Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (Revisit)

The first two Harry Potter films had a lot riding on them, and Director Christopher Columbus is often criticized for lacking an edge to the films. In truth though, it wasn't until the later books that the stories got deeper and the history started building on itself. This was a new venture and the book series was not complete when work on the first movies began. The kids in the story really are kids, not teenagers and so it seems appropriate to make these movies as children's films and establish the universe that the characters will occupy for subsequent stories. This film came after "Adventures in Babysitting", "Home Alone", and "Mrs. Doubtfire", all films that have a comic kids sensibility. He was the right choice to baptize Harry into films and the two movies he made are excellent. They may not be everyone's favorite Potter films, but they are essential and vastly entertaining. 

"Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets "is the second film in the franchise and takes us to the second year at Hogwarts. It continues to build the history of the school, show us an elaborate environment for the story to take place, and gives us another mostly stand alone hero story before the more complex interweaving of the following films. The beloved character of Dobby the house elf is introduced and even though he is primarily a CGI character, he comes to life and endears us in a way that Jar Jar Binks never could. Although Dobby can be annoying, his personality is understood as part of a character forced into a the circumstances that created him. He also is redemptive by the end of the series and was not overused just for laughs. 

A character who appears only in this one film, but dominates the movie (although not the plot) is Gilderoy Lockhart, as depicted by Kenneth Branagh. When I first read the book, and thought of an actor to play this character, Hugh Grant came immediately to mind. The vain, slightly silly and lightweight nature of the character seemed a perfect fit. The trivia on IMDB says that Grant was actually cast but had to withdraw due to a scheduling conflict. Nothing against Hugh Grant, I really enjoy him as an actor, but Kenneth Branagh was perfection in this film. He had the same qualities I mentioned above, but he also plays an unctuousness that I'm not sure Grant could have brought. Lockhart is the real comic relief in the film and he is inserted just enough to justify his presence, even though the character is superfluous to the main story. This is the only Patter film with a post credits sequence and it naturally is a joke about Gilderoy Lockhart. 

While the film is a little more dark in plot line, the photography matches that pretty well while still managing to keep the mostly upbeat tone of the first two books. There are still kids style shenanigans.  and the young actors sometimes over do the mugging for the camera, Radcliffe is stronger in the role as he is moving into the other films, Grint and Watson are a little behind but still better than in the first movie. The maturation process of growing up seems to have worked on the actors because they get better with each subsequent film. 

This was the last film for Richard Harris who originated the role of Dumbledore. In the same year he played a part in a terrific version of "The Count of Monte Cristo", where his character is quite aged and infirm. Harris was dying of Hodgkin's lymphoma when he made both movies and his delicate state was unfortunately obvious on film. I would never say it was a blessing that he passed on, but I will say that recasting was needed because Dumbledore, while aging, is still a vital and dynamic figure in the series, and Michael Gambon was more up to the task in the remaining films. 

One of the most inventive elements of the story was Tom Riddle's Diary. The effect of Harry, entering the pages of the diary, foreshadows the magic of the pensive which will become essential later in the stories. The other element of this is that the diary turns out to be one of the Horcrux that Harry is searching for in the last two films and it really helps tie the universe together without making every new component feel like it is being retconned into the plot. "The Chamber of Secrets" is surprisingly, the longest of the Harry Potter films, but it does not feel that way because of the light touch Chris Columbus brought to assembling it and the brilliant insertion of Kenneth Branagh into the role of Gilderoy Lockhart.  

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1

 

When I started this blog twelve years ago, most of the Harry Potter films had already been released, so they were not featured posts here, with the exception of the final film in the original series, "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2". I did visit a 20th Anniversary screening of "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone" just last year, so even though it was a revival visit, there is a post on it. I continue to write about the Fantastic Beasts series, but probably with less enthusiasm as I go along, next months entry does not have me particularly excited. Today however, I saw "Deathly Hallows Part 1" and this gives me an opportunity to go back to the original series and fill in another entry for this blog.

