 |
Harry and Voldemort prepare for their final showdown in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 |
Director: David Yates
Cast: Daniel Radcliffe (Harry Potter), Rupert Grint (Ron
Weasley), Emma Watson (Hermione Grainger), Helena Bonham Carter (Bellatrix
Lestrange), Jim Broadbent (Professor Slughorn), Robbie Coltrane (Hagrid), Ralph
Fiennes (Lord Voldemort), Michael Gambon (Albus Dumbledore), John Hurt
(Ollivander), Jason Isaacs (Lucius Malfoy), Gary Oldman (Sirius Black), Alan
Rickman (Severus Snape), Maggie Smith (Professor McGonagall), David Thewlis (Remus
Lupin), Emma Thompson (Professor Trelawney), Julie Walters (Molly Weasley),
Mark Williams (Arthur Weasley), David Bradley (Argus Filch), Ciarán Hinds
(Aberforth Dumbledore), George Harris (Kingsley Shacklebolt), Gemma Jones
(Madam Pomfrey), Kelly MacDonald (Rowena Ravenclaw), Helen McCrory (Narcissa
Malfoy), Miriam Margolyes (Professor Sprout), Geraldine Somerville (Lily
Potter), Adrian Rawlins (James Potter), Warwick Davis (Griphook/Professor
Flitwick), Matthew Lewis (Neville Longbottom), Evanna Lynch (Luna Lovegood),
Bonnie Wright (Ginny Weasley), James Phelps (Fred Weasley), Oliver Phelps
(George Weasley), Domhnall Gleeson (Bill Weasley), Clémence Poésy (Fleur
Delacour), Guy Henry (Pius Thicknesse), Nick Moran (Scabior), Natalie Tena
(Tonks)
And so here we are. After 19 hours and 40 minutes, the Harry Potter franchise draws to a close
in the rubble of Hogwarts. The franchise goes out swinging for some big hits –
and it misses some of them – but at least it’s trying. If this turns out to be
one of the least satisfying films in the franchise (at best the 6th
best Harry Potter film), it’s not because they haven’t thrown anything at it.
The film adapts just under the last half of JK Rowling’s final
novel. In an interesting structural twist, it actually ends up covering just
over one day of time: between our heroes breaking into Gringotts Bank and the
final confrontation between Harry and Voldemort, less than 24 hours has taken
place. Nothing is really made of this in the film, but it’s an interesting
thought. In fact Yates’ film is full of interesting half-thoughts that never go
anywhere. More than any other film in the series, this is one where it is essential you’ve read the book before
viewing it. Without the book you don’t get any of the rich context for most of
the events.
This all culminates, for me, in the way the film falls apart
in the last 20 minutes or so. This final section of the film changes, or cuts,
so much of the book’s thematic depth, so many of its plot strands and
explanations, that every time I see it I feel my disappointment starting to
rise. I don’t want to be the guy who says “just shoot the book” – but if any film
could have stuck with the book it’s this one. Why did they cut and change so
much of this stuff? Did they really think, after almost 11 years and 20 hours
of screen time, we wouldn’t have the patience for some of the more complex things
from the book? Did they really feel that they had to stamp their own distinctive
vision on it? Anyway, here are the things that always annoy me about this film:
1. Dumbledore's backstory gets forgotten
Okay this is a minor one – and
the film does leave some hints in. But for GOODNESS’ SAKE, they cut this book
into two films, spent ages in the first film talking about the mysteries of Dumbledore’s
dark past, then just as we meet Dumbledore’s brother Aberforth (a neat turn
from Ciarán Hinds) and are about to get an explanation, Harry basically says
words to the effect of “I’m not worrying about that. And neither should you
folks. On with the film”. Even the Ghost of Dumbledore doesn’t get to explain any of this stuff. All the careful mood build of Part 1 is just thrown away. The book is about learning about death, the futility of the search for power, and humility. Dumbledore’s backstory of failed ambition is a massive part of this – and it gets dropped. It’s not like we didn’t have time in a series that has churned out films pushing up to three hours in length. I mean why put all that stuff in the first film, if you aren’t even going to reference it at all in the second film?
