Already a subscriber? Log in
So, anyway, this is what? The film-makers insist it’s the fifth film, and not the 678th, as I’d suspected. I even said, ‘Come on, it’s the 678th, who are you trying to kid?’, but they wouldn’t be having it. It’s two and a half hours long and, boy, you are so going to know it unless you: 1) are mad for this kind of thing; 2) have some previous understanding of what the hell is going on and 3) aren’t the sort of person who asks yourself questions like: what’s the point of being the foremost boy wizard if you can’t at least magic yourself 20–20 vision? Come on. Even muggles, dumb as they are, can do it with laser surgery now.
The film starts coherently enough, and is actually fun for the first four minutes. It’s the summer holidays so Harry is stuck in Privet Drive with nasty Uncle Vernon and nasty Aunt Petunia and nasty cousin Douglas, and I do, at least, love Vernon and Petunia and Douglas because, cruel as they are, they are also gloriously human and don’t give a fig for the dark arts. But when Harry and Douglas are attacked by ‘dementors’ — don’t ask; don’t know; don’t care — in the local park and Harry fends them off with a ‘Patronus Charm’ he is charged with using magic in front of a muggle and expelled from Hogwarts. Next…oh, I can’t be bothered. Let’s just say that thenceforth it’s all bish, bash, bosh and Voldermort this and Dumbledore that and Hagrid what have you and dark arts and even darker arts and Helena Bonham Carter providing a mad-haired turn obviously based on Mrs Rochester. Traditional drama is usually a three-act deal: set-up, conflict, resolution. But this is the three-act deal every two minutes. Danger, baddie, magic. Danger, baddie, magic. Danger, baddie, magic. It’s as tired as it is tiresome.
I hoped, at least, by this, the 678th film (come on!), Harry’s sap would, at least, be rising, that we might be in for a little HP Sauce. True enough, there is a kiss. He kisses little Cho Chang and it’s quite full-on. Later, Ron and Hermoine interrogate him. ‘What was it like?’ they ask. ‘Wet,’ reveals Harry. What this film needs is less enchantment and more scenes where this trio are simply being teenagers. For all the special effects, the best bits are when they are doing just that, but there aren’t enough of them. I also think this film would have been much improved if Harry had simply taken Hermione behind a bush and shagged the living daylights out of her. She’s up for it, I can tell.
Actually, the acting is quite appalling. While the usual suspects (Gambon; Fiennes; Maggie Smith; Julie Walters, etc.) lazily camp it up, the kids are just awful. I know, I know, Daniel Radcliffe recently proved himself in every way in a West End production of Equus, but here he just either pants or looks on in wide-eyed astonishment. Aside from anything else, you’d think there would be little left to astonish Harry by now, just as there is little left to astonish an audience.
OK, so it’s not my kind of thing, and I was bored. Very bored. Bored stiff. But, again, what do I know? As it is, we don’t even bathe in champagne every Tuesday. We only do it on the third one of every month.
Also in Arts Reviews
Also by Deborah Ross
Latest
Comments
Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just $5 for 3 monthsAlready a subscriber? Log in