Starting with "Goblet of Fire", the Potter series grew grimmer with each episode. Of the last five films, this movie is the most despairing and saddest of the movies. It impressed me when it first came out in 2010, and I must have watched it at home four or five times over the last decade. Upon first viewing I felt it was a bit incomplete, but this is a movie that gets better with each additional visit. When the book of the Deathly Hallows came out, we complained about the three hundred page camping trip in the middle. It seemed long in the film as well, but on reflection it is handled extremely well by screenwriter Steven Kloves who did all but one of the original films. This is an adaptation that should have received awards attention because they ended up spitting the book perfectly into two films and each one got all of the essential information into the story, in spite of some of the complex written paths that had been laid out. 

It is true that a large segment of the movie is essentially the three main protagonists in a tent, it doesn't feel that way. First of all, the movie starts with two great sequences, one of which is so sad it might bring a tear to your eye. When Hermione obliviates her parents memory of her and she walks away from her home, you know this will not be a happy story. The escape from Privet Drive with all of the Harry poly juice variations is thrilling and contains a great deal of humor. It is finished off however with the loss of a beloved animal and maybe my favorite character in the series. When the story transitions to more narrative and exposition moments, it does not linger over all the talk. The wedding scene has enough snippets of information without bogging down the story, that we will be able to follow some of the threads later in this film and in the next. 

The raid on Gringot's happens  in part Two, but we do get a very effective sequence where Harry, Ron and Hermione, penetrate the now conquered Ministry of Magic, to recover the locket Horcrux. There is tension and humor and some great special effects moments in this segment, and it all happens before the camping trip. Even when they are hiding out in the woods, there are some good scenes. The dance of sadness between Harry and Hermione is a moment of relief from the doomsday scenario the characters are feeling. The trip to Godric's Hollow is also in this part of the film and it is atmospheric as heck and just what the movie needed at that point, and finally, when Ron returns to the fold and he and Harry destroy their first Horcrux, it is visualized in a disturbing manner that also suggests how adult the story has become. 

Hogwarts is a memory at most in this film, we never visit there directly, although there is a brief moment on the Hogwarts' Express. We are as isolated as the characters are from what is happening in the world, with the director and screenwriter deciding to hint at those events only through some headlines in the Daily Prophet and the radio signal from other outcasts from the school. The most beautiful moments in a bleak film are done in animation, telling the tragic story of the three Brothers and the origin of the Deathly Hallows, it is a terrific sequence that stands out for it's creativity at exposition in an interesting manner. 

The most dramatic moments of the film come at the conclusion as a narrow escape is accomplished at an exorbitant cost. The antagonist of the film has achieved his goal and our heroes are dejected at the conclusion of the film. In spite of how dismal the horizon looks, the story still suggests there is a path to success and that is, the only thing the audience can cling to at the end. I will add that the score by Alexandre Desplat, who was new to the series, was amazing. The music matched the mood throughout the story and it often made some of the tougher sequences emotionally bearable. 

So this is probably a little late for most of you, but as I said, I did not get the opportunity the first time around. "Half Blood Prince" is my personal favorite of the original eight films, followed closely by "Order of the Phoenix". "Deathly Hallows Part 1" would be next and as I wrote earlier, it gets better every time I see it. Next week, a second shot at "Deathly Hallows Part 2" .

Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone 20th Anniversary

 It's hard for me to believe that Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone is 20 years old. In that time frame we got a total of 10 films in the Harry Potter universe most of which were completed within a 12 year period . There had never been anything attempted  like this before, the MCEU came along later with its three and four phases. Harry Potter however is something that is special for most kids because it's a Gateway film into the fantasy universe. Kids who saw these films growing up have their own version of The Wizard of Oz, the Ten Commandments, and Star Wars. 

