November often makes me think of the Harry Potter movies. I didn't
watch any of them in a theater until HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY
HALLOWS - PART 1 on 19 November 2010, and finding that audience too
disruptive for my enjoyment, I returned the following day to see the
movie again. I'd only recently finished reading the books, which I did
well out their order, beginning with the final book,
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows
earlier that year I think (maybe near the end of 2009). Being in first
grade and already an avid reader by the time the second book in the
series,
Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, was published, I
would have been a likely candidate for the series' immense readership
except that my well-meaning parents were not so keen on my reading of
any books that might risk my soul's damnation. Yes, it was ridiculous
in hindsight, but within all frames of the burdens of parenting, living
in a conservative Christian community where they were actually more
liberal than many, and their wholly admirable desire to live the best
lives they could according to their values, I understand their concerns,
and as a zealous child, I was perfectly willing to embrace the
perspective that Harry Potter was evil. I don't think my parents were
too keen toward that development either, preferring to simply let this
cultural phenomenon go by without making a big deal of it one way or
another. But with the passage of time, the better powers of discernment
come to all those who desire them, and by the time I was in my teenage
years, it wasn't such a big deal. In 2009, ahead of the release of
HARRY POTTER AND THE HALF-BLOOD PRINCE, the ABC network played each
movie, one per Saturday, in the series up to that time. The first few
were mostly background noise for me while my brothers watched, although
there were a couple of moments which caught my interest, but I was
really sucked in by HARRY POTTER AND THE GOBLET OF FIRE. My taste in
movies has always run toward the emotional and mythic, and the fourth
movie in the series possessed those qualities in a way the previous few
hadn't at the time. I really, really liked that one, and I would watch
less than legally posted scenes of the film on YouTube with repetition.
Although I had very little money to spend (my parents gave me an
allowance of $20 per month, plus gas and additional spending money when
necessary for specific social activities in order to focus more on
school rather than a job), I splurged most of my money for a month on a
DVD of GOBLET OF FIRE. I was pretty well caught up on the timeline of
the story through the movies, and eager to learn the conclusion, I
checked out
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows from the school
library, and it was so much better than I expected. With a full
schedule as a high school senior, I still found time to whip through the
book in a little under a week's time, reading into the wee hours of the
night the words that rekindled my long-held but somewhat dormant
fascination with world myths and folklore. I gravitate toward movies
above other forms of storytelling for their emotional potency and
accessibility, but I can think of few other times that reading a book
hit me on such an emotional gut level. I used to have a college
instructor who seemed to take pleasure in telling his classes that the
Harry Potter series were not "great literature", and while I don't know a
whole lot about what makes great literature, I do know what makes a
great story, and Harry Potter has that much in droves. I don't remember
the exact order in which I read the rest of the books, other than I
think
Harry Potter and Prisoner of Azkaban was the last one I got to, and the connective tissue was largely provided by the movies.
It's
interesting to see so many 'Help Wanted' signs posted outside
businesses five years later, but back in 2010, I had graduated from high
school and saw most of my friends move on to college and out of town,
and two years into the Great Recession, even finding a minimum wage job
seemed to be an insurmountable task, resulting in several months that
were like an sudden ice cold bath of isolation and purposelessness. But
something that didn't cost money was the public library, and I poured
myself into reading those books. Perhaps it was just as well that I did
not read the books as a child, because in all likelihood, I would have
been obsessed. During those very depressing months of fall and winter
in 2010, I drew a lot of emotional energy from those books and movies
and found something to which I could devote my interests outside of the
fruitless job hunt. By the time HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS -
PART 2 opened in theaters, I had a job selling those tickets to the
masses.
Typically in film criticism, it's frowned upon to include
consideration of and comparison to the book source material, but in this
case, I think there are some points of interest, and in some cases, my
personal experience with the movies is, for better or worse, is partly
informed by my experience with the books. So shut up and deal. Also,
spoilers, obviously.
HARRY POTTER AND THE PHILOSOPHER'S STONE (aka HARRY POTTER AND THE SORCERER'S STONE)
Released 16 November 2003
Directed by Chris Columbus
Starring:
Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, Emma Watson, Robbie Coltrane, Richard
Harris, Maggie Smith, Alan Rickman, Ian Hart, Richard Griffiths, Fiona
Shaw, Tom Felton, Julie Walters, John Cleese, Warwick Davis, Harry
Melling
Rated PG for some scary moments and mild language.
152 minutes
★★1/2
At
152 minutes, HARRY POTTER AND THE PHILOSOPHER'S STONE (released in some
markets, including the U.S., as HARRY POTTER AND THE SORCERER'S STONE,
although I prefer the original title) is a very long family film. It's
heavy on the whimsy, arguably too faithful in its adaptation, and
sometimes clumsily executed. It's definitely one of the weakest of the
eight films, but upon rewatching it ahead of this writing, I found it
more affable then I previously thought, largely thanks to the atypically
strong child actors' performances. It lays a lot the ground for the
later, better installments to build on, and a lot of its weaknesses are
inherited from the source material, where J.K. Rowling's abilities as a
writer clearly evolve through the progression of the series. Of course,
with the phenomenal success of that source material (the series was
already on Book 4 by the time the first film was released), producer
David Heyman's Heyday Films and Warner Brothers had a guaranteed hit and
were able to go all out on the production, which is suitably lavish,
and more eccentric than the films that followed, as the team is still
figuring out the look and style of this world.
With such a high
profile adaptation, it wasn't surprising that Steven Spielberg's name
came up, and Spielberg pitched the idea of making it as an animated
film, something undoubtedly very different from the ultimate product,
not to mention different from what Rowling and Heyday had in mind.
Spielberg eventually declined the offer (Rowling refutes rumors that she
"veto-ed" Spielberg, or even that she had the power to do so if she had
wanted to), but his influence is apparent to a certain degree,
regardless. The chosen director of the film, Chris Columbus, is heavily
influenced by Spielberg throughout his career, and he got his big break
when Spielberg's company Amblin Entertainment produced three of his
scripts; GREMLINS, THE GOONIES and YOUNG SHERLOCK HOLMES. Columbus is a
steady, proficient hand as director, but his sentiments run toward the
saccharine and cutesy. He is more restrained than usual with
PHILOSOPHER'S STONE, where the dominating influence comes from the
source material and the previously established brand. The film conveys a
sufficient sense of wonder while drawing nearly all its conceptual
inventiveness from Rowling's book, but the visual renderings are
occasionally worth reveling in. This sense of wonder is strongest in
the Diagon Alley sequence, where we get a peek at the everyday conduct
and commerce of the wizarding world in the Gringotts Bank, Ollivander's
Wand Shop and other places of magical business. The film brings over
weaknesses from the book too, though. Some of these are arguably
quibbles, such as the annoying trend of poorly contrived last-minute
victories that applies both to the problematic but not unmerited game of
Quidditch where it seems nothing anyone does makes a difference outside
of catching the Snitch (the Quidditch visual effects have not aged
terribly well, either), and worse, Dumbledore's last minute rendering of
just enough points to Gryffindor for them to win the House Cup against
the previous leader by a substantial margin, Slytherin. It's no wonder
all bad wizards come out of Slytherin, when the headmaster is pulling
fast ones like that on them. That's another thing- you'd think a house
with as troubling a legacy as Slytherin would prompt some readjustment
of their practices, if not the elimination of that house, but it's
convenient so it stays. Speaking of which, Robbie Coltrane is excellent
in the role of Hagrid, the buffonish but sweet half-giant
groundskeeper, but the use of his character in providing plot points as
needed, then reciting, "I should not have said that," as an excuse is a
bit lazy.
All the child actors are very good, but Daniel
Radcliffe, Rupert Grint and Emma Watson, in the roles of Harry, Ron and
Hermoine, respectively, are real finds who play their characters with
precocious authenticity. Young Watson, in particular, is a spark of
energy as the slightly arrogant but also slightly insecure girl genius,
and they all have a strong, inimitable interplay without ever coming
across as cloying or irritating. The supporting cast is famously
fleshed out with an impressive array of veteran British actors, the
highlight of this installment being Coltrane, but others such as John
Hurt as the wandmaker Mr. Ollivander and Richard Griffiths as Harry's
cruel uncle Vernon Dursley lend nicely to the rich mixing pot of fairy
tale and folklore-styled characters. On the other hand, John Cleese is
miscast as the Gryffindor house ghost Nearly Headless Nick, and the
entire approach to the Hogwarts ghosts feels wrong as they aim for an
overtly kid-friendly whimsy that is out of place in what's essentially a
fable about death (this misguided approach is apparently noted in the
progression of the series as the ghosts quickly fade into the background
until directly called upon by the plot in the final chapter).
The
overall tone of the movie is strange- largely faithful to the book, but
the balance between Dickensian-inspired dark whimsy and Gothic fantasy,
both through a commercial Hollywood filter, is weird, albeit not
entirely flawed. The stories in this series, while appealing to a broad
range, aim most directly at audiences of an age congruent to the age of
its central characters which progresses with each installment, and thus
PHILOSOPHER'S STONE, featuring Harry and Co. as "first years" of age
11, is the most family-friendly. The characters are fairly cartoonish,
especially the villains, and the perils are heavily punctuated with
broad humor (i.e., "troll bogies"), however, especially in the climactic
confrontation between Harry and a somewhat disembodied Lord Voldemort
on the backside of Professor Quirrell's head, things get unexpectedly
menacing at times. Columbus is clearly more inclined toward the
lighthearted flights of fancy, not that one tone or the other benefits
from his interest or lack thereof. For better and worse, it's a
solid-enough introduction to the fantasy world of Harry Potter that hews
closely to the source material, or at least a certain interpretation of
such, but most importantly, it lays the ground work for a larger story
that gets better and better.
Top 3 of HARRY POTTER AND THE PHILOSOPHER'S STONE
- Child casting: Committed for a decade after, the child
casting of the film is exceptional, especially in the cases of the three
leads, and from there, especially in the case of Emma Watson as
Hermoine, who is chipper and annoying in the improbably best way.
- Sets & Production Design: Again, also setting a template
for several more films but to a more flexible degree, the
Dickensian/Arthurian/storybook hybrid look of the wizarding world (my
favorite sets are in Diagon Alley) makes for the kind of world that you can't help but want to explore.
- The Sorting Hat: That hat is cool.
Bottom 3 of HARRY POTTER AND THE PHILOSOPHER'S STONE
- Dumbledore's Last Minute Points: When the headmaster is
screwing them over as royally as this, it's little wonder that Slytherin
House has so many wizards gone bad.
- Quirrell's Monologuing: It's not a good thing when someone
has to re-explain the whole plot at the end of the film, and Quirrell's
hammy reveal is just dumb. Chalk that one up primarily to Ms. Rowling's
still-emerging skills as a writer.
- "I should not have said that. I should not have said that.": Indeed you shouldn't have, Hagrid. That's just lazy storytelling.
HARRY POTTER AND THE CHAMBER OF SECRETS
Released 15 November 2002
Directed by Chris Columbus
Starring:
Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, Emma Watson, Kenneth Branagh, Jason
Isaacs, Robbie Coltrane, Richard Harris, Richard Griffiths, Fiona Shaw,
Alan Rickman, Julie Walters, Bonnie Wright, Tom Felton, David Bradley,
Maggie Smith, Christian Coulson
Rated PG for scary moments, some creature violence and mild language.
161 minutes
★★1/2
I
generally think of the arc of the Harry Potter series as fairly
consistently bending upward, but upon re-watching CHAMBER OF SECRETS, it
seemed like a step down, albeit a small one, from PHILOSOPHER'S STONE.
CHAMBER OF SECRETS is a film that is conceptually very strong, building
on the fantasy world established in the previous film with exciting and
darker developments that make the world of the broader story better,
but the individual episode is scattershot, corny and bloated. Even
still, if it's the weakest in the series, it's still pretty good. Like
the previous film, but to a slightly more problematic degree, CHAMBER OF
SECRETS is thoroughly faithful to the source material, and the result
is an absurd 161-minute run time, the longest of the series. To be
fair, although it's ridiculously lengthy for the target family audience,
it moves along at a healthy pace.
With the wizarding world
established, the sequel delves further into its darker secrets and the
legacy of one of the school's founders, Salazar Slytherin (whose
denounced philosophies are curiously still maintained within one of the
school's four houses, but whatever), who touted the supremacy of magical
bloodlines, aka "purebloods", and believed magic folk born to non-magic
parents, aka "muggle-born", also known by the derisive slur "mudblood"
(basically the "n-word" of the wizard world), were illegitimate as
wizards and witches. This steps further into the nature of the broader
conflict of the Harry Potter saga, one that echos the greatest conflicts
of the real world 20th century, where exclusionist policies and
prejudice have collided with humanity at large. No doubt, the WWII
comparisons throughout the series and Voldemort's similarities to iconic
fascist figures are readily evident.
Elements of CHAMBER OF
SECRETS are darker than in the first film, in some cases very much so;
notably one of the petrified victims of a basilisk is a cat, strung up
by its tail with a message written in blood (the source of which is
unclear) on the wall. Several other characters are petrified by run-ins
with the basilisk, a massive snake unleashed by the "heir of Slytherin"
to terrorize muggle-born students. The basilisk doesn't typically turn
its victims into stone however, rather, a single look into one of its
eyes is instantly fatal, so it's more than a little convenient how all
of the several victims were lucky enough to only be petrified, whether
by seeing the eye through a mirror, or a reflection in a puddle, or a
ghost. The exception is Moaning Myrtle (played by Shirley Henderson,
who is actually 24 years senior of Daniel Radcliffe), the ghost of a
student killed by the basilisk years earlier, and not part of this
string of incidents. The final showdown in the Chamber of Secrets
between Harry and the Basilisk, under the control of a disembodied
Voldemort housed by an old diary, is satisfactorily menacing however,
combining practical animatronic effects and CGI. The diary, later
revealed in the series to be a "Horcrux", an object possessed with a
piece of Voldemort's soul, is also a considerably evocative image,
responding in automatic writing to written queries, and bleeding out ink
when Harry skewers it with a basilisk fang.
