Movie Review: “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 1″

Posted by staticblog

on November 19, 2010M at 9:04 am

Rating: 90
Imagine how unlikely it is that the seventh film in any series could be the best — most franchises plotz on the third outing. But as any longtime Harry Potter fan knows, the movies based on J.K. Rowling’s wizarding series were just getting going on round three, and “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 1” is the knockout.

In a wrenching set of opening sequences, director David Yates sets the tone for the world Harry, Hermione Granger and Ron Weasley inherit in “Deathly Hallows.” It is a foreboding place where Minister of Magic Rufus Scrimgeour (Bill Nighy) warns that the forces of good have faced “no greater threat” than the incursion of Lord Voldemort (Ralph Fiennes) and the Death Eaters. This is an environment where even the Dursleys, those most unsympathetic of all Muggles, can tug at emotions, and Hermione must make a tragic choice that leaves her, for all practical purposes, an orphan.

The plot structure for “Deathly Hallows” involves the search for six “horcruxes,” the talismans that hold parts of Voldemort’s soul. Just carrying one can elevate the holder’s anxiety to dangerous levels, a key source of mounting irritation for Ron (Rupert Grint), who is forced to confront the inevitable feelings of inferiority one must feel when Harry Potter (Daniel Radcliffe) is the omnipresent hero. Hermione (Emma Watson) is stuck in the middle of all this, a source of strength for the trio but also the focal point for irrational tension as the three collect the horcruxes in preparation for the inevitable war with Voldemort.

This gives Watson an opportunity to display nine years’ worth of accumulated acting skill. The nonstop production of “Harry Potter” films has had a hothouse effect on all three of the principal actors’ emotive abilities, but Watson is the clear breakout. It’s all in her subtle responses to the ramped up conflict around them. Watson always played Hermione as written, with all the precocity required, but the sighing and eye-rolling of the first two films is long gone, replaced with genuine nuance. The “Harry Potter” series, strong as it has been thus far, will probably not be the high point of this 20-year-old’s career.

But Watson does not exactly leave Radcliffe and Grint in the dust. Both prove immensely capable of the emotional heavy lifting required in “Deathly Hallows, Part 1” and are surrounded by some of the finest talent in British cinema. Nighy, Fiennes, Helena Bonham Carter (as the demonic Bellatrix Lestrange), Rhys Ifans and David Thewlis all distinguish themselves.

Still, the star of “Deathly Hallows, Part 1” is director Yates, who does far more than establish tension: He allows these characters to breathe. Unlike the earlier films, “Deathly Hallows” is mostly shot on location in the English countryside, creating the illusion that this magical realm truly exists in tandem with the real world. Yates’ sense of dynamics serves him well. Magic is not on constant display in “Deathly Hallows, Part 1,” so the results often look like a pastoral British independent film, but then when magic is required, it comes on with startling fury.

As for how the final book in Rowling’s series has been split, that is one bit of magic that should not be revealed. What keeps “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 1” from being a perfect film is the serialized story curse, which means that no one who has ignored the previous films or novels should bother parachuting into “Deathly Hallows” without the basic understanding needed to enjoy it. So, it does not stand alone. But as the beginning of the end for one of the most beloved stories in young fiction, “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 1” is a piece of beautiful cinematic sorcery.

— Lang

Categorized under:

Movies