Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1. This is a real title for a colossal major feature film that scores of people will pay to see. The reasons why are great in number but pertain to the reputation the series has established. These are people who are fans of the books and fans of a very well respected catalog of adapted screenplays. For them it doesn’t matter that the 7th book was expanded into two films for the sole purpose of grabbing more of their cash.
The titular wizard Harry Potter (Daniel Radcliffe) is at a low point in his life, just as his arch nemesis Voldemort has gained control over the magical world. With the help of his best friends Ron (Rupert Grint) and Hermione (Emma Watson), Harry seeks out to destroy the source of Voldemort’s power.
I’ve never read any of the Harry Potter books and I’m sure to many that this forwardness will affect your perception of my credibility. I judge movies, not books. As movies go, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1 is a single film and as such it needs to stand on its own despite being part of a series. It doesn’t even attempt this. I see no reason other then money to split the final book into two films, and this first half certainly suffers. A bombardment of action kicks off the film, then a massive lull occurs as the characters go camping. By the end of the film I didn’t even feel as though a significant story was told; we were where we started both in terms of the characters’ emotions and the plot. It would be one thing to criticize a full book adaptation for being 3+ hours, but to sit for 2.5 hours and watch something that is purposely incomplete isn’t going to cut it.
If you are not highly versed in the dynamic of the Potter mythos, you are not suppose to watch this movie. I missed only one film in the series and while watching this new adventure I was utterly lost. There are too many characters to keep track of and the way their actions are portrayed, or lack thereof, lends to confusion. People die offscreen and the viewer is expected to know the characters’ names when mentioned in conversation despite minimal exposure in this film. Plotting and scheming is strictly controlled by jargon. Lastly the rules governing spells and other magic are growing increasingly convoluted as it is now apparent that Hermione can do literally anything unless the story calls on her to find a tougher solution.
The Potter films have had something of a revolving door attached to the director’s chair, but David Yates has held it the longest and this is officially his 3rd outing. With this property it’s almost impossible to decipher the styles between the directors. I’m convinced that the role of director in this application has as much clout as the director of a TV episode. Yates has everything laid out before him, he only has to watch the pieces fall into place. They are glorious pieces mind you. Every shot has some technical wizardry about it. Not necessarily the best visuals ever, the CGI team made this Potter film realistic enough to maintain the illusion. As for the acting, I think it’s time to call out Radcliffe as the most unjustly overpaid star in existence. His two cohorts repeatedly show him up, and thankfully the crowd isn’t there for him. You don’t see a giant RADCLIFFE across the posters because his identity is irrelevant to the film’s success. Where shyness used to be cute as a young Potter, his naïve, flat, largely emotionless performance can eat on your nerves.
I’m sure Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1 will make a boatload of cash and possibly kick start a new trend of Part 1 films. Even following the production template set forth by its forbearers can’t save this depressingly lackluster entry. Confused or not you’ll come to one conclusion, that you paid full price to see what should have been a complete movie. **
Loading ...
Recent Comments