From Laremy Legel at Film.com:
Where the film falters is through the calculated exclusion of anyone not already steeped in Harry Potter lore. You'll need to come in emotionally invested, though the chances of that are solid if you've read this far. Newcomers need not apply, as the whole affair would likely come off as a blustery exercise without prior knowledge of the books or films.
Yes to all but "if you've read this far", you're emotionally invested.
From Anthony Lane in The New Yorker:
The trouble with Harry, as becomes clear from this seventh and penultimate installment, is not that we have lost the plot—the film is as tangled and as corkscrewed as Bonham Carter’s hair—but that we are in danger of losing everything else. The first words of the movie, which is directed by David Yates, are “These are dark times, there is no denying.” Actually, there is denying—that was the gist of the comic fantasy that used to prevail in Hogwarts, a place notably unvisited by our heroes on this occasion. Even allowing for the fact that we have followed Harry (Daniel Radcliffe), Hermione (Emma Watson), and Ron (Rupert Grint) into the slough of puberty and out the other side, the whole thing does seem preternaturally stained with Weltschmerz.
Yes, again.
From Peter Travers at Rolling Stone:
Like a virgin's padded bra, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part I is all tease, zero payoff. No investment banker left standing could fail to applaud the studio's initiative in halving the seventh and last book in J.K. Rowling's Harry Potter series to squeeze the goose for more gold. But a movie that plays like a 146-minute trailer for the actual final chapter — Part II opens next July in 3D! — is a definite cheat.
Once again, yes.
Last night, Tom and I went to see the latest Harry Potter film. I'd read the review in The New Yorker and was not enthusiastic about going, but we had not been to a movie together in quite a while, so since Tom wanted to go, I went along.
We'd missed
Before I read the second book in the series, I saw the movie, "Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets", and did not care for it nearly so much as the first. I didn't read any of the other Potter books, and, as I've said, we missed the next
I knew that Dumbledore had died, but Tom and I were pretty thoroughly lost in the first scenes of the movie. Although we never really caught up, we tried to follow along with the intricacies of the plot, as best we could. Tom enjoyed the action and special effects, but I was mostly bored.
I discovered that Daniel Radcliffe is short, 5'6" as best I can discover, since a good many of the other actors in the film seemed to tower over him, and not just Hagrid. I got caught up in the scenery, some of which was quite beautiful. According to Wikipedia, "The crew also shot on location, with Swinley Forest and Freshwater West as two of the main outdoor filming areas, along with the village of Lavenham in Suffolk and the streets of the city of London."
One scene that I loved was of Harry enticing the mournful Hermione (Ron having left them) to dance, in an attempt to lift her spirits - a sweet moment to savor for a romantic such as I.
Near the end of the movie, I had to make a run to use the facilities, and I missed all but the very last scenes of the film, which led to a to-be-continued ending. That I didn't mind not seeing the scenes I missed, says a lot about how much I cared about the movie. I missed the fun in the first movie, which was perhaps more due to my expectations than a fault in the movie.
On the plus side, we were given MovieWatcher rewards of two free small bags of popcorn, but, on the minus side, the theater discontinued discounts for seniors.
The wrath of true-blue Potter fans will probably descend on me for what I've written, but, what I have written, I have written.
UPDATE: See Bishop Alan's review of "Potterdammerung".
I cannot imagine making sense of it unless one had either seen all the previous films or read the books. Very brave of you to give it a go. I plan to catch it in another week.
ReplyDeleteThere was quite a long piece in the Guardian by someone who was 13 when she saw the first film, like the actors I think, and is now 21. She was saying how possessive she and her schoolmates felt about Harry Potter, which as far as they were concerned belonged to their generation. She thought the scene where Hermione danced with Harry was "so wrong" (it's not in the book, nor is there ever much suggestion that Harry fancies Hermione or vice versa). Shoot me down in flames, but I thought they were right to suggest the possibility. I would actually have preferred Hermione to end up with Harry rather than Ron.
ReplyDeletePS I kind of like the fact that she was unafraid to go for a very complex plot and a big cast of characters.
ReplyDeleteTorey's review and comments from Religion Dispatches here
ReplyDeletePaul and Cathy, fantasy fiction is not my favorite literary form. That I like very much the samplings of your writings that the two of you have sent me, is highly complimentary. I mean that.
ReplyDeleteAfter the second Potter movie, I gave up on the books and the movies, so I am not the best judge. To me, a movie should, for the most part, stand on its own, but perhaps the Potter series is in a special category.
