# Harry Potter And The Deathly Hallows Part 2



## Nick Jaden Williams

First of all I think it's just stupid that they split it into two. That being said...

I can't wait to see it!!!  I wonder if it'll top Pirates 4 and the Hangover Part 2 for best summer films...

Who's gonna watch it?


----------



## PandoraBox

You think so really? Why is that? I thought it was a good idea they did it. There was so much to cover in book 7... 
My hubby went to see Pirates 4 and said it was good.


----------



## Ophiucha

I'm mixed on the split; on the one hand, I reckon the main reason it was done had to do with the money. And I didn't like the seventh book, so having to sit through two films worth of it isn't spectacular. On the other hand, they cut a lot out of the previous films, and in order to explain everything, cover all their bases, please the fans... it'd have to be a monster of a film. And even though they skipped out on properly killing Pettigrew, I did prefer DH.1 to the first half of Deathly Hallows, the novel.

Anyway, box office wise, it will top them nine times over on the opening night, it's Harry Potter. And I think they'd have to do a rather poor job to do as bad critically as either of them. Fanwise, we'll say. I haven't heard much good about PotC4, and I know I found Hangover 2 to be pretty much a rehash of the first. So I think HP's fine in that department. The trailers don't give me much hope for more, though. That stupid suicide hug makes me giggle. "We'll end this the way we started, Tom. TOGETHER!" What? They've changed a lot, too, but I honestly don't care about that. I will say, though... the kid playing Scorpius Malfoy for the epilogue is _adorable_. Though without the blonde hair, I'd say he looks more like Daniel Radcliffe's kid than Tom Felton's. They've got the same bone structure.

The action scenes look nice. I'll be seeing it at midnight, and probably eight or nine times afterwards, too, because I've been with Harry Potter since the beginning, and it could be the worst film in history, and I'd still dish out upwards of a hundred dollars on it. The actors are all phenomenal, as usual, and though I couldn't stand Order of the Phoenix, the last two films have been really great, so I have high hopes, regardless of a stupid trailer. And I just want to see it. Though... seriously, Jamie Bower as Grindelwald? Really? Couldn't have picked someone a little more... threatening? Manly, at least?


----------



## Meg the Healer

I was not all that pleased with finding the splitting of the movies either. The BS line about "there's just too much going on that we couldn't cut anything" is just that....BS. They had no problem cutting out and rearranging things for the first 6 movies....so why should the last one be any different. I have always felt that it was money issue and nothing more.....milk it for as long as you can. And with people like me and Ophi - we'll watch it a few times anyway - so there's lots of money to be made.

With that rant over - as I said in a different thread - as much as I'm sad that it's over, I'm really kind of glad that it's finally over. The previews have definitely made the epic conclusion look as if it's going to be epic, so I'm really excited to see it.

And Ophi - I agree with you on the suicide hug - each time I watch it, I go....wtf?


----------



## Jenna St. Hilaire

Oh, I am SO seeing it. At midnight. In costume.

Up till I watched DH1, I didn't like the idea of the split... but then, I loved DH1 better than all the rest of the HP movies together (I'm one of those annoying follow-the-book sticklers. Burning down the Burrow, WTF?!) We'll see about part 2; I'm with you all on the suicide hug. Grrr. Still. I'm going to see it.


----------



## myrddin173

Originally the plan was to split _all _of the movies in two, which quickly got rejected because the actors would age out and the first director felt he could cut out enough stuff from the books.  I however agree with the decision to split the seventh as while the first six did include a lot of unnecesairy side plots most of what happens in the deathly hallows that is important for the ending.

Oh and Ophiucha I must disagree with you on a  couple of points,  Order of the Phoenix was my favorite of the movies so far, including the seventh.  I would also remind you that Grindlewald is, according to all evidence, gay and, not to sound homophobic, gay guys tend to be of the "pretty boy" type, not the "macho-guy" type.  Though I will say I did not agree with the old grindlewald actor.


----------



## fcbkid15

I think its fine. I actually think that it is better. They have to explain everything the seventh book did, and from what i've been told thats a lot. I never actually read the seventh book, so i wont really care if they put stuff in that wasnt in the book. My only complaint is that they could have made the release dates closer. We had to wait 9 freakin months for it to come out from the last one! I think they should have released they first half in november when they did, but the second half after Christmas, a few weeks into january or february.


----------



## ASMA.G.ABORROB

i read the book it is really interesting ! 
actually i think they split it because the movie is going to be really long if it is just one part don't  you think??
i am waiting to watch it really soon .
 in the trailer it said it is going to be in cinemas on 12/7/2011 that means tomorrow!!


----------



## Kelise

On the topic of two movies instead of one, I personally wish they had done mini-series or a TV show instead of movies, so they could fit everything in. Each book could have been a series.

I'm not sure whether the actors would have aged *too* much. It's not that noticeable in other TV shows - at least, not anymore than how much they've already aged in these eight movies.


----------



## Jenna St. Hilaire

starconstant said:


> On the topic of two movies instead of one, I personally wish they had done mini-series or a TV show instead of movies, so they could fit everything in. Each book could have been a series.
> 
> I'm not sure whether the actors would have aged *too* much. It's not that noticeable in other TV shows - at least, not anymore than how much they've already aged in these eight movies.



I agree. I'd love to see a good miniseries made of this story--one that starts off a little less Wizard of Ozzy and stays more like Deathly Hallows Part One in tone all the way through. One in which the Burrow doesn't burn and Dumbledore gets all his good lines. 

Maybe someone will do that someday. In the meantime, I'm crazy excited to see DH Part Two tomorrow!


----------



## myrddin173

I just got back from watching it, and I am speechless.  They truly did a fantastic job.  I'm going to leave specific comments in the spoiler tag



Spoiler: specific comments



I have to say I was choked up during the entire Snape Pensieve sequence and at the begining when I saw Dobby's tombstone (I really think she crossed the line in killing him).  I really thought it was funny when Professor McGonagal (sp?) giggled like a school girl after casting the spell to animate the statues.  I was really mad that Harry broke the Elder Wand instead of returning it to Dumbledore's tomb and did not go to speak to his portrait.


----------



## Ophiucha

Here's some comments, with a perspective as a movie goer and as a Harry Potter fan.



Spoiler: lol long post is spoilerific



As a fan of Harry Potter, I thought this was pretty good. It hit most of the key elements I loved in the second half of the book, and it even made a few scenes better - namely the epilogue (which I always hated, but kind of loved here) and Snape's backstory (the scene with Lily is going to make me cry for the rest of my life). It made Neville, Molly, and McGonagall badasses, it kept the "Not my daughter, you bitch!" line, and it did the deaths well enough, as well as the book at the very least. Bit surprised they killed Lavender, and a bit sad. I didn't give a damn about Colin Creevey, but Lavender I liked. If there were two major pet peeves this side of me had, it was the lack of magic words (I know that _some_ of them should know worldless magic, but not _all_ of them), particularly in the scene where they are meant to shout the classic old "Expelliarmus" and "Avada Kedavra" and just... didn't. Wand motions were simplified as well. The second is a bit more major, but, umm... Dumbledore's past? I am fine with them omitting it, but this leads me to my movie goer side...

They mention Grindelwald, there are shots of him in DH p. 1, they have Aberforth say "Arianna, Dumbledore's sister, died in spite of her trust", they showed Rita Skeeter's book, but... they never followed up on that. If you were going to omit it, *omit it*, don't leave in these odd hints that aren't going to go anywhere. The same can be said of Lupin and Tonks. Their relationship is entirely glided over, I think the only confirmation we got was Kingsley or somebody mumbling something in the last one about them getting hitched. There certainly was no mention of Tonks being pregnant or her father dying. But during the Resurrection Stone scene, we have Harry saying "Remus, what about your son?" For all I know, there is no son in the movie continuity. :/