2. The Deathly Hallows get benched
Again wouldn’t be quite so bad if we hadn’t
spent a huge amount of time in the first film talking about them – but are the
words Deathly Hallows even mentioned here? Instead, just like Voldemort, the
film is seduced by the elder wand, focusing everything on the ownership of this
MacGuffin. The point of the book is that all this stuff is a chimera –and that
the real point is learning that death should not be feared but accepted at the
proper time.
As it is, this never gets built on – and
the importance of the resurrection stone (including why it tempted Dumbledore
so much) never gets explained. Rather it just comes down to who controls the
powerful thing, with none of Rowling’s richer themes.
Harry ends up controlling all three here
but we never really get the sense of Harry controlling them all, or understand his
decision to throw away the stone, or his realisation that death is not to be
feared but accepted.
Gotta feel sorry for Matthew Lewis (who is
very good here). Reading the book he must have been thrilled: “So I pull the
sword out of the sorting hat and then in one move cut the head off the snake
like a total bad ass”. This should have been a great moment (it’s an iconic one
from the book). Instead Neville gets blasted and, presumably to give them
something to do, Ron and Hermione spend ages trying to kill the snake (intercut
with Harry and Voldemort fighting) until finally Neville gets to lop that head
off – by which point the moment has well and truly passed.
4. No one mentions Voldemort keeps making the same mistakes
In the book, Harry has a beautiful moment
where he basically tells our Tom that he’s made the same mistakes over and over
again. Namely that, by killing Harry, who sacrificed himself for love, he made exactly
the same mistake as he did with Harry’s mother and now cannot harm any of those
Harry died for (i.e. the rest of the cast). It’s a great moment, where finally
Harry understands what the novels have been building towards. Doesn’t merit a
mention.
Neither does Voldemort’s childish obsession
with famous things – he is consumed with belief in the power of a wand, he
can’t let go of associating his horcruxes with famous things and the lineage of
iconic wizards, etc. etc. Voldemort is basically a big, silly, empathy-free, sulky teenager – the
film misses this point entirely.
Instead of explanations and depth, the film
reduces Harry and Voldemort’s final clashes into dull punchy-bashy stuff. The
director clearly fell in love with the visual idea of Harry and Voldemort’s
heads merging together while apparating. This is a visual image that I hate
because it (a) feels like showing off and (b) would only work if they were
semi-reflections of each other – which they certainly aren’t. They are polar
opposites. It’s a flashy effect that actually makes no thematic sense
what-so-bloody-ever.
Perhaps not a surprise in a film, but
Voldemort gets killed and disintegrates into a huge puff of 3D-film smoke. I
hate this. I hate it. I really, really, really hate it. I’ll tell you why:
- The spells used in the duel are really unclear – it’s a great moment in the book that Voldemort’s killing curse rebounds against Harry’s disarming curse – instead we get the bright lights.
- Voldemort dreads death more than anything – and Rowling’s writing of his body falling dead to the ground like any other normal dead guy taps exactly into what Voldemort spent his whole life struggling against. It’s a beautiful irony.
- No one knew if Voldemort was dead or not the first time because he disappeared. In the book he is killed, by his own curse, in front of everyone and his body is left behind for everyone to look at and say “yup. Guy is dead”. Not here. Here he blows up in a puff of smoke in front of no witnesses. Did Harry just head back into the great hall and say “Okay guys. Take my word for it. He’s dead. He just is. Trust me on this. It’s not like last time. Totally dead. Promise.”
Wow. Okay that’s not really a review is it? That’s just like
a disappointed fan whining “I don’t like it because it is different”. But my point isn’t that this is bad because it’s
different. It’s bad because it takes stuff from the original and changes it AND
NOT FOR THE BETTER. Moments that worked beautifully, or carried so much weight
in the original are bastardised crudely for no clear reason.
