Harry Potter ja kuoleman varjelukset, osa 1

I saw the first four Harry Potter films and stopped there, as I’m not a fan of the series. I went to see Deathly Hollows: Part I only because of its attractive billboards. And I was bored to death. The beginning of the series introduced us to the characters and the story’s lovely environment and, in the case of Alfonso Cuarón’s contribution to the series, brought us a unique, wonderfully dark film adventure that showed a lot of inventiveness on the director’s part. The films had their own stories and always took the audience somewhere. In comparison to them, Deathly Hollows: Part I is only a protracted masturbatory porridge, slavishly and without any creative input following the original book, the qualities of which I don’t know, but if they’re anything like this film, I’ll gladly pass. (18.11.2010)

The worst Potter after The Goblet of Fire. What did actually happen during those two hours? Absolutely nothing. Thumbs up for the short animated sequence, the rest I would edit it into the second part as a 15 minute introduction and I would burn what’s left. Boring. (29.04.2011)

I don't know if this is a fantasy tribute to Satantango, but the fact is that, if all the shots were thrown out where the characters were mindlessly stumbling or looking soulfully into nothingness, there would be about 30 minutes of film left and I would have a hard time defending its purpose. The entire Harry Potter series has since become an unbearably stretched and non-inventive spectacle on the silver screen, which includes purposeful piling of meaningless branches and the creation of soap opera odor. Yet even in terms of character rendering, it is poor and dead tired, without sparkle and anything that would keep a person’s attention who does not look at it as an overpriced illustration of a book. Utterly useless, boring, and I dare say even a stupid half-part. (11.07.2011)

The seventh book is unnecessarily, although readably, drawn-out in the first half; and the second half has a fateful finale as we like them best. It’s movie adaptation has only got half way so far (somewhere around page four hundred of about six hundred), but it’s already better than the book at least in that Yates succeeded in approaching it in a way that doesn’t come across like unnecessarily watered down porridge. And if so, certainly less than the book is. Thanks to the convincing (!) emotions, the finally acting well central trio, the great atmosphere and Desplat, it works wonderfully. It’s true that there are a few scenes that stand out in quality above the others, but even so, the movie works primarily and mainly as a whole. But still, it is evident that where the creators dared to let their fantasy loose and not to stick word for word to the book, the movie is clearly at its best. Now all I can wish for is for Yates to manage to deal with the special effects-full, epic second part, while not forgetting those emotions and characters. If he manages that, we’ll have something to look forward to. But if he doesn’t, we will really have something to “look forward to". (19.11.2010)

The world of magic has entered truly the darkest times, but despite what random critical outbursts might suggest, it has absolutely nothing to do with the quality of the film adaptation. Yates and Kloves had a challenging task of transforming the "slower and more talkative" part of the Relics into a separate explosive blockbuster. The director stood out with incredible bravura, and whether the Trio is leaving home, the Tale of the Three Brothers is being told, or the horcrux is being destroyed, the magical atmosphere literally shines from the screen. However, Kloves' screenplay occasionally takes shortcuts, and if I didn't have the source material loaded backwards and forwards, I would be quite lost. But even though Bill and Fleur become members of the Order from minute to minute, when they were omitted in the Prince, and Minister Scrimgeour steps onto the scene only to quickly descend from it, the criticisms are hard to find in the consequences. The overall impression for me screams that from four hundred pages full of expectations of great things and the fulfillment of smaller ongoing goals, an epic fantasy full of intoxicating moments and such sincere private drama has been created that it takes one's breath away. The Phoenix and the Prince have gained a successful companion, and if David Yates was the king after the previous installment, he has slowly run out of room to climb. (27.11.2010)

I feel like this doesn't have much to do with good old Harry Potter anymore. It's all a bit too dark and the Hogwarts atmosphere is sorely lacking. I still respect Harry as a fan though. I'm just of the opinion that a "new" viewer won't be impressed by this installment (at least the first part). At times I feel like I'm watching a Canadian thriller. I give it 4 stars, but on a completely different scale than the previous installments. But I'm looking forward to Part 2 anyway. (13.05.2011)

The weakest Harry Potter instalment split into two parts? Oh dear, we're raking in the dough, we're raking in the dough. And unfortunately it phoned it in – the first part is boring. A fairy tale with thriller elements and coincidentally uncovered graves. It's sad, but as a fan, I'm disappointed. The music, the actors, the effects – nothing new, lackluster and drawn out. A brick on you. The second part might finally make you cry; so far it's been nothing but smirking. I had fun making fun of it. Otherwise, I was yawning. Sorry, Harry, you were acting like Frodo, and I won't forgive you for that. A weaker 3 stars. (03.12.2010)

