Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince film was crap
Ranked #28,471 in Entertainment, #324,874 overall
Harry Potter's sixth movie was boring
Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince film was crap
I understand that it's not easy for a director to be faithful to the book that he's filming and I also understand that there is something called artistic licence and liberty.
However, in the case of the latest Potter movie, I kept wondering if the scriptwriter and director had been on drugs when they wrote/made the movie. (Did they even read the book? I wonder%u2026)
My list of bitter complaints: One. The film begins with attacks on the Muggle world, which is there in the book too. But in the book, the Muggle Prime Minister has a meeting with Cornelius Fudge and the new Minister for Magic, about how the Muggle world and the magic world are colliding. In the film, however, we saw the attacks and then we saw nothing. The next scene had Albus Dumbledore taking Harry to Horace Slughorn's house. So what happened after the attacks? What were they all about anyway? The movie doesn't bother to tell us.
Second. The first half of the film is all about love-romance which is there in the book too but it's hardly the central motif. Burgeoning hormones are very cute, but since nothing actually happens, it makes for very dull viewing. So why did the film go on and on and on about the love thing in the first half?
Third. The burning of the Burrow as it's shown in the film doesn't happen in the book. So why is that scene there? And if you're going to put it in, it's weird that the very next scene is set in Hogwarts where everything seems quite normal and everyone seems to have amnesia about the Burrow being set on fire.
Four. The film gives hardly any importance to the Half-Blood Prince. (The book has so much about him; there is such a sense of mystery). Which is why, in the end, when Snape says, "I'm the Half-Blood prince," if you haven't read the book, you may have a hard time remembering who the hell this Prince fellow is.
Five. In the book, when the Death Eaters come to Hogwarts through the cupboard in the Room of Requirement, there's a huge, climactic battle in the school. In the film, Bellatrix arrives (almost casually) in Hogwarts with three or four Death Eaters and then all of them just stroll out of the school. Huh?
YOUR TURN!
Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince film was crap
Fetching blurbs now... please stand byYes, you're right!
zane says:
and when dumbledore gets harry he was at the train station not at privit drive they skiipped what would have been a funny scene for something ver boaring in my oppinion this was the worst of the 7 (soon to be 8) movies
Posted April 28, 2011
vaisakh says:
it was ok but not much action
Posted January 14, 2011
Hee says:
CRAP.
Posted December 04, 2010
joeblow 45 says:
the only good thing about harry-bloody-poofta is that there are no wimpass emo vampires in it !
Posted November 28, 2010
dave says:
oh yeah! i haven't read the Burrow being caught on fire so after seeing it in the movie i was like "did this really happen?"
Posted November 21, 2010
leafy says:
It was awful. What anoyd me was that in the book harry hides the book in the room of requirment but in the film ginny hides it so harry doesnt no wher it is. This makes no sense as harry has 2 no wher the book is cause he put helga huflepuffs tiara on top of the cabenet and thats how he nos wher it is to destroy it. The harry gini romance was non existent which was so disapointing. I came out of the cinema realy angry after watching this film. It realy didnt do the book justice at all.
Posted November 17, 2010
zorabel says:
I agree with all of these and would add many more if I wasn't death-sick at the moment. My biggest minus though - and I lack words for expressing how big that minus actually is - would be number 4. Snape's story, the headline story, has been completely swept under the rug. I really don't know how they will transport all its significance into the last movie now. And what about the Harry/ Ginny build-up? It was poorly done. Hormones raging everywhere but here. Where was Sirius' mirror? It is a major device in the last book? Okay. Done for now.
Posted November 05, 2010
Angelica says:
In the book we got to go into about half a dozen memories to do with Voldemort and where he came from. The movie only had the one at the orphanage and when he asks Slughorn about Horcruxes. I reckon for the people who haven't read the books (and there is a mistake in itself) there's is so much to be learnt about Harry's enemy and the Horcruxes he chooses. It's BECAUSE he knows his enemy so well that he can finally defeat Voldemort!
