Saw Harry Potter Part Two - Page 5

[best12bars]

Posted: 7/18/11 at 6:47pm

Saw it today and loved it. A great finale to this series. Even though we all knew the end was coming, saying "goodbye" to a story and cast that have been growing (literally) and evolving over the past decade was bittersweet.

I echo what a lot of you have said: Rickman and Smith were the highlights. So was Ralph Fiennes. I enjoyed seeing cameos from so many of the faculty members of past films. It was like "old home week," and a chance to bid farewell to these memorable characters.

I hope it does earn a Best Picture nomination. A fitting crown to an impressive achievement that has been sparking people's imaginations and entertaining them for a decade..

Well done, you.

[JerseyGirl2]

Posted: 7/18/11 at 7:03pm

Upon my second viewing, it hit me even harder that I really missed the Tonks/Lupin baby story in particular. I wish they had paid more homage to the characters who died, because that was the heart of the battle in the books for me. By the end, everyone was so exhausted and relieved it was over, but you can't convince me that Molly Weasley would be smiling softly and hugging her daughter. Her son's body was somewhere nearby.

[littlegreen2]

Posted: 7/18/11 at 7:17pm

I'm seeing it again tonight (number 3, welp).

I completely agree with you, though, JerseyGirl2. It seems like that was such a trivial part of what happened, when in the book it was so, so devastating.

The realization of the deaths of Fred, Lupin, and Tonks was done very well, I think. When Harry walks into the great hall and sees the Weasley's standing over his body... Chills.

It's upsetting that in Part I, Tonks was JUST ABOUT to announce her pregnancy when Moody cut her off. For those who have not read the books, wouldn't that be confusing that it was never revisited? The next time we hear about their son is in the forest, with the resurrection stone. I think that they should have mentioned it during the Shell Cottage scene in the very beginning - Harry, Ron, and Hermione have been cut off from everyone so maybe Bill could have said, "Lupin and Tonks had a baby a month ago, etc." All in all, that really is my only complaint. The rest of the film was so beautifully executed that I feel as though there is no room to really be upset about it.

[best12bars]

Posted: 7/18/11 at 7:45pm

"It's upsetting that in Part I, Tonks was JUST ABOUT to announce her pregnancy when Moody cut her off. For those who have not read the books, wouldn't that be confusing that it was never revisited?"

Yes, absolutely, it was. I read the first 4.5 Potter books. So the last two books on film were entirely fresh to me. And I found that very confusing. I didn't know there was a baby, and I thought I'd missed something.

And for a book that was split into two parts, it's hard to imagine how they could do that.

I will say this, too ... "Deathly Hallows Part One," as a movie, was by far the WORST Potter movie in the series. Really drawn-out, boring, and muddled storytelling. "Harry Potter Goes Camping" sums it up pretty well. Dark in tone (almost to the point of being laughable) and trivial and repetitive in plot. It was unsatisfying on every level to me. I walked into the theatre today hoping they could pull up out of the "muck" and end it well.

I was not disappointed, although that's not to say I didn't have some questions (as referenced above). Still the positives far outweigh the negatives. And I'm still not happy that they split the last book into two parts. Pure GREED, no other reason is justified, especially now that I've seen them. It could have been one fast-paced brilliant movie. As it stands now, we have a terrible (seriously flawed) Part One, and a thrilling, sometimes confusing, but heartfelt and well-executed Part Two.

[strummergirl]

Posted: 7/18/11 at 7:53pm

Nothing was worse and unsatisfactory than The Chamber of Secrets and nothing was more awkward and uneven that The Half-Blood Prince.

I like Part 1. The Tale of the Three Brothers animated short alone pulls it out of the worst Potter film category.

[best12bars]

Posted: 7/18/11 at 7:54pm

Not for me.

[littlegreen2]

Posted: 7/18/11 at 8:03pm

"I will say this, too ... "Deathly Hallows Part One," as a movie, was by far the WORST Potter movie in the series. Really drawn-out, boring, and muddled storytelling. "Harry Potter Goes Camping" sums it up pretty well."

I definitely agree with you that it was very drawn-out, but I guess because I read the book, I was very satisfied. It was the only one in the series that I felt like you had to really appreciate the annoyances and flaws in JK Rowling's writing to appreciate the movie. It stayed SO TRUE to the book that I always have to vouch for it. Just the simple details they added from the book made it so special for many readers. I loved it.

"Nothing was worse and unsatisfactory than The Chamber of Secrets and nothing was more awkward and uneven that The Half-Blood Prince."

