I really should be resting up for my Leak-Con Presentation in the morning, but, since I’ll be a little tied up with further wizarding excitement, and our Headmaster does TWO presentations tomorrow, I wanted to go ahead and toss out my initial reactions (not to be confused with a full-scale, completely analyzed review) as well as provide some thoughts on the terrific Leaky-Con Programing I enjoyed today. Follow me after the jump for some thoughts from a dark theater and a sunny day in Orlando.
Film Thoughts
If you haven’t seen the film yet, nothing I’ll mention will really spoil things for you. If you’ve not read the book yet, well, that’s a thestral of a different color. I was actually shocked how many non-readers seemed to be in the theater, a statistic I judged by gasps of surprise at the jump to 19 years later. Since these really are just my initial impressions, let’s look at the Really Fantastic, the Questionable, and the Nifty Homage Theme.
The film contains some really fantastic touches. One of my favorites, at the very end of the film, was the deletion of the word “probably” from Harry’s statement that Snape was “probably the bravest man I ever knew.” People three theaters away probably heard Travis Prinzi whoop with joy, as I know that qualification has always bugged him. On another Snape note, lovely to add “You have your mother’s eyes” to Snape’s last words (though the young actress playing young Lily really doesn’t have eyes like Dan Radcliffe’s, we’ll let that go as a technicality) and, a big winner for me, the wonderfully accentuated echo of Snape’s “always” with one from Lily as she promises that she and Harry’s other guides will remain with him. Snape takes the cake, as usual, since Alan Rickman is amazing(I loved his “accidental” take-down of the Carrows as he beat a retreat) and the whole Prince’s Tale was done beautifully. I would like to have known the reactions to his death of audience members who did not already know that important tidbit. (I do think I heard a few folks wondering aloud why Harry cared that Snape was dead). Speaking of dead, there is plenty of death and dying in this installment, including a nice touch with Griphook, killed by the raving Voldemort, clutching the Sword of Gryffindor, which subsequently vanishes. The King’s Cross scene was done well, with a nice thought from Dumbledore about the magic of words and the desire to revise them; it’s not in the book, but it had the ring of Rowling’s touch upon it. I also loved McGonagall’s moment of animating the suits of armor, especially since I know more about her now, thanks to today’s Pottermore preview! (More below)
Even with my overall reaction a positive one (for the film as a trailer for the book, of course), there were some issues that had me scratching my pointy hat. It was dramatic, of course, to not see Hagrid until the Forest Again sequence, but we needed him sooner. No Grawp? And Professor Sprout (love her overalls under her robes) didn’t get her place with the other House Heads (Molly Weasley seems to be filling in her spot). Neville’s sudden attraction to Luna seems odd, as we know from Rowling’s notes that they have different romantic destinies. (The delightful Evanna Lynch actually addressed this issue today at Leaky-Con, stating that she thought their relationship was pleasant but short-lived, as Luna was just too way-out for Neville, who would be unlikely to enjoy traipsing after mythical creatures). It also seemed puzzling that Harry didn’t fix his wand (or ask Olivander about it); it just gets dropped entirely. There are some big logic leaps: Luna materializes from nowhere in the Room of Requirement, since the timeline is compressed to make it seem as though she should still be back at Shell Cottage; the whole Two-Way Mirror issue still seems confusing, and poor Teddy Lupin, really an important figure as he replaces Harry as the alchemical Philosophical Orphan, gets barely a mention. Fred’s death is not actually depicted; he’s just seen with the family mourning over him. I imagine that most of these issues were fine with readers who knew how the blanks were filled in, but non-readers may still be wondering which twin is dead. However, such “it made sense in the book” moments actually have a positive purpose: driving movie people to the book!
My favorite element in this film was a theme of homages to the other films (not the books, but the films). I will need several repeat viewings on DVD, remote in hand to pause, before I catch them all, but, a bit into the movie, I began to notice elements being used that were from the previous films. These moments, far from gratuitous, actually create a lovely sense of cohesion and connect to the books’ Ring Composition structure. They do not include material from the books, flashbacks, or other “obvious” scenes from the previous movies. Here’s what I have so far (help me out with more!):
From Sorcerer’s Stone: McGonagall’s animated soldiers are much like her chess pieces guarding the Stone. The nearly last scene, with the Potter and Weasley children on the train, has a Chocolate Frog jump onto the compartment window.
Chamber of Secrets: Ron and Hermione are actually shown going into the Chamber and destroying the Horcrux, with watery results; Lockhart’s Cornish Pixies dart around the Room of Requirement.
Prisoner of Azkaban: The Marauders’ Map is used by Ron and Hermione. The clock, used as a pivotal symbol in that film, is blown up (thank goodness, no more Whomping Willow cameos)
Goblet of Fire: The boats used in the third task (and in ferrying first years) are used in a crucial scene. Harry and Voldemort actually take the same flight path Harry took in his fight with the dragon in the first task. When Voldemort “goes to pieces,” the bits look like the burned scraps of paper coughed up by the Goblet.
Order of the Phoenix: The paper bird scorched by Umbridge and the mischevious spark that set off the Weasley fireworks both show up at the train station.
Half-Blood Prince: Rather than siccing Nagini on Snape immediately, Voldemort first uses the Sectumsempra curse, Snape’s own invention, from his Potions book, which Harry inadvertently had used on Draco.
I’m eager to hear others’ catches, as I clearly only started watching for this theme after a bit! Though I’ve certainly had mixed feelings about all the films, this one does its job of “trailering” well, and I was sad to wave goodbye to the crowd at the train station at the end (okay, I was sad anyway. I usually have a big cup of cocoa just to get me through reading about Snape, Fred, and Tonks and Lupin!)
Leaky-Con
I’m sure we’ll continue to post our thoughts here about the conference going on now at Universal Studios in piping-hot Orlando, but I did want to mention that the presentations I was able to see today were super. I especially enjoyed David Martin’s hilarious speculations on the contents of that bestseller 12 Fail-Safe Ways to Charm Witches, David Gras’s wonderfully interactive roundtable on Rowling’s bridging of the pagan and Christian world, and the big Pottermore presentation. James Deeley and Melissa Anelli shared about the creative process and gave some sneak previews (including those McGonagall tidbits!) We were forbidden to take photos, but it does look like the site will be fun, but will also contain some great background and other information, including info from the fabulous notebooks! Hooray!
