 Some critics think Harry Potter has lost his magic. "Whatever happened to the delight, and, if you'll excuse the term, the magic in the Harry Potter series?" Roger Ebert asks in the Chicago Sun Times. Gene Seymour comments in Newsday that a newcomer to the Potter movies "may be forgiven for wondering where the magic is; not just the transfigurations, sparkling explosions and assorted phantasmagoria ... but the sense of wonder and transport that helped make [author J.K.] Rowling's books into a global cultural phenomenon." Lou Lumenick in the New York Post puts it more tersely: "There are lots of special effects, but sadly, no real magic." Kenneth Turan's review in the Los Angeles Times is headed: "The Magic Is Gone." On the other hand, there are those like Colin Bertram in the New York Daily News who concludes his review by remarking, "The magic is definitely back." And of course most point out that Potter fans will definitely be back, too. "[The] fifth Potter movie will be another surefire box-office wonder," writes Bob Longino in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. "It's easily better than Sorcerer's Stone and Chamber of Secrets. It's as dark as Azkaban and as unsettling as Goblet of Fire." A.O. Scott in the New York Times is one of several critics who simply give the movie a passing grade. "It manages to succeed as a piece of entertainment without quite fulfilling its potential as a movie," he writes, adding unenthusiastically that while it "is not a great movie, it is a pretty good one." Glenn Whipp in the Los Angeles Daily News concludes that the film "will satisfy the faithful." However, some critics maintain that many Potter fans will be disappointed. Carrie Rickey in the Philadelphia Inquirer, for example, calls it "a slog that might induce Potter fatigue even among stalwarts." |
