Movie Review: "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince"

Synopsis: It's Harry's sixth year at Hogwarts, and things are crazier than ever.  With Voldemort alive and on the loose again, the school is not the safe haven it once was, and Dumbledore is preparing Harry for his final battle against the Dark Lord.  Dumbledore's old friend, Professor Slughorn, takes a position at Hogwarts; it turns out Slughorn knew Voldemort when he was still known as Tom Riddle.  What secrets about the Dark Lord's past is Slughorn hiding? Harry also finds an old textbook with annotations by someone known only as the Half-Blood Prince.  Who could this person be? Meanwhile, love is in the air, and new relationships and crushes abound.  It's bound to be Harry's craziest year yet...in many ways.
Based on the book by J.K. Rowling.

The Good: What these films have done well in the past, this one excels at.  It really takes you to another time and place, and you get swept up in the events that unfold.  The special effects are amazing, and all of the actors--young and old--do exceptionally great here.

The Bad: If only it had been truer to the book.  Right from the get-go, we get a scene involving Harry nearly going on a date with a girl at a train station that is nowhere to be found in the original novel.  An action sequence involving Death Eaters causing the Weasley's house to be burned down is completely unique to the film.  Other scenes are out of order, and characters are either omitted (Fleur Delacour) or replaced (Bellatrix instead of Amycus).  Too much time is spent focusing on teen twitterpations and not enough on the core story.  You don't even find out why the Half-Blood Prince calls himself that, as he isn't really a prince.  The makers kind of botched it with this one.

Conclusion: Years ago, a random patron at the library where I work said of this film, "It's not the book."  When I saw it previously, it had been a while since I'd read the original novel, so, I couldn't comment on that front...but, while doing a book/film comparison, I'd say she was right.  Fans of the books are likely to feel alienated by the serious deviations from the source material.  Though good for what it is, this movie pales in comparison to what it could have been.  Oh, well; next up is Deathly Hallows, where things really get crazy.

Score: 3/5

Movie Review: "Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix"

Synopsis: In the middle of summer, Harry finds himself fighting off Dementors...in the presence of his Muggle cousin! Harry soon gets a letter saying he has been expelled from Hogwarts, and the case eventually goes to trial; will he be able to prove his innocence? Hogwarts itself is going through tough times; after Harry's claim that the evil Lord Voldemort is back, the Ministry of Magic and the wizarding press smells a conspiracy, and is bending over backwards to prove Harry wrong.  The new teacher, Professor Dolores Umbridge, is more focused on getting kids to pass tests than to actually learn magic, which leads to some kids starting a secret magic class and call it Dumbledore's Army.  Will they succeed in learning true magic, or will they be found out? Also, will Harry's claim that You-Know-Who has returned be proven?
Based on the book by J.K. Rowling.

The Good: This is one case--the only one of this series so far--that I would say the movie is better than the book.  The original novel plods a bit, and wastes a lot of space; it almost seems like Rowling was more worried about topping Goblet of Fire in length instead of in quality.  Still, what we have here is a great story, with excellent performances; notable additions to the cast of characters are Nymphadora Tonks and the evil Bellatrix Lestrange.  The finale is appropriately epic; I can only imagine what a treat it was on the big screen.  Profanity is kept to a minimum, and the sexual content that plagued the previous film is not present here; as sultry as it gets is one innocent kiss, which is rare for a "PG-13" film.

The Bad: Honestly, I can't think of any complaints about the film itself; it's not only a wonderful story, it keeps things clean as well.

Conclusion: People often say that the book is always better than the movie; maybe it often is, but, sometimes, I'm not so sure.  Bestselling "young adult" novels The Princess Diaries and Lemonade Mouth were much more sultry than--and, therefore, inferior to in my opinion--the celluloid adaptations; maybe that's because the films were made by Disney.  This is another case of that; the movie focuses on the best parts of the book, and doesn't waste nearly as much time.  I'm sure that people will continue reading the Harry Potter series in its entirety for years to come; however, the book was a low point for the franchise, though this film isn't.

