Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2
 

Just saw it (first film I've seen in awhile)

Three things bugged me:

1. I thought the writing was glaringly bad at a couple of cathartic moments. Basically, those moments involved Harry talking to ghosts and the ghost saying something to the effect: "We'll always be in your heart." Sirius doesn't say this, but points to Harry's heart. I think Dumbledore says it though. That's just terrible writing. Absolutely didn't need to be said and right on the nose too. Just awful.
2. The other part I didn't like was Neville killing Nagani. He just comes out of nowhere. Didn't seem as heroic as it could have. It would have been so much more satisfying to see some kind of battle between the two, but then, maybe Nagani would have been too much for Neville. Anyway, I didn't think it came across that well.

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2
 

actually, the Neville killing Nagini part was different in the book - and way better. the reason it felt so weird was because they cut out what actually happened for the movie. i was really looking forward to it because it's such an awesome part - there's a thing with the sorting hat being set on fire while it's on Neville's head and stuff, but they cut that part out.

so what was your third thing?

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2
 

Was disappointing. Some really trite dialogue, as mentioned. The majority of the film undermined a lot of the first and just demonstrated how unnecessary dragging it across two parts was, the destroying Horocrux's was a challenge in Part 1, finding the sword etc then the majority of Part 2 removed the difficulty of finding them, destroying them and just became an elimination process (i'm trying to avoid spoilers but long trip to find sword vs fang under their noses). Some of the plot points were obscure (i didn't realise that was the resurrection stone- which explained the Kings Cross nonsense) certain characters arcs were handled poorly and an ongoing issue with the franchise is their dealing with character deaths, which are either overly sentimental or too downplayed. The big battle of Hogwarts was an unfocussed mess. The whole experience was just really unsatisfying.

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2
 

I'll agree to disagree on most of the other points (well, pretty much ALL of the other points), but the King's Cross stuff was the perfect ending. It's completely in keeping with the classical themes interwoven into the books from the very, very beginning and was a long time coming. It may look silly when viewed only on the surface, but it makes perfect sense and underlines all the book's themes and parallels.

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2
 

I was disappointed. I thought the battle at Hogwarts was going to be much more grand, more epic than it actually was. Daniel Radcliffe is a terrible actor and the movie mostly focused on him, unfortunately. In truth, I didn't care all too much about his struggle or his last stand with Voldemort. I wasn't emotionally invested in this film as I had previously been with some of the others.

I enjoyed the sequence at Gringott's, with the dragon and all...but why didn't it last longer?! The trailers did a really good job of making it seem as though the dragon would have more of a role in the movie.

The whole thing felt a bit rushed, too. Weak character development, and no standard Harry Potter humor! What's up with that?! I know it was meant to be dark and all, but there was absolutely no comic relief...the whole movie felt so heavy, so serious. Why the hell was Hagrid in it for, like, 2 minutes?! He's one of the best characters in the series, I was so pissed that he was barely given any attention.

I didn't like the afterlife sequence with Dumbledore AT ALL. I felt like it was a time-killing scene that should have been shaved down or cut out completely.


I hate to bag on Harry Potter, but I was expecting so much more for the finale.

7/10

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2
 

Alright I'm gona wait until I see it to read this stuff. Seems like most of you were disappointed though.

7 out of 10 seems awfully generous for so poor a review!

anyway, i really enjoyed it. it didn't stray too far from the book which was great. i know people kept moaning about how making this one a 2 part movie was a money making scheme, but even at that it did seem terribly rushed.

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2
 

"Shave down" King's Cross? It's the whole ending! It's the whole point of the series! Maybe we can disagree about whether or not you like the series as a whole, or just found the execution wanting, but it's the culmination of the entire series, not some extraneous scene that can just be edited out.

I can appreciate the importance of the scene, Yoda. I never read a single Harry Potter book so I'm just judging strictly as a movie-goer. I guess what I'm saying is that the scene felt a little disjointed from the rest of the film...it took me out of the story for a bit. That's all.

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2
 

Fair play. I don't mean to sound like I'm ranting or actually outraged here; maybe reading the books make a big difference. I read them all, and looking back I can't really imagine it ending all that differently without abandoning the things it was building to all along. Perhaps that's much less evident in the films, particularly after translation, and particularly when spaced out over a decade (not that the books weren't, but I read the first few in quick succession).

It's unconventional, to be sure. But then again, they're unconventional stories. I feel like some people (not you, necessarily) are dismissing it just because it's unusual.

I don't have the heart to give Harry Potter anything less than a 7. Even though I was disappointed with DH Part 2 it's still a Harry Potter movie, and I can't be too mad.

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2
 

Hehe; I know that feeling. I was the same way with Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. I now simultaneously say I kinda liked it and pretend that it doesn't exist at all when it comes up in conversation.

I'm certain that reading the books would have made a huge difference for me. I opted out of reading the books because I wanted each movie to completely surprise me :D

One day, though, I will read each and every single one - and I'm sure I will love them.

Man, you should have held off watching the movies so the books would have been a surprise!

I'm just saying, i'm almost certain anyone who reads the book this movie is based on would no way in hell be dissatisfied.

I actually have never been able to understand it when people really love the HP movies but don't want to read the books. The experience is about a thousand times more rewarding. They're just denying themselves an amazingly written read.

I want to read them, truly. I just need to find the time!

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2
 

I think I meant I had two things. :)

I mentioned two dialogue moments. Those count as two. Then Nagini is the third.

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2
 

I too loved the King's Cross ending, it was such a lovely bookend to a series that has been going on for a decade (or 14 years for those who read the first book when it came out).

It was such a nice way of showing how the wizarding world has moved on from the terrible events of Voldemort and his armies, and sending the next generation off to Hogwarts seemed like the best way of closing Harry's story.

I actually thought the ending worked much better in the film than it did in the book, where I felt it was too cheesy and out of place (and unfortunately, like much of the 7th and 6th books, not very well written). In the film though it was perfect, and what better way of ending a decade long film franchise than playing it off with a bit of John Williams.

Also kudos to the effects guys for actually managing to age young actors convincingly for once.

I thought it was a very satisfying end to a series that, despite never really being as good as it could have been, was still a huge part of my life.


I know the Hobbit comes out next year (I'm too pessimistic to think lightning will strike twice) but, it's a sad realisation that all the franchises of my childhood and younger teens like Star Wars, Lord of the Rings and now Harry Potter, are now over (even Toy Story!), and it's left a big gaping chasm that will one day have to be filled by something special.

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2
 

One thing that I thought was unforgivable though was how little screen time some of the "minor" characters had. That huge moment for the Weasley family towards the end of the battle of Howarts should not have been shown briefly, only to be seemingly forgotten about.

For once I actually wish one of these films was a bit longer, another 5 minutes would have been plenty to give many more characters an extra line or two here and there.

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2
 

Am I the only one who really loved this movie? Both Radcliffe and Ralph Fiennes were terrific, some great effects, and the already mentioned "perfect" ending. It was the best way to send out such a great franchise.

This currently ranks as my second favourite Potter film.

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2
 

You are most certainly not. Hopefully I'll be able to squeeze out a review soon.

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2
 

No, you're not. It was a great ending.

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2
 

I was a little sad it was over, such a great series, plus I watched all of them with my daughter, was great daddy, daughter time, they grow up so fast these days.

I watched the last one with my Daughter as well and at the end we both agreed, it really was a great ending.

Totally in agreement here. I thought the Weasley ordeal would have been given more attention, seemed like they just milled over it. And I mentioned before that I was disappointed with the minimal inclusion of Hagrid - he showed up briefly and then disappeared :(

I know I'm complaining a lot - and don't get me wrong, the movie was still above-average in terms of the other summer flicks of 2011 - there were just a lot of things missing, IMO.

"The Prisoner of Azkaban" still stands as my favorite film of the series.

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2
 

My beef with the 'Kings Cross' scene was two fold, at the time I didn't realise the thing that fell out the snitch was one of the Deathly Hallows and didn't really like how Harry gained 'ownership' of the Elder Wand thus thought it was another Robot Heaven scene. Also, I was still uneasy on the Dumbledore knowing all along Harry had to die and was actually a bit of a bastard then being there. Probably needs another watch of both parts to appreciate, which i'm willing was possibly me down to me than the film itself.

My b/f told me that Dumbledore was much more caring and compassionate towards Harry in the novels than he was in the movies...I agree with you Pyro; he did come across as a jerkoff with this whole knowing-Harry's-fate thing.

He came across that way in the books to, I thought. I think that's the point of his character; you don't really know him, just like Harry, and therefore have to re-evaluate him just like any other person who quivers your trust bubble.

Dumbledoor wasn't a jerk-off about Harry dying. he knew he would be okay because he left him the Resurrection Stone.

