Lacks the freshness of Previous Potter films

Rating: 6/10 (18 July 2007)

First off, the last two Harry Potter movies (Prisoner of Azkaban and Goblet of Fire) were standouts in the series and although Order of the Phoenix is a very good looking film it has lost some of the spark of previous Potter adventures.
A noticeable problem in the movie is its duration, which at 138 minutes makes it the shortest film despite it being based on the longest book. Despite being known as the weakest novel, which it isn't, some of the many concepts in the book are therefore not fully realized. The pacing at times seems a little off and throughout the film there is a definite sense that something is missing. Harry Potter fans will notice the absence of a quidditch match for example, a previous hallmark of the series.
A wonderful aspect of the film, however is the great casting, Alan Rickman is again fantastic, Evanna Lynch as Luna Lovegood is perfect, Helena Bonham Carter's introduction to the franchise is marvelous and last but definitely not least Imelda Staunton as Umbridge is pure casting genius. Her performance is a highlight of the film and warrants the price of a ticket itself. Less flattering to the movie however is Daniel Radcliffe's performance (as Harry), which although with its highlights reaches a stage nearer the end where it becomes slightly unbelievable and laboured. Emma Watson and Rupert Grint have done a good job with the screen time they were given. Michael Gambon as Dumbledore despite some rumblings does a great job as a distant but highly relevant mentor to Harry.
This film will undeniably delight Harry Potter fanatics despite many omissions, (some of course are understandable given the novel's length) but to many moviegoers it is an experience which although providing visual sensation at times is not quite up to the standard of previous Potter films.