Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 1

I am a very easy consumer for movie makers. Give me a movie where I am entertained for those hours I spend in the theater and for me I have utilized my money well. I like going to watch movies in theaters, it is something different than watching it on a TV; it feels like I am doing something special.

What prompted me to write this post is my utter disappointment with the latest Harry Potter movie. Granted, I have never been a fan of any of the Harry Potter movies because I always expected everything in the book to be shown in the movie as well. Now, there are some instances in those earlier movies where the directors have left out very important parts in the movie but overall, they have been able to maintain the essence of the book. They were able to retain that 'magic'.

I have just returned from the theater and I was so disappointed that I felt compelled to write this at 2.30 am. As I said before, I always expect the scenes in the book to be shown in the movies. Before going to this one, I had decided that I will not expect any such thing and consider the merits of the movie in their own right. I don't think I should have done that. It just made me analyze it even more; more than I would for any other movie. And usually, I don't really analyze a movie that is pure entertainment. Serious movies? Yes, I do analyze them and I love doing that.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 1 was a movie with incorrect glimpses from the book. There was no flow to the movie. I felt transported from one scene to another without there being any smooth transition and the story seemed to shift from one part to another abruptly. Having the read the book about 3 times or so, even I was confused in a few places as to what exactly is happening. When the director takes artistic liberty to modify some sequences, I understand that is necessary to convert a book into a movie but why do the details in the scene have to be so incorrect? The movie was so confusing to the audience who hadn't read the book, that all around me, I could hear people explaining the movie to their friends as also while I was walking out the theater, people were still confused about what had actually occurred. It just felt like several scenes shot at random and thrown together to look like a movie.

I have heard from people who had gone to watch the earlier movies without having read the book that they were able to understand it and follow the story properly. This one, the director has just assumed that everyone in the audience has read the book.

One scene in particular is what annoyed me the most. It is the episode where Ron is attempting to destroy the 'locket' horcrux and different images pop out of that locket. One of those images is that of an apparently naked Harry and Hermione in an embrace and kissing. Though I don't find that scene objectionable per se, but my annoyance is with regards to its necessity in the movie. On the one hand, the director takes his liberty to change many important scenes and even completely omit them and here he adds a scene which is completely unnecessary to the story. If the director intends to convey that message, it is already conveyed in the movie before that scene and as it is, he has also already assumed that the viewer has read the book.

No matter how much I dislike the Harry Potter movies due to their inability to be efficient in converting the book in to a movie, I will still go and watch the last part like I have with the previous movies, just because I am a crazy fan of the Harry Potter series.

For the people who love these movies and argue that one mustn't expect everything from the book in the movie and make excuses for the movies for what they are; I would like to ask them why they think the Lord of the Rings movies were so well received, even by the book lovers?

(Part 2 dissection to follow)