Dumbledoor was always very aloof with Harry, though, yeah, and he might have purposely been so to protect him. also, that's just how his character was, anyway.

For me the Harry Potter films can be summed up by one thing. That I have never wanted to watch any of them a second time.

I just feel that they could have been made/directed so much better.

Bellatrix vs Molly Weasley could have been 10x better.

Harry should have killed Voldemort with a spell not have him wither away becuase of the wand.

Snape could have had a much better death or at least fought by Harry's side at the end and not just get killed on a whim by Voldemort.

Dumbledore was made to look a right uncaring ******** in the flashbacks.

Ron Weasley did nothing in this film. There was literally no point in him being there. Not bad for 20$ Million.

Neville vs Nagini should have been some sort of battle not just Neville appears out of nowhere as OP said.

Harry Breaks the Elder Wand. Eh What....! What if he faces some new evil in the future? perhaps the most powerful wand ever would come in handy. Well Done Harry you spastic, I hope you rue the day you snapped that piece of wood.

Terrible acting from Majority of the younger cast. Especially Radcliff throughout the series. Modern day Mark Hamill I think whereas Emma Watson will be the Harrison Ford of the three going on to a great career I hope.

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2
 

Some of those are plausible or could be tweaked stylistically, but some would completely undermine the setups and the characters. Snape, for example, could not have reasonably died another way, and certainly not in some blaze of glory. That wouldn't make sense.

And honestly, if you have to ask why Harry broke the Elder Wand, I think that you missed the entire point of the series. You might as well ask why Frodo was going to destroy that valuable ring when he could have used it to fight evil.

And you missed the point of the whole series

Terrible? Really? It's inoffensive at worst. You want bad acting watch N9ne, that's some of the worst voice work I've ever heard.

I do agree they could all be better, but that will never happen.

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2
 

I'm pretty surprised at how many people are just tossing out these casual suggestions about what should have happened as if they didn't have to be at all consistent or in any way consummate everything that had come before them.

Ha! Almost verbatim.

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2
 

Agree with most Gandalf's points....

I think it needed more exposition in some points, and less in others, was it always known to the audience that Harry had the Resurrection Stone thus all Three Deathly Hallows? Wasn't Neville also prophecised to kill Big V which turns out technically, in tandem with Harry, he did?

The whole Elder Wand/Master of Death suffered somewhat from 'Lost-itis' and felt like Rowling only thought the concept up for the last book and it just didn't sit well with me. I liked the horocrux's being destroyed without realising what they were in previous films and it all tied the series together, Deathly Hallows not so much. The focus was spoiled between the two when one would have been better.

Bellatrix vs Weasley was cringe worthy dialogue and poorly handled, with no build up just seemingly a 'tick the events from the book'. I get Snape died and then Harry realised through his memories but still, considering he was ultimately the big hero of the series, which should have been a far more startling revelation and interesting plot point. Instead he just whimpered out like a chump, he knew he was going to die and just took it, and maybe there's something I missed, but he seemed wasted.

I actually liked what the twist of Dumbledore's character was, ultimately knowing that Harry had to die and the cold side of him worked but the Kings Cross contradicted that a bit (to me). It seemed far too unlikely he'd die on the chance Harry would knock the Elder Wand from Draco. Who also probably had the most dis-satisfying climax to his arc, after all he did etc to then just be like a comic relief villain bahh.

I'll watch it again when a DVD rip appears and see if i was off on any of this

Harry was one of Voldemorts Horcruxes (that's a horrible word to spell), and like the others he had to be destroyed.

Of course, having possession of the resurrection stone means that he doesn't stay dead, so really he was in no danger.

Now, if you want to see an example of Dumbledore truly being a dick, then look no further than the end of the first film/book. The grand end of year feast, all the students and professors gathered in the great hall to celebrate Slytherins victory for the House Cup.
Suddenly, Dumbledore decides that now, at this moment of triumph for the children (!!!) of Slytherin house, to reward Ron, Hermione, Harry and Neville enough points to beat Slytherin and snatch a last minute victory.

He could have done it much sooner. It's like a soccer team in a World Cup Final being awarded a match winning penalty in injury time for something that happened several minutes earlier, when the opposition were already starting to celebrate their victory.

Now that was a dick move.

i'm trying to figure out if those who are doing so have actually read the book or not. i think not.

