Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1 (2010) ****/*****

At this point in the history of the Harry Potter films I would say that there’s two camps of people: those who are watching them, and those who are not. Nine years and five more films after The Sorcerer’s Stone was released in 2001 is plenty of time for people to try this series out. Potter fandom is one of those subgroups of people who are pretty obsessive about their love of their chosen universe, and the vast majority of people who go to see this film would have been there no matter what the reviews said. There could be no keeping them out of the theater. The people who won’t give it a chance; they could have several reasons. Maybe some of them refuse to watch something that often get’s viewed as being kiddy, maybe some tried the movies out and didn’t like them, and still more maybe liked the first couple and haven’t liked where the series has gone.

Regardless, at this point, I’m pretty sure everybody knows whether or not they are going to go see something called Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1 or not, and it doesn’t really matter what any self-styled critic might say about it. So, would there be any point in critiquing the film at all? Could anybody’s mind be changed about a series as it’s seventh film is being released? Probably not, but despite this I carry on in the hope that criticism is about more than just star ratings and upward or downward pointing appendages. It’s not just about recommendations and pans. There is still room for analysis and creating a dialogue. A lot of work has gone into both the writing of the books and the creating of these films, and it would probably be polite of us to at least pay them some attention. Right?

When talking about this first entry of the last chapter in a series of 8 films, it’s probably important to look back and spend some time talking about the series as a whole. Unlike most film franchises, the Potter films haven’t had the same vision behind them for the whole run. Chris Columbus started off as the director of the first two films, but despite staying on in a producer role, has passed on the directors chair to several other men. Also unlike most other film franchises, the Harry Potter films are ones that I feel have gotten better over the course of time. I remember Columbus’ first two films as being the weakest in the series. They had the worst acting, the worst special effects, the least interesting camera work, and serious pacing issues. Despite this, I can see how they might be some people’s favorites. They stay the closest to the source material, and while I think that the end results are pacing issues, there are a lot of purists out there who appreciate that sort of approach to adaptation. And despite my dislike of those first two films, I still respect a lot of what Columbus did to create this film world. He laid the foundation for this series, and the way that it has built and flourished shows what a solid foundation that is. He found the right players for the key roles, the initial design work of that first film has become the template for the wizardly world that all of the subsequent entries are set in, and he hired the legendary John Williams to create the Potter theme that has become instantly identifiable in only the way a John Williams score can. The sounds and images of the Harry Potter films are iconic at this point and they all started with Columbus. Without what he did in that first one, none of the others would have been possible. After the first two films, Columbus stepped down and Alfonso Cuaron took over the reigns of The Prisoner of Azkaban. Cuaron is an auteur, a true filmmakers’ filmmaker, and he put a clear signature on his entry into the Potter series. I enjoyed his film much more than the first two. Visually it was interesting and experimental, the child actors did much better with the material this time around, and the pacing felt much more copacetic with what a big budget blockbuster should be. But despite this, something was off. It didn’t quite have that indefinable Potter feel that the first two did in spades. It felt more like an Alfonso Cuaron film than it did a Harry Potter film.

And so for the fourth film the reigns were handed over to Mike Newell. I see him as the forgotten Potter director. Gone was the overpowering stylistic flourish of Cuaron, but a return to the negative trappings of the Columbus films this wasn’t. The young actors continued to develop, the special effects continued to be more seamless, and the pacing of the story wasn’t an issue whatsoever. And yet, there’s not much that I can remember about The Goblet of Fire. The camera work was utilitarian, but uninspired. I don’t recall any striking visual choices. I would put this one somewhere in the middle of a Potter film ranking. Obscured by mediocrity. After Newell’s turn with the series it was handed off to the fourth and final director David Yates with The Order of the Phoenix. This was the movie that I felt was the biggest wild card going in. Phoenix was the most bloated, meandering book of the series, and would be a bit of a chore to adapt. And Yates was an unknown commodity, being known for mostly TV work before landing this job. It felt a bit like the Potter series was being cast aside and written off. And then I was surprised when Yates showed up and became, in my eyes, the definitive Harry Potter director. His Order of the Phoenix was slick, quick, and very watchable. The excesses of the source material were excised and what was left was the core of the story and a very impressively written screenplay. The film maintained that familiar tone and feel of the Potterverse, it felt very much like it fit in with what Columbus established in the first two films, and yet it closely matched the visual interest of the Cuaron film.