Of course, it’s always great to hobnob with the fantastic folks at such events. It was super to visit with Erin Sweeney, David and Toni Gras, and the many others with whom I spoke. The hardworking Leaky-con staff was wonderful, and the hotel staff as well (Thank you, hotel folks, who helped us schlep books inside!). I look forward to another fantastic day tomorrow, and full reports to come!
You saw more than I did. I too liked the “Always” echo of Snape and Lily. And I loved the scene with Snape and Lily and baby Harry. It’s so much better than knowing that Snape ransacked Sirius’s room and took a picture of Lily.
The Prince’s Tale was wonderful. I’m so glad they took the time to do it properly.
I missed the reconcilliation with Percy, though. And I missed the explanation about why the Bloody Baron was, well, the way he was. Otherwise that was nicely done and got to the point of where Harry could find the Horcrux.
I’ll have to look for the ties with the other books. I noticed all those things but didn’t think about it the same way. I do have a question about Goblet of Fire and the boats. When were they in boats in this one? I don’t think I blinked, unless that’s when I was wiping away some of the tears I shed during this movie. Or is it just that they were in the boat house. I liked that location much better than the Shrieking Shack – less complicated.
As for Luna, didn’t she just come back quickly with all the others who had been elsewhere. I would like to have had the joy of Lupin celebrating the birth of his son Teddy, if only to further make the point that even in time of war life continues.
Adding to your list: Harry and Albus make a run at the platform just as Harry did when he first went to Hogwarts.
I liked the use of flashbacks to the previous movies as well. Yates does that very well. He also managed to tell the more complicated story of Lily and Severus growing apart once they were at Hogwarts with just a look between the two.
As for people who haven’t read the books and who are confused, well, I gave up on them a long time ago. When I bought the soundtrack at Best Buy today the clerk said she hasn’t seen any of the movies because she wants to finish reading all the books first. Good on her. She’s only on Prisoner, so unless she steps up her pace, it’ll take her a while. But it was nice to hear she is doing it in the proper order.
And my daughter’s nephew who is 10 or 11 has read all the books twice. So if he can do it, so can the rest of them. 😉
Just a quick comment since it’s rather late & I just got back from seeing the movie twice, but they did show Fred’s death. I’m rather sure of it. It was a quick scene of Fred on the ground up against a portion of wall with a Death Eater AK’ing him.
The HP7 picture you have up seems eerily like a cross between Frederic Edwin Church’s “Twilight in the Wilderness”:
http://www.paintinghere.com/painting/Twilight_in_the_Wilderness_693.html
and J. M. W. Turner’s “The Burning of the Houses of Parliament”:
http://www.oldmastersoncanvas.co.uk/photodetails.asp?PhotoID=11
I saw it last night, and I’m still processing; some things I loved [all Snape scenes], others less. I want to raise a question for you mavens, though: While Neville’s speech to Voldemort is breathtaking, it seems to lack some critical context due to editing. A behind-the-scenes shot of Voldemort’s speech to the Hogwarts defenders indicates that there were passages that didn’t make the cut, and they were really vicious, going well beyond the lies he was telling in the book to allege that Harry had betrayed his friends, that his heart had never been with them [He even aimed some such remarks directly at Ginny]. I recall none of these words in the film I saw last night, yet Neville addresses them in his speech [ “. . . they haven’t died in vain. But *you* will. Because you’re *wrong*! Harry’s heart *did* beat for us.”] Does this make sense?
Having divided it into two parts, they could have done Nagini’s death properly after having done Neville’s speech and torture properly. They went all Hollywood at that point and rendered a most powerful scene virtually pointless – unless you just “luv” Hollywood chase scenes as a crude attempt to build tension. The whole bit with Snape’s death by Nagini striking 3 times after the useless sectum sepra spell by Voldemort was overdone. Frankly, I’m really shocked that JKR allowed those crucial changes. They could have presented them as written without difficulty. I also found the whole tenor of the story hollywoodized (in the sense of bowdlerized) by the interactions of Lord Voldemort with the death of the horcruxes and their secondary impact on Harry. I thought it crucial in the books that Voldemort had passed beyond the capability of knowing such because of the mutilation of his own soul, in fact, I seem to recall Dumbledore telling Harry that.
On the other hand, it followed the conventions of the Hollywood action-adventure movie and one can see how the limitations of the medium limited the story. No surprise, really. And it could have been worse, I suppose. I shan’t be making a second trip to the theatre to see it. I’ll wait till I get the movie as a DVD as a gift to see it again. It unimpressed me that much.
Only one viewing so far, and still thinking about it. The whole film was darker, and not sure that it was just the 3-d glasses that kept falling off my nose. Older eyes had trouble seeing the picture at times. It really was shot through a dark lense
The movie felt like the end. The pace was quickened, lots of cameos, a collage of images not a lot of meat. I missed the day to day pace of the other movies. Especially towards the climax, where it was really like a fairy tale on film as the narrative was divided between several different scenes , which came together in a breakneck fashion. It removed me from my vantage point on Harry’s shoulder.There was more distance this time, like it was time to say goodbye as they wrapped it all up.
However, I quite liked the musical score. At the moment, ‘Severus and Lily’would be the piece that is most obsessive. It is a gorgeous layering of sound. It is so extremely sad, as the composer moves from a lovely sunny summer day , through adolescence and brings on the evil.. There are fragments of a waltz that are never resolved . It speaks of sadness and a life of sacrifice, to try to resolve that waltz somehow.
The screen shot of the child Severus losing Lily to Griffindor was heartbreaking. His eyes were amazing.
Snape is the revelation and the highlight for me.
