Personal view with the unhappy event. Definitely stemming from my obsession with the books, but Dumbledore always told Harry to trust Snape and that he was a good man. In that moment Harry chooses to completely trust Dumbledore by trusting Snape, and Dumbledore dies because of it. It’s a choice that would rip apart Harry, his trust, and his belief in Dumbledore’s infallibility. In the book he could hold some faith in his inability to act, in the movie it’s something entirely on him and doesn’t take anything away from the ultimate reveal of Dumbledore and Snape’s plans in HP7
Kermode is bang on. The books are unwieldy and clumsy at times, and despite the criticism from fans, the films do an excellent job of toning down the melodrama and translating some of the weaker moments (especially the dialogue) onto the screen.
I STRONGLY disagree that the books are “unwieldy and clumsy” in ANY way as the books try to flesh out and breath in life into the world it’s making by having all the daily life day to day activities of Hogwarts and the Wizarding world by making it a highly immersive experience. That’s FAR from “uNWiEldIng” or “clUmsY” at all as while the plot is tightly focused when it’s there, the chapters are there for the world to be brought to life more than ever around! And this is coming from someone who prefers the Harry Potter movies over the books as the Harry Potter movies are fantastic films as I Iove Prisoners of Azkaban and Half-Blood Prince from their cinematic storytelling experience that are all phenomenal watches! It’s not “mElOdRaMa” OR “drivel” (lol what?) AT ALL, it’s a book series that tries to flesh out world of Harry Potter into vibrant detail and life from the details that’s inside the books and the movies phenomenally bring to life all of that stuff in the books to the big screen in these phenomenal films that I love so much!
uhhhh I DIDN'T "take that personally" at all, I'm just BAFFLED from you're nonsense as you mouthed out stuff that makes no sense in regards to the books and movies as they're all fantastic all around.
@@myenemysenemy1043 LOL Are you for real? I'm NOT "mENTaL" at all, it's baffling bad how you can make very bad conclusion statements like this as it's obvious I only use "caps" when I have to highlight words to terms of importance to emphasize for expression LIKE THIS! The quotes that I use are made for you to see how ridiculous what you're saying truly is. That should be extremely obvious but looks like you need the help to explain things to you!
Quick correction to something Simon says here. Frank Dillane (who plays 15 year old Tom Riddle/Voldemort) is not the nephew of Ralph Fiennes (adult Voldemort), but rather Hero Fiennes-Tiffin (who plays 11 year old Tom Riddle/Voldemort) is. Frank Dillane is the very talented son of Stephen Dillane, who is probably best known for playing Stannis Baratheon in Game of Thrones. They appear together (as father and son) in the very enjoyable indie film Papadopoulos & Sons, which they are both excellent in.
Further correction - the 'unhappy event' in Harry Potter 4 (Goblet of Fire) was not the death of Sirius Black as Simon and Mark say here, but the death of Cedric Diggory. The death of Sirius Black was the 'unhappy event' in Harry Potter 5 (Order of the Phoenix).
And just to put in my two pennies worth on the 'unhappy event' in HBP, I think that yes although there is something a little unsatisfactory about Harry not intervening, from a purely practical point of view if Harry was frozen and invisible, we would not have been able to have his reaction to the 'event', which is pivotal to the emotional pay-off. In the book, we are told what Harry is feeling - you can't do that on film, we have to see it. All in all, I can look past it. I reason it being that a) He is obeying Dumbledore, b) His faith in Dumbledore is such that he believes Dumbledore will find a way out of it, and c) He reasons that Snape might have a plan (owing to the little 'shush' he gives Harry). Which, of course he does, but it's all Dumbledore's grand plan. Overall, this is probably my third favourite of the eight. It's very good, but not faultless. My biggest issues are the over-abridging of Voldemort's history in the Pensieve memories, and of the actual Half-Blood Prince storyline, which led to Snape's reveal at the end falling quite flat.
