Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows pt 2

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows pt 2

The finale like its protagonist is a redeemer.

Last film is one of the best.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows part 1 suffered from summarizing way too much plot, and really should have been expanded to two films - making the concluding book adaptation a trilogy - but given they decided to do it in two, it's best they made the first part the overstuffed one, because that freed up Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows part 2 to be the worthy climax we all wanted.

With a few of the horcruxes destroyed, Harry and friends set out to destroy the rest - which leads them back to Hogwarts, and a final showdown with Lord Voldemort and his army, who lay siege to the castle.

Finally we get epic fantasy that is less Chronicles of Narnia, and more Lord of the Rings. And, best of all, everything holds together well. There are only a few small plot holes (unlike part 1, which was rife with them), and generally everything makes sense. Granted, it's all a little predictable, but at lest it's dazzling enough that that doesn't matter so much - besides, most of the series' fans also read the books, so there wasn't going to be much room for surprises anyway.

The Good: 

• All the major plot lines are resolved

The Bad:

• A bit predictable

Pairing: Blood orange shandies and Reese's cups (10 points if you get why)

The Verdict:
**** out of *****

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows pt 1

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows pt 1

Worst film in the series... unfortunately there's no way to skip it

Harry and friends running aimlessly through
some foggy woods. Very apropos.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows is not a short book. At over 600 pages, no two hour film (or two and a half hour film in this case), could possibly do it justice. So the producers wisely chose to spit it into two films. Unfortunately, it's still not enough. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows part 1 probably makes sense if you've read the book - but as is, it's a choppy mess. The film opens with the muggle world completely upended - people going into hiding and basically living in what seems like a war zone. When did this happen? What's going on? Who knows - it's never adequately explained... though the conclusion we are supposed to draw is that at some point Voldemort declared war on the muggle world to get Harry.

But it doesn't stop there. The protagonists, Harry, Ron, and Hermione, move from scene to scene with amazing rapidity, and little explanation. Character's motivations are often inadequately explained, and almost no scene in the movie makes sense if you spend too much time thinking about it. Things happen for no reason, and to top it off, the main characters - who have been through a lot at this point -  act unbelievably stupidly, walking into traps, following ghost deers, and stripping naked and jumping in frozen lakes without telling anyone what they're doing. There's also a ton of amazing coincidences. Finding inscriptions in books like and just knowing they're important, teleporting (what's the point of magic trains and broomsticks anymore) to just the right place next to the lake with the relic they seek by accident... the list goes on and on.

Evidently, even split into two long films, still too much ended up on the cutting room floor. The deleted scenes, available on the DVD elucidate some of the plot holes - but not nearly enough. Unfortunately there's no way to skip this film - it's part one of a two parter, and as bad as it is seeing a disjointed two-and-a-half-hour film, walking into part two without seeing this one first would be ill-advised.

The Good: 

• School's out - things get real
• The effects and cinematography are top-notch, as is the acting. In fact, nearly everything that did make it into the film is fantastic.

The Bad:

• It's a patchwork quilt of scenes strung together. If you're new to the series, don't even think of starting here.
• Hermione comes across as a total b*** in this one.

Pairing: Order a whole pizza... you're gonna need it!

The Verdict:
*** out of *****

Harry Potter and the Order of the Half-Blood Prince

Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix

One of the best HP films, but also one of the most frustrating

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince poster

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince opens with some mysterious forces of darkness destroying a bridge on the Thames for apparently no reason. Maybe it's explained in the books, but if so, the movie omits even a hint of an explanation.

The unexplained destruction of the bridge is just the first of many such plot points in the film. The title refers to the owner of Harry's potions textbook, which is filled with notes on advanced spells that allows him to excel in that class, but later Ginny and Harry decide the book is bad - and there's no explanation for that, nor why rather than destroy it they decide to hide it.

There are many more examples, but you get the idea. Anyway, the film concerns Harry's attempt to stop Draco Malfoy, who he believes is working for Voldemort, but under Snape's protection. When Snape is named the new Defense Against the Dark Arts teacher, we know he's going to be the villain du jour.

