A (Tardy) Bitter Rant to Deathly Hallows: Part 2 (Part I)

[jdnightghobhadi]

8 January 2012

Note: Is it called a review? I will try and keep this as simple-worded as possible (because I know how much you all love to torture your eyes with reading). Read if you care to. Comments are not expected. Ignore the strange font styles. LJ is being screwy.

Comments

[reg_flint]

Without Tom Felton what would they do? An entire generation miscast. And there is a lot of air and air and air, you're right, Rickman does not equal Snape. Ralph Fiennes isn't that bad, but there are moments when he just seems too delicate.

[jdnightghobhadi]

Tom Felton, in part, made the movies for me. I'm pleasantly surprised with Rowling that Draco became a bigger character. At least the filmmakers didn't whitewash his role in HBP, because Felton definitely received his one chance to show off his real acting chops.

I'm just being overly critical. Fiennes' Voldemort is simply too Disney for me (elaboration to come later).

Part II's criticisms are worse. Teaser: I pretty much ''complain'' about everything wrong with the performances of one of the two best actors in the whole series. Very disappointing. I think it was largely Yates' directing.

[dreamsofpaprika]

Kelly! <3

Play the Narnia scene and the HP scene at the same time. Though Narnia is longer and probably cheating a bit, HP cannot simply compare. Not by a long shot. I even watched it without song. Still EPIC as ever (and Gods, I adore those tracking shots).

btw Is it just me or is there some parts in that battle scene that aren't on the DVD? Is our DVD a cut version, buy any chance? That battle scene seems to be completely uncut! (i.e. the Gargoyle scenes. I don't remember those in the DVD, and we watched that movie a thousand times!)

[jdnightghobhadi]

Is it just me or is there some parts in that battle scene that aren't on the DVD?

Really? *goes to rewatch*

[jdnightghobhadi]

Funny, I don't see anything ''uncut''. Aren't the Gargoyles in our version?

I'm probably being biased with the Narnia/Harry Potter comparison, but the way those movies are made they put Potter to shame. Honestly, I like the Narnia films better than the Potter films. Oops. With the books, however, it's the complete opposite.

[basje]

I am always very much weirded out by Rickman's very obvious makeup. He didn't have it at first, so they use it to show he's getting older and more evil? But it's so badly done it looks more like he just becomes more interested in being a goth! It just soooo doesn't match his face and it just looks weird, blah :(

[jdnightghobhadi]

I like the idea, of making Snape seem more worn and haggard as the years go on, but I agree - they didn't do it right. It doesn't look - dare I say - quite natural... He does look precisely goth.

[jdnightghobhadi]

I'm just being overly biased since I stan for the Narnia films all the way. Indeed, an unfair comparison. But taking into account your views on the matter, yes I see. I exclude Neville's BAMF moment and the RoR. Those sequences were fine as they were, but I'm just not a particular fan of individual duels, or wands for that matter. Oops. The battle was a background in the book too, so I guess I have to give it to them for that, yet I just wished the film would have at least expanded on it to some extent and intertwined it with Harry's Horcrux issue (like Narnia, the battle actually never existed in the book, on page; after Lucy and Susan's scene, the next chapter explains in one sentence ''the battle was over''), because I felt there was a lack of sense of 'struggle', which somehow killed the purpose. We see the staff and students gather in the courtyard moments later appearing terribly battle worn, but where was the battle in all of this? Where, indeed...