I didn't see a problem with the change they made to "the unhappy event". It looked like Harry was picking his moment, and the unhappy event took place before he could take action. He had his wand held the entire time, circling around.
it wasn't as much the unhappy event (The way it was constructed in the film) that annoyed me about "HAlf blood Prince" movie as much as the focus of the rest of the movie, and in particular Voldemort's backstory. I don't think this film goes into enough depth as to why Voldemort is as evil as he is, and why his motivations are what they are. He's just shown as an orphaned child who wants to conquer the world without any explaination as to who his parents are, why he's in that orphanage and why he cannot understand love. The scene where we find out about Voldemort making horcruxes doesn't work well, because Dumbledore is taken aback by it, and then a minute later (In the same scene) we find out that he's been searching for horcruxes in the background throughout the whole film. n the book the pensive scenes were there to show and teach Harry of Voldemort's past to learn about his backstory and his motivations. Not explained in this film
I love this movie and do agree it’s the second best Harry Potter behind Prisoner of Azkaban but I STRONGLY disagree with everything he said about “unhappy moment” and Harry’s decision making in that moment because Harry did everything logical he could in that moment from than onwards entirely which made sense AT that moment as the last “15 to 10 minutes” were entirely perfectly done just like the rest of the movie. Phenomenal film all around and adapted the book brilliantly!
I thought they did the "unhappy event" that way to show Harry's complete trust in Dumbledore, which, starting with this moment, will be successively undermined and put through the wringer over the course of the following 2 films. Dumbledore asked Harry to trust him completely and do whatever he said, even if it seemed crazy, and Harry, as a mark of his faith, did so. Of course, Harry eventually learns that his faith was well-placed all along and that the unhappy event was staged by Snape and Dumbledore.
I kind of agree. it was the best film but there are problems with it which cause a problem in the final 2 parts namely that they don't actually explain what the other four horcruxes are, so in the final 2 films, you have Harry "feeling" and "sensing" the horcruxes rather than knowing. Any script writer will tell you not to have your characters sensing or simply feeling something because it leads to funny faces and doesn't work on screen.
I love it as well but he's completely wrong about the "unhappy incident" as even then EVERYTHING about this movie was phenomenally perfect and well done! Love this much so much as it IS the second best harry potter movie completely on how fantastic it is!
Harry isn't really the type of person who picks his moment, which is why it didn't work for me. In the book he couldn't move and he would have if he hadn't the bodybind curse placed on him. In the film, he just stands there and watches.
yeah no shit. he' stunned in horror on what happens. shocking things can happen to people that make them freeze in place. That happens all the time in real life.
ya plus it makes you wonder why he didn't sense/feel tom riddles diary. It makes the series feel inconsistent. Every time i see this movie I enjoy it immensely at first but then somewhere over the half way point it all falls apart, mostly because it does an awful job of setting up the last two movies. failing to set things up for later movies has always been a problem with this series but it was worse then usual in this one.
The series has inconsistencies. Why is Bartey Crouch jr able to change his voice into Mad eye Moodys when he uses the polly juice potion yet everyone elses voice doesn't change when they take it. Why didn't Harry sense the Tom Riddles diary Horcraux in chamber of secrets yet he senses the Horcraux them in Hallows.
I'd wonder if the characters were actually speaking in their voices or if it was just made to appear that way so we'd know it was them in disguise when they were actually speaking the voices of their hosts. It's odd though if they're speaking their own voices without being suspected by their enemies. I do kind of wish they'd let the actual actors speak the voices because I would have liked to have heard Helena Bonham Carter sounding slightly more innocent as Hermione in Bellatrix's guise.
Its decent there are definetly reasons to enjoy this movie but this was the movie where they messed up things from the book more then any other in the series. My friend told me to judge the movies as stand alone films and not critique them based on there faithfulness to the book. While i think that is true for most book to movie adaptations I feel that Harry Potter is an exception to the rule because they books are so massivley popular.
LMAO fuck no. Azkaban is fantastic and a great transition point of the HP films. Cureon's filmic style fit perfectly for HP and made the series evolve in a whole new way. Everyone love it and it's a massive fan favorite. Nothing about it is "werid" and the stylistic part helps mature and become darker than the first 2 films by being more serious for the series. In what way is being "stylsitic" a negative thing? How? How is it "too weird"? It's not. Curean's style fit perfectly for HP and made it better than before. No ida where you're coming from where everyone love the movie.
Personal view with the unhappy event. Definitely stemming from my obsession with the books, but Dumbledore always told Harry to trust Snape and that he was a good man. In that moment Harry chooses to completely trust Dumbledore by trusting Snape, and Dumbledore dies because of it. It’s a choice that would rip apart Harry, his trust, and his belief in Dumbledore’s infallibility. In the book he could hold some faith in his inability to act, in the movie it’s something entirely on him and doesn’t take anything away from the ultimate reveal of Dumbledore and Snape’s plans in HP7
Half Blood Prince is excellent. I loved it.
I liked both versions of the unhappy event. In the film it made Snape's actions more shocking.