A couple of minor peeves: Harry and Voldemort's mind link was basically exploited to convenience away omitted scenes in previous films. "Oh damn, we never showed Harry seeing the Diadem in the Room of Requirement." "Umm, alright, have Harry read Voldemort's mind and see the Ravenclaw crest. That ought to do it." ... "Umm, well, he's not in the Shrieking Shack, is he? How would he know to go to the boathouse of all places? Have we even established that such a place exists?" "Well, it was in the games, that should be enough. Just have him read Voldemort's mind." *sighs*

Everyone kind of, erm, blew up. Voldemort, Bellatrix, the Death Eaters at the bridge. Voldemort wasn't even a little threatening, not just because they made him weaken a bundle with each lost horcrux, but because he was awkwardly chipper. He hugged Draco. It was really weird. And his mid-apparition battle with Harry was just so, so stupid, even worse than I imagined it would be when I saw the trailer. Every moment he was on screen was terrible.

Snape's death was amazing, but brutal. It was bloody, and I really felt pain when the glass of the boat house slammed as Nagini bit him/headbutted him. The tears were a little cheesy, but as I said before, his pensieve memories = sad forever. Helena Bonham Carter 'playing' Hermione as Bellatrix was hilarious, and the best part of that Gringotts scene. I thought it would have been better placed in the last one, though. It seemed like they wanted to rush it so they could get to Hogwarts. Everything at Hogwarts was beautiful, though. I wish we could actually see the Carrows.

Luna was a little... I dunno, unlikeable in this one. I say that as a big fan of Luna, she was just a bit off in this one. I did like how Neville and Luna go out, though. I like the idea that _somebody_, at least, goes out with somebody in their high school years and doesn't marry them. It's more realistic, and it probably pleases a few fans who wanted to see them together. I'm just happy that they might have two relationships as adults, like regular people do. :/ Sorry, that always soured me when I read the epilogue. Draco was the only one who married the girl he didn't date in high school, and even that was only confirmed in interviews.

Hermione in the epilogue didn't look like she aged a day. Ron was fat, tired, had age lines, and was beginning to do a bit of a comb over. Harry looked a bit bigger, though not quite fat, and definitely had age lines and thinning hair. Ginny... well, she looked chubbier, at least, which I think is fair given that she's pushed out three kids. Draco had a receding hair line and an attractive spot of facial hair. But Hermione? She cut her hair, but that seemed to be about it. The kids were all lovely, though. The kid playing Scorpius, though, lovely and blonde as he is, he has Daniel Radcliffe's facial structure, so I just see him as  a Potter as opposed to a Malfoy, even if he has the hair.

Also, Voldemort's face was in everything. The fire in the RoR, the water in the CoS, everything. It was weird. And the most minor of all nitpicks: isn't Cho Chang a year or two older than Harry? What was she doing at the school?


----------



## myrddin173

Spoiler: Spoilery comments on previous spoiler comments



I agree with a good deal of what you said, especially Dumbledore's back-story.  He's tied for my favorite character and his backstory is one of the reasons why.  They changed Snape's death to the boathouse for mainly cinematic reasons (they didn't want him to die in a box), but they did ask Rowling about it and she was very enthusiastic about it.  I think that Voldemort's face was in everything because his soul bits were trying to kill whoever killed them.  Also Cho was there in the book to, a lot of past students had come back to help fight Snape and the Carrows, but in the movie it appears that she is in the same year as harry, in the Order of the Phoenix she is studying for her OWLs even though in the books she had already taken them.

What annoyed me though was the knowledge that Harry's cloak was THE cloak of invisibility was completely ignored and the whole love shield harry had created for the Hogwartsians when he "died."


----------



## Lavender

I loved the movie, some parts kept me on the edge of my seat even though I knew what was going to happen having read all seven books. 



Spoiler: spoiler



Alan Rickman was the star of this movie - he makes an absolutely wonderful Snape and his death scene was superb. Many of the scenes played out almost exactly as I imagined them when reading the books and the special effects looked great, especially when watching in 3D.


