First really ambitious and wise movie from the book series of a decade.

Rating: 3/10 (29 July 2007)

First I must say, that, although a Potter-fan I am, I have not found the other movies pretty good. Harry Potter is a book series, a piece meant to be literature. That makes it a hard one to make into a good movie... and finally someone at least tries.
Not since the third installation of Potter series have I left the theater playing Harry Potter movie with such an satisfaction. The direction was superb. Angles and images roared in with a vision; the magic world was executed magically, still without becoming a meaningless blur of overwhelming effects. Also, the script was full of wit and intention. For once they had managed to understand, that adapting a book means different than copying the book word-to-word. They were very brave of altering the holy word of Rowling's, but in eight of ten cases, the effort payed off. The effects never take the grand stage, unless in the final grand combat between Dumbledore and You-Know-Who. I would have rather seen a Gandalf/Saruman -style magic battle. I remind you that the really great magicians don't need to explode everything and throw fire bolts from their fingers. Otherwise, the images were almost too beautiful to see and the musical score rocked.
The story of this one is tighter than usually, which helped to carry on with the narrative. Some important character stuff was cut out anyway, which is never such a good thing, but much less in here than in the "Harry Potter and the Flaming Goblet". I would have wished to see more of the Weasley family, at least the running away of Percy, and Umbridge's attempt to capture Hagrid. Also, the "fights" between Harry and his school mates didn't really feel so enraged than in the book to that extent, that we almost don't understand Harry when he says that he feels anger almost all the time. Also, the bit where Harry invades Snape's memory seemed kinda fake. Also, in the beginning the dialog doesn't work very well.
About the characters/actors: Gary Oldman steals the show as Sirius Black. Finally little more screen time for him. Also Alan Rickman and Helena Bonham-Carter make a brilliant job with their rather small roles. Stauton as Umbridge doesn't hit the mark all that well, she is rather "amusing" than evil and twisted. She doesn't look like Umbridge, and she doesn't act like her. But all the children have evolved as actors, even Daniel Ratcliffe, with his notable performance as the Defence Against Dark Arts teacher. Cho Chang was good, and so were Maggie Smith and Robbie Coltrane, but rather trivially used. Filtch became a very good comic relief. And the one character I was certain would not work, Luna Lovegood, was absolutely spot-on perfect. Unfortunately, Voldemort and Dementors still aren't scary and Mad-Eye Moody still doesn't quite work, but those are the faults caused by the previous movie makers.
This is my humble opinion. I don't understand those, who didn't appreciate David Yates' work and the changes that he made, all to make the movie a better experiment. I am honestly expecting the next movie almost as much as the final novel. Well, I did say almost.