New Release: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince

After seeing the 6th film based off of the most successful book series since the Bible, I've never been more excited to spend $20 in my lifetime.

I guess I got into the Harry Potter books somewhere in the middle. I definitely got the fifth book the summer it came out, and I'm pretty sure I got the fourth book when it came out as well. I do enjoy the books, although I wouldn't exactly consider them classic literature. The plot and mysteries of each novel have all been interesting, although I wouldn't say that the Harry Potter novels feature a great vocabulary or poetic writing.

What makes Harry Potter great is its depth. The world that J.K. Rowling created contains mythical creatures based off of stories from many cultures, over thousands of years. Each book, especially the last four, are just deep. The scope of the story itself is almost as relevant as the events that occur within. The fact that over the course of 4,000 combined pages readers have remained dedicated to this world, is proof that many of the events within the novels are all relevant to each other.

This, of course, is the problem with the movies. There is simply not enough time to give each story its fair treatment on film. Interestingly, even though the first two books were arguably the worst, simply because of the length of the stories, Sorcerer's Stone and Chamber of Secrets might be the most accurate of the Harry Potter films. However I, as well as many other Potter fans, could see ahead to the latter movies and know the problems that they would face.

Movie theaters don't have intermissions anymore. You can't show a four hour film in theaters. Sure there are very long movies, although they usually are for independent films. The longest, recent, mainstream film that I can think of was Return of the King, which was 3 hours and 20 minutes. And that's only because New Line was not going to get in Peter Jackson's way. But Warner Brothers doesn't care.

Two years ago, after Grindhouse bombed in the box office, Warner Brothers came to the conclusion that people don't want to see long movies. Which is absurd. Besides the massively successful Lord of the Rings movies, the Pirates of the Carribean series were insanely financially successful. People see the Pirates movies for Johnny Depp and zombie pirates, yet somehow they're almost three hours long. Anyway, after Grindhouse bombed, Warner Brothers made Order of the Phoenix(#5), the longest of the Harry Potter books, into the shortest of the movies.

Even before Order of the Phoenix(which I will refer to as OotP from now on) came out, I knew that the only possible way to do the book series right, would be to make more movies than there are books. Even if Warner Brothers didn't think that audiences don't like long movies, the theater owners would object to a four-hour movie because they couldn't show as many screenings as a two-hour film. At first I thought that if they released one book into multiple movies, they might give a discount for Volume 2 if you bought tickets for Volume 1. I then realized that people will buy tickets for both films no matter what, so there's no way they'd do that. Still after the way OotP was butchered, I was happy when they announced in March that the final book would be made into two movies.

On the other hand, this almost seemed like an admission of guilt from Hollywood. They're basically saying that they screwed up with the first six books, but they'll do the seventh one better. Why is it that the last book, which is more than 100 pages shorter than OotP, is the one that needs to be made into two movies?

Going into Half-Blood Prince I felt hopeful. This is a story that is shorter than OotP, yet is being made into a film that's 20 minutes longer. As a film, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (HBP) is very good. And as an adaptation of the book, it is certainly much more accurate than the previous film. But try as I might, I can't help but be disappointed.

Everyone that I know who didn't read HBP loved the movie. They felt that the story was understandable, without any gaps of explanation that were obvious in the previous film. Whether you read OotP or not, it was obvious that the plot in that movie was rushed.

However, HBP was more deceitful in its lack of information. It seems as though every element makes sense in and of itself. Film scholars would argue that a movie that's an adaptation should stand by itself, and a movie that's part of a series should also stand by itself. In that regard, yes, HBP is very successful. However, without giving away any major spoilers, there are a few examples of how HBP will make the last two movies harder to explain.

Right off the bat, when the meaning behind the title of the story, the Half-Blood Prince, is revealed, it is done very quickly. One would think that the significance of the meaning of the movie would be of great importance.