 This and Deathy Hallows Part 1 are the best movies in the series in my opinion.


----------



## Jenna St. Hilaire

Lots of fun on this thread this week!  I'm enjoying everybody's posts, and agreeing with a fair share of the thoughts.

I've already spent a couple hours today reviewing the movie. But to sum up, and I'll try to be reasonably spoiler-free: good special effects but too many of them; a few really stupid rewrites (Neville's speech, some of Dumbledore's lines) and some smarter ones (a certain scene in the Chamber of Secrets, and the end of The Prince's Tale); some good acting and fun moments.

Overall, I wound up with mixed feelings about the film because some of the more meaningful scenes were sacrificed for battle action. Also because I hate it when moviemakers rewrite the characters' best lines. Deathly Hallows 1 was better. But I still liked it. It mostly made me want to read the books again, though.


----------



## Angharad

I loved DH2; I think they did a great job although there were many changes from the book, which always annoys me.  I'll definitely be seeing it many more times.


----------



## Black Dragon

I finally got to see Deathly Hallows pt. 2 today, and enjoyed it a lot.  I didn't mind the changes too much.

I do have one question though:



Spoiler: question



How did Harry manage to come back from the dead?



I don't recall this being answered in the book, although it's been quite a while since I read it.  In any case, the film offered no explanation of this major development.


----------



## Celtic_Jewel

Black Dragon said:


> I do have one question though:
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: question
> 
> 
> 
> How did Harry manage to come back from the dead?
> 
> 
> 
> I don't recall this being answered in the book, although it's been quite a while since I read it.  In any case, the film offered no explanation of this major development.



Having just reread the book, I think I know the answer to this, although it's just my impression:



Spoiler: answer



When Voldemort cast the killing curse in the forest, he killed both Harry and the piece of his soul that had latched onto Harry just over sixteen years ago. But because when Voldemort regained a human body in the fourth book he took _Harry's_ blood, Harry's in particular, with the protection of Lily's sacrifice, Harry was kept half alive because Voldemort wasn't dead yet. So Harry had a choice... while the Voldemort soul piece thing was truly dead and 'beyond help', Harry could either go 'on' or choose to go back. Which he did, because Voldemort still needed to be defeated.





I may have become a little too obsessed... but I love these books 

Anyway, I hope that helped a little. I think I understood it, but if someone else has a better explanation/way of explaining it then please do so, because I'm not entirely sure I explained that well. 

Incidentally, I thought the film was okay. 



Spoiler: more thoughts



I saw it twice, two days in a row because of arrangements with different people, and I saw it once in 2D and once in 3D. After the first seven I was hoping just to enjoy it as a film, because I knew it could hardly be a strict, proper transition, but some bits seriously annoyed me: The way they completely missed out Percy's subplot and so Fred's death (this made me cry in the books!) and Tonks and Remus' subplot as well. Also, the weird hug/grapple/Apparation fight was just an odd add-in to make, it was strange even just as a film. And the missings out of speeches, particularly Neville's (I'll join you when HELL FREEZES OVER!). And, of course, no real explanation of Harry's return to life... I did have to explain stuff to my non-reading friends after it had finished, but they're used to my babbling, so it's fine 

On the other hand, Helena Bonham Carter as Hermione!Bella was awesome. And the Gringotts scenes were pretty cool visually, if poorly explained. The dragon in 3D was immense, because you actually felt threatened by it. The actual filming was really good, and the werewolf army, though there for no apparent reason, was good in that it added a little bit of fun (although on the flipside, that meant you didn't take the threat seriously, which was odd as they killed Lavender off randomly in the film, through Greyback. I thought he'd died. And his dress sense was just wierd...). On the whole, it was alright, but I won't pay to see it a third time, nor does it inspire me to buy the whole DVD collection.