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2
 

actually, the movie doesn't show how awful or complex the character Dumbledoor was in Deathly Hallows the movie vs. the book. in the book, you learn a lot a lot about Dumbledoor's past through both snippets of journal entries and flashbacks. it barely touched on that at all in the movie. i figured it wouldn't, it's a really complex storyline with mostly just dialogue and Harry reading a bunch of old letters and junk, but it does explain things a bit better. it also explains the Deathly Hallows better.

Ive never read the books so it's only natural that I am going to misunderstand a lot of it.

Perhaps my points are directed at the writer aswell as director.

I just feel that all the films could have been made much better, perhaps drafting in a top class director.

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2
 

Aye, some of the issues probably come from not reading the books...but I think a handful, like the Elder Wand, ought to be pretty obvious. If you understand why The One Ring had to be destroyed, you understand why the Elder Wand ought to have been.

If someone doesn't like this arc or that, that's fine. I just don't think it can be suggested that the very end be changed while leaving everything else the same. And I think the series has been leading us to most of this for a long time.

When Harry broke the Elder Wand in the movie... some guy sitting near me gasped stupidly loud and i heard him whisper to someone, "what is he, stupid?!" *silence* "he should have kept it for himself to kick some ASS" etc. it really annoyed me; not that someone was talking loudly during such a scene (well it did a little actually) but because the kid sounded like a moron and missed the whole point, so i went SHHHH! all loud, which i don't usually do and felt better. :D

at least he shut up after that!

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2
 

I enjoyed the movie, but it is my least favourite of them all. It just moves too far from the book and it seems very rushed. I think that even if I had not read the book I would still be a bit disappointed, it just doesn't quite compare to the other movies unfortunately.

I agree with a lot of the comments here so far, the Weasley family and Tonks & Lupin did not get the right amount of attention, the battle at Hogwarts in fact the entire time at Hogwarts was rushed, disjointed and sometimes slightly confusing, and the memories of Snape just didn't cut it for me either. Definitely prefer the other movies and the books.

Yeah... i got that. Just didn't realise that thing was the Third Deathly Hallow.

As much as you can try and condescend our opinions for having not read the books, the same can be equally applied to those who have read. It gives your opinions bias from the fact you gleaned a lot more background and details from books thus plot twists and events aren't new or surprising or needing to be processed on the same level.

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2
 

I did read the book and even I can see that the introduction of the resurrection stone was poorly done and if you missed Harry's quick whisper naming the object you wouldn't have known it for what it was. It doesn't help that there was actually very little information given about the Deathly Hallows throughout the two movies, I can't remember but do they ever mention that Harry's cloak of Invisibility is a Deathly Hallow as well, or do they just skip over that? Or give it only a passing mention?

Those of us who read the book know the reason for certain things, and we ignore the fact that the movies don't provide that reason, whereas those who have never read the book actually DO notice the missing information. So when people who didn't read the book show confusion over something in the movie, this actually tells us what's wrong with the movie. So it's a good idea to listen.

Really good movie.. I think this movie will win Oscar this year...

Yeah, I get what you're saying but couldn't I use the same logic against you? You're a film school student who is picking apart a movie that is essentially just a make believe tale about good and evil. And you having the knowledge that you do have about how a film is made would lead me to think that you'd understand how hard it is to really get a book onscreen and for it to really follow the whole story.

I saw that you said you were planning to re-watch. Definitely do and watch the first part first. This isn't two films. Obviously they needed to make their boatload of cash on this deal but they are not separate films. I watched the first part right before this one and the transition is seamless.

And I will go ahead and say it. If you haven't read the books then how can you conceivably complain about the ending? That's the way the story ends. And its a very nice ending to a rather sad tale, really. I do agree, actually, that the movie ending may be better than the book, actually because the ending in the book was rather short I thought.

But whatever, I'm kind of a reformed Harry Hater so maybe I am biased.

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2
 

There is no such thing as a fully self-contained work. Every work of art derives its significance from a rich context, a hermeneutic circle or world of meaning no matter what the work is. In some sense, we have it much easier with fictions like Harry Potter, since much of that context is explicitly invented and clearly enumerated for the books whereas the context for things like, say, comedies is deeply cultural/historical and require that you somehow always be familiar with the leading zeitgeist.

If you are a person unfamiliar with recent developments in pop culture, do not complain that SNL is unfunny.

If you have not read the books upon which the films have specifically parasitized in order to exploit the profit potentials of its popularity in the cinematic market, do not complain that the films are too elliptical.

