Why The Harry Potter Collection Isn't All It Ought To Be.

The Good: Movies get better and better, Decent effects, Good overall story
The Bad: Glaring plot and character problems, Lack of consistent effects (especially retroactively)
The Basics: Despite what legions of fans of the Harry Potter franchise might want, the Harry Potter Ultimate Collection is not the greatest cinematic triumph of all time.


I never intended to get into or watch the Harry Potter movies. Then, like magic, I fell in love and the woman I fell in love with was a big fan of the franchise. She had read all of the Harry Potter books and when we got together, the franchise wasn't quite over, so I ended up going through the movies that were out and then the new movies as they came out. The movie franchise has grossed billions of dollars and has a hugely loyal following, so I'm not exactly expecting to light the world on fire with my considerations of the Harry Potter Collection, but for those with an open mind or coming late to the party - as I did - there are some very helpful notes I can provide on the franchise.

First, it is worth noting that I have considered each of the Harry Potter films on their own. Those reviews, which are the substantive content of The Harry Potter Collection, are at:
Harry Potter And The Sorcerer's Stone
Harry Potter And The Chamber Of Secrets
Harry Potter And The Prisoner Of Azkaban
Harry Potter And The Goblet Of Fire
Harry Potter And The Order Of The Phoenix
Harry Potter And The Half-Blood Prince
Harry Potter And The Deathly Hallows, Part 1
Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows, Part 2
Furthermore, it bears repeating that I have not read the books upon which this movie franchise is based and as such, this is a very pure review of the movie franchise. I've heard innumerable times in comments to my film reviews, "well, in the book . . .": This is NOT a review of the book series, it is the film series as it stands up on its own.

Harry Potter is deposited as an infant on the doorstep of his aunt and uncle, the Dursley's, where he is raised as the lesser child. Forced to live under the stairs, he is surprised on his eleventh birthday when he is invited to go study at Hogwart's School Of Witchcraft And Wizardry. Previously unaware of his family's magical talents, he is taken under the wing of Rubeus Hagrig who helps him get school supplies and sends him on his way to the private magical school. En route, he meets the poor, bumbling Ron Weasley and the brilliant, booksmart Hermione Granger. Together, the three are inducted into the same House in Hogwart's and they begin studying magic. Harry draws the attention of the school's headmaster, Albus Dumbledore, who was instrumental in saving Harry's life the night his parents were killed.

Harry begins to study magic with those around him convinced there is something special about him, more than just the scar on his forehead. Soon, it becomes clear to Harry that he is special; he is the only known survivor of an attack by the great evil, Lord Voldemort. Voldemort, it appears, was killed, but still has followers in our world. Throughout the years, clues emerge that the followers of Voldemort, the Death Eaters, are working to bring the dark lord back to Earth and that Harry Potter has a connection to him. As the forces of evil gather, Harry is tutored in magic to meet his destiny: to stop the dark lord from destroying the magical world and enslaving the human (Muggle) world.

The Harry Potter collection has all eight movies at they were originally released and the Blu-Ray version features so many bonus features, it makes the extended editions of The Lord Of The Rings Trilogy look anemic. Each of the movies, save the last two, has been released as three-disc ultimate collector's editions with additional bonus features and collectible materials and one suspects that there will be an Ultimate Collection which bundles the super-expensive, ultra-packed versions of all eight films together. But for most people, the Harry Potter Collection with the movies, deleted scenes, trailers and featurettes will be enough.

What is worth watching in the set? First, the movies do tend to get better and better, both with storytelling elements and the acting. The first film hinges more on the fact that there was a built-in audience than making a great movie, so it stands poorly on its own, even as an establishing work. Similarly, in the first sequel, were it not for the exceptionally important plot event that occurs within the Chamber Of Secrets, it would be hard to advise anyone sit through the movie. But, the Harry Potter Saga is largely a mystery wherein Harry learns more and more about his potential in each film and then has to confront the ultimate evil.

