something is missing in this film but I can't decide what

Rating: 6/10 (25 July 2007)

This is the first Harry Potter film I have seen, with no prior knowledge of the series or the books. Perhaps not the best place to start, but with the considerable recaps of what has gone before, 'The Order of the Phoenix' proved reasonably easy to follow.
What's missing is an emotional core. Daniel Radcliffe does not convince as Harry, a superwizard in waiting. He may be without his full powers but he does appear weak and unchallenging, with moments of bravado which do not sit well with the rest of his character. Having a child character carry a film is always going to be a problem - as it was for the Chronicles of Narnia as well - and in comparing Harry Potter with, say, Frodo Baggins, they are worlds apart.
The plot is in some ways derivative of the classic good vs evil battle - as seen in LOTR, Star Wars, and others. The flashbacks are overdone and the characterizations sometimes too much like a cartoon - particularly Imelda Staunton's Doleres Umbridge. And is that really Emma Thompson in thick jam-jar glasses? And Ralph Fiennes without a nose? The classy cast is perhaps the biggest draw for mature viewers of the Harry Potter series (we have Michael Gambon, Maggie Smith, Robbie Coltrane, Julie Walters, David Bradley, Robert Hardy, Alan Rickman, Gary Oldman, etc.) but with a few exceptions, they didn't really convince, only made me think of other roles they've done which were so much better.
Special effects - the class conjuring up rabbits and horses and the like was impressive, as were the final scenes of fight and destruction, and the twins' firework display. But the miniatures were sometimes obvious, which is a shame.
In pace, the film drags for long periods and gets bogged down in pseudo philosophy or silly jokes. The two strands don't really fit together.