It's ten years since the Harry Potter films started and now we have reached the very last movie Harry Potter And The Deathly Hallows Part 2. Here I review this final installment and lament the passing of a brilliant British franchise.

Tagged with:

Comments

This entry is now closed for comments.

  • Comment number 63. Posted by information1st

    on 23 Jul 2011 21:38

    I'll discuss the Dr.'s clip 1st:

    1/ COLUMBUS (1&2) vs YATES (7a&b): It's interesting that I have the complete opposite pov: I much prefer the first Harry Potter movies than the last ones. Why? It's difficult to slice apart the books or the way the movies were interpreted/made, but (for me):

    a) The Harry Potter early books were classic tales of the sort that have been written about boys and girls for well over a century from the boy's own stories of the weeklies through to the hardy boys and enid blyton stuff... eg the chips are down and it falls down to the kids to save the day; work things out that the adults in the adult world have not perceived, along with the delights and perhaps trials of growing up and understanding things.

    b) The kids get more focus and the stories are about their dynamic; Columbus achieves these things imo whereas Yates seems tasted with making the next LOTRs CGI, swirling camera rubbish eg Hermione and Ron hardly get any real acting in front of the camera, Ron just does his gruff voice: They can do a lot more than this.

    c) Cuaron is imo the best of the lot: He manages to capture the emotions of the kids in 3 like non-others, perhaps his Hispanic touch is the difference, even the clothes they were seem to have this subtle difference; it again helps this is the best of the books too imo. It also helps that HE manages to create a dark and moody contrast to the golden days of 1&2. Sadly the other movies could not produce their own colors and only ever attempted to ape the dark look and do no more...

    d) Agree, the British cast is simply magnificent and joyful display of acting talent from many wonderful actors!!! It will be missed by me.

    2/ Again looking at the comments here, there is great diversity of opinion. That said I don't agree with a lot of it. My problem with the later Potters is they lose the story of going through a Year of Harry's life and they all clamour all the time during the incessant motion for your instant shock/present alert/important-right-now rollercoaster viewing. Eg Movie 3 had small pauses where the SAME tree shook itself to subtle change the Seasons and the tempo. Whereas in the above clip the swirling camera around the kids drying off was *ridiculous!*, never leaving any time for real emotion except a token sly smile or touching of fingertips before careering off on the next rampage... zzzzzzz. Fortunately the fun plot of the book came through very well at the end, as well as more time for different characters to come on scene eg Neville. Definitely a case for me of a movie series that started v well but the trapping of AAA blockbuster with bolder pretentions in the medium driving out the story and fun with schlick tricks.

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 63: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 63: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 62. Posted by Sam Shaw

    on 21 Jul 2011 22:24

    According to wikipedia, deathly hallows 2 only made 43% of its money from 3d showings. :) The tide is turning..

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 62: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 62: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 61. Posted by GomezTheCritic

    on 21 Jul 2011 16:25

    Though as you have declared, this is a irrefutable movie, that is both epic, equally as entertaining as the rest, with major faults!
    But seems to erase them in a very fluid swipe!


    The acting has grown, the seminal farce, the script writing by Mr. Kloves, also David Yates himself has set his eyes finally upon a fixation and style and wit for the Potter board, pondering since the sixth.

    3D is a money spinner, it only seems to work for morbidly atrocious vomit like Bays sexual-masculine sweaty robotic trilogy!

    The music is scaled, very emotional, though the problems above and beyond with Yates his his way of trying to please a major leagued audience, or mainstream cinema goers, cinema extremists, or just Potter fans alas us Critics!

    By way of keeping the piece of a system of timing and piece, and eradicating some key pieces of information, he simply acknowledges it and slides it across to be forgotten...fans happy, mainstream audiences gaping at their sweet sticking noisy popcorn... Though he's so good at with holding tension and Potter lore together, entwining it you get intrigued, though just left unaccomplished! Just referential for the fans. Also continuity, and possible inadmissible for the Director himself.


    Still a very triumphant/wide berthed/scaled film, that with holds some of aforementioned plot points, and loop holes.