I'm not picking apart the content, just the delivery and felt having not read the book wasn't a fair rebuttal of my points as readers and non readers are watching it in different contexts. I'm not sure what relation studying film has to the criticisms of weaknesses in the script that can't be remedied by suspending disbelief? Though I do see why people are miffed over the Elder Wand snapping, they don't labour any point about it being a corruptive or evil object as the One Ring was. I get the principle behind Harry's actions but generally it wasn't given much pretext beyond common sense.

Don't think I complained about the ending as much as Draco's having pretty ineffective conclusion to his story, the repetition of the family feud with the kids was a bit cheesy but I did like the fact they tied it up relatively succinctly, as opposed to a certain other franchise.

I meant to watch Part 1 before watching it but saw it on a whim, I didn't not enjoy just thought it didn't live up to the high expectations.

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2
 

And I don't mean to pile on you or anything, I actually watched all seven films before this last one and was genuinely surprised at how well the story comes through in the films. Sure, they leave a ton of stuff out but I guess I missed how their delivery was off. If you've never read a line in a Harry Potter book you can go watch all 8 films right now and have a pretty good feel for the way the books were intended to be. I think. Maybe if you ever do read them you can either agree with me or disagree more. ;)

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2
 

The Elder Wand thing doesn't need much explanation or pretext, I don't think, but it was given some anyway in the first film, I think...


Anyway, I wouldn't take issue with the idea that there are things made clear and elegant in the books that are much less so in the films. That's by design. But I think some of thid discussion has gone well beyond that, with people suggesting they basically upend things that both the books AND the films have been building towards for a good long while.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3BowqAGMYjI

I thought it was the best film so far of 2011. I don't know it might just be me but if you focus on it as a film and not as an adaptation it tends to be a lot better! haha.

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2
 

I agree with this, it's evident that they make easy money on a successful long-time project but... a movie was cool. at least, it was impressive in some moments.
the ending is a real fail. this story got the closed interpretation (nothing special can be found further in a plot). it was like a message: you were kids and magicians, but now you should have a family

What really annoyed me about the whole series, and Deathly Hallows especially, is that it was nothing like the books at all. For the true fans, who have also read the books, such as myself, would all probably very disappointed by all the changes.
One thing that really annoyed me, and as mentioned in a comment above, is that Neville didn't say his brilliant quotes that J.K Rowling wrote in the novel.
It was just very disappointing after reading the books to see an entirely different script in the movie.

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2
 

Aside from maybe Unbearable Lightness of Being, not a single book adaptation is anything like the book. They're adaptations, in the literal sense that they are not the exact book, but just share the story and characters and half the events.

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2
 

I didn't read that book, but I thought it was an amazing movie and I wouldn't change it. :)

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2
 

Fantastic!

I went to watch this at a friend's place, a friend that was bashing it pretty heavily as soon as we walked in the door. This guy had already seen the film, and he wasn't pulling any punches. He even decided to pass out about 15 minutes into the film, leaving Lisa and I to watch the film.

It was SO good. I was gobsmacked when it ended, as I tried to figure out just exactly why anyone would bash this moving, brilliantly realized finale. It was dark and operatic, and it didn't hammer the viewer into boredom with a 30 minute battle sequence at the end (I'm looking at you Matrix:Revolutions). In this film, they actually tied all the character arcs up (for the most part; Malfoy needed another scene or two), and ended the film with a few scenes that summed up the entire series as a whole.

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2
 

This movie was A Toast for me! I loved it!
Verdict: If you’re a Harry Potter fan, then you’ve probably already seen the movie by the time this review comes out. If, however, you’re on the fence about watching it because you can’t (for one reason or another) watch a movie that you think is meant for kids, you need to suck up your pride. It made 168 million dollars in the first weekend, you cannot go wrong.

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2
 

What has this guy been smoking

Loved it. I thought that it was a perfect send off to what has been a terrific series.

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2
 

Whether this movie was actually well acted or well made doesn't matter because you are going to love it anyway as it brought an end to our favourite fantasy escape. Yes it will never come close to the books but i thought it was good enough!

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2
 

The ending made it seem like sometime in the near future they may have a story line for new harry potter movies!!!!! With their children of course playing the main roles. It at least would make for a great television show, I for one would watch it to see the characters childrens stories and such. I just hate to say good-bye to hogwarts. I basically grew up with these movies and i'm sad to see them be over. It was a fantastic series of movies and I love how the whole story unfolded from begging to end. Any one who bashes the movie, I'm sorry you didnt enjoy it. I know I posted my love for this movie already, but it deserves an encore, lol.