CHAMBER OF SECRETS
has the most prominent use of practical effects in the series, using
them especially in the service of creating fantasy creatures with
storybook qualities such as the squealing mandrake roots and giant
"acromantula" spiders, and the overall visuals are an improvement over
PHILOSOPHER'S STONE. But there is Dobby, a character that aims to be
endearing but falls over into ridiculous and cloying. Dobby isn't as
bad as being the Jar Jar Binks of Harry Potter; he's generally
tolerable, but the sooner his scenes pass, the better. He works a
little more successfully in THE DEATHLY HALLOWS PART 1, but even then,
he's a character whose translation from book to screen is clumsy.
Probably
the weakest aspect of CHAMBER OF SECRETS is the dearth of Hermoine as
she becomes one of the basilisk's petrified victims not long into the
second half. Hermoine is the glue that holds the trio together and
Watson is the most magnetic of the leads, so her absence is really felt
in the film's second half. Tonally, it's a little uneven, and the
post-climax scene of Harry, Ginny and Professor Lockhart flying out of
the Chamber of Secrets as Lockhart shouts, "It's just like magic!" is
probably the corniest, schmaltziest moment of the series. Speaking of
Gilderoy Lockhart, played by Kenneth Branagh, why did Dumbledore hire
him? Years 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 each introduce a new Defense Against the
Dark Arts teacher as one after the other they are revealed to be
villains, charlatans or more-or-less sacked, but Lockhart makes the
least sense, being apparently selected by Dumbledore (as opposed to
Dolores Umbridge, who is appointed by the overreaching Ministry of
Magic) despite being a transparently incompetent self-promoter. Branagh
is fine in the role, however, the original casting of Hugh Grant (who
dropped out due to scheduling conflicts) seems particularly inspired.
Richard
Harris appears for the last time as Dumbledore in CHAMBER OF SECRETS,
having died at 72 only a little more than a week before the film's
premiere, and although he's fine in the role, he lacks the commanding
presence that Michael Gambon could deliver in the later films when it
was called for. In fact, Dumbledore feels like a fairly minor element
in these first two films, showing up for appearances that are few and
far in between for gently humorous insights, but in the twilight of his
life, Harris always feels tired as the greatest wizard of his age.
Harris's Dumbledore is much more a mentor (which, to be fair, is how he
appears in the first couple books) than the significant and motivated
player which he later evolves into.
Top 3 of HARRY POTTER AND THE CHAMBER OF SECRETS
- Tom Riddle's Diary: It's a successfully creepy prop, and I can't deny the appeal of a book that spurts ink when stabbed with a basilisk fang.
- Practical Basilisk Effects: It doesn't always look convincing, but a giant animatronic snake lunging at the screen has inherent appeal.
- Feral Ford Anglia: The dumpy old flying car is pretty cool on
its own, but when it shows up in the Forbidden Forest having gone
native, it steals the show momentarily.
Bottom 3 of HARRY POTTER AND THE CHAMBER OF SECRETS
- Dobby: Oh, Dobby. Not a fan.
- Running Time: 161 minutes is nearly an hour too long for most films.
- "It's just like magic!": You don't always see Chris Columbus' directorial stamp in these movies. This is one moment where you can't miss it.
HARRY POTTER AND THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN
Released 4 June 2004
Directed by Alfonso Cuaron
Starring:
Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, Emma Watson, David Thewlis, Robbie
Coltrane, Gary Oldman, Emma Thompson, Richard Griffiths, Fiona Shaw, Pam
Ferris, Alan Rickman, Maggie Smith, Michael Gambon, Tom Felton, Lee
Ingleby
Rated PG for frightening moments, creature violence and mild language.
142 minutes
★★★
PRISONER
OF AZKABAN is where the series really starts to get interesting,
deviating from the bloated children's high fantasy of the first two
films directed by Chris Columbus, with brilliant Mexican filmmaker
Alfonso Cuaron taking the reins to give it a darker, slightly quirkier
and overall more heartfelt tone that is distinct within the series.
Although I do not go in for the conventional wisdom that it is the best
of the series, I don't deny that it is very good, and also the most
succinct vision of the Harry Potter world. There are two ideal
approaches to the material, and one is Cuaron's darkly whimsical,
Halloween-style adventure, and the other is David Yates' somber,
high-stakes myth which comes into play later in the series. Cuaron and
his crew cannot be blamed for the movie's most noteworthy shortcomings
however, unless they had opted to deviate substantially from the source
material in the third act, as both the movie and the book share a
particularly troublesome, or shall we say,
lame, plot twist.
Year
3 brings Harry back to Hogwarts where there is a great deal of concern
over the recent escape of a notorious murderer from the maximum security
wizard prison of Azkaban. Sirius Black, the fugitive in question, is
played by Gary Oldman, whose reputation for playing over-the-top
villains lends itself nicely to the red herring menace of Black. Until
the final act, the story is less a coherent narrative than it is a
series of smaller adventures throughout the wizarding world with the
slowly emerging story of Sirius gradually emerging in the background,
returning to the world-building structure of PHILOSOPHER'S STONE. In
this sense, it has the least motivated plot of the films, Cuaron's deft
hand guides it through these adventures with a unifying theme about
countering fear.
The only really solid, noble Defense Against the
Dark Arts professor during Harry's education (unless you count Snape),
Remus Lupin is played by David Thewlis as a "gay junkie", as reportedly
directed by Cuaron, an implication refuted by later installments but one
that works ideally for the purposes of this story. Unfortunately, but
also understandably, both Lupin and Black are forced into what are
essentially background roles in the subsequent installments (although
ORDER OF THE PHOENIX does its darnedest to service Black), resulting in
underwhelming payoffs for the conclusions of each character.
Dumbledore
still plays a similar role to that which he did in the previous two
films, mostly as a side player who shows up to offer a couple brief
words of sage advice to the young heroes. With the passing of Richard
Harris mere days before the premiere of CHAMBER OF SECRETS, PRISONER OF
AZKABAN introduces the second of the two Dumbledores, Michael Gambon,
and with all due respect to Harris, Gambon brings a greater strength of
command to the character that becomes imperative later in the series.
In terms of the books, Rowling's skills as a writer evolve throughout the series, but in the particular case of
Prisoner of Azkaban,
I'd argue that while her writing is improved past the previous two
books, it's the most flawed in terms of narrative. When you introduce
time travel to a story in which it is not integral to the plot, you're
always asking for trouble, and that damn Time Turner is trouble. It
opens up too many complications and hypotheticals that the larger
narrative simply can't afford attention to, so it remains an isolated
element in the series. You don't have to look hard to find some jerk on
the internet asking why anything in the Harry Potter world couldn't
have been remedied through a few simple turns of the Time Turner. Yes,
it's a cheap shot and arguably invalid in terms of the larger narrative,
but the device is problematic regardless. On the upside, the way the
twice-played third act's series of events tie each other together is
intelligent and entertaining if taken within themselves.