I am not going to complain about this movie, but I have to point out that I am so exhausted from the whole series that I would gladly accept Voldemort's victory. I have previously mentioned that, from my point of view, the movie series should have had only four parts, as this fully demonstrates a lot of filler from the books. Additionally, since the producers decided to divide the last book into two movie parts for higher profits, this flaw is even more evident in this case. Logically, the film does not escalate as it should and thus lags from a dramatic perspective. On the other hand, it once again scores points with the big budget and the care of the film studio, so Harry Potter fans will not be disappointed. Overall impression: 50%. (06.04.2011)

Now I’ve reached the age where I have read all of the Potter books, but it’s so long ago now, that I can’t remember anything more than the main plot and how they ended. Yates understands (but the studio doesn’t yet) that most of the fans have aged considerably (personally I first got to know Harry and his friends in the ninth grade and a whole lot of water has flown under the bridge since then) and, starting with part five, has begun slowly but surely to shift from slightly rugged fairytale into a dark fantasy which suits us, over-aged kids, better now. Part seven also has the advantage that it radically differs from its younger brothers in its most fundamental aspect. We are no longer shut in at Hogwarts, but we are beginning to move around, far and wide around the entire, well... British Isles. The visuals in the first half of Deathly Hollows are entrancing (the sea) and yes, I also mean the ingeniously handled insert about the three brothers. Desplat’s music is probably the best possible substitute for Williams’ awesome soundtracks. The cast give their very best performances (after all these years, they have their characters nailed) and because the story has been divided into two, they have a lot of room to strut their stuff. They are clearly saving Snape for the finale and Voldemort is at last truly demonic. It was interesting that although it was a little slow-moving, I wasn’t bored for a minute. In fact this made me want to see the last half and maybe read the books again. Sometime. So, our last meeting is in six month’s time, Mr. Potter. (28.11.2010)

Watching teenagers run around in the woods for 140 minutes is borderline torture. David Yates rips off Nolan's Batman themes at every turn, but doesn't understand that that alone doesn’t make a good movie. Because when the actors don't have anything to work with, and there is not a single memorable scene that will make it worthwhile, the result is more than trivial. An unfinished, poorly made film with no drama, where they drown in lavish camera panoramas and robust music, forgetting everything else that made the Harry Potter franchise a success. (22.07.2023)

The first half of the great Potter finale is unexpectedly quiet and conversational, but it certainly doesn't hurt, because it is without exception superbly acted. The establishing part, which makes you realize how far not only the characters, but also their representatives have come since 2001, is probably the best of all. The tension is almost palpable for the whole 140 minutes, the gloomy atmosphere as well, but the screenwriter and director still know when they can afford something to lighten things up and the viewer doesn't get bored. The action start was top notch, while the ending with Bellatrix and Dobby is one of the most impressive moments of the whole series. And Alexandre Desplat got to compose the music, which was a safe bet. (11.09.2015)

The best acted film in the series, which does not change the fact that the screenplay is not very good and that the plot is much slower and longer than in the book. In contrast to the beautiful scenes (the introduction, the story of the three brothers, the ministry, the destruction of the Horcruxes...), there are really a lot of shots that are downright distracting and look like they are from another film (the dancing in the tent and everything during which half of the theatre burst out laughing). Because of this, it also failed to transfer to the screen the suffocating atmosphere of permanent tension, fear, and anxiety that should haunt the protagonists at every turn. The first part of the Hallows is not able to function independently and only evokes in the viewer a feeling of calm before the storm, which at least gives me hope that the second part will really get going and be breathtaking. (20.11.2010)

"After 'Prisoner of Azkaban,' it is probably my favorite installment, which, in my opinion, was killed by the second one, where a lot happens, but I'm not sure if it benefits the story. However, that is mainly because I have a general problem with the seventh book. Everything is just wrapped up as expected. But this first movie has the tension of how everything unravels and how it all ends." (17.02.2014)

The first half of the "seventh" probably pissed me off the least of all the instalments I've seen so far, because it sticks to its source material really faithfully (I understand that some trimming of the plot is necessary so that a viewer unfamiliar with the book doesn't get bored – but in this case it didn't much bother even me, a multiple reader of all volumes). Moreover – as we have become accustomed to, the script itself is nothing particularly great, the main assets are traditionally the directing, music, and the increasingly mature, believable, and extremely likable actors (the central trio from Twilight is really ridiculous compared to the Harry Potter trio.:)) A couple of very strong moments, which to my delight were filmed almost exactly as I had already imagined them in the source material, enhanced the perfect experience and increased my anticipation for the second part. 4.5 stars – seen in the IMAX cinema at Flora – 18 Nov 2010, 7:00 p.m. (22.11.2010)