So i know it would have made the movie go forever but it's a shame we didn't get to see more of these (the Gaunt family would have been VERY interesting)
Posted November 05, 2010
ian says:
ur are so damn right!!!,,,i thought the same as u....but the real theme in the book is the life of voldemort this movie really desapoint me so bad...and hoppefully i think the new might be is as the book said...
Posted November 04, 2010
DL says:
I think EVERYONE will love the last two Films. I'm sure it will end AWESOME and it will close a long awaited ending. I look forward to DH Part 1 ...I'm going to buy tickets for midnight show! :)
Posted November 02, 2010
Cathy says:
I totally agree... another example of how topics of great importance in the book were pushed, like, roughly out of the way in order to be replaced by loooove and romaaaance is the scene of Ron's poisoning... in the book, the scene was pure tragedy: Ron almost died, Harry managed to save him, everyone (parents, siblings, friends) was really anguished afterwards and there was always the mystery of the villain... But in the movie, we see Hermione and Lavender quarelling over the seat by Ron's bed... Will he be all right? Why (and by whom) was the mead poisoned? These questions apparently seemed too lame to the scriptwriter... Lavender-"I'm his girlfriend"-Brown is apparently much more important... Shame.
Posted November 01, 2010
Jordan says:
'Artistic license and liberty', as it was so elegantly put in the article, is another way of saying, "We'll screw it up just so it looks good to us. The book? PAH!" indeed, they did a rather messy job, and were inconsistent with the plot. And this next one looks like they are using action to make up for any possible (and perhaps likely) mistakes.
Posted October 30, 2010
ankit says:
THE WORST POSSIBLE FILM FROM THE SIXTH BOOK.
Every part of the film can be much, much better.
Posted October 29, 2010
hpfan says:
d muvi ws utterly crap!! didnt mek ne sense..my cousins who hadnt read d books were completely clueless as to what was going on!! even i got confused in many parts..
Posted October 28, 2010
Skeefiez says:
One of my biggest complaints besides all that was already covered above was that this movie was to dive into the memories about Voldemort and how he came to be. In the book there were at least 5 memories that Harry & Dumbledore "visited" including when Merope was still young and living in the shack with her father (Volde's grandfather) and brother as well as the other memories that had clues of what the horcruxes would be, yet all that was in the film was Dumbledore 1st meeting a young Tom Riddle and then the corrpted Slughorn memory. How would Harry then know to look for the Hufflepuff Cup in the next movie?? GRRR although I still think Goblet of Fire movie was TONS worse...
Posted October 28, 2010
mike says:
Love this review especially point 4! The book is filled with mystery about the prince, and the fact that Snape is the new defense against the dark arts teacher is huge in the book two because its known that that teacher never last more than a year.
Posted October 28, 2010
dre says:
I am by no means a director. I'm just saying what I would have liked to seen or wish they had done differently.
1. I wish they delved a bit more into this. Even if the meeting was a short two minute one conversation, I would have preferred that, rather than a collapsing bridge and a newspaper headline. A combination of the two would have been nice. I feel it would have enforced that that this was no longer just a Wizarding War. This concerns Muggles as much as it does wizards.
2. I feel that it does focus a bit too much on the love aspect of the book, rather than Voldemort's past and the key to destroying him. They condensed these scenes down way too much. We've already covered the character relationships in the past five books. Did we really need another movie, this time being 70% of the central focus?
3. I liked the attack on the Burrow. It really pushed the fact that Voldemort is no longer joking around. Also I agree. Had they added a 30 second clip of the Weasleys trying to pull memories from the rubble it would have made me feel a bit more, but otherwise, just action to wake you up if you were falling asleep.
4. I didn't like this either. They covered Harry's obsession with the book for about a minute or two, and then no more mentioning it until the very end. Not good coverage, but it was of little importance in the book. i agree that the Snape quote made me question if the audience really asked that question to begin with.
5. I like the quiet "battle." I doubt that if wizards did exist in the real world that they would send their children back to a school where a battle ensued only months before. We need them for the Final Battle. (A few children reading WANTED ads in the newspaper in the halls would have been nice.) I just wish they'd did a bit more for the loss of the greatest wizard since Merlin than just a wand-light vigil.