Probably
the most noted evolution of the series within PRISONER OF AZKABAN is the
darkened tone. Cuaron mitigates that darkness slightly by applying it
to a whimsically fantastical Halloween-style tone (there are pumpkins
growing even when the story is in springtime, with the seasons of the
year otherwise clearly set by establishing shots of the Whomping Willow)
where many visuals are generally warped and blackened to some degree,
and students sing in a choir a song with words borrowed from the witches
of
Macbeth. The Dementors of course play a very large role in
this story as a literal physical manifestation of fear and depression
and are appropriately ghoulish as a faithful realization of the
creatures as described in the book with bony, decaying hands and
tattered cloaks. In this film and in their appearances later on in the
series however, the manner in which they devour their victims' souls is
frustrating, as we never see anyone actually meet their fate by a
Dementor, but the Dementors' victims appear to have an awful lot of
excess soul, or something to that effect, to expend before they use a
Patronus charm to finally repel the Dementor. That's probably
nitpicking, but it does seem curious. In the midst of a plot that lacks
a distinct thrust, Cuaron also brings a newly character-centric
approach to this world and matures the characters into forms more
befitting heroes of the imminent conflict.
Top 3 of HARRY POTTER AND THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN
- Professor Lupin: David Thewlis' Professor Lupin is never
again quite as good as he is in this film where he gets a spotlight,
being a pitiful, but not too tragic figure.
- Whomping Willow Transitions: The only film in the series that
really emphasizes the passing of the seasons outside of Christmas, the
recurring shots of the Whomping Willow dropping its leaves or sprouting
blossoms are a charming touch.
- Aunt Marge Floats Away: It's such a weird, funny moment when
Harry inadvertently inflates his bullying aunt like a helium balloon
followed by her floating away.
Bottom 3 of HARRY POTTER AND THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN
- The Time Turner: The movie uses it well enough I suppose, but
it's one of those plot devices that should never have been brought up
in the first place.
- Dementors Soul-Sucking: Clearly, the Dementors are sucking
something out of their victims' faces, and if it isn't soul, then what
is it, and if it is soul, how much do this people have to spare?
- Giant Jack-in-the-Box: When Lupin teaches his class how to
defeat a boggart, which transforms into your greatest fear, by turning
the boggart into something humorous, one girl transforms it into a giant
jack-in-the-box, and I suppose it's meant to be whimsical, but it's
actually horrifying.
HARRY POTTER AND THE GOBLET OF FIRE
Released 18 November 2005
Directed by Mike Newell
Starring:
Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, Emma Watson, Brendan Gleeson, Michael
Gambon, Robert Pattinson, Miranda Richardson, Robbie Coltrane, Frances
de la Tour, Stanislav Ianevski, Clemence Poesy, Timothy Spall, Ralph
Fiennes, Mark Williams, Roger Lloyd Pack, Jeff Rawle, David Tennant,
Katie Leung, Pedja Bjelac
Rated PG-13 for sequences of fantasy violence and frightening images.
157 minutes
★★★1/2
GOBLET
OF FIRE was the movie that pulled me into this series. It was the
first one I watched all the way through, and I watched it many times
after that. It was secretly a major staple of my movie diet during my
senior year of high school, but it wasn't the fantasy that drew me in
like it did for so many readers of the books. It was the heart, and
even the angst, of the teen drama. It was a highly romanticized version
of a lot of the things I was feeling at the time, and also spoke to my
interests in a wide range of myths and folklore from around the world. I
don't love quite as much now as I did in my teen years, but I still
love the big emotions of the high school-high fantasy melodrama, and
GOBLET OF FIRE is where the action picks up in a big, spectacular way.
There's a big transition in the series at GOBLET OF FIRE, not only in
plot where Lord Voldemort, the "big bad" of the saga, returns in a real
and physical sense, but also stylistically and tonally. It's the first
in the series with a PG-13 rating, although the line between PG and
PG-13 is very hazy in this series, at least from the third film through
the sixth. PRISONER OF AZKABAN carries the series into slightly more
mature territory than the first two films, but it's still clearly a kids
adventure with a dark whimsy and fairy tale tones (not at all to its
detriment, to be clear, but of a different nature), but GOBLET OF FIRE
feels a distinct shift into something resembling a high-stakes, mythic
action-adventure blockbuster. There are big action set-pieces tied
directly into the plot of the Triwizard Tournament, an international
wizarding games event revolving around three perilous competitions, the
first and grandest involving a confrontation with an ill-tempered
dragon, the second, a dive into a murky lake inhabited by unfriendly
merpeople and other threats, and the third and final task to navigate a
massive, labyrinthine hedge maze, a la THE SHINING, except that the maze
is living and even appears to devour and possess the competitors.
The
climactic showdown between Harry and a newly resurrected Lord Voldemort
(Ralph Fiennes, making his first appearance in the series) is one of
the highlights of the series, the first of the real life-or-death wizard
duels in the series and the most emotionally charged. For the first
time in the main narrative of the series, a non-villain is killed, and
the specters of several murder victims accompany the duel which is not
about winning or losing so much as surviving. Fiennes is perfect as the
supreme villain, one that pulls no punches whatsoever in a creepy and
malicious scene as Voldemort gleefully torments Harry in a show of power
and sadism for his cult of Death-Eaters following his perverse rebirth
from a bubbling cauldron soup of severed hand and stolen bones. There's
a real gravity at this point in the series where bad things can really
happen, and things can get ugly.
In fact, it's in lighter matters
where the film falters most. Humor is never this series's strong suit,
and it's often spotty with lots of jokes that are awkwardly broad or
overtly specific to the fantastical universe, and GOBLET OF FIRE leans
toward that kind of dumb comedy more heavily than the other movies.
Moments of slapstick, often involving the series's comedy mainstays Fred
and George Weasley, and gossip columnist Rita Skeeter (the Hedda Hopper
of the wizard world), and other moments that are just strange, such as a
woman pulling something out of a man's beard and eating it, are big
misfires. However, the smaller and relatable awkwardness revolving
around the pubescent courtship rituals and the Yule Ball works very well
and even brings quite a a bit of heart with it.
Directed by Mike
Newell, a journeyman director with a diverse body of work but a less
distinct artistic style than his predecessors in this series, GOBLET OF
FIRE is nonetheless a distinct product that shines on its own thanks to
Newell's ambition and the collective effort. Overall, the movie pumps
the series up to a new level of grandiose myth-making, even evident in
the score by Patrick Doyle, who replaces John Williams after the first
three films with big, romantic new themes while still retaining
Williams's main theme. It's bigger, grander and scarier, mostly to its
advantage, and opening new, larger doors to the world of Harry Potter.
Top 3 of HARRY POTTER AND THE GOBLET OF FIRE
- Voldemort Reborn in the Graveyard: Voldemort's rebirth is
suitably frightening and disturbing, and the subsequent duel between he
and Harry is a peak moment for the series as a whole.