And that's what makes this one of the best films. With Dumbledore directly involved we finally see some high-level magic employed. There's still a lot of teenage romance, and Quidditch matches, but we also get a lot more magic and destruction.

The Good: 

• The stakes continue to rise. For the first time the series seems to flirt with real danger
• The look of the film is much darker thanks to cinematographer Bruno Delbonnel (making it the only HP film nominated for a Best Cinematography Oscar)

The Bad:

• Harry seems a little tangentially involved in what is more about Dumbledore vs. Voldemort
• Rowling seems determined to pair Harry with Ginny and Hermione get with Ron

The Verdict:
**** out of *****

Halloween (2018)

Halloween (2018)

Halloween movie poster

In 1978, Halloween kicked off the slasher genre. And, while it remains the single best example of the genre, the same cannot be said for its many dreadful sequels and reboots. Beyond spotty, the franchise, like its iconic villain Michael Myers, refuses to die, yet keeps coming back like a flat, emotionless, and often terrible stalker.

For the films' 40th anniversary, it is reboot once again, with a sequel to the original that wisely chooses to ignore all the intervening films. But is it successful? Sort of.

The good part here is that the film reunites Jamie Lee Curtis reprising her role as Laurie Strode with Nick Castle, the original Michael Myers, and writer/director John Carpenter back as Executive Producer, creative consultant, and of course music composer.

The rest of the cast is merely adequate, with some odd casting choices, like Judy Greer as Strode's daughter

The film is pretty much a direct homage to the original, with a lot of references to that film, including some shot-for-shot recreations. In some ways it relies a little too much on this slavish loyalty to the original, yet it is the complete opposite of that film in one crucial way. It lacks a master like Carpenter at the helm. Carpenter's original was filled with tension, with the killing coming after a long buildup. This film however is long on on-screen killing and gore, almost from the get-go, but short on suspense.

Still, given how low the bar has gone with this franchise in the past, we'll take it.

The Good:

• Jamie Lee Curtis as an older, damaged Laurie Strode is outstanding
• Carpenter's signature musical score

The Bad:

• Lacks the jolts of Carpenter's original; to some extent Wes Craven's Scream is a better homage
• If you have a prisoner who is ONLY known for killing people on Halloween, why for the love of God do you choose to transport him between facilities on October 30th?
• If Laurie moved to a new house, how did Michael know where to find her?

Stuff to watch for:

• probably the only mainstream film to reference Repo Man
• references to every other Halloween film even as it ignores them

Pairing: Popcorn and Apple Cider

The Verdict:

***1/2 out of *****

Halloween (1978)

Many movies are good for Halloween. But one film is Halloween...

Halloween

Halloween movie poster

Halloween changed everything. There are few films that have had as great an impact on the genre.

The story is painfully simple, an escaped lunatic returns to terrorize his old neighborhood on Halloween night. And, while the escaped lunatic story is a time-honored tradition predating the film medium itself, never has it been more effectively presented.

To be fair, the film is a tad bit dated (it predates M.A.D.D. and Nancy Reagan's "Just Say No" campaign big time); and the acting by some of the supporting characters is horrendous - (the children are better actors than some of the teenagers here). But some of the acting is quite excellent - we all know how it launched the career of Jamie Lee Curtis (heir to her mother's scream queen crown) - but also noteworthy is the performance of Donald Pleasence as Dr. Loomis, the relentless and compassionless counterpoint to killer Michael Myers; Loomis will stop at nothing to see Michael stopped, hippocratic oath be damned!

Halloween has a pretty long buildup by modern standards. But all of that is worth it for the last white knuckle twenty minutes, which is some of the scariest, edge-of-your-seat storytelling on celluloid. It's noteworthy that for most of the film, a majority of the characters are totally unaware of the danger, and despite the film's reputation as the King of Slasher movies, there is actually a very minimal amount of gore here.

Other things to watch for in Halloween:

- John Carpenter created and composed the "stalk and kill" theme music imitated by so many, it's performed by the Bowling Green Philharmonic (John and his friends)

- the one popular song of the day used in the film is "Don't Fear the Reaper" by Blue Öyster Cult, it fits this film like a glove - and the scene where it plays will make you chuckle

- The Thing (later remade by Carpenter) and Forbidden Planet are prominently featured on TVs throughout the movie

- Can you pick out the characters named after characters in Hitchcock films?

