Wednesday, July 15, 2009


BBC Does Blockbuster - Potter gets the miniseries treatment


Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince

Rating - A-




In the history of sci-fi/fantasy film franchises Harry Potter stands out as a grand experiment. No blockbuster series has ever been willing to tinker with its formula so often in order to continue to make fresh and interesting movies. Of course, I can’t think of any major film franchises that have had this many installments (except the Land Before Time I guess...) so the Potter series stands out as something of a pioneer. For the less film geek-y here’s a short history of the series.


1. Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone was released in 2001 as Potter fever was in its profitable infancy. Children rejoiced. Chris Columbus’s direction introduced some positive trends like hiring veteran actors Richard Harris, Maggie Smith and Alan Rickman to fill out a strong supporting cast of adult characters while the kids developed their acting skills keeping parents well entertained as their kids went into spasmodic delight in seeing their favorite characters brought to life on the big screen. All-in-all Columbus put together a solid debut for the series, but the format was familiar big-budget fare: giant, expensive action sequences, cheesy quips, overblown soundtrack, ticking off the book’s plot points one by one without much thought of the film’s rhythm.


2. Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets came just a year later and was likely the cause of what was apparently some serious soul-searching on the part of the studio and Rowling. Despite garnering generally positive reviews the film was overlong and shoddily assembled, once again following the book far too closely. Plus the kids’ acting didn’t seem to be maturing much. Columbus left not because he was asked to but because the franchise was taking over his life. Nevertheless, Columbus' departure proved to be a good thing.


3. Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban: This was the turning point. After Columbus announced he was leaving the series producer David Heyman and Rowling decided to take the road less traveled and hire Alfonso Cuaron who took the film in a more visionary direction. Potter 3 was shockingly dark and artful, turning Hogwarts into a bleak yet transfixing world with sparing moments of joyful transcendence. His primary achievement was taking the time to mentor the three young leads into convincing human beings, infusing the story with a great deal more drama than Rowling’s book ever delivered. This film was an unprecedented move toward giving a major moneybag franchise a distinctive stylistic stamp. It would've been like giving The Empire Strikes Back to Stanley Kubrick to direct. Cuaron showed us that popularity didn’t necessarily have to stifle creativity as long as an inspired director’s creative powers were encouraged and the story could be interpreted rather than re-enacted onscreen.


4. Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire: Cuaron was pooped so Mike Newell took over for the fourth installment putting the film into steady British hands for the first time. Taking strong visual cues from Cuaron’s artistic reboot of the franchise, Potter 4 may not have had Cuaron himself at the helm but certainly benefited strongly from his influence. The fact that the film was only one film instead of split into two to support the overlong plot was Cuaron’s doing, once again saving good cinema from the complicated demands of rabid faithfulness to below-average source material.


5. Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix: Longtime BBC TV director David Yates started his run on the series with a shockingly muted take on the fifth book giving new meaning to the term ‘less is more’. His film was almost entirely devoid of soundtrack, used visual effects sparingly at best and methodically built the tension using empty space and a hushed tone until the final explosive finale. Yates picked up Rowling’s slack turning problems of a poorly paced storyline, a ridiculously over-the-top villain and an incomprehensible climax into a film that dodged summer blockbuster goofiness with good British sensibility.


So now we come to the long-awaited sixth installment. It was delayed 8 months, much to the fans chagrin but it has proven to be worth the wait. The film is fuller than the fifth by blanketing a sparse Yates’ run on the franchise is characterized by challenges that the previous filmmakers didn’t have. Here’s another enumerated list:


1. He has had to adapt Rowling’s crappiest books: Books 5-7 just really lost focus. 6 is the best of the lot but in all they meander into a dullness and confounding web of plotlines.

2. He has to do 4 movies in a row, splitting the last one into a two-part feature.

3. He has to maintain interest in a franchise that is far past its height of popularity

4. He has to make a compelling movie despite the fact that everybody already knows how it’s going to end.


It’s this final challenge that is probably the most daunting since the element of surprise is not in his favor and plot twists lose their shock value. Yates overcomes by pushing a feeling of inevitability and terrible purpose on the characters as the events move along. Dumbledore’s death, for instance, doesn’t exactly come out of nowhere. It is a climax that is built up and all but spelled out for the entire film. Likewise, Ron and Hermione’s romance is wisely turned into one of those familiar frustrating sagas everyone has experienced in their groups of friends in which everyone else sees it coming miles ahead of the lovestruck couple. Ginny Weasley is even given the line “about time”.


At several points, the film transitions into outright comedy, keeping things novel. It's all very self-aware, making fun of the familiar narrative patterns that have become the norm in the Potter series. For example:


Dumbledore: You’re no doubt wondering why I brought you here, Harry

Potter: Actually sir, after all these years I just sort of go with it.



