Fair enough Adam - I agree that his contribution is somewhat overlooked sometimes in the areas that you describe. Personally I liked Gambon as Dumbeldore too but I know many didnt. I also thought Thewlis was excellent as Lupin. But I feel the reason Columbus is so often overlooked is because the problems that plague the first two films (script, performances being the main two for me) undermine most of the good work he did - I dont think this is the case with the other films.

How often do people criticise Lucas Star Wars prequels for exactly the same thing ? He can do all the worldbuilding he likes but if people dont like the script and performances then the films are not going to be reviewed well (and I say this as someone who generally likes the prequels).

Just wow.  My 2 second review because I need to go to bed and will write something up later:   This is the Empire Strikes Back of the HP series.   It ends in such a dark place; but it is also a perfect place because it gives us 7B to be the redemptive act.  I also think that this much longer story telling gives us far more details from the book, and of all the series, this one seemed to most live up to the favorite moments of the book.   While other movies were good, this is the first one that felt truly "unabridged".

It's going to need a second viewing (Friday evening with the wife in fact) but I think this one is tied with Half-Blood Prince as my favorite.  It took me literally almost until we got done with the second act of the film before I realized what Yates and Kloves were doing with the film...only because it's been three years since I read Deathly Hallows.  

Essentially, they've emphasized the dual treasure hunt aspect of the story more than anything else with some deep, deep characterization on the trio's side.  All of this leads to a finale that's not big but emotional satisfying and black as hell.  When Harry realizes what Voldemort's plan is and what it costs him at the end of this film, it heart breaking to see these characters go through this...especially since we've seen them grow up before our eyes.  

And Yates makes it even worse with tone of climax and the last scene of the film.  In that moment, when it cuts to black, you immediately want to watch the rest and you immediately realize (especially if you haven't read the books but only have used the films as your guide) that Harry and posse are SCREWED!  It's that dark. People have been making this comparison but it's darker than Empire's ending.

As for the performances, brilliant from top to bottom but a special recognition has to go to Emma Watson.  She's the heart of this film.  She has come a long way as an actress.  She literally almost killed me at least four times during this film with how gut wrenching her performance was.  Just awesome.

3.5 out of 4 stars.  Depending on a second viewing, it could easily go to 4 stars.

If I was a teenage girl I'd be screaming, "OH MY GOD! THAT WAS AWESOME! THE BEST EVER!"  Which is what a lot of the teenage girls were screaming at the end of the movie and in the lobby and in the parking lot.  Yada yada yada.

Well, I'm not a teenage girl.  Just a middle aged movie lover who watches a lot of movies every year.  This movie was not even close to the best movie of the year or even the series.  It was, IMHO, the worst.  It was just a garbled mess that felt like you needed to have watched and remembered everything that happened in the previous movies.  Special effects were just average at best.  Nothing major.  The good part I liked was the animated story of the Deathly Hallows.

Overall, 2 1/2 stars out of 5.

oh, and to compare this to The Empire Strikes Back is just

LOL!!!!

Kinda insulting reply on your part.  Maybe it's true, maybe it's not but he's entitled to his opinion, just like you are entitled to your opinion. 
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jose Martinez 

oh, and to compare this to The Empire Strikes Back is just

 

 

LOL!!!!

I'd also say that criticising the film for not being accessible to people who havent seen the others is kind of pointless. This is the last in a 7 part series. What do you want - Previously on Harry Potter.....

Id love to know who saw Return of the King and thought that was satisfying without having seen the previous two

Certainly dont think it is the best film of the year but as a Potter film I think it does very well. In fact Id go as far to say that they did a better job than Rowling in not making it feel too much like Harry Potter and the Very Long Camping Trip.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jose Martinez 

oh, and to compare this to The Empire Strikes Back is just

 

 

LOL!!!!

I'm glad you feel that way.   Look, I've felt as though most of the rest of the movies really failed to capture the books.   This version is far closer, in almost every aspect, to the heart of the book.  The opening of Deathly Hallows is fairly dark, and it stays that way for sometime.

Maybe it is because I Love the books, but yes, I consider this, along with PoA to be the two best films of the series.   Just my opinion; and I'm glad you find it laughable but *shrug* it is how I feel about it.

I think that's a good thing about film, we can all watch on our own and reach our own conclusion.   I could say the criticism about " you have to know the rest of the series" is a bit strange, considering this is Part7.  I don't remember in any of the LOTR series them doing a recap of everything that happened before, etc... because the books of both series are so well known and collected, that a big responsibility of the film is to live up to those.

