Hey, folks.
Once again, a Potter film lands in theatres and I march out with the family to see if this installment is any better than the previous ones. I refuse to get caught into its pagebook form and all the nonsense that surrounds it. And as so, I can actually view the film adaptations without whispering over my neighbor's shoulder about how so-and-so is not doing what-and-what as according to the text. Unlike some who go to movie theatres to debate the merits of the book rather than watch the goddamn movie.
The first two helmed by Christopher Columbus were snoozefests of epic proportions (although the second film was a little bit better with the only interesting character being Kenneth Branagh's). I believe it was Mandark who said that Potter himself was an uninteresting character with the phrase, "I'm generic looking and know magic! Love me!" That's kind of how I feel about Harold Potter. My gripe, along with the fact that he's famous and rich and did jack shit the first two movies to prove that he deserves it, is that he doesn't fight anything evil.
In the first movie he fought some teacher with a talking cancer growth on the back of his head. And that wasn't until the last ten minutes! The second movie he fights a diary and a giant snake. I'm supposed to root for this character? There's no great evil he must overcome, nor is he any form of life-threatening danger that he can't easily overcome from the audience's standpoint.
The one, main bad guy in the entire fuckin' series hasn't even shown his face and we're three movies into this damned franchise already. He's a giant cocktease. It'd be like watching all the Star Wars movies with Luke, Leia and Han telling us all this shit about how big and bad Darth Vader is, building him up as this evil of epic proportions, but we never see him.
It's the same problem with the third film. About three-quarters into the film we already know the "bad guy" in this one isn't actually bad, and that's if you couldn't figure it out earlier. What we're left with is Harry Potter Goes Back to the Future and by that point, I really don't care. What's he fighting? Nothing. But he's trying to save Gary Oldman and that's supposed to warm my heart or something. Bite it, J.K. Rowling.
The new director whose name is so not American and thus, I can't recall it at this point, is one billion times better than Columbus. He actually succeeded in keeping my attention for a good part of the film and - damn! - everything from a technical standpoint seemed improved under his watch.
The visuals. The music. The acting. The CG. Everything.
It's a vast improvement over the other two. I loved the whole look of the film, which was a lot darker than the kiddy magic playground shit Columbus pumped in the first two flicks. It's still a shame that the new director still doesn't have a legitimate bad guy to pit Harry & Co. against unless somehow TIME ITSELF is now considered an antagonist.
I was told by my Potter-enlightened sibiling that the bad guy whose name I cannot spell will be in the next movie. Thank-fucking-God. For such a badass that gets in Harry's shit every year, but never shows up for some mano y mano duel, he's come off cowardly asshole so far. If they were to get a good villain and keep the same director, which unfortunately they are not, I'd be even more onboard.
As is, this is potential wasted, but is more entertaining than the first two films. As always, these Potter flicks are never bad, but are far from memorable and there are far worse things you could end up seeing. It's just kind of sad that the biggest thing in fantasy literature can't conjure up something a bit more interesting.
Once again, a Potter film lands in theatres and I march out with the family to see if this installment is any better than the previous ones. I refuse to get caught into its pagebook form and all the nonsense that surrounds it. And as so, I can actually view the film adaptations without whispering over my neighbor's shoulder about how so-and-so is not doing what-and-what as according to the text. Unlike some who go to movie theatres to debate the merits of the book rather than watch the goddamn movie.
The first two helmed by Christopher Columbus were snoozefests of epic proportions (although the second film was a little bit better with the only interesting character being Kenneth Branagh's). I believe it was Mandark who said that Potter himself was an uninteresting character with the phrase, "I'm generic looking and know magic! Love me!" That's kind of how I feel about Harold Potter. My gripe, along with the fact that he's famous and rich and did jack shit the first two movies to prove that he deserves it, is that he doesn't fight anything evil.
In the first movie he fought some teacher with a talking cancer growth on the back of his head. And that wasn't until the last ten minutes! The second movie he fights a diary and a giant snake. I'm supposed to root for this character? There's no great evil he must overcome, nor is he any form of life-threatening danger that he can't easily overcome from the audience's standpoint.
The one, main bad guy in the entire fuckin' series hasn't even shown his face and we're three movies into this damned franchise already. He's a giant cocktease. It'd be like watching all the Star Wars movies with Luke, Leia and Han telling us all this shit about how big and bad Darth Vader is, building him up as this evil of epic proportions, but we never see him.
It's the same problem with the third film. About three-quarters into the film we already know the "bad guy" in this one isn't actually bad, and that's if you couldn't figure it out earlier. What we're left with is Harry Potter Goes Back to the Future and by that point, I really don't care. What's he fighting? Nothing. But he's trying to save Gary Oldman and that's supposed to warm my heart or something. Bite it, J.K. Rowling.
The new director whose name is so not American and thus, I can't recall it at this point, is one billion times better than Columbus. He actually succeeded in keeping my attention for a good part of the film and - damn! - everything from a technical standpoint seemed improved under his watch.
The visuals. The music. The acting. The CG. Everything.
It's a vast improvement over the other two. I loved the whole look of the film, which was a lot darker than the kiddy magic playground shit Columbus pumped in the first two flicks. It's still a shame that the new director still doesn't have a legitimate bad guy to pit Harry & Co. against unless somehow TIME ITSELF is now considered an antagonist.
I was told by my Potter-enlightened sibiling that the bad guy whose name I cannot spell will be in the next movie. Thank-fucking-God. For such a badass that gets in Harry's shit every year, but never shows up for some mano y mano duel, he's come off cowardly asshole so far. If they were to get a good villain and keep the same director, which unfortunately they are not, I'd be even more onboard.
As is, this is potential wasted, but is more entertaining than the first two films. As always, these Potter flicks are never bad, but are far from memorable and there are far worse things you could end up seeing. It's just kind of sad that the biggest thing in fantasy literature can't conjure up something a bit more interesting.