- another classic Cadillac to watch for in this one - this time a black Fleetwood

***** out of *****

Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix

Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix

The series begins its struggle to adapt increasingly longer books

Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix poster

The Harry Potter series maintained a mostly upward trajectory across the first quartet of films, but with Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, the series feels like it's hit a plateau.

In his fifth year at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry, Harry is haunted by dreams of Lord Voldemort. The Ministry of Magic has assigned the school a new Defense Against the Dark Arts teacher, nobody believes that Voldemort has returned, and the students have to study for their all-important "OWL" exams.

If this sounds a bit run-of-the-mill... well, it kind of is. But the story isn't without some high notes. Dolores Umbridge, the aforementioned Dark Arts teacher is one of the more interesting antagonists we've seen. All the authority of the Dursley's, but with actual teeth to back up her oppression of Harry. Another highlight comes in the form of Cho Chang, a new potential love interest for Harry.

But overall it seems like the film is struggling to squeeze the book in. For example, at one point Umbridge is believed to have met her fate, but at the end a newspaper reveals she has been removed from her position by the Ministry with no adequate explanation as to how she survived. To top it off, Voldemort's annual return and traditionally vague evil plans are starting to get repetitive that they threaten to turn him into a joke villain.


The Good: 

• Cho Chang provides a long-needed (non-Hermione) love interest

The Bad:

• Some of the returning villains like Filch and Voldemort almost seem comical at times
• Hagrid's half brother Grawp is a bad CGI note in an otherwise mostly good effects symphony

Stuff to watch for:

• Warwick Davis (his appearances still steal the scene)

Pairing: a bowl of Cheerios ("Cheeri-Owls")

The Verdict:
***1/2 out of *****

The Paperboy

The Paperboy

Possibly the most underrated film of the 2010s

The Paperboy movie poster

The Paperboy premiered at the Cannes Film Festival in in May of 2012, where it was widely panned. It suffered such critical contempt that it never got more than a limited release in the U.S., and to this day it has only a 44% critic and 33% audience rating on review aggregator Rotten Tomatoes.

All those reviewers are wrong.

The film had it's admirers - and not insignificant ones either. The Guardian, and Roger Ebert to name a couple. But they were few and far between. Yet only a year later, UK paper The Daily Telegraph did a complete 180 when it re-reviewed the film upon its general release a year later. It was also nominated for a boatload of awards the year after it's festival premiere. What accounts for this?

We can only speculate. What we do know is that between 2012 and 2013 streaming services (Netflix in particular) began to seriously cut into Hollywood's bottom line resulting in an almost complete emphasis on tentpole special effects films in 2013. Overnight the smaller, stranger dramas like The Paperboy became a rarity - that alone may have warranted the reappraisal.

But the initial ire was likely because of just how sleazy a film The Paperboy is in comparison to both mainstream Hollywood, and the Indie Arthouse world. From at least the late 60s to the mid 90s this was familiar territory for film - from Beyond the Valley of the Dolls to Se7en, there were films exploring the sleazy underbelly of America. But sometime around the turn of the millennium movies became so sanitized that a film like The Paperboy landed like a bomb. And bomb it did, making back only about 10% of it's already modest budget.

But what it delivers is worth checking out - a hot mess of a film set in the corrupt courtrooms, backwater bayous, dim motel rooms, and bright sand beaches of Florida that follows a trio of small town newspapermen, and a prison groupie looking into the suspicious conviction of a lowlife swamp-dweller for the murder of a dictatorial good-ole-boy sheriff, and the predictable downward spiral their lives take once they meet. Think of The Big Easy crossed with Blue Velvet, and you get some idea of what you're in for.

The Good: 

• Nicole Kidman deserves an Oscar for this one

The Bad:

• The mystery takes a back seat to just about everything else in the film

Stuff to watch for:

• vintage cars and soundtrack

Pairing: double rum daiquiris

The Verdict:
***1/2 out of *****

Searching

Searching

Searching movie poster

When a teenage girl goes missing, her distraught father goes searching for her. The film's title is well chosen - when most of us encounter the word "searching", it's because we're trying to find files on our computer, and Searching's central conceit is that it's told entirely through computer screen shots. As such, it's a whole new twist on the "found footage" genre, as it occurs not through archival tape, but in real time.

