Page to Screen: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 1 (2010)

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1
based on
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows by J. K. Rowling

While Harry Potter is an integral part of my generation, I drifted away from the fandom shortly after finishing Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. While I was excited for the film, I wasn’t as excited as some people I knew. (There’s a joke about the average student at my women’s college being a vegan lesbian who loves Harry Potter, which is funny because it is true.) I was also displeased about the decision to split up the film; I’ve dealt with so many series, film and novel, with such poor structure that I thought it would be difficult to pull off. Still, I was going to go see it–how could I not?

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1 finds The Boy Who Lived in a dark place; after narrowly escaping another attempt on his life (killing and wounding friends in the process), the Ministry of Magic falls and becomes a puppet government for the Dark Lord Voldemort and his racist agenda. On the run from the magical government with his faithful friends Ron Weasley and Hermione Granger, Harry decides to seek out and destroy the magical artifacts that protect Voldemort from death–the Horcruxes that Voldemort has housed bits of his soul in–in order to take down Lord Voldemort once and for all.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1 is unrelentingly dark–fitting for a film whose tagline is “Nowhere is safe”. The film opens with Rufus Scrimgeour, Minister of Magic, delivering a speech meant to hearten his public in these dark times. It’s immediately contrasted by the Dursleys hastily abandoning Privet Drive, Ron looking out at an oncoming storm, and, heartwrenchingly, Hermione removing herself from her parents’ memories, literalized by her vanishing from the family photos around the house. (And that’s when the first round of tears started.) This sense of instability reigns supreme, even in the humor–at one point, disguised as a Ministry member, Ron worries over his wife being interrogated until Harry reminds him he doesn’t have a wife. Even the cinematography is dark; shadows, night shots, and plenty of forests on cloudy days. There are moments of real horror; Bellatrix’s torturing of Hermione is framed as a very physical assault (which, of course, it is) and the Bathilda Bagshot sequence made me jump in my seat. This darkness makes the moments of brightness all the more dazzling.

Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, and Emma Watson have all grown into their roles over the past seven years quite well. Radcliffe, especially, gets across the burden of being the Chosen One while still managing to be a guy growing up, and Watson, while too pretty for Hermione, splendidly gets across Hermione’s brand of awe-inspiring and mildly socially off-putting brilliance–when Harry declares Hermione a genius, she corrects him; she’s just highly logical. While Grint is no slouch, I was really impressed with Radcliffe and Watson’s portrayal of good friends in dark times. After Ron storms off and Hermione sits crying by the radio, Harry silently asks her to dance–it’s a sweet friendship scene, as the two goof around like proper teenagers in the middle of all this darkness. (Didn’t cry, but definitely teared up.) I could really go on about the young cast–the Phelps twins, as ever, nail the Weasley twins (one of the funniest scenes in the film occurs when George walks in on Harry and Ginny making out in the kitchen), and Matthew Lewis’ sadly short scene gives us a taste of the Neville who is going to rock Part 2, but I simply haven’t the space. The “adult” actors (the distinction is arbitrary by this point, don’t you think?) are, to a man, lovely–except for Helena Bonham Carter’s portrayal of Bellatrix, which I’ve never liked. While Bellatrix is certainly unstable and vicious, Carter’s Bellatrix is just too crazy. (The hair certainly doesn’t help; the Black women got the shaft on hair in these films, didn’t they?) Still, in a film with this big of a cast, it’s not a big deal.

As an adaptation of the novel, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1 falls into the same trap as the rest of the Potter films–if you haven’t been following the film series or the book series, you might be aconfused as to who’s who and why should we care about them, especially in the very quick Seven Potters sequence. Otherwise, it uses its two and a half hours to maximum benefit–the pace is quick but never frantic, and, miracle of miracles, the plot structure actually works in a similar fashion to Jacqueline Carey’s fantastic The Sundering. It stops during a natural lull in the action after the climactic battle of Malfoy Mansion, albeit with a killer hook for the next film. While I’m still not convinced that two part adaptations are a good idea (especially not for The Hobbit), it works well here. There’s also a pleasant surprise when a character tells the Tale of the Three Brothers–a fantastic 3D animated sequence that blends together the whimsy of the earliest Harry Potter films and the darkness of the later ones. I was terrifically impressed by Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1, and I’m definitely looking forward to Part 2 next summer.

Bottom line: Unrelentingly and brilliantly dark, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1 is not the place to start if you’ve been immune to Pottermania–but it’s otherwise a very good film that proves that two-part film adaptations can work. A fantastic set-up for the series’ finale.

I saw this movie in theaters.

17 thoughts on “Page to Screen: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 1 (2010)

  1. I will agree that Carter’s Bellatrix is pretty different from the one in the book, but it doesn’t bother me very much.

    I completely agree that the movie was AWESOME and that Dan, Rupert, and Emma have really grown into their roles – though I don’t like Emma’s acting in the 5th movie. However, she TOTALLY makes up for it in this one.

    One thing that this movie does better than the book did – for me at least – was that it made me cry during Dobby’s death. It’s a very sad scene, but when I read it, I didn’t cry because I was so overwhelmed already by everything around me. Reading the book, it was more like “oh, another death, great, now we’ll never see him again.” But the movie was making me cry. Dobby!

  2. What a thorough write up. I’m much like you: I was a die-hard Harry Potter fan, predicting what would happen, etc., until the last book was read. And then I moved on. I haven’t seen this yet, I’ll wait til it comes to Netflix. But sounds like a rewarding experience!

  3. I haven’t seen any of the Harry Potter movies after 3. I tried to watch 6, but I got bored. For some reason I just don’t enjoy film adaptations of books I’ve read, even if they’re well done. I don’t plan on seeing the latest release; I think I’d just be disappointed. It sounds, though, like it was extremely well done, for which I’m glad!

  4. I’m looking forward to this one so much! I do agree that the movies are often hard to follow for people who haven’t read the books. As my boyfriend said after movie 6: it seemed all just a set up for the next movie, nothing to care about, while for me, I really enjoyed it and it didn’t feel that way at all.

    And I am so glad that the stop between movie 1 and 2 didn’t feel too awkward for you! And that you enjoyed it so much 🙂

  5. Great, so I’m gonna cry?! I’m with you; I wish they hadn’t split the movie up but no one asked for my opinion…

    Two friends have promised to take me to see it on Imax for my birthday which should be wonderful! Although, I did admit to them both that I would be seeing it this weekend anyway. 🙂

  6. I was surprised at how much I enjoyed this film. They’ve been up and down for me, and I was very unimpressed with the sixth one (a lot of this had to do with dissatisfaction with the Harry/Ginny dynamic). But I was shaking throughout most of the seventh film, because it was just so damn tense. Loved the animated sequence, loved the scene with Ron and the Horcrux (apart from my eyeballs being scalded by sudden nakedness what the hell?), absolutely loved the creepy-ass thing Bellatrix did to Hermione.

    Helena Bonham-Carter is playing Bellatrix way over the top. I dislike it. I thought she was splendid in the fifth film — there was just enough of her loose-cannon craziness to make her terrifying — but now I’m kind of over her.

    However, I was so mad that when Voldemort goes to see Grindelwald, they have Grindelwald be all evil and give up Dumbledore. That didn’t happen! I loved it in the books that Grindelwald tried to protect Dumbledore, and then, oh, when Harry was talking to Dumbledore in the end and said that Grindelwald was trying to keep Voldemort from breaking into his grave — that was emotional, man. I am sad they took away that really quite sweet bit of the book. FROWN.

    • Normally, I’m usually fine with general nudity, but I was, in the throes of fatigue, just soundlessly mouthing “THEY ARE REALLY NAKED!” at the screen for a minute or two. (I did the same with the infamous Entertainment Weekly True Blood cover.)

      I see why they did so; it’s a difficult callback to stretch across two films, but I would have preferred it.

  7. Pingback: Page to Screen: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows — Part 2 (2011) « The Literary Omnivore

  8. Pingback: Page to Screen: Where the Truth Lies (2005) « The Literary Omnivore

  9. Pingback: Review: Tessa Masterson Will Go to Prom | The Literary Omnivore

Your Thoughts?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s