Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1 (Movie)

[ReZourceman]

I caved, got tickets for tomorrow night.

 

Caving would be tickets for tonight. You've done well my friend.

 

...and when the hell did Ron become buffed up? Harry looked so weedy (and hairy - yuck. There should be warnings on some of the film!) I mean come on!

 

Haha, yeah Ron looked hench!

[Jon]

 

Caving would be tickets for tonight. You've done well my friend.

 

 

Haha, yeah Ron looked hench!

 

 

If I hadn't been working early tomorrow, I probably would have

[Supergrunch]

Well I have tickets for Sunday. Is it true it's 3 and a half hours long?

[Jon]

Well I have tickets for Sunday. Is it true it's 3 and a half hours long?

 

My tickets say it's 2 hours and 50 minutes.

[nightwolf]

I went in to the film at 1:15 with long credits I came out at about 4. So yes it is quite long.

 

I was a little bit fidgetedy by about 2 hours or so, but the story is well done for this film, which is nice to see.

 

Very much looking forward to the next one. It finished well too.

[Oxigen_Waste]

Pretty decent, as expected... nothing too good, though.

 

And can someone explain to me how the tale of the 3 brothers, which is 5 minutes long, is better than everything else in the Potter film franchise all summed up and multiplied by 2?

Fucking brilliant, that was. I demand to know the one responsible.

[ReZourceman]

(Its 2 hours 25 minutes as far as I'm aware)

[Beast]

ReZ is right, mine started at 12 and I got out around about 3 due to adverts (which are apparently 20 minutes long....yeah right!).

[nightwolf]

Pretty decent, as expected... nothing too good, though.

 

And can someone explain to me how the tale of the 3 brothers, which is 5 minutes long, is better than everything else in the Potter film franchise all summed up and multiplied by 2?

Fucking brilliant, that was. I demand to know the one responsible.

 

You'll find some of JK's imagination is actually very good! Some of her beast books and such are pretty good reads.

 

The adverts were insane, far, far too long.

[Oxigen_Waste]

You'll find some of JK's imagination is actually very good! Some of her beast books and such are pretty good reads.

 

The adverts were insane, far, far too long.

 

I don't mean the story itself, I read all the HP books at launch since the forth, so I'm familiar with her imaginarium... which isn't all that great. What I mean about the tale of the 3 brothers or whatever it's called is the way it's been done on screen. Because it was brilliant, whoever the responsible for it is.

[Beast]

I don't mean the story itself, I read all the HP books at launch since the forth, so I'm familiar with her imaginarium... which isn't all that great. What I mean about the tale of the 3 brothers or whatever it's called is the way it's been done on screen. Because it was brilliant, whoever the responsible for it is.

 

She is, she wrote it herself. I've read it in my copy of The Tales of Beedle the Bard so the person responsible for Deathly Hallows (or 'The Tale of Three Brothers', which is it's proper name) is J.K. Rowling. I think she also took part in how the animation was done too.

 

...but yeah, I loved that story.

Edited November 20, 2010 by Animal

[Oxigen_Waste]

She is, she wrote it herself. I've read it in my copy of The Tales of Beedle the Bard so the person responsible for Deathly Hallows (or 'The Tale of Three Brothers', which is it's proper name) is J.K. Rowling.

 

God damnit, are you deaf (or blind, in this case), I care little for the story, it's generic moralist fairy-tale fare... What I mean is the visual presentation of the tale in the movie. The animation!!!!!!! Get it?

[Beast]

She is, she wrote it herself. I've read it in my copy of The Tales of Beedle the Bard so the person responsible for Deathly Hallows (or 'The Tale of Three Brothers', which is it's proper name) is J.K. Rowling. I think she also took part in how the animation was done too.

 

...but yeah, I loved that story.

 

I think you might be blind too, then

[Oxigen_Waste]

I think you might be blind too, then

 

You edited it after I posted, Dazzy-o! That's not fair!

 

Still, that's hardly her responsability. What I want to know is who the animator was, bascially. : peace:

[nightwolf]

The best thing to do is go on their website and find out the visual effects director, you'll most likely know then - as I believe for harry potter it might be d negative as the visual effects guy came in to talk to us recently.

 

But yes it was nice to see, I loved the portrayal of the three brothers.

[Jon]

People weren't lying about the adverts at the start! thought the film was never going to start. Is Rupert Grint in the running for the next Hulk? he should be, the guy is looking seriously ripped.

 

I know the why film was done like it was and it's obviously such a radical departure from the previous films. I'm all for darker tones, as there's only so much joy you can take after 6 films. It just seemed to never get into gear, three quarters of the film were spent in a tent. I still loved it and I expected it to be like it was, setting things up for the epicness that is due to come exactly 8 months tomorrow.

 

[Diageo]

I thought it was all right. Nothing special. Was getting bored towards the end. Felt nothing towards the characters and the sad scenes weren't sad at all. I haven't read the books and never will. Saw all the movies up to now so I might as well keep going.

