![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
movie: Harry Potter finale
2011-Jul-16, Saturday 08:09 amThis post will include many spoilers. If you're one of the 12 people on the planet who still doesn't know the complete story of Harry Potter after the media attention spanning the last decade, you are now forewarned. Here is my review of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part II.
The short version is that it's a very good movie. Special effects are exceptional. Acting is wonderful. Sets are dramatic. This film, like the ones before it, focuses on characters and storytelling. It is exactly what complainers like me keep wishing that Hollywood would produce. This film series stands together with Lord Of The Rings trilogy as some of the best film produced during the last decade. And it really has taken a decade to reach this point in the Harry Potter series.
However, and here begins the longer version, I do have a few nits to pick.
1) The anticlimax. The single defining moment of the film, when Voldemort finally dies, is anticlimactic. It begins with a bang but ends with a whimper. Almost an audible whimper, actually, as Voldemort slowly crumbles into dust and blows away. There is no "killing blow" from Harry Potter that makes it emotionally satisfying. Instead, that honor goes to Neville Longbottom (looking astonishingly heroic and handsome) elsewhere in the castle as he kills Voldemort's snake which is the last horcrux, and Neville doesn't even realize the true import of his action. The director was surely constrained by the storybook, but still I was slightly disappointed with this scene.
2) The plot holes. There was also a plot point or two that confused me. Harry drops the resurrection stone onto the ground. And. Just. Leaves. It. There. Huh? Again, apparently the director is constrained by the story. Also, when Harry Potter dies (just temporarily, we have a storyline to complete here ya know), I swear I heard Narcissa Malfoy ask Draco (her son, not on screen anywhere) if Harry was dead. That non sequitur still baffles me. What does Draco have to do with that scene? Speaking of Draco, how exactly did he get into the secret room at a moment's notice? Nobody had been able to force their entry for weeks during one of the previous movies.
3) The battle! I'm glad the film sacrificed battle scenes in favor of keeping the focus on the main storyline. I also think, however, that after a decade of waiting, we the audience would have gladly sat and watched a longer film in order to accommodate some of the fate-changing battle occurring in the story. In the film that was released to theaters, much of that action occurs off-screen. Yes, we see the dead bodies of young people scattered through the halls of Hogwarts school. How they got there, however, is often a mystery. I think one of the Weasley twins dies, but I couldn't tell you which one or how.
The only emotionally satisfying battle scene was given to us by Molly Weasley as she protects her daughter from Bellatrix Lestrange. "Not my daughter, you bitch!" Finally! Somebody said it! The movies heretofore have been far too polite about Bellatrix. It's a fair matchup, but Molly succeeds in killing Bellatrix. Her body shatters in an emotionally satisfying way at last.
4) Severus Snape. It irks me slightly that Alan Rickman will be entirely overlooked for the fame he deserves for Severus Snape. I've thought all along that the actor did a spectacular job of displaying so much conflicted nuance in his character. In this film, after Snape's death, we finally learn the long overdue truth behind his complicated relationship with Harry Potter. The film should have lingered much longer on the flashback memory to the first Harry Potter film when Severus first lays eyes on Harry Potter in the grand hall. I think all of the actors have done great jobs throughout the whole series, but I think Alan Rickman deserves an Oscar for his decade of performance in this role.
It's a good movie, go see it on the big screen! I just saw the traditional 2D film, and it was very entertaining without the 3D IMAX bonus.
The short version is that it's a very good movie. Special effects are exceptional. Acting is wonderful. Sets are dramatic. This film, like the ones before it, focuses on characters and storytelling. It is exactly what complainers like me keep wishing that Hollywood would produce. This film series stands together with Lord Of The Rings trilogy as some of the best film produced during the last decade. And it really has taken a decade to reach this point in the Harry Potter series.
However, and here begins the longer version, I do have a few nits to pick.
1) The anticlimax. The single defining moment of the film, when Voldemort finally dies, is anticlimactic. It begins with a bang but ends with a whimper. Almost an audible whimper, actually, as Voldemort slowly crumbles into dust and blows away. There is no "killing blow" from Harry Potter that makes it emotionally satisfying. Instead, that honor goes to Neville Longbottom (looking astonishingly heroic and handsome) elsewhere in the castle as he kills Voldemort's snake which is the last horcrux, and Neville doesn't even realize the true import of his action. The director was surely constrained by the storybook, but still I was slightly disappointed with this scene.
2) The plot holes. There was also a plot point or two that confused me. Harry drops the resurrection stone onto the ground. And. Just. Leaves. It. There. Huh? Again, apparently the director is constrained by the story. Also, when Harry Potter dies (just temporarily, we have a storyline to complete here ya know), I swear I heard Narcissa Malfoy ask Draco (her son, not on screen anywhere) if Harry was dead. That non sequitur still baffles me. What does Draco have to do with that scene? Speaking of Draco, how exactly did he get into the secret room at a moment's notice? Nobody had been able to force their entry for weeks during one of the previous movies.
3) The battle! I'm glad the film sacrificed battle scenes in favor of keeping the focus on the main storyline. I also think, however, that after a decade of waiting, we the audience would have gladly sat and watched a longer film in order to accommodate some of the fate-changing battle occurring in the story. In the film that was released to theaters, much of that action occurs off-screen. Yes, we see the dead bodies of young people scattered through the halls of Hogwarts school. How they got there, however, is often a mystery. I think one of the Weasley twins dies, but I couldn't tell you which one or how.
The only emotionally satisfying battle scene was given to us by Molly Weasley as she protects her daughter from Bellatrix Lestrange. "Not my daughter, you bitch!" Finally! Somebody said it! The movies heretofore have been far too polite about Bellatrix. It's a fair matchup, but Molly succeeds in killing Bellatrix. Her body shatters in an emotionally satisfying way at last.
4) Severus Snape. It irks me slightly that Alan Rickman will be entirely overlooked for the fame he deserves for Severus Snape. I've thought all along that the actor did a spectacular job of displaying so much conflicted nuance in his character. In this film, after Snape's death, we finally learn the long overdue truth behind his complicated relationship with Harry Potter. The film should have lingered much longer on the flashback memory to the first Harry Potter film when Severus first lays eyes on Harry Potter in the grand hall. I think all of the actors have done great jobs throughout the whole series, but I think Alan Rickman deserves an Oscar for his decade of performance in this role.
It's a good movie, go see it on the big screen! I just saw the traditional 2D film, and it was very entertaining without the 3D IMAX bonus.