The ending of the movie was quite different in feeling from the book. Aside from the denouement not being done publicly, there is no applause for Harry being the one that stops Voldemort, life just regains it normal colour(as the dark lense is lightened) wizards are gossiping about everyday things again. Harry is a quiet hero, no one knows about Hallows or Horcruxes. The sword of Griffindor in Neville’s hand seems more like an affirmation of manhood than anything else.
Guess I had better check it out again tomorrow to see how it seems on second viewing
Nice to find a spot on the internet where there is some discussion going on!
Overall I loved the movie and many scenes were well done. Shell Cottage, Gringott’s, Hogsmeade, Room of requirement x 2, Into the forest and especially King’s Cross were superbly done.
A little disappointed they wrecked the lonely, hurting hero by having Ron & Hermione farewell Harry on his way to the forest, but I will forgive them that because they used the scene to make it clear Harry was also a Horcrux.
However I was very disappointed in the overdone final battle between Harry and Voldemort and how quickly Harry came back to life. Totally lost the sense of these brave wizards fighting on against evil with heavy hearts and hope at its lowest ebb followed by the resurrection joy when Harry revealed himself. Also very much missed Harry using the beloved cloak of invisibility to both protect others and seize the right moment to safely set up the confrontation with Voldemort.
The absence of a final chat with Dumbledore’s portrait, tying up the loose ends of the Deathly Hallows and Harry’s selfless use of them, left the Hallows as a very vague strand in the film. How many non readers will work out that Harry ended up as the owner of all the Hallows and became a true master of death by submitting to it rather than seeking to outwit it or over power it? Might as well have renamed the film “Harry Potter and the Deadly Horcruxes”, because the film makers obviously made the same decision as Harry – pursue the Horcruxes rather than the Hallows. I hope I’ll find more of what I’m looking for in deleted scenes on the DVD or maybe a Director’s Cut later on.
But what a journey it has been! Have so loved watching these wonderful books brought to life on the big screen. Allowing a week or two the absorb the first viewing before I line up to watch it again.
I noticed a neat callback in the first DH film: the ceiling light that swings in the room next door to Bathilda’s bedroom, when Harry gets thrown through the wall fighting Nagini –it looks like a ceiling light that swings in the Philosopher’s Stone movie, in one of the shots in Harry’s bedroom when his mother is killed.
I think it’s a definite allusion to the flashback to his parents’ deaths, which happened so near by, and which was in that chapter of the book.
I can think of two more references to previous movies; Filch running in to tattle to Snape “Students out of bed!” harkens back to the first book. When McGonagall is instructing Neville to make something unknown to the audience go “boom” she suggests that he consult Mr. Finnegan – who has a penchant for pyrotechnics. I can’t remember her exact quote. Got a big laugh from the audience I was with because we had just sat through a HP marathon in that theater. Seamus certainly did cause a lot of explosions.
Also the enchanted vines from the maze in Goblet of Fire are seen reaching up and tangling around a death-eater.
Like most above, I enjoyed the film, especially the Prince’s Tale (oddly enough, I actually felt more empathy towards Snape and really appreciated his bravery, sacrifice and love for Lily after watching the movie than I ever felt after reading the book probably a dozen times).
And like most of you, I was disappointed that the final dual was carried out alone in the courtyard rather than in the great hall. The main thing is, NO ONE SAW IT! If they wanted the final bit to be outside, fine, but why not have everyone else, Order members, students, death eaters, standing there, watching? I mean, not only is that how it takes place in the book but honestly isn’t that what would naturally happen (oh by the way, the two most imporant wizards of all time are outside dualing to the death and of course our very life depends on who wins but we’ll just find out later…REALLY?) The other thing that really bothered me was that it’s never made clear that Harry’s sacrifice gave everyone that same kind of “love protection” that his mother gave to him. I think that bit has a beautiful symmetry to it, Lily dying for Harry and Harry dying for his friends and all receiving protection because of their sacrifice, and I was sorry it wasn’t made clear (wasn’t even the case, really) in the movie.
One thing I wondered about: since we know JKR was a producer in the film…when Harry tells Hermione and Ron he has to leave and that he’s really a horcrux, movie Hermione (of course) already knows. Do you think she might have known (or at least suspected) in the book? I have to reread with that thought in mind. 🙂
Just saw the movie for the first time this afternoon. A question: In the Battle of Hogwarts what looked to me like a vampire was devouring his prey, and when he raised his head, the prey looked like Lavender Brown. Was it?
Also, in the Great Hall scene when Harry comes in and Madame Pomfrey and others are tending to the wounded, she [if I remember right because it was about a second-long snippet] and [again, if I remember right] Padma Patel were pulling a blanket over someone’s head. I couldn’t tell who that was, but my husband said maybe it wasn’t supposed to be anybody we know. Anybody know?
@DML: The answer to question one is that it was Fenrir Greyback, a werewolf, and yes, he was devouring Lavender Brown.
As for the second question, I was trying to tell if they were pulling the blanket over Padma’s sister, Parvati. Did anyone get a close enough look to tell? (Neither Lavender’s death nor Parvati’s are canon, by the way, just for the record).
During the last fight scene, just before Harry dispatches Voldemort, and just before Neville decapitates Nagini, Ron and Hermione are huddled together as one. Possibly a nod to the quarrelling couple becoming as one just before the resolution can happen.
Thought that this was a fitting end to the series. I really wished the relationship between Lily and Snape had been developed a little deeper. It seemed one sided in the movie, but in the books appeared that they both cared for each other- even if it was friendship. No matter what Rickman did a wonderful job with the character. I think that is why these movies are so powerful– they were so well cast, the cast remained (for the most part), and you really got to see these three young wizards grow up over the years. Of course, the strong and beautifully written story also had a lot to do with it. Do wish they had spent more than five minutes on the “19 years later part” and told us more about what the characters ended up doing following the book, but guess it is left up to us to decide. And ending the movie, as all the others, with the three of them together.