Kermode is bang on. The books are unwieldy and clumsy at times, and despite the criticism from fans, the films do an excellent job of toning down the melodrama and translating some of the weaker moments (especially the dialogue) onto the screen.
I STRONGLY disagree that the books are “unwieldy and clumsy” in ANY way as the books try to flesh out and breath in life into the world it’s making by having all the daily life day to day activities of Hogwarts and the Wizarding world by making it a highly immersive experience. That’s FAR from “uNWiEldIng” or “clUmsY” at all as while the plot is tightly focused when it’s there, the chapters are there for the world to be brought to life more than ever around!
And this is coming from someone who prefers the Harry Potter movies over the books as the Harry Potter movies are fantastic films as I Iove Prisoners of Azkaban and Half-Blood Prince from their cinematic storytelling experience that are all phenomenal watches!
It’s not “mElOdRaMa” OR “drivel” (lol what?) AT ALL, it’s a book series that tries to flesh out world of Harry Potter into vibrant detail and life from the details that’s inside the books and the movies phenomenally bring to life all of that stuff in the books to the big screen in these phenomenal films that I love so much!
@@Gadget-Walkmen Why are you quoting in caps and non caps? Are you mental?
uhhhh I DIDN'T "take that personally" at all, I'm just BAFFLED from you're nonsense as you mouthed out stuff that makes no sense in regards to the books and movies as they're all fantastic all around.
@@myenemysenemy1043 LOL Are you for real? I'm NOT "mENTaL" at all, it's baffling bad how you can make very bad conclusion statements like this as it's obvious I only use "caps" when I have to highlight words to terms of importance to emphasize for expression LIKE THIS! The quotes that I use are made for you to see how ridiculous what you're saying truly is. That should be extremely obvious but looks like you need the help to explain things to you!
@@Gadget-Walkmen No. I’m just making fun of you.
Quick correction to something Simon says here. Frank Dillane (who plays 15 year old Tom Riddle/Voldemort) is not the nephew of Ralph Fiennes (adult Voldemort), but rather Hero Fiennes-Tiffin (who plays 11 year old Tom Riddle/Voldemort) is. Frank Dillane is the very talented son of Stephen Dillane, who is probably best known for playing Stannis Baratheon in Game of Thrones. They appear together (as father and son) in the very enjoyable indie film Papadopoulos & Sons, which they are both excellent in.
Further correction - the 'unhappy event' in Harry Potter 4 (Goblet of Fire) was not the death of Sirius Black as Simon and Mark say here, but the death of Cedric Diggory. The death of Sirius Black was the 'unhappy event' in Harry Potter 5 (Order of the Phoenix).
And just to put in my two pennies worth on the 'unhappy event' in HBP, I think that yes although there is something a little unsatisfactory about Harry not intervening, from a purely practical point of view if Harry was frozen and invisible, we would not have been able to have his reaction to the 'event', which is pivotal to the emotional pay-off. In the book, we are told what Harry is feeling - you can't do that on film, we have to see it. All in all, I can look past it. I reason it being that a) He is obeying Dumbledore, b) His faith in Dumbledore is such that he believes Dumbledore will find a way out of it, and c) He reasons that Snape might have a plan (owing to the little 'shush' he gives Harry). Which, of course he does, but it's all Dumbledore's grand plan. Overall, this is probably my third favourite of the eight. It's very good, but not faultless. My biggest issues are the over-abridging of Voldemort's history in the Pensieve memories, and of the actual Half-Blood Prince storyline, which led to Snape's reveal at the end falling quite flat.
I didn't see a problem with the change they made to "the unhappy event". It looked like Harry was picking his moment, and the unhappy event took place before he could take action. He had his wand held the entire time, circling around.
it wasn't as much the unhappy event (The way it was constructed in the film) that annoyed me about "HAlf blood Prince" movie as much as the focus of the rest of the movie, and in particular Voldemort's backstory. I don't think this film goes into enough depth as to why Voldemort is as evil as he is, and why his motivations are what they are. He's just shown as an orphaned child who wants to conquer the world without any explaination as to who his parents are, why he's in that orphanage and why he cannot understand love. The scene where we find out about Voldemort making horcruxes doesn't work well, because Dumbledore is taken aback by it, and then a minute later (In the same scene) we find out that he's been searching for horcruxes in the background throughout the whole film. n the book the pensive scenes were there to show and teach Harry of Voldemort's past to learn about his backstory and his motivations. Not explained in this film
ASobsessive Sometimes explaining something takes away the mystery.
He was taken aback by the fact it was 7 horcruxes he was asking about, presumably more than Dumbledore expected
NOOOOO. He was taken about how many there were. He was searching for dark objects connected to him but didn't know exactly what they were.
Frank Dillane who plays younger Tom Riddle is the son of Stephen Dillane - One for the Game of Thrones fans if you know what role he played.
This is why i love Kermode!
totally agree with you, Azkaban best, this second
In hindsight kermode was right
I love this movie and do agree it’s the second best Harry Potter behind Prisoner of Azkaban but I STRONGLY disagree with everything he said about “unhappy moment” and Harry’s decision making in that moment because Harry did everything logical he could in that moment from than onwards entirely which made sense AT that moment as the last “15 to 10 minutes” were entirely perfectly done just like the rest of the movie. Phenomenal film all around and adapted the book brilliantly!
I thought they did the "unhappy event" that way to show Harry's complete trust in Dumbledore, which, starting with this moment, will be successively undermined and put through the wringer over the course of the following 2 films. Dumbledore asked Harry to trust him completely and do whatever he said, even if it seemed crazy, and Harry, as a mark of his faith, did so. Of course, Harry eventually learns that his faith was well-placed all along and that the unhappy event was staged by Snape and Dumbledore.
I kind of agree. it was the best film but there are problems with it which cause a problem in the final 2 parts namely that they don't actually explain what the other four horcruxes are, so in the final 2 films, you have Harry "feeling" and "sensing" the horcruxes rather than knowing.
Any script writer will tell you not to have your characters sensing or simply feeling something because it leads to funny faces and doesn't work on screen.
Fuck no. Having the sensing them out because you have to show don't tell from the books. know the medium.
The film is terrifically acted, strongly directed, effective, stylish, emotional & is one of the best in the series. (87%) (4.5/5 stars) (positive)
The Harry Potter and the Hunger Games books and films are my favourite YA series.
I agree with mark totally loved it and seeing it in cinemas back in 09 working in the uk as an Australian tourist
I love it as well but he's completely wrong about the "unhappy incident" as even then EVERYTHING about this movie was phenomenally perfect and well done! Love this much so much as it IS the second best harry potter movie completely on how fantastic it is!
Harry isn't really the type of person who picks his moment, which is why it didn't work for me. In the book he couldn't move and he would have if he hadn't the bodybind curse placed on him.
In the film, he just stands there and watches.
yeah no shit. he' stunned in horror on what happens. shocking things can happen to people that make them freeze in place. That happens all the time in real life.
ya plus it makes you wonder why he didn't sense/feel tom riddles diary. It makes the series feel inconsistent. Every time i see this movie I enjoy it immensely at first but then somewhere over the half way point it all falls apart, mostly because it does an awful job of setting up the last two movies. failing to set things up for later movies has always been a problem with this series but it was worse then usual in this one.
The series has inconsistencies.
Why is Bartey Crouch jr able to change his voice into Mad eye Moodys when he uses the polly juice potion yet everyone elses voice doesn't change when they take it.
Why didn't Harry sense the Tom Riddles diary Horcraux in chamber of secrets yet he senses the Horcraux them in Hallows.
I'd wonder if the characters were actually speaking in their voices or if it was just made to appear that way so we'd know it was them in disguise when they were actually speaking the voices of their hosts. It's odd though if they're speaking their own voices without being suspected by their enemies. I do kind of wish they'd let the actual actors speak the voices because I would have liked to have heard Helena Bonham Carter sounding slightly more innocent as Hermione in Bellatrix's guise.
Thought Half Blood Prince was incredibly meandering and lifeless, with some Spider-Man 3 level comedy randomly thrown in near the end
Its decent there are definetly reasons to enjoy this movie but this was the movie where they messed up things from the book more then any other in the series. My friend told me to judge the movies as stand alone films and not critique them based on there faithfulness to the book. While i think that is true for most book to movie adaptations I feel that Harry Potter is an exception to the rule because they books are so massivley popular.
Mark DL loves harry potter
Azkaban was too weird and stylistic - it was a Cuaran film, rather than a Harry Potter film.
LMAO fuck no. Azkaban is fantastic and a great transition point of the HP films. Cureon's filmic style fit perfectly for HP and made the series evolve in a whole new way. Everyone love it and it's a massive fan favorite.
Nothing about it is "werid" and the stylistic part helps mature and become darker than the first 2 films by being more serious for the series.
In what way is being "stylsitic" a negative thing? How? How is it "too weird"? It's not. Curean's style fit perfectly for HP and made it better than before. No ida where you're coming from where everyone love the movie.
Worst Potter film