JEREMY: In fairness, I’m a bizarrely crazed fan of the series, so I noticed many, many discrepancies, some of which I thought were fine for an adaptation. I really felt the 2nd film was quite rushed overall, although it played better the second time. The theater filled with cheers at every stinking “triumphant” moment was irritating though. Combined 1 and 2? They don’t even seem like the same movie, the pacing is so totally different. The first started rushed then got better, but the second one was rushed throughout. The truth is, I wasn’t sure why they changed the final duel so significantly.
AN: You see, I felt totally different. I felt the first one started off very focused and then went off path. However, I noticed that they shot the second half of Part 1 and the first half of Part 2 almost entirely in shadows, but towards the end of Part 2, daylight started to return to the screen.
On acting, in Part 2, the best parts surrounded Watson, Radcliffe and Grint‘s facial reactions. Watson has a tendency towards melodrama; but, with limited lines, Yates and Kloves forced them to facially react to the grim horror of interrogating prisoners, willingly sacrificing themselves, and knowingly throwing themselves (and their friends) into death. I felt Helena Bonham Carter was wasted; but I loved her eccentrically contorted shadow reflecting child-like glee when the Deatheaters returned Harry’s “body” to Hogwarts. I raved about Fiennes’ acting in Goblet of Fire, but this time I didn’t notice it. However, I also noticed, I always called him by his character’s name whenever he appeared on screen.
On the characters, I still love the affection these characters show each other from Hermione always giving Harry the hug he needs, to their casual comfort with each other’s bodies while changing. However, I didn’t like Hermione’s muted personality. Normally she solves the puzzle and is more direct in directing the action. This time, they focused her more on finding comfort from Ron or supporting him.
CHUCK: I watched Parts 1 & 2 pretty much back-to-back, but I didn’t notice any tonal shifts between the two or that the final film felt rushed. I was disappointed that some of the deaths didn’t have more of an emotional impact (although Snape’s was pretty horrifying even off-camera), but in the end it was about Harry Potter, and this wrap-up of an eight-film series that only had one previous chapter that I truly enjoyed was ultimately satisfying for me.
KATIE: What they messed up was pretty damn disappointing (Harry’s apathy towards the Hallows, the lack of Dumbledore’s complex youth, leaving out Percy’s redemption and the weird “post-Kings Cross” showdown), but what they got right was good. Really good, actually. Alan Rickman‘s performance leading up to and during the Prince’s Tale is absolutely perfect, and I don’t use that word lightly. I would have liked to see more of the Epilogue (especially since they mention Lupin’s son in the forest for the first time, yet he’s never brought up again), but the kid who played Albus was strong. Radcliffe really hit the nail on the head with that last scene. I left the theater content that the series ended well.
MEREDITH: Going into the theater, I tried to put aside my expectations that the film would be a carbon copy of everything in the book. Over the years I have been mildly irritated by various cinematic departures from Rowling’s words in the past, but not so for this final movie. This was the end of the Harry Potter film series, NOT the book series. It couldn’t replicate the book because the Deathly Hallows is mammoth, so large, in fact, that it was broken up into two films, clocking in at what, some five hours of film in total? It’s unrealistic to expect the exact story to be the same on the silver screen.
As the conclusion to this eight-film series, I adored it. It moved me, literally to tears several times (shockingly at Snape’s death and his precious memories of Lily). It thrilled me with heroic, tragic self sacrifice such as the scene of Harry offering himself to Voldemort in order to snuff the life out of Voldemort’s final horcrux, and the pitch perfect, bright white scene at King’ Cross. I cheered when Neville stood up to Voldemort in the face of lethal threats and declared that Harry did not die in vain and lived within their hearts as McGonagall’s eyes brimmed with tears. It was likewise surprisingly emotional to see Harry as a late thirtysomething father seeing his first child off to Hogwarts, giving the kind of loving advice and embrace he himself had craved during his own childhood. Seeing the film series come full circle, with Harry sacrificing his life in order to kill Voldemort, as his mother sacrificed her life to save his, was just what I, a fan of the books and movies (as separate and distinct entities), wanted to see.
Sure, we can nitpick that this thing was left out or something was overblown (I had an argument with my 12-year-old son who said it felt “rushed” and who objected to the change in venue for the Harry/Voldemort final face-off) but I honestly cannot think of a better way to see off The Boy Who Lived.
Clacked by Chuck Duncan 
on Jul 23, 2011 @ 09:00 EST5EDT