Cathy, about the dance scene, it did not come out of nowhere. Whether or not it was present in the books, the sexual tension between the three was evident throughout the film.
My objection is not to the complex plot or the large cast of characters, but to the fact that the movie was mystifying to those who had not seen the others or read the books. And a whole movie as pretty much of a tease for the finale does not work for me.
I didn't make my comments to argue against what you have said, Mimi - I'm sure you're right. The films seem a slightly cynical exercise in some ways.
ReplyDeleteThank you for your kind words :-) I'm curious to know what Paul's is about! We should compare notes, Paul, but mine has a fair way to go yet before it is polished.
Ann, I believe few people are more convinced of the power of stories than I, but one must be caught up in the story for it to take on serious meaning.
ReplyDeleteI hate that Rowling has to defend her stories against the idiocies of the fundies. Her overarching theme is good v. evil, defending the powerless against the powerful. She's quoted at The Lead:
“What did my books preach against throughout? Bigotry, violence, struggles for power, no matter what.”
Of course!
A cruciatus curse on your head, Mimi! :) I can't imagine anyone following the plot of the latest film without having read the books or at least having seen the films. One must be well versed in the HP series to understand the final book. I admire you for going to see it without all the Blue Book background. :)
ReplyDeletePS the word verification for this post is really and truly "devil".
Cathy, you and Paul should talk.
ReplyDeleteI loved the first Potter film, perhaps too much to think that the others could satisfy me after my disappointment with the second.
James, there should be a warning. :-) But, of course, the filmmakers want everyone there in the theater so they make their money.
James, word verification is beginning to spook me a little. Perhaps the letters are not random. Perhaps there's an intelligence setting them up.
ReplyDeleteA cruciatus curse on your head, Mimi! :)
ReplyDeleteHere, that's not very nice. I don't think our Mimi deserves that!!
I don't think our Mimi deserves that!!
ReplyDeleteRight you are, Cathy! I'm too old for that sort of thing.
Well it's not that, it's that you're our friend!!!
ReplyDeleteYa can't cruciatus yer friends. It's not on!! You only cruciatus people like Helena Bonham Carter. And even then you feel bad about it.
Oh, so it's nothing naughty in THAT way, then.
ReplyDelete:-) Just kidding. I know what the curse is, and I hope James was not serious.
Mimi, if it was naughty, you wouldn't be too old! ;-)
ReplyDeleteCheck out Greg Garrett's Harry Potter posts at http://theotherjesus.com/
ReplyDeleteBex, that's nicely done. Greg feels that he must defend himself against the charge of blasphemy when he refers to Harry as a Christ figure, but why? The Christ-figure character is a standard reference in literature. Melville's Billy Budd comes to mind, as well as Prince Myshkin in Dostoevsky's The Idiot. I could go on, and I'm sure you could, too.
ReplyDeleteOh dear.... I haven't read the books, but thoroughly enjoyed the movie. And all the ones before.. However, Joel hated it... all.
ReplyDeleteBut I surely won't curse you for not liking it --and I have put a magic shield around you so all the attempts at cursing you for speaking your mind will be simply ineffective.
oh --here's a thought... Perhaps you don't 'like' the movies because you are a mere Muggle, Grandmere...
The problem is that Rowling didn't really write seven individual books. She wrote one very long story that was published in seven parts. As Paul said, you need to know what was in the earlier installments to fully understand the later ones: lots of things play into each other as the story moves on.
ReplyDeleteI've read about half the series--couldn't get into Half Blood Prince and skimmed through much of the first half of Deathly Hallows[ I think Order of the Phoenix, which ends with Harry grappling not very successfully with the death of Sirius Black, was the strongest. And while the first half of Deathly Hallows is something of a mishmash, the second half is much more coherent, as Harry comes to realize that getting rid of Voldemort will require his own death (and Rowling slid around that dilemma much too superficially)--and while there's a good deal of tragedy at the end, you do get shining moments such as Mrs. Weasley demonstrating what a real "mama grizzly" is capable of, and Neville demonstrating that, under other circumstances, he would have been as capable of taking out Voldemort as Harry. And Rowling handles the final duel between Harry and Voldemort superbly.
So I suspect you and others will like the final installment better thant his one.
Darn! Now you've made me want to read the books again!
Margaret, Joel is a man after my own heart.
ReplyDeleteThe problem is that Rowling didn't really write seven individual books. She wrote one very long story that was published in seven parts.
