Harry Potter, the Photo Album

Rating: 6/10 (24 November 2005)

I love the books, but I still recognize that a book this large cannot be placed into a 2 1/2 hour movie without some revision. That was not the problem. In fact, I only see two problems with it: the director and Michael Gambon as Dumbledore.
The director chose to edit his screen play to work only for people who have read the book. If you have not read the book, this film would be moving too fast for any sense to be made of it. The best description I would place on the movie is that it feels like a magic world photo album montage of the events in the book. One of the things I have found interesting in the previous movies were the segways - very smoothly showing the passage of time. This film did not seem to flow at all. There was no recognition of the passage of time.
As for Michael Gambon, I am still a fan of his for the film genres that he does best. I do not consider Albus Dumbledore to be best played by him. Dumbledore is tall, thin, and with a strong sense of humor and whimsy - not traits Michael Gambon portrays very well. I love his past films where he plays the darker side of humanity with its levels of duplicity. Dumbledore is being played too dark, too over-reactionary, and not much of the presence Albus Dumbledore has in the books. I know that he will not be replaced but if I had my preferences it would have been Peter O'Toole who better fits the description in the book. Sir Ian McKellan would also be ideal but I suspect he had been playing wizards longer than he preferred.
On the positive, the twins were well prepared for the next film in which they do have starring roles. Ralph Fiennes was wonderful as Voldemort - exactly what I imagined. And, of course; Daniel, Rupert, and Emma have shown their growth as actors.