There's a moment in
Harry Potter And The Deathly Hallows: Part One when it's not entirely clear what's going on or why certain characters are doing certain things, and you get the feeling that the answer lies somewhere in the source novel. Which would be fine, except that moment lasts about 146 minutes.
It's not that it's not an enjoyable film, because it is, but it's a bit annoying to have to hunt out the nearest Potterologist afterwards and ask why Harry's stashed a piece of broken mirror in his sock, or why that old dear suddenly turned into a snake, or how many horcruxes there are / have been found / have been destroyed, or, most bafflingly, what kind of magic keeps Mrs Weasley's gigantic norks from dragging on the floor. Because none of those questions are answered within the film.
Director David Yates, having already made two bloated epics in the series, continues to fling everything at the screen with wild abandon regardless of whether or not it's necessary or makes sense, and frankly why should he care? He could film Harry Potter washing up for two and a half hours and it would still be the number one film of the year at the box office.
Fortunately there aren't any scenes of Harry doing the dishes, and in actual fact there are some great moments in this film. There's a cute dance scene that could have been horrendous but turns out very sweet, a genuinely moving death scene, a fantastic animated sequence and a remarkably saucy bit of nekkidness that will be most welcome to certain sections of the audience. I imagine.
It's just frustrating that it's all surrounded by gaping plot holes and fumbled storytelling. When you're heading into the final part of an eight-film series and it's still unclear exactly what the protagonists still have left to do to defeat the bad guy, or what the difference between a horcrux and a deathly hallow is, or indeed why nobody bothered to mention the titular Macguffins until two hours into the running time, then something, somewhere, has gone awry.
Still, despite all this it's ludicrously enjoyable nonsense, there's bugger all else on this autumn to rival it and if nothing else it does give you a chance to contemplate the remarkable engineering that must go into Julie Walters' over-the-shoulder boulder holders.
Harry Potter has come to an end. I’m sure to miss you all. But I’m so excited for their red carpet.
ReplyDelete...and for those of you who actually WOULD like to see Mrs Weasley nekkid:
ReplyDeletetoo bad the series of harry potter ends..but i heard daniel sayd that he's tired to be in the same movie for 10 years..
ReplyDeleteYou seem to be forgetting that Harry Potter was written for young children. It is legitimate for a film reviewer to attend an industry screening of HP:TDH pt.1, but in general no adult should be allowed in a cinema showing the film unless accompanied by a small child. (Who will be able to explain why HP puts a piece of broken mirror in his sock or why you might turn into a snake - if you are not a hissterical black adder already.)
ReplyDeleteFrom an adult point of view the film must seem deathly hollow.
I've been calling chesty actresses "Titular Heroines" for years.
ReplyDeleteTony, if you look around any audience for a HP film you'll notice the grown-ups are just as into it as the kids. Children who were 9 when the first film came out are adults themselves now. These films are for everyone and with the amount of money spent on them they should be written and directed for that broad audience. The last thing anybody needs is a child explaing all the back story throughout the film.
ReplyDeletePuss in Boots and Jack in the Beanstalk pantos have many adults in the audience and many a double entendre uttered on stage for their benefit, but that hardly makes them adult mainstream theatre. Harry Potter films belong in the same category as the pantos. Perhaps youngsters at the time of the first HP film are taking family kids along to the new HP film. I used to watch Sesame Street and Play School with my kids when they were young but that hardly makes them adult viewing. I still think adults should not be going to HP films unless accompanied by achild.
ReplyDeleteTony, I love you but you're wrong. x
ReplyDeleteExcellent review Mr Suit, quite accurate, especially for those of us who haven't read the books.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with Tony as well - panto? Seriously; the stories are a lot more than panto can offer. There's no denying it's appeal across ALL ages and that's what is going to give Harry Potter real retaining power.
ReplyDeleteLoved this review by the way, very funny! My attempt is here: http://note2screen.blogspot.com/2010/11/review-of-harry-potter-and-deathly.html