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 61: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 61: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 60. Posted by Rosko

    on 21 Jul 2011 15:36

    it seems to fit into a rare category of film franchises which started off purely as a money making exercise but then subsequently reached a certain point of mass acceptance so that the directors have been given more creative freedom to produce films with a beautiful gothic imagery throughout. That's how its seems anyway, but I have to admit that I've never read a HP book or seen a film. When I picked up one of the books in a shop I had the same reaction as when I tried to read The DaVinci Code ... what was all the fuss about... I can accept all of the points mark is making on an academic kind of level, but to me this is a hammer horror with the dark pagan soul ripped out of it - judging by the things that fans tell me and the snippets of dialogue and descriptions which I've caught. It seems more like an industry than a film - good training and experience for actors, directors, SFX, art directors etc. but I've heard better dialogue on bbc childrens dramas, so what is there to rave about other than the visuals... I find the whole idea of tailored kids horror banal and pointless. I grew up reading Roald Dahl and an adult could enjoy those books as surreal fairytales just as much as children instinctively enjoy them. HP surely can't be considered as original or imaginative as those. It's a bunch of cliches and class ridden sentimentalism that appeals to Americans like tourist trips to the houses of parliament or King's College. It's not British or English, just an excercise in creative marketing. I hope the actors do well in the future with more interesting projects - I noticed that Harrry himself will be in the one of the new Hammer Horrors coming out - http://www.hammerfilms.com/productions/film/filmid/24/the-woman-in-black

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 60: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 60: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 59. Posted by zuko

    on 20 Jul 2011 20:39

    Was there no podcast this week? Still hasn't arrived...?

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 59: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 59: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 58. Posted by Matt

    on 20 Jul 2011 18:19

    Had to watch it in3D as the 2D screenings were all sold out, cinema for 3D was nearly empty, hmm, I think people are finally learning the difference between how a film should look and how some people just want to take your money.

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 58: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 58: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 57. Posted by Scurra

    on 20 Jul 2011 12:50

    With the sole exception of Harry vs Voldemort, I have to largely agree - this is a very successful translation of the second half of the novel to the screen. Unfortunately, since that confrontation is the entire point of the story, it failed completely for me. The way in which Rowling has Harry do the Dumbledore exposition scene, and not in private but in public, is a genuine marvel, and it was all gone in favour of something that, by virtue of being made more "dramatic" for the screen was made infinitely less "dramatic" as a result.

    Don't get me wrong - I enjoyed the film a lot, and it's a fine conclusion to a generally fine series. But - with the possible exception of #3 and maybe #7a - none of these films qualify for that limited group of "as good as the book", let alone the vanishingly small subset of "better than the book".

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 57: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 57: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 56. Posted by LucyNatureGeek

    on 20 Jul 2011 12:24

    I've read every book (slightly out of order originally but queued for my copy of Deathly Hallows back in 07) and watched every film in the cinema (haven't repeated the experience of an afternoon viewing with children though in 01, never again!) Apart from Goblet of Fire, every time I have left the cinema with a mild level of frustration at how dark/lacking/slow each film was and as someone else stated above, the movies were always moving the story along to this final film.

    24 hours before watching Part 2, I speed read my way through chapter 24 to the end and have to say, bar a few small changes that were worked around successfully, this final film is the best of the lot and the closest to the original books. I finally felt a bit for the characters, something the other films have never managed to manifest.

    As Mark points out, the embellishing of the battle scenes really worked (we've all visualised the battle in our own heads) and had the five year wait to see it on screen was worth it. I didnt cry, there wasnt any need but the feeling inside as it all came to a close was sadness that until a. The Hobbit comes out (and that has been too long imo) b. someone else creates a series as epic and engrossing as HP, we all have a fairly long wait until we the likes of this 'franchise' and book writing take over our winter and summer cinema schedules in a future era.

    Was left wondering once The Hobbit 1 + 2 are over...what will we have after that?

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 56: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 56: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 55. Posted by Dominic Holmes

    on 19 Jul 2011 23:34

    Good but not magical which is odd for a film about wizards. I blame the cgi.

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 55: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 55: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 54. Posted by Sapphire77

    on 19 Jul 2011 13:34

    @ CapnSim

    The third movie really isn't awful at all, you know? It's flawed maybe but in my opinion all of them are, really (I even remember Kermode calling the fifth(?) installment nothing less than a holding pattern). But I think the third movie has stuff going for it and this view seems to be the consensus.

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 54: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 54: 0
    Loading…
More comments

More Posts

Previous

Next