The first film in the series had to try and get everything right. Director Christopher Columbus was sometimes accused of going soft on the storytelling but that ignores the fact that this was indeed a children's story to begin with. It's only after the third or fourth film that it really becomes much more a coming-of-age film series and much more dramatic. The Sorcerer's Stone had to work for the audience at this time, in order to set everything else up. The visualization of the story is it strongest component. Privet Drive, Diagon Alley, and Hogwarts are perfectly presented to us in almost exactly the way most of us thought in our Mind's Eye. The casting of the characters was also very successful, especially the young leads, who would have to carry this film series for a decade. The one choice that seemed obvious at the time was Richard Harris as Professor Dumbledore, but it seems to me in retrospect to be the weakest link in the film. Not because Harris was bad or didn't look like the Dumbledore  we wanted but his advanced age ,which was later clear because of his death, made him seem more frail than any of us probably imagined. But Harris's voice and facial expressions do setup the criteria for the character. 

Today I got a chance to see the original film on the big screen and once again it impresses. John William's Charming score featuring The Beautiful Hedwig's theme, set the grounds for the music in the rest of the film series. The CGI only looks clunky in a couple of places and everything of course got much better as the series went along. Most of the things that were essential in the book, got put into the movie ,which may have made the film a little long but probably delighted it's youthful audience, and me too.

Had I known that the movie was playing with  what is billed as Magic Movie Mode, I would have made plans to stay and watch it the second time through. The Magic Movie Mode basically includes inserts of director's commentary,and  bubble screens with details about props and makeup and scenery, as well is having a little bit of a game for kids to follow along ,where they count appearances the golden snitch. But since the film is almost 3 hours to begin with a second 3 hours seemed a little daunting. The problem with watching this film is that I immediately I want to watch the other films in the series right away.

My own kids experienced this film at just the right age they were 13 and 15 when the movie came out and, as such, could easily relate the main characters in the story. The night we first saw this was the last time we also saw our friends Kathy, James, and Rebecca. Something had upset Kathy and much like she had done 6 years earlier she ghosted us and we never figured out what her problem was. I feel a little bad because the two kids were friends with our kids and they were the children of my best friend who had passed away. I have never let the negative experience interfere with my memory of the first time we saw this film. It Still Remains a glorious children's film that sets up an astonishingly mature set of films that follow it. If you get a chance, make some time and remember what it felt like the 20 years younger and anticipating the Wonder.

Young Sherlock Holmes

Inspired by a post from one of my on-line friends, I revisited this film today and decided to include it in the summer look back project, "films lost in time". This really should not be a lost film but given it's lack of box office success and the the fact that it is not yet available on blu ray, I suspect that most of today's audience is only vaguely familiar with it. 

This should have been a smashing success given it's pedigree and release. Steve Spielberg is one of the Executive Producers and his team made up the rest of those responsible for bringing this to the screen. The Director was Barry Levinson, who had directed "The Natural" the year before and would go on to direct and win the Academy Award for "Rain Man" three years later. The script comes from Chris Columbus who had written "Gremlins" and "The Goonies" before this and who would go on to make a few films that will feel very familiar after seeing this (more on that later). This was released in the U.S. during the holiday season of 1985 and it basically tanked. The box office was mild to low and barely matched the production cost. So what went wrong, again, I'll delay that for a few paragraphs. Let's talk about the movie first.

The idea of retconning Sherlock Holmes into a youthful action character is not a bad one. In the original books, we learn of Holmes and Watson meeting as they take up rooms together on Baker Street, but this scenario makes them schoolmates at a posh academic institution in Victorian England. Holmes has already mastered the art of deduction as he calls it [frankly it is mostly inductive sign reasoning and a little hard to believe at times]. 

As the two young future archetypes are meeting, a series of deaths are taking place in London. We witness a mysterious figure using a small blow gun to shoot darts at several older gentlemen. Those men begin to have fantastic hallucinations which result in deaths that appear to be suicides. From the start of the film, it is clear that the film makers want to dazzle us with special effects as part of the excitement of the movie. Articulated puppets and stop motion animation are used early on to bring horrific images to life. 