- Harry and Ron Try to Ask Out Girls: "Blimey, Harry, you've slayed dragons. If you can't get a date, who can?" and "Why is it they always have to travel in packs?" The daunting requirements of young courtship are spoken true in humorous and bittersweet fashion.
- Patrick Doyle's Musical Score: Yeah, it's grandiose and bombastic, but Doyle has a highly romantic, sweeping style that suits the Triwizard Tournament well.
Bottom 3 of HARRY POTTER AND THE GOBLET OF FIRE
- Slapstick Humor: The broad slapstick comedy of this film is
really dumb a lot of the time, especially in relation to the Weasley
twins antics. There are good moments, like Hagrid stabbing Professor
Flitwick in the hand with a fork, but there's also lots of cringe-worthy
moments like Fred's and George's backfiring aging potion.
- Rita Skeeter: Perhaps they didn't realize it at the time, but
the character goes nowhere in the series after this, and in addition to
be annoying, she adds nothing.
- CGI Leprechaun: The details of the big wizarding sports event are interesting, but I do not like that dancing CGI leprechaun.
HARRY POTTER AND THE ORDER OF THE PHOENIX
Released 11 July 2007
Directed by David Yates
Starring:
Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, Emma Watson, Imelda Staunton, Michael
Gambon, Ralph Fiennes, Gary Oldman, Alan Rickman, Helena Bonham Carter,
Mark Williams, Julie Walters, Evanna Lynch, Emma Thompson, Robert Hardy,
Jason Isaacs, Katie Leung, Robbie Coltrane
Rated PG-13 for sequences of fantasy violence and frightening images.
138 minutes
★★★1/2
ORDER
OF THE PHOENIX introduces yet another new director, but in this case,
the one that would last through the completion of the series. Lesser
known than either Columbus, Cuaron or Newell when each had been brought
aboard, Yates was mostly a director of British television, including THE
GIRL IN THE CAFE in 2005, a romantic drama TV movie starring Bill Nighy
and written by LOVE ACTUALLY writer Richard Curtis. As with each
filmmaker of the series before him, Yates brings a new darkened edge to
this chapter, blending the blockbuster spectacle of GOBLET OF FIRE with a
slightly politically bent thriller that's cooler than its predecessor,
but nonetheless emotionally charged. ORDER OF THE PHOENIX is the movie
in the series that I seem to forget how much I like. It's funny,
exciting and even a little insightful while doing quite a bit with a
somewhat placeholder plot. Or rather, it's an expository plot,
reestablishing the story and stakes yet again following the events of
GOBLET OF FIRE, the fulcrum point of the larger conflict.
In a
saga revolving around the concept of death, ORDER OF THE PHOENIX is the
first film in which Harry can see the Thestrals, creatures which pull
the Hogwarts stagecoaches and can only be seen by those who have
witnessed a death, following the murder of Cedric Diggory. Harry is
accompanied in this ability by Luna Lovegood (Evanna Lynch), a new
character but only a year younger than Harry, who would be a "manic
pixie dream girl" in most other movies. Curiously, although Luna is an
eccentric, some would say "open-minded", individual with an appreciation
for conspiracy theories (which often turn out to be true), she is there
primarily as part of Harry's journey through feelings of isolation and
grief, despite the more prominent story revolving around the corruption
and fear-mongering in the wizarding government.
The Ministry of
Magic, presided over by Minister Cornelius Fudge (Robert Hardy), are
unprepared to accept the reality of Voldemort's return and use the
unscrupulous press and other influence to defame Harry, Dumbledore and
others who attest to Voldemort's return, and to further stifle the
"agitators", impose themselves on Hogwarts, appointing the new Defense
Against the Dark Arts teacher to keep an eye on the proceedings. Played
with relish by Imelda Staunton, Dolores Umbridge is probably the most
sinister of Harry's improbable streak of unreliable Defense Against the
Dark Arts teachers, with a sickeningly, artificially sweet facade of
pink attire and filigree, condescending sweet talk and decorative kitten
plates that belies a core of sadism and obsessive pursuit of control.
She's no mere bully, with the gravity of her cruelty exposed when she
orders Harry (and later, other students) to write lines in detention
with a "rather special quill" that writes in blood as the writing is
magically carved into the writer's hand. Although she's not even the
only major villain in ORDER OF THE PHOENIX and only again returns for a
couple of scenes in THE DEATHLY HALLOWS - PART 1, Umbridge is one of the
series' most memorable villains, only exceeded by Voldemort of course,
and Voldemort's most devoted disciple, Bellatrix Lestrange. The most
prominent female villain of the series, Bellatrix first appears in ORDER
OF THE PHOENIX, played appropriately loud and large by Helena Bonham
Carter. Carter is fun and weirdly sexy as Bellatrix, although the
moment when she solidifies her status as second only to Voldemort in
reprehensibility by killing Sirius Black (Gary Oldman) is undercut by
Sirius' scarcity throughout this and the previous two films since he was
introduced, and the impact of his death is never really felt in the way
it should be. Sirius does get a couple of good moments ahead of his
send-off though, acting as a mentor for Harry.
The titular "Order
of the Phoenix", a league of wizards devoted to combating Voldemort and
his Death Eaters, play an ironically small part in the story as the old
guard now ceding ground to Dumbledore's Army, the secret organization of
Hogwarts students founded by Harry, Hermoine and Ron in order to make
up for the insufficient Ministry-approved Defense Against the Dark
Arts. This all culminates in a solid battle sequence in the Ministry's
Department of Mysteries, although the MacGuffin at the center of the
battle, a prophecy that seems to reveal what everyone already assumed
anyway, is a little weak. It's a nice touch though to have Sirius and
Harry dueling side-by-side just ahead of Sirius' death and having Sirius
accidentally refer to Harry by his father's name. Finally, of course,
we get the duel between Dumbledore and Voldemort, which is probably more
obligatory than truly conducive to the story, but my goodness, it's
pretty awesome.
Some side stuff involving Hagrid's giant brother
Grawp are among the weaker links of the film, and while CGI rendering of
the character isn't bad, the integration with live action characters is
very clumsy and the overall character just seems strange and
unnecessary. More focus on the centaurs and their strained relationship
with the Ministry, leading up to Umbridge's conclusion at their hands,
would be more beneficially spent.
The highlight of the film is
Harry's private "Occlumency" lessons with his least favorite professor,
Severus Snape. Let's not kid ourselves- Snape is the gem of this
series. Harry's an exceptional young hero with a pathological hero
complex and just enough ego, Hermoine is an exceptional young heroine
with brains and delicate emotional rigidity, and even Dumbledore turns
out to be a much more complicated figure than would be expected, but
Snape is in another league. A clue into his true nature as revealed
later, Snape's expertise in Occlumency indicates his mastery of personal
emotions and hiding away his thoughts and feelings, and yet, there's no
doubting these two characters' mutual animus toward one another, and
Snape's cool facade starts to break momentarily.
"It may have escaped your notice, but life isn't fair. Your blessed father knew that, in fact, he frequently saw to it!"
ORDER
OF THE PHOENIX gets some guff for being the angsty one in the series,
but it's a good moment to meditate on the duality of its characters.
