GRADE: B+

How to start this review of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1? Of course I am a die hard Potter fan, a ‘Potter Purist’ if you will. I have enjoyed all the movies, but the literature is really where the heart of this series lies. J.K. Rowling has a gift for painting a picture, giving characters a pure heart or one of menace, and is especially skilled at creating a whole entire new world. Being a Potter purist, I have a devotion to the books. But as a fan, I really enjoyed the Deathly Hallows movie. Having seen the movie twice now, I think my take on the film is set in stone, and this review was well thought out.

This Deathly Hallows review is long, elaborate, and will sometimes play the comparing movie to book game. I find it necessary sometimes to get my point across, not to say the movie should be exactly like the book. That said, my grade for Deathly Hallows would probably be a lot lower if I wasn’t a Potter fan who read the books and didn’t know what was really going on overall. But because I have read the books many times, the Deathly Hallows movie made sense to me. Without this background knowledge, I am not sure how well I would have been able to enjoy the way this epic story was told for the screen.

I am not going to waste any time with a synopsis for Deathly Hallows. Either you know whats going on, or you don’t. I also am not going to tiptoe around “possible spoilers” because the book has been out for three years. If you want everything to be a surprise, see Deathly Hallows or read the book (my recommendation) and check back on this review.

I will begin with the best part of the entire movie, the cinematography. Director David Yates and his cinematographer Eduardo Serra really outdid themselves with the breathtaking landscapes staging the scenes for Harry, Ron, and Hermione as they move around the countryside to remain hidden. Yates also employs a lot of useful closeups in this portion of the story that is driven by the three main characters and their struggles against Voldemort and his mighty army. In my opinion, Deathly Hallows moved from a B, to a B+ from the cinematography alone. Seriously, it was that good.

My favorite scene in Deathly Hallows follows Harry and Hermione searching the graveyard in Godric’s Hollow with the crisp, pure white snow gently falling as the two stop to mourn the loss of Harry’s parents at their headstone. My second favorite scene was the wonderful animation for The Tale of the Three Brothers. It was a joy to watch the story unfold is such an imaginative manner. One small problem I had with the editing was the overuse of fading to black, used to bridge one scene to another. This technique is not favored by many experienced filmmakers. The fact it was used so many times was a little bothersome to someone who is familiar with this area of study like myself.

The acting from the cast was exceptional top to bottom (minus the dude playing Bill Weasely, he was pretty garbage). This chapter of the story is ripe with a plethora of characters new and old. The ensemble lost themselves in this magical world allowing themselves to become their characters. Hats off the Rhys Ifans killing his role as Xenophilius Lovegood. Of course, most of the camera time goes to the trio of heroes bonding together as friends in times of peril (except Ron for a bit, haha). Emma Watson portrays her emotionally demanding role better than the two male leads, but Daniel Radcliffe and Rupert Grint were pretty dang good most of the time.

Ok, moving on to the Deathly Hallows screenwriter Steve Kloves. I think the man gets the gist of the Deathly Hallows book, but doesn’t really understand some of the most important details from the literature. Don’t think for one second I am downgrading the difficultly that resides in condensing this enormous book into a two part story. Kloves has many successes in his effort, but also many failures.

Oftentimes, the tone in certain scenes could mislead the naive audience away from their true meaning. First things first, Ron and Hermione seem to have a brother/sister relationship most of the movie. Sure there are moments where it is reletively blatant they have interest in one another like holding hands while falling asleep or Ron being jealous of Harry and Hermione having private conversations.

But the connection between the two is lacking. Some of this is the fault of the actors (I think this is where all three lead actors struggle, conveying emotions to a love interest), but Kloves missed some real opportunities to spell it out for the audience. After Ron leaves, Hermione is devastated (more on this in a bit) and constantly in a down mood. In an attempt the cheer her up, Harry pulls Hermione to her feet to dance as a song plays over the radio (not a part of the book).

