Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows (part 1)
Go, go, long titles!
Let's see... "darker" than previous movies, sure. Times are tough and the good guys are on the defensive from the get-go. There's some tragedy along the way, but the moment that packed the most emotional punch for me was actually very, very early in the movie.
Having not read the books probably gives me a relatively rare perspective. From where I sit, a lot fo the movie is spent running around accomplishing relatively little. Now, it does set up atmosphere, and describe what's happening in the world, but the primary conflict of Harry and Co. versus His Baddiness really doesn't advance all that much. I think if this didn't come from a novel with such effort made to preserve details, it probably could have been condensed into one movie with tighter pacing and focus. And it certainly wouldn't end without any real resolution. Still, I understand why it is the way it is, and it doesn't feel bad for it. 'tis still a fairly good installment, but you wouldn't want to weigh it in the absence of the rest of the series.
Also, I have to say, while the story of the Deathly Hallows (the in-setting legend, not the movie itself) is interesting, I'm really unclear on why it's given such weight. I can see some reasons why the one item being sought is important, but what I don't understand is why it's connected to the other two items at all. The tale is told in such a way as to indicate there has to be more to it, but... it definitely seems unclear to me at this stage. *shrugs*
Let's see... "darker" than previous movies, sure. Times are tough and the good guys are on the defensive from the get-go. There's some tragedy along the way, but the moment that packed the most emotional punch for me was actually very, very early in the movie.
Having not read the books probably gives me a relatively rare perspective. From where I sit, a lot fo the movie is spent running around accomplishing relatively little. Now, it does set up atmosphere, and describe what's happening in the world, but the primary conflict of Harry and Co. versus His Baddiness really doesn't advance all that much. I think if this didn't come from a novel with such effort made to preserve details, it probably could have been condensed into one movie with tighter pacing and focus. And it certainly wouldn't end without any real resolution. Still, I understand why it is the way it is, and it doesn't feel bad for it. 'tis still a fairly good installment, but you wouldn't want to weigh it in the absence of the rest of the series.
Also, I have to say, while the story of the Deathly Hallows (the in-setting legend, not the movie itself) is interesting, I'm really unclear on why it's given such weight. I can see some reasons why the one item being sought is important, but what I don't understand is why it's connected to the other two items at all. The tale is told in such a way as to indicate there has to be more to it, but... it definitely seems unclear to me at this stage. *shrugs*
Connection between objects. Wait, what? The horcruxes?
ReplyDeleteNo. Well, not specifically? The story of the Deathly Hallows is about three brothers dealing with Death, who gives them each an item. So those items (the elder wand, resurrection stone, and invisibility cloak) all have (according to the legend) a shared origin. Yet after several hints via a symbol that shows up in several places through this movie leading them to the story, there doesn't seem to be any actual importance to them being connected.
ReplyDeleteMr. Lovegood does say that one who has all 3 Hallows would be the 'master of death'. It's kind of glossed over but it would be a nice thing to have on hand if you need to face down Voldemort. I felt that the explanation of the Hallows could have been much better explained without too much more screentime. For example, Lovegood never says in the movie that he's a "Hallows Seeker", one who looks for the objects in question and believes them to be more than just a fairy tale. The symbol of the triangle, circle and line identifies one as belonging to this unofficial "club". This has some implications because Dumbledore obviously wanted the trio to look into the Hallows. Why else would he have given Hermoine the childrens book containing the story (she would have never known about the tale otherwise), and specifically he marked the sign of the Hallows on the book as well. Anyway, I enjoyed the movie quite a bit but I agree they really only teased the Hallows.
ReplyDeleteHandy, I suppose, but Voldemort doesn't actually appear to care himself. He seems to be after the wand (and only the wand) for other reasons. If Dumbledore really wanted our heroes to have them all, why not just bequeath the wand to Harry? Too obvious? Well, not doing so certainly didn't work out. ;) Then we have the resurrection stone that I don't even recall mention of before now. And the invisibility cloak that... umm... I don't know. Was it in Harry's bag, or did he lose it earlier in the series somewhere? I don't remember it being used in quite a while. I don't know. Perhaps more will become clear, but so far it feels like flavorful backstory that has very little actual bearing on the main plot.
ReplyDeleteI agree on all counts and I suppose in that respect the first installment of the movie is true to the books. I wonder if the 2nd installment will be able to pull off all of the 'Ahh so THAT'S why this happened!' moments the book has.
ReplyDelete