Matt Zoller Seitz, my favorite working film critic (I say that as if there’s a whole legion of non-working critics who I like better, when in truth there’s really just Pauline Kael, who, being dead and all, certainly isn’t working anymore) has a nice review of the new Harry Potter film, which I haven’t seen yet. Seitz’s enthusiasm notwithstanding, I have my doubts about the film (every one of the Potter films has been overpraised, including by some very good critics), but as I said, it’s the review that’s nice, and don’t be put off by the fancy sounding intro. Seitz is a critic for the common reader:
Am I overselling the movie? I hope not, but given the genre–a slick, big-budget fantasy, designed to fit into a series whose formula is established–such are the risks. The fifth Potter isn’t a transcendently great adventure, nor is it a work of pop art to rival Metropolis, Close Encounters of the Third King, Blade Runner, Brazil and City of Lost Children (movies that were stylistically accessible but more wholly original; watching them, both fans and detractors could say, "I’ve never seen anything like it"). Phoenix’s excellence falls within a narrow bandwidth that includes the Star Wars, Lord of the Rings and X-Men pictures and much of Pixar and Disney’s animated output. It has inherent constraints and occasionally bursts them, delivering more humor and feeling, and a smidgen more complexity, than you expect. It personalizes — makes idiosyncratic — a property that ultimately belongs to Potter creator J.K. Rowling, and that has a fiduciary duty to replicate the essence of its source.
Scott Tobias, another fine working critic (for The Onion) offers a take on the Potter film that’s more in alignment with what I’ve come to expect. He writes:
While not all Harry Potter movies are created equal, consistency has been a major priority for the series, to the point where it’s become the Prozac of blockbuster franchises—few highs or lows, just a general baseline of pleasing competence. Granted, there’s a significant difference between the flat literalness of Chris Columbus’ first two entries and Alfonso Cuaron’s fanciful Prisoner Of Azkaban, but the films are telling one long story, and inspiration is often sacrificed for continuity’s sake. Directed by David Yates, who has a background in British television, Order Of The Phoenix feels a little too complacent at times, though it has moments of visual wit, and it doesn’t soft-pedal the dark mood that has eclipsed the series. Save for the thrilling opening sequence, there’s not much to remember about the film beyond Staunton (Vera Drake), who masks her bottomless malevolence behind a pasted-on patrician smile. During this transitional stage, Dumbledore’s Army and the Order Of The Phoenix prepare for bigger fights ahead—and presumably, more exciting movies, too.
