![]() As with the previous films, Yates uses the colors of the world to convey emotion. There are shots that are simply beautiful, and the visuals are almost a character in themselves. 3D is not always a good thingĪt times, this film looks better than it has any right to. In fact, the events in the film all take place over the course of a few days. Part 2 does not have that problem at all. It had moments that dragged, and there were very few action scenes to break up the monotony of the months the characters spent on the run. Part 1 was nearly all set up, so many of its faults were overlooked, and rightly so. All of the exposition and setup was dumped into Part 1, leaving Part 2 to focus on the climactic confrontation and final battle, which occupies more than the last hour of the film. There is very little fat on this film, which is both a good and bad thing. If you watched the first film, then you know everything you need to know about the plot of the second. Without spoiling too much for people that haven’t read the books, Harry (Daniel Radcliffe), Ron (Rupert Grint) and Hermione (Emma Watson) continue to hunt the horcruxes that are keeping Voldemort (Ralph Finnes) alive, while around them the war is over, and he-who-must-not-be-named has won. It picks up immediately where Part 1 ended and hits the ground running. The movie begins without much introduction. It will make more sense in terms of the narrative flow. If possible, watch Part 1 immediately before watching Part 2. Rather than having its own three-act structure, Part 2 essentially begins during the middle of the second act, which began in Part 1. Part 2ĭeathly Hallows - Part 2 is not so much a sequel as it is just a continuation of Part 1. That makes the journey and the conclusion satisfying, but at the cost of the epic scale of the final battle. He is a character director, and as a result the emphasis is on Harry’s journey more than anything else. ![]() He is closer to Mike Newell (who directed Goblet of Fire) than to the other two, but still, Yates has his own way of seeing things. Yates is not into the spectacle of Harry’s world as the original Potter director, Christopher Columbus was, nor does he emphasize the magical nature as Alfonso Cuaron did in Prisoner of Azkaban. ![]() ![]() For the final outing, David Yates returns behind the lens of Harry Potter for the fourth time, and his style has become very distinctive, as has his view of what Harry Potter is all about. The style changed as well, partly due to the deepening plot, but mostly due to the change of directors. The tone became darker, and the stories grew more complex. And as the actors matured and grew into their roles, the series itself also matured. It has been an odd and nearly unparalleled experience watching the cast of Harry Potter grow through the years. Barring that, the franchise ends on a high note, albeit a slightly muted one. Rowling and force her to write an eighth Harry Potter book. It is something of a bittersweet realization that after ten years, the Harry Potter films have come to their conclusion, and the character will never again grace the big screen - excluding Lucas-style special editions and the possibility that a rabid fan will go Misery on J.K.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |