Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1 review

[Porkchopexpress]

Originally Posted by MrSmith70

The story only really facilitates for HP fans with prior knowledge of whats going on, for everyone else we're left guessing (horcruxes?), and is in desperate need of a 'Previously, on Harry Potter'. ?

Woah there Nelly!

Who in their right mind would see part 7 of a series with no prior knowledge? You can't really criticise it for not being an hour of "Previously on Harry Potter...".

Couldn't really imagine the same criticism aimed at say 'Return of the King'.

I haven't seen it yet, but I quite like the gloomy cinematography of the trailers, can you confirm or deny that
Rupert Grint says 'Bloody Hell!' at least once?

Because it's not an HP film if he doesn't!

[MrSmith70]

Dont know about bloody hell but he does say Blimey!!

[Jeffbiscuits]

Went to see this on Saturday morning and it was alright. With this film the series seems to have given up any attempt to cater for the younger children it originally seemed to be marketed for. Many themes dealt with in this film are handled very explicitly. Violence and even torture of this kind were things I would never have expected to see in a Harry potter film. A death early on in the film is dealt with in a very throwaway fashion. Despite being very uneven the film's high points bring it back up. Emma Watson and rupert grint are a joy to watch and deal with these mature themes perfectly. The great Peter mullan getting big budget screen time is very welcome. I wouldn't recommend anyone to take young kids to see this( hopefully jaykay might agree here) . My seven year old was asking every ten minutes when Harry was going to go to the school and had completely lost interest by the end and started telling jokes to his mum.

[jaykays hat]

Originally Posted by Jeffbiscuits

Went to see this on Saturday morning and it was alright. With this film the series seems to have given up any attempt to cater for the younger children it originally seemed to be marketed for. Many themes dealt with in this film are handled very explicitly. Violence and even torture of this kind were things I would never have expected to see in a Harry potter film. A death early on in the film is dealt with in a very throwaway fashion. Despite being very uneven the film's high points bring it back up. Emma Watson and rupert grint are a joy to watch and deal with these mature themes perfectly. The great Peter mullan getting big budget screen time is very welcome. I wouldn't recommend anyone to take young kids to see this( hopefully jaykay might agree here) . My seven year old was asking every ten minutes when Harry was going to go to the school and had completely lost interest by the end and started telling jokes to his mum.

I saw this yesterday morning and was supposed to take my 10 year old but he was ill so I took my 15 year old nephew instead and it was more suited to the 15 year old. I think my son would have got bored. I watched one of the early films on TV at the weekend and they are so far apart now, the last couple have been so dark and this one is the scariest one yet. I did enjoy this a lot more than the last one and am looking forward to the second part.

[Jeffbiscuits]

Originally Posted by jaykays hat

I saw this yesterday morning and was supposed to take my 10 year old but he was ill so I took my 15 year old nephew instead and it was more suited to the 15 year old. I think my son would have got bored. I watched one of the early films on TV at the weekend and they are so far apart now, the last couple have been so dark and this one is the scariest one yet. I did enjoy this a lot more than the last one and am looking forward to the second part.

I completely agree. I am definitely looking forward to the second part now. I won't have any expectations of distracting kiddie film this time though.

[Zippykins1]

It's a cliche to say that each harry potter film gets darker and more adult, but this time the claim is really justified - allusions to the Nazis and naked kissing visions, bloody hell, as Ron would say.

I always judge these films much less harshly than other things because I really like the books and the world of harry potter as a whole, and I think this was a decent adaptation of the first half of the last book. Emma Watson has always annoyed me, but I finally warmed to her this time round. I also really liked the animated 'story of the 3 brothers' section.

Looking forward to the final instalment now - there better be more Alan Rickman in that one though!

[White94]

Good movie? Definetly! However, as it's a two parter the end is kind of an anti-climax, it can't have that same exploding ending as the other. However, good film overall, funny at times! Cant wait for Part 2 to be released!

One quotation that must be said (bad judgement or intentional?):
Ron: "It's 10 inches, nothing special"

[fortunesfool]

Beautifully shot as per usual; these really art the most artful blockbusters around at the moment.

I was disappointed though, but then I suspected I would be. The first half of the book is a rambling rip-off of Lord of the Rings (they take turns wearing the evil object around their neck which affects their emotions - really Rowling?) and the kids just aren't interesting enough to carry the attention. It just stumbles from one character introducing, exposition heavy scene to the next, never giving you enough time to get to know anyone.

There are a few fun set-pieces along the way - The Ministry of magic sequence for example, but the need to explain, explain, explain really drags it down.

Editing down Rowlings indulgent text has helped in other movies (Order of the Phoenix) but here they seem to have held onto more because they were splitting it. And this one needed it more than the others - why keep 7 horcruxes for the films, knowing each one was going to have to be explained and be a waste of valuable screentime.

Still, the last one should be a knock out, it's just a pity we had to sit through 2 hours of exposition to set it up. Blame Rowling for that though, it's not the film-makers faults.

How uncannily real were the elf's????

[Roba Fett]

Originally Posted by fortunesfool

How uncannily real were the elf's????

Very convincing. The cgi has come a long way in this franchise.

I agree with your review. Very LOTR'esque and exposition heavy. I enjoyed it, but not as much as I thought I would after the last fantastic installment. However, surely the blame does lie with the studio / film makers? I've not read the books but did The Deathly Hallows really require two parts? The other book to film adaptations have proved very successful - the decision to split this final book just smacks of greed. I get the impression a 150 minute (or 180 if necessary) complete movie would've been a rollicking adventure and very satisfying.

I must say the animated segment is inspired and actually compliments the film immensely.

[fortunesfool]

I think Rowling has a significant hand in what makes it into the movies. I think splitting it in two is a good idea, it gets most of the exposition out of the way before the finale. Having said that, there's still loads to come.

Paying off Snapes character alone is gonna be a decent chunk of screentime, plus there's some convoluted nonsense involving the 'elder wand'.

Still, massive battle for Hogwarts which will be cool.