Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1 & 2

Scroll to see replies

I'm preparing for neg-rep here but... I really enjoyed quite a few of the Harry Potter films, but Deathly Hallows part one felt... I don't know... really empty to me. Like completely devoid of incident. Like half the film they weren't really... doing anything.

Considering the others are so magical and rich in content it made me wonder why this one felt so bleak and uninteresting.

Have you read the books? If so then what did you expect? If not then :facepalm2:

Reply 1481

Ape Gone Insane

Original post by TotoMimo

To be honest, I can see where you're coming from.

The decision to split the book into two parts had both good and bad consequences (though in a commercial sense, it was the best thing ever). The book itself is very much rich with content and there is a lot going on with Voldemort hunting the trio, with them travelling around not knowing their next step and not knowing where to find the other Horcruxes. It also allowed for development of the Deathly Hallows, which in all fairness, despite being brought up reference wise (cloak and ring) didn't have a huge part to play in previous books. So J.K. Rowling was introducing this whole new dynamic.

Snap to the second part or the later part in the book, there is more action than all the Harry Potter books/films put together. There is so much stuff going on that it would not make sense to put all of this into one film.

So what you get is the split which favours the action and really plot-moving stuff in the second part whereas the slow-moving and camping is given really it's own film. In the book, this is fine as it's all part of the same book but as a 2 hour or so film, then I can see how it may not appeal to some.

Reply 1482

Raiden10

I heard that Voldemort wears the sorting hat for most of this movie.

Reply 1483

Liam_G

Original post by aja89

NOT MY DAUGHTER... :woo:

This scene is definitely my favourite bit out of all of the books... I really hope they do it justice, it actually gave me goosebumps when I first read it :colondollar:

I wont be able to see the film when it comes out because my sixth form's leavers meal is on the very day that it premiers :cry2:

I'm tempted just to ditch the meal, go to the cinema and just get popcorn instead.

I hate you sixth form last supper thingy :shakecane:

I'm going to have to try and refrain from appearing on this thread for the first few days after it comes out, because I'm sure you'll all be discussing it. On the bright side, at least the delay will allow me to postpone what I envision will be the complete and utter abolition of my childhood... I just know that I'm going to come out of the cinema, and the inevitable feeling of awe will be tainted by a tinge of regret, as the metaphorical youngster who resembles my innocence is mercilessly stabbed to death* :sad:

*metaphorically

Goodbye cruel, Harry Potter-less world... You're now nothing more than a soul-less platform on which we are expected to exist, devoid of all that is Granger and with a distinct lack of Weasley :emo:

/dramatic rant

Reply 1484

madders94

Original post by xXxBaby-BooxXx

We have the same birthday :five:

My sister's taking me on the evening of the 15th for a birthday present :awesome:

Reply 1485

-honeybee-

Original post by TotoMimo

But that's what the book is like! I would prefer it to seem slow-moving than for the film makers to feel the need to add unnecessary action just to make it more 'interesting' (see the scene where the Burrow is set on fire in film 6 I think). The first part sets up an awful lot for the second film (i.e. sword in lake) so the second part would be devoid of meaning without it. I actually really like this film, more so than some of the others anyway. Especially HBP which I think is my favourite book. That film was ruined in favour of making the films flow better or whatever excuse was made.

Reply 1486

TotoMimo

I absolutely agree that in the books, it makes a great deal of sense. Preserving the sense of dire isolation and loneliness, a descent into the unknown with circumstances slowly becoming less and less in their favour. I just think that, translated into image, it loses a great deal.

I personally would've developed the characters a little deeper in the "down-time", not just shoe-horned action in there, instead of keeping the silent nothingness just for the sake of keeping true to the source material.

I'm sure it's easy for criticism when you're just a critic, but I'm a games developer by profession and it's the same deal when translating a film into a game. Sometimes material that is really exciting in a movie can make for pretty lousy gaming, so it's important to weigh up how better to keep your audience amused.

Just my tuppence, team!

Reply 1487

Liam_G

Original post by TotoMimo

It's a lovely tuppence, thank you :h:

I know what you mean, when the first part ended I was like :nooo:

You can't possibly end it there! But then I realised that all it means is that the last film is going to be absolutely crammed full of awesomeness... I think when people see the last film, they'll appreciate the division, as the first section allowed for the emotional turmoil and for the introduction of the Deathly Hallows, which is necessary to the plot, and the second one will allow for all of the insane amount of action.

Reply 1488

-honeybee-

I know what you mean but I also think that the first part is a necessary precursor to the second. Without the introduction of the Deathly Hallows, the sword in the lake and the search for the Horcruxes the second part would be meaningless. I actually really liked the first film despite, on first reading anyway, not particularly enjoying the time spent camping in the book.