While the scene shows the two characters care for each other, it also is ripe with sexual tension for even someone who knows the finer details of the series like myself. I know Ron and Hermione end up together, but to any casual viewer this scene makes it seem like Harry is trying to make his move with Ron out of the picture. Add a lingering close up of the two starring at each other after the song is done and the audience is almost waiting for a kiss (though we know Harry likes Ginny because they kiss in the beginning of the movie). It was a tender moment, but it had the wrong tone and just felt strange.

A wonderful opportunity to show Hermione’s love for Ron is the devastation her life becomes once he leaves. The movie shows a tear or two and some sadness. But in the book, this tear soaked period in Hermione’s life not only makes the audience compassionate for the loss of Ron, it shows just how much he means to her. Her sadness in the film could almost resemble the loss of a teammate on their mission, not the man she loves. (Nitpick) Why wouldn’t the filmmakers make the scene where Ron leaves feature rain like the book? The drops of rain perfectly match the mood of the events. Another loss that was grazed over was the loss of Harry’s closest confidant, his wand. He barely seems upset about this notion when he hears the news. Sure, Watson is reluctant to tell him, but Radcliffe hardly looks devastated like one would expect losing his precious Holly and Phoenix feather wand.

Then, Ron comes back, saves the day, blah blah. Before Ron musters up the courage to destroy the horcrux he sees images of Harry and Hermione together. In the book, Harry reassures his best friend after he sees the display, “Hermione is like a sister to me, she cried every night for weeks after you left.” Saying this lets the audience know clear cut, “Hermione ain’t for me mate, she loves you.” This piece of storytelling not being featured in the film was another missed opportunity for Kloves to establish the relationships between the three characters with five seconds of dialogue.

Another tone that was completely missed was the cautiousness Harry has to take everywhere he goes, even the wedding at the Weasley’s house. The point of Harry remaining hidden resides with the fact that nowhere is safe for the Chosen One, and no one can be trusted. That is the brilliance of Voldemort remaining hidden from the general public and in the background of this uprising. Everyone in the magical world is in a hushed state of fright because they really are unsure if the Dark Lord is pulling the strings from behind the scenes, and who secretly is in his pocket.

Harry not taking the polyjuice potion at the wedding was the first mishap of cautiousness. While some may not see this as significant, it really paints the picture that Harry isn’t safe anywhere. Of course the notion of having Daniel Radcliffe absent from the entire scene is a problem; but with creativity, any good filmmaker can remedy this. I am going to create a video post this week expanding on this thought. But one of the biggest blemishes in Deathly Hallows is Hermione and Harry venturing to Godric’s Hollow (place where Harry’s parents were murdered) without the slightest protection.

This adventure has disaster written all over it. The duo suspects Voldemort will be waiting for them, but yet they go as themselves? In the book the two not only use polyjuice, but the invisibility cloak (more on this later) as well. The movie tries to justify this decision by Harry saying, “I was born here, I’m not going to return as someone else.” Well, you should if you don’t want green light blasting you into nothing. The danger of returning here is just as apparent as sneaking into the ministry. Yet, these two bright wizards don’t venture down any avenue to protect themselves. The character Hermione is as cautious as the come, and she would not allow them to go out into the open exposed because of Harry’s moronic brash attitude.

The situation of Harry and the “inferior” magical folk draws comparison to the treatment of Jews from the Nazis in World War II. Because of segregation and open persecution, the parties are forced into hiding from their oppressors. Harry is not only one of the oppressed, but he is the most sought after fugitive in the world, recognizable to any member of the magical community. Wishing to remain hidden requires the steps to do so, not simply strolling around in one of the most prominent magical communities in the world on the notion, “I won’t be someone else here.” The main point here is Harry and Hermione look like fools unaware of what is at stake walking into this situation with no precautions whatsoever. Staying alive requires the will to stay that way.

