I've always liked Harry Potter, the books and the movies, but I've never been a huge fan. I don't mean that as an insult, it's simply that I don't get excited about it. Or a lot of other things, for that matter. But I still enjoy it, and it was still a part of my childhood. We have the first three films on VHS. Seems like a long time ago, doesn't it?
I thought Deathly Hallows Pt. 1 was great. I know some people thought it was slow moving and dull in parts, but I didn't. Part 2 has all the action.
Part 2 is great, as well, although there were instances when it could have, should have, had more of an impact; gone further in depth so that it really hit the audience. Parts felt glazed over. All in all, it was just as it should have been. I'm not one of those people who remembers everything from the book and then sees all of the differences in the movie, not with this one, anyway. I know there are differences, but don't ask me what they all are!
Acting-wise, I don't think there was a great height of skill displayed by the younger cast. I mean they were fine, but I wasn't overly impressed. I rarely am. Hmm...I don't know if you've noticed this about me, but I tend to be critical of actors and their acting. I didn't feel that anyone underachieved, however, and I love Daniel Radcliffe. I could go over the rest of the more seasoned cast and say how wonderful they are (Alan Rickman, Maggie Smith, Helena Bonham Carter), but you already know that. Let's just say that I can't complain about anyone.
The action sequences and the big fight were awesome. The ending was okay, but I'm not a fan of time-jumps.The actors weren't aged dramatically, though, so it wasn't as depressing as it might have been. At this point I thought I should have been teary-eyed, but I wasn't. The final scene failed to move me, but the rest of it was more effective. No tears, though!
By the way, am I the only one who doesn't give a flying eff about the Harry/Ginny and Ron/Hermione romances?
My grade: A
Comments
Post a Comment