Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2

It's time to stop delaying the inevitable. 

Seven, books, eight films, more than a decade of the magic that is the Harry Potter universe. Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows Part 1 was the calm before the storm and the Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2  is the big, grand, epic finale. But allow me to rant a bit:

Spoilers abound. But really, who doesn't have even the slightest idea?

Professor McGonagall (Maggie Smith) gigling "I've always wanted to use that spell" is, I think, completely out of character. Granted the Hogwarts' Deputy Headministress has a bit of punk in her persona, she has more sense than that, especially knowing that all hell is about to break loose.

But it was a blast to see her and Mrs. Weasly kick ass.

The before-we-die kiss between Ginny (Bonnie Wright) and Harry (Daniel Radcliff) was forgettable. And so was Ginny, which is a bit sad. And speaking of kisses, the most awaited kiss between Ron (Rupert Grint) and Hermoine (Emma Watson) would have been nice if the camera showed the lip-lock.

And not just "the most awaited" shot of Ron's red hair. Pffft.

Overall, it feels a bit rushed. Although I agree that the cameras should follow Harry and Voldemort (Ralph Fiennes), I felt a little robbed of the essential aspects of the Battle of Hogwarts. The whole grand battle is seen more in a macro scale: You see the massive number of Death Eaters and giants storm the castle, but we miss out on seeing Fred (Oliver or James Phelps?), Remus (David Thewlis) and Tonks (Natalie Lena) die. I thought the whole idea of splitting the book into two films was to be able to have time to show what counts, be it the magnificent special effects or the gravity of emotions that the story holds.

That's it, I swear, no more rants.

But all that said and let go, it may very well be a fitting end to the Happy Potterverse. I maybe just expected that it'll be too faithful to the book (Yes, I know films are different!). But it's not at all bad. Not bad at all.

My eyes were dry up until the scenes after this.  

The child actors have grown physically into and connected with their roles and it's evident that they gained experience acting side-by-side with most talented actors. Fiennes was really effectively evil. Bonham Carter playfully displayed her acting range. Ciaran Hinds as Aberforth Dumbledore and Kelly MacDonald as Helena Ravenclaw were unexpectedly awesomely cool. Special mention, though, to Alan Rickman as Professor Severus Snape, who as an actor and a complex character really stole the show for me.

"Eee-qual-ly..." guilty of making the audience sob in terror.   

It's bittersweet to bid farewell to Harry, Ron, Emma, Draco (Tom Felton) Neville (Matthew Lewis, who has a bit of a Clive Owen-feel now that he has shed the baby fat and has facial hair, plus a good sense of British humor), Ginny, and Luna (Evanna Lynch), and to Hogwarts and The Burrow. But as J.K. Rowling said, "Hogwarts will always be there to welcome us home."


Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 gets an eight out of ten because Snape made me cry and because it is the last of its kind and we will all miss it. And because the child actors in the series kinda grew up fairly decent.


*Photos from daemonsmovies.com



You may also want to check out the other reviews of Deathly Hallows: Part 2 by Mary Quite Contrary and Sting Lacson.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1

Destroying Hocruxes can't be too boring, right?

I just finished the seven Happy Potter books just a few hours before stepping in the cinema to watch this. I'm not comparing book vs. film, but it's nice to note that this film (and maybe also Part 2 together) might be the one of the closest to the books.

In the seventh film of the Happy Potter series, we see Harry set to continue the task Professor Dumbledore left him. With best pals Hermoine and Ron, their journey outside Hogwarts leads them face-to-face with kinds of magic they, or even the members of the Order of the Phoenix, have never known before. But they have to find and destroy the Hocruxes in order to defeat Voldemort once and for all.

We have loads packed in our tiny rucksacks.

Kudos, of course, to the cast—and this means not just the three leads—because they have all done their part well. Great job especially though to Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, and Rupert Grint who had grown up with their characters. Rupert, who I think as Ron, is so hilarious in the absence of Fred and George Weasley's screen time. Emma has several very fashionable pieces of wardrobe, as Hermoine travels with a small bag with undetectable extension charms. Brilliantly done, mainly so because she has to look good being the only girl in the trio—she looked amazing! And Daniel has grown to be an actor I think we will see more of after the series ends.