*cough*

Just my two pennies


----------



## Ark1117

I enjoyed the movie too, though I had a hard time being completely embraced by it because I kept referring to every scene of the movie to the same scene of the book. They kept some of the aspects of the book alive but in other areas it was disappointing. 



Spoiler: Spoiler



Like another person said, and i feel the same way, Dumbledore's back-story is one of my favorites and they didn't explain it at all. And if everybody remembers back to the Half Blood Prince, at the ending where he is moaning about his guilt, for those who only saw the movie they will never know what he meant by that unless they read the book. Another scene that i had actually been looking forward to the whole movie was a the end where Voldermort duels Mcgonnagal and Slughorn, and this fight never happens. I was disappointed by that, but it was such an emotionally heavy movie that it was still good. Malfoy made up as a man in his thirties was hilarious, though.


----------



## Codey Amprim

If I'm bringing up a dead thread, I apologize. 

However, when I went to see it...

After waiting about an hour in line, and another hour for the actual movie to start, a group of about sic or seven entered the theatre; one in a Darth Vader costume, another in an Ewok costume, one in a light, light blue pokemon outfit (a guy), another playing as Neo from the Matrix, and another as Boba Fett.

That aside, I thought the ending was rather Anti-climactic.  The way that Voldemort died? COME ON! That was such a let down! - As was the whole end fight that I expected to be more EPIC than 300 and LotR combined... okay that's a little exaggerated. But seriously, what was with that ending? Well... I suppose I was looking for a rated R more than a PG-13. Oh well!

I was, if you haven't guessed, extremely disappointed.


----------



## Ark1117

yeah i know what you mean it was anti-climatic and I really don't see why this ending was changed from the book's ending, which was a lot more climatic. At least in the book, Voldermort and Harry are surrounded by the entire school and teachers and they actually _see_ him defeating Voldermort whereas in the movie there off by themselves.


----------



## Shadoe

I kinda liked the way Voldemort got it. He didn't get to go out with a bang and be all impressive. He went out more with a pffft - which served him right. No big legends or grand stories to tell the next generation of evil wizards - he just got stepped on like a bug.


----------



## Codey Amprim

Shadoe said:


> I kinda liked the way Voldemort got it. He didn't get to go out with a bang and be all impressive. He went out more with a pffft - which served him right. No big legends or grand stories to tell the next generation of evil wizards - he just got stepped on like a bug.



Hmm, that is one way to look at it.

I just grew up watching these movies, and all of the hype led up to this big, awesome ending... which didn't happen! I just wanted what was coming to him so badly on the screen. Oh well!


----------



## darthbuttchin

I was disapointed with the part 2. Part 1 was so good and filled with info that was important (except the stupid dancing scene...), it really set what looked like a good platform for part 2 to finish the series with a resounding bang. But for me it didnt. It was a fizzle. Lots of stuff was just wrong, how and when Voldemort died being a big issue for me. They cut Peeves' song after the death too. Which is just disgusting haha.

But seriously, I just didnt feel like this was the best way to end the series. They had so much potential for some amazing battles and amazing scenes, dialogue, humour and so much more. It just felt like they rushed through it to get to the forest part and then the end. And the epilogue - I hated that in the book. It was marginally better in the film. 

The concept of a television series (ala Game of Thrones?) is a good one, although that wouldnt happen for at least 10 years I reckon. It needs time for the films to die down in memory. Plus, casting harry would be a nightmare, as Radcliffe IS Harry Potter in most peoples eyes. The character of Harry doesnt seem as easily adaptable to different actors as, say, Batman.  A remake series would be good, but I cant envisage that happening, with 7 films to re-do, the financial commitment would be massive.

db


----------



## Dreamer

I can understand why they had to split it up since there is so much to cover that there would be a lot lost if it was all jammed into a 2 hour movie.  On the flip side of the coin I hate that it had to be because that means two release dates and more waiting!  It 
is too bad we couldn't have just one long movie.


