Review: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Pt. 1

The forces of evil (Lord Voldermort, Bellatrix Lestrange, and the Malfoys’ among them) are conspiring against boy wizard Harry Potter and have taken over the Ministry of Magic to begin a reign of terror, after the death of the Minister of Magic (Bill Nighy). Our wizard protagonists Harry (Daniel Radcliffe), Hermione (Emma Watson), and Ron (Rupert Grint) have protected their families from danger, whilst they flee Hogwarts and spend time in the woods searching for Horcruxes, which hold pieces of the soul of evil Lord Voldermort (Ralph Fiennes) and once all have been collected, will make him vulnerable. One such Horcrux has Ron start to act all jealous, irrational and Gollum-like, alienating himself from his two friends before running off on his own. Eventually they reunite for a plan to get inside the Ministry of Magic in disguise.

I haven’t read the books and I can’t really claim to be a Harry Potter fan. The film series started out well, especially the second film “The Chamber of Secrets”. However there were a few bum notes like the outright boring and plotless “Goblet of Fire”. I really enjoyed “The Order of the Phoenix” and did also rather enjoy the gloomy “Half-Blood Prince”. Thus I was hoping the trend would continue with this 2010 film from director David Yates (“Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix”, “Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince”) and writer Steve Kloves (writer of every film except “Order of the Phoenix”). Unfortunately, the series has never been terribly friendly to non-Potter Heads (thus I don’t see it having much replay value for me), and this one definitely has its problems. Poorly written, it dispenses with any attempt to be inclusive to anyone not already steeped in Potter lore, but more importantly, it’s just a rather lousy story. I don’t mind so much that it’s a big story split into two films, as Quentin Tarantino made that work wonderfully for his “Kill Bill” films (However, those who are bothered by it might be interested to know that this is the first film which JK Rowling herself has been producer, and it was a decision made by the producers. Just sayin’...) Yates and Kloves give us a clearly incomplete film and one with far too many characters. Fans of the novels won’t care, but at this stage I felt it was too damn late to be introducing new characters (though thankfully Bill Nighy’s character does not turn out to be the soon-to-be-villainous replacement Professor of the Dark Arts. I’m glad that sorry trend has ceased) let alone having to figure out where characters like Mad-Eye Moody and Prof. Lupin fit into things after having been either MIA for so long or barely integrated into the plot. I could’ve sworn that Lupin was already long dead, for starters. Worse still, John Hurt reappears playing a character who hasn’t been seen on screen since the first film! The fact that so many major characters are actually missing from this film or barely glimpsed (McGonagall, and Harry’s Aunt and Uncle are entirely absent, Hagrid and Luna barely get a look-in) coupled with the fact that main characters like Ron and Hermione are still not 3D creations after seven frigging films has resulted in me being left somewhat cold by this film. It’s better than “The Goblet of Fire”, but easily the next worst film and agonisingly slow.

It doesn’t really work as a stand-alone film and I really think you need a separate film series for the villainous characters and the heroic ones, because they’ve both been fighting for screen time throughout here, and never is it more clear than in this film which takes forever to get to where it’s going (and doesn’t end up getting there anyway, as it’s a cliff-hanger for the next one) while all the characters are getting introduced. In the seventh frigging film! Unlike “Goblet of Fire”, this one has some interesting elements, but there’s an awful lot of time-wasting and a seriously sagging middle. Isn’t seven films way too far in for Ron to start getting jealous of a possible romantic spark between Harry and Hermione? I mean seriously dude, it wasn’t all that long ago that Hermione (and Ron for that matter) spent an entire film seemingly not even liking Harry. It just makes Ron out to be an even bigger tool than usual (and the camaraderie between the three has always been a bit lacking for me), and the whole film ends up having far too much of a “Lord of the Rings” (one of the best film series of all-time) vibe with the ‘Precious’ this time being a horcrux instead that has Ron going all Gollum/Frodo on everybody (Not to mention that actor Michael Byrne looks alarmingly like an elderly Gollum. Tell me I’m wrong!).