I also thought one of the best elements of the movie was that it didn't rely on special effects, because the book, until near the end, doesn't really have them and I think several of the movies have relied too heavily on effects sequences to sell the point.  

So, I'm sorry you didn't like it.   Have a cookie ;)  You'll feel better ;)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Simon Massey 

Harry Potter and the Very Long Camping Trip.

That seems like a pretty apt description to me. There were parts I liked, but I sure don't crave a 2nd viewing.

OTOH I think Part 2 will be awesome.

My 2-word review: Deathly Dull.

There are interminably long stretches of just nothingness to this film, and it just felt un-cinematic, and had a rather more pedestrian feel in the filmmaking.  Bringing back Yates was a mistake.  Even though it felt like there was about 45 minutes of plot in this film, it was staggering that it ran for about 2.5 hours.

I give it 2 stars or a grade of C. (being generous)

Adam,

Agreed with everything you said even if I thought that Yates pulled in a brilliant Half-Blood Prince.  But, after seeing it a second time, the film has only one real problem that I don't know if they're saving for Part 2 or they just decided to not include it.  If you really break down this film as a three act film, Harry only has half a character arc.  Ron and Hermione have full characterizations in this film.  But with the truncated aspect of Dumbledore's past in this particular part, they've cut down an essential element of Harry's growth toward the end of the story, and that's his crisis of faith during this journey.

We get slight glimpses of it but I don't know if it's enough when compared with what we got with Ron and Hermione.  At the same time, I might be getting ahead of myself because we still have one film to go.  

Another thing, which my wife brought up last night, was the point of Voldemort killing Potter.  Technically speaking, how does Voldemort know he's suppose to take out Potter?  If you look at the seven films, it isn't stated anywhere how Voldemort came to choose Potter in the first place.  Now, as a book reader, I know how he got to that point.  But, technically the film hasn't told us yet.  I know where it should've gone, in terms of canon but I'm not including that when it comes to analyzing these films.  We still have one film to go and honestly, they're running out of spots to tell the audience the full story and that piece of information is absolutely essential to understand the overarching plot to the Potter saga.

As it stands though, this film is tied with Half-Blood Prince as my favorite.  It is definitely one half of a long movie and you almost can't judge it until we get the last half...hence the reason I'm not going to throw it under the bus for some crucial information into understanding the whole thing.

I saw it yesterday, enjoyed it a lot, but was disappointed with the abruptness of the ending. I really don't feel like waiting until July to see the rest. I hope I can keep myself from reading the book in the meantime.

To paraphrase the famous Indiana Jones's line, 'Snakes!  Why did it have to be snakes?';

'Tents!  Why did it have to be tents?'

The movie, or very much so as the title states, half a movie aka Part I follows the books slavishly including the dreaded camping scenes.  What was a slog in the book is interminable in the movie.  At my showing the youngsters in attendance became restless enough that they resorted to running up and down the aisles.  Indeed, at times there was more entertainment in the aisles than up on the screen.

Interesting - I thought they did a good job of making the camping scenes not feel interminable, far better than the book IMO.

Suprised few have commented on the wonderful animated sequence of the Deathly Hallows too. And I thought the infiltration into the Ministry of Magic was very well done.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Simon Massey 

Interesting - I thought they did a good job of making the camping scenes not feel interminable, far better than the book IMO.

 

Suprised few have commented on the wonderful animated sequence of the Deathly Hallows too. And I thought the infiltration into the Ministry of Magic was very well done.

 

Better? I suppose in the way that a movie encompasses less time to sit through than a book.

Yes the animated sequence was very delightful.  The MoM stuff was very well done.

JonZ,

It'll be there.  They have no choice.  We know why Voldemort wants to kill Potter (as stated by Tom Riddle in Chamber of Secrets) but how he choose him hasn't be told yet.  They only have two places to do it.

Saw it this morning and enjoyed it.  The film does a good job of conveying the feel of the book.  The camping scenes are what they are--meant to portray the loneliness and desperation of the situation.  Criticism of them is criticism of the story.  I wouldn't have wanted them to be left out.  I applaud the decision to split the book in two.  The Deathly Hallows is the most epic of the Potter books, and it needs plenty of room to breathe.