Posted October 28, 2010
dre says:
Now that you mention it, these things WERE the nagging questions in the back of my brain that went unanswered. Now I know why I didn't really like this film as much. But as for the ending, I like that they kept the "final battle" quiet, but I wish they did include the tribute to Albus Dumbledore. It would have made a more effective Somebody-has-to-stop-Voldemort ending, rather than a cheesy, lackluster phoenix flying off into the sunset.
Posted October 28, 2010
Ashish says:
Hpgirl says 'It was suppose to be the most dark and misterious movie of all 7! But they made it like a romantic comedy or something like that. Only people that haven't read the book could say it was a good movie. I totally agree with all the five points of why it was so bad. They didn't get to the point (dark lord's past and the half-blood prince mystery) on the whole movie and they didn't even put a defense against the dark arts class! (while they added extra scenes that didn't even appear on the book). As a reader I think it was dissapointing but I think non readers can enjoy it...'
I so agree with u. The movie was RUBBISH. Yates is definitely a loser. It was one of the most amazing book the series. The movie was soo disappointing. The BOOK was awesome. Rowling is a genius. Screw Yates! I hope the Deathly Hallows is good :( And to all those people who say movies and books are diff and tht its not tht easy to put almost everything in the movie. I agree but HPHBH was full of shit. All those romantic scenes, Burrow on fire, Harry flirting with the waitress, annoying Lavender. Do you think these scenes were more imp than the memories?? :O
Posted October 28, 2010
buggy says:
just read the book. it's better than any movie if you want good plot. jk rowling is a genius. woots for her! :D
Posted October 28, 2010
khushi says:
totally crap and biggest disappointment.....what the hell dumbledore dies just like dat??? i mean read the book it shows so much details...... and there is nothing shown about the half-blood prince.......the director didnt do nay justice with the book!!!!
Posted October 28, 2010
MichaelB says:
Agreed. HP6 was total rubbish. It left so much out from the book. It.had nothing to do with.the mystery of the half blood prince. Its like harry finds the book and thats ituntill the end of movie. HP7 better better
Posted October 28, 2010
Screamers says:
Spot on! This movie was the worst of them all, the choices made were beyond my understanding. To choose to needlessly burn down the burrow but NOT iinclude Dumbledore's Funeral? Unforgiveable! To reduce Harry and Ginny's relationship to one brief kiss then they have to break up? No sense! I only hope this next movie can undo some of the damage. I'm so excited!
Posted October 28, 2010
Katrina says:
Totally agree!!!! The film was poor representation of the book, missing out vital scene and adding in completely useless ones!
Posted October 28, 2010
Plabita says:
it sucked... big time! i am a very big fan of harry potter and this film squelched my hopes... coz i had expected a lot lot more...
Posted October 28, 2010
anHPgirl says:
It was suppose to be the most dark and misterious movie of all 7! But they made it like a romantic comedy or something like that. Only people that haven't read the book could say it was a good movie. I totally agree with all the five points of why it was so bad. They didn't get to the point (dark lord's past and the half-blood prince mystery) on the whole movie and they didn't even put a defense against the dark arts class! (while they added extra scenes that didn't even appear on the book). As a reader I think it was dissapointing but I think non readers can enjoy it...
Posted September 29, 2010
anonymous says:
It was the worst piece or rubish ive ever seen you are completely right and i could add so much more. very dissapointing!
Posted September 11, 2010
The Ledhead says:
While the trio's acting is at this point top-notch, the film seemed to be extremely unrealistic (set aside the fact that it's a fantasy movie). Character development that had happened in the previous films is completely disregarded, the foremost being Harry's hatred for Bellatrix. Obviously, JKR is much smarter than the filmmakers and actually understands human nature, because in the book, when the Death Eaters arrive, Dumbledore stuns Harry and throws the invisibility cloak over him because he knows that Harry can't help but try to attack Bellatrix, no matter what he tells him. Bella did kill Sirius, after all, that's what Harry hates her for. Dumbledore knows this, and stepping into the middle of a Death Eater attack would put Harry in danger. Instead, in the film, Dumbledore says, "Get down below," and Harry obeys. While under the stairs, Harry confronts Snape, the man he doesn't trust IN THE LEAST BIT. Snape puts his finger over his mouth, signaling "Shush." Harry does so. Harry only goes all-out once the Death Eaters flee from Hogwarts. This just goes to show that this filmmakers don't pay attention to that kind of stuff and are more focused on Harry and his chum's hormonal imbalances. That kind of stuff sells these days, but it doesn't appeal to me, and probably not to a lot of people who expected a deeper storyline than that.
Another major problem with the film was that they didn't resolve the major conflict (conflict for lack of a better word, the major base of the book was discovering Voldemort's past, which didn't happen too much). At the end, Dumbledore's death is only redeemed by everybody raising their wands and making the Dark Mark disappear, and they didn't even include his funeral (which might leave them in knots for the 7th film). When Harry decides to skip Hogwarts and look for the Horcruxes, the delivery is so weak and nonchalant that it doesn't even make an impact or make you realize that this is 'the beginning of the end', so to speak. Overall, probably the weakest film in the series.
Posted July 28, 2010
12 yr old Riz says:
Well, after my cousins watched the movie, they told me, "NO. Please don't watch it, 'kay?" After reading and scanning nonsense trailers, I believe it WAS crap. Good thing I didn't waste Php179 and three hours in a movie house watching a confusing movie. READ THE BOOKS, people. :))
Posted July 23, 2010
sweetdevil13 says:
I think the film was total crap!! They started going downhill for me when the 5th one came out. That one and the half blood prince were completly and utterly boring!! I mean I was in love with the books and damn excited about the movie but i hope to high heavens that the deathly hallows will be better!!
Posted July 20, 2010
No way, Monkeybrain!
jessica says:
if the movie stuck to the book as much as you wanted, it would be a 9 hour movie. sure, there were parts that didn't add up, but who cares? if you're taking time to worry about every little thing that didn't satisfy your harry potter craving, i suggest finding a different hobby.
Posted July 31, 2011
Nia says:
haha more hates than likes. you are proved wrong and i agree with babygin, you need to appreciate the magic
Posted July 30, 2011
Babygin says:
stop being silly and annoying, you obviously just watch the film to hard and boringly. appreciate the magic for once
Posted July 30, 2011
Jamie says:
Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince was AWESOME!!!!!! sure it was not as good as the book but was still super sweet! The actors were great and it was just amazing!....You guys are on crack!
Posted October 30, 2010
HP FREAK says:
I thought the movie was great!!! Everyone who knows of Harry Potter, whether they're into HP or not, knows that HP consists of Books and movies... and if they want all the information, they really should read the books. Everyone knows that a book contains more information than a movie (unless it's a small book like 'Where the Wild Things Are.') If they want more information, they should read the book. I think the movie had plenty of information and what you say the movie lacks, will probably be explained in DH part 1
Posted October 28, 2010
Aaron says:
1. There was no time to fit all the events in the book. The focus of Yates was to focus on Harry's personal journey, and it meant cutting the Prime Minister and Minister of Magic's scene. It would've been boring anyway--besides, wouldn't it be more exciting if we saw a first-hand account of what was going on?
2. The entire film is about relationships--not just Harry and Ginny, but Ron and Hermione, Hermione and McLaggen, Ron and Lavender, Harry and Dumbledore, Harry and Slughorn--how people change, how they relate and what builds and tears down relationships in general.
3. It was to speed up the pacing of the film, to add more excitement and have Harry witness a first-hand account of what the Death Eaters were doing. They do brush it off, because it can be simply fixed, and nobody was hurt. Hermione does briefly tell Harry that he has to keep himself safe.
4. After the introduction of the Half-Blood Prince, there was not much they could do to keep the emphasis of the film on him throughout the last hour and a half. Too many other things were happening, so it was very nostalgic when Snape came back and revealed his identity, saying that he was the HBP, and everyone was so surprised they forgot, lost in the aura of the film.
5. Simple: keeping the battle would add repetition in 2011 when Deathly Hallows: Part 2 comes out, featuring a huge battle in Hogwarts.
Posted October 28, 2010
falak says:
it's not easy to portray details as it is in book..in the movie!!
think practically deah..it was a great attempt. though it did not match my expectations . but stil i liked every still of it.
Posted October 28, 2010
sekar says:
i can't say you wrong or you right but there is some reason why they made it like this is the answer(maybe that)
1. they didn't make it about the prime minister talk to Muggle minister because that's not really important
2. yeah,it's like a dull movies but if you know a half of the stories told about their romance remember
3. it just make that voldemort has grown stronger
4.i dunno about that but maybe because they just give it about the most importance about the Prince
5.they don't give it a huge climatic battle because if that happened in the seventh will be repeat the producer didn't want that
that it's all i can give you a reason
2
Posted August 04, 2010
patrick says:
while i do agree that the climax was, well, rather anti-climactic, i don't believe you should throw out the baby with the bathwater...it was still a very well made thing, and while there are a few weak points, it doesn't mean the whole film was rubbish
Posted April 02, 2010
Aaron says:
1. Instead of making the film boring and having Harry hear about the attacks, they wanted us to see one firsthand, which is why they included the attack on the bridge. And if you look at Harry's newspaper, it does say "Death Toll Rises," giving you some sense on what happened.
2. Actually the love is mixed in with a whole bunch of dark aspects: Spinner's End, Knockturn Alley, Harry spying on Draco on the Hogwarts Express, Dumbledore's Speech, Harry's meetings with Dumbledore, talking about Voldemort, and Draco's attempts on fixing the Vanishing Cabinet. These blend quite nicely with the "love" scenes to make a proper balance.
3. Again, the filmmakers wanted Harry to experience one of these attacks abroad instead of hearing about one, to make the danger seem real. In fact, it would be only too easy to cast "reparo" to fix the whole thing.
4. There is actually quite a reasonable amount of screentime that has to do with the Half-Blood Prince, and seeing as the title is called that, I'm pretty sure audiences will remember it.
5. The filmmakers cut the battle to avoid repetition with Book 7's Battle of Hogwarts, which happens in the same fashion and place.
Posted March 16, 2010
soumya says:
the movie as such wasnt that bad........but..........if u havent read the book and leaving out the certain things u mentioned,it was quite entertaining!!! but yeah i do kinda agree with u becuz they shudnt change the story so drastically
Posted September 10, 2009
Jordan says:
i feel the movie was good, it had a good balance of comedy and darkness. It was a book that had the ability to be played with, but I agree with you on some parts, but not all. The school battle, I really wanted to see, but some of the other things seemed to just fit.
Posted September 09, 2009
YOUR MOM says:
You suck, your website sucks, and this movie was awesome. I read the book and loved it!
Posted August 17, 2009
Lilly C says:
I don't exactly think it was crap, I do like my movie adaptations to be exactly like the book, but at the same time, were I a non-reader, I would've thought it was pretty good. But since I did read the book, I though it was like they just made a collage of various scenes of the book and other new (non-existent in the book) scenes to give the non-readers a sense of what really is happening, yet they never really explain to them what is happening... I was expecting a scene with the two ministers, and nothing remotely similar to that appeared in the film. The burning of the Burrow was like, a total brainfart, I didn't understand why they decided to put that in, in the first place. I got the same feeling during the first part of the movie, it was all lovey-dovey, but I was expecting something to connect it all, it felt very disconnected to me, the entire movie felt disconnected to me. Having said that, I think visually, it was a success. It was very dinamic and very beautiful. All in all, it was funny, but it felt like they put together a collage of their favorite scenes of what happens in the book and put it together in the film.
Posted August 14, 2009
sfeps says:
i aggree in lot of your aspects but i think the movie was GOOD! i mean lot of scences which were in the book were'nt in the film BUT for example qiuiditch was much better than in in ALL films!! i think the film is more realistic as in the other ones, and the love stories in this film were a PERFECT contrast to the fightenend scenes! in my opinion the film is very short but he is good !
