My Rating Scale:
* = AWFUL
** = Pretty bad
*** = Not great, but still worth seeing
**** = Memorable, really good
***** = FANTASTIC
"Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows Part 2"
Story *****
Characters *****
Performance ****
Standing As A Sequel ****
Standing Compared to Book ****
Overall Rating *****
HP 7 Part 2.
Wow.
It's been six days since I saw it in theaters, and I'm still not sure what to say except... Wow.
By which I mean, of course...
That. Was. Incredible.
My family was unable to score tickets to the midnight showing, unfortunately. I did feel like it detracted from the experience of seeing the end of a series that helped to raise a generation (mine). There were only about thirty of us in the theater -- my mother, my introduction to Harry Potter as an eight-year-old, my sister, who grew up with the movies but only managed to squeeze in the books two summers ago, so she would be allowed to see the midnight premier of "Half-Blood Prince", my eight-year-old brother, who has never seen any of these movies in theaters but has listened to the books on CD and grown up with the movies almost since birth, my cousin David, a newcomer to this fabulous world, and myself, who began reading the series seven years ago (coincidentally, the length of a full study, entrance through graduation, at Hogwarts), watched with huge eyes when "The Sorceror's Stone" was new on DVD, waited impatiently for every DVD from "Chamber of Secrets" through "Order of The Phoenix", migrated with millions of other excited fans to the midnight premiers of both "Half-Blood Prince" and "Deathly Hallows Part 1", and who proudly sported now, upon my forehead, a lightning-shaped scar, painted on in brown eyeliner, despite the fact that it was the third day, and nobody in that theater really cared, except us.
What an incredibly emotional experience. I have never cried so much during a movie. Not during "Up!", not during "Bridge to Terebithia", not during "Soul Surfer". My mother, sister and I pretty much sobbed from the moment the familiar Warner Brothers logo appeared to the moment the screen faded to black and the credits began to roll.
The movie begins where Part 1 left off: Voldemort has broken into Dumbledore's tomb to steal the Elder Wand. And from that moment the movie is heist/epic battle. That's literally what happens. They rob a bank, and then go kick some butt. And it is AWESOME!
I'm going to begin by listing the cons; that way I can end on a positive note. One of the most disappointing things for me was the lack of reappearing characters and cast members. The movie gets where it's going very quickly -- within minutes Harry, Ron and Hermione had robbed Gringotts Bank and were hiding in Aberforth Dumbledore's bar. Most of the two-and-half-hour movie is spent preparing for and fighting the epic battle. And while certain of the the supporting cast did return -- for example, Maggie Smith as Professor Minerva McGonagall, kicking butt and taking names as usual, raking in a few laughs to boot with her giddy and strangely out-of-character, "I've always wanted to use that spell!"; Matthew Lewis as the ever-wonderful Neville Longbottom, stepping out as the hero he's been all along; Robbie Coltrane as Groundskeeper and Care of Magical Creatures Teacher Rubeus Hagrid; Warwick Davis as both the familiar Filius Flitwick (Charms) and the relatively new Griphook (goblin); Evanna Lynch as the beautiful, spacey, and slightly ethereal Luna Lovegood; David Thewlis as werewolf and former professor Remus Lupin; Michael Gambon as Albus Dumbledore; and the entire Weasley family, Ginny (Bonnie Wright), Fred (James Phelps), George (Oliver Phelps), Bill (Domhnal Gleason), Arthur (Mark Williams), and Molly (Julie Walters) -- other former cast members were very noticeably absent, or hardly there at all. The absence of Kenneth Branagh as Professor Lockhart I found particularly annoying. Though the character did not appear in the book, I had hoped that director David Yates would bring back all the old familiar faces, for nostalgia's sake, if nothing else.
The fact that Rubeus Hagrid did not appear until near the very end I also found very irritating. As the movie series has aged, directors Mike Newell and David Yates, respectively my least favorite and favorite of the string of directors, have placed less and less importance on Hagrid. They seem to have forgotten that Hagrid was Harry's very introduction to the wizarding world, as well as one of his best friends throughout the books. Even in "The Deathly Hallows", Harry, Ron and Hermione were at least worried about the safety of their half-giant friend, and are devastated when they witness his capture by the Death Eaters (previously to which, I might add, he put up a serious fight). In the movie, however, Hagrid appears at last already captured and bound in the Dark Forest, apparently having been easily subdued. His sole job here is, not to act as Harry's friend, but to carry Harry's apparently dead body back to Hogwarts. I'm afraid, had he not been given this job in the books, one of the worlds favorite characters may not have appeared at all.
Despite the absence of certain characters, the acting, when the characters did appear, was overall quite good.
Except.
Except for Bonnie Wright as Ginny Weasley.
Oh. My. Gosh.
Bonnie Wright has been bugging me since "Order of The Phoenix". And it isn't that she's really terrible, or even that she's boring and forgettable.
It's that she plays the character all wrong.
Let me tell you something, and please remember it: Ginny Weasley is not a quiet, demure, awkward little hoverer who talks like she thinks she's in a fairy tale.
Ginny Weasley is a fiery, fierce, confident, hot-tempered, out-spoken young woman who acts like a normal girl and knows how to control herself.
But not in the movies! Oh, no. In the movies Ginny is every inch the quiet, demure, awkward little hoverer. For instance, the first time she sees Harry after six months of not knowing where he is, she screams out, "HARRY!!!" and then stands there awkwardly looking sheepish. Would Ginny of the books have done that? No! In the books, she simply says, "Hi, Harry." and makes absolutely sure that every girl in the room who's ever had a crush on Harry (particularly Cho Chang) knows that Harry is her property. Hands off, Cho. "Luna will show you the way, won't you, Luna?"
So like I said, she's not a bad actress. She's just wrong for the character. And maybe I'm the only one who notices or cares. Ginny happens to be one of my favorite characters in the books.
As for the rest of the cons... Well... There aren't any.
Yeah. That's it. Two cons. Absent characters and one mediocre performance.
And now, the pros.
Where do I begin?
At the beginning, I guess.
Warwick Davis' performance as Griphook the goblin and John Hurt's portrayal of Ollivander the wand-maker were SPOT ON. I mean, they were perfect. I've loved John Hurt's Ollivander since the beginning -- his performance fit the character I'd just begun reading about so perfectly. His eerie, creepy voice, big milky eyes, and iconic, "Iiii WONDERED when I'd be seeing YOU, Miiister Potter." were exactly as I'd pictured him when I read the book. And he was just as perfect now, a frail, beaten, weak old man, trying to excuse his fascination with death. Warwick Davis' performance was equally wonderful. You couldn't have asked for a colder, more devious goblin.
Aberforth Dumbledore (Ciaran Hinds) was not quite what I'd been hoping for, but all the same he captured Aberforth's bitterness perfectly.
Both the heist and and battle sequences were fabulous. This is all I'm going to say, but both brought tension, laughter, fear, excitement, tears, and some very suppressed cheering from our row.
Which brings me to my two favorite parts of any movie: My favorite character and the visual effects.
Severus Snape has always been my favorite character (alongside the Weasley twins -- RIP Fred), from the beginning -- even when I thought, and was meant to think, that he was evil and wanted Harry dead. Alan Rickman has always, in my opinion, been the best actor in the series. That is why I didn't mention him in my rather long-winded list of familiar faces -- I wanted to save him for later.
As I said before, my family and I sobbed pretty much all the way through the movie, start to finish. But where did I really start to sob? Snape's death scene, and The Prince's Tale. Ho. Lee. Cow. As one of my close guy-friends says, "Alan Rickman took what would otherwise have been a good movie, and turned it into a great movie." My respects to you, Mr Rickman. As to Professor Snape, you are always in our hearts. Always.
And now... The visual effects!!!
So, this movie was no "Lord of The Rings". I know a lot of film critics are comparing the two series, but the fact is, "Deathly Hallows" just isn't on the level of my favorite trilogy. It never will be. But that doesn't change the fact that the visual effects in this movie were excellent. Not phenomenal. But excellent.
There are, of course, the standard completely computer-animated things: the dragon, the giants. I've never been a big fan of the effects under any director, although Buckbeak the hippogriff and Dobby the house-elf I've always found very impressive. This dragon was, however, quite good in comparison even with Grawp the giant back in "Order of The Phoenix".
The real visual attraction for me in these movies are the prosthetics and things of that kind. Computer graphics have always been low on my list of impressive effects -- puppets, sets, forced perspective, makeup, costumes, models, and tangible things that fool the human eye I find infinitely more fascinating.
The two things that made the visual effects in this movie as good as they were, for me anyway, were the goblins and Voldemort. Warwick Davis really honestly looked like a goblin. I believed him. There was not a trace of Professor Flitwick on him, not even in his eyes. And those prosthetics looked so real! All the goblins looked completely real, completely tangible and there.
And Voldemort was the same way! A hah-YOU-ge step up from the animated face (with, I might add, a NOSE) we saw back in "Sorceror's Stone" sticking out of the back of Professor Quirrel's head. He is scary! And scary-looking is hard to do.
And now we come to the end of my review of the end of one of the greatest series, movie or book, of all time. The series has come to define our generation the way rebellion came to define the 1920's, war came to define the 1940's, and bad clothing came to define the 1980's. Harry has been a part of our lives for thirteen years now. He has been one of my most constant (albeit most fictional) companions for nearly half of my life. And now he has finally gone away -- grown up and left us behind. But it is consoling to know that we still have the books, and great movies like this one, to remember him by.
Goodbye, Harry! We'll miss you! Thank you for everything.
(PS: "Half-Blood Prince" was still a better movie, IMO)
No comments:
Post a Comment