For Snape, it is merely hinted at, and the Occlumency scenes tease the
darker nature of Harry's own venerated father, but at the heart of it is
the shared nature of Harry and Voldemort. As Dumbledore advised Harry
in CHAMBER OF SECRETS,
"It is not our abilities that show what we truly are. It is our choices," he repeats that sentiment in ORDER OF THE PHOENIX,
"It is not how you are alike. It is how you are not."
These are the emotional stakes of the film, bringing into question the
nobility of its hero. It's a movie that functions more strongly on
those emotional stakes than on its physical ones.
Top 3 of HARRY POTTER AND THE ORDER OF THE PHOENIX:
- Occlumency Lessons: Snape is awesome, and here we get an early glimpse at how complex he really is, ahead of the big reveal three films later.
- Dumbledore vs. Voldemort: The two most powerful wizards of
the age, wielding dragons made of fire and massive whirling globes of
water. It's a unique duel in the series, and the most creative.
- "It's not how you are alike. It is how you are not.": I realize that this scene is sincere to the point of being a little corny, but it works on a real emotional level.
Bottom 3 of HARRY POTTER AND THE ORDER OF THE PHOENIX:
- Grawp: The computer rendering of Grawp looks better than
expected after 9 years, but his interaction with live characters is
clumsy, and the character is a bit too cute besides.
- The Prophecy: It's kind of a weak MacGuffin.
- Sirius's Death: Not the death scene particularly, but that
the Sirius-Harry relationship hasn't built up in the series enough to
give it the emotional oomph it should have.
HARRY POTTER AND THE HALF-BLOOD PRINCE
Released 15 July 2009
Directed by David Yates
Starring:
Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, Emma Watson, Michael Gambon, Jim
Broadbent, Tom Felton, Alan Rickman, Bonnie Wright, Helena Bonham
Carter, Helen McRory, Jessie Cave, Evanna Lynch, Robbie Coltrane,
Freddie Stroma, Frank Dillane, Hero Fiennes Tiffin
Rated PG for scary images, some violence, language and mild sensuality.
153 minutes
★★★★
By
a narrow margin, HALF-BLOOD PRINCE is the peak of the series, darkly
resonating, smart and emotionally rich as it navigates the tumultuous
euphoria and heartache of the sexually-charged relationships between its
burgeoning young adult characters within the looming menace of Lord
Voldemort's rising insurgency about to push the the wizarding world past
the brink of chaos in the larger narrative. It's a beautiful and
brooding maturation of the series that carries the stakes into the
climactic level, and what's more, it's the most genuinely funny film in
the series.
HALF-BLOOD PRINCE deviates the most significantly from
the source material, dropping most of the book's heavy focus on
Voldemort's origins as Tom Riddle, the sadistic but charismatic
half-blood wizard whose quest for immortality made him into the most
evil dark wizard of all time. In fact, Voldemort makes no appearance in
this film outside of memory sequences in which he appears in his youth
as Tom. With a place in the series' narrative that makes it essentially
a setup for the climactic chapter, directed David Yates and writer
Steve Kloves wisely turn their focus toward the human elements of their
story for the better part. The pivotal plot point of Horcruxes,
physical objects used to host separate pieces of Voldemort's soul and
thus prolong his existence beyond ordinary death, is established and
emerges into the foreground for the final act, but the film keeps its
heart in the will they-won't they and yearning heartache of the young
men and women at its center. As Michael Gambon's Dumbledore quips, "Ah,
to young and feel love's keen sting," these familiar follies prove rich
material for comedy and heartfelt emotion, accented elegantly by
Nicholas Hooper's musical score.
On the margins, the film
possesses an operatic tone, injecting scenes of Death Eater terror that
build the threat that has emerged and necessitates the coming battle
(although, admittedly, a mid-movie action scene outside the Weasley home
in the Burrow is strangely placed and might work better if instead of
involving the prominent villain Bellatrix Lestrange, it were depicted as
the act of lower-tier disciples of Voldemort), and the final act in the
cave where Harry accompanies Dumbledore to retrieve one of Voldemort's
Horcruxes (setting the stage for the next film) is fierce and
foreboding. The very dark concept of magically reanimated corpses is
further elaborated upon in the book (which explores Voldemort's origins
and heritage to much deeper effect and is far and away, the darkest in
the series), but the bony, grey figures of the "Inferi" that emerge from
the murky depths to attack Harry and Dumbledore are nonetheless
unnerving to say the least.
HALF-BLOOD PRINCE also brings with it
the monumental death of Dumbledore at the hands of Snape, a moment that
in spite of slow motion and a few emotional fireworks, is surprisingly
restrained. Dumbledore's funeral from the book was controversially
excised from the film, but the brevity works in its favor whereas a
second ending would feel like nothing short of fan service. The
eponymous "Half-Blood Prince" is revealed to be Snape soon after, but
curiously, the story doesn't offer any particular new insight to the
character, albeit further building on the villainous reputation that is
revealed to be false in the final film.
Numerous characters are
greatly enhanced in this installment, including a more mature Harry who
gets an introduction flirting with a waitress in a cafe and generally
taking things in stride. He's funnier and savvier, not entirely against
the idea of using his reputation as "the chosen one" to get on with the
ladies, and in a wise deviation from the books, he plays it cool when
Snape finally achieves the long-desired position of Defense Against the
Dark Arts professor (as opposed to the petty outburst in the book).
Ron's insecurities and desire for glory and recognition are built upon
as he joins the Quidditch team (the effects for which are hugely
improved upon from the first few films), along with Hermoine's romantic
timidity and emotional depth. Dumbledore is probed a little further in
preparation for the revelations of the final chapters (revelations that
unfortunately are never given their full due in the midst of so much
already to come), but probably the biggest character evolution is that
of Draco Malfoy, whose bullying nature is revealed as a shallow facade
to not merely a buffoonish weakling like he has sometimes come across
before, but as a quivering mess when he's finally called upon to deliver
on the sentiments he's espoused.
Although tempered with humor,
arguably more than the rest of the films, it's also a very somber film,
color graded to shades of grey and green, reportedly inspired in its
visuals by the paintings of Rembrandt (director of photography Bruce
Delbonnel received an Academy Award nomination for Best Cinematography
but lost to AVATAR). It's a moody piece, but also eclectic in its tone,
bouncing from comedy to romance, to fantasy and to horror.
Top 3 of HARRY POTTER AND THE HALF-BLOOD PRINCE
- Teen Romance: The whole sexual angst thing, all of it. Ron
and Hermoine, Ron and Lavender, Harry and Ginny. The first kisses, the
accidental poisoning, the love potions. Even the exchange between Harry
and the diner waitress at the beginning. It's a bloody soap opera and I
love it.
- Felix Felicis, aka "Liquid Luck": Daniel Radcliffe says he
hates his performance in this film, but it's one of his best, and the
best part of it is his somewhat woozily drunken spell on the
luck-bringing potion, Felix Felicis (coincidentally, Radcliffe
was struggling with alcoholism at the time of filming and sometimes
showed up drunk on set, but no word on what specific scenes). It's
Harry at his weirdest, and it's funny.