Posted August 13, 2009
William says:
I agree with you on alot of points, but I think that this movie was definately a good one. Sure, I do think that there shouldve been a battle at the end and that there shouldve been more about the Prince and less about the love and romance, but it was definately better than the Prisoner of Azkaban. Now that movie was crap. However, that's just my opinion. I did like the Burrow and Quiddich scenes though. Those were awesome scenes. All in all, the movie was good.
Posted August 08, 2009
William says:
I agree with you to a point. I do agree that there should have been a fight at the end of the movie. However, I did like the Burrow scene. That was pretty cool. I also thought that the quiddich scenes was pretty cool as well. I think that they couldve done alot more with the story but it was definately better than the Prizoner of Azkaban. Now that movie was crap. Just my opinion. However, I do think that it was a good movie, even though they left a whole bunch of stuff out. I just hope the next movie is better.
Posted August 08, 2009
preknan says:
Oh, yeah. Remember! All of the films producing is under monitor of J.K. Rowling. If the film was released like this, it must have the 'OK' statement from Rowling herself.
Posted August 08, 2009
preknan says:
Many of my friends say that the film is not good. Not good doesn't mean it's crap, isn't it?
If you read the book, you can imagine many things until the details. But, human has limits. They only can make the film in they point of view. Everyone has their point of view. Like you. If you like it, then you like it. If you don't, then you don't. You want the film be very similar to the book. But, in the film, you can't tell the viewers the 'Harry's mind' most of the time, unlike the book.
Many other films, which is an adapted from a book, can't tell the whole 'inner' story. I've said it before, human has limits. They (the movie producer, etc.) had done what their best. Respect their efforts! Make a film isn't easy.
If you think you have a critics then can make the film better, why don't you send it to them by an letter, e-mail, or anything else?
I'm sorry if this comment make you feel offended. I just want you to respect others.
Thank you.
Posted August 08, 2009
Devika17 says:
I do agree with your points, especially points 3 and 5. I think it would be insanely amazing if they could make a movie that completely followed the book.Unfortunately, it was not so. But i think despite the differences, it was still a great movie. The romance in the first half did make the movie slightly more comical than all the others. I enjoy the books very much, but i have learned to separate my liking for them from my liking for the movies. If i didn't i would be sincerely disappointed as you are! I am a huge harry potter fan, (books and movies) really enjoyed the sixth film, and am awaiting the upcoming last ones.
Posted August 07, 2009
charlie says:
And Ginny was hot!
Posted August 04, 2009
charlie says:
You all are mistaken, it was the funniest harry potter film.
Posted August 04, 2009
bekbek09 says:
I thought the movie was great!
The only part that was wierd was the Burrow scene and then in the beginning where Harry was stuck on the train under his Cloak and LUNA found him...not TONKS...?? but other than that,i thought it was probably one of the best HP movies!!it was very suspensful, and it if i hadn't have read the book about 20(billion) times before,then it would have probably kept me wondering throughout thr whole thing!
Besides,if they put everything in the movie,it would be like a zillion hours long!!! let's please be realistic :)
Posted August 04, 2009
£Lf says:
You're right about your points but i don't think that the film is crap. The director can't put all the things in the book to the movie. And there's one more thing: The movie isn't the same in the book in all of harry potter films. So something can change and it doesn't make the movie so crap.
Posted August 03, 2009
FutureGinnyPotter says:
Although I do agree with your points, I agree with those only if I do compare the movies to the books. Obviously the directors cannot put everything from the book into the movie. We have seen it in every movie, why make a big deal out of it now? SEEING the destruction of the muggle world made the movie that much more interesting, and the opening scene shorter, then it would have been had the ministers talked. The romance thing was interesting, and it made the movie different from all of the other movies. And it made it funny in parts, which as I said, was an interesting change up. The burrow burning did not happen in the book, and I agree it was weird, but I think the director just wanted to show how bad it was getting, and how terrible the death eaters were becoming. The movie DOES have stuff about the half blood prince in it, and although not as much, like I said, time restraints. He does end up having to get rid of the book, attacking Malfoy with it, becoming excellent at potions, etc. And, as much as I do wish that they had had a battle at Hogwarts, they may have not wanted to put in another one, since basically half the second part of the seventh movie, if they don't cut anything out, would be an epic battle. If they had added in another battle, then the audience would have gotten bored, or just tired of watching fighting. Leaving out this battle was a smart choice in the long run. The only thing I was upset about was that Dumbledore did not have his funeral. I was thinking that they could add that to the beginning of the seventh movie, part one, but then realized that would mess up how the seventh book was planned. So I guess Dumbledore does not get a funeral. Which is disappointing. But in response to the person who said the burning of the burrow was so they could cut out the wedding in the seventh movie, they would not be able to do that. Too many things happen at the wedding that are important, and I do not think that they could pull off cutting out the wedding and make it good. But, they are magic, so they could probably figure out a way to fix the burrow.
