Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2

First Hit: Somewhat better than Part 1 but frankly, I’m glad this long winded tale is over.

Thrusting children who are the bringers of light and lightheartedness to our planet into an ever increasing darker set of circumstances as they get older is part of our life on this planet; or so it seems.

The Harry Potter series of films reflects this transition in a different way and I’m not sure if it is (or was) to our benefit or entertainment. The tales took the mystery of magic and attempted to make it a real life thing and being embodied in a select few children. 

The series of films only focused on the selected few therefore we rarely were able to see or sense the difference between this magical world and non-magically gifted children or adults. This was one of the problems I had with this series of films. Where as the Hobbit tales were all fantasy.

These films originally started in a world where regular people were part of the story but they ended up being only fantasy until the very last scene when the main character's children are in a real life railway station heading off to Hogwarts School.

This film took started where Part 1 left off. Whereas Part 1 of the final chapter was long winded, boring and attempted to set-up our characters for the final resolution; Part 2 was filled with CGI action. Harry (like Luke Skywalker) was connected to the dark force of Lord Voldemort and had to be willing to kill himself to save Hogwarts and all the special magical kids who attend. One has to be willing to lose oneself to find oneself and this is true in the Harry Potter world as well as our own.

Anyway this film was dark (both in concept and visually), long, and, in some ways, filled with senseless action.

Daniel Radcliffe (as Potter) was good to watch in the first couple of films, but became limited and shallow as the series went on. He lacked depth of character in Part 2. My guess is (and I could very well be wrong) he’s glad to be through with this film series because it showed. Rupert Grint (as Weasley) probably won’t have much of an acting career after this last installment, there is nothing engaging about him or the character he played. Emma Watson (as Granger) was and is the strongest actor of the main three characters and will continue to have success as an actor. Alan Rickman (as Snape) is always enjoyable to watch and here he makes his character intriguing. Ralph Fiennes (as Voldemort) is good as the story’s evil dark character and it wasn’t because of the lines but because of his skill at creating presence. Steve Kloves wrote the screenplay from J.K. Rowling’s novel and some of the dialogue felt stiff. David Yates directed this and there seemed to be the belief that the more crap you throw up on the screen the more of it will stick. One scene particularly felt out of place, was when Harry was coming down some stairs after an intense encounter with the vision pool and Ron and Hermione are sitting there. Why were they there, how did they get there, why would they be sitting there as if they were having a private “together” moment in the middle of the battle for their school? Then they get up and after a couple of stilted lines, the three of them get more engaged with the war against evil again.

Overall:  I waded through all of the films and only one or two were noteworthy and engaging. This one excelled only in the amount of CGI stuff thrown up on the screen.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1

First Hit: All I can say is Part 2 will hopefully be really good because Part 1 is one long boring piece of nothing.

I really wonder what the mindset is of a director who can create a long piece of preamble in hopes that he hits a home run with the epilogue.

Jesus, sitting there during hour after hour of darkly filmed set-up for Part 2 was an immense time waster. Here is what I learned: Ron (played by Rupert Grint) can dislike Harry (played by Daniel Radcliffe) if even for only 20 minutes of the film's time.

Ron and Hermione (played by Emma Watson) have a thing for each other. Muggles are dying and why should I care. Hogwarts as a school is history. The Ministry of Magic dies. A sword is important. People can switch wands.

And finally Yoda, from Star Wars fame, arises again in a slightly different body but speaks sentences in the same oddly phrased way. It was obvious that the producers skimped on lighting, therefore everything is dark.

And lastly I’ve got to find it within me to care about these people even though Harry is the chosen one, he isn't very smart and people follow him blindly to their death. I was astonished by the milking of the public in this way for a 2.5 hour preamble which does very little.

My question is: Will Part 2 begin with a synopsis of Part 1 (should take about 5 minutes)? If it does, don't waste your time watching this film and if it doesn’t; I'm not sure you need to this film to move the story along. I just didn’t learn enough in Part 1 (save the aforementioned above) to make it worth my while to see Part 2.

