Anyway, number one is a multi-layered issue that has many caveats but includes both plot points and general issues taken with the movie so bear with me.
First and foremost, I have to say that the one thing that all the directors, producers, and makers of these movies do extraordinarily well is casting. Sure, Harry, Ron and Hermione are good. But Snape and McGonagall are PERFECT. Even I can't complain about the casting. And they did a fantastic job with Dumbledore initially (Richard Harris, rest in peace) and in terms of appearance, I thought Michael Gambon was a fine replacement. Gambon, however, just doesn't do it for me. I've always imagined Dumbledore possessing a truly incomparable demeanor of patience, gentleness, and understanding afforded only to those of the greatest comprehension and superiority. That being said, Dumbledore also possesses a ferocity of spirit not easily found in your average Wizard. First of all every time he enters a battle I get chills and imagine it's like Peyton Manning playing in a 7th & 8th grade football game, CC Sabathia in a little league game, or Landon Donovan in a PeeWee soccer game. You get the point. He's a superhero in a world already filled with magical powers; that's impressive. But what's more is the combination of these two feats. Dumbledore is both a man of supreme power and paramount importance to the Wizarding world and a man with unparalleled compassion and wisdom. The fusion of these two things into one person presents the ultimate champion of good, or in other words the ultimate hero(sure Harry is a hero, and our protagonist, but that doesn't detract from Dumbledore's heroism). Perhaps from an archetypal perspective, he fulfills more of a mentor or teacher role, but I'm hesitant to don him that only because of his active badassness. Anyway, ok, we all know Dumbledore is sweet, get to the point. Gambon, or Yates, or someone in charge of his behavior is doing something wrong. In a book where Dumbledore becomes most vulnerable, both physically and more importantly, emotionally (in his relationship with Harry), why is he portrayed as aloof, distracted, distant? Gambon doesn't inspire in me the bone chilling, hair-standing-on-the-back-of-my-neck confidence that JKR's Albus Dumbledore does, and it is extremely upsetting to me. The relationship in HBP was very poorly developed, failing to show Dumbledore's disappointment in Harry when he faltered in obtaining Slughorn's memory as well as the continued expressions of love the Dumbledore gives Harry, or in other words, actively reaffirming both his own (Dumbledore's) greatest strength as well as the most important fundamental difference between Harry and Voldemort. I can't help but remember reading the books and feeling a lurch in my stomach when Dumbledore is disappointed in Harry or a surge of pride when he gives out a compliment. Every time Dumbledore says one of those things like, "Well, I have the benefit of being quite clever," or something along those lines, I laughed hysterically, because what is funnier than this cockiness disguised as false modesty in the most powerful wizard of all time? (NOTHING). The movies fail to make me chortle at Dumbledore's humor. Remember when Dumbledore is on the tower, likely aware of his certain death, and yet he still maintains all the etiquette not usually afforded by the Death Eaters? Just another little thing that makes him so utterly worthy of our respect. Finally, I sobbed when Dumbledore fell to his death, reading through blurry eyes with the same hope that Harry clung to... Impossible. The movie failed to move me to any emotion whatsoever, for I never loved Dumbledore in the movies as I did in the books. And that's not fair.
As you can see, that's a lot about Dumbledore in general, and across all of the movies so far. The second point about Dumbledore is specific to HBP. I think most of you probably know what's coming, because it was the single biggest and most unnecessary plot flaw in the entire movie.
"He looked around at Dumbledore, who gestured him to retreat. Harry backed away, drawing his wand as he did so. The door burst open and somebody erupted through it and shouted, 'Expelliarmus!' Harry's body became instantly rigid and immobile, and he felt himself fall back against the tower wall, propped like an unsteady statue, unable to move or speak. ... Dumbledore had wordlessly immobilized Harry, and the second he had taken to perform the spell had cost him the chance of defending himself" (HBP, p. 584).
There was no idiotic shhh from Snape's finger over his mouth and Harry did not just wait idly beneath the stairs for one of his last remaining profound emotional connections with an adult to be severed by yet another murder at the hands of Death Eaters. This is Harry Potter we're talking about here. I don't need to remind you, but I will, that he has mindlessly, though bravely, rushed into every dangerous situation the Wizarding world has to offer. Even this stupid ass movie added its own proof of this; Harry rushes into some British Open weeds or hay or something after Bellatrix LeStrange despite explicitly being told not to go anywhere and likely walking right into a trap (something that doesn't even happen in the book and allows for the Burrow to falsely be blown up; also, it's worth noting that nothing comes of this chase either. They just disappear and the Burrow is on fire. Nice). Yet they expect us to believe that he would just sit by as Malfoy and Snape, his two MOST HATED enemies since he became a wizard killed his mentor, friend, and idol...??? NOT LIKELY. Again, I find myself trying first to control my breathing as I think about this, and then trying to at least attempt to determine why the makers of this felt this mindless failure to adhere to the important details of the books would benefit their viewers. And with this one, the reason that this gets the Number 1 Reason why Harry Potter Movies could and should be better, is because I can't think of any reason to change this, particularly in light of the fact that you've already established Harry's recklessness earlier in THIS movie. If you can think of a reason, please let me know.
Anyway, I hope you like the Top 10 and please feel free to share with any and everyone. I'm gonna post a less fleshed out Honorable Mention list later. Thanks for reading. Comments encouraged.
whoa, thats a pretty big mistake there, I still havent seen this, but if the movie really made that change then they screwed up, and basically created a huge plot hole, because Harry is meant to feel guilty for dumbledore's death, and can only take solace in the fact that he was immobilized and couldnt possibly do anything to prevent the death. In this continuity, harry sounds like a pussy, and hides under some stairs.
ReplyDeleteThe reasoning behind this is probably that the director wants to put his own interpretation to the scene, because i remember after reading it, I didnt really know what was going on. Was dumbledore pleading with snape to not kill him, or to kill him? Its intended to be ambiguous, and for the director to purposefully make it clearer is BS.
I too was shocked by the omission of Dumbledore's petryifying spell over Harry at the climax of the film, as well as his manners to the Death Eaters who were about to kill him. Dumbeldore's unflappibility and total lack of fear of death is an essential part of his character and what makes him so appealing as a character.
ReplyDeleteIncluding the spell also would have been a nice touch for one other reason. In part in Hagrid's hut when Harry is trying to get the memory out of Slughorn, I think the film made a nice addition (not in the book) of Lily giving Professor Slughorn a charmed fish. It vanished on the night when she was murdered, because when the person who casts a spell dies, their magic dies with them. If they had included the spell Dumbledore placed on Harry, that too would have been broken and been a very nice/subtle bookend to the earlier spell Slughorn had seen destroyed.
Though I frown upon any movie additions, an excellent point.
ReplyDeletewell said, nick the closeted nerd... i especially like the part in the movie when dumbledore remarks to harry (and im paraphrasing), "you look just as you did when you first started hogwarts" and harry says back, "so do you, sir" uuuuh FALSE, you are a NO richard harris, sister... is what he should have said
ReplyDeletei would also like to add that jim broadbent was preeeeeetty pretty good as slughorn.
Great, great post Nick. While I become happy when reminded of parts of the book that I had forgotten, it in turn, only makes me sadder about the films themselves. Oh, well. I guess we all just learn a lesson that's been known for years.. a great book is , just that, a great book. It's not a great book awaiting movie transformation...
ReplyDeleteif anyone, we should blame Peter Jackson and others who have made such amazing adaptations that we begin to assume them as the norm.
-Max