Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (2009)

An introduction so dark that the first seconds are in black and white. Cue attack by death eaters on muggles and wizards alike, with a haunting score from Nicholas Hooper. Now this is something entirely different.

David Yeates wants us to be in no doubt that these are dark times. The filters are wildly grey and brown from the off (at times almost completely devoid of colours), and Dumbledore speaks low and emotionless.

The new guy on the block this time is Jim Broadbent. Not a great character as he is a bit of a buffoon, but he has a drunken beauty of a soliloquy at a crucial point. A wonderful story, told with the perfect blend of happy reminiscence  and bottomless regret.

Watson is still rock solid as the sassy, resourceful young witch, but her clear discomfort at an unwanted suitor is acting at a very high level for her age. Watch it and grin. After having been a footnote for several films, Felton is suddenly front and centre. Thankfully, this is his best effort by far. Encumbered by his sudden introduction to a task far greater than he's comfortable with and torn between duty, pride and morals. Well helped by great direction of dark, quite scenes with an absolute minimum of distraction. More of a nuisance is Grint's love interest, again turning his part of the story into something daft that doesn't really fit into neither the story, nor the general mood of the film.

As for the older cast, Gambon is travelling for lots of the duration, but he has a solemn demeanour as if he knows his ending before the rest of us (and he does of course). His last scene an exceptionally memorable death with a hauntingly beautiful theme accompanying him as his faithful strive to find light in the darkness, quite literally. Rickman keeps us guessing at every turn, enthralling with every syllable.

A bit more of Star Wars-thievery as we discover that Dumbledore of course discovered, and mentored, Voldemort. More of an original, but quite tantalizing, detail is the hour-glass. Great scene, perfectly edited.

Yeates keeps reminding us of the mystery of who the half-blood prince is. Firstly as a teenage caper, but later as a much more serious theme. And the disclosure does in no way disappoint. Nice build-up and concentration throughout.

So this instalment has some wonderful scenes, much better use of mood and symbolism than in the previous film, though lacking an enthralling end-game as it is substituted for emotional devastation. Very nice indeed.

8/10

Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix (2007)

So the Dursley-introduction is for once relevant and dark, instead of just annoying. Could this be a good omen? Richard Griffiths squeal of joy should indicate so. As should Harry's lingering dark dreams. Not to mention a most welcome reunion with Mad-Eye and Sirius. Generally the first half hour builds a very good premise for the rest of the film. There's conspiracy, secret meeting, darkness afoot and speak of war as things seem to take a political turn.

But alas. It soon takes a plunge. For some inconceivable reason they've decided to make the centre of the entire development Dolores Umbridge. A walking parody. A putrid character. Perhaps even worse than Jar Jar Binks. If you want Kafkaesque persecution, and resistance movement after model of the series V, that's fine. But you can not build around a five foot villain with a constant daft "drunk aunt" smile and a love for cats and pink. Her techniques are actually rather dire and evil, but it has no believability in her hands. I have no idea if she was this daft in the books, but the movie takes a devastating blow as a consequence.

Where they get it right is the growing connection between Potter and Voldemort. Whereas there were only little drops earlier, Harry is now struggling with Voldemort entering his dreams, and his insomnia creates fatigue with the following paranoia. All perfectly built up.

Oldman is amazing here. His whole face shines with pride of Potter. and he shifts between playful and menacing in the blink of an eye. Radcliffe and Watson shine, and without the stacked stupidity of the former instalment, Grint is also good. They really start to come together both on their own, but even more as a team, and some of their best scenes together are in this flick. Rickman is still a scene-stealer of dimensions, and Isaac's arrogant calm and high-pitched end to his dialogue a treat. Bellatrix is another miss though. Bonham-Carter simply overdoes it and makes Lestrange more of an annoyance than anything useful.

So the end game is as usual magnificent, perhaps the best so far (the falling of the prophecies a sight to behold), there are a lot of things done right. And the author certainly has the ability to give a film the ending it needs, rather than the one that makes people feel brilliant. Unfortunately, the massive amount of screen-time (and key to the story) awarded to Umbridge is a spectacular fail that no kind of magic can save. And the match between Voldemort and Dumbledore, surely is that, even more so the cutting of scenes as Potter struggles with the former. But with a run-time of over two hours, you can't make an hours worth of a great adventure.

5/10

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (2005)

Ahhhh. A start devoid of Dursley's. What a wonderful surprise. And (almost) straight to action as well as new director Mike Newell shows off some wonderful CGI with a bit of a stereotype Irish.

The only new character that brings anything of value to this flick is the brilliant Brendan Gleeson. His Mad-Eye really a feast. Bringing a blend of good-old-days discipline, and some raw humour. His introduction of the three unforgivable curses, really is first rate. Pattinson is rather anonymous and dull (probably to take the shine off Radcliffe) whereas father and son Crouch (Pack and Tennant) are both doing it over-the-top. Making it easy to believe their genetic connection, but also leaving them a bit misplaced. So we're left with the regular cast.

Gambon grows in this instalment. Puzzled, overwhelmed and concerned by events he does not quite understand, he appears preoccupied and at times even short-tempered as he struggles with his conscience. As for Voldemort, Fiennes immediately hits a chord. With a narcissistic, sadistically gleeful turn, he brings out fear in even the foulest characters as we've seen them. And with them at each side, Radcliffe seems to grow perfectly into his part. Isaacs has turned his menacing streak up a bit, and it suits him perfectly. Unfortunately, his scenes are very few. Rickman suffers the same fate, but he is still able to make every pronounced letter memorable.

No teenage-flick can be made without some romance and the ensuing lack of rational thought. It's not particularly bad, but it's not good either. Ron's sulking jealousy a particular nuisance. Grint really has a poor script for this film as his exceptionally overblown anger directed towards Potter is also marring the logical build-up of his character.

The storyline has something extra this time with a competition between three wizarding schools (Both the others are naturally single-gender). Newell baths us in both the grand introductions and celebrations, as well as the thrill of competition with the tension that comes from the danger of the tasks. I reckon he has the original author to thank for a lot of that, though. Where he fails is to keep a lingering evil in the shadows. As Voldemort finally appears in full figure here, one would expect more bad omens, more of an evil feel. But Newell is apparently better at storytelling than an unseen, lurking evil presence. He does succeed spectacularly at ending on that note though, with the last scene of the Wizard's Cup a chilling and devastating affair.

At 157 minutes, Newell does stretch it. But apart from the aforementioned and a couple of glaring logical errors, this is great entertainment showing Mr. Potter growing up in many ways. And it offers another brilliant end game.

7/10

Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (2004)

Aunt Marge is a welcome addition to the Dursley's. They needed some direct meanness to push Potter over the edge and show a darker side. And the intro is blissfully short too this time around.

It's a smart move to introduce Sirius Black in pieces through different sources and gossip. Not until past the hour, is the (alleged) full truth exposed, unfortunately in a very poor scene. And it takes another hour until the real truth is presented. The Dementors are CGI at it's best. Well helped by the direction of Alfonso Cuaròn (replacing Chris Columbus that directed the first two instalments) who takes his sweet time setting them up.

The characters seem to be getting better for every film, naturally. And this time the main new characters (David Thewlis and Gary Oldman) are tantalizing and central, bringing both relevance and interest. That they both provide very different father-surrogates for Potter is a clever bonus, and gives us a couple of heart-warming dialogues. Emma Thompson's Trelawney is a daft parody though. Quite astonishing that neither the director nor the actress saw how utterly stupid her scenes are. Rickman's Snape is now growing into a most delectable character. A worthy foe and big reason to tread carefully. As for the kids, this is the first time Radcliffe seems 100% at home. For some reason Felton seems to have lost his touch though, struggling with being an obnoxious teenager.

Unfortunately, Richard Harris past away in 2002, leaving the franchise with huge shoes to fill as Albus Dumbledore. Michael Gambon makes no attempt at merely replacing Harris, and his Dumbledore is much more feisty, sneaky and mischievous from scene one. No worries here, then.

The side-story of the hippogriff Buckbeak is quite smart also. Building on Harry's love of flight, the importance of being kind to animals and adding an interesting extra everyday drama in all the big lines. Generally, Cuaròn is very good at balancing the everyday struggles of a teenager with the huge task of saving the world from evil. The Marauder's map is another cool feature.

So all in all, this is perhaps the best film so far. The storyline is fine, the characters (mostly) great and it all flows beautifully. Another stunning end-game with several story-layers is a big bonus.

8/10

Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (2002)

So it would appear that the Dursley's get to start every instalment. OK as long as the film doesn't linger there, I guess. The problem now is that they add the extremely irritating Dobby to the mix, making the intro rather unbearable, despite downplaying both Petunia and Dudley. The Weasley's are a much more likeable, albeit not particularly interesting, family, and the film is soon back on track with them and a few of the lovely details that were so brilliant in the first instalment.

This movie is even longer than its predecessor, and this time it feels like it. A harsher editor would have proven very beneficial. Branagh is one character that could use a little less space. Not a bad idea in himself, but nowhere near interesting enough for the screentime he's awarded.

A brilliant piece of casting is Jason Isaacs. Sneeringly arrogant and just outside being outright rude 90% of the time. Most menacing the remaining 10.

