tags: Harry Potter, movie review
With one more agonizing week to wait for the last Harry Potter book to arrive in my mailbox, I finally saw Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix last night. I literally could not wait one more minute for my Harry Potter fix, so I went to the very last showing of the movie for the night, which kept me in the theatre until early this morning. Since I have been talking about Harry Potter for months now, I am sure you all want to know what I thought of the film, so here it goes; I liked it. But I'll give you more details below the fold (although my comments are not really spoilers since you all, like me, have read all the books several dozen times each, right?);
I was surprised by several things in the movie. For example, I was surprised to see how much of the original book was not included in the movie. On one hand, I realize that movies are not novels, nor can they be, so I was expecting that some parts of the novel not make it in to the movie (Charlie Weasley and Fleur Delacour, for example), but I was curious to see which parts they would be.
The parts of the novel that didn't make it into the movie were numerous. For example, the Weasley twins were rather subdued and nowhere near as delightfully mischievious as they were in either the previous movie, nor in the book. Additionally, they did not have nearly as large a role in the movie as I thought they should have had, and I was disappointed with their fireworks and the lack of a swamp in the school. I was also surprised by the sudden and inexplicable appearance of Percy Weasley at Hogwarts, the sudden and inexplicable appearance of the members of the Order when Harry and his colleagues were under attack at the Ministry of Magic's Department of Mysteries, and the non-role of Kreacher in the movie (of course, Kreacher is important in the next movie, so they had to give him a small introductory role in this movie).
However, that said, I think the movie presented an interesting angle that was only alluded to in the books; the battle for Harry's soul. The Order of the Phoenix focused on building up this angle so it was quite dramatic by the inevitable climax near the end of the film. However, the battle for Harry's soul lacked all the subtlety in the books and instead, was boiled down into a basic battle between isolating himself, of "going it alone" (as Voldemort did), versus relying on a community of friends whom Harry loves, but is afraid that Voldemort will kill because of his affection for them. Since this was such a large plot device in the film, I thought that, as Harry's best friends, Hermione and Ron would have had larger roles than they did, and that Luna Lovegood and Neville Longbottom would have had larger roles as well -- especially Luna, since there were several important things that passed between her and Harry in the story.
Speaking of roles, the largest roles in this film were Harry's and Dolores Umbridge's. Dumbledore, Hagrid, McGonagall, Snape, Trelawney, Flitwick, Sirius, Lupin, Moody and Tonks all had very small roles, or were nearly nonexistent in the film (although this is to be expected since they also did not have a huge presence in the book). The ghosts and the Fat Lady were nonexistent.
Imelda Staunton as Dolores Umbridge was a wonderful, delightfully horrible (and pink) headmistress. Evanna Lynch as Luna Lovegood was also quite good in her role, although my imagination of her based on the books was somewhat different than the reality. I was also surprised with how much better Michael Gambon was as Dumbledore in this film than in his previous appearances, where I always found him to be disappointing (Richard Harris was always superb in this role). I also thought that Daniel Radcliffe showed a large improvement in his acting, probably due to his time on the stage. David Bradley as Argus Filch, the squib caretaker at Hogwarts, used his small role to good effect by being thoroughly hilarious, as usual. And of course, the special effects were wonderful.
Anyway, in short, I found Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix to be an interesting film, both for those parts from the book that they did include in the story as well as for what they left out. As everyone says, it is a much darker movie than the others, and may not be as appropriate for little kids as the earlier films were.
Incidentally, if you were wondering why I chose the title that I used for this entry, well, that was (probably) the funniest line in the entire film. It was uttered by Cornelius Fudge, the Minister of Magic, when he actually saw Voldemort in the Ministry of Magic. After spending the entire film denying the reality of Voldemort, it was a real "D'oh!" moment when Fudge shouted "He's baack!!" (as if it was some sort of surprise) near the end of the film, and this revelation was greeted by huge laughter from the audience.
- Log in to post comments
So when are you going to see it again? :o)
probably on friday evening, since i will be going CRAZY for the book to show up in my mailbox on saturday morning. GAH!
well, unless i go sooner. but if i do, i will attend matinees, since they are half price (the cost of one beer or well drink).