Score: 4.5/5

Movie Review: "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire"

Synopsis: Harry is being haunted by dreams that his sworn nemesis, the evil Lord Voldemort, is alive again.  After Harry arrives at Hogwarts, it is announced that his school will be host to the Triwizard Tournament, where students from other magical schools will compete in a big championship.  Harry isn't even old enough to enter, and doesn't want to anyway...but, after the three competitors from each school are drawn from the magical Goblet of Fire, a fourth name emerges: Harry Potter.  Everyone is shocked, especially Harry himself.  Who could have entered his name into the tournament? With three arduous tasks in front of him, Harry has no choice but to participate...but, the results could be deadly.
Based on the book by J.K. Rowling.

The Good: This is a darker turn for the series, as evidenced by the "PG-13" rating.  For younger viewers, the atmospheric darkness may be too much to handle; for older viewers like me, though, this is a treat.  The introduction of the lovely Fleur Delacour, as well as the convoluted plot and excellent production values, made this mostly enjoyable.

The Bad: Unfortunately, this entry is also a bit too oversexed.  Between Harry being in a bathtub while a female ghost talks to him--couldn't he have at least worn some trunks or something?--to a sexual remark here and there, to moments of immodest dress (Hermione's dress; Fleur's swimsuit, though it is a one-piece, thankfully), some may be bothered by such content.  The language also intensifies; Ron uses his signature profane phrase at least five or six times, and there's also a d-word and a p-word thrown in there as well.  So, while this is good, it also has some rougher elements.  Plus, as usual, there's way much more detail--and, in this specific case, less expletives--in the book.

Conclusion: The original novel was among the most beloved of the series; could the movie ever stack up? While it does it justice, I would still recommend checking out the book as well.  After this, I'm curious to see where the series goes.

Score: 4/5

Movie Review: "Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban"

Synopsis: It's Harry's third year at Hogwarts, and things are definitely crazy.  The notorious murderer Sirius Black has escaped from Azkaban, the wizard's prison, and is apparently on the hunt for Harry.  Dementors, ghoulish creatures that guard Azkaban, are surrounding Hogwarts.  On top of that, Harry's sworn enemy Draco Malfoy makes a mistake with Hagrid's pet Hippogriff that leads to Draco getting injured...only for Draco to blame the poor creature, leading to its impending execution! Not sure what to do or where to go, Harry doesn't feel safe anywhere, even in the Hogwarts castle.  Will he be able to escape the clutches of Sirius Black before it's too late?
Based on the bestselling novel by J.K. Rowling.

The Good: The directing of this film earned serious acclaim, and it's not hard to see why; most of the movie has an overall dark mood, and the filming style illustrates that very well.  The young actors have improved here, and do their best job so far.  Of particular note are the special effects, which were really well done, especially the Patronuses.

The Bad: If only it had stayed truer to the book.  Like the previous adaptations, this one leaves a lot out, which I expected...but, what I didn't remember is that some scenes were added that were not in the novel! The shrunken head and the scene with Harry flying off into the distance were unnecessary; why couldn't they have used that time to put more scenes from the book into the film?

Conclusion: So far, this is the best one yet; the filming style is a wonder to behold.  However, for those who have read the original book cover to cover multiple times, you're bound to say, "Hey! That wasn't in there!" more than once while watching this.  Next up is Goblet of Fire, which is when things really get interesting; I'm sure I'll have a lot to say about that one.

Score: 4/5

TV DVD Review: "A Pup Named Scooby-Doo": Volume Two

Synopsis: Whenever there's a mystery, the kids in the Scooby-Doo Detective Agency are on the case! Whether it's a ghost haunting a television studio, an ice monster at a winter resort, or a ghastly samurai at a resort, you can bet that Shaggy, Velma, Freddy, Daphne, and their loyal pup Scooby-Doo will figure out who is behind it and why!
Featuring the late Don Messick and Casey Kasem, the original voices of Scooby and Shaggy.

The Good: I've been a fan of "those meddling kids" since 1998, so, how could I not like this? As entertaining as ever, these younger versions of the famed teenage sleuths and their insane Great Dane bring equal doses of laughs, action, and thrills.  As usual, the makers keep this clean: no profanity nor any sex, only mild cartoony violence, etc.