Kishnevi, that explains a lot. I think I will have to see the finale, if for no other reason than to see "mama grizzly" Mrs Weasley in action.
I felt the resolution of Harry/Voldemort was a bit of a letdown. It just was kind of "Agatha Christie" - you know: "While you weren't looking and didn't know, so-and-so did such-and-such." That's one of the reasons I loved the series Avatar: The Last Airbender, because I thought the similar resolution was handled much better - still a bit deus ex machina but more straightforwardly approachable as a solution.
ReplyDeletewv: "forkle" - I don't think you have anything to fear Mimi.
I have only read the books and then seen the movies (not this last one) -- so I fill in the blanks, no doubt. I did find the happily ever after ending was a bit much - but then the book was written for Jr. High age kids -- so you gotta have a little fantasy.
ReplyDeleteAnd while I am ranting - for those who are disappointed that Daniel Radcliffe is short-- enough of that prejudice against short people -- our son and nephews are short and have suffered enough.
Ann, I do not consider what I said about Radcliffe's height prejudicial. Since I missed the 5 movies as the three characters grew up, I did not know Radcliffe was short. I noted that he was 5'6". That is all. Not that there's anything wrong with that.
ReplyDeleteI repeat that I think a movie should stand on its own, unless the moviemakers caution the unknowing not to buy a ticket unless they've seen all of the films, or they may not understand or appreciate the story.
The Lovely Mona and I went to see this film last night (but it was called Harry Potter y las Reliquias de la Muerte,) and we enjoyed it very much. I reread the book last month in preparation as it had been a while . . .
ReplyDeletePadre Mickey, way to go! I just wish I had known.
ReplyDeleteI think they found it difficult to get to what will be part 2 without a lot of lead in. I doubt it was intended as a trailer until they got to the point of making cuts.
ReplyDeleteThis one was odd. It might have been titled "Harry Potter: Excerpts From a Long Book." I found very much a series of vignettes that required the viewer to have been a reader. odds on bet is that most of the viewers were but that is not good movie making in my view.
Will I see the last film -- of course! If nothing else I want to see how they find their way through it. And I have to say that given the script they had, the actors did a credible job.
FWIW
jimB
Cathy, back in grad school I wrote a couple of fantasy tales that began as "bedtime stories for graduate students." The first was short and silly, a serial children's tale written and read at bedtime, one page per night for four weeks. The sequel was 100 pages of love amid a genocidal war. The heroine of the second tale was the granddaughter of the little boy in the first. It involves a parallel world, and so a fantasy began that spanned centuries in two worlds. I envisioned prequels and one sequel to what was already written, then set it aside for three decades. Taken up again, it looks like potentially ten novels with thousands of characters. I love inventing a world and a history and exploring the people, who fascinate me. Like Potter, it is really one long story, the history of one family in two worlds (from the 8th to the 15th in the other world; 18th to 21st in ours). I feel some of the books would stand on their own as tales but there is a lot of background. Nothing published. I hope to do one more revision on the first two books (one adventure in two parts) in 2011 and try to submit it. In the middle of book three. Parts of six, 7-8, and 9 are in early drafts. So many tales in my head waiting to be put on paper (or at least digitally readable).
ReplyDeleteWhat are you writing, Cathy?
I was not saying you were prejudiced about height of men - but many are. As to fantasy /sci-fi -- much (most) of the creative theologizing goes on in those books.
ReplyDeleteKeep on writing. If we can dream it - it can happen. - the power of story.
hiya Paul, I am at work so cannot explain in great detail just now I fear, but mine is about a girl aged 13 who flies through time back to ancient Britain just after the Romans had invaded, in search of her father, who has gone missing, and who once there gets caught up in the conflict of the invasion. It is turning into four books and is also pretty elaborate, with a big cast of characters and not everything worked out yet. I have drafted book one in its entirely twice and am working on a third draft, but it is undergoing changes as I work on the overarching plan. I don't want to think about sending it out before I have got the whole structure thoroughly in place and part-drafted at least.
ReplyDeleteYours sounds fun and rather lovely. Mimi says you write beautifully, which I think is highly unfair of you :-) although I would have expected nothing else.
Mimi, I think that Warner Brothers (I think that's the company.) would assume that EVERYONE knows that the seventh story in a series requires knowledge of what's gone on before. One of my students found himself unimpressed and confused with "The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers" film, but told me he had neither seen the first film nor read the book. Hmmm..... Perhaps such films should begin with "Previously, on Harry Potter...." (Snark!)
ReplyDeleteRegardless, every contributor on this thread has a good grasp of book vs. movie. Unfortunately, most of my students (language impaired), do not. It has been my good fortune to have JK Rowling as an ally in the effort to help them to understand that. I love it when a student begins to catch the "reading fire" and starts criticizing movies for glaring omissions or changes to a story line. Yes!
As Jim has pointed out, most attempts at book to screen become a strand of vignettes, only truly appreciated, perhaps, by those familiar with the book. It is to WB's credit that they have stayed relatively true to the story and characters, though much of the book is not included in any film.
I've not yet seen the film, but am picking up two of my nephews and going to see it this afternoon. Both of them have read all the books, and one makes my Potter geekiness look very pale in comparison.
Never read the books. Saw part of one of the movies, on an airplane, I think. Doesn't do a thing for me and no interest in any of it. BP likes that sort of thing, though.
ReplyDeleteCathy,
ReplyDeleteI look forward to reading your work. Best wishes with it.
Ann, theologizing indeed. I believe my novels constitute the dissertations never written from the two doctoral programs I dropped out of: church history and multi-cultural & interfaith ministy. The major theme of my books is the choice between domination-subjection or love (Caesar or Christ?). Learning compassion and living with loss also recur. Not difficult to see biblical themes in my stories though they are stories, not sermons or lessons. Lots of imagining ways we might be with one another. I've taken a break of just over a year and it's time to get cracking. I may not live long enough to finish. (Need to buy more powerball tickets so I can quit working and write.)
Jim, since I saw the whole damn 2½ trailer, I will have to see the movie it shilled for.
ReplyDeleteMimi, I think that Warner Brothers (I think that's the company.) would assume that EVERYONE knows that the seventh story in a series requires knowledge of what's gone on before.
KJ, Warner Bros. assumed wrong, but they got my money, which is what they wanted.
IT, I love you.
Paul and Cathy, do carry on with your stories.
I love you too, Mimi.
ReplyDeleteThat should be "the whole damn 2½ hour trailer...."
ReplyDeleteI'm back from the theater - loved it! But of course, much of the tale is missing. In the book, I love the scene in Godric Hollow where Harry locates his parents grave, but omitted from the movie is the inscription from Paul, "the last enemy to be destroyed is death." When I first read that scene, set on Christmas Eve with the sound of carols coming from the little church, I knew where we were heading. It's made all the more delicious with Nagini revealing herself shortly thereafter. Hope in the midst of great horror.
ReplyDeleteI absolutely understand that some do not care for the genre. But Mimi, I'm still puzzled by your surprise that rejoining the story near its climax would be confusing. That would be like not reading the first chapter of "Great Expectations" or starting "Pride and Prejudice" after Lydia has run off with Mr. Wickham. It's just not done!
Of course, I should add, I love you Mimi, in spite of our differences on this matter, and wish you a blessed Advent. :-)
ReplyDeleteBut Mimi, I'm still puzzled by your surprise that rejoining the story near its climax would be confusing. That would be like not reading the first chapter of "Great Expectations" or starting "Pride and Prejudice" after Lydia has run off with Mr. Wickham. It's just not done!
ReplyDeleteKJ, my sweet, "Deathly Hallows" was not a book which I started to read in the last two chapters. It was a movie - unless, I was hallucinating as I read the book. A movie should stand on its own, unless the filmmakers advertise in the trailer that one should not spend one's money unless one has seen all the movies or read all the books.
Of course, I should add, I love you Mimi, in spite of our differences on this matter, and wish you a blessed Advent.
I love you, too, KJ, however, I must ask: Will you share the table with me? Is it possible for Potter fans and non-Potter fans to be in communion? The differences sometimes seem insurmountable to me.
At table together? Certainly as long as some of us sit at the children's table -- LOL
ReplyDeleteAnn, a two-tier communion, then?
ReplyDeleteYes Grandmère - one table for the juvenile delinquents and one for those who know which fork to use
ReplyDeleteAnn, which tier will be the top tier, the tier with the muscle and the magic? I guess I don't need to ask.
ReplyDeleteThe magic is always at the children's table - as to muscle -- oh well- Jesus did not need any
ReplyDeleteAnd what about senile delinquents who know which fork to use but insist on misbehaving? I want a seat too, you know.
ReplyDeleteThis is such a fun place to hang out.
I will only consent to use a fork if I can stick it into people's legs under the table.
ReplyDeleteI don't need a seat, I'll hang out under the table.
Ann, I knew that. :-)
ReplyDeleteAnd what about senile delinquents who know which fork to use but insist on misbehaving?
Paul, in your case, the benefits of second childhood will kick in.
Cathy, stick a fork in your idea. No one hangs out under the table.
ReplyDeleteI do, but if you insist I will sit at the table instead and throw food, Mimi :-)
ReplyDeleteNo, one table. We all deserve each other.
ReplyDeleteMimi, you've put your finger on it - Potter fans, and non-Potter fans. Yesterday, one of my nephews was muttering about omissions in the film, and then decided if the viewer cared enough to fill in the missing pieces, he/she would read the book. With that insight, he could relax in regards to the matter!
But when it comes to "serials" with one long story arc (Not a secret to readers of the books.), I don't agree that each movie should stand alone. When that is attempted, either missing information is filled in in very awkward ways (Actually, there was some of that in the Deathly Hallows - "Hello, Bill, brother of Ron whom Harry has apparently never met. Where did you come from?") or glaring omissions. HP fans would have been very disappointed if rather than being faithful to the books, the screen writers had accommodated non-fans who haven't been paying attention all along. That would be like the ABC attempting to accommodate exclusivists, and pleasing no one for his troubles.
So, let's try this - Imagine that it were possible that there was someone who knew nothing of Jane Austen's writings ("St. Jane, come and save me in my time of need!"), and such a person, again if it were possible, began watching the 1995 Pride and Prejudice "miniseries" at the second episode. Since it's all one story, I don't believe the viewer would be surprised at needing to catch up or back-up. Of course, it's possible that the viewer just may not care, as hard as that is to imagine.
(Did you notice, that in order to not break our bonds of affection, I used an allusion to Jane Austen? This is an attempt to avoid a food fight at the table. What unites us is some much greater than that that divides.)
KJ, how can I object to a rebuke that is handed out with such kindness, and (shall I say it?) sycophancy? And sycophancy that you're not shy to call to my attention! You're a nice boy, but you're a sly one, too.
ReplyDeletePeace be unto you and to your nephew.
"Hello, Bill, brother of Ron whom Harry has apparently never met. Where did you come from?"
ReplyDeleteAlways the problem when it comes to a long serial (not meaning to interrupt a dialogue here BTW). I think Rowling manages it as artfully as most. Seven books translated to standalone films is a clunky arrangement. It's just clunky, that's all there is to it. She can't cater to fans and non-fans alike. She chooses fans, because the result will be more elegant if you assume people know what you're talking about, as opposed to trying to explain what you have explained already. God knows the fans have been obsessive enough, so, I guess she was probably more or less reasonable in assuming this. It doesn't mean the films work for everybody, nor does it remove the faint whiff of cynicism that hangs over everything Potteresque these days.
I should clarify, everything Potteresque that comes out of Hollywood. I don't think the books are cynical.
ReplyDeleteAnd Rowling had no control over the films once she sold the rights. None of what I've said applies to the author of the Potter stories. Perhaps I should not have let the second movie discourage me from reading the rest of the books.
ReplyDeleteAnd I still think I'm right about the movie, but if the films please the Potter fans, then I'm happy for them.
Bishop Alan, who is more of a Potter aficionado than I, didn't seem to care a whole lot for the movie, either, although he gave it a 4½ out of 5 rating, which I don't quite understand.
And I should say that Tom liked the movie more than I did.
I think the movies are distinctly Hollywood productions and the books are probably not to be confused with them, in that sense.
ReplyDeletePS I reckon you should read them, Mimi - she's not a perfect writer by any means and yet she is staggeringly impressive and profound and addictive, if all that makes sense.
ReplyDeleteThe game's afoot:
ReplyDeleteFollow your spirit, and upon this charge
Cry "God for Harry, England, and Saint George!"
Exeunt. Alarum, and chambers go off
Cathy, if you say so....
ReplyDeleteRight now, I'm rereading Barchester Towers and thoroughly enjoying it. The Church of England hasn't changed much since the mid-19th century.
Wow, I give you two credit for watching the movie without having read all of the books. I read them all but had forgotten quite a bit- thank goodness I have kids with good memories :) Anyway, I was so happy to see a movie with only about 10 people in the theater. The dubbed version was mobbed but not the subtitled version. All that and hot caramel popcorn- well, we were quite happy.
ReplyDeleteCatherine, I didn't know better!
ReplyDeleteDubbed movies drive me up the wall. I'll take subtitles any day. Hot caramel popcorn? Yummy!