I wonder if this top will look good on me? Hmmm.

But as a stand-alone movie, it dragged on for more than two hours without an obvious climax. And this is so because, of course, splitting the plot of the seventh book means splitting the story. And it's only natural to have the climax at the end of the film series which is Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2. I would have waited for the second part and watched them in a marathon for a better movie experience. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1, sad to say, elicits not much of a rave as a movie, except that it sets the stage for July next year. That, I expect, will complete the Happy Potter series on a high note. Because no matter how the books were adapted into movies, it's no denying that it's a great epic story. I honestly can't wait for Part 2!


Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1 gets six out of ten, for staying true to the well-written narrative, being hyped all over, and extending the wait for the very last installment.


P.S. If one's going to argue that an elf's death is a climax-denouement, then I say otherwise. It could have been that for Part 1 if the preceding scenes were treated with heightened emotions, effects, action, music, and what have you. But it doesn't feel so. It was just as it was presented in the book, a sort of subclimax.


*photos from www.listal.com

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince

"No, Miss Granger, I have no potion to improve acting."

(Boo to Claire for not reviewing this despite watching it first.)

They say this is like The Dark Knight of the Harry Potter franchise. I say not really.

Okay, first thing's first. Let's get the adaptation issue out of the way.

This is already the sixth Potter adaptation. Everyone should know by now that the movie is not like the book. There are some exceptions, of course, but as a general rule, do not expect the movie version to be a hundred percent faithful to the adapted source.

So what can I say about Half-Blood Prince? It's darker. Edgier. Less action than Order of the Phoenix, but we have more flashbacks of Tom Riddle, which makes it a treat for fans of the book.

Emma Watson and Bonnie Wright are getting prettier and prettier. But sadly, Emma Watson's acting hasn't improved much. Just a little. She doesn't overact that much anymore. Daniel Radcliffe's acting has improved a lot. And Rupert Grint is always good.

On the adults' performances, Mrs. Tim Burton a.k.a. Helena Bonham Carter is in her element as usual, while Jim Broadbent is excellent as Professor Horace Slughorn. Alan Rickman is still the best. And Michael Gambon tends to look like Gandalf the Grey in a lot of shots. Must be the hair. And the beard. Or both.

This reminds me of something Homer Simpson once said: "No man should outlive his fictional wizard." Which is exactly what I felt when Dumbledore, you know, died.

Again, they say this is The Dark Knight of the Potter franchise. And I say The Dark Knight does not have any teeny-bopper romance going on every fifteen minutes or so.


*some info from IMDb
pic from movies.msn.com


Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. UK. 2009.


Rating: Seven and a half out of ten.

Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix

"One more take, please? Didn't stick my tongue out too much."

By now, everyone should have realized that it is very rare for a movie adaptation to be exactly like the book. This film is no different. Movie adaptations should only be either one of two things: as good as the book, or better. I would like to congratulate David Yates for a visually somber look, complementing the darkness of the story itself. Order of the Phoenix, compared to the other movies, utilizes the most magic, with an excellent representation of the Ministry of Magic, as well as the Weasley’s Skiving Snackboxes and their awesome fireworks display. The juvenile actors have shown some improvement, especially Daniel Radcliffe, whose angst-filled Potter takes center stage. Rupert Grint as Ron Weasley is terrific as usual, while Emma Watson still has to work on her overacting. The adults, meanwhile, give the film its darkest edge, with Gary Oldman taking the lead (when will this man win an Oscar?) and Helena Bonham-Carter making her wizarding debut as the twisted Bellatrix Lestrange. Of course, there is no need to mention Ralph Fiennes, who gave a five-star performance as Lord Voldemort. Alan Rickman has never failed to deliver an extremely despicable Severus Snape, and we can expect his splendid performance for The Half-Blood Prince.

Note: Mrs. Arabella Figg was played by the actress who also played Cleopatra’s nanny in HBO’s Rome.

Three stars.