I did a mini review on my blog – focused on the implicit deepest moral message specific to the movie (as I perceived it, and somewhat different from the books due to the elimination of almost all the book’s Christian elements from the movies):
http://charltonteaching.blogspot.com/2011/07/moral-message-of-harry-potter-at.html
I thought of two more times they reflected past films: When Hermione uses Arresto Momentum to stop the group falling in Gringott’s reflects Dumbledore using it when Harry was affected by the Dementors on the Quiddich pitch in Prisoner of Azkaban and Snape is bitten by Nagini three times quickly as was Mr Weasley in Order of the Phoenix while guarding the Prophecy.
Excellent review, Elizabeth.
I, too, was moved by the movie’s depiction of Snape’s death. Adding the line, “You have your mother’s eyes” reveals that Snape not only wanted to look in his final moments at the eyes that were so like his beloved Lily’s, but also that he is at last able to see (as Dumbledore always did) Lily’s soul in Harry. Snape is a true tragic hero: trapped by bitter disappointment, loss, and hatred of Harry’s father, and forced by the demands of his role as a double agent to submerge and disguise any emerging kindly feelings for Harry. The movie gives us this beautiful fleeting moment of redemptive contact through which Harry comes to understand how much Snape loved Lily and how much Snape sacrificed to atone for his role in her death. Because Snape is finally gifted with the opportunity and the courage to drop the iron guard in which he encased his soul and memories, he enables Harry to free his own soul from the parasitic grasp of Voldemort.
We can be sure that Harry understands this because of the name he bestows on his second son. Albus Severus Potter, who alone of Harry’s children has Lily’s eyes, is Snape’s final redemption — symbolically healing the rift between Lily and Severus and carrying on in his name and his eyes/soul the memory of Snape’s love and terrible sacrifices.
I’m having a hard time getting over the overdone duel to appreciate the good in the movie. All I could think about when watching it was what they missed: Harry using the Elder Wand only to repair his own (is he stuck with Draco’s wand now?), the specific use of “expelliarmus” to kill Voldemort (especially with Remus telling Harry that it’s become his signature move), the HUGE number of Death Eaters, mentioning that Neville is teaching at Hogwarts at the end…
I was pleased with the pale pink dragon (after spending too much time on this site studying its alchemy), and I love the way they handled the drop into the water, mixed, I think, with a montage of VDM realizing that they’re hunting horcruxes. I don’t know how canon it is, but when the battle resumes after VDM and Neville’s speeches, I liked to see the Malfoy family just walking away. Their reluctance to be Death Eaters was built up well, and I liked seeing them make the choice to leave, if not to fight against the Death Eaters.
I may or may not see it again in theaters, but if I do, I’ll watch the movie rather than read the book before going, so maybe I can notice more of the artistry and less of what they missed.
I came home at 3am and re-read DH right after seeing the movie and I must agree that my biggest disappointment was the final battle scene. Had it been portrayed as JKR wrote it (in public, with the dialouge between Harry and VDM) many of the questions would have been answered for both the characters and the viewers.
Also, someone asked why Harry did not repair his wand. In DH pt1, a Snatcher tosses Harry’s wand aside in the forest when Harry is captured. They could not have it magically re-appear. Other than that, I found the movie enjoyable. I would recommend that it not be compared to the books, but rather used as supplemental material. Enjoy the movies as one entity and the books as another.
Tracey, I think you make the best point, that the movies need to be enjoyed for themselves and not compared event for event to the books. The problem with including all the dialogue is that exposition doesn’t always work well in a movie, especially when it is the action part of the movie. Somehow that just works better in a book. I did think, however, that Harry and Voldemort needed to be surrounded by everyone else as they were in the book.
The other thing I missed, as someone else said, was seeing that Voldemort no longer had the ability to cast spells over all of them at Hogwarts because of Harry’s sacrifice. I’m not sure how that could have been done, though, since in the book it is Harry thinking it. Just seeing it wouldn’t explain it.
I did notice that there was no cheering for Harry in the movie as there was in the book, but I’m not sure that was a bad thing. It put the focus on the grief that everyone was feeling and allowed Harry to leave quietly without an extra scene – it was a smoother way for him to exit. It was a shame that he didn’t use the elder wand to repair his own, but at least the point is made that Harry is not keeping it. And we did see the resurrection stone fall to the ground in the forest.
As for the Malfoys, they did not walk away during the battle in the book. They were still there, but off to the side and unnoticed by everyone else after the battle was over. However, it’s clear in the book that they didn’t join in the battle once they found Draco. So having them walk away makes the same point – they are no longer interested in being Death Eaters and no longer loyal to Voldemort.
I hadn’t thought that the death eaters were getting trapped by the vines from Goblet of Fire, but that it was Devil’s Snare that we first saw in the Philospher’s Stone. In the book, Prof. Sprout mentions something about using Devil’s Snare when she is listing off the things they can use in the battle.
All in all, I wasn’t as bothered by the fight scene because they did take the time to do The Prince’s Tale properly and the scene at King’s Cross. That must have been tricky to put in because it did slow the pacing. But I thought it worked well.
As for Harry going into the forest, in the book, he went without knowing where Ron and Hermione were – they had disappeared and we learned later that they had gone to the Chamber for basilisk fangs. He also had told Neville to kill the snake if he saw it without explaing to Neville why that is important. I was just glad that with all the attempts everyone else made to kill Nagini that it was Neville who did it.
Did anyone else notice that at some point Voldemort pulls up his sleeve and looks at his arm where the Dark Mark was and there is nothing there? Perhaps that is the recognition that Voldemort’s powers have been diminished.
Oh, and Harry did get Voldemort’s wand by Expelliarmus, but we just didn’t hear him say it. It wouldn’t have had the same impact because that part was changed in part 1 – Harry tells Remus that he was recognized because Hedwig tried to protect him, rather than knowing it was him because of his signature spell.
Just a few brief thoughts from the movie. First, both Bellatrix and Voldemort reminded me of Professor Quirrell as they died, the way they turned ashy and crumbled. Second, I think that Neville’s speech was directed both to his friends at Hogwarts and to us as the audience. Yes, Harry is gone, but his heart beats on in all of us. Finally, any comments on the Draco story? In my opinion, it was handled well. I could read all sorts of emotions on the actor’s face in his key scenes: confusion, ambivalence, possibly a hint of regret. I thought the scene with Narcisssa marching him out and Lucius running after them with a backwards glance tied things up nicely, though differently than in the book.
