Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (2009)

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince

 

The revelation of the meaning of the title is somewhat anti-climactic. The film is darker than its predecessors, and somewhat more dependant upon them, would probably be more confusing for the three people left in the Western World who are unaware of the saga of the Chosen One and He Who Shall Not Be Named.

 

However, that stuff aside, "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince" is something of a marvel, not in its singularity, but for the position it holds in one of the most remarkable film series of all time. How wonderful it has been to actually watch these kids mature along with their roles! "Prince" is positively awash in teen hormones and angst, and scenes dealing with these issues are among the most charming of the entire series. Really, if you're a Potter fan, there's no way you'll miss this, the penultimate story of one of the great children's literary sagas...and fantasy sagas...and popular fiction sagas.Rowlingsdeserves her success, and so does everyone associated with the film project. An easy "A" for Potter fans. For general audiences, a "B+".

##

WARNING: SAMBO ALERT

 

I mean that in the sense that I'm going to discuss racial issues, and many have no interest in such things. Fair enough. What I wanted to say is that as with the original "Star Wars" the firstPottterfilm, supposedly set in a universe embracing wizards from (what? Around the world? Around the British Empire? I'm not clear on that) actually is about the union of white wizards from around the world. Or the Empire. Or whatever. Like I said--I'm not clear on that. I'm sure that if you were to ask the filmmakers, they would say "the most powerful wizards in the world." And "the most promising magic students from around the world." Or something like that. But look at the films, and it is clear that every major character as well as everyone who determines a plot point or shows any power at all is white. Now, that's just fine...as long as you can be honest about it.

 

But my sense watching this latest film is that the filmmakers got their hands slapped a little. Someone asked them if that was the intent, and they blinked. They didn't realize that that was the universe they were creating: anexternalizationofRowlings' inner world. And the inner world of almost anyone will reflect their own ethnicity. THIS is why it is important for people to complain, to let studios know that our dollars are valuable too, and that unless they want us to assume the all-white casting is deliberate, they need to be a bit more inclusive. And so the series has over the years. Although they have no major roles (other than a Chinese girl and a black girl mooning over Harry. Countered by a black kid making out with Ron's sister! Way to go!) the inclusion of non-white background characters inQuiddichgames, in the dining hall, in classrooms and hallways...it makes a difference. It allows non-white kids to fantasize that they, too, attendHogwarts, and imagine the adventures they are having when the camera goes the other way. IT MAKES A DIFFERENCE. And I appreciate their efforts in this direction: it makes Jason's world a better one than mine was. Thank God.

##

"SomeSplainingto do." Apparently SenatorCoburnsaid this to SoniaSotomayor, and theblogosphereand talk radio were humming over this reference to Ricky Ricardo. Was this deliberately offensive? I doubt it. Was it offensive at all? I'd need to hear from some Hispanics on that. But until then, let me look at it from my perspective, and from my perspective? A bit wince-inducing, but not much more. It might even be funny. After all, Ricky Ricardo was one of the most beloved characters in Television history. He was created by, and was the alter-ego of,DesiArnaz, anabsolutlybrilliant performer and producer who basically created syndication and got filthy rich in the process. The character of Ricky was physically fit and attractive, successful in his career (very), and quite sexual. "I Love Lucy" was the first television show to have a pregnant housewife, something that was quite scandalous at the time. In other words, he had everything that I want for black images in film. Lucy, the woman he was married to, was the alter ego of Lucille Ball, who, with CarolBurnette, was arguably the finest comedienne in the history of television. Their routines are still beloved forty years later. In fact, Ricky's relationship with Lucy is Exhibit A in my argument that barriers for Latinos are far lower than those for blacks--unless they are Latinos with African features or dark skin, of course. All of this is to say that the "Lucy! You've got someSplaining' to do" catch phrase was not at the expense of Ricardo...it was aimed at Lucy. And Lucille Ball owned her own production company and was the most powerful woman on television for a decade. She knew EXACTLY what she was doing, sufficient to stay on top of the game for almost thirty years. No victims here. The line is part of Americana.

##

That said, wouldCoburnhave been as likely to say it to a non-Hispanic? I doubt it. But that's human nature. If there is one black person at a party, the chances are that someone is going to say something that reflects race. One woman, and someone is likely to say something reflective of gender. We notice these differences, and it is in our minds. No matter how careful we are, we let these things slip out. I think it is clear that for many, the most important thing aboutSotomayoris that she is Hispanic and a woman. As the most important thing aboutObama(for many people) is that he is black with a Muslim name. It is hard for them to avoid making jokes that relate to these specific things, because humor is a release of tension. This ain't going away any time soon, and it is NOT a terrible or bigoted thing. I understand people flinching over it, but frankly, we've got bigger fish to fry.

##

The question of the day is: is it appropriate for special interest groups to pressure Hollywood to be more inclusive of race, gender, body type, sexual orientation etcetera in films and television? Why or why not?

My attitude: it is perfectly fair to tell Hollywood that if they want my dollars, they have to listen to my requests. They then have the right to say "no--we don't care."  And I then have the right to either avoid certain films, or peacefully communicate my displeasure through blogging, protest, NPR articles or anything else.  And people who just say: "go make your own movies" generally have no idea how the industry works: from top to bottom, from script to financing to production to post-production to distribution and exhibition, the structures have been in place for almost a century, and no one can avoid dealing with it, not Oprah or Tyler Perry or anyone.  Ultimately, you are dealing with the system.  So the sensible thing is to appeal to those within the system who are either fair-minded and unbigoted, or interested in my money.  

What do you think?