I'm very curious as to why you didn't like Chamber of Secrets. Besides a few sub-plot points missing here and there, I thought Chamber of Secrets was a wonderful film adaption.I felt that the first two really captured the essence of the books, and the end of CoS was a great segway into the darker points of the series. I think Order of the Phoenix was BY FAR the worst Potter movie.

[strummergirl]

Posted: 7/18/11 at 8:08pm

Chris Columbus was why I didn't like Chamber of Secrets.

[best12bars]

Posted: 7/18/11 at 9:11pm

Chris did an excellent job with the first two films. He would have been increasingly out-of-step had he done the others.

The same can be said for the recent "Potter" directors. If they had tackled the earlier movies, they would have failed miserably.

Why? A simple reason of story arc. The earlier movies were more "golden" both in tone and pallor. More innocent and magical. As Harry grew up and the plots became darker and more was at stake, it rightfully "matured" into the colder, more serious feel. If all the movies had looked or felt the same, the series would have been repetitive and dull.

As it is, watching all the movies back to back, as I did two months ago, they play really nicely together and evolve just as the story and the actors do.

[romantico]

Posted: 7/18/11 at 9:27pm

Azkaban has always been my favorite. I think Cauron is responsible for that.Wish he could have directed more of them.

[YouWantitWhen????]

Posted: 7/18/11 at 9:35pm

Whatever your concerns with Chris Columbus, you have to admit his casting was just about perfect.

[spiderdj82]

Posted: 7/18/11 at 9:42pm

Azkaban is my favorite as well

[best12bars]

Posted: 7/18/11 at 9:58pm

The Order of the Phoenix is my favorite, followed closely by Azkaban.

[strummergirl]

Posted: 7/18/11 at 9:59pm

"Whatever your concerns with Chris Columbus, you have to admit his casting was just about perfect."
Oh, definitely.

Azkaban and this film are my favorites. I do know a lot of people that are not too fond of Azkaban for what was left out but I really loved the presentation of a day-to-day student experience at Hogwarts in addition to a Gilliam-like flare Cuaron had (JK Rowling did have Gilliam in mind with the movies but it was just a marriage not meant to be with Warner Bros. involved).

Anyway, I think a lot of people on this thread would appreciate this countdown from the AV Club that mixes both likes and dislikes from both the book and film universes.


The Potter Postscript Updated On: 7/18/11 at 09:59 PM

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 7/18/11 at 10:01pm

Azkaban is my favorite since Cuarn is one of my favorite directors. I thought he did a brilliant job with it.

[best12bars]

Posted: 7/18/11 at 10:11pm

By the way, I'm not interested in how faithful the films are or aren't to the books. I'm only interested in how well the films work as films. They need to be successful on their own terms first and foremost. Deathly Hallows Part One was a crappy movie, regardless of how meticulously faithful it was to the book. The Half-Blood Prince was good, but had way too many holes in it, where things felt "left out."

I love the Lord of the Rings films, but they are not meticulously faithful to the books. Still they honor them and capture their intent beautifully. The same can be said for MGM's film of The Wizard of Oz. Far from faithful, but a brilliant film just the same.

[jasonf]

Posted: 7/18/11 at 10:19pm

I shudder every time I see that someone says Azkaban was their favorite. I hated it so much that I walked out. Some people will say "no one dislikes that one" but a LOT of the hardcore fans hated ot. So glad he didn't direct anymore!

[spiderdj82]

Posted: 7/18/11 at 10:47pm

Yes, it left a good deal out but for some reason, that is the one that I can watch over and over and over again and not get tired of it. Granted, I have a love for time travel so that may play into it.

[littlegreen2]

Posted: 7/19/11 at 12:46am

"I shudder every time I see that someone says Azkaban was their favorite. I hated it so much that I walked out. Some people will say "no one dislikes that one" but a LOT of the hardcore fans hated ot. So glad he didn't direct anymore!"

I completely agree. I thought Azkaban was awful. There was something about it that didn't feel like a Potter movie and to this day, I still skip over it during marathons. It's just not good. That said though, next to Deathly Hallows, Azkaban is probably my favorite book in the series.

Favorite to least favorite (films) - Deathly Hallows Part 2, Deathly Hallows Part 1, Chamber of Secrets, Goblet of Fire, Sorcerer's Stone, Half-blood Prince, Order of the Phoenix, Prisoner of Azkaban.

Anyway, I saw DH2 in IMAX 3D tonight and left with a huge headache. It was nice at first, because the picture is obviously much more defined, but it just wasn't worth it, and the 3D didn't add much to the experience. See it in 2D! So much better.