Good points all around. (Not that anyone needs my approval.) Some of which will be echoed here, perhaps with a twist.
Regarding examining the movies apart from the books – it’s clear now that the movies weren’t just telling the story differently, they were telling a somewhat different story. By focusing more on the visuals, part of what was removed from the stories was their meaning. I’d suspected that for a while, but it became clear as crystal in “HP7B”, as the marquee in our local theater called it.
For instance, after his return from King’s Cross, had not Dumbledore told Harry that Voldemort was no longer capable of harming him? And yet the extended fight scene portrays the possibility of LV winning. (Hat tip to my wife for pointing that one out.) Just as at the second coming/last judgement, there will be no battle with the triumphant Christ.
What we missed was the dialog between a now transformed and supremely confident Harry, in his “new role” as Christ figure, offering LV the opportunity to repent – an opportunity he presumably knew would be rejected. The story simply ignored that the battle was won before they began their duel – which should properly have consisted of a single spell cast, and not merely because it was in the book that way.
Along similar lines – and I will have to rewatch to clarify – what killed Voldemort in that scene? It’s not at all clear that he was killed by his own spell (i.e., his own hatred/lack of love) rebounding on him. One could easily take from what we saw on screen that once his last horcrux was destroyed, his strength was gone, and he simply disintegrated. Or it could be interpreted that with the loss of Nagini, he simply was weakened to where he could no longer hold off Harry, so that Harry’s spell (never verbalized) killed him. Again, not consistent with the theology of the story Rowling told us.
The making of seven horcruxes rent LV’s soul to a degree that has no longer in touch with it. Hence why, as I believe Dumbledore told Harry in HBP, Voldemort is unaware of the destruction of his horcruxes. (Did we see any reaction from LV when the locket was destroyed in Part One?) But Voldemort’s anguish plays better on screen, so again it’s out with the theology, and in with the drama and the visuals.
Some of my other disappointments were just matters of personal preference. But these were the essence of what the story was all about.
As others have said, if the movie drives viewers to the books, that’s good. And if it drives them *here*, to discover so much of the storytelling magic that has been impacting them all these years without them realizing it, even better.
As the movie did out-of-this-world box office ($169 million?!), we’ll see where the dialog goes from here.
Forgive me if my disappointment projects as harsh or offensive. Not my intention.
Nicholas
Elizabeth, great catches on the homages to the previous films. There is one other BIG one, that is more of a montage (if I’m using the word correctly), but it is a montage that is a homage (lol try saying that 5 times fast!) 🙂
It happens during the battle. I can’t remember when in terms of plot, but it is a montage of the trio running from point A to point B on the Hogwarts grounds during the heat of the battle–again, I forget where they were running to. But first they encounter a huge troll (though maybe it is a giant, but his mannerisms are like the troll in the first movie). Once they escape the troll they are faced with a herd of giant spiders (2nd movie). They run from the spiders (and by now I was looking for something from the 3rd movie.) and this is when they see Fenrir Greyback over Lavender (and since Remus-as-werewolf is in the third movie, this makes sense as the first homage to evil creatures in the 3rd movie. But wait! There’s one more…). And finally they then face a group of dementors (also 3rd movie and beyond). That’s where the homage ends, but it makes sense because after the 3rd movie, Voldemort becomes the primary adversary, which is the enemy they are currently fighting of course at that moment in the battle.
All of the above takes place over the course of maybe 2 minutes, and the music accents the homage wonderfully. Definitely keep an eye out for this the next time you watch. It was a joy to catch 🙂
Also, one other echo to a previous movie, in the music and (actors’) blocking: when Harry comes out of the portrait in the Room of Requirement and Neville announces him, the beloved Harry Potter melody plays triumphantly as his classmates come to greet him–an homage to the first two films in which the most Harry had to worry about was being famous among his peers, and the child-like wonder of the magical wizarding world was always at the fore.
Agree with most comments regarding your likes and disappointments and just reminding myself that books and movies are different bodies of work. One tiny thing that bothered me, that I didn’t see mentioned here, was Snape passing on his memories as he died as his tears. My daughters think that is the least of the problems with this film and that it worked in a way. Just wondering what others thought.
VAreader: I really liked that the memories were in Snape’s tears. We saw Dumbledore and Slughorn remove memories with their wands and it seemed to be from their forehead at the hairline. But by having Snape’s memories in his tears it gave the moment even more poignancy and if there are any in the audience who haven’t already figured out why Harry should care that Snape has been senselessly and brutally murdered, those tears (and Alan Rickman’s face) should move them that direction.
I looked it up in the book, because I couldn’t quite remember it. This is from the US edition, Chapter 32, page 657-658:
“Take . . . it . . . . Take . . . it . . . .”
Something more than blood was leaking from Snape. Silvery blue, neither gas nor liquid, it gushed from his mouth and his ears and his eyes, and Harry knew what it was, but did not know what to do —
A flask, conjured from thin air, was thrust into his shaking hands by Hermione. Harry lifted the slivery substance into it with his wand.
Then in the book he says “Look at me.” I like the movie better here when he echoes what everyone else has said to Harry — “You have your mother’s eyes.”
Well done.
Hi – I hope you don’t mind me jumping in with a question, since I have not seen the movie and am not likely to see it in the theater. Was Harry’s gratuitous and unrepentant torture of Amycus Carrow included? Or did they take that whole scene out?
It sounds as if they took it out.
mary, They took it out. Harry never makes it to the Ravenclaw common room where this happens. They invented a scene that takes place in the Great Hall, and though it isn’t canonical, I actually liked it in and of itself.
Wow! What an amazing dialogue that renders pretty much unnecessary my follow-up review! Thanks so much for contributing all your thoughts and helping me with my “hat tip hunt” (okay, not nearly as cool as Horcruxes, but then, I am a mere mortal)! Did anyone notice tips to classroom scenes of Moody/Crouch Jr. or Lupin (jars of spiders, that phonograph, maybe)? I’ve noticed that there may be a pattern of images related to the DADA professors, but I’m not sure.
