Iconic Films

2 for 1 tickets to Singin' In The Rain, this coming Monday. Book now

Navigation - link to other main sections from here

From The Times

July 12, 2007

Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix

Wendy Ide

Adolescence hits Harry Potter like a juggernaut full of newts’ tongues. In Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, the fresh-faced boy wizard is gone and in his place is a bruised, hollow-eyed teenager struggling to cope with the very prosaic concerns that blot the lives of adolescents the world over. He’s alienated; he’s so angry he barely knows or trusts himself any more. And he’s developed a giant crush on a fellow Hogwarts pupil, Cho Chang (Katie Leung).

Of course Harry has more to worry about than teen angst, skin eruptions and unexpected hormonal surges. The cliffhanger ending that closed the previous instalment left Harry with first-hand experience of the mortality of innocent bystanders who get caught in the crossfire of his increasingly personal feud with the evil Lord Voldemort. Disillusioned by a newspaper smear campaign against him and the fact that the Ministry of Magic fails to believe his story, Harry initially hunkers down into an almighty teenage sulk.

Perhaps it’s the introduction of a new screenwriter (Michael Goldenberg takes over from Steve Kloves), a new director (the British TV veteran David Yates) or perhaps the fact that with Harry’s age comes a new complexity, but Daniel Radcliffe has brought a raw-nerved intensity to the role that was absent before.

Not all the peripheral characters are so well served. This is the weightiest of the Potter books so far, and the challenge was to bring it to the screen without the story seeming too episodic. The casualties of a narrative whittled out of the bulging novel are Emma Thompson’s dithering professor, Sybil Trelawney (two scenes), and David Thewlis, who gets barely one line as Remus Lupin.

But the cull of established characters gives free rein to the film’s major asset. Imelda Staunton plays the new professor, Dolores Umbridge, as a cross between Barbara Cartland and anthrax. A sadist in a fuchsia-pink twinset, she simpers with toxic delight as her punishments carve chunks out of the morale of the school (and occasionally also the students).

Staunton is great fun – she’s certainly one of the more colourful villains to strike fear into the hearts of the Hogwarts students. And she brings a levity to a film which otherwise continues the trend that started with Alfonso Cuarón’s third instalment: Harry’s world is increasingly dark and dangerous. The jeopardy in this story has less to do with losing honour on the quidditch pitch and more with potentially losing a life.

The other stars of the film are the impressive special effects. The Ministry of Magic is a chilly, deco palace that wouldn’t look out of place in a Fritz Lang vision of dystopia. But the unexpected charmer is Hagrid’s half-brother, a simple, sad giant who takes a fancy to bossy Hermione. Although entirely rendered in CGI, the giant outacts several of the supporting cast members with a moment of pure pathos – seeking to impress Hermione, he roots around in his pile of junk and comes up with a bicycle handlebar which he passes to her, gently ringing the bell and scanning her face for approval.

While this serviceable addition to the Potter series is unlikely to win any new fans, it’s probably not going to disappoint too many of the existing ones. The formulaic structure notwithstanding, the Potter films continue to be one of the most visually inventive and meticulously detailed franchises.

12A, 138mins

I enjoyed the film a lot but it felt rushed and so much was missing which in my mind made it lack a little feeling. Amongst other things it doesn't seem to show how much of a link there is between Harry and Voldermort. They seemed to miss the depth and what happened to the bit where he doubts his father? In the book he enters snapes mind during a lesson and sees a side to his father he didn't know about, that is the start of him wondering about snape and wether he is as awful as harry thinks. I hope this doesn't come back to haunt them in later films but it was still enjoyable and to watch the trio acting and seeing how they have developed over the years was good. I'm glad they are doing all the films and I hope they will be even better!

pink, Harrogate, uk

Yes it's a fair attempt from a very long book - but yes there's a lot of detail missing... detail that could have been included - why restrict the length of the film to 138min?

Some clarity of plot was lost and it was never satisfactorily shown why Harry felt compelled to go to the Ministry of Magic for the final showdown (read the book and you'll see why). I was also disappointed in how that final scene was truncated - again sections didn't quite knit together as they do in the book. Even with amazing special effects, the final Dumbledore/Voldemort showdown was a bit of an anti-climax.

My biggest fear is that plot points so carefully laid in the book for the following books - and especially Deathly Hallows - will have been left out leaving the screen writer and director of that final film with almost insurmountable problems.

Still - OOTP was a highly entertaining movie and shows that Dan Radcliffe has become something of an actor!

Stuart, Halifax, West Yorkshire

I thought that the film was really good but its not something that you can just watch you do need some basic Harry Potter knowledge before watching it. I found it to be quite enjoyable and also quite entertaining. I would definatley recommend it to a freind just based on the picture quality and the special features. Daniel Radcliffe has out done himself and his acting ability has grown up with him through the years of Harry Potter
well done

Rachael, Birmingham , UK

I'm glad I read the reviews. They prepared me for what was MISSING from the film. However, I did enjoy it and came out satisfied.

Jan, Toronto, Canada

Fantastic keep Yates and Goldenberg on the goblet of fire was a mess come on u need people like yates and goldenberg for the last two they r fantastic

will, adelaide, south australia

Having read the book I absolutely loved this film. Radcliffe's acting skills were amazing and the scenery and set wonderful. It was a pleasure to watch. It would be rather difficult to follow if you had not read the books,and a few important areas were skipped, but that surely is to be expected: if they were all included everyone would be complaining about the length! Harry Potter is great!!! can't wait for the book.

helen warren, Oxford, UK

What a disappointment. While the acting was spot on, the script was obviously "Swiss-cheesed" -- lots of holes. We walked out of the theater saying, "Soooo...that was it??? That was what we had been waiting for????"

Yes, it was dark and it was supposed to be, but even in previous films within the darkness there have been some lighthearted scenes. Where's the "house cleaning" at the Order? The Fred-George swamp Filch pays homage to? Peeves giving Umbridge a run for her money?

Props to the actors, however, especially Radcliffe. But the script writer should be force-fed puking pastilles.

J., Allentown, Pennsylvania / US

This was the best potter movie yet, because it wasn't scared to fully express the darker themes and emotions of the books. I think the movie did definately include details only book-readers would understand, but they don't at all detract from the movie; those little thing are really just for the fans to get. I think the screenwritier, Michael Goldenberg, did an amazing job adapting this monster of a book into a movie. The book has a good plot, but its buried in all of the details appreciated by fans like quidditch, St. Mungo's, and rita skeeter; these details are not necessary to the plot. Personally I thought some more could have been excluded from the film, but the filmakers creatively were able to implement creatures like Grawp, and Kreecher into the plot. In a nut shell, if you prefer good movies over verbatim copies of the book then you will love this film. J.K. herself wanted the filmakers to take all liberties to make the best movie, and approves the exclusions.

Nicolas Smallwood, New Orleans, Louisiana

The movie was terrible. so many things were drastically changed or left out completly. Cho Chang wasnst supposed 2 be the one to rat out the D.A., Ron and Hermione were supposed 2 be prefects, Fred, George, and Harry were supposed to have thier brooms confiscated and leave with a more dramatic exit. Umbridge was supposed to attempt 2 kick out hagrid and McGonagall was to have taken 4 stunners 2 the chest and be in St Mungos when Harry wanted 2 go to the Misistry. There are many other improtant details that should have been addeed, not only to make this movie better, but to help people understand the things that will be in the movies to come. In result of this crappy movie, the rest of the movies will besignificantly altered. I cannot belive that JK Rowling actually let you botch her movie/book like this. I suggest that David Yates be fired and a better director should be hired. I understand that not every little detail can be included but the movie could have been 10 times better.