But therein lies the first strike against the cinematic franchise. The fundamental story is one of a boy being raised to take on the great evil of the age. That is a classic hero story and it could be epic. The problem with this particular epic is that how it is accomplished makes no real sense. Harry Potter is taught incrementally what he needs to know in order to fight the Dark Lord and those around him retain secrets as opposed to being as clear, direct and forthright as possible. In other words, the writer of the Harry Potter Saga was much more concerned with selling the next book than telling a story that makes sense.

What do I mean by this? Harry Potter is seen by Dumbledore, Hagrid, Serius Black, Minerva McGonagall and virtually everyone else in Hogwart's (and the adversaries fighting on the side of Lord Voldemort) as the one chance the magical world has to take down and destroy the evil of the age. Rather than groom the boy and have him prepared to confront the Deatheaters and Voldemort, the forces of good are scattered and only intimate to Harry what he needs to know. This would be most analogous to Obi-Wan and Yoda only telling Luke Skywalker about one or two aspects of the Force in the Star Wars Trilogy or only training him to use a lightsaber, without ever informing him of the Dark Side, the nature of the Force or that Darth Vader was someone he would have to confront. Or, from the fantasy realm, this would be like Gandalf discovering the nature of the One Ring, finding it with Bilbo and then having Frodo wander around with the ring without ever telling him where to go or what to do with it. Despite what fans of the Harry Potter franchise might want to believe, the mechanisms of the storytelling are ridiculous in that it is not until the sixth year and in the wake of the resurrection of Voldemort that the existence and nature of the Horcruxes are revealed. It's pretty shoddy storytelling to have a small army of people who claim to be good who refuse to tell their soldiers how they can actually take on the enemy. Even a "hey, if you ever see, hear about or encounter this thing, let us know," would be better than the ignorance with which Dumbledore keeps his followers. And while some might say that Dumbledore didn't want to insight a panic or scare Harry, I respectfully submit that the time to stop evil is before it materializes, has legions of followers and takes over the world.

Moreover, the Harry Potter Saga become muddied by time travel elements and interpersonal elements that do not flow organically in the films. So, while viewers can clearly see the arc by which Hermione and Ron Weasley overcome obstacles to develop an eventual romantic relationship, the development of a relationship between Harry Potter and Ron's sister is much less organic in the films.

The real strike against the ultimate Harry Potter Collection is the fidelity to the original as opposed to creating a unified Saga. The eight films were directed by four different directors and, truth be told, they didn't know exactly what they were doing all along. The technology exists now to fix up the technical issues in the making of the films and it would do a great service to the fans to do that. I'm not talking about rewriting the movies or even replacing Richard Harris, who unfortunately died between the second and third films, with Michael Gambon who played the part for the rest of the franchise. But, Griphook in the first film and the goblins look nothing at all like what they do near the end of the franchise and unlike the changes George Lucas made to the Star Wars Saga, changes like replacing characters who appear late in the movie series by inserting the refined look to the character types in the early films would lend a greater sense of continuity. When I was reviewing this year's Golden Snitch ornament (that's here!), I noticed even practical effects like the Golden Snitch were redesigned. How is this problematic? Well, Harry receives that magical object in the penultimate film and viewers are asked to recognize it as an identical object to the one in the first film when it is not.

Despite the storytelling problems - and it was only as I wrote this consideration of the entire story that it truly hit me how woefully unprepared Harry is for no good reason other than to drag the story out for more movies - and a few niggling character issues, the Harry Potter Saga tells an interesting story. And, despite the gripe, it is a more engaging story than it might have been had Harry simply been tutored at the very beginning with all he needed to know. The characters do get developed, though it takes several films.

What the Harry Potter Saga does exceptionally well is develop the acting talents of three young actors who grow into the iconic roles as their characters grow. Teamed up with established great actors like Richard Harris, Michael Gambon, Gary Oldman, Brendan Gleeson, Maggie Smith and Kenneth Brannagh, actors Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint and Emma Watson hone their talents from painfully awkward children into powerhouse adult actors who can take on virtually any role that is given to them.