After losing his 44 year old wife to cancer, single father David Kim wakes up one morning to discover his daughter never came home the previous night. When he's unable to reach her anywhere he finally calls the police. However, when he begins looking through his daughter's social media accounts, he begins to realize there's a lot he didn't know about his little girl.

Searching is far more entertaining than you'd expect from a film primarily made up of Google searches and Facetime calls. Kind of like a computer nerd version of Taken.

The Good: 

• enough plot twists to keep you on your toes

The Bad:

• not everyone's going to be able to enjoy a film where no two people are ever in the same room

Stuff to watch for:

• numerous Internet in-jokes and references; watch all the nearby posts and comments on screen

Pairing: hot tea

The Verdict:
**** out of *****

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire

While Prisoner of Azkaban gets all the attention, Goblet may be even better

As previously mentioned, the Harry Potter films didn't really take off until the third film, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban. But that film wasn't without its problems - namely, it drags along in the first half, and seems saddled with a plot that isn't fully fleshed out and thus at times confusing. It's also got a lot of missed opportunities: we never actually understand much about how and why Sirius knew when to break out - and for a film with 'Azkaban' in the title, it would've been nice to see the actual prison, if not the prison break itself.

This time out we get Harry competing with three other wizards in the Tri-Wizard Challenge (the reason for there being four wizards in a tri-wizard challenge is explained in the film). But like all the Harry Potter films, there is more to the challenge than meets the eye; once again sinister forces are at work behind the scenes, and it's up to Harry, Ron, and Hermione to figure things out.

The taut script here doesn't have the the plot holes of Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, which is why I rate it somewhat higher.


The Good: 

• More action than past films
• Here there be dragons!
• David Tennant joins the cast

The Bad:

• why was Fleur back in the contest after failing the underwater challenge?

Stuff to watch for:

• Warwick Davis (again!)
• the band the Weird Sisters (a supergroup created for the film) brings some long overdue rock to the series

Pairing: a big plate of hot wings

The Verdict:
**** out of *****

Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban

Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban

If you only watch one Harry Potter film - it should be this one.

Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban poster

The first couple Harry Potter films are fun, but never really get as good as you hope they will. Then someone had the bizarre persuading Alfonso Cuaron, who had just gotten a lot of attention for making the sexually explicit Y Tu Mama Tambien, to direct the third film. Well, it worked. Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban is a darker, more grown up film, which is probably appropriate as the "kids" move into high school age.

The story involves a murderous wizard escaping from Azkaban (wizard jail), with his sites set on killing Harry. Hogwarts goes into full lock down mode, when Harry learns that the prisoner, one Sirius Black, is responsible for his parents death, he goes looking for trouble.

The film still follows much of the Harry Potter blueprints so far, so if you liked the previous films, you'll like this one, and if you didn't like the first two, the slightly better story here still isn't going to be enough to convert you. Still if you only see one Harry Potter film, this might be the one to watch.


The Good: 

• more great actors - this time Gary Oldman and Emma Thompson join the cast
• a seamless transition from the deceased Richard Harris to Michael Gambon as Dumbledore

The Bad:

• if magic alone weren't enough of a crutch, this one relies on time travel too 
• Rowling still has terribly cliched names for characters. There's a Mr. Lupin in this, and someone is a werewolf... I wonder who?
• At one point Snape gets blasted from a room by Harry, and then doesn't show back up for quite some time, and Harry suffers no repercussions for it

Stuff to watch for:

• Warwick Davis and Julie Christie in bit parts
• Why are all the pumpkins in the pumpkin patch already cut?
• Sadly, this was the last Harry Potter film with a John Williams score

Pairing: a cup of tea, or a large brandy

The Verdict:
**** out of *****

Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets

Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets

A worthy sequel

Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets poster

In the second Harry Potter film, Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, director Chris Columbus takes us back once again to Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry.