Rev. George: I guess I should have been more specific. That quick flash (which could have been George or Fred, really) is hardly “Fred’s last laugh” frozen on his face after Percy’s return, which, yes, Eeyore, I really missed, too! David, I also wondered if there wasn’t some connective tissue lost in the editing, and found it jarring to have Neville switching back and forth from William Wallace to Wart just happening upon this cool sword, and oh, hey, here’s a snake…though I do love the scene of Neville bringing Harry in through the secret passage!
Mary, no interaction with the Carrows and Harry at all; Snape takes the pair of them out just before he “does a bunk”; but Harry does Imperius the goblin at Gringotts (who gets fried by the dragon before the trio free it.)
DML, that is Lavender, alas, who is attacked by Fenrir Greyback. In the book, she was still moving “feebly” when Greyback was slammed, but I figured she was the one under the blanket, since she and Trelawny and the Patils are so close.
Not, canon, as Kat points out, but logical. Speaking of canon, anybody else headscratching over Neville’s sudden proclamation of love for Luna, whom Rowling herself has dismissed as too far-out for the level-headed Neville? No less a person than Evanna Lynch herself was asked this question at Leaky-Con, and she (a delightful person, by the way, with that same lovely sing-songy voice in real life)theorized that Neville and Luna might have dated before realizing they were just not well matched and parting friends so she could romp around the world hunting Crumple-Horned Snorkacks.
I look forward to more of the great conversation as more folks get to the movies or make repeat viewings and new folks join us! It almost feels like we all got to go to the theater together, which would have been fun (though I wouldn’t have traded my date with my husband since we’ve seen every one of these things together!)
Did anyone notice that baby Harry had a mobile over his crib with a handmade stuffed pig, which was shown just before Snape’s dialogue with Dumbledore about having raised Harry as “a pig for slaughter?”
I missed the pig in Harry’s nursery, but I liked the Owl that reminded me of Hedwig.
I agree w Corry, DV, DPH and others on the final battle scene between Harry and Voldemort. Such a disappointment. One point not made is that one of the major psychological differences between Harry and Tom Riddle was that Harry did NOT act alone, whereas Voldemort was a loner and never shared his secrets with anyone. In the book Harry, very appropriately, was joined in his final battle by his friends, adopted family and teachers. Without that transcendent moment of shared terror and joy, the movie’s end felt flat for me, almost obscuring so much that was so very right (especially Snape’s death and the Pensieve memories).
Also DPH 100% right on how bad the omission of Harry’s speech to Voldemort is — the part about remorse but also the bit before. I looked it up in the book and it is even more powerful than I’d remembered: ‘Don’t you get it?’, Harry says, ‘I was ready to die to stop you from hurting these people…I’ve done what my mother did. They’re protected from you. Haven’t you noticed none of your curses are binding? You can’t torture them. You can’t touch them.’ Including that quote would have brought us full circle to Lily’s sacrifice, and as Luna tells the Ravenclaw doorkeeper (in the book, but not the movie): ‘A circle has no beginning’, and of course, no end. Guess it’s another of those perhaps too religious references that got dropped.
Rochelle, I loved the dragon, too; pausing on the broken cupola above Gringotts and London for it’s first breath of fresh air in who knows how long — and then tentatively stretching its torn wings to lift off into freedom.
All the ‘grown-up’ actors were wonderful. Rickman’s Snape moved me to tears, especially the scene (a GOOD addition!) where he weeps desperately while holding Lily’s body. At the other end of the emotional spectrum, Bonner-Carter was so funny as Hermione-Bellatrix, especially that Gringott moment when she asks to enter her vault, getting the Bellatrix sideways head movement and lifted chin ‘almost right’, but totally ‘missing’ the carelessly arrogant tone of voice, not to mention the mastery of high heels. And, of course, Polyjuice potion is one of those recurring themes (that little bit when Harry and Ron ask if she’s sure the hair is Bellatrix’s harks back to the moment when Hermione accidentally turned herself into a half-cat in Chamber of Secrets with the wrong hair.)
I think I’ll see it again, but I’ll leave before the last battle and go read the book to picture a more fitting end to an otherwise wonderful film.
I had to watch the movie three times and read through everyone’s comments before I managed to put my finger on what was bothering me about the film.
In the King’s Cross scene, Dumbledore never mentions that Harry is tethered to life as long as Voldemort lives because Voldemort took his blood! To me, this was the most important thing Dumbledore told Harry in that scene in the book- because this is what guarantees that Harry will win! As long as Voldemort dies, Harry cannot be killed!
The filmmakers seemed to stray off this theme, because as Nicholas said, in the final duel it seemed that Voldemort had a chance of defeating Harry- which was impossible!
I imagine non-readers were confused as to why Harry didn’t die- does having only the part of Voldemort’s soul make sense if not for this little point?
bellatrix/hermione, The Vault, The princes tale, Ron in the RORx2, Maggie Smith! The Ressurection stone, Voldys last speech and creepy hug…Great!
cutdown alberforth, no explanation why harry didnt die (hallows? voldys blood etc) cutdown voldy/neville speech, bellatrix exploding not so great!
loved the nods to the previous films especially the cornish pixies
Hermione whacking stones off Nagini’s head reminded me of her crackshot aim in POA when she hits Harry in Hagrids hut.
Interesting that most of us were disappointed in the final battle which was turned into just a big action sequence, while those who didn’t like all the Christian imagery in the book are really happy with the way it was done.
I have some friends who I still check in with, but not often because we so heartily disagreed about the last book. They didn’t like Snape’s death in the book because it was too sudden and jarring but liked it in the movie. Um, Ok, I thought it was pretty horrific in the movie, but . . .
Then there was the final battle that they didn’t like in the book or the talk with Dumbledore at King’s Cross because of all the redemption and reflection on Harry’s and Dumbledore’s part. So they were quite happy with the movie.
