Who hates Harry Potter

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (M), 153 minutes. Director: David Yates. Starring: Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, Rupert Grint, Michael Gambon, Jim Broadbent, Alan Rickman, Bonnie Wright, Tom Felton

I was an 18-year-old casual bookseller when the fourth Harry Potter book came out. Until that point the series had passed me by. Gradually I was persuaded by a trusted associate to ignore the hype, give the books a go and judge them on their own merits. I have since read all the books, and seen all the movies to date, always with that advice in mind.

The rule seems to be that one's attitude to the saga should be either obsession, derision, or toal lack of interest. If that's true, I'm in a minority: I am an equivocal fan. A few of the books are great, particularly early in the seven-volume series. A couple are average. At least one is bloody awful.

Likewise, the film versions have been hit and miss. The first two were slavishly, tediously recreated by director Chris Columbus. Films four (dir. Mike Newell) and five (David Yates) overcame the narrative bloat of the source material (by that stage, it was as if no one bothered to edit the novels any more), but the stories suffered from being thus decimated.

Only film three, The Prisoner of Azkaban, directed by wonderful Mexican filmmaker Alfonso Cuarón and based on the series' best book, managed to be both a faithful adaptation and a great film in its own right.

Film six, The Half-Blood Prince is, like its literary namesake, problematic. The series builds towards a prophesied David and Goliath showdown between Harry (Radcliffe), student at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry, and the evil and formidable Lord Voldemort. The first 90 per cent of The Half-Blood Prince is a set-up for the final gripping few scenes, which in turn merely provide the catalyst for the climactic events of the next and final installment, The Deathly Hallows. In short, the film, like the book, is a glorified stop-gap.

In fact, without giving too much away, The Half-Blood Prince contains the most important and shocking plot development since Harry first learned about his magical roots. But other than that, not much happens. 

What we do get during Harry's sixth year at Hogwarts is a preponderance of exposition (less so in film than in book), thanks to a few tumbles into author J. K. Rowling's most tedious of contrivances, a magical memory-viewer/flashback device known as the 'pensieve'.

There are a few cards held close to the chest. School bully Draco Malfoy (Felton) has something more serious in the works than his usual schoolyard harassment. Whatever it is, brooding Professor Snape (Rickman) has something to do with it — his loyalties remain questionable. These sinister elements help sustain the intrigue.

There is also entertainment of the teen drama variety. Harry's best mates Ron (Grint) and Hermione (Watson) have that whole love-hate thing going on. And Harry has feelings for Ron's sister Ginny (Wright), who is already spoken for. The humour and angst evoked lend a touch of mundane reality to the magical proceedings.

So why the lack of other goings-on? Well, Harry has been tasked by Dumbledore (Gambon), the eccentric headmaster, with a deceptively difficult mission. He must win the trust of old sycophant Professor Slughorn (Broadbent) in order to gain possession of a certain memory that contains the key to Voldemort's power.

Until he succeeds, the plot cannot move forwards. So it stagnates. The frustrating thing is that the obvious solution to Harry's dilemma lies in a plot device, a good luck potion, that is introduced very early on. God knows why he takes so long to use it — the film could have been an hour shorter.

One point of intrigue that the film fails to capitalise on pertains to the title character. His name is scrawled across the nameplate of a second-hand textbook that Harry obtains in his potions class. This mysterious 'Half-Blood Prince' has scribbled tips and corrections throughout the book. These help Harry excel in the class.

But the textbook also has a corrupting, corrosive effect on Harry. There's something not right about its previous owner, and the film fails to capture the import of this. Again without giving too much away, half-baking this aspect of the story could also bear on how powerfully one of the series' central redemptive character arcs will play out.