‘Half-Blood Prince’ not perfect, but close (4.5/5)

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince

Starring: Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, Rupert Grint.
Directed By: David Yates.
Rating: PG for scary images, some violence, language and mild sensuality.
Running time: 2 hours, 33 minutes.

I’ll admit my bias: I’ve been a Harry Potter fan for fully half my life. I was actually the same age as Harry for the first three books, until series author J.K. Rowling iced her speedy hand and took longer than a year to write and publish each novel.

The movies have always been subpar to the series. It’s to be expected, as Rowling has delivered arguably the most rich, complex and loved young adult series of all time. Having said that, “Half-Blood Prince” strikes as close to perfect as any of the films have thus far. There are notable and at times shocking variations from the book, and while these will no doubt sting like a sectumsempra charm to the 2005 novel lovers, they can almost be forgiven by the fantastic acting by ALL of the actors and the acute melancholy Rowling increasingly infuses each year at Hogwarts caught by returning director David Yates (“Order of the Phoenix”).

I was a little nervous upon hearing that screenwriter Steve Kloves was returning. His adaptations of “Sorcerer’s Stone” and “Chamber of Secrets” worked well under director Chris Columbus, as both kept to the lighthearted atmosphere omnipresent in the first two works. “Prisoner of Azkaban,” my favorite of the books, suffered through his script (mostly thanks to director Alfonso Cuarón), but “Goblet of Fire” hit such a bipolar note in terms of ranging from dark to just plain corny that Kloves’ absence in “Order of the Phoenix” was notable and needed.

But, maybe a little refresher was all he needed. Kloves and Yates created a fantastic film in “Half-Blood Prince,” with good dialogue and excellent pacing, and I cannot wait to watch it again.

A major addition to the behind-the-camera crew, though, was cinematographer Bruno Delbonnel. If you have seen “Across the Universe,” then you are already familiar with his work. Delbonnel keeps the audience visually involved through dark hallway conversations and firey encounters to the highly anticipated Quidditch match.

The stars of the film, Daniel Radcliffe (Harry), Emma Watson (Hermione) and Rupert Grint (Ron), have finally grown into their roles. It’s almost painful to go back and watch the first few movies (the term “flat acting” is almost a compliment). “Half-Blood Prince” shows the trio at last appearing truly natural in their roles, making me even more excited for “The Deathly Hallows.”

Tom Felton does an excellent job as the tortured Draco Malfoy, and it was great to finally have Draco’s screen time nearly match his book appearances.

Other notable actors were Bonnie Wright as Ginny Weasley, Alan Rickman as Severus Snape, Jim Broadbent as Professor Slughorn, and, of course, Michael Gambon as Albus Dumbledore. Too, the portrayal of 11-year-old Tom Riddle by Hero Fiennes-Tiffin (nephew to Voldemort actor Ralph Fiennes) will leave many with chills up their spine.

Despite the brilliant acting, it did seem that budding relationships and raging hormones overshadowed some of the key plot points — for example, I think many would have been happier with more Tom Riddle and less Lavender Brown.

The film has its fair share of memorable scenes — from Katie Bell’s curse, to felix felicus, to the Burrow and the Dumbledore/Harry scene near the finale — but in the end, the movie is a true compilation of talents from every angle. It is apparent that everyone involved gave their all to bring Rowling’s sixth installment to the big screen.

There will be a lot of fans disappointed by the changed scenes — and, while there were a few very important bits left out that maybe shouldn’t have been left out, it’s also important to realize that the film is an adaptation and cannot mimic the novel precisely. In the end, it must be viewed as a movie and as a supplement to the books. In fact, I hope now, as I have always hoped with this film series, that the movies will only encourage people to read what is perhaps one of the most significant literary achievements in the past several decades.

4 1/2 of 5 stars