After seeing Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1 for the second time last month, I finally feel like I'm ready to talk about it. Fair warning, this post will contain spoilers for both the book and movie. I'm also going to be discussing stuff from the second half of the book and the second film. If you haven't read it/seen it and care to – stop reading now. Review/brain dump continues below the line.
*********************************************************************
I'm never sure exactly what to expect when I see a new Harry Potter film for the first time. Well, obviously I know what I'm getting into plot-wise, as I've read all of the books countless times. However, each time a new film comes out, I can't help but wonder how the filmmakers will translate JK Rowling's words into actions. What things will they leave out? What things will they add? Will they use Rowling's dialogue, or will they create their own? And, as we've progressed in the series, I keep wondering how on earth they will address some of the very important things they've hitherto left out.
And, every time a new Harry Potter film has come out, I have been left feeling at least mildly disappointed. Don't get me wrong – I think the filmmakers have done an absolutely wonderful job of translating the books to the screen. While there are lots of decisions, in terms of writing, directing, and acting that I disagree with (see: Michael Gambon's performances in Prisoner of Azkaban through Order of the Phoenix, the business at the Burrow in Half-Blood Prince, and the entirety of Goblet of Fire), I think that, on the whole, the films are great companions to the books. However, there has always been something major that I feel should have been addressed that wasn't.
Obviously, the films cannot hope to capture the subtle nuances of a 500+ page novel in a 2-hour production. Some things have to be cut or altered, and the films cannot be a perfect translation of the novel. However, with the first six Potter films, there were differences – usually glaring ones – that distracted me from experiencing the films in a truly emotional way.
Perhaps the most surprising thing about Deathly Hallows Part 1 is that there were differences – and I didn't care. Sitting in the theater watching the film for the first time, it didn't matter to me that they didn't get it exactly right – I had (almost) as intense of an emotional experience watching the movie as I did reading the book. It wasn't a perfect translation, but it was as perfect as I could have hoped for. What the filmmakers lacked in following the novel to the letter, they made up for in feeling and intensity. What they got right was so perfect that I was able to easily overlook what they didn't get quite right.
There are, as I'm sure you might suspect, a number of things I'd like to address. Read on, if you dare...
Harry and Hermione's Relationship
Say what you will, but I think that the filmmakers handled Harry and Hermione's relationship exceptionally well. Harry and Hermione have, throughout the series, a very strong bond of friendship. You can't go through the things they go through and not be close. And their relationship is, for the most part, platonic. It's fairly obvious from early on that Hermione likes Ron while Harry has obvious feelings for Cho and, later, Ginny. Harry simply does not see Hermione in a romantic way (and, at least outwardly, Hermione feels the same way. Since we're not focalized through her, we can't know that, of course, but we can infer). Additionally, Ron shares in most of the harrowing experiences that draw Harry and Hermione together, thus bonding all three together in deep friendship. Sure, Harry has some adventures with Hermione alone, but no more than he has with Ron.
However, during Deathly Hallows, Harry and Hermione share something that Ron isn't a part of (because he walked away, remember) and grow closer as a result of those experiences. The isolation of Harry and Hermione makes these experiences different from those they've had before (like at the end of Prisoner of Azkaban or when Harry and Ron weren't talking during Goblet of Fire). Harry and Hermione are alone together for almost all of the time Ron is absent, meaning that their experiences are much more intimate.
This intimacy is expressed in several ways in the book, most notably when Hermione musses Harry's hair at James and Lily's graves in Godric's Hollow. It's an intimate gesture meant to hint at the new, adult, character of their relationship. There are moments throughout parts of Deathly Hallows where Harry and Hermione could have ended up together. But, they didn't – their friendship is deepened by the time they spend alone together, but it never becomes anything more.
I think that the film does an excellent job of showing us some of these intimate moments, the what could have beens. While they include the scene in Godric's Hollow that I mentioned above, I like that they included other moments not found in the novel. I know – I just said that I liked something that they added in just for the movie. However, the new-found sense of intimacy between Harry and Hermione is a feeling the reader gets from Harry's thoughts, not necessarily actions. Adding in scenes like the dance or Hermione saying that they could grow old together help reinforce the intimacy in a way that otherwise would be difficult (if not impossible).
Remus Lupin
I really wished they had included the business with Remus leaving Tonks / being an idiot. In the end, it doesn't really matter, but I thought that was an interesting scene. I especially thought that it showed how Harry had grown up while Lupin, in some ways, remained emotionally stunted. Or maybe it's just because I have a love of all things Marauders...
The Dursleys
While I do appreciate that the Dursleys were included (after being cut out of Half-Blood Prince), I do wish they had spent more time on their departure. In fact, I just wish Harry could have gotten to say goodbye on camera (rather than just watching them drive off). I especially wish we had seen Dudley redeem himself, if only slightly, by declaring that Harry wasn't a “waste of space.”
When Did They Learn That?
I found myself thinking that quite a bit on the second watch-through. There were three things that I wondered a bit about. (1) Apparation. When, exactly, did they learn to apparate? They seem pretty good at it for apparently having learned on the spot. (2) Wordless magic. I guess we didn't spend too much time in class with Harry during the last film, so maybe we missed a thing or two, but it feels like we went from saying every spell to doing a LOT of wordless magic with no in-between stage. (3). The two-way mirror. I could be wrong, but I don't think Harry learned it was a two-way mirror in the movie. Yet, he must know, because he's not creeped out when he sees Aberforth.
A lot of times, with these films, my brain will automatically fill in the gaps. I just assume that the characters in the film know everything they would in the book, even if we haven't been told it in the movie. That way, things like this don't bother me too much.
RAB
I could say a lot, but I'll keep it brief. I wish that Kreacher could have told the entire story about going with Regulus to retrieve the real horcrux, but I understand that it's not the most important thing in the book and was expendable. What did bother me, though, was how freaking quickly they jumped from seeing “Regulus Arcutus Black” on the door to “RAB was Sirius's brother.” Did that seem like a suspicious leap in logic to anybody else? At least in the book, they remembered the big locket they threw out in Order of the Phoenix. And Kreacher backed up their theory.
Acting – Specifically, Rupert Grint
I am constantly impressed with how talented Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, and Rupert Grint have become. They have done an amazing job growing as actors and growing into their characters. That said, in Deathly Hallows, Rupert Grint blew me away. He is starting to make me like Ron Weasley. Just a little bit, though.
Malfoy Manor
Forgive me if I am incorrect, but Peter Pettigrew was supposed to die, right? Weird.
Dobby's Death Scene
In my opinion, Dobby is one of the most endearing characters in Rowling’s series. Loyal not to his hereditary preconditions, but to his ideals, he fights for what he believes is right, at any cost. Despite particularly unconventional methods (stealing Harry’s mail, bewitching the bludger, etc), Dobby did what he had to in order to help Harry. More than once, Dobby risked everything to help Harry because he believed in what Harry stood for (the power of love, goodness, etc).
And there’s no denying it – Dobby is good. Rowling could have written his character as flat and one-dimensional. However, she treated us to a non-human that is more humane than many wizards we meet. Dobby grows into his role as a free elf, as a voice for how non-human intelligent creatures should be treated. Unwavering in his commitment to help Harry Potter, Dobby defies the Malfoy family yet again (which must have been difficult. Despite his freedom, his preconditioned impulse to serve his old masters can’t be easy to overcome). And, in the end, his love and loyalty costs him his life.
Now, many (many) of Rowling’s beautifully written characters died because of their love for or loyalty to Harry (his parents, Sirius, Remus, Tonks, Moody, etc). I don’t want to take anything away from those deaths. Whether they particularly affected Harry or us as readers doesn’t matter – Rowling is not one to kill off characters for no reason. All deaths are significant in their own right. However, I feel that Dobby’s death is particularly painful, both for us and for Harry. Reading Deathly Hallows for the first time, the moment when Dobby dies in Harry’s arms had me crying so hard I couldn’t see the words to keep reading (not the first time that would happen during Deathly Hallows, I promise you). It hurt so bad to read about the death of someone that was so pure, so good, so undeserving of such a cruel fate.
To say that the corresponding scene in the movie didn’t disappoint would be a huge understatement. I cried nearly as hard as when I read the book - even knowing what was coming didn’t prepare me for my reaction. It was so visceral, so much more emotional than anything I’ve experienced during a Harry Potter film – I couldn’t believe it. It was handled absolutely perfectly. The differences (changes in dialogue, characters present in the scene, etc) didn’t matter. Not at all. As with so much of the rest of the film, David Yates captured the perfect feel/emotion/tone of the scene. He made me feel like JK Rowling made me feel, and that’s quite the accomplishment.
The death of a character is, I think, particularly tricky for filmmakers adapting a work of fiction. On one hand, deaths are usually described with some degree of detail (though not always), making it somewhat easier for filmmakers to get it “right” (if we assume it is “right” to follow the author’s cannon). On the other hand, having that description already written can make filmmakers feel boxed in and unable to put their own creativity and spin on the scene. In this film, Yates walks the perfect balance – he sticks with cannon where it matters which, in this case, is the emotional response of the scene. The dialogue may be different, but Dobby and Harry don’t act out of character and the way you feel watching the scene mimics the feel the book gives.
This is probably my favorite scene in the entire film. It made me cry like a baby both times I've seen the movie, but I absolutely love it. I also love that David Yates made you care about Dobby. After having been cut out of Goblet of Fire, Order of the Phoenix and Half-Blood Prince (and his function in the first to being passed to Neville?), it would have been easy to overlook the importance of Dobby's death. Or, at the very least, Harry's emotional reaction would have felt melodramatic (after all, in “film-world”, Harry hadn't seen Dobby since 2nd Year). Yates, however, managed to give Dobby the importance he deserved, both in life and in death.
