Reviews

Let me start by saying that I am a huge fan of the Harry Potter. I went to the opening midnight screening, and again this morning in order to see the film both in a huge crowd and a tiny one, as that often affects one's reaction to a film. Unfortunately, my reaction at both screenings was disappointment. I am not one that insists that a movie exactly match the book it is based on, but in this instance far, far too much is left out to make the film a great one.

What we do get to see is sketchy, but beautifully done. The special effects are incredible. The music is superb. The acting is, for the most part, very good. Rupert Grint and Emma Watson as Ron & Hermione are especially good. Lord Voldemort, when we finally get to see him toward the end of the film is all you could wish him to be, though his rebirth gets the same short shrift as everything else. The film has humor, action, budding romance, and some real thrills.

What it doesn't have is depth. Almost every single one of the nuances and subplots that, in the books, bring the Hogwart's world to exciting life are absent from the film. Major characters in the book are missing or minimized. Dumbledore is mostly reduced to an uncertain, weak old man. Snapes puts in a minimal appearance. Not enough is done with the Rita Skeeta character, house elves are non-existent as is the Hagrid/giant sub-plot--and the twins have no real reason to be in the film at all. Major plot devices, such as Mad-Eye Moody being supplanted by a polyjuice potion chugging Bertie Crouch Jr., whip by so fast your head spins. In fact, most of the stuff that did make it into the film is touched on only superficially. Overall, if you haven't read the book you won't know what is going on or why in too many scenes. For instance: the reason Hogwarts students were so ticked Harry's name came out of the goblet is glossed over (the film intimates it's because he's thought to have cheated, but no one got bent out of shape when the twins tried to cheat--the Hufflepuff angle is totally ignored); just why Ron is so angry at Harry; why Krum asks Hermione to the ball; why Voldermort's and Harry's wands react the way they do against each other and why the spirits come out of Voldemort's wand; why Mad Eye Moody was replaced; why Nevil Longbottom reacts the way he does to the Cruciatis Curse; etc. etc. etc. etc. In addition, Daniel Radcliffe's acting skills haven't matured along with him and he is outshone by just about everyone else in the film.

I came out of the film--both times!--with a sense of disappointment. The film is OK--but you can see where it could have been great.

All-in-all, this is an "OK" film, but not a great one. Don't go in expecting a lot and you will have a pleasant 2+ hours. i have seen it twice and I give it a 6 out of 10.

WHAT'S RIGHT WITH THE FILM (It might not sound like it, but there is a lot right with this film).

1) Art Direction & Set Decoration. These are SPECTACULAR. Beautifully done and deserving of a nomination.

2) Cinematography. This is really a very beautiful film and artfully done.

3) Emmy Rossum, as Christine, can sing.

4) Patrick Wilson, as Raoul, can sing, too.

4) The Andrew Lloyd Webber score, almost complete, from the stage production. Just a few bits changed or left out.

5) The use of B/W in the film. It opens in B/W, with a grainy "old film" quality that changes to full color when the chandelier comes to life. There are other segments in the film done in B/W, all denoting the here-and-now while color is reserved for the past.

6) The chemistry between Patrick Wilson as Raoul and Emmy Rossum as Christine works well.

WHAT'S WRONG WITH THE FILM.

1) Gerard Butler, who plays the Phantom, can't sing. They should have dubbed him. It's almost painful when he reaches for higher notes--but he doesn't do all that well with the lower ones, either.

2) There's not a lot of chemistry between the Phantom & Christine in this film, and there really needs to be.

3) Minnie Driver just isn't right for the role of Carlotta.

4) Some scenes are rushed through that really need more time: those in which the Phantom is disrupting the Opera or messing with La Carlotta, for example, or when Christine whips that mask off the Phantom--she does it immediately--no hesitation, no fearfulness on her part, just whips it right off.

5) And speaking of that scene, when the Phantom is cursing her for removing his mask there isn't the feeling of rage & anguish from him there should be--sure he moans and holds his face, but one isn't driven to pity as in the stage production.

6) The gorgeous masquerade ball sequence has been reduced to people all wearing shades of black, white & gray, with the exception of Christine's extremely pale pink dress. They're all singing about swirling color...and there is none. When the Phantom enters dressed as the Red Death, his costume is not the fearful, imposing one you expect--this is a "dressed down" Red Death.

7) The falling chandelier has been moved to the very end and is almost off-hand rather than having the enormous impact it should.

8) During the Don Juan sequence toward the end of the movie, after killing Piangi, the Phantom steps out of the alcove looking as he always does!! No cloak, nothing. And yet, no one seems to notice he's not Piangi! Hello! Piangi is a fat oaf & the Phantom looks nothing like him. Even when Christina notices, she doesn't give much reaction.

9) The Phantom's disfigurement isn't all that horrible--a red face, a couple of lumps, some missing hair & a pulled lower eyelid--and when revealed you feel that a lot of fuss was made over not much.

10) Having Raoul, the Phantom & Christine wading around in waist deep water during the last big song was not a bright idea on someone's part...

11) And speaking of that last big song, there was another rushed sequence that deserves better--but I guess when you're waist deep in water you don't feel like hanging around for long.