So there are simply more things at fault here. The balance of humour has shifted to the level of eye-rolls with Dursley's, Dobby, Ron driving stick, Lockhart etc. It leaves the flick feeling a bit hectic, and quite frankly stupid at times.

There is still lots to enjoy though. The kids are all acting better this time around, though Watson is still in a league of her own. The mystery is good (the diary that writes back a suspenseful and outstanding feature), Isaacs, Rickman and Harris wonderful, and you are mostly well entertained. With a rather subtle way of introducing a racial debate, this is not an instalment without value for the rest of the franchise either. As a film though, it might have been rushed a bit, and hence suffers.

The end game is thrilling nonetheless (well aided by a fine turn from Christian Coulson), albeit a disappointing deus ex machina that shows its ugly head at the end of it.

6/10

Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone (2001)

There really is no better way to start off a fantasy-franchise than with an old-mentor-to-be showing off what a wise smart-ass he is, then end the opening scene with a little mystery and a cliffhanger.

As for the family. Petunia and Dudley are a bit too cartoonish combined, but the late Richard Griffiths is wonderful as uncle Vernon. Just the right blend of believable bastard and caring family-man.

When it comes to the actors, they are all British (a demand made by J.K. Rowling), but thankfully the Brits always did have enough actors. Special mentions in that regard to John Hurt, the stoic and warm Harris, and of course the deeply underestimated and thoroughly brilliant Rickman.
Radcliffe is a bit hit and miss at times, but then again he has an exorbitant number of scene for a kid his age. So he has a few scenes, that doesn't really work out. The best of the litter are Watson (perfectly snarky and over-confident) and Felton.

What this flick does best is perhaps the myriads of little details and the build-up of Radcliffe's powers and reputation. Columbus takes his time in this respect, adding to the 182 minutes running-time, thought it never seems prolonged unnecessary.

As it's a film mainly for kids, the humour is light and simple, with plenty of righteous comeuppance. Though there are small nods to the older viewers. Professor Quirrell as a villain is only for the kids though, and director Columbus makes a very smart choice not to expose him before he can simultaneously launch a second, and much better villain.

John Williams delivers a very capable score, and the main theme particularly is outstanding.

For the kids, this is about as perfect as it gets. There's a familiar and flowing story, a relatable character for most, discovery of new friends, some nice morals, tons of large and small events to marvel at, and just the right dash of mystery. For adults, it's some of the most enjoyable you'll ever take your kids to see. Though at times the "look of wonder" does become a bit too frequent and they take quite a few very kid-friendly shortcuts. And, shockingly, the CGI is straight out awful at times. The final scene at Hogwarts should be avoided by adults, though.

8/10

Bull Durham (1988)

What better way to introduce a young Tim Robbins than by a naked ass pumping in and out of a booth (I wonder if it was his own?). A brilliant start to the sportsfilm that has more sex than baseball.

This surely is the most sexual film ever made about baseball, even earning it an R-rating. And in the centre of it all is Susan Sarandon, oozing with just too much sexuality to overcompensate for her feminist views. Until she meets the young Robbins' veteran mentor Kevin Costner, a rugged minor league legend.

The three really excel here, and particularly Robbins and Sarandon (who started a long-lasting relationship with this flick) seem to be having the time of their lives. With Robbins being the "Million dollar arm, with the 5 cent head" that takes nothing seriously, and Sarandon the quasi-philosophic free-spirited feminist, this film needs Costner. His stoic, laconic and weary catcher with somewhat traditional values, a perfect balance to the simpleton and the philosopher.

Chemistry is key here though. Costner has a sizzling chemistry with Sarandon, both quarrelling and flirting. His on-screen partnership with Robbins is also fantastic, and provides a light humour as the smarter and more experienced toys with the dimwitted rookie. And as a bonus, all three characters, particularly Sarandon and Robbins, develop very nicely through different types of mentoring from Costner, finding a balance and calm. In that respect, the two characters are given a very much needed sand-grinding. And Costner has immense charm and shows off a comic talent that was never to be seen again. Furthermore, he always did have a way to play his character with an edge of bitterness and wile temper, that adds a bit of spark

It's a strange sports-movie, though. There are no big games, most of the on-field action is conversation between the leads (oral or written). No suspense of any kind as to the outcome of any given situation or game as far as sports are concerned. We hardly learn the score of the games, even.

And there sure are some speeches of quality and one-liners to speak of. And although Costner's speech about belief is rather famous, my favourite is. "He fucks like he pitches. Sorta all over the place".

So it's sexy, it's funny and it has some great leads. The rest of the cast are hardly noticeable, but then again, in 1988, the three aforementioned would do.

7/10