The film opens in the traditional way that Harry Potter books do – a brief but good quality overview of the summer between years 5 and 6. This is done well and is only brought down a little bit by the arrival of the dynamic duo of Gambon and Broadbent. The former manages his usual feat of getting Dumbledore completely wrong in a major scene (if you thought ‘Four Champions’ in GoF was cringe-worthy, well…), while the latter aims for his character’s regal and genial manner, misses, and overshoots to ‘dopey and senile’. Mercifully, both improve once the title rolls and the film proper gets started. Although Jim Broadbent isn’t as impressive as Kenneth Branagh (Gilderoy Lockhart, HPCS), nor faithful to the book portrayal of his character like Maggie Smith or Alan Rickman (McGonagall and Snape respectively), he is solid and likeable as Slughorn despite one curious omission. Gambon puts in what is unquestionably his best performance as Dumbledore. Gone are the days of the really pathetic “Harrydidyouputyournameinthegobletoffire *breathes*”, and generally verging between ‘very poor’ and ’shambolic’ over the three films which have been burdened with his presence. While he is never brilliant, he is pretty good which is a major improvement and most definitely required given that Dumbledore is vital to Half-Blood Prince in a way unlike any of the other books. Put it this way: if Gambon had put in the sort of performance he did for GoF then, despite everything else, this film could have been a turkey of Phantom Menace proportions.

The rest of the performances are what we’ve come to expect. Tom Felton (Draco Malfoy) has a significant role this time around, and pulls it off well. He’s always seemed good as Malfoy but up until now the brief cameos haven’t been enough to show just how good he really is. Helena Bonham-Carter is only on screen briefly but she is outstanding as Bellatrix Lestrange, making me wonder how David Yates (the only other possible culprit) managed to mess up the climax of OOTP so badly. The only other gripe I have regarding the characters is Hagrid – even though Robbie Coltrane is as good as ever. The problem is that there is some goofy problem with the CGI during the scene with Slughorn in Hagrid’s hut. The result of this is that Hagrid is proportioned more like The Ghost of Christmas Present in A Muppet Christmas Carol than the way he looks outdoors elsewhere in the film and indeed in all the previous films. What possessed them to do this I’m not sure, but it is something of a “WTF moment”.

The cutting of scenes between book and film is better done than it was for OOTP, although still not perfect. As a minor aside which I am never good at making technical comments on, the music this time round was much more enjoyable. In fact as soon as I publish this I’m going to order the soundtrack CD – only my second Harry Potter one after PS. Quidditch is included, but only one match is shown. This prevents the relationships between Ron/Hermione and Harry/Ginny from developing as they did in the book, since both revolved around Quidditch. It will also make the “Ron leaving due to feelings of inadequacy” storyline in Deathly Hallows (you know, the central subplot of the first half of the book) much more difficult to do given that Ron’s feelings of insecurity regarding himself and the relationship between Harry and Hermione share the distinctions of being vital to DH and omitted from HBP.

Summary

Good points:

• Jar Jar Gambon finally manages to act
• Better choice of which book scenes to include, and MUCH better screen translations of them
• Jim Broadbent is – after the intro, at least – a fairly good Slughorn even if I’d have preferred Sir Derek Jacobi.
• The returning cast all put in good performances. Rupert Grint and Emma Watson in particular are much better than they were in the previous film (as with Helena Bonham-Carter, I suspect that their relatively poor show in OP was the result of poor writing and directing rather than poor acting).
• The love scenes are nicely done rather than cheesy as they were last time – though see below.

Bad points:

• The decision to omit Quidditch – the foundation of the trio’s romantic interests in the book – from the relationship development could cause serious problems for DH1.
• The Burrow attack scene didn’t add anything of significance, which makes me curious as to why they put it in
• Minor prop annoyances:
  • Voldemort’s ornate, ancient family ring is translated by the film as a painted-plastic novelty ring of the sort one would find in a goody bag
  • The bowl of potion is not empty when Harry leaves it with the ‘final’ cup of potion yet it is empty when Harry returns to retrieve the locket
  • The Tom Riddle of Slughorn’s memory looks at least two years younger than he actually should have been
  • Ollivander being kidnapped a year early. Surviving Voldemort’s torture for nine months was a slight stretch in the DH book, but for almost two years?

Conclusion

There are some things which are done wrong – with varying degrees of seriousness – in this film, but it is so much of an improvement over the previous two films that it feels slightly nitpicking to concentrate on them. Despite these, Half-Blood Prince is a thoroughly enjoyable film which does justice to the book.

Rating:4/5

The one thing you’re probably already aware of is the fact that it is not a live action movie but an animated one. The style is something between a conventional cartoon and the more realistic CGI of Pixar et al. From the stills that I saw online prior to getting this DVD, I thought that it would really annoy me. The characters looked weird indeed. However when you actually see it in motion the CGI isn’t nearly as disconcerting as that. In fact, it’s actually growing on me.

The plot, it has to be said, is fairly weak. It is essentially just a by-the-numbers attempt at fitting all the desired elements (opening space battle, ground battle, air assault, lightsaber duel, end of film) into the hour and forty minute running time. This only strengthens the hand of those who claim that TCW is really just an extended opening episode for the new TV series. In a TV episode, a plot which only serves as a means of connecting different action sequences is largely acceptable, because the more involved plot is handed out in small helpings throughout the series to come to a climax in the final few episodes. TCW, being a one off film, doesn’t have that advantage and is left looking a bit weak in the story department.

The only significant new character, Ahsoka Tano, is done quite well. Aside from the times when she calls Skywalker “sky guy” (which is wooden and forced to a greater degree than any of the scenes fans love to hate in the Prequel Trilogy). You may at this point be thinking that my mention of Jar Jar Binks was just the typical Star Wars fan’s swipe in The Phantom Menace’s direction, but there was a point to it. As unlikely as it may seem, TCW has actually managed to come up with a character even more irritating than Jar Jar. Ziro the Hutt is Jabba’s ‘uncle’ – at least that’s what the characters say. Evidently nobody told the production team, as the Ziro actually put into the film is female. Why nobody at Lucasfilm noticed this slight (!) discrepancy before the release is quite beyond me. Let me make it quite clear, however, that as an irritant Jar Jar is pollen to Ziro’s sulphuric acid. I cannot begin to explain just how utterly infuriating it is to have Ziro on the screen. Jar Jar at least managed to be funny from time to time – Ziro is more grating and less funny.

Now on to the central issue: the action. This is, on the whole, excellent. My one concern is that some of the lightsaber action (mostly the first duel) is animated in a very jerky, stunted way. This is obviously supposed to give the impression of a frantic, desperate duel but doesn’t really work. When the animators stick to emulating the lightsaber fights of the Prequel Trilogy, all is well. The conventional battle sequences are very well done indeed. Furthermore, because all of the participants (clones, droids, and starships) were done as CGI in the live action prequel trilogy, they look more or less identical in TCW.

Overall then, TCW doesn’t have the plot strength to compete with the live action films. It isn’t as good as it could have been. Nor, however, is it the cinematic abomination that the critics and hardcore fans would have you believe.

Rating:2.5/5