It is difficult to review a movie adapted from a beloved book because it is so hard to forget the book, so hard not to make comparisons. It helps to recognize and accept that 870 pages could never be fully realized in little more than two hours. But there are always things you could wish the filmmakers had done.
If you have neither read the books nor watched any of the previous Harry Potter installments, “Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix” is not the place to start. The movie may be a long 138 minutes, but the fast pace leaves little time for a “previously in the Harry Potter movies” montage.
Perhaps the influence of new director David Yates, and new screenwriter Michael Goldenberg, (“Order of the Phoenix”) excels at reducing J.K. Rowling’s complex story to its essential parts and tying those together with smooth and believable transitions. Sometimes that meant changing things from the way they happened in the book — though fans of the books will not like and will possibly lament every change, they are necessary for the sake of time. The hope is that they are done well and with respect to the continuing saga. As is the case in this film.
After the death of his friend Cedric Diggory and the rebirth of Lord Voldemort at the end of “Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire,” Harry is in a dark place emotionally in “Order of the Phoenix.” This darkness is exacerbated by his friends’ lack of communication over the summer holidays, his new ability to feel Voldemort’s feelings and dream Voldemort’s dreams, and the Ministry of Magic’s refusal to believe that Voldemort has indeed returned.
The last two complaints set up the movement of the story: Voldemort has not revealed himself to the general public yet because he is searching for something — a thing that Harry, through an almost psychic connection with Voldemort, can feel the importance of and sense the location of. As for the Ministry of Magic, they are in such deep denial that rather than believe Harry, they turn on both him and Professor Dumbledore, sending the sadistic Dolores Umbridge to be the new Defense Against the Dark Arts teacher and to ultimately take control of Hogwarts for the Ministry.
One of the film’s strengths is the tightness of the script. Very little feels extraneous or purely gratuitous. The only two exceptions were Harry’s flight over the Thames with the Aurors, who escort him to the headquarters of Dumbledore’s Order of the Phoenix, and Harry’s “relationship” with Cho Chang. The flight over the Thames is an obvious bit of gratuitous computer antics, but Cho? Yes. That story line doesn’t really move the plot along, so it feels as if it is added just because people want to see Harry kiss a girl.
Yates shows a maturity in this Harry Potter that the previous directors did not have: “Order of the Phoenix” was able to achieve a good balance with the computer animation. The previous films seemed so enamored of the way computer animation could bring the fascinating details of Rowling’s imagination to life, that those things dominated the pictures, distracting from the storytelling. In this film, the computer animation seems finally to be doing its proper job: supporting the story.
As Dolores Umbridge, Imelda Staunton gives this movie’s prime villain great nuance. Though never made explicit, slight pauses, twitches and moments taken to adjust herself hint at a complex character who, however misguided, feels she must do terrible things to prove herself.
In a fascinating reversal, Snape, played to perfection by Alan Rickman, is almost a good guy in this film. Umbridge is externally his polar opposite — Pepto Bismol pink where he is black, squeaky clean where he is greasy and all smiles where he is eternally glowering. However, inside she is darker by far: actually physically tormenting her students where Snape merely derides them. She may be the darkest character this side of Voldemort himself.
The supporting cast of the Harry Potter films is always amazing: Emma Thompson as Trelawney, Gary Oldman as Sirius Black, Jason Isaacs as Lucius Malfoy, Robbie Coltrane as Hagrid, Maggie Smith as McGonagall, and the list goes on. They are all so good that one can’t help feeling that they are each underutilized. Most of these wonderful actors are on the screen for fewer than five minutes each.
A new and noteworthy addition to the cast is Helena Bonham Carter as Bellatrix LeStrange. Carter is an excellent actress; however, her portrayal of Bellatrix seems rather stiff of limb, as if she confused Bellatrix with her Frankenstein’s bride. She seems to have heard the word “mechanical” when the better direction would have been “maniacal.”
Though in the books, Voldemort does come off as a bit over-the-top in his mannerisms and speeches, when Ralph Fiennes portrays him this way he seems cartoonish. If one hasn’t read the book, this could be interpreted as bad acting. Onscreen, Voldemort would be more effective played with more subtlety. This seems more a flaw in directing than in Fiennes’ acting.
And how did Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson and Rupert Grint fare? Pretty well, this go round. Emma Watson has always been the strongest actor of the three, and this time was no different. Radcliffe and Grint seem to have benefited well from their excursions into other acting ventures in the two years between “Goblet of Fire” and “Order of the Phoenix.” Though they still exhibit some of their former stiffness, they are learning the art of nuance.
The film has everything: emotional highs and heart crushing lows, moments of breathless tension and moments of much-needed laughter. It even has a jump-out-of-your-seat and scream-out-loud moment. Yet, though the last battle is exciting, well crafted and executed with triumph and poignancy, it didn’t give Harry, Ron, Hermione, Ginny, Neville and Luna their due: They put up a much better fight in the book.
But when the credits roll, it is to applause for a job well done, by Harry and his friends, and by the filmmakers.
(Three and a half stars out of four.)
Guest movie reviewer Amanda Brooks can be reached at 737-1056 and
abrooks@lompocrecord.com.