On DVD and Blu-Ray, the Harry Potter Collection includes all eight films, their trailers and limited bonus features. Warner Brothers, which produced the Harry Potter Saga, has shown a complete willingness to exploit its audience. With Harry Potter And The Half-Blood Prince, over half a dozen different exclusive packages were developed to get fans to rebuy the same source material for the exclusive bonus features. By that logic, there will come a time when Warner Brothers sees the point in investing to do refurbished editions of each film wherein the Saga is corrected for effects continuity. Will it be worth the buy? Not if you already have the current Saga. Will it be a better film series? Yes. I say hold out, at least, until all of the Ultimate Editions are bundled together in an exclusive, space-saving package!

For other epic fantasy or science fiction series', be sure to visit my reviews of:
The Star Wars Saga
The Lord Of The Rings Trilogy
The Indiana Jones Trilogy

6.5/10

For other movie reviews, please visit my index page by clicking here!

© 2011 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

Jake Gyllenhaal Is Not Johnny Depp And Prince Of Persia: The Sands Of Time Flops.

The Good: Good action/adventure feel and sequences, Special effects
The Bad: Light on character development, Obvious plot and character development, Disappointingly obvious progression, Disney conceits.
The Basics: In an attempt to rule the theaters with a new franchise, Disney and Jerry Bruckheimer make a boring miscalculation with Prince Of Persia: The Sands Of Time.


I know that I am in the minority of reviewers when it comes to the Pirates Of The Caribbean movies. Still, I stand by those reviews because they are basically overrated popcorn movies which have as much to do with merchandising Johnny Depp as they do with telling a decent story. I mention this at the outset of my review of Prince Of Persia: The Sands Of Time because not only is the film produced by Pirates Of The Caribbean producer Jerry Bruckheimer, it is also obvious that it is attempting to establish another franchise like Pirates, presumably to fill the gap until the next Pirates film is ready. However, they failed. And hard.

Prince Of Persia: The Sands Of Time is loosely based upon a video game franchise by the same name, much like Pirates Of The Caribbean was based upon a Disney World ride. Sadly, this film has about the emotional resonance of a video game and while the effects are worthwhile in most parts, the plot and character developments are so full of holes one could sail a pirate ship through them. This comes from two essential problems with the film: the time travel element and the emphasis in the film on parkour. Before I get too far into critiquing the film, let me address the latter point first.

For those unfamiliar with it, parkour is a current “phenomenon” sweeping people in urban areas who have too much time on their hands and a physical gift which is grossly misapplied. While some define parkour as the “art” of moving in a straight line, no matter the obstacle, I look at parkour as making one’s life intentionally difficult by forcing oneself to climb, jump and straddle when such movements are in no way necessary. So, for example, while one person might walk down a flight of stairs, through a turnstyle and around a fence to get into, say, a subway terminal, a traceur or traceuse (one who does parkour) might leap down the stairs or jump between hand rails to descend, leap over the turnstyle and climb over the fence to make the same journey. There’s a kung-fu movie feel to watching people perform parkour and while there’s a guy who is currently credited with “creating” parkour, it has clearly been around for decades before he put a name to it. The point of this little diatribe is this: parkour requires physical agility and strength, but at the end of the day seems to be a pointless waste of time and energy for most people. I long suspected that, like track and field events (or soccer) it is far more interesting to be participating in the activity than just watching others do that. Prince Of Persia: The Sands Of Time went a long way to proving that thesis. Throughout the film characters, most notably Jake Gyllenhaal’s Dastan perform parkour and while it is initially interesting, it wears thin early in the movie and one is stuck watching Gyllenhaal run, jump and swing when he could use other methods of transport. Director Mike Newell seems to be desperately hoping that viewers will be so astounded by how Gyllenhaal and costar Gemma Arterton (known for her role in Clash Of The Titans, reviewed here!) do their own stunts that they will neglect to notice that many of the situations which require the stunts are utterly unnecessary.