Adam,

I think that because they did 2/3's of the book in Part 1, a lot of "exposition gaps" that were not filled in from movies 5 and 6 will be added to Part 2 to fill it out.  Personally, I think the Neville aspect of the Prophecy was a wonderful detail in the book, but it doesn't really add anything to Harry's story.  Now, "how" Voldemort learned of it and made Harry his greatest nemesis HAS to be included in Part 2.  When it was absent in Half-Blood Prince, I just sort of knew that Kloves was probably going to save it for "the moment" in Part 2.  Adam and Jon, I'm almost positive you know where it'll go...if it is in fact in the narrative of Part 2.

As for the two memories not included in Half-Blood Prince, the second you mentioned Adam, I fretted about for a long time.  It's probably my second favorite sequence in that book but it really would not have had a place, as you said, in the film's narrative.  I just don't know where you'd put it.  As for the first memory you mentioned, Part 1 rectified that problem in the climax if you were paying attention.

What's amazing about Part 1 is that they did all that work in 2 hours and 15 minutes.  I've read a couple of rumors that Part 2 might be well over 2 and a half hours long.  Not entirely sure I buy that, considering how Yates cut back way too much on Order of the Phoenix, but he was way more forgiving on Half-Blood Prince and Deathly Hallows Part 1.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RobertR 

The camping scenes are what they are--meant to portray the loneliness and desperation of the situation.  Criticism of them is criticism of the story.

Absolutely on both counts.  Though those feelings had been pretty well mapped out since the first book.  A redundancy not needed in the final book or needed to occupy such a large portion of it.

Disappointed the major weakness of the book was merely transported straight into the movie.  An improvement opportunity via cinematic adaptation existed.  None was even attempted.

IMO, of course.

On the bright side, Part 2 should crackle now that the narrative null zone of the tent is concluded.

"Leaving out the first one puts them in a quandary for DH Part 2, because without it there's no way for Harry to know about that particular item."

Exactly my point, only you said it better than I did.

JonZ,

But, this film did in fact fix that problem of Harry and his pals finding that particular Horcrux.  It's in the torture sequence with Hermione, Bellatrix, and Griphook.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lou Sytsma 

Quote:

Originally Posted by RobertR 

The camping scenes are what they are--meant to portray the loneliness and desperation of the situation.  Criticism of them is criticism of the story.

Absolutely on both counts.  Though those feelings had been pretty well mapped out since the first book.  A redundancy not needed in the final book or needed to occupy such a large portion of it.

 

Disappointed the major weakness of the book was merely transported straight into the movie.  An improvement opportunity via cinematic adaptation existed.  None was even attempted.

 

IMO, of course.

 

On the bright side, Part 2 should crackle now that the narrative null zone of the tent is concluded.

I have to disagree in that the desperation in the 7th book is unique to the series and that the camping scenes are important.  For the first time Harry is without guidance or protection from Dumbledore.  He doesn't know what to do or where to go.  He knows his mission but doesn't know how to complete it.  He has Hermione and Ron to help but they're looking to him for direction.  The camping scenes in the book/movie are necessary to create that sense of directionless wandering, that sense of being up against something and not having any idea how to tackle it. Plus, you know that not only are your best friends counting on you but the whole wizarding world.  What would people think if the three of them quickly figured out what to do and where to go?  I'd feel short-changed because after the lengths we saw Voldemort go to to hide the locket in the cave I'd find it impossible to believe that the other horcruxes were easy to find.

I loved the book and love the movie.  I thought it ended perfectly and can't wait for part 2.  First impressions is that DH part 1 is up there with PoA and HBP as my favorite films of the series.

That was well said, Jim.

Managed to see Part 1 this morning. Must agree with Adam and Robert. We needed to get back to the core story in greater depth, allow our main actors some breathing space to flesh out their characters for more realism and JKR makes this all possible at this point in the Harry Potter opus by giving us all a chance to slow down and appreciate our friendships under stressful, even life threatening times. Have to admit the middle section of this book was a very hard slog to read and the movie tackles it much better in my opinion - but then, we have been watching these three young people literally grow up and flesh out their respective roles... so in no small way we all have a vested interest in the outcome that will follow in Part 2. I am glad David Yates is at the helm and that we are not switching Directors midstream again. Dividing the last book into two films offers a better chance to tie up any loose ends and prepare us for the conclusion of Part 2 - smart thinking. Of course the marketing and accounting departments over at Warner would not be disappointed - but, this is probably one of those rare chances when it makes better sense all round, including the artistic decision to do so. Simply cannot wait for Part 2 now.