Elves have played a very crucial role in the book series, yet in the movies there was Dobby in the 2nd movie, and Kreacher briefly mentioned in OotP. First of all, Kreacher was responsible for all of the events that went down at the end of OotP, a fact that was totally ignored in that movie. But additionally, in the 6th book, Kreacher comes into Harry's possession and both him and Dobby play major roles in the final book. That was overlooked.

While a large amount of HBP revolves around Harry trying to retrieve a memory, when he finally finds it, it isn't even explained that well. Now those who only saw the movie may think that it was. However, the entire basis of the seventh book revolves around Harry searching for things that were based off of knowledge that the reader knows, but the viewer does not (this is all very hard to phrase without spoiling anything).

It's very hard to talk about my problems with HBP without sounding like a whiny nerd complaining about who shot first(I can't believe that has its own Wikipedia page). And perhaps I am. However, I don't believe that everything in the movies need to be the same as in the books.

For example, the opening scene in the film was totally different than in the book, but it worked well for the big screen. There are also aspects that were left out of HBP that I don't really think hurt the series that much. For example, in the book there is a character who planned on getting married and had an encounter with the werewolf Frenrir Greyback. This character was not mentioned in the movie at all and Greyback was only seen for a few seconds. While that part would have been cool in the movie, leaving it out was understandable.

My problem simply lies when the film doesn't back up the parts it decides to show. Leave out whole subplots, that's fine. However, don't have a build up, and then either not provide more information, or provide information that is contrary to the information that will be provided in future films.

I think that all of the Harry Potter movies, through all 4 directors, have done a good job of bringing the magical world to life. However, David Yates, who has done the last two movies, seems to do a greatest hits collection. I'd rather have more small scenes taken out, while having the moments that need to be stressed, stressed.

Hopefully, with Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows being broken up into two films(both being directed by Yates), fans will finally get their due. And that is why I am so happy, as a broke and unemployed graduate, to throw away another $20, just to see the finale done right.

New Release-Brüno

I'm not going to pretend that I was a fan of Sacha Baron Cohen before anyone else was. I know that he was big in England for years. I do, however, feel confident in saying that I was following him before most Americans were.

There were only 12 episodes of Da Ali G Show, which were somehow spread out over two seasons. I definitely was watching at least the second season when it was still airing on HBO. While it's hard to call anything on HBO obscure, outside of my family, I didn't really know that many people that watched it.

Da Ali G Show was one of the most brilliant comedies I had ever seen. It didn't need any sort of plot, outside of a loose theme that Ali G would introduce at the beginning of each episode(such as Respek or Jah).

A couple of years after Da Ali G Show went off the air, Ali G Indahouse was released straight to DVD. While there were some funny moments, the entirely scripted story was just dumb. Dumb funny is fine sometimes, but fans of Da Ali G Show probably expected something cleverer.

Borat blew up more than anyone could have predicted. It broke the record for the largest opening weekend for a movie opening in less than 1,000 theaters. No one expected it to be a wide-release film. But not only did Borat blow up, but so did his catchphrases, look, and Baron Cohen himself. While there were some scenes that fans found out later were acted out, Borat showcased how America can be exposed to its own racism and laugh at it simultaneously.

Now three years later we have Brüno, the third character from Da Ali G Show. This movie probably had more scripted scenes than Borat, but the real scenes were just, if not more, tasty than those in the previous film. I read a review of the film on Newsweek.com, which said that while Borat was a lovable character, Brüno was just mean. Not only that, but it claimed that instead of Brüno exposing America to its own homophobia, the movie only fueled the fire.

Before I get into my response to that claim, I'll just quickly say that Brüno is great. It's wunderbar. Is it better than Borat? That's tough to say. However, if for some reason you're actually deciding on seeing this movie based on my review, than yes, you should see this movie.

Now on to my response to Newsweek. I'd hate for my first review on this site to be elitist, but here it is. You have to be really dumb to agree with some of the people that Brüno comes across in this film. I'm not just saying that agreeing with some of the more hateful people in this movie makes you homophobic. I'm saying that it also makes you an idiot.