The film opens with Harry, once again, living under virtual house arrest at the Dursley's. There he's visited by Dobby, a "house elf" that tries to stop him from returning to Hogwarts. After Uncle Vernon literally locks and bars Harry in his room, the Weasley's show up in a flying car to break him out.

A number of obstacles block Ron Weasley and Harry from getting back to school, but eventually they do, and the rivalry between Harry and Draco Malfoy heats up with Draco first becoming Slytherin's Quidditch seeker, and later the two chosen to square off in a dueling class.

But eventually a mystery develops as Hogwarts residents start turning up mysteriously petrified, including Hermione, leaving it up to Ron and Harry to try to get to the bottom of things.


The Good: 

• The classically trained British cast is again excellent, and now includes Kenneth Branagh too.
• Again the scenes in Hogwart's Castle are visually stunning with ghosts and magic furnishings.
• Now that Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone got the setup out of the way, Harry gets to have a more full-length adventure

The Bad:

• Dobby is a CGI character that's more sniveling than Gollum with a touch of Jar-Jar Binks-like attempts at comedy. His scenes are a bit irritating, heavy handed, and even cringe-worthy at times, fortunately they are few and far between
• There's a few too many lucky coincidences here, including a literal deus ex machina moment when Ron and Harry are rescued by a benevolent magic car

Stuff to watch for:

• John Cleese's returns as Nearly Headless Nick
• The extended version includes a scene with former Sex Pistol Edward Tudor-Pole
• Richard Harris in his final role (as Dumbledore)

Pairing: Hot tea

The Verdict:
***1/2 out of *****

Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone

Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone

It's better than you remember

Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone movie poster

It's hard to believe it's been almost 20 years(!) since Warner Bros. announced plans to make a movie series based on J.K. Rowling's "Harry Potter" novels.

Although not originally written for any specific age group, Bloomsbury the publisher of the novels, targeted them at the burgeoning young adult market - a huge demographic of Millennials. The result was a runaway success that, along with the long-awaited Lord of the Rings film adaptations revitalized the fantasy genre.

Few film goers haven't seen Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone, but a lot may not have watched it in many years.

Fortunately, the film holds up well all these years later. As the first in the series, HPatSS strength is in the introduction of the viewer to a whole new world. The plot itself - about Harry Potter trying to stop an evil wizard from getting hold of a powerful artifact, (the titular "Sorcerer's Stone"), really takes a backseat to the wonder and majesty of the setting, spending more than half of its two hour and forty minute running time awing viewers with scenes in and around Hogwarts, Harry's school for wizards, and the various characters and beasts that inhabit it.

Ultimately, that makes the film a bit anti-climactic, with the final half hour of the film devoted to wrapping things up with a couple clunky scenes to allow each of Harry's sidekicks, goody two-shoes witch Hermione, and comic relief buddy Ron, to take the spotlight before Harry's final showdown with the evil wizard (no spoilers, but you probably already know who He-Who-Should-Not-Be-Named is).

Anti-climactic or not, Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone is still magical.


The Good: 

• The acting, by a whole host of classically trained British actors.
• Another highlight is the set design; Hogwart's Castle looks and feels like an amazing place throughout the film.

The Bad:

• The title. The original title used "Philosopher's Stone" which is a real mythological artifact like the Holy Grail or Excalibur. They changed it to "Sorcerer's Stone" for cheap marketing reasons.
• The CGI Harry Potter. Whether fighting a troll, or anytime he's on his broom, was a clumsy and obvious insertion, even at the time.
• The school's pastime Quidditch has to be the dumbest sport ever. There are a bunch of different balls and a whole team of players, but none of that matters because there is only one ball (the "Golden Snitch") and two players ("The Seekers") that matter whichever catches it, their team wins no matter how many points the other team has scored.
• Hermione is already so powerful that one wonders why she's in school at all? She seems more powerful than not only the other kids, but also the professors, and even the main villain of the piece

Stuff to look for:

• John Cleese's Cameo as Nearly Headless Nick
• Warwick Davis, who's made a career of playing dwarves, goblins, and leprechauns

Pairing: Pumpkin Spice Latte. The film came out between Halloween and Christmas, and has that seasonal feel to it.


The Verdict:
***1/2 out of *****