The Bad: If you've never seen this incarnation of Scooby-Doo before, let me tell you: This is unlike any of the previous versions.  It's much more cartoony; so much so, it almost feels like Looney Tunes at times.  For those who liked the fact that the old-school Hanna-Barbera episodes were more realistic than the average Saturday morning 'toon, that could be a deal-breaker.  Also, the theme music, which constantly repeats Scooby's name, was über annoying; I much prefer the old-school soundtrack.

Conclusion: When I first saw this back in the day, I was a bit surprised; it wasn't in the traditional style of Scooby-Doo cartoons, and, therefore, I felt that it was inferior to its predecessors, though still fun for what it was.  Some fans of "those meddling kids" may embrace it; others may despise it.  If you've never seen this show before, I suggest borrowing a DVD of it from the library, or streaming an episode for free, before shelling out cash for any part of this series; you may decide that it's not for you, even if you're a longtime fan of that insane Great Dane.

Score: 3.5/5

Movie Review: "Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets"

Synopsis: Harry Potter is looking forward to his second year at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry...until a strange little creature, Dobby the House-Elf, comes and tells him he must not go there, because terrible things await Harry if he goes.  Harry goes anyway, and finds out that a secret place at Hogwarts, called the Chamber of Secrets, has been opened...but, the teachers don't know who's responsible.  All evidence, however, seems to point to none other than Harry himself.  Harry and his friends know that he is innocent...but, the opening of the Chamber is putting the lives of his fellow students and faculty in danger.  Will he be able to discover who the culprit really is...before someone gets killed?
Based on the book by J.K. Rowling.

The Good: Just like with the previous entry in this series, I watched this film version alongside reading the original novel.  For the most part, it stays true to its source material; even though I knew the ending from watching this flick previously, I still found myself enthralled by the details of the story.  Profanities are kept to a minimum, and there's no sexual content.

The Bad: As was the case the first time around, quite a bit was left out in this celluloid adaptation.  Also, the violence was a bit edgier; without giving away plot details, I'll say that the climax was a bit bloody, and it was rather disturbing to see a message on a wall written in blood.

Conclusion: Better in some ways, not as good in others; that's how I feel about the second Harry Potter flick.  This franchise has legions of fans, and it's not hard to see why; still, I feel that the original novels are superior to the films...so far, at least.  Maybe my opinion might change when I get towards the end, where popular opinion says the books weren't as good.

Score: 3.5/5

Movie Review: "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone"

Synopsis: Orphaned as an infant, all young Harry Potter (Daniel Radcliffe) has known is a miserable life with his Aunt Petunia, Uncle Vernon, and bratty cousin Dudley.  However, his life does a complete turnaround when he meets Hagrid, and gets accepted at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry.  When Harry finds out that Voldemort, the evil wizard who killed his parents, is on the loose again, he knows that his life is in danger.  His friends Ron and Hermione are willing to help him every step of the way...but, will even the three of them be able to stand up to a master of evil?
Based on the bestselling book by J.K. Rowling.

The Good: It's easy to see why this movie franchise became one of the most successful of all-time.  Excellent production values, great acting, a captivating story...what's not to like? Harry's triumph over dire circumstances is very inspiring.  Profanities are kept to a minimum, there's no sexual content, and the violence isn't bloody or gory.  Sounds all well and good, right?

The Bad: If only I hadn't read the book alongside watching the film.  There's so much more to the original novel that, just by watching the film, one has no clue of what's really going on; it's like reading the Cliff's Notes instead.  Also, some scary scenes are present, particularly the climax; then again, it only gets scarier from hereon out.

Conclusion: I was late to the party with Harry Potter; I didn't read the books until not long before the seventh and then-final one came out.  A few years ago, I had watched the movie series in its entirety...but, until recently, I had not read any of the books save for Cursed Child, which is actually a play.  As good as the movie is, they cut out so much of the novel, I felt that it didn't do the book justice.  People who don't read--of which there are many, especially millenials--are likely to just stick with the films; they don't know what they're missing.  While this flick is memorable, it still pales in comparison to the international bestseller that inspired it.

Score: 3/5