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.
(HORROR-COMEDY/FANTASY) 