 

The most likely reason this film would be historically significant is that it contains one of the earliest CGI effects on screen to achieve the images the film makers wanted. A priest is attacked by a figure that climbs out of a stained glass window. This sequence explains why the films lone Academy Award Nomination was for Visual Effects. The Knight becomes a three dimensional image which strikes terror into the elderly man who runs into the street and is mowed down by a carriage. 

Although primitive by today's standards, it was jaw dropping at the time and I remember Siskel and Ebert talking about it and one of them picking it as their choice in their annual Oscar handicapping show. 

The story centers around the two well known characters and a third one invented for this enterprise.  A confirmed bachelor like Holmes is during most of his film history, must have a woman in his past to explain his predilection. So Columbus creates Elizabeth, the niece of a character in the story and Holmes love interest. This will require that Watson and Holmes have to rescue Elizabeth on more than one occasion. That's right, she is a damsel in distress for most of the last third of the film. The development of Holmes as a character is pretty good in the story. He is interested in unique subjects, he has an eccentric mentor, and he is admired by many and despised by a few elitists. His friendship with the new boy does not help him win the affection of either his belligerent teacher or the light blond future MP that he makes an enemy. Does any of this sound familiar to you? It should because it is likely that Harry Potter and friends grew out of this kind of stew. The fact that Chris Columbus who directed the first two Harry Potter films also wrote the screenplay here, seems like a lot more than just coincidence.

Let's add another interesting parallel, young future Dr. Watson looks like a chubbier version of you know who.

With so many things going for it, what caused this film to fail with a broad audience? Speaking simply as a movie fan I think I can point to two things. The most criticized parts of the previous year's "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom" are resurrected to provide the villain and motives here. There is virtually no surprise when the antagonist is revealed, so the suspense is missing for the most part. When to secret society perpetrating the crimes is revealed, it is a moment right out of the very dark Indiana Jones movie. 

 Acolytes surround a hapless victim overseen by an evil priest of an alien religious cult and a towering figure of the spirit that they worship. In a true "what the hell" moment, we discover that there are other murders connected to this story and suddenly the plot shifts to a completely different issue. Foreshadowing his future emotionally stunted growth, Holmes cries out and alerts everyone there to his presence. And none of this seems to be well connected to the logical procedural method Holmes supposedly follows. Instead, a series of chance insights leads to the discovery of an underground temple. 

Holmes and Watson have to become Butch and Sundance and it is just not as credible at this point as it needs to be. The action points start driving the plot instead of the character points. 

Holmes and Watson have to become the Wright Bothers at one point, and although the scene is fun, it feels tacked on rather than organic to the Holmes tradition of investigation. 

One other thing that I think sabotages the film, and this is a spoiler so if you haven'y yet viewed the movie and don't want to be ticked off before doing so, stop now and come back later.

Holmes fails. 

All the build up and eventual destruction and the outcome is depressing and undermines the spirit of the film. Someone must have thought it was creatively challenging to finish on this note. Here is the way it came across to me. "Ho,ho, ho, your [character not to be identified by me] dies, Merry Christmas. Hope you and the family enjoyed this." If you did the same thing to any of the other successful Spielbergian type movies at the time, you would get the same dismal box office result. "Goonies" would not be a beloved 80s touchstone, "Cocoon" would have stalled Ron Howard's career, and "Raiders" would be an experiment that failed. 

Despite the dramatic faults of the movie, it had a lot of other things to recommend it. The setting and sets were very nicely utilized and they look great. The costumes and the actors fit into the world that was created very effectively. 

Bruce Broughton was nominated for the Academy Award for his music in "Silverado" from earlier in the year, and his work here is alo excellent. The theme tune will be a pretty simple earworm that will remind you every time you hear it of this film. 

For those of you who think the Marvel Films invented the post title credit scene, stick around for the end of this movie. Clearly there were hopes of a sequel, but when a movie under-performs like this, you are not going to get Part II. Although Nicolas Rowe does reprise the character in a brief cameo in the far superior "Mr. Holmes" which I guess we can call "Old Sherlock Holmes". 

Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them

When I wrote my review of "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2" five years ago. I  reported on the sadness that came with knowing the story was over and our time in the Wizarding World was at an end. I must have forgotten the times we live in because of course when there is money to be made and a hunger for stories, the film industry will try to find a way to produce more. Earlier this year, a widely acclaimed stage play of a Harry Potter story from post Deathly Hallows made it's debut in London, and the script for that play became a bestselling book. Also in the woks was this piece of entertainment, a spin off story of the Potter books, featuring only a vague couple of references to characters we would recognize. The opening of the Universal Studios Hollywood version of The Wizarding World of Harry Potter earlier this year, making this a banner year for fans of the franchise. I've not seen the play, so I can't comment on it (although I did read the script and had some reservations). I've not yet visited Potter World at Universal, although my daughter has an annual pass and seems to have gone a half dozen times or so, (she is very enthusiastic). I have however seen the new movie and that I can speak about.

"Fantastic Beasts" is mostly a delightful fantasy adventure that captures much of the essence of the magical world. It is also clear that there are many other stories to exploit in this thread and many others from the Magic worlds. The story is a bit convoluted but works out correctly in the long run. The biggest strengths of the film are some new characters, the production design and the title beasts themselves. The additional films that are planned may run a bit thin at times because there is not the rich backdrop of a single location or the evolution of characters over seven years,but as fantasy films they should be a treat. There are seeds of the Dumbeldore-Grindelwald story are here, as is a plot line that will lead to more exploration of the social taboos of "No-Maj" (Muggle) relations.

The lead character in the film is Newt Scamander, played by Eddie Redmayne. His look is perfect and the actions he plays out seem to fit the story nicely, but I do have to say he was the weak link for me of the main characters. Jeff Bridges is regularly criticized these days for the tendency he has to mumble his lines in that Texas grumble. Well Redmayne does a whole lot of mumbling as well, but he is supposed to be so reserved and shy that when he mumbles, not only can you not make out the words, you may not be able to tell he is speaking. There may be confusion over some key elements of the story because he has a lot of exposition in his character's dialogue. Fortunately, the character is accompanied by a great trio of supporting characters that have the light touch and personality that his aw shucks boyishness sometimes misses. Dan Fogler, an actor I know from "Fanboys" and "Balls of Fury", is impressively effective as the "No-maj" Jacob Kowalski, a bystander who gets sucked into Scamander's adventure. He is a great audience surrogate and has a charm that belies his somewhat schlub like appearance. Unconventional casting results in a humorous side kick and a surprisingly believable romantic figure.  The magical sisters Tina and Queenie Goldstein are also great additions to the story. Katherine Waterson as Tina and Alison Sudol as Queenie are lovely women cast as ethereal beauties with much more than their looks to get them through this adventure.

I think everyone will enjoy the creatures that Newt carries around in his briefcase. An item that has magical dimensions to it much like the tents used by the Weasleys in their trip to the Quidditch World Championships. Some of the beasts are charming and will amuse the audience immensely, others are more difficult and present a threat at times but also a promise. All of the story takes place in a vividly realized 1920s New York setting. The decor and clothing styles are all right up my alley. It is a world vividly realized by the talented craftsmen behind the scenes and in the computers used to make this film. Colin Farrell's suits are enough to make you want to be living in that period and wealthy enough to dress as the magic folk do. There are the usual magical battles and dramatic chaos that accompanies it. There are however several quieter scenes that make the story richer. I especially appreciated the apartment scenes where Newt and Jacob are taken in by the Goldsteins. The mixture of the mundane and the magical is great in that sequence. The more extended trip into Newt's collection of animals is another standout moment from the film.

The idea of exploring the Magic world in another location on the planet is a solid start in making this series of films feel fresh. The Magical Congress of the U.S, as counter-part to the British Ministry of Magic is clever with some very American style twists.  I do think there is a great opportunity for these films to grow in stature and depth as we get deeper into the mythology and history of the characters and places in the stories. "Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them" should be a successful start to a new line of stories, only distantly connected to Harry Potter, but hopefully as rewarding when we get to the conclusion.