[nightwolf]

People weren't lying about the adverts at the start! thought the film was never going to start. Is Rupert Grint in the running for the next Hulk? he should be, the guy is looking seriously ripped.

 

I know the why film was done like it was and it's obviously such a radical departure from the previous films. I'm all for darker tones, as there's only so much joy you can take after 6 films. It just seemed to never get into gear, three quarters of the film were spent in a tent. I still loved it and I expected it to be like it was, setting things up for the epicness that is due to come exactly 8 months tomorrow.

 

What people forget is that the book is exactly this spoiler, it isn't anything more exciting, but unfortunately it had to be done to understand what was going on. The next film should be more filled with action.

[ipaul]

Just got back from this. The group I was with got there a bit late so I didn't find the adverts to be too long :P

 

It was alright, decent even. My main gripe is the whole thing just feels so clunky and slightly emotionless - I really didn't care much for the characters anymore. It's all a bit run of the mill I feel. It's too long as well, I was checking my watch constantly by the end.

 

I agree with Oxigen, the 'Three Brothers' scene was the most interesting thing in the whole film. It was just great to look at.

 

Overall the film has evoked a great big 'meh' from myself, but I get why people like it. Now I feel obliged to watch part 2 even though I feel really indifferent towards it.

[Emasher]

I just got back from it. I'm not sure what to think really. It wasn't bad, just as good as the last one at the very least (and saying that, I did enjoy the last one), but overall, it felt like it was missing something. Too many of the details that made the book as good as it was just weren't there. The movie was largely missing emotion. The only scene that actually felt emotional at all was:

 

When Hermione wiped her parent's memory.

 

 

Most of the stars just haven't grown into good actors (although some weren't bad), which didn't help matters.

[Oxigen_Waste]

Too many of the details that made the book as good as it was just weren't there.

 

What do you mean, as good as it was? JK could've gone out with several different bangs and instead settled for the least ambitious ending possible. Everything happens as you expect it and nothing really makes you feel even remotely justified for having read through all of the books. The whole 7th book is just a moronic delaying of that consumer-happy ending that you already know is coming, and not anywhere in the whole book is there a single shred of enthusiastic writing. It's just... a colossal failure, as a piece of literature.

[killer kirby]

What do you mean, as good as it was? JK could've gone out with several different bangs and instead settled for the least ambitious ending possible. Everything happens as you expect it and nothing really makes you feel even remotely justified for having read through all of the books. The whole 7th book is just a moronic delaying of that consumer-happy ending that you already know is coming, and not anywhere in the whole book is there a single shred of enthusiastic writing. It's just... a colossal failure, as a piece of literature.

 

Everything you said there is spot on, I feel the same way. It was obvious she wanted to make it dark and such, yet in the end it was like she remembered she was writing a children's book and quickly changed the pacing to be exactly the happy ending everyone wanted it to be. It felt like in the end it was meh, you could have read the first book and the last book and felt like you had the same satisfaction that you would when reading all the books. Nothing made me feel for any of the characters in the end, they all were the same characters that were in the start of the book.

[Eddage]

Saw it on Friday, wasn't amazing, wasn't terrible. Haven't read any of the books but still new that this would be nothing more than a set up for part 2 - which I am looking forward too.

 

Just a couple of questions...

 

At the end when Dobbie rescued them did they get the sword back?

 

How many Horcrux's are there? In the last film Tom Riddle talked about splitting his soul seven times, therefor I was under the impression there would be seven. However after they destroyed the amulet (the third one after the diary and ring) Hermione said there were three left? How do they even know how many there are?

 

 

Also before the film started there was only three trailers and the usual Orange advert - much less than any other film I've been too!

[Dog-amoto]

Am I the only one who hasn't seen/read a single one?

 

I like when Harry Potter comes out, means that all the other screens are pretty empty at the cinema.

[dwarf]

Pretty decent, as expected... nothing too good, though.

 

And can someone explain to me how the tale of the 3 brothers, which is 5 minutes long, is better than everything else in the Potter film franchise all summed up and multiplied by 2?

Fucking brilliant, that was. I demand to know the one responsible.

That animation was fantastic, I thought it'd be cheesy but Watson's narration actually worked with it well. When it cut to the characters again I was disappointed.

 

I thought the film was good. It relied quite a great deal on emotion, something it lacked a great deal of, and some of Daniel Radcliffe's (sp?) acting was dubious, but nothing too jarring. I enjoyed it more than I thought I would, and will definitely be seeing part 2, as will evrywun eva maid.

 

I'm tempted to read some of the HP books again/the series just because I was rather young when I first read them and would like a second review opportunity. I actually think they're superb though. The fact that there's better literature around counts for shit in my eyes, I think the thing is well done. The ending book was weak, but it doesn't prevent the others from being thrilling reads.