thing that bugs me is not necessarily how the films have gotten darker, but rather how the picture has gotten darker and darker.  I mean, the post-processing is just so over the top.  That pretty much goes for a lot of stuff coming out these days.  Ever since film 3 Potter has been heading into this high contrast, crushed blacks, ghostly skin tones, super gloomy look.  I like gloomy, but geez, turn a light on every now and then fer cryin' out loud!

I appreciate this sentiment. While the books do gradually get darker in tone, content, and mood, there is no reason the visual imagery needs to in the way you describe. The books are the real deal....the movies are a pleasant bonus.

[nathanm]

All I can say is that if you want to feel like you have the best home theater system in the town I would suggest seeing the 8:15 show during a weekday at the Marcus Cinema in Saukville, WI.  This is now the 2nd Harry Potter and 3rd movie overall which I have watched completely by myself in an empty theater!  I really know how to pick 'em apparently.  It's great; you can put your feet up on the railing, use both armrests, ignore the warning about turing off your cell phone and just generally feel like you're sitting in the world's largest million dollar living room with however-many-channel THX surround.  Heh!

The movie was great, I liked it better than the previous one although of course whimsy has been generally banished from the film.  How depressing for the Hogwarts students, they know how each year is going to end; some huge tragic battle involving Harry and Voldemort.  Sheesh!  I dunno about you, but when I was in school there was only one kid who died tragically, but if you go to wizard school there's terror and death all around.  Then again, how sad can one be about your house being burned down when it's been established that a trashed house can be magically restored with a spell.  Hmmm.  The look was generally gloomy as expected, but not too distracting.  Well, except for those bits where you can practically see the feathered-edge mask on people's faces.  The Tom Riddle memory bits were especially Soft Light Blur Layery with just certain faces isolated with a glow.

[richidoo]

Just got back from seeing it. I sat next to my 11yo who has read every book. He said the movie is just a shadow of the book, he was disappointed. I thought the movie was shallow and boring, compared to all of the others.  My 7yo daughter cried when .....    well, you know...   I'm glad Harry finally has a woman. Took him long enough!

[nathanm]

Yeah, but leaving that hottie at the diner so he could fly off to magic world with some creepy old man, what a bummer!

He said the movie is just a shadow of the book, he was disappointed.

  See what I mean, you just set yourself up for disappointment with this book\movie thing.   Pick one or the other, you'll be happier!  Heh!

[richidoo]

Yeah, but leaving that hottie at the diner so he could fly off to magic world with some creepy old man, what a bummer!

I agree, but as quick as she came on to him he was right to think he can go back and pick her up again with a wink.

[ecramer]

Went to see this yesterday with my 13yr old nephew who is visiting from England I injoyed the movie a lot. Ive seen all the movies and have read the first couple of books but have not finished reading the series. I left the movie wanting more to the extent that i think i will have to sit down and read the book's. I'm substance to the books then can be conveyed in a 2.5 hour movie I was opretty much engaged during the whole movie. Helena Bonham Carter