----------



## Cheryl

A remake would be pretty awesome so they could do the movies knowing what actually happened in the end. I think this is where the series has nost its flaws. In the movies, Harry and Hermione have so much chemistry and I think they got scenes like the dance scene in part 1 because Kloves was an H/Hr fan whereas JK knew in her mind that Romione and Ginny/Harry were end game. I think in an interview DanRad said he wanted to play Dumbledore in the future, Emma wanted to play McGonabamf and Draco, Lucius. That would be pretty cool to see!

Also, I think the final battle scene went down that way because of the influence of the 3D. I really feel like they wanted to maximize the effect. I just wish it had happened in the great hall for everyone to see how the great evil wizard will fall!


----------



## Meg the Healer

darthbuttchin said:


> The concept of a television series (ala Game of Thrones?) is a good one, although that wouldnt happen for at least 10 years I reckon. It needs time for the films to die down in memory. Plus, casting harry would be a nightmare, as Radcliffe IS Harry Potter in most peoples eyes. The character of Harry doesnt seem as easily adaptable to different actors as, say, Batman.  A remake series would be good, but I cant envisage that happening, with 7 films to re-do, the financial commitment would be massive.



I think a TV series would be interesting (more things could be included) but yes, it would be hard to imagine a different Harry Potter (at this time). As far as redoing the films - they may not redo all 8 of them quite frankly. I mean look at how many times the BBC as redone the Chronicles of Narnia. They don't do all the books (even though I'm pretty sure all the books have been made at least once now). They may just redo the most popular ones. Either way - I'd like to see how the series would change in a decade.


----------



## cenurrita

Harry Potter is my favorite series. I watched second part and found it quite interesting.


----------



## Elder the Dwarf

It's been a while since I saw it at the premiere, but... I really enjoyed it, just because I love the books and all the movies, but there was a lot I was disappointed about:



Spoiler: Spoiler



-Neville was a straight badass in the book, but the part where he killed the snake was weak in the movie, and what happened to pulling the sword out of the hat?  Completely screwed that up
-Am I the only one who never heard of a Hogwarts boathouse?  The grounds look very different
-The harry-Voldemart part was BS.  One of my favorite parts of the book was Harry casting protection spells from under the cloak to fight him one on one.  Which reminds me...
-They completely ignored the invisibility cloak, which I was furious about.  And I can't completely remember, but I don't think it mentions the resurrection stone when Harry is walking to the forest
-Someone else mentioned it, but there was almost almost attention given to Percy, George, Tonks and Lupin.  The parts in the book were so emotional.



To sum up: as always, the books were a hundred times better.  Still a pretty good movie though.


----------



## Shadoe

I agree with your points. But as with any book made into a movie, I think you have to look at the movie as a stand-alone project. With all that happened in the books, it couldn't all go into the movie. And what worked in the book, wouldn't have worked as well on screen. The boathouse for instance. Created solely because it would look better on screen than the setting in the book. On its own, I think it was a pretty good set of movies.


----------



## Elder the Dwarf

Oh I completely agree, I'm just nitpicking a few details, most of it really didn't bother me too much(with the exception of the Neville scene and the Harry-Voldemort part).  I do love all of the movies, I was just stating a couple things that were kind of annoying.  With the boat house, I wouldn't have a problem with it except that it doesn't exist.  Period.  We've seen all the castle grounds, both in the books and in the movies, and I think they should have had the foresight to put it in another movie somewhere, or just set the scene somewhere else.


----------



## myrddin173

@Elder  Actually we have seen it, in one of the games.  I don't remember which one it was.  Anyways the mere fact that it made it into the movie means it was approved by Jo and is therefore "canon."  I also think it made the scene much better than it would have been.


----------



## Shadoe

Yes, they did go to her about the boathouse and she did approve it. There was an article about it somewhere on the web a few months before the movie came out. I think the scene worked well. I think I liked it much better than I would have if they'd done it the way the book had it.

Not sure about the other scenes. I've forgotten so much already. Have to re-read the books to remind myself.


----------

