| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Demisemicenturian |
Posted - 07/06/2009 : 22:03:45
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part I and Part II
I have eventually got round to reading this, finishing it Friday. Afterwards, I spoke to the friend that I borrowed the book from (about two years ago); she mentioned that she had heard that it was going to be two films, and when I confirmed that that was definitely the case (as I knew from here), she was quite shocked. As she -- like one of Rock Golf's reviews -- pointed out, about half of the book is just about them going camping. The first 500 pages can quite easily be fitted into about an hour, I.M.O. Even before reading it, I had not been happy about the planned split, but now it seems especially strange. There was much more in The Order of the Phoenix for them to fit in one film, which they did, just about. What on Earth is going to be in the first of these two?
I would have liked a couple more characters to be covered in the epilogue, so I hope that the second film adds that, at least.
On a maintenance issue (which I may as well include here since it needs to be covered by the same spoiler warning), I've mentioned before that we really ought to address tidying reviews into the correct film as far as possible. As far as I can tell, there isn't likely to be any existing review that cannot go in one or other. I suggest that any review about the camping trip, Godric's Hollow, the Horcruxes or Hallows in general (other than all the Hallows/goodbye puns), Gringotts &c. should go into Part I for now, along with any reference to its being the seventh film (luckily, thefoxboy's "7 Potters" refers to an event near the beginning). Any review referencing the battle at Hogwarts, Voldemort's death, Snape's death, Fred's death &c. should go into Part II, along with any mention of its being the last film or of their adult lives. I think it would be better to do this now rather than wait for the films, as it is unlikely that many will be moved erroneously and there are starting to be quite a few duplicates. It's also not fair for people who may visit the Part I page after seeing that film to see spoilers there for Part II. |
| 11 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Demisemicenturian |
Posted - 11/24/2010 : 23:48:41
The only applause-inducing films I can remember are all three Star Wars re-releases. |
| BaftaBaby |
Posted - 11/24/2010 : 23:20:13
quote:
Originally posted by Chris C
This is the only movie I've ever been to, apart from Avatar, where there was applause at the end. (this is not meant to be an endorsement, I'm just sayin')
Once upon a time I worked at The Maidment, a re-run house on Bleecker Street. Whenever we'd schedule One-Eyed Jacks [which I'm sure I saw over 50 times], the audience always applauded twice - once when Brando kills Malden, and again over the end credits. Never failed. Genius film.
Sigh ...
|
| Chris C |
Posted - 11/24/2010 : 23:10:50
Despite all the criticism (for various reasons), this looks like being another box-office biggie. Millions of fans will watch it, regardless, and most others either won't bother or will wait for the DVD rental.
This is the only movie I've ever been to, apart from Avatar, where there was applause at the end. (this is not meant to be an endorsement, I'm just sayin') |
| Demisemicenturian |
Posted - 11/22/2010 : 22:42:49
I quite liked it, although I stand by my earlier opinion that one film would have sufficed. I don't agree at all that die-hard fans automatically forgive the films' flaws or that many people who haven't read the books don't go to see the films. In my case, I think the books are only pretty good (derivative but no more so than The Lord of the Rings or the Chronicles of Narnia) and the films are weaker but still quite good in the main.
The Three Brothers animation makes a nice change from the rest of the series although it is not at all original in itself. Always glad to see Luna, my favourite character in the books and the best cast one in the films. Liked her father too. All the scenes looked good to me, other than close shots of the tent.
I was also pretty pleased with myself for noticing a translation error in the second Polish sentence on screen. 
4/5
Benj, I'm going to go through and report the misplaced reviews (again). I'm not going to add individual comments, but all those reported today are fresh after my seeing the film. |
| thefoxboy |
Posted - 11/22/2010 : 03:07:48
quote:
Originally posted by thefoxbo11
quote:
Originally posted by Chris C
If you're an HP fan go and see. If you're not, or you've never seen an HP film before, this is not the one to start with.
Correct.
Oh, btw, I didn't like it. I not a fan but have seen all the movies.
The scene when Hermione was telling the Tale Of The Three Brothers woke me up, one of the rare bits that I liked.
Ralph Fiennes and Bonham Carter are great and would have liked more Rickman.
|
| Sean |
Posted - 11/21/2010 : 23:41:23
quote:
Originally posted by demonXIc
Daniel Radcliffe is still an emotional vacuum. He's got no range - no genuine charisma or ability to bring any light or shade to what he has to do, which is a lot. He can't even smile convincingly. And let's not mention the dancing - awkward as that is meant to be - the whole cinema groaned. It's a shame really because with a better central actor the whole series could have been really special, rather than occasionally embarrassing. It's a poison chalice of course because the whole series has been packed from the start with brilliant British talent in all of the adult roles. That means when an actor with real stature or understanding of the craft is on the screen the comparison is even starker - Radcliffe sharing a scene with Ralph Fiennes or Gary Oldman or Michael Gambon is painful.
Agreed. If the series was subject to re-auditioning* at about No 3 or 4 none of the three protagonists would get a role. They were great in HP1 but now they're clearly the worst actors in the series. I don't think any of them have an acting career much beyond HP8.