Ashley, Elmsford, New York

I found 5th installment of Harry Potter to be terribly boring and horribly missing some of the key elements of the story. The portrayal of Dumbledore as a scared, angry man detroys the dynamic in the story. The big battle between Voldemort and Dumbledore so well crafted by Rowling is shredded to bits by the film. The confidence and sheer power that is Dumbledore is thrashed. I felt no fear when Voldemort arrives at the Ministry. If I were Harry I would not have been terrified and when Dumbledore shows up, I expected a cheer to rise in the theatre. Instead I got the sense of: "Dumbledore's herem, yawn". I also did not get the sense that Voldemort feared Dumbledore in the least but instead that Dumbledore feared Voldemort. The real tragedy is how the movie glazes over the lose of Serius. On the good side, Umbridge is played brilliantly capturing the feeling of the character extremely well. Gabon is a good acter aching for good direction and a decent screenplay

Mike O, Manassas, Virginia

great film, obviously not as good as the book, naturally. Definately an improvement from goblet of fire, however.

CANT WAIT FOR THE BOOK!

still a great movie

Anita Dhesi, Southampton, UK

Read the book and then.....
See the film and then ....read the book again.
Unless they were going to make the film 4 hours long (fine by me) they have done a super job.
To see the special effects only enhances the book.

Andrew, New York, NY

I've enjoyed every Potter Film without any tangible complaint until this screen adaptation of the longest and perhaps richest book of the series. I didn't dislike what I saw, but rather I am left feeling disappointed and hoping that Yates and Goldenburg are dropped before they plow through the next installment and leave us with another average adaptaion. Overall, the film felt as though its scenes were slotted in one after the other with little to bridge them together but the viewers knowledge of the book. The acting performances in this film were excellent but suffered because they were sandwiched into a claustrophobic screenplay - The film takes a rich unforgettable experience, and makes it a forgettable watered down paint by numbers script/screenplay with a connect the dots directional approach... Sack Yates and Goldenburg before they muck up the next installment, Please !

James, Montreal, Quebec, Canada

Bad writer plus bad script equals one VERY BAD MOVIE. At least Steve Kloves wrote understandable scripts. I want my money back for having to watch this dark, nonsensical, messy, and incomprehensible series of short, unrelated, and boring scenes, thank you so very, very much.

jay, austin, texas

In my opinion, the best Potter movie so far! Amazing visual and sound efects, especilly the ones used for the battle scenes! The artists were, once again, spectacular.
Also, as a reader and great fan of the book series, I must say that this movie, as the previous ones, lacked parts of greatest importance from the book!!

Bernardo Carnevale, Rio de Janeiro,

Great movie.
Kinda bad review.
great and emotional scenes.
very much enjoyed.

Maria, Grand Rapids, Michigan/ United Sates

Agreed. Daniel Radcliffe looks much more comfortable with the part and the hoo-hah of "being" Harry Potter this time round. it's a shame the emotional bits are passed over, especially following the last battle, but that's what happens with cutting down such a vast doorstop. The girl playing Luna Lovegood is wonderful, but really: Helena Bonham-Carter's Bellatrix Lestrange is about as chillingly frightening as Barbara Windsor after one too many sherries.

Cable, London, UK

I was extremely depressed by the way this movie turned out. I, being one who read and appreciated the story in the book, was forced to compare it constantlyto the movie. The movie lacked significant parts of the book, parts that do end up in later texts, such as Siruis' two-way mirror. I cannot view this movie as a good movie, without a book, because it randomly inserted parts of the book, expecting the viewers to have read it. I am disappointed by the screenwriters lack of adaptive ability and the serious neglect of the director and producers to get the best story from a screenplay.

Alexandria, Ripley,

is fanastic a good there will no film like it and IS A 4 STAR IT SHOULD BE A 5 STAR is sounds that is the best film in the world and when it comes out on cinems am watching it and when it comes out on dvd am going pay 2 of them the makes should be really happy with it HARRY POTTER is the best of the film

daniel currran, blackpool, blackpool

You cannot make a good movie from a badly written script. JK Rowling should pay Steven Kloves to write the rest of these movies from now on, hint, hint!

jay, austin, texas