McGonagall: Any time something happens why is it always you three?

Ron: I've been trying to figure that one for six years


Yates even pokes a little fun at the all-too-trite concept of Harry’s status as ‘The Chosen One’, a plot element so obviously cherry-picked from other fantasy epics like Star Wars, the Matrix and every other 'hero with a destiny' story it’s hard to take it seriously. The humor manages to add an odd gravity to it since the characters talk about it as if it’s a tired label, suggesting that the whole idea that Harry Potter is 'The Chosen One' has been so exhausted in conversation between the 5th and 6th movie that it's become a rather boring subject for the characters. It's a bit like reverse psychology making light of a subject for comedic effect and in the process re-affirming its seriousness.


Hermione: (after seeing a pretty girl and Harry making eyes at each other) Snap out of it! She’s only interested in you because she thinks you’re 'the chosen one'.

Harry: (pompously) But I am the chosen one.


Technically, the film is incredible. Bruno Delbonnel’s (Amelie) cinematography is the best yet for the Potter franchise. All the sets, costumes and props blend seamlessly to create a world that is at once surreal and believable. The visual effects are perfectly done, maintaining an elusive beauty. Mark Day’s editing was ultimately what sold me. He made things properly kinetic or calm and showed a remarkable ability to pick up or slow down the pace and maintain a stimulating rhythm throughout.



In the end it’s the mood that makes this movie work. Half-Blood Prince is the darkest Potter film yet yet but by ‘dark’ I do not mean violent, cynical or negative in any way. It’s just, well, dark. Most of the film is shot in cloudy grays and nighttime hues (a rather accurate depiction of England) Hogwarts is no longer the fantastical playground it was back in the Columbus days and it’s an effective progression. Yates manages to communicate how dire the situation is for our heroes what with the magical war brewing and dark wizards lurking around every turn. The students cut up and do what they’ve always done in the past movies: they fall in love, get in fights play their wizard rugby or whatever it is, but it all seems to take place under a dark cloud of foreboding. The events of the past films seem to have taken their toll on the mood of the school. Hermione’s prophecy at the end of the fourth film has come to its full fruition “everything’s going to be different now isn’t it?” The hallways feel much more deserted than in the past and the characters all act a bit shell-shocked. It feels like the students’ last hurrah before the storm, a final return to innocence and laughter that feels charming yet bleak. Everyone seems to be aware of how bad things have gotten but they’ve decided to have fun this year nonetheless, struggling to preserve normalcy in severe and challenging times. It’s all has a tragic feeling, like trying to revisit a lost innocence. By the end of the film as Harry announces his plans to end the war, one truly understands his decision not to return to his beloved school because it has been hollowed out. Friends are dead and gone, rivals have become enemies and the characters’ adolescence has been jolted into a premature adulthood. The Potter world is no longer safe.


The primary criticism I have heard leveled at this film is that it doesn’t feel like a complete movie. It’s long and doesn’t have a satisfying enough conclusion for a summer blockbuster. I think it’s important here to understand the philosophy new and final phase of the Harry Potter franchise. Yates is a TV director and as such he appears to be treating the latter end of the Potter series like a miniseries. The film does not stand alone as a film true enough but it remains as a strong installment in the Harry Potter series as a whole. He did downplay the finale but what has been unfortunately proven in Rowling’s writing is that big finishes do not necessarily mean good finishes. Every book seems to end on some big, overblown fight scene and I just honestly do not believe that would’ve made this film any better. It may have been overlong but Rowling’s books ramble so darn much it’s proven to be hard for anyone to pare it down to the bare essentials since all the plot lines are so frustratingly tangled together. Rowling would’ve benefited immensely from an editor who wasn’t a big fan; instead she hired a huge Potter nerd who knew her own invented world better than herself to help keep the world contiguous and all the plotlines straight (not kidding).


Though it may be slow I completely reject that the movie is ‘boring’ since every single shot seems to collect a million little curiosities, from magical cabinets to jars of liquid memory to twisty carnival-like corridors. If the only thing that holds your interest is spastic action scenes and big expensive special effects then take some ritalin and just accept the film for what it is. What it lacks in ‘action’ it makes up for twofold with its thick air of mystery and artful direction. Some stories just aren’t meant to be blockbusters. And that’s okay (though not usually for studios, which does producer David Heyman and Warner Brothers immense credit in my book).


Franchise films have a lot to learn from the Potter movies and the changes they have undergone. David Yates’ most recent work proves that film series can function like big-budget miniseries, making visually contiguous movies whose plots fit together rather than making one standalone film after another or shooting it all to hastily back-to-back (like The Matrix 2 & 3 and Pirates of the Caribbean). Lessons for big budget franchises: Take your time, be creative and realize that not every chapter in a series needs to be explosive to be magical.