I think by now almost everybody has already seen Deathly Hallows part 1 so it wouldn't be so bad if I write a bit about it now, would I? :)
I spent the entire day yesterday re-reading the book. I've forgotten how gripping Rowling's story-telling was (although admittedly the first few parts were rather slow - which is pretty much the same thing that I can say about the movie)).
The ominous opening pretty much set the mood for the entire movie. It's dark, sinister, full of blood shed. This is no longer a movie for kids; nothing like the the Christopher Columbus' Tweedle-dee-ooohhh-what-magic version of the 1st installation of the Potter movie.
After re-reading the book, I was rather surprised at how faithful the movie was to the original literature. I'm sure a lot of die-hard fans will disagree but those who are versed in film production will understand what I'm talking about.
The director and screen writer took some liberties with a few details in the story, but the general plot movement and the over-all themes were astoundingly faithful. A good job, of course, but I think is also one of the reasons why, in my opinion, the movie was painstakingly slow.
For the large part, the first part of the book is all about figuring out the puzzles that Dumbledore left behind. It was all about putting pieces of fact, fiction, and lore in the characters' HEADS. It works of course, in the book coz one's imagination is practically limitless when your transforming the words i your head.
The solving of the puzzles were not as gripping as it was in bok, and how can that be possible to do in a very visual medium, right?
Visually, there is VERY minimal movement for this part of the movie: a lot of camping, a lot of talking. There are very limited cinematic elements to play on. The figuring out part being more of an intellectual/mental movement than visual: rather difficult to do in film when you have to actually show what is physically happening.
Nevertheless, the movie moved with the natural ease of the original plot movement. The highlights (The chase to The Burrow, breaking into the ministry, the scene with Bagshot, the rescue at the Malfoy Mansion, even the glimpses into Voldemort's mind) were woven rather well, creating a good crest-trough movement, jolting one's interest when everything seemed to have lulled.
I deliberately did not read the book prior to the movie, (as is recommended). And I must say I rather enjoyed it in itself.
The Death of Dobby was really something VERY moving. I was almost THIIISSSS close to shedding a tear!
I'd say the movie deserves a 7 for a good book-to-silver-screen translation. But I don't smell an Oscar nomination for this one... I feel it lacks that certain spark of brilliance.
I am excited, though, for the second installation. There are more materials to work with for the latter part of the book and I think they will be bringing out all the guns for the final movie.
* * *
There was one Rave-worthy thing though about the movie: Hermione Granger's (Emma Watson) wardrobe!!!
Her "costumes" were all rather FABULOUS! not to mention the way her character was particularly styled. Or maybe that's just my jealous adoration for winter cothing (?) But still, outstanding work for the wardrobe team.
I wouldn't be surprised, though, if Burberry lent one of their stylists for Emma Watson. After all, you wouldn't want your brand's image model to be seen looking Too much like her character, won't you?
* * *
I'd have to say, though, of the three lead characters. Emma Watson's growing up to be a rather charming woman! Her managers must be doing a really good job.
Meanwhile, I feel like Daniel Radcliffe has lost his charms when he grew up. He's not as adorable as he was on the first few HP movies. His acting hasn't improved much (I still find him rather dry and the spectrum of emotions by which he can display is rather limited and quite, sorry to say, un-sophistticated). Equus, I hear, was not as much of a success as the press say it is and judging from Radcliffe's rather limited projects, I'd say HP7.2 would have to be his last hurrah. Good luck to his managers!
Rupert Grint has the makings of a good star. He's got the build, the swagger. he just needs a bit of a make-over to be more "commercial" probablya les ginger-y hair color and some MASSCARA! (My god, we can't see his eyelashes, it's kinda freaky)
On a separate but kind of related note, I learned (after much googling) that the fabulous Emma Watson just had her hair short. Not pixie short but BOY-CUT short.
Do I love it? Not really. She'd need more attitude to pull that look off. But it has definitely made her look more edgy... more "fasyon". You can see her lovely features better. It made her look tough-pretty.
Let's see how she fares with this new do. If don;t work, well, there's always a weave! :D