Potter-mania has undeniably dominated the month of July. With the release of the seventh and final book of the series just a week away, the release of the newest Harry Potter film just eleven days prior to the novel was clearly a preemptive strike meant to titillate die-hard fans and keep Potter on the brain.
But for those of us who stood in line until midnight on Wednesday, July 11, the book's release will be a much-welcomed respite from the film franchise. Despite its undoubtedly darker and more ominous tone, choppy character development and over-editing prevent "Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix" from attaining the polished, fulfilling edge it pursues.
For both the film and the book, "Order of the Phoenix" was marketed as the beginning of the descent into the darkest period of the series and of Harry's life. The fifth installment is faithful to its word; we see a more irritable, edgy Potter (Daniel Radcliffe), the introduction of the dark wizard-hunting Order of the Phoenix, an obviously distant Dumbledore (Michael Gambon) and the launch of a despotic reign of dread at Hogwarts, headed by ministry minion Dolores Umbridge (Imelda Staunton).
When realized on screen, however, much of the sinister and mysterious appeal of the fifth book vanishes. Instead there is the semblance of darkness and references to the imminent terror in the wizarding world, but less of the palpable emotion found on the book's pages.
Where poor editing had been a problem in previous films, overly efficient editing might have caused a few missteps in the fifth. Such technical changes have made "Order" difficult to follow, especially if you've never read the book. While director David Yates' film can celebrate a slick two-hour and eighteen-minute running time, Alfonso Cuaron's "Prison of Azkaban" was both short and navigable.
We've learned to excuse the necessary omissions, but when large percentages of lengthy and important plot points disappear, the audience has to scratch their heads in confusion. Did you think the Black household was fascinating? How about the extensive information on the Order? Gone. And the obstacle course to find the Department of Mysteries? You'll have to grab the book for that one.
Corners were also cut concerning much of the character development. The film attempts to put greater emphasis on Harry's dark, irritable attitude, but Radcliffe's performance makes Harry come off more as a temperamental, apathetic teenager than as a wizard partially possessed by Lord Voldemort (Ralph Fiennes). He appropriately mopes, mutters and yells. Sidekick Hermione (Emma Watson) makes much effort to raise her eyebrows in the appropriately perplexed or annoyed manner, sadly leaving little room for Ron's (Rupert Grint) humor. The cast of esteemed actors that make up the Hogwarts' faculty are painfully underused, as was pivotal character Sirius Black (Gary Oldman). The only shining star in this installment is Staunton, who manages to make Umbridge the kind of subtle psychopath that words simply couldn't describe.
An examination of the dialogue and cinematography indicates there are a few more stones missing down the path. Writer Michael Goldenberg was misguided in his efforts to create snappy dialogue. Commentary on Dumbledore's "stylish" exits was nauseatingly strained and intentional. The same can be said for the special effects and cinematography. Fight effects amount to streams of sparks and colored lightning flashes that will tire the audiences more than the characters. Scenes taking place in the Forbidden Forest were literally lost to the darkness, as there was no lighting on camera. Staring at a nearly blank screen is not only cinematographically ineffective, but also downright annoying.
It is true that Potter films do improve with time. "Order" lacks the rigid acting, lengthy running times and childishness of the first two films. But "Order's" cinematic realization misses the mark on more than one occasion. We might be enticed by the slick veneer of "Order's" darker, gloomier installment, but the final sense of satisfaction is missing in action.