Radcliffe is about the same as he’s been in all the other Potter films except the first one where his innocence was a welcomed joy. There is nothing extraordinary about him as an actor and he doesn’t really give much to the audience and it is difficult to care about him in this part. Grint has changed a bit and has grown slightly. He also has to share a different set of feelings for Harry in about 3 minutes of screen time when he gets mad at Harry. But overall, nothing much new here either. Watson appears to have some acting chops as there were multiple scenes in which she says nothing but the audience is given a sense of feelings and shifts in her character. The snub nose on Ralph Fiennes as Lord Voldemort is a good look for evil and that was entertaining. The best acting in this film is by Helena Bonham Carter as Bellatrix Lestrange. She is great, brings great energy to the screen and was the only acting highlight. Steve Kloves wrote a boring screenplay from J. K. Rowling’s novel. Direction by David Yates is heavy handed, emotionlessness and overly dark.

Overall: If you must see this, rent it and eat dinner while watching so you get something done during the time. You won't miss much while you are chewing your food.

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince

First Hit: Long, dark, and boring with virtually nothing in it to make it interesting.

A series of films on a particular subject or character have a general rule over time, they get worse unless someone really creates a new story line with a unique view or character.

The Batman series was failing until Batman Begins came along which put a new fresh light on the character.

By the 3rd film in the Star Wars series the franchise was headed downhill despite being produced by one of the best producers ever.

Star Trek became a joke after hitting its zenith with The Wrath of Khan and then came the 2009 film Star Trek which was spot on perfect and will do wonders to revitalize the series. Harry Potter is suffering greatly from this malaise and with this latest offering hasn’t found any new life yet.

Half-Blood Prince is a title looking for a story; a film looking for something to shoot. 

The film begins with Rampaging Death Eaters? Who are these things and why do they exist? Nothing in the film gives us any background about what and why they are; although I did enjoy Helena Bonham Carter because she brought some fun, charisma and focus to these death eaters. 

Lastly, why did Dumbledore have to keep asking Harry to trust him? Jeez they’ve been together for years now and if that trust wasn’t already established then what the hell are these characters about?

Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, and Rupert Grint reprise their roles of Harry, Hermione and Ron respectively. All of these actors appeared to be unpracticed and unrehearsed in roles which they should be familiar with because this is there 6th film together in the same roles. The actors which stand out in this film are Helena Bonham Carter as Bellatrix Lestrange and Alan Rickman as Professor Snape. Rickman commands you watch him in his scenes and makes good on his practice to deliver. Director David Yates got little or nothing out of the rest of his actors but maybe it simply because it was a bad script looking for an interesting story.

Overall: Every film needs to stand on its own and shouldn't require seeing previous films or, in this case, the reading J.K. Rowling's books on which they are based. I’ve not read the books but I’ve seen all the films and this one is the worst one yet.

Harry Potter and the Order of the Phonix.

First Hit: A bit confusing, despite seeing the previous films and not very well acted. Although

Daniel Radcliffe is competent in his reprise of this role, he must carry the film as the rest of the cast is becoming a backdrop.

When the series brings in or highlights a new character it often can make a film series interesting. However the Dolores Umbridge role got tiresome and I kept wondering why she was doing what she was doing. Being a mole for the ministry just wasn't enough.

I also think I am getting tired of the ongoing story. The film felt long and there were times I found myself thinking, can we move this along? This doesn’t bode well for a film. If I’m having thoughts about the film while I’m watching the film, there is a problem. The problem here was there wasn't enough story to make it interesting.

Diehard fans will probably enjoy it and take great pleasure in the film. Others who have not seen the other films and sit through this will find out early it does not stand on its own. It requires you to see the previous films or to have read the books so that you can follow along.

As a medium, any film must stand on its own merit. Each film must be a good full and interesting story. This isn't. Like a couple of the Star Wars prequels and sequels, it is difficult to do a series of films about one story. What makes this story harder is that the background changes very little. It is still about a small town in England, the Castle/School, and the surrounding woods.

A good film will let on slip reality and slide into another. This one does not do this and therefore I was disappointed. This is the worst of the bunch.

Overall: Some of the visual effects are good but to me the story and the point of the story took too long to develop and didn’t play out strongly. I may not even consider seeing the two remaining films.