*I wish the producers had had the balls to make a tough decision after HP3 and re-audition for the three major roles. Sure, they'd have the tweenies marching in the streets, but being realistic here they're ALL going to go see it anyway. The end result could have been a fantasy series with real staying power. As it is, I can't imagine wanting to watch it again.
|
| demonic |
Posted - 11/21/2010 : 22:56:50
I didn't like it, but then I didn't expect to like it all that much. For me the whole series has been largely ordinary, all have been middle of the road films, and this one fits that mould. Because the books are so loved (again, not particularly by me - they're competent, quite exciting but derivative novels for children) a hell of lot of leeway is given by the fans to the flaws of the films. Like the others in the series there are some good moments, particularly in the darker areas, but it's seriously hamstrung by two big things:
Daniel Radcliffe is still an emotional vacuum. He's got no range - no genuine charisma or ability to bring any light or shade to what he has to do, which is a lot. He can't even smile convincingly. And let's not mention the dancing - awkward as that is meant to be - the whole cinema groaned. It's a shame really because with a better central actor the whole series could have been really special, rather than occasionally embarrassing. It's a poison chalice of course because the whole series has been packed from the start with brilliant British talent in all of the adult roles. That means when an actor with real stature or understanding of the craft is on the screen the comparison is even starker - Radcliffe sharing a scene with Ralph Fiennes or Gary Oldman or Michael Gambon is painful.
Secondly the screenplay is utterly horrible. Always has been. The dialogue is bad, the logic bizarre - especially if you don't know the details of the book you'll be utterly lost and confused.
To be more specific - because they've spilt the story to fit more in they really take their time, but curiously that doesn't mean there more that happens in the film. They just take a lot longer over set pieces that don't deserve the time - which makes me think this film, and all of them since the first couple, have only really been made for people who love the books. If you didn't love them there'd be practically nothing for you to enjoy watching these long, sometimes confusing movies of suspect script and bad acting from the lead. The "camping" section is a long and serious lull where all of the attention sits entirely on Harry, Ron and Hermione and they aren't strong enough to handle that amount of exposure without something to distract from their acting. Actually that's a little unfair - Emma Watson comes out of it pretty well and will probably have a decent career in later years because she looks good and can handle emotions better than her co-stars. You also start thinking about problems with the plot - and that's the last thing you need in a fantasy movie.
What I liked: the darker elements stand up well, as usual - particularly Fiennes who is a convincing and menacing. It all looks pretty good and it's nice to see some real locations to hook the fantasy back into the real world. The last death of the film is surprisingly effective but that just made me wonder why two previous deaths of fairly significant characters were only reported and not seen in any way. That might be consistent to the book... but this is a film adaptation. Another example of the shoddy job Steven Kloves does as a screenwriter and adapter. For me the gold standard of fantasy fiction adaptation is Peter Jackson's work on Lord of the Rings (it helps that the source material is pretty well impeccable) - there's really no comparison.
Finally it's worth saying I went with a bunch of work colleagues - most of whom were die hard fans and knew every moment as it happened and what was missing, and they laughed and cried along with it all. One friend, like me, isn't a fan, and we sat moderately entertained, sometimes bored, sometimes annoyed. Fair to say then I agree with Chris. The diehards aren't going to care if it's rubbish or not, because in the grand scheme of things they all have been in one way or another; people who don't care probably won't go anyway. It'll be a massive hit. |
| thefoxboy |
Posted - 11/21/2010 : 21:20:59
quote:
Originally posted by Chris C
If you're an HP fan go and see. If you're not, or you've never seen an HP film before, this is not the one to start with.
Correct.
|
| Chris C |
Posted - 11/21/2010 : 19:16:07
Family trip yesterday afternoon to see Part 1. If you're an HP fan go and see. If you're not, or you've never seen an HP film before, this is not the one to start with. It picks up where the previous one left off, and there are a number of unfinished story threads at the end. Essentially it is a road trip, with a couple of characters meeting their deaths in the process. The whole 144 minutes flew by, and everything is set nicely for the finale. I have only 2 major criticisms:
1) It's very dark (lighting), almost too dark. It's a good thing that it is not in 3D, or you wouldn't be able to see anything at all.
2) There's a couple of chase/fight scenes where handheld cameras have been used, with some very quick changes of PoV. Not for me, thanks. |
| Demisemicenturian |
Posted - 11/06/2010 : 22:39:16
This is now very urgent. The first Deathly Hallows film is about to come out in a couple of weeks and it would be very unfair if people read the page here after seeing it and got spoilers for the last film. |
| Demisemicenturian |
Posted - 07/24/2010 : 20:30:42
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
On a maintenance issue (which I may as well include here since it needs to be covered by the same spoiler warning), I've mentioned before that we really ought to address tidying reviews into the correct film as far as possible. As far as I can tell, there isn't likely to be any existing review that cannot go in one or other. I suggest that any review about the camping trip, Godric's Hollow, the Horcruxes or Hallows in general (other than all the Hallows/goodbye puns), Gringotts &c. should go into Part I for now, along with any reference to its being the seventh film (luckily, thefoxboy's "7 Potters" refers to an event near the beginning). Any review referencing the battle at Hogwarts, Voldemort's death, Snape's death, Fred's death &c. should go into Part II, along with any mention of its being the last film or of their adult lives. I think it would be better to do this now rather than wait for the films, as it is unlikely that many will be moved erroneously and there are starting to be quite a few duplicates. It's also not fair for people who may visit the Part I page after seeing that film to see spoilers there for Part II.
Part I will come out this year, so this really needs sorting out. It also may as well be done before book readers come to the site, as it is a big upcoming release so there is a fair chance they'll visit its page.
To make things easier, I've gone through and reported all the reviews that definitely or may need moving. In the latter case, I've selected Other problem and indicated that I'm not sure. Where I have selected This review is listed against the wrong film/not reported the review at all, I'm certain it needs to move/stay. |
|
|