It’s a popcorn movie, nothing more.

Dastan is living on the streets in Persia when he comes to the attention of King Sharaman who adopts Dastan as a Prince so his own sons might not fight for the throne. Raised as an equal and a son of Persia, Dastan is by Sheik Amar and aided by Prince Garsiv, the head of the army, Dastan prepares for the day when he might be called upon to lead or fight. That time comes when Dastan leads a military operation that lays siege to a neighboring land. There, he discovers the dagger with the Sands Of Time, which he learns about from its protector, Princess Tamina, who - as a captured subject - is to become the wife of one of the Princes.

But Tamina does not take her job lying down and when Dastan is framed for the murder of Sharaman, she and Dastan are forced to flee. Their running through the desert puts them in league with a rogue and swindler, Sheik Amar, and his knife-throwing lackey. As Dastan tries to keep possession of the dagger, Tamina leads him further into the desert to the source of its power, unwittingly leading its greatest enemy there as well!

Prince Of Persia: The Sands Of Time is exactly what we have come to expect of big budget special-effects driven summer blockbusters. Disney is betting heavily on this one and while the teenybopper crowd might find Jake Gyllenhaal, who was admittedly great in Donnie Darko (click here for that review!), to be a dreamy substitute for Johnny Depp, the flick is almost inevitably doomed to failure for two big reasons: 1. it’s nothing we haven’t seen before and 2. There’s no hook.

The first problem is the death knell of the movie. Nizam is as monolithic a villain as virtually any Disney villain and there is a pointless quality to him and his goals. Evocative of Jafar from Aladdin, Nizam is just monolithically bent on ruling the world and remaining alive, which makes his character very limited. Whenever I see such a character now, the first question I find myself asking is “what is motivating this person to want to rule everything?” If I can come up with an answer, my next question is “does it fit the character?” Nizam does not have any philosophy or idea to better anything, he just wants it all. And frankly, unrestrained greed is a motive that becomes harder and harder to watch the older I get. Prince Of Persia: The Sands Of Time does nothing new with the concept and as such, the villain seems very one-sided in a way that is utterly boring.

As a result, Dastan comes to seem equally boring. While Jake Gyllenhaal does a decent job of looking shocked when he comes to realize how his dagger works, but beyond that he is remarkably white bread. I recognize the irony of characterizing the buffed up, tanned version of Gyllenhaal that way, but his character of Prince Dastan truly has no unique traits and just as Nizam’s monolithic evil sense seems over-the-top, the loyalty and bland acceptance that his mission is righteous falls flat as well. Dastan is not internally tormented by the power he wields and he never comes into his own as a realized character of any interest. In other words, he is important only because he is focused on the most and the viewer is told he is important.

This leads us to the hook, or lack thereof. While Pirates Of The Caribbean had Jack Sparrow who was mumbling crazy things and doing his own thing much of the time, Prince Of Persia: The Sands Of Time has no such catch, no such unique or defining quality. As a result, this becomes a pretty bland and straightforward hero narrative and because the protagonist doesn’t inspire the viewer or amuse them, the film flops into a rut of action films that is actually likely to alienate the teen girl audience which made Pirates so big.

As for the Sands of Time, within the dagger they create a 10 second to one minute time playback option for the person with the dagger (usually Dastan) and that is mildly amusing, but more an excuse to make a special effect which is at times nauseating and others mildly intriguing. This effect-based and stunt-based work does nothing to negate the fact that the film is disturbingly dull to watch and for those looking for something new, they are likely to be disappointed. Instead of wasting one’s money seeing this in theaters, they might as well go back and rewatch The Mummy. At least that effectively mixed humor and action. This does not.

