About Me

My photo
Lover of all things film, ready to tell you what to avoid, and more importantly, what to seek out.

Sunday 24 July 2011

HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS PART 2 (2011 - Cert 12A)

I don't think I've even been more confident that a film would live up to my expectations than when I was sat in my reclining chair at the Clapham Picturehouse to watch the big finale to the Harry Potter series. After the first two very child friendly and perhaps a little too innocent Chris Columbus entries, The Philosopher's Stone and The Chamber of Secrets, David Heyman with his team of co-producers and a selection of directors (Alfonso Cuaron, Mike Newell and David Yates), managed to make a series that was both faithful and dedicated to the source material. As a reader of the books I was constantly impressed with how the films managed to grasp the wonder, youth and darkness of J K Rowling's creations so perfectly. There was a real sense that the makers of these films were putting a lot of care into what they were doing, yes they wanted to make a lot of money but they also appeared to be desperate to do the story justice. They were only getting one crack at this, there isn't going to be a reboot, they didn't want to be the people who made a hash out of Potter. The quality of the films along with the continuing story has meant that it has never really felt like a 'franchise', although there's no doubting that it really is, it's more of an epic series that has spanned the last 10 years. This means that there isn't the usual dread that comes with a sequel to a film that you like. When I watched Spiderman 3, I knew deep down that it wasn't going to meet my expectations and the standards set by the previous two. With Part Two of The Deathly Hallows I just knew that this was going to be a brilliant end to a series of films that I love.



Imagine my disappointment when it came to light that The Deathly Hallows Part 2 was, in my opinion, the weakest since The Chamber of Secrets. Disappointment is perhaps a bit too strong a term, I really enjoyed it, but it just struggled to live up to the incredibly high standards set by the Prisoner of Azkaban through to the first Deathly Hallows film.

The decision to split the last book into two films meant that very little plot set up was required in this sitting.  The first film was all setting up, not much happened, it was criticised for being too wordy, but it was a necessity and it added a huge amount of depth to characters that we all thought we already knew so well. In part two we are thrown straight into the action, dragons, Gringotts vault, a roller coaster style bank job, Horcruxes. It's all there and before you know we are back at Hogwarts for the huge final battle, that takes up much of the film, and it has to be said that it is visually superb. The scale was reminiscent of the biggest and best that The Lord of The Rings had to offer, Death Eaters vs the teachers and pupils, giants, huge spiders, suits of armour coming to life, spells being cast, counter spells raining in, Hogwarts crumbling, it's relentless and is great to watch. Huge battle scenes come out every week in mediocre effects movies but there is something extra special about seeing Hogwarts at the centre of it, especially when we've been waiting ten years to see it.

This might be a good moment to mention the 3D. None of the previous incarnations were in 3D, there was a plan to have the first Deathly Hallows film in 3D but they decided that it just wasn't working and they didn't want to compromise their creation. I have to ask whether they stopped to think about whether it was a good idea this time around. This is a dark film, not in the usual Harry Potter sense of the word, but actually dark in terms of colour. There are the occasional flashes of colour through a spell or an explosion, but this is largely set against a black back drop as the battle plays out during the night. The 3D drains the film of what little colour it has and you have to wonder whether there is any point in giving darkness depth, it doesn't exactly leap out of the screen like the penis in piranha or immerse you like the surroundings in Avatar. There were also a couple of instances where the effects let the side down, for example a broomstick chase looked a little on the cheap side, contrasting with the otherwise very accomplished effects.

The cast continues the 'biggest' theme, everyone is in it. I mean everyone. Any character from the Potter universe that hasn't been killed off is in this film. Some have beefed up roles integral to the story like Maggie Smith's Professor McGonagall becoming an action heroine, some have a line or two but others,  such as Jim Broadbent, have nothing more than a couple of seconds of screen time. There is a great deal of pleasure to be taken from all of the characters from all of the films coming together at once, a school reunion of sorts only one where you're pleased to see everyone and not avoiding the smug bloke who is now a TV presenter.

It's much more than just bit parts by all the best British thespians though. There are some very good performances in the film. The main three, Radcliffe. Watson and Grint are perfectly solid, they don't really have a great deal to do other than running around trying to save the day, which is a bit of a shame after the quality and depth of their characters in Part One. Ralph FiennesVoldemort as desperate, almost scared. As the horcruxes fall one by one, I got a very real sense that Voldemort knew that things were unravelling, the closer he gets to his goal, the more the wheels start to fall off. He really isn't in control. It's a great additional dynamic to the usual good vs evil. Matthew Lewis' Neville Longbottom finally gets to the party and has his pivotal role. It was great to see the bumbling fool from the earlier films grow into a hero and there are a couple of stirring speeches from Lewis that got the goosebumps going. What was noticeable about the film to me though was the lack of any real 'goosebump moments', or for that matter, many moments of genuine emotion. It really should have been packed to the rafters with them, the book is after all. The kiss, the deaths of important characters, the reveal of Snape's importance to the whole story - that reveal is probably the best part of the film actually, Harry seeing Snape's memories and his past is the closest I got to a tear and it was brilliantly played by Rickman, as you would expect, and superbly handled by David Yates.

I've thought long and hard about why the grandstand moments didn't feel jaw dropping like I expected them to, perhaps it's because I've read the book and I knew what was coming, although I had read all the books before I'd seen the films and that didn't diminish from the wow factor. I think the reason is, strangely, that the film was too short. Everything felt a bit too brisk. There are a number of changes in direction and plot in the story and the closer you get to the ending, the less time you are allowed to pause for contemplation. Deaths happen and then you are quickly forced to move on, you don't have time to get upset, a set-piece pops up, you want to be impressed but all of a sudden you're following a broomstick through a fiery room and you need to brace yourself for the next big effect. I wanted to be able to appreciate these important moments, as they make the leap from page to screen, but there are just so many of those moments. It's a strange thing to criticise the film for but at only just over a couple of hours I though there could have been another 20 minutes or so just to give us all a chance to actually enjoy what was happening. I thought that was the reason why the last book was split into two wasn't it? To avoid the feeling of everything being shoehorned in. The prime chunks of storyline lobster from the book become tightly packed sardines in the film.

I think this may have all come across a lot more negatively than I have intended. It is a very good film, it does the usual things well, it's funny, it is exciting, it has all the spectacle and scale that I expected, it has great actors doing what they do best, but it just fell short of what I wanted. To say it's the weakest film since Chambers of Secrets isn't to say it's rubbish, it's just that number three through to seven were all amazing. Perhaps my expectations were too high, they were never going to be met, perhaps the 3D ruined it for me, I may re-watch it on DVD and think differently about it (I hope so) and realise that it was the perfect sign off for a film series that really has been one of the greatest achievements by the British film industry.

No comments:

Post a Comment