Posted August 03, 2009
Drake says:
if you think it is bad then you probably arent looking at it in the correct view. this movie cut out too many important pieces of information and will not map out the next movies correctly. Bill and Fleur were not in this movie, and they did not properly introduce fenrir greyback. Also you should keep in ming that the book is a very long book and if tey put in all of the information it would have been 3 1/2 to 4 hours. i personally would not have minded sitting through that but SO MANY viewers would have. and i know a lot of people would disagree,but this book was the 2nd worst book in the series! of course it was crap! the point of this storyline was to map out the next book! i think the reason for jk rowling to make these movies (besides the movie and career promotion) was to show the viewers what she sees as she is writing this magical story. obviousley we may not see it the way she sees cuz we all have different brains! on a new note, they knew it wasnt going to be that good so they covered it up with funny moments to make it enjoyable. i think people are being a little to harsh, and i hopethat this insight will convince you to look at it in a different way, or at least try to give it a better chance
Posted August 02, 2009
Preston P says:
the burning of the burrow was in there because JK Rowling told Yates to put it in there. i dont know if it needs to be in there for the next two movies or what...
i do agree however that there needed to be a battle royal at the end. i was kinda pissed about that. but i did like the movie. you do make some good points tho.
Posted August 02, 2009
Palmer says:
First point: The beginnings and endings are regularly changed to make more sense on film than in print. You haven't noticed this before now? Film is about visualization. Rather than having Fudge talk with the 'recent events' (cinematically boring), they decided to show them (you noticed the whole bridge collapse, right?).
Second: Another interesting thing about the Harry Potter series is that it's about more than a boy-wizard and his wild wacky world. It's about real life. It's about growing up in extraordinary circumstances (as all teenagers seem to think they do), dealing with the outside world, and how that is generally easier to manage than even dealing with themselves. You know. Like real teenagers. Leaving out the "love thing" would've been a disgrace to the humanness of the story.
Third: My best guess is they burnt the Burrow to forgive the fact that they won't be starting DH there. No Fleur and Bill in HBP, no wedding.
Four: Better that than being constantly choked on it. I just recently saw Terminator Salvation. I went through the movie being constantly reminded that THIS IS JOHN FREAKING CONNOR. It was annoying. Anyway, the book itself was less "who is this Prince guy, anyway?" and more "what is Malfoy up to?", which is exactly what the movie covered.
Five: This was the only part that disappointed me. I was looking forward to the duel. Bummer...
Posted August 02, 2009
kenzie says:
i thought the movie was great! and if u never noticed, they cut a lot of stuff out of all of the movies!
Posted August 02, 2009
nense says:
I think the movie is quite okay.And the Deathly Hallows movie (first part) will have the end of the Half-Blood Prince in it.
Posted August 02, 2009
DISPROVE MY POINT (fine, be that way)
Disagree? Put your money where your mouth is and show us why.
Post links that point out why you think I'm wrong.
Please add at least one item before saving.Is Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince Game good?
The sixth Potter game should defnitely be better than the movie.
Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince
Amazon Price: $9.39 (as of 02/16/2012)
RELATED NEWS: FODDER FOR ARGUING MORE
New Amazon
by kaplan
I am a webmaster, a filmmaker and a dreamer all rolled into one. I love to do work that I enjoy, and get paid for it! At this moment of my life, its precisely... more »
- 5 featured lenses
- Winner of 4 trophies!
- Top lens » Emma Watson