The acting in Prince Of Persia: The Sands Of Time never sparkles. Sir Ben Kingsley is never given enough to work with as Nizam and Jake Gyllenhaal’s acting in this consists mostly of running and jumping and slashing at people and computer generated things. As for Gemma Arteron, she is easy to watch, but is hardly a shining gem of acting in this work.

In other words, there’s no reason to hold your breath for this latest Disney cashgrab.

For other Disney films, please check out my reviews of:
Toy Story 3
The Little Mermaid
The Nightmare Before Christmas

4/10

For other film reviews, please visit my index page by clicking here for an organized listing!

© 2010 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.



| |

Don't Enjoy Sports? Harry Potter And The Goblet Of Fire Will Bore You!

The Good: Acting is all-around wonderful, DVD bonus features, Final fifteen minutes
The Bad: Erratic special effects, Predictable plot/character events, Pacing, Editing, Awkward character development (Ron!)
The Basics: Despite a few decent moments and a great climax, Harry Potter And The Goblet Of Fire is more often a sports-based teen melodrama that will disappoint adult viewers.


I'll admit it right off the bat: I came into Harry Potter And The Goblet Of Fire biased. The prior cinematic installment, Harry Potter And The Prisoner Of Azkaban had such a huge, glaring plot problem that went unresolved, essentially setting up Harry Potter And The Goblet Of Fire that it was pretty much agony for me to sit with my wife watching this installment. Viewed on DVD, Harry Potter And The Goblet Of Fire is too erratic for the serious cinephile to enjoy, complete with setups that go unfulfilled and such a lack of tone that it was only when the movie was almost over and my wife asked "Have you figured it out yet?" that it even occurred to me that there was a plot underfoot in the film.

Unfortunately, by this point in the Harry Potter Saga, the elements are so predictable as to be tiresome to even bother reviewing. The action always stems around the heroism of Harry Potter, a young man just learning magic, but with a strong innate ability to do it anyway. He goes from his normal life in the muggle (non-magic) world to Hogwart's school where there is something going on, a new villain rising and a complication that always centers around the new Defense Against The Dark Arts professor. It's always the Defense Against The Dark Arts professor that moves the plot in whatever way it zigs or zags. It's like the way the doctors on House, M.D. always guess "lupus" whenever they encounter a sick character. By Harry Potter And The Goblet Of Fire, the viewer is ready for something different and, alas, we are not treated to it until the final fifteen minutes, long after most of us have stopped caring.

As always, it is worth noting that this is not the book, this is the movie I am reviewing.
As such, the usual "that was explained better in the book" might be applicable, but if it's not clear by the film, it's a poor cinematic rendering. Unfortunately, Harry Potter And The Goblet Of Fire has far too many moments like that.

After dreaming of Peter Pettigrew and another villain in a house with a severely weakened Voldemort, who has been made corporal, Harry Potter awakens horrified and absolutely convinced the dark lord has returned. So, he goes with his friends to the world championship Quidditch match where after much fanfare, the game is played and the afterparty is interrupted by an all-out attack by Deatheaters, followers of Lord Voldemort. Terrified, the Weasleys shuffle their kids, Harry and Hermione off to Hogwart's School Of Wizardry And Witchcraft.

Once there, the school plays host to a dangerous competition designed to test the magical abilities of a champion from each of the three great magic schools of the area. The Hogwart's champion, because it has to be a person over seventeen, is the Quidditch player Cedric Diggory. But the Goblet Of Fire, which chooses the champions, also spits out Harry Potter's name and he is bound to enter the competition. Tutored and guided by MadEye, the new Defense Against The Dark Arts professor and Hagrid, Harry works to survive the various trials and work with Cedric to win the competition. But at the same time, he is plagued by the sense there is something evil underfoot and his unexplained presence in the competition is a setup for something horrible.

In fact, Potter's place in the competition is a setup for a pretty fabulous finale to the film. Unfortunately, most of the film is the competition broken up by awkward scenes of stupid middle-school antics character scenes. Throughout the film, Ron is moody in a way that is never satisfactorily explained, so it comes across on screen as a Degrassi-style melodrama. The investigation into the acts of the Deatheaters in the opening is brushed under the rug almost instantly and so MadEye's place in the film is mostly to guide Harry on the competition.

