David Yates...DavidYatesDavidYatesDavidYates. Who is this director? Oh, wait...he's really only done t.v. and short films up until now. This comes as a bit of a shocker, seeing as how he was handed the directorial reins for this installment of the Harry Potter film and the next one. His lack of feature experience shows, unfortunately. Fortunately, however, his support staff helped to make this film comprehensible. This film is fairly rife with clichèd moments, like when the Weasley twins set off fireworks and fly through the OWLS (the story's version of finals, and A Levels): very big, very bright, very flashy, and you laugh at the just desserts that Umbridge (played by Imelda Staunton), but it left me cold at the end. Like a sucker just taken for a ride. And after the ending battle with Voldemort, you get a sort of multi-wrap-up, from Dumbledore, Hermione & Ron and Harry. A bit much, for my tastes. But, of course, the slew of famous Brit actors and actresses that they continue to get for these films are tickling to watch, so that always helps.
This film finds the kids a year (in the story, at least. I can't even BEGIN to fathom just how awkward it would have been to see Daniel Radcliffe, who plays Harry Potter, in the stage production of Equus he was in while he was on break) older and maybe none the wiser. Hermione and Ron still follow Harry to the ends of the Earth and back again, and Harry still pushed them away whenever things get tough. When will they learn? Do these characters grow? Harry, in his understanding of himself and his role in a prophecy that he has to uncover in the final third of the film, does. Ron & Hermione? Not so much. They were background to Harry's journey, which rightfully, and wrongfully, so. It's his name in the title, ain't it? But cuts had to be made from the book to fit a feature length, and so went Ron & Hermione's character development. If you want your fill of development for Ron & Hermione, read the last book, I say.
This film probably has the least depth to it (followed only by part 4, Harry Potter And The Goblet Of Fire), but some great visuals. I did, I will admit, love the newspaper device used throughout the film. Not your typical spinning newspaper device, as the layout of the Daily Prophet adds a little spice (although, watching those moments in IMAX-vision: not so fun). Also, the ending battle in the Hall Of Prophecy was pretty spectacular to watch. So, kudos on action that pushed the film along and kept me interested.
After seeing this in IMAX, I have decided to never again see a feature film in IMAX. It is WAAAAAY too disjointing. First of all, you go through about 3/4 of the movie in non-IMAX vision. Suddenly, glasses flash in green at the bottom of the screen to let you know you should put on your glasses. Which everybody in the theater does. Too much distraction! Then, and in particular to the big fight at the Hall Of Prophecy, it doesn't always sync up. Some moments looked 3-D crystal clear, and some were double-vision. I tried moving my head, adjusting my glasses, and noting would rectify the problem. Also, when characters would walk in front of one another, they looked like paper people. 2-D, but in a 3-D world. Weird. Same gripe when they prompted you to take off your glasses: too distracting! I had the beginnings of a headache after that wrapped up. Maybe I'll go see the prehistoric sea-creatures film in IMAX, but Beowulf? Non.
No comments:
Post a Comment