Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1 - A Review by Ren3004

Recommended Videos

Ren3004

In an unsuspicious cabin
Jul 22, 2009
28,357
0
0
Back in 2001, the first film based in J.K. Rowling's series was released in theatres worldwide. Nine years later, the saga is coming to a close, starting with Harry Potter and the Excessively Long Title Deathly Hallows: Part 1.


The film starts with the protagonist trio preparing to leave their lives behind so they can go out and search for Lord Voldemort's Horcruxes (the objects containing pieces of his soul, which essentially makes him immortal, in case you didn't pay attention in the last film). Of course this would be a lot easier if the aforementioned Dark Lord didn't want to find Harry and kill him for good. During the course of the film, they have to find a Horcrux, figure out how to destroy them, get into a few fights and find out about the titular Deathly Hallows. Oh, and a couple (hundred) characters die. Yes, the series has matured along the years, and this film is probably the darkest in the saga. It's not a gore-fest, but it's still pretty violent, as well.


[small]It's not all rainbow coloured candy anymore...[/small]​

Well, this being a review, you're probably expecting me to formulate some kind of opinion. Say what you will about Warner Bros.'s decision to split the last book in two parts, but the truth is that this is probably the most faithful film in the series.


[small]This may have also had something to do with it.[/small]​

There are, of course, some changes, but they're all pretty minor. There is one glaring omission that I noticed in the film, but other than that, there are only a few scenes that were trimmed and some lines that were a bit changed. If you're the kind of person who throws a shoe at the screen every time something is not exactly like you imagined, you're still gonna have to go shoe shopping before the movie, but if what you want is an adaptation you won't mind it. Actually some other films (I'm looking at you, Order of the Phoenix) would probably have been better with this approach, instead of trying to cram a 766 page book into 138 minutes.


As it is, there's a lot more time to breathe between the action scenes. And, I'm sorry, but I have to take a moment for a little patriotism here. Eduardo Serra's cinematography work is simply amazing. The familiar interiors of Hogwarts are replaced by beautiful landscapes, the kind of which has never been seen in the series. This film is worth seeing in cinemas simply for the outdoor scenes. But the film also does a good job of not letting these slow moments take too long, so the next action scene is introduced before you get bored.


[small]Unfortunately this was the best picture I could find. You're gonna have to trust me.[/small]​

Being more faithful to the book actually has one problem. Some of the characters (Mundungus Fletcher, Rufus Scrimgeour) and objects (Harry's magical mirror) have never appeared in the previous films. People who read the books will have no problem recognizing them, but those who only know Harry Potter from the films may be confused by the appearance of new characters with little to no explanation. Of course, if you've never heard of Harry Potter before, you'll be completely lost, but come on, it's the 7[sup]th[/sup] film. If you just got interested in the series, you should probably catch up before watching this one.

So, is Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows worth watching? Well, that depends. If you're a fan of the other films, you're probably going to watch this film anyway, and you'll have no problem making sense of the references to the previous entries in the series. If you hated Harry Potter before, this film is unlikely to change your mind. As a Harry Potter fan, I wholeheartedly recommend the film. And I hope that the last instalment is at least as good as this one.
 

Sassafrass

This is a placeholder
Legacy
Aug 24, 2009
51,250
1
3
Country
United Kingdom
A very nice, albeit short, review, Ren. It's a good film, plus it was never actually boring. There was always something going on, be it action, comedy or that stupidly cringe-worthy dance scene. I'd definitely watch it again if I could but sadly, seeing as I am skint, I'll have to wait for either the DVD or get a mate to pay to go again. :p
 

Pocotron

New member
Mar 16, 2009
111
0
0
I totally agree that it should have been split in two parts. But, if I may, do you think that the director will put parts of the book into Part 2 that should have been in Part 1? I think some people forget this and mark it down without thinking that. Its a tough movie to think about, but good job nonetheless!
 

Ren3004

In an unsuspicious cabin
Jul 22, 2009
28,357
0
0
Pocotron said:
I totally agree that it should have been split in two parts. But, if I may, do you think that the director will put parts of the book into Part 2 that should have been in Part 1? I think some people forget this and mark it down without thinking that. Its a tough movie to think about, but good job nonetheless!
What do you mean? That he may put some of the scenes that were cut in Part 2? It doesn't seem very likely to me, that glaring omission I mentioned

Pettigrew's death.

would look out of place in the second film, in my opinion.
 

Pocotron

New member
Mar 16, 2009
111
0
0
Ren3004 said:
Pocotron said:
I totally agree that it should have been split in two parts. But, if I may, do you think that the director will put parts of the book into Part 2 that should have been in Part 1? I think some people forget this and mark it down without thinking that. Its a tough movie to think about, but good job nonetheless!
What do you mean? That he may put some of the scenes that were cut in Part 2? It doesn't seem very likely to me, that glaring omission I mentioned

Pettigrew's death.

would look out of place in the second film, in my opinion.
Exactly what I think they will do, just to make it look more like a battle. I'm not sure why, but I think they may do that.
 

SeanTheSheep

New member
Jun 23, 2009
10,508
0
0
You... You... Scene-stealing hack!
I make my review and turn my back for five minutes, and you do this?
I am offended sir!

OT: A decent review, though it suffers a little from the opposite problem my review did, in that your overuse of pictures and the short paragraphs make it seem lacking in depth. While the lack of "Wall-o'-text-iness certainly makes it much more manageable, some more insight into the inner[footnote]Inn indoors in an inn in Inuit Igloo Village. In.[/footnote] machinations of the production, like acting, music and other review-y type things would be nice.