Started By
Message

re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2: Film Review

Posted on 7/7/11 at 8:32 am to
Posted by Baloo
Formerly MDGeaux
Member since Sep 2003
49645 posts
Posted on 7/7/11 at 8:32 am to
Actually, my biggest gripe with the movies have always been that they are too respectful of the source material, particulaerly the first two films. It felt like it was just rushing to get to specific plot points. I do think they conciously failed to develop some characters, focusing primarily on Harry. This means some second tier characters have been abslutely gutted in the film, and come their "big moment", we don't really care that much about them - Tonks, the Weasley twins, even Neville to some extent.

I do think the films LOOK very good, and the films are much better at the action sequences, which Rowling sort of sucks at writing about. So I liked adding the attack on the burrows. It something the films do well that the books don't.
Posted by OMLandshark
Member since Apr 2009
110063 posts
Posted on 7/7/11 at 8:53 am to
quote:

Actually, my biggest gripe with the movies have always been that they are too respectful of the source material, particulaerly the first two films.


Yeah the first two films are far too literal and uninspired.

quote:

It felt like it was just rushing to get to specific plot points. I do think they conciously failed to develop some characters, focusing primarily on Harry. This means some second tier characters have been abslutely gutted in the film, and come their "big moment", we don't really care that much about them


I'd say the biggest perputrator of this in the series was Goblet of Fire, which is why I rank it below Columbus' Film. It cared solely about the plot and rushing between the tasks that it took away pretty much all the spirit and tone of the novel it was based on, hell even the genre (mystery) it is based on. In the book there are like 7 suspects on who put Harry's name in the Goblet of Fire, and you (unless you are a genius), but the film tells you in the very first scene, and it makes it far too obvious that Moody is obsessed with him, so there is no mystery whatsoever. Its easy as hell to figure out.

quote:

I do think the films LOOK very good, and the films are much better at the action sequences, which Rowling sort of sucks at writing about. So I liked adding the attack on the burrows.


Aside from plotholes, what did it add? Anything? They don't talk about it again, there is really no sadness to it, and the scene is entirely pointless. Plus why wouldn't Voldemort himself show up and finish Harry off? Its as if the Death Eaters got shitfaced on Christmas and decided just to play a prank on them.

HBP shouldn't have had much action in it. They should have focused more on the characters' motivations from Slytherin, and while they did good on Draco and Slughorn, they utterly failed to develop Voldemort and Snape. This isn't a film that stayed too close to the plot to the book, it was just a terrible adaptation which turned the D-Plot in the novel to the A-plot of the film.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram