Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips
Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 4 of 63: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [Next]
Index 621 reviews in total 

23 out of 39 people found the following review useful:

Do people really like this film?! It was so utterly boring!

5/10
Author: Eelco_1977 from The Netherlands
24 December 2010

After I'd seen the sixt Potter movie, I thought they would improve on the pace in this (part 1) seventh movie. But boy, was I wrong. I was so bored after the very well done beginning of the movie. Voldemort's meeting and the motorcycle chase were very exciting, but then it started again just like in part six...the very very slow scenes about how Harry thinks he's so alone and he and his friends don't know what to do...blablabla. Really, I have to see the second part of the seventh book, just because I have to know how it all ends, but the director is giving me a really hard time. I like the wonderous world of Harry Potter, but not like this. Personally, I think the fourth part was by far the most exciting of the Potter movies. OK, now let's sum up what I liked about this seventh movie: -The beginning (Voldemort's meeting and motorcycle chase) -The overall look of the movie (sets, lighting, etc.) -The Deadly Hallows story sequence -The casting. Helena Bonham Carter is one of my favorite actresses Now, things that I didn't like: -The pace...ow my goodness. And I thought Gone with the Wind was slow or for instance Dr. Zhivago or Signs. -Ron thinking Harry has the hots for Hermione and fighting about it. Jeez...this was so forced. I mean, Harry already knew in the 5th and certainly in the 6th movie that Ron liked Hermione and Harry already had it going with Ginny. This was so stupid and boring. -How many items do they actually need to kill Voldemort. 7 Horcruxes that can be destroyed by a sword and than you also have the 3 Deadly Hallows. My goodness...in a computer game OK...but in a movie?! -When it became clear the neckless was making people angry I wanted to shout: "Cast the ring into the fires of Mount Doom!" Damn, this was such a rip-off of Lord of the Rings. -And yeah, there we have it again...all those damn unoriginal references to WW2. As Basil Fawlty would say: "Don't mention the war!" -There were so many moments in this movie that it seemed like the story progressed simply by chance. -The introduction of Dobby again and his utterly useless and overemotional death. He dies and the movie tries to make us feel so sad because he was such a lovable and important character...NOT! Maybe in the books, but when you've only seen the movies like I have, Dobby's not really a character that I established an emotional band with during the last six movies. -The movie took itself too serious, but that's probably what the tone of the book is too. A little more wonder and innocence would have been nice. The humor was so scarce. As The Joker said in The Dark Knight: "Why so serious?!"

All in all I just have two words for this movie...too bad! :(

Was the above review useful to you?

31 out of 55 people found the following review useful:

The worst Harry Potter film so far

4/10
Author: darkthirty from Vancouver, BC
21 November 2010

Is it part art film? I'd say yes, in the better parts, it had something wise and melancholy going for it, rather like the book, but it was lost all too easily to the infrequent action sequences which neither impress nor lend any forward motion, aside from a particular part of the Bagshot/Nagini sequence making the audience jump a couple feet, and all without Voldemort. Meh.

Alterations to the plot were generally as bad as they've been in the past, but the Lovegood house was so very poorly done, it rates special mention. It well and truly sucked. (I wondered if there had been some technical difficulties with the editing, it was so bad.) Most of the emotional scenes are strangely unmoving. Hermione's torture becomes something weirdly camp - Tim Burtonish, if you will - with no power to unsettle. The much anticipated horcrux destruction scene lacks any sort of nuance at all, so much so that Ron's resigned remark at the end of it falls as flat as a bassoon. Hermione looked like an airbrushed NY fashion house mascot, and Harry looked like plastic, with some silvery gloss smudged on. It was hokey, and I felt embarrassed watching it.

There were other bothersome things (the list could go on) - the whole imprisonment scene was horrid, rushed and thoughtless, and the basement itself looked like they were in some half-finished suburban ground floor, only thing missing was a couch, a TV and some paneling. Olivander looked far healthier than he did in the first film, Luna was an afterthought, Wormtail was apparently lulled to sleep by general uneventfulness, and Dobby looked like a wax figure moved by strings. Bellatrix was about as scary as The Count from Sesame Street, the snatchers behaved like the three stooges, and the confrontation at the end had all the movement drained from it, arranged instead like a lazy, half-hearted family portrait, just so they could end it with a hokey special effect that didn't work - the knife turning to jelly or something in the whirlwind of apparation. Dobby's death was atrociously handled, Luna spoke far too soon, and the burial was filmed in the blandest possible way.

The story was told in a linear way, and the camera work was too, which resulted in a very one dimensional film. The burial scene, for example, could have had a shot threw the window, with Hermione on the couch, Ron beside her, and Harry in the background or something - it would have taken no more time, but it would have filled the world better. Anything to vary the 1, 2, 3 of the telling.

The Story of the Three Brothers animation was very cool, and strange as it may seem to say it, Emma Watson's acting is almost the best thing about the film.

I liked the arty parts, but everything else is trash.

The film needed a new director and a new writer. I fear for part two very much now.

Was the above review useful to you?

65 out of 123 people found the following review useful:

OH MY GOD... what did they do.,..

4/10
Author: darren-906-93171 from Spain
24 November 2010

I have looked at other peoples reviews of this film, and let me start by saying I loved the other HP Movies.

But the people that have reviewed this film are you sniffing GLUE??? What a waste of 2 hours..... it was just a lot of nothing.... I read this on someones Else's review and i think they are spot on...

"When Harry Potter and the Deathly Hollows ended, I asked to myself: Two and a half hours for this? I think that the important elements from this film could have easily occupied the first half hour from the following film without losing the spirit from the book or the growth from the main characters. Big part of this film is a boring "road movie"" I was shocked and I nearly feel asleep and for 1 second i thought it was just me but when it ended, I heard nearly everyone in the Cinema saying what a load of XXXX and how do we get our money back!!! What were they thinking when then split it and done what they did, I guess it must have just been a money making Spin before the last one..

Do yourself a favour wait for this to come out on DVD and don't waste your money at the Cinema, YOU WILL BE Disappointed:: Just my view, but I have never come back and went straight on IMDb to tell everyone I could, not to waste the time in their life when they could do other things and enjoy it more when the next one comes out.... I hope they don't mess that one up too..... I'm worried.

....

Was the above review useful to you?

8 out of 10 people found the following review useful:

Focusing on isolation and desolation, this feels far removed from Harry Potter--Yet its the best

10/10
Author: jacksakes from United States
21 November 2010

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Yes, I am a fan of the Harry Potter series. I love it because Harry Potter has always had substance and a storyline with twists and turns to figure out as well as character development.

This one is by far not only the best acted, but also a gutsy move by the director, screenplay writer, and author J.K. Rowling. Never before would I think I would be going through a very bleak world chimed on by the mystical sounds that brought on the many funny moments of Hogwarts introduced in every Potter movie. The director had to choose when he made this movie and I felt he made the right one.

What was the choice? SPOILER ALERT-- The choice that was made was to put you in shoes of these three kids in a world gone wrong and let you feel the full emotional impact. Using things like a squelchy radio reporting all the deaths and things gone wrong in the wizarding world gave you such a withdrawn feeling that nothing is left out there for you.

The hopelessness that you feel is nothing any other post apocalyptic movie can touch. For this the movie is a complete success. The only other one that was close to giving me this feeling was the Road, but the Road didn't have 10 years and 6 movies built up to make you feel the intimacy you do with Weasley, Hermoine, and of course Harry.

Special effects (although there is still much of the brand in dueling wizards and witches as well as some chase scenes--one is even soaring above the clouds) and epic battles are sacrificed for minimalist moments of surviving in tents in undisclosed locations. The dance between Harry and Hermoine was unbelievable. It was brief and awkward, but for just a mere moment you saw the purity of children within, and how it was necessary for them to do such silly things to survive: to remember and not lose themselves.

Harry Potter has developed unbelievably. Not only is he more confident (no longer the kid with the glasses and the awkward smile), you really feel that he could be the champion of the story, and yet you still see how much pain and anguish he goes through. You feel his follies, you get the sense that he is utterly lost without Dumbledore. You see his anger that has culminated for the past six movies, and you see him breaking down.

Emma Watson as Hermoine Granger has peaked. She is showing some real acting chops in this movie. No longer is she the shrill, cracking voice, but now she has shown unbelievable conviction to her character and what she is going through.

Ronald Weasley of course plays a humorous role well, but he is not without his conflicts and there are some scenes that he really rises and shows that he is more than just a goofy red-headed kid you should always be laughing at. He too has his pains.

Spay special attention to Ralph Fiennes as Voldemort. He has been given screen time only in chunks, but if you watch him closely, you'll see what a three dimensional villain he is. At first I felt they got him wrong. I expected an unstoppable force with tenacity in his calmness with the likes of Darth Vader, and now I realize that they nailed this villain so well. But he goes through his own pain and anguish in his hot pursuit of Potter and his claim to power. He too goes through a whirlwind of emotions.

This is an amazing movie. This not only has the special effects and action, but also the minimalist acting of art-house films. Try to take off the Harry Potter label and look at this movie just once. You'll see past the famous-infamous popularity of the franchise, and see a movie for what it really is.

Was the above review useful to you?

13 out of 20 people found the following review useful:

Best movie so far

10/10
Author: babak-burbi from Sweden
18 November 2010

Hey, Tis movie was so great and funny and a bit scary in some parts but i think this time it has really got it MOST SE!!! And its starts great and ends really god. I watched the movie with my friends and i really want to buy the movie to Blu Ray THANK GOD THAT I HAVE A PS3 :) But do anyone knows when it comes out really want to buy this and i am wondering if i should buy all the seven movies in blue Ray I only have 4 and 5 but they are in DVD :( So i think i going to buy all to blue ray. To all those who thinks that if they should go to the movie or not I say GOOO!!! Really want all people see this amazing movie I am WAITING FOR PART 2 whose coming out 2011 :( SO LONG ISENT IT?

Was the above review useful to you?

18 out of 30 people found the following review useful:

A Disappointing Disjointed Movie

6/10
Author: tabuno from utah
11 December 2010

This beginning of the end for the Harry Potter series is a disappointment and apparently without the book the movie is unable to stand alone as a movie and instead becomes a disjointed, disconnected series of movie scenes that initially begins with fusion between a TERMINATOR 2: JUDGEMENT DAY (1991) action thriller and a junior version of BRAZIL (1985) and a retro-stylistic, parody version of the cold war, totalitarianism. The rest of the movies eventually almost becomes more like an expensive video game as Harry and company get to survive to the next level in a series of disconnected, random levels. Throughout there are logic gaps, omitted scenes that avoided much needed character, plot development. The purported transformation from magical children entertainment into a darker fantastic juvenile action thriller merges too close the LORD OF THE RINGS trilogy which in many ways remains a fantasy classic and by comparison pales in J.R.R. Tolkien writings.

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

Worst and Longest of the Series

6/10
Author: erik_squires from Boston, MA
13 April 2011

Worst of the Harry Potter series. The biggest problem to me seems that they wanted to save money on effects and actors by spending endless amount of time shooting outdoor forest fly-by scenes instead of including side plots and more special effects. The movie has about 30 minutes of outdoor scenes which could be completely removed. Also, there's a scene where Harry and Hermione dance that is supposed to be poignant, but I found it endless and pointless. I can't remember the last time I saw a non-musical movie which included a complete song. Usually they are shortened to show the highlights and move the story along, but not Deathly Hallows. I'll definitely not be too worried about buying the extended DVD! I'd actually pay extra for a better edited version.

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

Didn't live up to expectations

5/10
Author: emmakateri from United Kingdom
12 April 2011

I missed out on seeing this at the cinemas, and although the experience would have been undeniably better if I had seen it there first as opposed to from my living room sofa, I'm kind of glad that I didn't bother. I have read the books and seen the other films countless times, and even the later, darker ones are still enchanting and heart-warming. This one, however left me completely cold. Most of the film is flat and dull, with none of the charm and detail of the book and as much as I usually love the actors, I didn't feel any connection to the characters. After all the hype and success of the other films, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part I was a big disappointment. I can only hope that Part II makes up for it.

Was the above review useful to you?

9 out of 13 people found the following review useful:

Well, the fans asked for it, and they got it

8/10
Author: kylopod (kylopod@aol.com) from Baltimore, MD
22 November 2010

Ever since the release of the first Harry Potter movie in 2001, I've wondered how a TV miniseries of the books would have fared. The movies so far have had difficulties showing enough of the books' events within a reasonable time slot to keep the story flowing. They've all had to omit significant plot points, which has not only disappointed the more literal-minded fans but risked the integrity of the story. This was most painfully evident in the fifth movie, "Order of the Phoenix," which awkwardly attempted to fit the longest Potter book into just 2 hours and 15 minutes of film. The result was a movie that felt choppy and barely coherent, almost dreamlike. The two best films up to now--the third and the sixth--worked in part because they took the most risks, often departing substantially from the narrative of the books, to the consternation of many fans. I was not one of the fans complaining, because I figured that as long as it wasn't a miniseries, the best approach was to interpret the story rather than present the events exactly as they appeared in the books.