In one of the final scenes in the film, Sacha Baron Cohen comes into a wrestling ring as a character-within-a-character. Brüno has tried to go straight by this point, and tells the audience that his name is "Straight Dave." He gets the crowd riled up by getting them involved in an anti-gay chant. Then Brüno/Straight Dave challenges Lutz, his lover throughout the film, to a fight(definitely scripted). When each of the fighters bodies are wrapped around each other in combat, the crowd doesn't bat an eye. They only love it that much more. Then the two characters kiss. The entire crowd goes crazy(not scripted). Things get thrown into the ring, and fans start walking out of the venue. I sincerely believe that if the cage where Brüno and Lutz were kissing was not locked, that they would have both been seriously injured by the mob.

The hypocrisy in this scene should be obvious to anyone. How does a sport which involves men grabbing and pinning each other have the chutzpah to decide what's gay? I used to watch the WWE back when it was called the WWF, but even when I was young I thought it was strange how little those wrestlers wore.

Now I know that wrestling is very different from mixed martial arts(which I believe was the event in which the previously mentioned scene took place). And I'm not going to get into a discussion about how gay many different athletic events are. My question is, how could an audience member watching that scene become more homophobic, as Newsweek would suggest?

First of all, if you have that sort of mindset, what are you doing watching Brüno? Did you think you were going to see a Schwarzenegger movie? Second of all, can't you see that in movies like Borat and Brüno you are the fool, not the protagonist?

Is it possible that people can become more homophobic after seeing Brüno? I guess. However, that would only help prove Cohen's point. And you can't hold back from making a point for fear of retaliation. If you do that then the terrorists homophobes win.

Between the people Brüno goes to in order to become straight, and those that just show their vanity(such as Paula Abdul), Brüno (as well as Borat and Ali G) are not about who Cohen is pretending to be, but who we are. These are movies about the reception foreigners get from Americans. They are about how we present ourselves to those who are different from us. And time and time again, the Brit Cohen shows that we, as Americans, should be embarrassed of ourselves.

First Post

Hello and welcome to More Than Just Reviews, my very first website dedicated towards a specific subject. And what is that subject? Anything entertainment related. That means movies, video games, television shows, music, cool things online, and books. But for the most part this site will focus on movies and gaming.

Of course, as the name implies, this place is not just for a simple "I like it" or "I don't like it". There will be no stars, no numbers or percentage scores. I will not be giving "Two Thumbs Up". Well, actually there are a few reasons I won't be giving "Two Thumbs Up":

1. It's probably copyrighted.

2. Seeing as this is online, and I won't be posting any video blogs(or vlogs as the hipsters might call it), it would have to be a hypothetical two thumbs up anyway. Unless for some reason I actually decided to hold up my thumbs while typing on this keyboard.

3. Considering Siskel is dead and Ebert can't speak, I don't even think anybody uses that system anymore.

Anyway, before I digress, back to my original point. Actually, I'll digress once more to inform everyone that I'll be digressing in a lot of my posts, so get used to it.

As I was saying this blog will be more critiques than simply reviews. For instance, I may think a movie is technically good, and not enjoy it all. I may go into my personal experience watching the movie, which may have nothing to do with the quality of the film whatsoever.

Finally, on occasion I might go on rants regarding thoughts I've had about different forms of media. There may be a post on one of the dozens of controversial issues in video games, or where I think the music industry will be in a decade from now.

However, when I do decide to write a film or video game review(which should be the bulk of this site), I'm going to put it into four categories. New Release will be a movie in theaters, or a game that came out in the last few months. Recent Release will be a movie out on DVD or playing on premium cable, or a game for a current generation of consoles. That will be for something that's roughly 1/2-3 years old. Classic will be anything older than a recent release, and Revisited will refer to a movie or game that I've watched or played before.

Obviously, all of these posts reflect my own opinion. Even though I regularly read other entertainment websites, please don't accuse me of plagiarism, because there will be some views I express on this page that no one else would even think about, let alone dare mention. And that is why I hope you will give me the time of day to care about what I have to say, even though there are thousands of other blogs writing about the same things, with even more self-righteous writers.