As I say, after almost 18 hours and a life time (for many
viewers) of growing up with these characters: surely we could have given the
film a bit more time and allowed some actual intelligent context from the books
to creep in? Surely we had the patience for Harry getting to point out to
Voldemort how wrong he is? Everyone in the audience was ready for that right?
If there was one film people were probably willing to dedicate three hours of
their life too, in order to see it done properly it was this one, right? Rather
than rushed by in a little over two?
But no this film goes always, always, always for the big spectacle.
Not that this always work: Yates doesn’t shoot the battle hugely well. Aside
from one excellent sequence which shows our three heroes trying to get across
the castle courtyard, while chaos rages around them (beautifully scored as
well), the battle is unclear, dingy and not hugely exciting. Again, I’d have
liked to have had a bit more of this – to get some moments with this huge cast
doing stuff in the battle (especially since they are ALL back – kudos to the
producers there).
It’s a real, real shame because honestly parts of this movie
are really, really, really good. Tom Felton is cracking again as Draco – and
the film gives real development time to showing the impact all this has on the
Malfoy family with genuine empathy. The break-in at Gringotts is exciting and
fun – as well as giving Warwick Davies his best moment in the series as
two-faced Griphook. Inventions and flourishes, such as Harry having visions of
an enraged Voldemort slaughtering the staff of Gringotts in fury, are chilling.
Some moments of the book are carried across really well, in
particular Snape’s escape – a powerfully filmed sequence of bravery from the
pupils, and some great work from Maggie Smith. Yates really understands how to
get moments of magic to work: the creation of the shield around Hogwarts is
totally spine-tingling. When the film sits and breathes it generally gets it
right. Fiennes is terrific still as Voldemort, serpentine, arrogant,
unsettling. He gets some lovely moments here – from fury, to pained fear (as
horcruxes bite the dust) to an almost-funny-awkward-mateyness as he tries to
seduce Hogwarts pupils to his side (his awkward hug of Draco is terrific).
The three leads are of course great. Daniel Radcliffe could
certainly have delivered the more complex moments of the book if he had been
given the chance. He even does his best to sell the slightly awkward coda “19
years later”: a controversial sequence, it makes a great footnote in the book
but it was always going to be a tough ask to make three teenagers look like 40
year olds convincingly, particularly when we are nearly as familiar with their
faces as our own.
There are some troubling and failed moments in this film,
stuff that doesn’t work. But then there is this:
Oh wow. For all that the film changes stuff from the books
for the worst – this is a moment it unquestionably does better. And a massive,
massive part of this has to be down to Alan Rickman. Rickman was told this
backstory from the start of the films – and he delivers it with a passionate
commitment here. Helped by brilliant score, and fascinating re-editing of
moments from previous films seen from new angles, Rickman delivers the reveal
of Snape’s heartbreaking moments perfectly.
Was I tired? Was it the added impact of Rickman’s own depth?
I don’t know but I shed tears watching this again. It’s just a beautiful,
beautiful, beautiful piece of film making. Everything in it works perfectly:
directing, writing, music, editing, filming and above all the acting. It’s just
sublime. For all the film misses the point elsewhere it finally totally gets it
here. I would take this moment over dozens of moments of Harry and Voldemort
fighting each other.
And yes this Harry Potter film might miss the point, and it
might bungle the ending, and it might well fail to carry across the richness
and intricate plot explanations of Rowling’s original. Yes it gets bogged down
in “who controls this wand” and yes it misses the point completely about the
film being about learning to overcome a fear of death and defeat (something
Voldemort totally fails to do) but then it has moments where it works
wonderfully like this.
But in these films we got a beautiful franchise, with some
excellent films. It’s always going to reward constant viewing. And it will
always move the viewer. And it’s always going to be great.
Always.
No comments:
Post a comment