Wanted: A Director

Rating: 6/10 (17 November 2002)

I didn't much like the second Harry Potter movie. I think the blame lies squarely with Chris Columbus; Alfonso Cuaron should do a much better job with the next movie. Columbus never builds tension into his shots by holding them longer than necessary to communicate a plot point. His camera angles never seem to do more than tell a direct narrative. Unlike plays, movies can force the audience to view the actors according to the very specific intentions of the director, accomplished by the angle, the lens, lighting, etc. Columbus does this somewhat, but not enough.
The acting was excellent and the sets and effects were spectacular as expected. But the series deserves a director with imagination, a director who is willing to be more than Rowling's lapdog, a director who will make a movie instead of an adaptation. Hopefully Cuaron will be that director.
One might make the argument that the audience should not expect a fantasy to hold up to the standards of Citizen Kane. But Lord of the Rings is a fantasy, and Peter Jackson is just as aware of what a camera is capable of as Orson Welles was. Both Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings feature enthralling magical worlds, brilliant British acting, fantastically detailed sets, costumes, and effects, and a wonderful score. The main difference is that Lord of the Rings has a director.