"when Fudge shouted "He's baack!!" (as if it was some sort of surprise) near the end of the film, and this revelation was greeted by huge laughter from the audience."
When we saw the movie, most of the people in our theater had the same response.
Well, like you I'll be waiting for the book.
I'll actually be at home, good planning on my part for once.
I do hope that the postal dispute in the UK is resolved else it might be delayed.
I wonder when amazon will send them out?
Oh well, they do advise when a book has been sent.
If you have a dark sense of humor:
http://www.theonion.com/content/video/j_k_rowling_hints_at_harry_potter
(Despite my griping about the movies on the other thread, I did indeed see this one too, in anticipation of the last book I'm open to any Potter fix I can get!)
Did you notice the completely fabricated character, Nigel? He is NOT in any of the books, just a Hollywood add-in. I'm not quite sure why, maybe just as a source of some comic relief?
I agree that Umbridge was done VERY well, definitely my favorite part of the movie, she definitely got the most laughs out of me.
I didn't like that they made Cho the one that tattled on the DA. In the book, it was a different girl, remember, Hermione had done some kind of curse that made the culprit break out in boils or something, and it definitely wasn't Cho.
i also didn't like that they made Cho the tattletail (her friend, Marietta was the tattletail in the book who ended up with the word "SNEAK" emblazoned across her forehead in boils), but i think that Harry et al. realized they judged her too harshly (you know, later, when they all were captured in Umbridge's office) when it was mentioned by Snape that Umbridge used all of his veritaserum to question students.
students like, um, Cho (well, in the movie).
yes, Cho tattling on the DA was VERY inexplicable in the film.
actually, nigel IS a character in the novel; he is colin creavey's little brother, remember?
Well, it wasn't until today that we finally got to see it. My wife and I both thougt it was excellent, including the special effects (however, I thought the "Sirius in the fireplace" scenes were done better in the previous movie). Mrs. cope was dissapointed to not see Dumbledore's office locking itself up against an sneaky visit by Umbridge and I thought Sirius' death was dealt with pretty superficially. As I recall from the book, when Valemort entered Harry's body and Dumbledore told Harry he was being killed, Harry said something to the effect of "let him kill me, then I can be with Sirius" and at that point, Valdemort exited Harry's body.
However, these are nitpicking points. It was neat to see how some scenes from previous movies were melded into the mix. It is also neat to see them age and mature and I am almost willing to believe they can all act in two more movies before they get too long in the tooth.
i agree with you, cope, regarding the sirius in the fireplace scenes. thanks for reminding me of that, too!
It was (easily missed) mentioned that the truth serum was used up on "Miss Chang" when Harry was going to be questioned by Umbridge.
I haven't gone to see this yet, but it has reminded me to check when my local Suomalainen kirjakauppa opens on Saturday. The big one in the city centre is advertising that it'll be open at 7am, but I'm not sure I want to join the ex-pat parent community at that time in the morning.
Would the film make any sense if you hadn't read the book? I thought the plot in The Goblet of Fire film didn't work, because it was squeezing too much into a short space of time. It should probably have been split into two films.
Bob
I think the appearance of the Order at the Department of Mysteries is explained by Harry's 'Padfoot' comment to Snape. Now if someone could explain where the horses vanish to during the final battle in Return of the King, I could finally get some sleep.
Anyways, this was probably my favourite of the series, the Dumbledore/Voldemort battle was excellent.
My sons and I, three deep geeks, enjoyed the movie. My wife, who has only read OotP once, was a bit bored and occasionally disoriented as to what was happening and who was who. I know the filmmakers had to radically simplify the plot to make the film manageable, but I wouldn't have minded a bit more exposition for the sake of the non-expert audience.
But a movie is just a movie. The real thing is on its way: five more days. Or you can read the pirated pages now appearing everywhere.
Just curious, but did anyone see the Imax version with the 20 minute 3D section, or is that not playing where you are. If not, I really must insist you find a way to experience this. It was one of the single most remarkable movie experiences I've had in years. Perhaps decades. The movie was pretty good, but even the most die hard harry-hater would have to admit that the 3D bit is absolutely mind-blowing.