Ok, moving onto the cloak. How many times was the cloak mentioned outside The Tale of the Three Brothers? Zero. Harry Potter has, in his possession, a Deathly Hallow, yet it isn’t even mentioned or used the entire film. The easiest way to express my thoughts on this is, WTF? I cannot believe this piece of the puzzle was not touched on the entire film, and this in my opinion was a glaring flaw in Deathly Hallows Part 1. The book uses the cloak in many instances that could have been just as easily used in the movie. A perfect chance would be Harry sneaking around the ministry. How could the filmmakers think it would be better to leave the uber-important cloak out of the narrative? Especially when it is something as fun as sneaking around invisible under the veil of a magical cloak?

Now some say, the cloak will come into play later in the Part 2. Well, duh. But it plays such an integral role to Harry’s magical adventures, and yet it is pushed to the side as if it won’t fit into the story. We already know what the cloak is, no time is needed to explain it, but just show him using it. Then, when the story about the Hallows is revealed, the audience can make the correlation between the cloak in the story and the one Harry owns. Isn’t the movie called Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows?

While the trio is on the run, I think far too much time is wasted just sitting around. I know how important this element of patience is stressed in the book which adds even more frustration as they all feel like the are making minimal progress on their mission. But, this is the movie, and you need to squeeze in the really important pieces of the story. I think a long montage could have helped showing them planning their next moves and getting frustrated with each other.

The absence of talking about possible horcrux locations and what move was next really kept the viewer from knowing the direction of where the movie was headed. Another thing that upset me was how the trio just watlzes right into the Ministry of Magic with no time in the story, not even a line of dialogue, to the planning involved in executing this daunting prospect.  Like I said earlier, a montage would work great here.

The last gripe about Deathly Hallows from this corner is a big issue for me. When Harry sees the doe and finds the sword, there is not questioning of how this all happened. Ron banters on about the deluminator, but no one in the party stops for a second and asks, “We have been looking tirelessly for the Sword of Godric Gryffindor, and then it just shows up right next to us in a pool of water, WTF?”

After Ron finds out it wasn’t Harry’s patronous, that is the extent of questioning the events. That isn’t a little odd to you three this event just transpired? The rare missing magical artifact the three of you were looking to find besides horcruxes shows up at your doorstep and none of you even stop to consider who delivered it, and why they did? The same can be said for Dobby saving the group at Malfoy Manner, but discussion about that miracle should come after the mourning of the lost house elf in Part 2.

I have a few other things that bothered me about this movie that were not simply omissions, but just flaws in the storytelling. I won’t waste any more time with words on this page. I will reserve that discussion for a video post I am working on. So look for that in the next week to see my thoughts on some more issues I had with Deathly Hallows Part 1.

It may sound like I want the movie to be a perfect representation of the book. But that is not the case. A change like Hedwig dying as a sacrifice revealing the true Potter in the flight from Privet Drive is a good modification that saved movie time. The same can be said for Pius Thickness being a corrupt politician siding with Voldemort as opposed to being under the Imperius Curse. The point I am really trying to make is how this movie missed some very, very important elements from the book. When important things are missed in the movie that help tell the story in the book, it’s bothersome to me. Changes like the Hedwig example work because Hedwig still dies and we get the point across that this was how Harry was differentiated from the other six clones.

Overall, I enjoyed Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. There was light humor to bridge the serious story lines, great acting by the cast, and visuals that will transport any viewer to the magical settings. The CGI employed to display the magical environment and the score by Alexadre Desplat were also top notch. But the filmmakers missed key elements and opportunities to tell details of the narrative which hurt the story. I think by using these storytelling devices the narrative would have flowed better and shaped Deathly Hallows for the non-book reading audience.

The failures mentioned bothered me as a fan of the books, but bothered me even more as a fan of movies. I tried to take myself out of the book to film comparison game both times I sat through Deathly Hallows. Nitpicking the differences will make any fan of the books hate the movies. I tried to base my judgment on the film alone. By doing so I was able to see what was left out of the movie that would help the noob-audience better understand this tale. To display how it could have been done right, I used the book as a reference of how it works best.

What Should You Do? Despite certain shortcomings, the movie would be a delight for any Potter fan. Try not to compare book to movie and you will enjoy Deathly Hallows much more. People strictly on a Potter movie diet, pay close attention; if you miss some of the details, you might get left at King’s Cross Train Station.