Yates blocks and shoots his scenes in interesting, off-the-beaten-path ways. Instead of always shooting a scene in the most obvious, utilitarian way, Yates finds the best shot for what the scene is trying to convey. One of my favorite things about watching his entries in the series is just following along with the camera and being surprised by where it decides to go. Order of the Phoenix is the one Potter film that I feel actually improves upon the book. So, for the first time since Columbus stepped back to a producer role, Yates was able to go on to direct a second Potter film with Half Blood Prince; and I feel he improved his second time out. Going into Deathly Hallows I ranked Half Blood Prince as my favorite in the series so far, and for the first time I walked into a theater to see a Potter film and was legitimately excited.

Doing a plot summary for a film like this feels a little silly. Nobody is going into Deathly Hallows with it being their first foray into the Potter universe. And if they are, they shouldn’t. I can’t conceive of any way that this could be watched and understood as a stand-alone film this far into the continuity. There are hundreds of characters, dozens of ongoing plotlines, and a whole universe of physical rules and properties different from our own that have been established in the first six Potter stories, and trying to watch Deathly Hallows: Part 1 without being familiar with all that has come before sounds like a really unsatisfying and confusing experience. What is important to know about this story is that it is the first one set outside of Hogwarts School for Witchcraft and Wizardry. Foregoing their senior year of training, the main triumvirate of protagonists, Ron (Rupert Grint), Hermione (Emma Watson), and Harry himself (Daniel Radcliffe), find themselves cast out into the wilderness on a scavenger hunt that has no clues. They are hunted constantly by the evil Lord Voldemort’s (Ralph Fiennes) minions, they have no help from their usual cadre of teachers and mentors, and the whole scenario is looking very bleak. Dumbledore is dead, for the love of Mike! These are dark times. And consequently, Deathly Hallows doesn’t feel anything like any of the other Potter movies; or any tent pole release that has come out of the Hollywood system for that matter. Up until this point the Harry Potter franchise has felt like a warm hug. Childhood adventures, mysterious creatures, the warm, lush setting of Hogwarts; it all adds up to a universe of pure escapist fancy. Deathly Hallows completely subverts all of that. The kids are out in a frozen, bleak wilderness, confused, angry, and helpless. In all of the films that have come before this the kids are very proactive. They are presented with a mystery and a threat, they study, they take action, and they triumph. Usually with some well timed help from a wise and noble benefactor along the way. In this film they don’t know which direction to move in or what to do. All they know is that the situation is dire, the wizarding world lies in the balance, and danger lurks around every corner. This isn’t going to be for everybody. Even the book version of Deathly Hallows got a bit of flack for the never ending camping, fighting, and naval gazing of the first half of the story. Usually, all of this stuff would have been glossed over by a Hollywood adaptation. The frustrating isolation that takes up much of this movie would have been handled in a ten minute montage sequence and we would have zoomed straight on to the action and resolution that is sure to come in Part 2. It took some real cojones to decide to split this story into two films and release this one as it is; all build and no resolution, all frustration and little satisfaction. But I think it was the right choice. Dumbledore was such a looming presence over this entire series. He was always there, watching in the shadows, having all of the answers, and making sure nothing went too awry. He was the kids’ protector, their mentor, their safety net, and for Harry a surrogate father figure. Now that he is gone, now that all of his knowledge and power have gone with him, it would be an insult to the material to ignore all of the chaos and weltschmerz that his death has caused. For the first time in their lives our protagonists are all on their own. It’s important to the progression of the story to make sure the desperation of that situation is well established. Without these scenes I’m not sure that the ending could be very effective. I’ve heard rumblings that splitting this story into two movies was a callous cash grab: a chance to milk our pockets twice for one product. I walked out of Part 1 confident that the split was an artistic choice with a fortunate for the studio side effect of added profiteering.

But, while bold, I’m not sure how most people will react to this approach. That familiar John Williams Potter theme welcomes us into the film after we see the Warner’s logo, just like in all of the others, but it’s the last time we hear it. It’s a piece of music that reminds us of the fire warmed halls of Hogwarts, sensory feasts in the great hall, magical creatures roaming the grounds, and that eccentric cast of characters that makes up the teaching staff. It reminds us of that twinkle in Harry’s eye as he discovers a world beyond the one he knew, and a life better than the one he imagined for himself. Here all of that is gone. While the previous Potter films were filled with moments of discovery, Deathly Hallows is filled with moments of dead ends. The pacing of the film is slow and deliberate. It has much more in common with an avante garde European film than it does a Hollywood blockbuster. Long stretches of time go on without much of anything happening other than Harry and his friends blindly traveling and snipping at each other due to frustration. But, for me, the film was never boring. We’re always right there with the characters. They’re just as frustrated with the pace of things as we are, and since we’ve become so attached to them over time we share their frustration in an active way instead of just becoming bored by it. In any other film series this wouldn’t be possible. We are riding the momentum of six films here, and it’s not so big a favor to ask us to take a bit of a breather and focus on little more than the characters. And we get some great moments with these three characters and these three actors. At this point, we’ve become so much a part of the Potter universe as an audience that it feels natural and comfortable to just sit and spend time with Harry, Ron, and Hermione. It’s like going on a road trip with close friends.

