REVIEW: HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS: PART 2: PG-13
I didn't review last year's prelude to this film, because I didn't want to sound biased as a fairly big Potter fan. Or Potterite? Potthead? I don't know. All I know is that I HAVE to review this movie, not to let people know about it, obviously they do; $168,000,000 over the course of a weekend doesn't lie, but to say how excellent of a movie it is, how marvelous of a franchise it is, and how sad it made me that this is the last bit of Pottermania the world will know unless some very daring idiot wants to remake the series 70 years later.
But is that even possible? I don't think so. The intricacies and complications and such spot-on casting make the Potter movies as easy to remake as "Gone with the Wind;" you just can't screw with it. There will be no main character as Daniel Radcliffe's Harry Potter, no one as comically funny as Rupert Grint's Ron Weasley, and no one nearly as intelligent and level-headed as the incredible Emma Watson's Hermione Granger. These are characters we grew up with, thought about and pictured in our imaginations as we all read the "Sorcerer's Stone" novel for the very 1st time, and saw come to life on the cinema screens portrayed with such spot-on accuracy by Radcliffe (now on Broadway,) Grint and Watson.
I sound like I'm babbling, and I probably am, but for what it's worth, this being the final thing Potter-related, I think I'm allowed to. I started reading the series in 2006, with a paperback copy of "Sorcerer's Stone" from BJ's. A family member strongly recommended it, so I thought I'd give it a try. The rest of course, is history, and throughout the 4th grade school year I snatched up "Chamber of Secrets," "Prisoner of Azkaban," "Goblet of Fire," "Order of the Phoenix" (God, that was a really long book) and "Half-Blood Prince." Then the following year, the summer of 2007, the "Deathly Hallows" finally came out. And of course, it was only fitting I bought the epic conclusion of the series from BJ's. Over the course of a trip to New York I had the book finished. Like this film, it was bittersweet, because the book was so amazing and epic in its storytelling but it had all come to an end, but I knew I had 3 more movies to see. (At the time I thought "Deathly Hallows" was going to be just one movie, and the "OotP" and "H-BP" film adaptations were yet to come.)
I think splitting the "Deathly Hallows" was not only an extremely wise movie financially, but to the series as well. The story just simply couldn't be told in one setting, unless they wanted to go "Gone with the Wind"-style and throw in an intermission. Ironically you would think they would've cut the "Order of the Phoenix" into 2 parts because of the book's 800-some pages of information, but even more ironically "Order of the Phoenix" is one of the shortest Potter films, and it STILL managed to be faithful to the original source. How is that possible?
Many critics and fans (myself being both) have noted the drastic tone change from the lighthearted and fairly simple tone of "Sorcerer's Stone" and "Chamber of Secrets" to the dramatic, edgy tone of "Prisoner of Azkaban." There is, (well, now "was") a bad or even so-so Potter film. All 8 of the films not only delivered breathtaking effects but strong performances and great story-telling. On that note, "Azkaban" is my least favorite Potter film, mainly due to the tone shift and lack of Voldemort's presence. "Goblet of Fire" saw Harry and his pals hit puberty and all the weird and awkward things that come from that. "Order of the Phoenix" saw director David Yates (who did all Potter films ever since) and an even darker tone, as Harry now realizes there is a very grave threat from Voldemort and his army of Death-Eaters. "Half-Blood Prince" maintained that same tone, and delved deep into the relationships of the characters.
Now to the "Deathly Hallows:" Part 1 was spectacular for me. I can't say it was a truly magical experience; I saw it in IMAX theaters very front row (the only seats available as I was very late getting there) but the movie still dazzled me. When Voldemort held out the Elder Wand and the screen turned black I felt punched in the guts....I have to wait till July to see how this all ends?!?!? Well let me tell you know, after a decade of Potter films, 4 years waiting for the "Deathly Hallows" to be adapted, then an additional 9 months to wait for the "Hallows" conclusion...it's all worth it.
After 7 films to carefully develop the character's personalities, dissecting each one with extreme care; "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2" could've been a movie basically devoted to the epic Battle of Hogwarts; a huge eruption of spells, wands and just stupendous imagery flying across the screen before your very eyes. It has that, don't worry, but it provides much more. An emotionally satisfying ending, wrapping up all knots, showing us characters that we've loved all these years who've died come back for one last trip to remind us how much we love the Potter series. The final battle between Harry and Lord Voldemort is one of the most memorable screen fights I think you'll ever see in a movie.
