Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part 2: Review By Julian Roman

J.K. Rowling's boy wizard gets a spectacular, yet not entirely satisfying finale in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part 2. The conclusion to this magnus opus was brilliantly conceived in the nine hundred page novel, where subtlety and substance could slowly boil to a triumphant ending. Film adaptations are a different animal, but considering the last book was split into two films, I had hoped for a more emotionally complete ending akin to the book. Alas, Hollywood prevails. Director David Yates has done an excellent job directing the last four movies of the epic franchise. This last film comes off as a popcorn action film. The sentiment seemed forced. It's almost like trying to force tears and blow up firecrackers at the same time.

Part 2 picks up with Harry (Daniel Radcliffe), Ron (Rupert Grint), and Hermione (Emma Watson) continuing their quest for Horcruxes - objects that hold pieces of Lord Voldemort's (Ralph Fiennes) soul. Their goal is to destroy them, thus leaving the dark lord mortal and able to be killed. The film builds up to an epic battle at Hogwarts. The school had been the primary location for the previous stories, and is totally absent in the first part of the sequel. The climax is an all out war between those loyal to Harry against Voldemort's death eaters. Several characters are killed while others find love in their darkest moments. I can honestly say there were cheers in the theater during these pivotal scenes, so they did elicit an audience response.

Bigger is better is the Hollywood way and the filmmakers went all out to have a huge action climax. This is expected as the final battle between Harry and Voldemort, but it takes on a Transformers-esque gratuity that caught me by suprise. It could be that I've read the book, and while not expecting an exact adaptation, Rowling's battle isn't nearly as mythic as the one we see here. It ebbs and flows strangely. There's balls to the walls action, then scenes of total quiet that don't connect. The difference is substance. The filmmakers make no effort to explain pivotal plot points. Harry's possession of The Deathly Hallows is key to the finale, but this is never fully understood in the movie. So, if you hadn't read the book, and didn't know its consequences, then it would be confusing. My thought is that they're assuming everyone has read the book, and decided not to spend any time in the final cut quibbling with details. This seems a bit sloppy to me. I've noticed the last three Potter films were more prone to this kind of lazy storytelling, but maybe I'm being too picky.

The character work continues to be great. Christopher Columbus (original director and producer) hit a home run when he cast the primary characters. Harry, Ron, and Hermione are not children here. They are adults, fighting for their lives and a cause. These actors have grown into their adult character roles and deliver them well here. Daniel Radcliff is the anchor for all the Potter films. His ability to bear the tragic nature of his circ*mstance, and be an ass-kicking action hero is not to be underestimated. The guy is such a tremendous actor. I really believe we will see great performances from him in the future.

There's a bit of a cheese factor to the denouement. The exact resolution of the book does not transfer well to film. It's the money shot moment, the grand resolution, but it honestly looks silly. I wont go into detail, but it isn't Benjamin Button effects. I laughed, sadly, when I should have been feeling meloncholy. This is the supposed end to a fantastic series, and needed to have a bit more cinematic gravitas to hit you right in the gut. That said, very few series have a perfect ending, and this conclusion is admirable in every regard. It's just that you have such high expectations, when it doesn't reach them, you're invariably a bit disappointed. I didn't get a chance to see the IMAX screening - Thanks WB - so I can't comment on that or the 3D conversion.