It all ends indeed. Incredibly, it's been 10 years since the Philosophers Stone hit cinemas, and 11 years since I first picked up a Harry Potter book in a moment of curiosity in our school library. That book was Goblet of Fire. I was bored of revising for my AS levels and decided to have a break and see what everyone had been raving about. One chapter later I was hooked. I read all four of them in 2000 and waited with anticipation to see what the first film would be like. That week in December 2001 is etched in my memory as the week that I saw The Fellowship of The Ring and The Philosophers Stone. I was equally blown away by both. What struck me most about the Harry Potter films, although some may disagree, is how faithfully they stuck to the books. At the tender and impressionable age of 16 I was amazed that Chris Columbus had created a Gryffindor common room that was almost exactly like the one that existed in my head. 10 films later and they haven't all been instant hits - both Prisoner and Order took me a while to get used to - but after extensive re-watching I love them all equally. I suspect that Deathly Hallows Part 2 might be one that will also need a couple of viewings to really bed in. Despite the fact that David Yates and co have only had a third of a book to deal with here there is an awful lot going on and, much like the book, tying up all the loose ends proves rather complicated.
It's difficult to critique this film as its successes and failures are so closely tied to those of the book. My favourite sections remain the Gringotts heist, the Snape/Lily flashback, and the discovery of Aberforth and the resurrection of the DA. The Gringotts bit is great and starts the film off with a bang. Helena Bonham Carter once again proves what a skilled actor she is, playing Hermione in polyjuice disguise as Bellatrix. She's so despicable and terrifying in full-on Bellatrix mode, but it's incredibly easy to see past the terrifying get-up to the scared 18-year old girl within. That small section on its own would be enough to make me want to see the film again (also, is it just me or is Ron rather hot as a disguised death-eater...). It's marvellous to see Griphook (Warwick Davis) again, that wiliest of goblins, and I loved the whole section with the dragon. Who'd have thought one could feel sorry for a dragon? Nevertheless, the poor beast is exactly as described in the book and looks even more realistic than the dragons in Goblet of Fire, CG having obviously moved on since 2005!
The key reveal section towards the end of the film with Snape was very well done, and goes a long way to explaining the mystery of Harry Potter's strange life, including his relationship with Dumbledore, how he survived the attack that killed his parents, and the link that has tied his whole life to that of Voldemort. I enjoyed the flashback scenes where we get to see young Snape and Lily (kudos to the two young actors who must have found it strange being brought in to such an established franchise right at the end), though the sequence wasn't long enough for my liking, though I can appreciate that cuts had to be made. However, once that was over the end of the film seems to tail off somewhat. I think this is partly down to the adaptation of the book. The Room of Requirement bit was as exciting as it is in the book (even if they changed the exact location of the diadem - grr), and I very much enjoyed seeing the excellent Kelly MacDonald as Helena Ravenclaw but whereas the mad dash around Hogwarts somehow works in the book, in the film it didn't quite gel somehow and I occasionally lost sight of how everything fitted together and where we were going.
I anticipated that the main points of contention would be the 'Kings Cross' scene in Harry's mind, and the flashforward at the end. The Kings Cross bit actually worked surprisingly well on film; better perhaps than in the book. I remember being utterly thrown by it the first time I read the book, and even on re-readings it never quite makes sense to me, but as it had to be slightly simplified for the film, and we get a clearer visual reference, it actually fits in with the story more convincingly. As for the flashforward, perhaps the less said the better. Fans were divided on this scene in the book and although I was fine with it in my head, on screen the various 18-21 year olds are not very convincingly 'aged up' and it all seems a little clunky. I was looking forward to seeing the final scene, and I am glad they kept it in, but I do wonder if there's an argument for using older actors rather than trying to convince us that a fresh-faced 18 year-old in her mum's clothes (hello Bonnie Wright) is a middle-aged mother of three.
As with many of the films I suspect that my expectations of this one were just rather too high, and I need to rewatch it to enjoy the film on its own terms. I also plan to read the book again as my cinema-buddy and I left the screen fruitlessly trying to remember which bits had been edited and what had been changed. What is obvious is that, consistent with the franchise as a whole, the film is made for fans of the book, and Yates has kept the film as faithful as possible to both the source material and the previous films. And, of course, if not all of the scenes fit with the pictures in your head, then you can return to the books, which I suspect will outlive their silver-screen adaptations anyway.
Comments