Dividing the seventh book into two movies has given a taste of what a miniseries might have been like. "Deathly Hallows: Part 1" is a more faithful adaptation than any of the previous films. This surprised me a little, because the portion of Book Seven it covers is actually longer than the entirety of some of the earlier books. (As I was rereading it a few months ago, I correctly guessed where they'd end Part 1--it's at an important turning point in the story that occurs close to the two-thirds mark.) Most of the film's sequences are exactly as I had envisioned them, and sometimes better than I had envisioned them. I especially liked its approach to the Riddle-Hermione scene, to the matter of protective enchantments around their camp (which is handled with a nice dose of spookiness), and to a spell that distorts a character's face. Apart from the oversimplification of a few plot details here and there, any flaws in the story come straight from the book. The two-and-half-hour movie drags at some points, but then so did the book, particularly in the forest scenes. The plot concerns Voldemort's takeover of the wizarding world and pursuit of Harry, who goes into hiding with Ron and Hermione but repeatedly endangers them and himself in his daunting efforts to find and destroy a set of objects that keep Voldemort immortal, aided only by a few enigmatic clues Dumbledore has left him.

It is not a very accessible film for non-fans. People who haven't read or seen any of the previous installments will probably be lost. It never once pauses to explain the Harry Potter universe or anything about the background to these tumultuous events, not even a prologue like the one that began the third of Peter Jackson's "Lord of the Rings" films. The good news is that it doesn't condescend to the audience. The bad news is that if you don't know or can't remember things like what a horcrux is or what happens when you point a wand at someone and say "Obliviate," you might have trouble following the story.

As a fan, however, I loved it. It's just well-filmed, and I had notably fewer complaints about acting and special effects than I had for the previous movies. The CGI is relatively unobtrusive, and there aren't too many fake-looking moments. (The house-elves look especially good this time.) Ralph Fiennes finally appears to have settled into the role of Voldemort, after having delivered somewhat phoned-in performances previously. The kids, who get to dominate more scenes than in any of the other films, when their presence was counterbalanced by a plethora of seasoned British performers who are mostly absent here, have really grown into their roles. They were well-cast from the start and always had a certain raw talent, but early in the series they possessed some of the amateur qualities common to young actors. They have become increasingly proficient as the series has progressed (which I suspect was what the studio intended when it eschewed the tradition of casting older actors in child roles). Here they display the kind of camaraderie that can only be developed gradually, after having acted together in several films, and it makes the scenes that deal with their relationship feel natural and unforced.

I actually look forward to seeing the movie again at some point, just so I can sit back and take in more of the details. I think I didn't appreciate it enough the first time, distracted as I was by my knowledge of what happens in the book and the lack of any significant divergence in the film's depiction. There is not a lot in this film that will surprise fans; the enjoyment comes from seeing how vividly it is all brought to life.

Was the above review useful to you?

11 out of 17 people found the following review useful:

The best Harry Potter ever...are you kidding?

1/10
Author: chrichtonsworld from Netherlands
21 January 2011

My first attempt in watching this movie I fell asleep. The second attempt was more successful as I managed to stay awake. But what on earth did I just see. The first three HP movies were mysterious and magical. And as Harry matured he became stronger and skilled. After the third movie the Harry we see on the screen is nothing but a plot device. He is nowhere near as impressive and no match at all for any bad guy,in a believable way that is. So I haven't read the books,something tells me I do need to do that. But I should not read the books to make sense of it all. I judge solely on what I see on the screen. Why would the Dark Lord be so afraid of Harry Potter. Not once an explanation is given for it which I believe the books do (somebody told me). It really is beyond me that people can call this the best Harry Potter movie ever. Excuse me? Was there actually a plot? The scenes that were interesting were over before I could get into it. Please give this a miss. It is a waste of time.

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 4 of 63: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
Awards External reviews Parents Guide
Official site Plot keywords Main details
Your user reviews Your vote history