So: following the events of Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, Harry (Daniel Radcliffe) is without a mentor, a protector, or a safe place at his beloved Hogwarts, and as the new film begins, he is going underground with the aide of a whole mess of protectors. The biggest shock is that it's not more tedious: though, on its own, it's the worst film in the series since the first two, Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone and Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, ghastly drab things that choked for any air or hint of life under the hand of anti-visionary Chris Columbus, it's still a reasonably entertaining fantasy picture, albeit one that would have been well-served with a running time much shorter than its endless 146 minutes, which are at once not long enough to give Rowling's doorstop all the room it needs to breathe (though it is internally coherent more than most if not all of the preceding Harry Potter films), and too bloated with self-indulgence for a narrative that moves this slowly.
Rowling's fairly tedious novel (sorry to all the Potter faithful, but it's not remotely in the same league as the best books in the series), and it is, shockingly, a bit tedious. A transparently stupid claim: the book was already sick with padding, relative to the three books that preceded it, and every one of those was turned into a fleet, terrifically engaging adventure movie.īut here we are with Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1, the adaptation of the most tedious parts of J.K. The decision to cut the seventh and final Harry Potter novel into two parts for its film adaptation was a damn bad choice, made for obvious financial reasons despite the filmmaker's urgent, repetitive insistence that it was because of that book's "density".
0 kommentar(er)
