Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince

"No, Miss Granger, I have no potion to improve acting."

(Boo to Claire for not reviewing this despite watching it first.)

They say this is like The Dark Knight of the Harry Potter franchise. I say not really.

Okay, first thing's first. Let's get the adaptation issue out of the way.

This is already the sixth Potter adaptation. Everyone should know by now that the movie is not like the book. There are some exceptions, of course, but as a general rule, do not expect the movie version to be a hundred percent faithful to the adapted source.

So what can I say about Half-Blood Prince? It's darker. Edgier. Less action than Order of the Phoenix, but we have more flashbacks of Tom Riddle, which makes it a treat for fans of the book.

Emma Watson and Bonnie Wright are getting prettier and prettier. But sadly, Emma Watson's acting hasn't improved much. Just a little. She doesn't overact that much anymore. Daniel Radcliffe's acting has improved a lot. And Rupert Grint is always good.

On the adults' performances, Mrs. Tim Burton a.k.a. Helena Bonham Carter is in her element as usual, while Jim Broadbent is excellent as Professor Horace Slughorn. Alan Rickman is still the best. And Michael Gambon tends to look like Gandalf the Grey in a lot of shots. Must be the hair. And the beard. Or both.

This reminds me of something Homer Simpson once said: "No man should outlive his fictional wizard." Which is exactly what I felt when Dumbledore, you know, died.

Again, they say this is The Dark Knight of the Potter franchise. And I say The Dark Knight does not have any teeny-bopper romance going on every fifteen minutes or so.


*some info from IMDb
pic from movies.msn.com


Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. UK. 2009.


Rating: Seven and a half out of ten.