Updated On: 7/19/11 at 12:46 AM

[eatlasagna]

Posted: 7/19/11 at 2:55am

A friend and I were discussing the movies and how each are different... and I think with Prisoner of Azkaban the movie was just different from the previous two which, especially with the Scorcerer's Stone, felt like almost too faithful of an adaptation to the books... as if Christopher Columbus was afraid to be a filmmaker. When Alfonso Cuaron took over it truly felt like the filmmakers could still be faithful to the books while creating a film version that was so different yet familiar... I watch the first two, which now almost visually feel like two very different movies than the rest of the series... I love the entire series and I think they did an incredible job but these two are my least favorite (but I still love them because I find them to be excellent movies) just because it didn't feel like it was trying to be new and exciting as compared to the rest of the movies

btw... I think the biggest thing I noticed one time when watching the movies was Hagrid's hut... in the first two movies it's literally like 100 or so feet away from the grounds but then you get to the other movies and it's like a journey to get there... and it opened up the world of Hogwarts and just really set the overall feeling of how grand this world can be... but like others have said, Chris Columbus did cast the movies and I also felt he did a good job establishing inside of Hogwarts (and well besides the Forbidden Forest, there really wasn't much stuff for the characters to do yet outside of the castle)

basically... i just think these movies are just amazing to watch and for a movie franchise to have practically consistently positive movie reviews across 8 films is pretty damn awesome accomplishment... not a single one of these movies is rotten on rottentomatoes.com

[adamgreer]

Posted: 7/19/11 at 11:04am

I always thought I was the only person who couldn't stand Azkaban. Glad to see I'm not alone.

[best12bars]

Posted: 7/19/11 at 11:05am

Okay, I've read this thread title way too many times.

I'm now seeing, "Saw Harry Potter In Two."

[Q]

Posted: 7/19/11 at 11:23am

"I always thought I was the only person who couldn't stand Azkaban."

Nope.

[broadwayjim42]

Posted: 7/19/11 at 11:37am

I don't think any of the Potter movies are bad...just varying levels of good...but Azkaban, Phoenix and Half-Blood Prince were the lesser lights for me.

As for Hallows Part 2, I liked it a lot, but was surprised that it didn't engage my emotions more. I expected a Toy Story 3 level cry saying goodbye to these characters and it never happened. I also found the pacing a bit off...it seemed longer than 130 minutes.

[wickedrentq]

Posted: 7/19/11 at 12:53pm

So I saw the movie and loved it, didn't have much to add until the discussion got to the other films. Though one thing I don't think has been mentioned is how fantastic Helena Bonham Carter is as Hermionie...

But in terms of all the films, it's interesting the different terms we all judge them on. I suppose the right thing to do is to judge them as a film, but at least in determining my favorites, I can't help but judge how they compare to the enjoyment of the books themselves -- not meaning they had to follow the book to a tea, but how close did my enjoyment of the films mirror my enjoyment of the book?

So for me, without a doubt, my favorite movie is Order of the Phoenix. I think that's the one that definitely could have used some editing, and it remains my least favorite book -- not that it wasn't well-written, but I thought it was a tad long and mostly it just kept me depressed for a week after reading it. Plus, one of the things I loved about the series was the unpredictability of it -- I still remember in GOF thinking OMG Moody's bad yay I realized a page early -- oh wait -- except it's not actually Moody -- damn you Rowling. But Phoenix was much more predictable to me than the rest, I figured Sirius was gonna die early on and I didn't think he was actually there, etc.

The movie was of course sad, but I think it kept the better aspects of the book and the major moments were included and the film as a whole was just great -- Staunton as Umbridge is perfection and the battle is just one of the best in all the Potter movies. Really edits it down nicely I think, and I could be wrong, but I don't think it leaves enough out to leave the viewer confused.

So then along the same lines, my least favorite film is Half Blood Prince. I just thought it focused too much on the Ron/Hermionie stuff which yes, is a part of the book, but I think too much time was spent there and not enough time on Voldy's memories. I'm not sure they ever even fully explained the horcruxes...and the way they made Snape see Harry first gave the viewer a bit of an idea that Snape wasn't completely evil, moreso than the book.

Goblet of Fire is actually down there for me too -- as a movie itself it's really well made, but I think so much was left out, that not having read it in a while, I was pretty confused. I know it's a really long book and to keep it one movie they had to leave stuff out, and I'm not sure it would have been good to make it 2 movies...just not sure what the solution is.

But yeah, this final film definitely set out the whole film series on a high note. Though when it went to black I said please skip the epilogue, I don't wanna see them in bad older make-up...too bad.