But even the competition has a sense of obvious melodrama to it that is unclearly presented in the film. Touted as a dangerous series of challenges to each magician, the competition soon becomes harmless. For example, while rescuing friends who are magically trapped underwater, the champion Fleur Delacour loses her magic bubble (her ability to breathe underwater). She mysteriously survives the event, as does the person she was supposed to rescue from her (would-be) watery grave. My point here is that the competition is revealed to be all hype and no substance; if Fleur lost her ability to breathe underwater, the competition truly is illustrated as dangerous if she dies a horrible drowning death, not if she manages to swim an impossible distance back to the surface. As it is, she only loses that test within the overall competition, so the viewer is seriously letdown. This is the basic theory of the hero; the greater the challenge, the greater the hero. Harry, it seems, is not truly in danger - save by his moody teenage friends being upset with him - until the very end.

As for that, Harry Potter And The Goblet Of Fire entirely hinges on the mistake made in Harry Potter And The Prisoner Of Azkaban, as it is Peter Pettigrew who appears to be instrumental in making Voldemort corporal again. The Harry Potter films, largely are more about flash than substance. This is almost made hyperbole in this installment when the gang goes to the world championship Quidditch match but after much hype the game is performed entirely off-screen. This first anticlimax comes on the heels of a terrible special effect for the portkey, a magical device that transports people from one location to another. The concept is integral to the final part of the movie, but by the time it comes up, viewers are likely to figure that something is going on given where the movie goes.

What Harry Potter And The Goblet Of Fire has going for it is the acting. While Rupert Grint is forced to act like a moody, melodramatic teenager with little on-screen cause, he does it quite well, portraying the anger expertly. Similarly, Emma Watson continues to develop as a convincing and impressive acting talent, especially in scenes where he character makes her first few awkward steps forward in dating an older boy. Watson and Grint play the character conflict that causes off perfectly.

Brendan Gleeson joins the cast as MadEye, a hunter of evil wizards and Gleeson is phenomenal. In fact, his performance is so different from any of his other roles that he is virtually unrecognizable in the part. Adult actors like Gleeson, Michael Gambon (Dumbledore), Robbie Coltrane (Hagrid), Maggie Smith (McGonagall) and Alan Rickman (Snape) fill out the cast wonderfully and play off each other perfectly to create a very adult sense of mature magic-users. Even Matthew Lewis, who plays the minor role of Neville Longbottom, comes into his own in this movie, seeming more confident within his character's nervous skin. In fact, the only performance that seems based more on casting than talent is Robert Pattinson, of Twilight (click here for my review of that film!) fame, as Cedric. Pattinson struts around cocky, but never seems to fit the otherwise professionally-performing cast.

It falls to Daniel Radcliffe to hold the film together at many points and he does it as best he can. Unfortunately, there are moments a digital double is used and it looks absurd. As well, there are times when he seems unclear with what the action going on around him is supposed to be and he does his best, but the plot seems to baffle him at times, too.

The problem here is that there is too much that is unexplained that makes the movie a real tough nut to swallow. Peter Pettigrew getting away at the climax of the prior installment makes no real sense, but given that Hermione has one of the many tools needed to capture him, why no one has is not satisfactorily explained. As a result, this is another special effects epic that is more flash than fun.

On DVD there are a bevy of deleted scenes and featurettes on the special effects and the process of bringing the book to screen. They enhance one's education into the broader world of Harry Potter, but do not make this film any more palatable.

For other films in the Harry Potter franchise, please check out my reviews of:
Harry Potter And The Sorcerer's Stone
Harry Potter And The Chamber Of Secrets
Harry Potter And The Prisoner Of Azkaban

4/10

For other film reviews, please check out my index page for an organized listing by clicking here!

© 2010, 2009 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |