Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2

[lovesitx]

[spoiler]• I never liked Snape, nor did I understand why so many fans love his character so dearly. And because of this the revelation in the book that he is a good guy after all always felt peculiar to me. Yet the Prince's tale, in which we see him as a young child falling in love with Lily, being tormented by James and eventually cradling Lily's death body in his arms, was the most beautiful and heartbreaking part of the movie. I cried buckets. It's hard to describe really how phenomenal this part is, you have to see it for yourself. But it was certainly Snape's shining moment and Alan Rickman was absolutely superb.[/spoiler]

THIS!!! He was a total b*****d to Harry (and a lot of the other kids) for pretty much all of the time he was at Hogwarts for no particular reason. I'm sorry but to me the whole your-daddy-was-mean-to-me-when-we-were-kids excuse just does not cut it. Even at the end he had no feelings for Harry it was all about Lily, so god knows why Harry felt the need to [spoiler]name one of his kids after the man.[/spoiler] Regardless of what The Prince's Tale revealed to me Snape was just not a nice person, he wasn't even someone like Volemort or Bellatrix who I could love to hate, there was just nothing about him that I find appealing.

However I could not stop the tears coming during that scene on screen. Rickman definitely nailed it.

[TheyCallMeMrGlass]

[spoiler]• I was so disappointed we did not get to see Fred, Remus or Tonks die. I know it's likewise in the books but there are often many changes in film adaptations and this truly was one that the story could benefit from. The moment felt even more fleeting than in the book, with a blink and you miss it scene where everyone weeps over their death bodies. They're truly great characters - important to the stories and Harry - and they deserved so much better than that.[/spoiler]

Oh yes, I forgot to mention that in my original review.

[spoiler]I don't think Fred was given the death scene he deserved. Harry actually witnesses Fred's death in the book unlike Lupin and Tonks so I think they should have found a way to include it in the film. All you see is Ron crying over a dead body and people unfamiliar with the books may not have realised that was Fred (could have been George). The way Fred's death was handled in the film was a disservice to the character, IMO.

And where was Grawp during the battle?[/spoiler]

[spoiler]Perhaps Fred's death was filmed but cut out to maintain a fluid narrative and that wouold be understandable. However, I dont think they even filmed it. The heartbreaks of the family and friend of losing loved ones was the main focus of the battle scenes in a collective scale to show us that in war, the individual victims, no matter how much we care for them, are just a drop of blood against the backdrop of war. Its how war is. Comrades bond with each other and the next thing survivors see is their dead comrades bodies but they have to move on to fight the greater war. And that is exactly what Rowling wanted us to feel, that sudden harsh reality of loss, no dying words, no send offs, just a painful realisation of seeing your loved ones or friends lying dead without even knowing how the hell they died. And the movie version pretty much stayed faithdul to that IMHO.[/spoiler]

[weirdfilms33]

[spoiler]• I was so disappointed we did not get to see Fred, Remus or Tonks die. I know it's likewise in the books but there are often many changes in film adaptations and this truly was one that the story could benefit from. The moment felt even more fleeting than in the book, with a blink and you miss it scene where everyone weeps over their death bodies. They're truly great characters - important to the stories and Harry - and they deserved so much better than that.[/spoiler]

Oh yes, I forgot to mention that in my original review.

[spoiler]I don't think Fred was given the death scene he deserved. Harry actually witnesses Fred's death in the book unlike Lupin and Tonks so I think they should have found a way to include it in the film. All you see is Ron crying over a dead body and people unfamiliar with the books may not have realised that was Fred (could have been George). The way Fred's death was handled in the film was a disservice to the character, IMO.

And where was Grawp during the battle?[/spoiler]

[spoiler]Perhaps Fred's death was filmed but cut out to maintain a fluid narrative and that wouold be understandable. However, I dont think they even filmed it. The heartbreaks of the family and friend of losing loved ones was the main focus of the battle scenes in a collective scale to show us that in war, the individual victims, no matter how much we care for them, are just a drop of blood against the backdrop of war. Its how war is. Comrades bond with each other and the next thing survivors see is their dead comrades bodies but they have to move on to fight the greater war. And that is exactly what Rowling wanted us to feel, that sudden harsh reality of loss, no dying words, no send offs, just a painful realisation of seeing your loved ones or friends lying dead without even knowing how the hell they died. And the movie version pretty much stayed faithdul to that IMHO.[/spoiler]

Glassy, I applaud you.

[hopeprince]

[spoiler]• I was so disappointed we did not get to see Fred, Remus or Tonks die. I know it's likewise in the books but there are often many changes in film adaptations and this truly was one that the story could benefit from. The moment felt even more fleeting than in the book, with a blink and you miss it scene where everyone weeps over their death bodies. They're truly great characters - important to the stories and Harry - and they deserved so much better than that.[/spoiler]

Oh yes, I forgot to mention that in my original review.

[spoiler]I don't think Fred was given the death scene he deserved. Harry actually witnesses Fred's death in the book unlike Lupin and Tonks so I think they should have found a way to include it in the film. All you see is Ron crying over a dead body and people unfamiliar with the books may not have realised that was Fred (could have been George). The way Fred's death was handled in the film was a disservice to the character, IMO.

And where was Grawp during the battle?[/spoiler]

[spoiler]It was disappointing that a lot of things were missing.
Like Hermione, Luna and Ginny fighting Bellatrix.. I would have loved to see that.[/spoiler]


Dont know if it is a spoiler but dont want to take chances.

[stuartboy]

This being the first Potterfilm I've seen (believe it or not!) for reasons previously given - I purposely avoided the Deathly Hallows Part 1 freeview last year too - but I enjoyed trying to identify some of the minor characters from what I'd imagined them to be in the books. Sometimes not so easy when you are seeing a famous actor in costume rather than seeing the actual character, and less easy when so few of them seemed to have more than a cameo role.

[weliveandbreathewords]

[spoiler]THIS!!! He was a total b*****d to Harry (and a lot of the other kids) for pretty much all of the time he was at Hogwarts for no particular reason. I'm sorry but to me the whole your-daddy-was-mean-to-me-when-we-were-kids excuse just does not cut it. Even at the end he had no feelings for Harry it was all about Lily, so god knows why Harry felt the need to name a kid after the guy[/spoiler]

[spoiler]I believe that in the books he deliberately asks in that demeanor so that everything goes to plan, Harry was meant to hate snape and not trust his and to be suspicious of him the whole time for certain things in the book to happen. I dont think he really wanted to hate him, it was probably more the fact that every time he looked at harry, he saw his dead beloved.[/spoiler]

[TheyCallMeMrGlass]

[spoiler]THIS!!! He was a total b*****d to Harry (and a lot of the other kids) for pretty much all of the time he was at Hogwarts for no particular reason. I'm sorry but to me the whole your-daddy-was-mean-to-me-when-we-were-kids excuse just does not cut it. Even at the end he had no feelings for Harry it was all about Lily, so god knows why Harry felt the need to name a kid after the guy[/spoiler]

[spoiler]I believe that in the books he deliberately asks in that demeanor so that everything goes to plan, Harry was meant to hate snape and not trust his and to be suspicious of him the whole time for certain things in the book to happen. I dont think he really wanted to hate him, it was probably more the fact that every time he looked at harry, he saw his dead beloved.[/spoiler]

[spoiler]Well actually, my interpretation was that he really did hate (or more like grudge) Harry because he looked very much like his father and Snape allowed his hatred for his father (which was somewhat justified to a certain extent) to take a negative perception of Harry, seeing only the bad elements that reminded him of James. This is worsened by the fact that the only remnant of the love of his life is in Harry's eyes, which is embedded in the resemblance of the person he hated most. He didnt have to be nasty to Harry to carry out his mission, his treatment towards him was purely from the anger in his heart. But he literally lived for just one thing, one love, and despite his serious flaws of character, his love proved to be stronger than any other, even Dumbledore was surprised how strong it was when Snape produced Lily's patronus. And its this one element alone, that even after the death of his only love in life, he would do anything for. Anything. And that is what ultimately drives him to protect Harry, to protect the only remnant of Lily.

What I love about the the moment when Snape produces his Patronus is not just the fact that he has the same patronus as Lily Potter but the fact that his love remained so strong and so powerful, that he can produce some one ELSE's patronus. Not even Dumbledore can produce a patronus as powerful as that. That's why Dumbledore staggered at the sight of it, and to realise that afer all this time, Snapes power of love for Lily never diminshed. Harry, despite hating Snape for the way he treated him, appreciated Snape's greatest virtue by naming one his son's after him.

Severus Snape was not a good man but not an evil one either. He never killed anyone (immorally!). He was just a very flawed but passionate man. You just dont get much young adult literature featuring such character complexities as this. When I reach my twilight years, I might forget about Harry Potter and the other colourful characters that populate Rowlings books but I wont ever forget one of the greatest characters in English literature, Severus Snape.[/spoiler]

[evilzadi]

All of these spoilers are killing me!

[TheyCallMeMrGlass]

All of these spoilers are killing me!

LOL, be strong! You can do it. You can hold out, don't read them I hope you already have your premiere tickets to see it next week, right?

How was your evening at the premiere? I've been waiting for you to talk about it!

[andrews]

I loved every minute of the film. As you know, I am not a fan of 3D at all, and this film did not do anything to convince me to change my mind. It was unnecessary and, as other members have already pointed out, it actually detracted from the major scene in the film.
I am prepared to overlook the many shortcomings of the weaker actors - the story was portrayed well on the whole and I left the cinema feeling very happy with the closure I had been given. In fact, I will be going to see it again next weekend - in 2D - with my OH, who had a prior engagement, and was most put out that he couldn't see it. (And he'll be p*ying for his own ticket.)

I could have done without two hours of 'red carpet'. That was milked for all it was worth.

9/10 from me.