I think I’m probably done trying to talk with them, honestly. They want to see their own version of the story rather than the one that Rowling wrote and they’ll never be happy and I will never agree with them.
I hope that some of the things we all missed with the ending are in the deleted scenes when we get to that point in this last movie. But even if they aren’t, I can go back and read it for myself or listen to Stephen Fry’s wonderful audio book that brings me to tears for most of the last quarter of the book. ( I can’t listen to this one in public, actually.)
So I have found that I am very glad for this place where we agree about the important events in the book, even if we disagree about smaller details.
One other thing that my wife noticed (she’s good!) – in the Battle of Hogwarts, we don’t see any of the magical creatures fighting for the good guys. Voldemort has his giants and his dementors and his acromantulas, but we don’t see the house elves, the thestrals, or buckbeak, or Grawp, or, most especially, the house elves. That one aspect of the postmodern character of the story has been turned on its head – the outcasts and the downtrodden have, or so it might appear, to have embraced the darkness rather than light.
In my old age, I forgot the other observation I wanted to write between the time I set the book down and the time I arrived at my keyboard on the other side of the room. Hopefully I’ll remember it – but it was likely not as good as my wife’s.
Nicholas
That’s so interesting about the absence of the elves, thestrals, and other sentient but non-human magical beings
Perhaps because they can think (though not in the same way as humans), creatures like elves and even acromantulas seem to be able to exercise some freedom of choice. (Aragog said he protected Hagrid out of gratitude even though forgoing such a large meal would not have been in the nature of a giant spider.) Leaving out the non-magicals that fought on the side of good seems to subtly de-emphasize the free choice theme that is such a big part of the HP series.
It also really bothered me that, in the movie, Prof. McGonagall told the Slytherins to leave the great hall and go to the dungeons, rather than giving them the choice to fight with the other houses, as in the book. I was glad, however, to see Horace Slughorn casting protective charms. I also rather liked the departure of the Malfoys; I guess slinking away is a choice in favor of the lesser of two evils (or ‘the lesser of two weevils’ as Patrick O’Brian’s Captain Aubrey put it).
Oops – just noticed the error in my previous post, in which I mentioned house elves twice. The first mention should have been the centaurs, since my second reference, with the “most especially”, definitely goes to Kreacher and the others. (That would have been such a great image – running around poking the bad guys in the ankles!)
Also just want to add my pride in the All Pros, in that for the most part, our lamentations of book-to-movie changes aren’t simply about cool scenes that we missed out on, but changes that directly related to the meaning of the story, so that non-trivial aspects of Rowling’s masterful story-telling are seemingly undone. Given that she’s credited as one of the producers, it’s genuinely baffling to see some of the changes she permitted.
And still no progress in remembering my other point. I’m pretty sure it was induced by something in the middle of a right-hand page somewhere in “the Flaw in the Plan” (yes, I’m strongly visually oriented), but I haven’t had the time to read that chapter again to see if I can re-stimulate my rapidly-aging mind.
I understand why they left out the thestrals and the centaurs – a lot of CGI they didn’t have to deal with. But I did really miss Kreacher. At least the importance of the loyalty of both Kreacher and Dobby was sort of dealt with in the last movie. And I did like that the movie started with Harry sitting by Dobby’s grave before he made the decision of what to do.
I did see Fred this time, but still, no Percy. There was no mention of Percy, but his story was really left behind once he went to the Ministry and they never came back to it.
I saw more in the Room of Requirement that goes back to other movies. There were the hanging red organge lanterns that were at Slughorn’s Christmas party. There was also a table with china, mostly teacups that made me wonder if they were left-overs from Trelawney (they were all blue, I think).
They did a pretty good job with Aberforth and his story, but left out the comment from Harry that Albus was remorseful all his life over his mother and sister’s deaths. That, to me, was one of the critical points that needed to explain why Dumbledore didn’t use the most powerful wand to take over. In the book, that came up again when Dumbledore tells Harry that he learned early he couldn’t be trusted with power but he could be a guardian so no one else could use the power of the wand.
I am surprised as well that Rowling signed off on some of those omissions as they seemed to be pretty important to her in the interviews she did right after the last book came out.
I think the flash-backs were so well done, and the second time through I saw even more of the incredible details included.
As for Voldemort feeling the destruction of the Horcruxes, it just seems to work better visually. That changed didn’t bother me that much – it helps move the story along and shows the desperation of both Voldemort to protect his remaining Horcruxes and of Harry to destroy them.
Oh, one more thing. Helena Ravenclaw. Right at the beginning of the movie when there are flashes of Voldemort seeing the destruction of his Horcruxes or the ones remaining, there is one brief scene with the Ravenclaw banner and the Grey Lady. I missed her the first time round.
They have made the story work with the Grey Lady, but I did miss the explanation of the Bloody Baron and why he is so fierce and always clanking his chains all over the castle. But I guess that is one of those details that makes the characters richer and wasn’t really necessary to explain where that particular Horcrux was. We missed the riddle at Ravenclaw Tower, but the Grey Lady does a nice sort of riddle for Harry as to where he will find the diadem, and he gets it.
Percy was in the scene where McGonagal suggests Slytherins be taken to the dungeon. He’s in the group that puts themselves between her and Harry. A lot of prominent characters are reduced in this movie to mere extras, and he’s among them. Trelawney is another. For her perhaps you’d call it a ‘cameo’ appearance, but it appeared to cram everybody in, some characters get token nanoseconds on the screen. Those who get a lot of screen time are Snape, who didn’t get enough in the last movie [they added Snape’s long walk to Malfoy Manor partly to correct that, I think], McGonagal and Neville. There’s really not that much Hermione in this one, either.
One other thing I’ve not seen addressed is the soundtrack. DH1 paled compared to Nicholas Hooper’s OotP and H-BP, the latter being the best of all. I wasn’t impressed with the DH2 soundtrack, which lacked the grandeur that Hooper so powerfully captured in H-BP, especially when Harry and Dumbledore were on the Gibraltar-looking rock amid the sea.
DML, I have to disagree with you about the sound track. I liked Hooper very much and was sorry he wasn’t staying with it, but I liked the one for DH1 and love the one for DH2. If you stay through the credits, there is one section that seems to replay large parts of the sound track from one of the first movies, if not the first. At least, that’s the comment my daughter made when she saw the movie for the first time this morning. Did anyone else notice that? There is definitely a section during the credits that isn’t from the current movie.
I’m especially partial to choirs and solo voices on sound tracks, and this one included more of that and it was usually at times that were emotion filled. The moment, for me, is all the more human when I hear a human voice rather than instruments.
Something I realized when people started hoping that John Williams would finish the series was that I didn’t like them as much. I started listening to the first three sound tracks again and I’ve found them to be over-powering, where all the subsequent composers really came up with music that enhanced the movies. Goblet of Fire was not my favorite of the Potter movies, but I love the sound track by Patrick Doyle, for instance.
I was skeptical of having different composers and directors, but I think because there were eight movies it really did make it better. And I think the best thing that happened was that Chris Columbus started it by bringing Hogwarts to life and making some brilliant casting choices and David Yates made it better by showing that he really understood a lot of the story, even if they didn’t include all the Christian elements we all wanted to see.
I don’t read the books from a particularly Christian point of view, as I gather some or many readers do here, so my criticisms aren’t from there, but…
I was very upset about Harry’s sacrifice not saving them all –victory should be through death (hence “master of death/uniter of the deathly hallows”, what the two movies are all about). Neville’s speech came across as though Harry was simply another casualty of the battle, which of course he was, but… The walk to the forest should have been what finalized the battle, not just a lull in the middle of it. Harry wins by giving in –that was very important, and I don’t think the film showed it… or if it did, it was just to be inferred, not outright shown…
I also thought that if they wanted to include the scene of Harry saying goodbye to Ron and Hermine, they should have gone all the way and had Ron engage with Harry too! They opened a can of worms with that scene and then didn’t deal with them. Ron should have tried to stop Harry from leaving to sacrifice himself, tried to hold him back –then movie!Hermione could have restrained Ron in turn. I simply do not believe that Ron would accept Harry’s decision to die just like *that*. I buy movie!Hermione’s reaction because of the implication she’s had time to think about it.
I wasn’t happy that the final moments as well as Neville’s crowning moment of awesome took place with no huge crowd of witnesses, either. Getting everyone together at the end is far more monunental, that’s why so many tv shows end with everyone in the same room!
Other than those things, though, I thought the movie was really good. I thoroughly enjoyed it (if by enjoyed I mean “bit my knuckles and cried” heh).
Such an interesting discussion!
I feel compelled to weigh in about the transformed final battle with Voldemort. I actually like it better in the film than in the book, and here’s why. In the book, I felt a bit let down by how mundane the battle between Harry and Voldemort seemed. While it was satisfying that Voldemort’s own curse rebounded on him, he just fell over dead. Also, Harry and Voldemort had what seemed like a pretty ordinary duel, with Harry doing a lot of talking. While his points were important, it just seemed anticlimactic. So in the movie, the duel happening throughout the destroyed castle, and even in the air, struck me as much more interesting and important. I loved the visual image of Voldemort crumbling; it just seemed more . . . scary and striking. I was just as happy that Harry didn’t preach to Voldemort about remorse, or explain the whole Elder Wand thing.
The other place I preferred the movie action to the book was at the beginning of DH I – where Hedwig dies trying to attack Death Eaters rather than simply falling out and getting hit by a stray spell. Much more dramatic, and I liked it better!
Okay, this is merely my opinion, but there it is!
Perhaps this goes back to the reasons behind my disappointment with the portrayal of the final battle. When Harry made the “walk to Calvary” in “The Forest Again”, *that’s* when Voldemort was defeated. When he and Harry came face to face in “The Flaw in the Plan”, there was no possibility that he would defeat Harry. All that remained was just a matter of tying up loose ends. (John might even argue that once Harry made the decision while digging Dobby’s grave, the last 300 pages of the book were all about those loose ends.)
And the movie version gives the impression that Voldemort might still win at that point. Recall that someone (was it Dumbledore himself?) said that even after the Horcruxes were destroyed, Voldemort was still an exceptionally-skilled wizard who would be a formidable opponent. Yet Harry, still a not-particularly-skilled 17 year-old boy, manages to dispense of Voldemort with a single “expelliaramus”.
He clearly was something much more than just the boy he appeared to be. Is this scene perhaps representative of the confrontation in Revelation 19, when the beast is dispatched into the lake of fire, an outcome that could have ended no other way. This may be stretching it a bit – as the beast is not offered an opportunity to express remorse or repentance. But I think that the fact that there was no *actual* battle going on at that point is not a minor point.
Nicholas
I believe the central point in the book is that Voldemort self-destructs in his will power, relying on horcruxes to overcome even the near-destruction of the body Peter Pettigrew helped him grow should Harry win. It is his own killing curse that undoes him for he has not learned, even under Harry’s immediate tutelage, that “he who saves his life loses it” even should “he gain the whole world and lose his soul”. This is portrayed in the text in the characteristic spells: Voldemort chooses murder while Harry goes for disarming (which would allow Voldemort a further chance at remorse/repentance should Harry succeed). Harry indeed succeeds in disarming Voldemort because of the allegiance of the elder wand, but it is Voldemort who destroys himself by his chosen lifeview. Voldemort falls over dead because he is truly what he has chosen. While the dissolution of the body of Voldemort in the movie may have been more satisfying (borrowed as it was from the cinematic vampire mythology and less than inspired), Voldemort is not therefore anymore dead than merely when he fell over (and I think there is a reference here to the death of Saruman in LOTR-the book, as well).
Where did George Weasley get his new ear from? I’ve seen the film several times now and each time I pay particular attention to that scene (partly because it is the last time we’ll ever see the twins together), and George has a left ear.
We were told in the book that it couldn’t be regrown. Maybe it is a magical prosthesis ear?
Any explanation???