Add to that the amount of crazy Harry Potter fans. It's unlike many other adaptations in that most people have read the books, it is a bit of a phenomenon (especially for people our age who have grown up alongside the books and films) and imo people who go to see it generally want that true-to-the-books style which was missing in some of the earlier films and has been widely criticised. It seems bizarre to me to simplify the films when it is the back story that is most interesting. Maybe it appeals more to children/people who haven't bothered to read the books but I would much rather see a proper exploration of the plot, although I know this perhaps isn't financially the best option.

Reply 1489

FuzzySheep

Original post by diamonddust

What time is the premiere? Is it Leicester or Trafalgar Square? *noob*

http://wwws.warnerbros.co.uk/harrypotterworldpremierevisitorinformation/index.html

Hope that helps! :smile:

Reply 1490

Liam_G

I completely cringed when I saw the part of the trailer where Harry grabs hold of Voldemort and they fall over a cliff. I was like :nooo:

That's not in the book, and it's completely unnecessary, why would you put it in?!

I hate it when they add in bits that they just shouldn't :unimpressed:

Like when The Burrow was burned down... That wasn't supposed to happen at all! We needed the Burrow to hold Bill & Fleur's super fancy, super awesome wedding :sad:

It just seems so... wrong :shakecane:

Harry seems to speak to him as an equal, in a sort of friendly way, and he touches him... He shouldn't want to touch him :no:

Spoiler

Meh, I guess I'll find out soon.

Reply 1491

cambo211

I don't have any real issue with it :dontknow:

Reply 1492

username402722

Today I will now upset many Harry Potter fans or make them envious. I have met Daniel Radcliffe twice and found him to be a very pleasant and charming man. I wish him well in all his future film and theatre work.

Reply 1493

Liam_G

Original post by cambo211

I don't have any real issue with it :dontknow:

It's not that big of a deal really, it's just that it seems directors always try to put there own stamp on the movies without much foresight, or consideration of the actual book.

It's just a little bit of a pet peeve of mine :colondollar:

Obviously I understand that they can't cram everything into a film, so they have to improvise somewhat... But for some reason I'm always little bit iffy about it.

Reply 1494

cambo211

Original post by Liam_G

Obviously I understand that they can't cram everything into a film, so they have to improvise somewhat... But for some reason I'm always little bit iffy about it.

They're allowed to adapt the books a bit. I don't think there's a film adaptation that sticks 100% to the book its based on. Rowling steps in to keep things on track when they want to drastically change something. IIRC she had to step in when they wanted to get rid of Kreacher when he was first introduced because he wasn't a necessity back then.

Reply 1495

Groat

Original post by Liam_G

Obviously I understand that they can't cram everything into a film, so they have to improvise somewhat... But for some reason I'm always little bit iffy about it.

I haven't minded when they have changed the story or omitted things in the other films, but The Half Blood Prince really frustrated me.

•

They made up the Burrow scene and then complain they couldn't fit it all in!

•

They decided not to have the battle of the Astronomy Tower because it was too similar to the final fight of Hogwarts.

•

Dumbledore doesn't stun Harry under his invisibility cloak but tells him to go down under. I would've thought this scene could be so much more emotional if Harry was trapped under the cloak watching Dumbledore die, helpless.

Other than that, I love them and welcome the changes. :colone:

Reply 1496

Liam_G

Original post by cambo211

Interesting :beard:

I don't know why, but for some reason I didn't imagine that she had that much input into the films :dontknow:

I guess I was wrong. Although if I was a director, I think I'd keep asking her questions just out of respect...

Reply 1497

Liam_G

Original post by Groat

I haven't minded when they have changed the story or omitted things in the other films, but The Half Blood Prince really frustrated me.

•

They made up the Burrow scene and then complain they couldn't fit it all in!

•

They decided not to have the battle of the Astronomy Tower because it was too similar to the final fight of Hogwarts.

•

Other than that, I love them and welcome the changes. :colone:

Agreed

HBP frustrated me a little too :yes:

Reply 1498

cambo211

Original post by Liam_G

Interesting :beard:

I don't know why, but for some reason I didn't imagine that she had that much input into the films :dontknow:

I guess I was wrong. Although if I was a director, I think I'd keep asking her questions just out of respect...

When they start making a film series of a book series that is yet to be completed i imagine they need to check with her that what they're doing i alright. Otherwise they end up changing the entire story :tongue:

Reply 1499

Peachz

Original post by Liam_G

Interesting :beard:

I don't know why, but for some reason I didn't imagine that she had that much input into the films :dontknow:

I guess I was wrong. Although if I was a director, I think I'd keep asking her questions just out of respect...

They must have had to keep her like 'in the loop' especially with a series like Harry Potter where when they started the films, the books weren't complete so how were the directors to know of Kreachers importance or including the scenes of Snape's childhood etc etc.