Film
What's on at the cinema plus reviews of the latest movie and DVD releases
Bookmark this pageHarry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (2009)
Director: David Yates
Movie review
From Time Out London
Click here to read our exclusive interview with Daniel Radcliffe
Harry shaves! Harry snogs! But stay your wand, there are other forces of darkness besides late adolescence which are afflicting the poor orphaned wizard of Hogwarts and his hormone-raging contemporaries. For one, Voldemort’s allies, the aerial, ink-trailing Death Eaters, are ravaging London. Ping! Pling! There go the stanchions of the Millennium Bridge! And Harry has hardly been re-admitted to school, following the departure of Mrs Umbridge, last term’s knit-robed Robespierre, when Dumbledore teleports him to Tudor-relic Budleigh Babberton to meet and recruit one-time Potions Master Horace Slughorn (Jim Broadbent, disguised as a sofa).
False-memory syndrome is at the heart of this next stage of the fight against evil forces: Dumbledore’s phials of stored reminiscences have been polluted, and it is sly Slughorn’s recall of his past tutoring of a Horcrux-fascinated student which may hold a necessary and life-saving corrective.
Longer than the last, the sixth episode of the adventures of the increasingly burdened magic warrior of Privet Drive is a more human affair than its predecessors. It’s as full of the romantic dalliances of the maturing students as it is of warring set-pieces, creature shocks and detours down dark Dickensian alleys. We can already sense the two-part seventh and final saga on the horizon, and the whole less-frenzied affair is tonally and emotionally suggestive of a post-battle re-grouping before a final cinematic assault.
To this end, scriptwriter Steve Kloves, back after a one-film sabbatical, has ably summed up the JK Rowling doorstopper by omitting a major battle and axeing at least one character. Also, the fine, less showy work by new DoP Bruno Delbonnel and Nicholas Hopper’s non-strident second Potter score are in tune with director Yates’s laudable refusal to underline too forcefully moments of triumph and disaster. Togther, they allow space for as much human detail, intimacy, humour and, indeed, pathos as a family magical/fantasy action adventure will allow.
Thus – thrillseekers beware – the film’s memorable scenes are, interestingly, not necessarily the most momentous: the sad, assembled Weasleys regarding their crooked Norfolk tower; a lionine, wind-tossed Dumbledore (Michael Gambon) framed in the Hogwarts tower with all the grandeur of Powell and Pressburger’s ‘Black Narcissus’; poor Emma Watson’s Hermione crying in solitary heartbreak; blonde bombshell Draco Malfoy pitied in a picture of isolated evil. Rupert Grint’s Ron is still the leavening star – striking funny, victorious poses in the series’s last game of Quidditch – but Daniel Radcliffe’s less self-conscious and more self-deprecating Harry runs him a close second.
Click here to read our exclusive interview with Daniel Radcliffe
Author: Wally Hammond
Time Out London Issue 2030, 16-23 July, 2009
User reviews of this film
-
- layla said...
- Posted on Nov 20 2009 17:48 boring, alright but borning kinda x
- Report as inappropriate
-
- Sabrina said...
- Posted on Sep 24 2009 19:46 I loved the movie, was very boum same, only that it should have a bit more detail ... I love Harry Potter ♥
- Report as inappropriate
-
- Sam said...
- Posted on Sep 21 2009 19:00 i thought that the harry potter movie was a let down!!!!! i have the book nad it is nothing compared to book!!! The film in my opinion needed more graphic events to occur, the book provided fairy tale thoughts of a non-fictonal world, it maid the thought of it seem real, the film however completely ruins it! I have also read the 7th book, the deathly hallows, that book can not be ruined, it is full of imagination, fingers crossed!!!
- Report as inappropriate
-
- bobby said...
- Posted on Sep 06 2009 20:27 the film was really good and i think u should watch it
- Report as inappropriate
-
- adam said...
-
Posted on Aug 29 2009 01:47
This particular Harry Potter film was excruciatingly painful for me to watch as always the book was 100x better but it clearly did not reach expectations.
People have said that the film was too long but in my opinion it was far too short as there were loads of important details missed in the film.
I am sincerely hoping that the deathly hallows is a LOT better. - Report as inappropriate
-
- kay said...
- Posted on Aug 25 2009 12:09 Dis Wz Da Shittest One Ive seen nd i saw all of dem what happend to harry havin his moment of defeatin someone in the dark forces da ended woz reli bad it ooked as iff dat shud have been the middle nd more was meant to happen Very disappointed !!!!!
- Report as inappropriate
-
- charlie said...
- Posted on Aug 23 2009 11:16 this movie was rubbish!
- Report as inappropriate
-
- charlie said...
- Posted on Aug 23 2009 11:16 this movie was rubbish!
- Report as inappropriate
-
- india and georgia said...
- Posted on Aug 23 2009 11:11 this harry potter movie was better than all of them.it was more funny and romantic than the rest.also it was not as dark as all the others.we both thought it was 21/20
- Report as inappropriate
-
- moonshine said...
-
Posted on Aug 19 2009 18:03
film was ok. not sure that if you haven't read the book that you would understand. i have yet to be as impressed with a harry potter film as i have the books, but i think the 5th film was the best.
the sub-plots, such as the love potions and the mince pie chemistry, were good, especially anything with rupert grint acting as the loveable idiot and tom felton as the slick evil kid, but the overall plotline was a with under wheling. as usual, radcliff's performance was overshadowed by the better actors, but it still kept my attention.
not looking forward to the next film because i'm not sure it will translate well into a film as the book itself was a little tedious with quite a few plot-holes. - Report as inappropriate
-
- The truth said...
- Posted on Aug 17 2009 12:54 Harry Potter is a big load of rubbish!
- Report as inappropriate
-
- Cappybear said...
- Posted on Aug 16 2009 12:19 I've read the book but, to be honest, couldn't remember much about it. I found the movie quite entertaining, but a tad long, and there seemed to be lots of stars popping up for a minute or two, then disappearing for the rest of the film. My wife thought it all a bit boring.
- Report as inappropriate
-
- princess said...
- Posted on Aug 15 2009 16:29 there was loadz of romance
- Report as inappropriate
-
- princess said...
- Posted on Aug 15 2009 16:28 gud film
- Report as inappropriate
-
- Sophie said...
- Posted on Aug 15 2009 13:10 I have not read the book so I do not know what was missed out but I found the film very good! I likes the way that there was more romance and not as much action. I thought that overall it was a great film that included action, romance and a whole lot of great acting! x
- Report as inappropriate
Now showing
This film is showing at these cinemas near Leicester Square, Greater London
[change location]
Cast & crew
Director: David Yates
Cast: Helena Bonham Carter, Emma Watson, Alan Rickman, Jessie Cave, Rupert Grint, Bonnie Wright, Jim Broadbent, Maggie Smith, Michael Gambon, Tom Felton, Helen McCrory, David Thewlis, Robbie Coltrane, Warwick Davis, Evanna Lynch, Natalia Tena, Julie Walters full cast
Genre(s): Action/Adventure, Drama
Duration: 153 mins
UK Release: Jul 17 2009
US Release: Jul 17 2009
Most popular on this site
Top Stories
Time Out's 101 Films of the Decade
Ten years, thousands of movies and millions of dollars in international box office, and it all boils down to this
Martin Provost discusses 'Séraphine'
Trevor Johnston talks to the director of 'Séraphine' about bringing a little known French painter back to life
Our verdict on Peter Jackson's The Lovely Bones
Peter Jackson ends a triumphant decade with a sentimental misfire with this lush Alice Sebold adaptation
On the set of Ken Loach's 'Route Irish'
Dave Calhoun meets Ken Loach on the set of his forthcoming Iraq war movie
Stephen Poliakoff discusses 'Glorious 39'
Stephen Poliakoff’s ‘Glorious 39’ is his first film for cinema since ‘Food of Love’ in 1997. Dave Calhoun met him
Is 'Paranormal Activity' the new 'Blair Witch'?
How does a film go from DIY experiment to box-office smash? 'Paranormal Activity' director Oren Peli explains
Steven Soderbergh on 'The Informant!' and 'The Girlfriend Experience'
We talk to Steven Soderbergh about his two forthcoming films: one featuring a porn star, the other a chubby Matt Damon
A gateway to all things 'New Moon'
In anticipation of 'The Twilight Saga: New Moon', Time Out is offering the chance to pick up a limited edition pack with three exclusive magazines and a free poster.
The films that deserve a TV spin-off
With Roland Emmerich suggesting he'd like to make a '2012' TV spin-off, we propose some more movie-to-TV serialisations
Time Out's 50 greatest animated films with commentary by Terry Gilliam
In celebration of the release of Pixar's 'Up' and Wes Anderson's 'Fantastic Mr Fox', read our rundown of fifty classic feature length animations
What do you think?
Post your review now