And the scenery is so pretty, and so well shot, that there’s always something on the screen to keep you engaged. Yes, there is part of me that feels like this doesn’t stand on its own enough as a film and that I should be more critical of that fact, but I had such a good time watching it that I can’t. Seven films in and I no longer care if these things stand alone as “wholly satisfying films”. Could we even view them as anything other than small parts of a whole if we tried? The fact is that this is just a small part of a large series, and it is just the first half of one chapter in the grand scheme of things. When viewed in that context I love what they did here. Why should I care how this would play if shown as an individual film to a theoretical person who knows nothing about Harry Potter? That should never even happen. So this film becomes the Empire Strikes Back of the Harry Potter series; but it’s even more Empire than Empire. That film is famous for ending in a very dire, unhappy place. This film starts us off in that dire place, and then keeps us there for its entire runtime. There is some pretty dark stuff in here aside from all the angsty camping. We’ve got deaths and Nazi imagery. We’ve got Ron freaking out at the image of a nude and embracing Harry and Hermione. I’m not even sure if this film is appropriate for children. And why should it be? The main players in this film started off as children, just like the audience, and since then they’ve matured into young adults, just like the audience. The Harry Potter franchise is one that people can grow up with, perhaps in a way that nothing that has come before it can compare to. When you look at it objectively, it’s kind of a wonder that this film got made. That a dark, frustrating, slow paced entry in a children’s series about wizards was allowed to get the financial support that this did from a big film studio is crazy. Without the goodwill and momentum of the six successful films that came before it, this wouldn’t have happened. You will never see a second film in a series that takes as many risks as this. So, in that respect as well, the Harry Potter series has become a unique film watching experience that nothing that has come before it has matched.

But like I said earlier, I’m not sure how other people will react to this very risky chapter of the Harry Potter epic. I loved it, but I could see a lot of people being very frustrated and bored. And in one respect, even I experienced a bit of frustration with what this film ended up being. If there is any great, glaring problem with this film for me it’s in the acting. Radcliffe, Grint, and Watson started out pretty horrible, but have really grown into their roles over the years. I believe that time has proven them to be the right choices for these characters, but the fact remains that they’ve always been the weakest actors in this series. The biggest joy of the film version of Potter, for me, has always been watching the laundry list of amazingly talented, veteran British actors who have signed on to take up the eccentric roles of the Harry Potter supporting characters. You have Richard Harris, Michael Gambon, Kenneth Branagh, Gary Oldman, Gemma Jones, Alan Rickman, Jim Broadbent, Emma Thompson, Ralph Fiennes, and John Cleece just to name a few. I’m sure I’ve left someone out. Each has been cast perfectly in their roles and each has been an absolute joy to watch ply their craft over the last decade. Here they all get pushed far into the background to focus on the three young actors. I feel bad singling them out here because they all perform admirably in their roles, they manage to adequately support this film on their young shoulders, and they’ve all exceeded the expectations I had for them when this series started. This is the best acting that they’ve ever done, and it should be a huge victory for a trio of actors that started out being pretty bad. But those supporting actors are all just SO good that getting anything other than them living in these weird, wonderful Potterverse characters can’t help but feel like a letdown.

After Part 2 is released and this whole Harry Potter endeavor comes to its end I’m not sure where this one is going to rank alongside the others. I’m not sure if it’s going to be enriched or cheapened by multiple viewings. I’m not sure how it is going to look as a segment of a completed whole. But walking out of the theater, I was confident that I had really enjoyed what I just saw. Right now I would put it somewhere below Half Blood Prince, maybe tied with Prisoner of Azkaban as my second favorite. Depending on how our opinions of the films that have come out up to this point synch up, that might let a Potter fan have a better idea what he or she is getting into with this seventh movie. But heed my warning, if you are fidgety, if you are uncomfortable with change, if you’re not appreciative of a filmmaking style that takes bold risks and subverts storytelling convention, then you might walk out of Deathly Hallows: Part 1 completely hating it. I stand by my opinion that splitting the story in half was an artistic choice first and a financial one second. And I stand by my opinion that presenting things this way will prove to be the most satisfying way of doing things once the series can be viewed as a completed whole. But maybe you disagree. Maybe you’re a philistine.