It’s not all bad, in fact it starts out somewhat promisingly. A really cool, gloomy WB logo slowly heading towards the screen that is followed by a close-up of Bill Nighy’s ugly mug is a good way to start a film. It’s all so gloomy and dark blue but that sets a foreboding tone from the get-go, and we are near the end after all. Besides, cinematographer Eduardo Serra (“Map of the Human Heart”, “What Dreams May Come”) still lights things enough for it not to be too distracting. Even in an early scene where it is dark and murky, it is excusable because it’s a scene set at night and it focuses on the dour and somewhat murky Prof. Snape. There’s some terrific imagery throughout here, whereas a film like “Half-Blood Prince” wasn’t so much muted and gloomy as it was damn-near B&W, and irritatingly so. The oppressive look here is probably the best thing about the entire film.

Despite my issues with Emma Watson’s lack of acting ability (which is still enormous in 2018), I found it interesting that there’s more Hermione in the opening scene than Ron or Harry for a change. It was initially nice to see Rickman, Bonham-Carter, and Spall on screen in the early going as I’ve enjoyed their work in the series and they’re lots of nefarious fun. However, a long table shot of them, Tom Felton, Jason Isaacs, and Ralph Fiennes really does illustrate the wasted talent and ridiculous overabundance of characters. Still, in this section of the film, things were terrifically gloomy, quite creepy stuff without being dull. I love the Britishness in the look to these films, from the scenes away from Hogwarts to the boarding school-like Hogwarts (though we don’t venture inside Hogwarts itself this time), it’s so uniquely British.

Unfortunately, after a while, the series’ problem of too many characters at the expense of plot and pacing just weigh it down too much. It’s not a boring film, just a slow and unwieldy one. Purists be damned, I think those pared down early entries (and “Order of the Phoenix”, which despite being the longest book, was the shortest film) got the balance right. The sets in this film are magnificent, it must be said. In the latter stages the film takes on an Orwellian (or at least “Brazil”-ian) vibe in some of the sets and themes, as well as the chance for series newcomer David O’Hara to be able to claim that he once played Harry Potter (you’ll see!). Imelda Staunton once again graces us with her Thatcherian presence in a reprisal of her wonderful turn in “Order of the Phoenix”. Unfortunately, she and the character are far too good to be a mere support player here, a symptom once again of too many characters. Seeing her, Isaac, and Felton here makes one feel like those characters participation in previous Potter films was ultimately pointless, so I’m not sure if they ought to have been here at all. That said, Snape and Voldermort don’t get it a whole lot better, either. Whilst this film has more plot than “Goblet of Fire” it really doesn’t have any more Voldermort (who surely must rank as the tardiest villain of all-time), and since he is the main villain, that’s a big effing problem. Meanwhile, more Alan Rickman as Snape is always preferable, and unfortunately, he’s not in this one much at all.

Overall, this is one of the weaker films, and certainly the slowest, but unlike “Goblet of Fire”, at least this one doesn’t leave the entire plot until the last fifteen minutes, it just takes forever to play out. That said, the film’s abrupt ending hurts a lot, necessary or not, it’s a completely unacceptable ending. Even the first two “Lord of the Rings” films finished more appropriately than this. The film definitely doesn’t work as a stand-alone film, more so than any previous Potter film in fact. I really think that if you got rid of one or two of these films and just put the most vital information of those films into the other films, the series would be a lot stronger cinematically. Fidelity to the source novels does not equate to cinematic enjoyment outside of perhaps the core audience of readers. As is, the story takes too long to play out over all these films, and by now I’m a bit bored. This is especially the case here, partly because I knew throughout that this was not going to be the end, and thus a lot of the film is time-wasting and unnecessary. Great production design and cinematography, but the second weakest film in the series. It works in bits, but more often it feels like a waste of time. Thankfully the final film in the series leaves a better impression.

Rating: C+