Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 2 review

Matthew Lewis, Emma Watson, Rupert Grint and Daniel Radcliffe star in the final Harry Potter film.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 2

Studio: Warner Bros.
Directed by David Yates; Starring: Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint and Emma Watson

Jul 15, 2011 By Chris Tinkham Photography by Jaap Buitendijk Web Exclusive

In the 10 years since the November 2001 opening of the first and most successful Harry Potter film, Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone, there have been films from other franchises that have made far bigger splashes at the box office: the third Star Wars prequel, the third Lord of the Rings film, the first two Spider-Man titles, The Dark Knight, and the second Transformers installment, which handily beat Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, the second-most successful Potter film, head-to-head two summers ago. Even the last two Twilight films matched the last two Potter films in U.S. box-office receipts. But, none of those contemporary franchises has yet to venture beyond three releases.

Staggeringly, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows — Part 2 marks the eighth Potter film in 10 years, and, amid all those other franchises vying for the hearts and minds of fanboys and fangirls, interest in the screen adaptations of J.K. Rowling's blockbuster fantasy novels has not waned. The average box office gross for a Harry Potter film is $286 million, and the penultimate film, last winter's Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows — Part 1, grossed $295 million. Though Rowling's book series concluded four years ago, and the most diehard Potter fans know how his story will end, Deathly Hallows - Part 2 is poised to become the most successful title of the film series.

Consistency has been one of the greatest virtues of the Potter film series, and for Deathly Hallows — Part 2 to be a disappointment this late in the game would be a surprise, which it's not. Deathly Hallows — Part 2 lives up to the standard set by its predecessors, remaining true to their spirit while also delivering an epic battle royal between Harry (Daniel Radcliffe) and Lord Voldemort (Ralph Fiennes). And, just as the film is loaded with fanciful motifs and archetypes—goblins, a minecart coaster ride, an invisible cloak, a flying creature, a ghost, a map to hidden artifacts—that make fantasy-adventures so much fun, it also boasts an astonishing wealth of British acting talent, this time adding Scottish actress Kelly Macdonald to the mix.

As established in the previous two films, the immortality of Harry's evil arch nemesis, Voldemort, is sustained by various Horcruxes, objects that preserve fragments of the soul and allow its creator to regenerate after his or her body has terminated. Part 2 picks up with Harry on his mission to seek and destroy Voldemort's remaining Horcruxes. Only once all the Horcruxes are destroyed will Harry be able to defeat Voldemort and save the Wizarding and Muggle (non-magical) words from Voldemort's wicked rule.

With the stakes so high, some of the charm of the earlier films has been sacrificed. Part 2 is short on humor, and, in the few instances where romance is squeezed in, the sequences feel nothing more than obligatory. Harry's love interest, Ginny (Bonnie Wright), is practically a non-entity, and, by the middle of the film, his trusted sidekicks, Ron (Rupert Grint) and Hermione (Emma Watson), are more tag-alongs and bystanders than active participants affecting the tide of battle.

The decision to split Rowling's final book into two films was unquestionably necessary, and even still, it feels as though other characters were shortchanged to some extent, such as Neville Longbottom (Matthew Lewis), Draco Malfoy (Tom Felton), and Luna Lovegood (Evanna Lynch).

David Yates, who's directed the final four Potter films, has proven to be an able hand, yet some compositional choices are curious from time to time, as is the case with a sequence where Neville, manning a bridge to Hogwarts, faces a legion of Voldemort's army. The distance between them never is clearly conveyed. Viewers also could use a refresher in how Death Spells work. And, for all the advances that have been made in special effects during the era of digital filmmaking, green screen halos around the actors should not be so obvious, not in the final film of the biggest moneymaking franchise in movie history.

The emotional impact of the film's conclusion will vary widely among viewers, depending on how much they've invested in these characters and films over the last 10 years. Part 2 does include a brief flashback shot of the three protagonists as children, but it's used earlier in the film, by no means to induce waterworks.

While consistency has been a laudable attribute of the Potter series as a whole, it's also a minor shortcoming in the case of Deathly Hallows - Part 2. In blunt terms, the film is more of the same. For what it offers in drama and action, it lacks in chapter-closing poignancy. The lives of fans who have grown up with these films have changed in the last 10 years, probably dramatically in most cases. But how much have Harry, Ron and Hermione changed in that same time? With a Potter film released within every two years, it hasn't been especially evident. Yes, they've matured incrementally, but, despite casting that turned out to be terrific, their roles and characteristics have remained virtually the same. Harry the young man is still the brave, gallant, judicious, and loyal soul that Harry the boy was. He's held resolute as his adversity has magnified, which is more than most teenagers can say.

With the peaks and valleys of adolescence in mind, not to mention how common it's become for children to be raised by divorced parents, maybe the stability and trustworthiness of Harry, Ron and Hermione have been as much of a comfort to young fans as the Wizarding World has been a magically entertaining refuge of escape.

www.harrypotter.com