I don't think you need to hear anymore to go see "Deathly Hallows: Part 2" as soon as you finish reading this review. It's not only a well-made, masterful film in its own right, but it's a beautiful immensely satisfying conclusion to a franchise that we all love, that can be described in just one simple word: magical.
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2: 10/10.
As one big movie (both parts): 20/20.
But is that even possible? I don't think so. The intricacies and complications and such spot-on casting make the Potter movies as easy to remake as "Gone with the Wind;" you just can't screw with it. There will be no main character as Daniel Radcliffe's Harry Potter, no one as comically funny as Rupert Grint's Ron Weasley, and no one nearly as intelligent and level-headed as the incredible Emma Watson's Hermione Granger. These are characters we grew up with, thought about and pictured in our imaginations as we all read the "Sorcerer's Stone" novel for the very 1st time, and saw come to life on the cinema screens portrayed with such spot-on accuracy by Radcliffe (now on Broadway,) Grint and Watson.
I sound like I'm babbling, and I probably am, but for what it's worth, this being the final thing Potter-related, I think I'm allowed to. I started reading the series in 2006, with a paperback copy of "Sorcerer's Stone" from BJ's. A family member strongly recommended it, so I thought I'd give it a try. The rest of course, is history, and throughout the 4th grade school year I snatched up "Chamber of Secrets," "Prisoner of Azkaban," "Goblet of Fire," "Order of the Phoenix" (God, that was a really long book) and "Half-Blood Prince." Then the following year, the summer of 2007, the "Deathly Hallows" finally came out. And of course, it was only fitting I bought the epic conclusion of the series from BJ's. Over the course of a trip to New York I had the book finished. Like this film, it was bittersweet, because the book was so amazing and epic in its storytelling but it had all come to an end, but I knew I had 3 more movies to see. (At the time I thought "Deathly Hallows" was going to be just one movie, and the "OotP" and "H-BP" film adaptations were yet to come.)
I think splitting the "Deathly Hallows" was not only an extremely wise movie financially, but to the series as well. The story just simply couldn't be told in one setting, unless they wanted to go "Gone with the Wind"-style and throw in an intermission. Ironically you would think they would've cut the "Order of the Phoenix" into 2 parts because of the book's 800-some pages of information, but even more ironically "Order of the Phoenix" is one of the shortest Potter films, and it STILL managed to be faithful to the original source. How is that possible?
Many critics and fans (myself being both) have noted the drastic tone change from the lighthearted and fairly simple tone of "Sorcerer's Stone" and "Chamber of Secrets" to the dramatic, edgy tone of "Prisoner of Azkaban." There is, (well, now "was") a bad or even so-so Potter film. All 8 of the films not only delivered breathtaking effects but strong performances and great story-telling. On that note, "Azkaban" is my least favorite Potter film, mainly due to the tone shift and lack of Voldemort's presence. "Goblet of Fire" saw Harry and his pals hit puberty and all the weird and awkward things that come from that. "Order of the Phoenix" saw director David Yates (who did all Potter films ever since) and an even darker tone, as Harry now realizes there is a very grave threat from Voldemort and his army of Death-Eaters. "Half-Blood Prince" maintained that same tone, and delved deep into the relationships of the characters.
Now to the "Deathly Hallows:" Part 1 was spectacular for me. I can't say it was a truly magical experience; I saw it in IMAX theaters very front row (the only seats available as I was very late getting there) but the movie still dazzled me. When Voldemort held out the Elder Wand and the screen turned black I felt punched in the guts....I have to wait till July to see how this all ends?!?!? Well let me tell you know, after a decade of Potter films, 4 years waiting for the "Deathly Hallows" to be adapted, then an additional 9 months to wait for the "Hallows" conclusion...it's all worth it.
After 7 films to carefully develop the character's personalities, dissecting each one with extreme care; "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2" could've been a movie basically devoted to the epic Battle of Hogwarts; a huge eruption of spells, wands and just stupendous imagery flying across the screen before your very eyes. It has that, don't worry, but it provides much more. An emotionally satisfying ending, wrapping up all knots, showing us characters that we've loved all these years who've died come back for one last trip to remind us how much we love the Potter series. The final battle between Harry and Lord Voldemort is one of the most memorable screen fights I think you'll ever see in a movie.
I don't think you need to hear anymore to go see "Deathly Hallows: Part 2" as soon as you finish reading this review. It's not only a well-made, masterful film in its own right, but it's a beautiful immensely satisfying conclusion to a franchise that we all love, that can be described in just one simple word: magical.
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2: 10/10.
As one big movie (both parts): 20/20.
Comments
Post a Comment