A friend and I caught Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince on opening night and I have to say I enjoyed it thoroughly. I figured it was worth a (spoiler free) review for those of you who are thinking of seeing it. Which, really, should be most of you.
First off, if you're going with the kids, use your judgment, there are some genuinely creepy scenes, including the one in the cave full of inferi (zombies) that is shown in the advertisements. Creepy as it may be, though, I think most kids are OK with it, just be prepared to jump out of your seat at least once (trust me, it doesn't help that you know it's coming).
The Potter movies, like the novels, get progressively creepier, darker and more violent as the series progresses, which is appropriate to the story, and Half-Blood Prince is no different. However, another element thread that runs very strongly through this movie is the character's growing interest in... well, each other. There is plenty of awkward, painfully intense teenage romance going on. Younger viewers will relate, while older viewers will... probably relate too, but on some level cringe a bit and think "my god, that used to be me."
Ron gets the worst of it, mostly because he gets what he thinks he wants, and steals the show for pretty much all of the non-combat scenes. Harry and Hermione get their share of the angst though.
The quality of acting is, generally, superb, as it has been in most of the Potter films. Dan Radcliffe does fairly well with what he's given in Harry, although by this point in the series Harry is probably the least interesting character in the story. Rupert Grint really shines as Ron Weasley, the Everyman foil to Harry's Chosen One. The Weasley family in general is brilliantly portrayed (by the way, did Bonnie Wright, aka Ginny, grow about three feet taller between movies?).
The other standout actor is Evanna Lynch as Luna Lovegood. Luna could easily have been written off as the Jar-Jar Binks of the series, but Rowling's writing and Lynch's portrayal strikes the balance between the flaky comic relief and a genuinely likeable person. You get the feeling you'd like Luna enough in the real world that you'd be willing to ignore, even embrace her eccentricities to be her friend.
The movie moves along at a fast pace, which is both a strength and a weakness. On the one hand, this long (150 minute) film just about flies by, with great action shots and plenty of adventure. But when things aren't blowing up, it feels like a lot has been left out. If you haven't read the book, you may have to struggle a bit to figure out the whys and hows of some plot developments.
Now, of course, we have to wait for the next installment of the series, which is scheduled for late next year, followed by the final movie in 2011 (Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows is being split into two movies. First, it's a really big book, second, if you were Warner, would you want to let go of Harry Potter any sooner than absolutely necessary?), which brings me to my one other minor quibble: can we get these kids out of school before the actors start having kids of their own?
Friday, July 17, 2009
Thursday, May 14, 2009
To Boldly Split Infinitives: The New "Star Trek," and why it matters.
I saw the new Star Trek movie last night, and it was good.
J.J. Abrams seems to have struck the right balance, honoring the original premise of the show while not being a slave to it.
While the new movie jazzed things up a bit over some of the old (and relatively low-budget) offerings from the early series it remained faithful to the most important aspects of the series, its optimism and emphasis on cooperation, and its somewhat idealistic look at the future.
One thing that Star Trek offers us, that many otherwise brilliant science fiction stories do not is the simple idea that the future can be better than the past. Too many stories either assume we have to reach back to some mythic "Golden Age" or that we're simply going to keep slipping into a corrupt, barbaric dystopia. Star Trek was always the antidote to that. Don't get me wrong, I love Star Wars and Blade Runner and the other great SF/Fantasy stories out there, but it's nice to have a little hope with your space battles.
There are still problems and conflicts, disasters and villains, but society moves forwards, and while the government is far from perfect, it contains a lot of good people trying to make things better.
And unlike some other series, Star Wars for example (especially in the lamentable Episodes I-III), Star Trek doesn't have a Campbellian "chosen one" who is destined to save the day. Yes, Captain Kirk is the face of the story, but it's made explicitly clear (more so in this movie, even, than in the previous films) that Kirk is nothing without Starfleet. On his own, as a lone-wolf antihero type, he's just a waste of talent. It's only with a good ship and good crew, which includes his conscience Dr. McCoy and his dramatic foil Spock, that he becomes any sort of hero.
And the design of things... Starships are big. Starfleet Academy is big. These aren't scrappy little pirates with a heart of gold saving the day, these are humongous cooperative endeavors between entire worlds. When you see the Enterprise being built in a dry dock in Iowa (I guess the whole ehtanol thing doesn't pan out, they've got to put that real estate to use for something), you can imagine what we might accomplish if we put our collective heads, hearts and muscles together to solve problems and explore.
As author David Brin points out, Star Trek is less about Top Gun than it is the voyage of the H.M.S. Beagle.
Who knows, it might be an overly idealistic fantasy world, which is a common criticism of the series (it's much more trendy to be gritty and cynical these days, although that might be changing little by little). On the other hand, since the original series debuted in 1966, it has had an undeniable impact on not just popular culture, but real-world technology.
A few examples of modern things that were either anticipated by or even directly inspired by the series: cell phones, tablet PCs, PDAs, MRI machines, MP3 players, flat-panel televisions and jet injectors. And let's not forget that we've already had one spaceship prototype named The Enterprise. There will be more.
Additionally one cast member alone, Nichelle Nichols, who played Chief Communications Officer Uhuru (and by the way is that a Bluetooth headset in her ear?) worked with NASA on a special program to recruit minorities and women to the space program and has been a strong advocate for space exploration since the 60s.
Well done Mr. Abrams and company. Live long and prosper.
J.J. Abrams seems to have struck the right balance, honoring the original premise of the show while not being a slave to it.
While the new movie jazzed things up a bit over some of the old (and relatively low-budget) offerings from the early series it remained faithful to the most important aspects of the series, its optimism and emphasis on cooperation, and its somewhat idealistic look at the future.
One thing that Star Trek offers us, that many otherwise brilliant science fiction stories do not is the simple idea that the future can be better than the past. Too many stories either assume we have to reach back to some mythic "Golden Age" or that we're simply going to keep slipping into a corrupt, barbaric dystopia. Star Trek was always the antidote to that. Don't get me wrong, I love Star Wars and Blade Runner and the other great SF/Fantasy stories out there, but it's nice to have a little hope with your space battles.
There are still problems and conflicts, disasters and villains, but society moves forwards, and while the government is far from perfect, it contains a lot of good people trying to make things better.
And unlike some other series, Star Wars for example (especially in the lamentable Episodes I-III), Star Trek doesn't have a Campbellian "chosen one" who is destined to save the day. Yes, Captain Kirk is the face of the story, but it's made explicitly clear (more so in this movie, even, than in the previous films) that Kirk is nothing without Starfleet. On his own, as a lone-wolf antihero type, he's just a waste of talent. It's only with a good ship and good crew, which includes his conscience Dr. McCoy and his dramatic foil Spock, that he becomes any sort of hero.
And the design of things... Starships are big. Starfleet Academy is big. These aren't scrappy little pirates with a heart of gold saving the day, these are humongous cooperative endeavors between entire worlds. When you see the Enterprise being built in a dry dock in Iowa (I guess the whole ehtanol thing doesn't pan out, they've got to put that real estate to use for something), you can imagine what we might accomplish if we put our collective heads, hearts and muscles together to solve problems and explore.
As author David Brin points out, Star Trek is less about Top Gun than it is the voyage of the H.M.S. Beagle.
Who knows, it might be an overly idealistic fantasy world, which is a common criticism of the series (it's much more trendy to be gritty and cynical these days, although that might be changing little by little). On the other hand, since the original series debuted in 1966, it has had an undeniable impact on not just popular culture, but real-world technology.
A few examples of modern things that were either anticipated by or even directly inspired by the series: cell phones, tablet PCs, PDAs, MRI machines, MP3 players, flat-panel televisions and jet injectors. And let's not forget that we've already had one spaceship prototype named The Enterprise. There will be more.
Additionally one cast member alone, Nichelle Nichols, who played Chief Communications Officer Uhuru (and by the way is that a Bluetooth headset in her ear?) worked with NASA on a special program to recruit minorities and women to the space program and has been a strong advocate for space exploration since the 60s.
Well done Mr. Abrams and company. Live long and prosper.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
