Escape to the Movies: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1
- Thread starter MovieBob
- Start date
Indeed. After all, it's not like the Harry Potter novels are the only series to have an educational establishment geared solely for wizards. In another universe, Harry and friends would probably be attending the Unseen University.T0RD said:
I didnt mind the 5th one, but the 6th one was terrible. Not to bad with the effects but the actual telling of the story was poor. I was wary of the 7th one but its a tradition for me to go watch it, so both me and my partner went, and were definitely most impressed and thrilled with this movie. Definitely the best out of ALL the Potter movies so far, and keeps to the book extraordinarily well. Loved all the features, fantastic graphics and effects. Hope the 2nd part is even better =)Slimshad said:
TOTALLY agree! wtf happened to the whimsical magical adventures they used to have back in the first few books!? why the hell is HP turning into Twilight?!!?!?! and why does JK Rowling suddenly hate all of her characters so much! thanks for killing off part of my childhood, jerk!Aiddon said:
Because everything has to be "grim" to be interesting, mature, etc, etc. It's a bad habit that plagues pop culture.RickRoll said:
It was sad, but I never had a huge problem with all the character deaths. Really, I think the bad habitat actually is preserving all of the main characters and just killing off supporting roles. It's a freakin' war; people die, important or not, and I left sad but satisfied that the costs were accurately represented.
I think where a lot of people will find disappointment in this film is not with the change of tone (darker) or pace (slower) themselves. I think it's with the scope (narrower). As you mentioned, there's no more of the day-to-day Hogwart's rigamarole... because there is no more Hogwarts in the film. You don't see any of the professors (save Snape), classrooms, quidditch, any of it.MovieBob said:
You also see fewer characters and far fewer points of view. Gone is the sense of omniscience on the part of the audience (with the exception of some table talk amongst the Death Eaters, and some of Potter's mysterious visions). You know what the "big three" know, and nothing more.
It's like you'd spent the past six movies enjoying a lavish buffet from which you could sample any of a dozen novel snacks, and then someone comes in, takes it all away, and hands you a bowl of potato soup, a roll, and an old wooden spoon.
This can seem like a detriment to the film (and some will undoubtedly see it as such), if you fail to consider that this drives home the emotional point of this movie. You aren't a viewer anymore. You're part of the "big three," the invisible fourth. What is mysterious to them is mysterious to you because you are them. The luxury and variety to which you are accustomed has been taken away because theirs was, too, and you are them.
My only issue with the movie is:
that Dobby's death (and Hedwig's, for that matter) don't have the weight the ought to have. In the books, these deaths are game-changers, as you get the sense that things are so grim that even the innocent and beloved are in the crosshairs.
The problem is that, in the movies, neither of these characters gets the screen time they received in the books--they tend to pop in all deus ex machina style when needed, making them feel more like props than people. It's an understandable problem--you can only fit so much in a movie, after all. But it does make the movie's ending somewhat less weighty, juxtaposing Voldemort seizing an item of presumably unimaginable power with the death of... well, just some puppet, instead of a sincerely brave and unquestioningly loyal ally.
If the emotional tone of the ending didn't rely so much on that juxtaposition, it wouldn't matter quite as much, but it does... and a weak ending is usually the cardinal sin of the "middle children" of a series.
The problem is that, in the movies, neither of these characters gets the screen time they received in the books--they tend to pop in all deus ex machina style when needed, making them feel more like props than people. It's an understandable problem--you can only fit so much in a movie, after all. But it does make the movie's ending somewhat less weighty, juxtaposing Voldemort seizing an item of presumably unimaginable power with the death of... well, just some puppet, instead of a sincerely brave and unquestioningly loyal ally.
If the emotional tone of the ending didn't rely so much on that juxtaposition, it wouldn't matter quite as much, but it does... and a weak ending is usually the cardinal sin of the "middle children" of a series.
I'd be interested in seeing if people who didn't read the books still enjoy the films. I liked it myself, but it still felt very...choppy to me, like they'd taken the scenes from the books and just pushed them in, but without really building them up properly, or explaining why something has happened, which makes it seen completely random.
So - has anyone here seen the films, but not read the books?
And also, what was up with that dancing?
So - has anyone here seen the films, but not read the books?
And also, what was up with that dancing?
Personally, I found myself crying at the end; I thought it was quite touching. Yes, granted, the character you mentioned didn't get a lot of screen time, but that rousing speech made up for it, in my opinion. I didn't think it was weak at all.dastardly said:
And I agree with you about Hedwig, although I have to give them credit for making her at least die while trying to save Harry rather than while she was cooped up in her cage like in the book.
That's gonna be a real YMMV moment, but I kinda liked it. It helps convey the sense of hopeless despair of the characters in that Harry's most valiant (if awkward) attempt to add any enjoyment quickly dissolves into a reminder of their dismal situation. Also, the fact that they carry off the entire scene without any dialogue is a testament to how the actors have matured over the years.lordofthenight said:
This here is a video game website, we take our wizard schools very seriously sir.Stabby Joe said:
On an entirely unrelated note: How the hell does Ron get to be Batman! I get that Harry= Christ figure = Superman, and Hermione = The girl one = Wonder Woman, but Ron is, at best, Matter-Eater-Lad.
Erm...the books STARTED grim. Harry's an orphan because his parents were murdered by a man so vile and fearsome no one would say his name. And Harry doesn't even have a happy home after that, hes emotionally abused and neglected, he lives in a cupboard for Pete's sake.Aiddon said:
The whimsical magical adventures they had in the first few books?
You mean stopping an evil wizard (a dude that murders unicorns and drinks their blood) from accomplishing eternal life?
Fighting a giant snake that was trying to murder students and also dealing with the ghost of said evil wizard that was sucking the life force out of a young girl to regain life?
Dealing with an escaped convict that was stalking the grounds of Hogwarts out for blood?
I'm not too fond of her death count in the last couple books, but I don't hold them against her. I save that distinction for Joss Whedon. I mean it was pretty much established when this series started that it was building up to something, and that something was not a group hug.