- That One Shot: I love that one shot after a broken-up
Hermoine hurls magically-conjured birds at Ron, and from outside the
castle where it's snowing, Ron and Lavender are running up the stairs
past one window, and Draco is brooding by another window. Love it.
Bottom 3 of HARRY POTTER AND THE HALF-BLOOD PRINCE
- Burrow Attack: The scene and concept of the scene is fine.
It furthers the point that the Death Eaters are terrorizing people out
there and the wizarding world is on the eve of war, but putting major
villain Bellatrix Lestrange at the center of the attack lends an
inappropriate sense of importance to this harassment.
- Alterations from the Source Material: Again, not a major criticism, but I'd sure like to see a version of movie that retained more of Voldemort's backstory.
- Blank: Yeah, I dunno. It's a really good movie.
HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS - PART 1
Released 19 November 2010
Directed by David Yates
Starring:
Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, Emma Watson, Ralph Fiennes, Helena
Bonham Carter, Alan Rickman, Rhys Ifans, Bill Nighy, Tom Felton, Imelda
Staunton, Julie Walters, Peter Mullan, Guy Henry, Robbie Coltrane, Nick
Moran, Andy Linden, David O'Hara
Rated PG-13 for some sequences of intense action violence, frightening images and brief sensuality.
146 minutes
★★★★
DEATHLY
HALLOWS - PART 1 is the most underrated of series, berated as too slow
or boring, but it's in the opportunity to slow down and really meditate
on the relationships and mood on the eve of battle that makes this movie
so strong. Most of these movies are so rapidly and relentlessly paced,
and in contrast, it's one of the most engrossing and emotionally
invested. Now freshly independent young adults, Harry, Ron and Hermoine
are thrust into the world outside even the now all-too-questionable
security of Hogwarts, forced to rely on each other in a mythic quest to
conquer a great evil. PART 1 is often thought of as a set-up, but it's
actually a lot of payoff.
There's plenty of action, but the movie
starts out on a rare contemplative note as each of the three young
heroes make their conscious farewells to their respective worlds as they
know them. It's a deep breath in anticipation of the imminent battle
against evil that requires them to employ all that they've learned over
the six previous years in order to kill Lord Voldemort, piece by
malevolent piece. Hogwarts is conspicuously absent from this
installment as the trio go off the grid, camping out in the England
wildernesses, and like the scenery, this chapter is more rugged and
ferocious than its predecessors. PART 1 is the first of the series to
really own its PG-13 rating, including some fairly horrifying moments of
torture and mayhem as the surrounding peril and the evil of their
enemies becomes far more pronounced. However, there are also beautiful
moments of sweetness that emerge throughout the darkness, such as a
somewhat awkward bit of dancing between a forlorn Harry and Hermoine,
and one of the most touching scenes in the series when Harry and
Hermoine visit Harry's birthplace of Godric's Hollow on Christmas Eve to
pay their respects at the grave of his parents.
PART 1 is surely
the most slowly paced of the films, but there are a few thrilling action
sequences, mostly short, sudden and ferocious, such as the
confrontation with Voldemort's giant snake Nagini in Godric's Hollow or
the shootout-style wand fight in the London cafe, but the early-on Death
Eaters attack as the Order of the Phoenix races to transport Harry from
the safety of No. 4 Privet Drive to the safety of the Weasley family
home, the Burrow, is spectacular. The sound design is used to
exceptional effect in this sequence to enhance the drama as members of
the Order on their brooms, and Harry with Hagrid on a rumbling
motorcycle, enter a foreboding thundercloud as the score goes silent and
suddenly the air is filled with whirring and whizzing broom-borne Death
Eaters. The ensuing chase is one of the most thrilling action scenes
in the series. There are even the occasional moments of quirky humor,
most notable when Harry, Ron and Hermoine must infiltrate the Ministry
of Magic to obtain a horcrux and encounter confusion with their assumed
identities as Ministry officials.
Stylistically and visually, it
is the peak of the series, taking the Harry and his friends to exotic
vistas of England that we rarely see on film in the hunt for Horcruxes
and on the run from "Snatchers", thugs who round up Muggle-borns and
other "undesirables" for reward money. The most stylized scene of the
entire series depicts a fairy tale,
"The Tale of the Three Brothers",
animated in the style of puppets and shadow theatre by the British
visual effects company Framestore, and possesses a wonderfully ethereal
quality within a scene that is nothing less than baldfaced exposition.
Oh, and I love the touch of Harry pausing and pocketing the Snitch
before entering the wedding tent at the Burrows.
As
aforementioned, DEATHLY HALLOWS - PART 1 is unfortunately written off by
many viewers as "the boring one", but it has the advantage of having so
much more room to breathe than the other films. Of the recent literary
adaptations to split their finales into two parts (or in the case of
The Hobbit trilogy splitting a single book into three parts), Harry
Potter is the series that does it the most successfully. The climax of
the first part is naturally subtler than those of the other films (not
being the inherent climax of the overall story, but functioning suitably
enough as one), taking place as a capture and escape in the mansion of
Voldemort's disciples, the Malfoys, culminating in the death of Dobby
the House Elf, a character whose role is more consistent in the books
but is only reintroduced in this film since his previous initial
appearance in CHAMBER OF SECRETS. I'm still not a fan of Dobby and
don't feel the same emotional connection that's torn by his death as
other viewers might, but the moment is still recognizable as a
satisfying emotional conclusion. The battle is far from over, but much
has been done already, great losses have been sustained, and characters
have a moment of respite ahead of the storm.
Top 3 of HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS - PART 1
- "Merry Christmas, Hermoine.": I'm not sure why he doesn't go
with the more English "Happy Christmas", but this quiet scene is so
beautiful and poignant. I'm not saying it makes me cry, but if I was
already in a bad way, I bet it would.
- The Tale of the Three Brothers: This animated sequence is
visually sumptuous and engrossing, somewhat evocative of Guillermo del
Toro's work, and oh yeah, it's really cool.
- Destroying the Horcrux Locket: I'm going to include the
moment when the doe Patronus shows up, finding the sword and finally
destroying the locket, because that whole section is great, and also
there's the weirdly digitally-manipulated Harry and Hermoine naked
make-out scene. It's creepy and startling and weird.
Bottom 3 of HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS - PART 1
- "The last words that Albus Dumbledore said to the pair of us?:
That test question between Remus Lupin and Kingsley Shacklebolt after
transporting Harry to the Burrow is awkward and feels like shameless
exposition, but is kind of pointless.
- The Mirror Shard: Harry is walking around with a magical
mirror shard that has no background or set up in the film, so people who
haven't read the book will just be confused.
- Dobby: I'm sorry, the character just doesn't work for me.
HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS - PART 2
Released 15 July 2011
Directed by David Yates
Starring:
Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, Emma Watson, Ralph Fiennes, Alan
Rickman, Warwick Davis, Maggie Smith, Julie Walters, Mark Williams,
Bonnie Wright, Matthew Lewis, Ciaran Hinds, Kelly Macdonald, Nick Moran,
John Hurt
Rated PG-13 for some sequences of intense action violence and frightening images.
130 minutes
★★★★
And
so we finally come to the grand finale, and it is grand. Following the
first fourth of the film, practically the entire remainder is an
elongated climax to payoff all the previous seven films together. While
in itself, the first fourth, practically a film within the film, is a
solid heist-based adventure as Harry, Hermoine and Ron infiltrate the
most secure holding of the wizarding world, Gringotts Bank, in order to
retrieve a Horcrux, it fits weirdly with the rest of the film, as if
tagged on. Once they return to Hogwarts though, it's a non-stop race to
the finish with the trio hurrying to uncover the last few Horcruxes and
defeat Voldemort while a bloody battle rages along the margins.
Perhaps
it's because these last two films were the only two for which I'd read
the books first, but THE DEATHLY HALLOWS - PART 1 and PART 2 do seem to
have some difficulty juggling all the payoffs for what has been set up
in earlier films. Ultimately, it's in these films' favors to focus on
the central issues of Harry and Voldemort's final showdown and to lesser
but similarly important extent, Snape's conclusion, but there are big
things raised without receiving the deserved attention. A big one,
shared between both parts, is Dumbledore's past, which is a major part
of the book and is teased at within the movies. There are mentions of
Dumbledore's troubled legacy and brash youth which trouble Harry, and in
PART 2, his long secret and estranged brother Aberforth (Ciaran Hinds)
is finally revealed, but the nature of their relationship is only hinted
at, while their sister is mentioned but ever more cryptically. It
would be a shame to leave all that out, but bringing them up without
doing anything with them isn't much better. Furthermore, the shard of
special mirror (which shows the reflection of a cousin mirror and vice
versa) taken from the Order of the Phoenix's headquarters which Harry
uses to ask for help from Aberforth is a fairly substantial prop that
never receives the necessary set up (you'd never know how Harry happens
to have it and where it came from going by the movies alone).
All
that said, DEATHLY HALLOWS - PART 2 is an undeniably spectacular and
emotionally solid conclusion to the saga which brings things to a
satisfying close where it matters most. Interestingly, while the action
is non-stop, a lot of it is kept on the margins while the main trio
races around the fiery, crumbling campus to complete their quest. The
climactic battle is merely a diversion, and yet, it's nonetheless
grandiose, with huge swarms of wizards and witches charging at one
another, ugly giants swinging semi-trailer-sized clubs, and even the odd
over-sized spiders (
acromantula; spiders literally the size of
Buicks) while red and green energies zip dangerously through the air,
crumbling the stone walls of Hogwarts. While the school never once
appeared throughout the entirety of PART 1, with the exception of that
first fourth, it is all about Hogwarts in PART 2. Many familiar
locations are destroyed, including the Quidditch arena, which collapses
in flames, the Room of Requirement, which is wiped clean by a
supernatural blaze, and the covered bridge which first appeared in
PRISONER OF AZKABAN is blown up outright. The Chamber of Secret makes
another appearance with the dead basilisk now nothing but bones, and the
house ghosts (well, one of them) return after a prolonged absence.
Helena Ravenclaw, aka "The Grey Lady", played by Kelly MacDonald, is
more faithful to the ghosts as they are written in the books as opposed
to the goofy, playful portrayals in Chris Columbus' entries. The ghosts
have wonderful backstories in the books, mostly revealed in
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows,
but in the movies where the ghosts' appearances have mostly been brief
and obligatory at best, they would have been well out of place.
As
I mentioned before, and well aware that it's obvious, Snape is the
hidden jewel of Harry Potter's story, unveiled in his true glory in
showstopping flashback. Snape meets a bloody end, throat slashed and in
excessive fashion, repeatedly struck by Voldemort's over-sized snake,
and in order to deliver a piece of crucial information, Snape reveals
his true, exceptionally well-hidden memories to Harry. THE DEATHLY
HALLOWS has a lot of hard-hitting emotional beats, but none more
hard-hitting than cold and cool-tempered Snape declaration of undying
love for Harry's mother Lily,
"Always," as he summons a Patronus
charm testifying to his true nature, intercut with his discovery of her
body which he clings to in a flood of tears. This is followed
mercilessly by Harry's learning that a piece of Voldemort's soul lives
within himself, making him also a Horcrux, and in order to defeat
Voldemort, Harry must die. And so J.K. Rowling's epic fable about death
culminates in the inevitable Christ figure, as Harry willingly goes to
his death in an appropriately and unnervingly silent moment that's a
close second to Snape's revelation in terms of emotional beats for the
series. If the Christ metaphor wasn't evident enough, Harry awakens in a
bright King's Cross station.
In the book, the final showdown
between the recently resurrected Harry (a "master of death" in
possession of the three Deathly Hallows; the Invisibility Cloak
bequeathed to him by his father in PHILOSOPHER'S STONE, the Resurrection
Stone bequeathed to him by Dumbledore, and the Elder Wand, which
Voldemort possesses but Harry is master of by disarming its previous
master) and Voldemort is curiously anti-climactic and makes up only the
final moments of the extended showdown as portrayed in the film. The
final duel in the film is, well, strange. It's not bad, but in some
ways it makes me think of early Disney films where animators pitched
'gags' to fill out a cartoon, like in SNOW WHITE AND THE SEVEN DWARFS
when they show all the creative sleeping places of the dwarfs. The
Harry vs. Voldemort duel has a similar structure where it transports
them around the castle grounds and intermittently stopping for Voldemort
to wield his cloak like tentacles or an especially bizarre and
none-too-subtly symbolic moment in which Harry's and Voldemort's faces
appear morphed into one.
In the later moments of the film, things
turn nostalgic, and not unduly, but the contrast between the dark tones
of the latter few films and the "magical", for lack of a better word,
tones of the earlier films is surprisingly stark. The prologue, 19
years later, as Harry and Ginny, and Hermoine and Ron bring their
children to King's Cross Platform 9 3/4 for another year at Hogwarts
School of Witchcraft and Wizardry is corny, a little hokey, but after 8
films of watching our heroes grow from children into adults, it's
earned. By the time they get to HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS -
PART 2, the series has earned something.
Top 3 of HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS - PART 2
- Snape's Memories: That one is just obvious. This sequence is an emotional cannonball.
- Harry Goes to Die: Again, an emotional juggernaut moment.
- Prologue: Even as the climax to the series as a whole, this
movie is Snape's big moment, and the opening shots of a fallen Hogwarts
are poignant and haunting as Headmaster Snape, a man whose true nature
is buried away to impossible depths, looks down at the school from his
office as an unknown protector.
Bottom 3 of HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS - PART 2
- Lack of Payoff on Aberforth and Ariana: I suppose that may be
a complaint about the movie not 'being' the book, but they're kind of
big things to just brush off with a mention.
- Disconnect Between Gringotts Heist and Battle of Hogwarts: They're both good, but they feel like parts of separate movies.
- "If we die for them, Harry, I'm going to kill you!": Yeah, it comes straight from the book, but it's kind of dumb.