[Time for an unfortunately lengthy digression. Promise, it's still Harry Potter related. Just not specifically Deathly Hallows related. Sorry!] Now for all I’m praising David Yates for handling Dobby’s death with such mastery, he doesn’t always get it right. For evidence, watch the death of Sirius in Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. I might be biased because of my unwavering love for Sirius Black, but I feel like Yates took something away from me in that scene. To be completely frank, Yates and company messed up big time. I will concede that the novel doesn't specifically say which spell Bellatrix used, but it is strongly inferred that Sirius was sent through the Veil with a Stunning Spell, not Avada Kedavra.
What's my evidence, you may ask? For one, Harry's reaction. If Bellatrix had hit Sirius with a Killing Curse, would Harry have expected Sirius to come back from behind the Veil? Would Lupin have needed to spell things out for Harry, telling him that Sirius couldn't come back? Harry has seen Avada Kedavra used before, and knows that it kills instantly (unless your initials are HJP, of course). If Bellatrix had used the Killing Curse, Harry wouldn't have reacted the way he did.
Besides, the book says “the second jet of light hit him squarely in the chest” (I would reference the page number, but the book is upstairs and I'm being lazy) just after Sirius dodges a red jet of light, which indicates a Stunning Spell. This tells me that the second jet of light was also red. If it were a different color (say, green, indicating Avada Kedavra), Rowling might have mentioned the color change. At any rate, the only reason we know that Sirius is dead is because Lupin and Dumbledore tell Harry as much. The Veil isn't explained (at all, which annoys me), but it's assumed to have killed Sirius, not Bellatrix's curse. The ambiguous circumstances surrounding his death leave hope (especially for pathetic, obsessed fangirls like me) that Sirius might one day return through the Veil.
Now, why does the film version of this scene upset me? BECAUSE BELLATRIX USES AVADA KEDAVRA!!!!! Sorry, but that's not right. The use of the Killing Curse takes away any doubt that Sirius Black is dead. This changes the nature of the scene in two ways: deviation from cannon and change in tone. We'll deal with cannon first, because it's the most obvious. What happens in the movie isn't the same as what happens in the book. Furthermore, since the Order of the Phoenix film came out before Deathly Hallows was released, it changed how I viewed the final book. I couldn't expect Sirius to return in the book because he was definitively dead. If he wasn't dead, Rowling would have told the filmmakers to change his “death” scene (this is NOT just wishful thinking – she insisted they include Kreacher in the film, telling filmmakers he would become important later. Obviously, if Rowling feels strongly enough about “what's important later” to let the filmmakers know).
The alteration of this scene also changes the emotional impact, both for Harry and for the audience. Harry's reaction in the film, while heartbreaking, is fundamentally different from his reaction in the movie. Movie-Harry is, understandably, distraught over the loss of his godfather. However, book-Harry's reaction is, I think, more profound. At first, he doesn't believe that Sirius is dead, and his reaction to Lupin's words is awful (think of it this way: Your best friend gets shoved through an open doorway. You expect them to be alright – probably really angry at whoever shoved them, and maybe a little banged up, but fundamentally alright. Instead, you find out that while getting shoved through the doorway, they had a heart attack and died. You thought your friend would have a scraped knee. Instead, you no longer have a best friend.). Furthermore, Harry doesn't fully believe that Sirius is dead, even after Dumbledore and Lupin confirm it. Harry's reaction to the two-way mirror and questioning Nearly Headless Nick are proof of that. Book-Harry doubts because of the ambiguous nature of Sirius's death. Movie-Harry does not doubt. It's still sad, but not in the same way.
Perhaps this upsets me so much because of my reaction upon seeing Order of the Phoenix for the first time. The first time I read the book, I got so upset that I threw it against the wall and bawled my eyes out for at least 10 minutes. After I re-read it a few times to make sure (I was just as confused as Harry). Seeing the movie for the first time, I was so mad that Bellatrix used Avada Kedavra that I couldn't be sad. I was so focused on the differences that I couldn't have an emotional reaction to my favorite character's death. Thanks for that, David Yates. [Here ends the digression. Sorry again.]
In Conclusion
Deathly Hallows Part 1 was, by far, the best Potter film yet. I am beyond excited for the second part to come out in 2011. If the filmmakers treat Rowling's work with such care, respect, and honor as they did in the first film, the second should be even better than the first (judging by my personal feelings towards the second part of the book).
And if I thought my bawl-baby reaction to Dobby's death was bad, I'm a little afraid to see how I react to Harry using the Resurrection Stone. I have never, in my life, cried so hard over something fictional as I did during that scene in the book. I mean, really, go re-read it right now. If it doesn't tug at your heartstrings, you have no soul.
Alright, for now, I shall sign off. If you soldiered on through the whole thing, bravo to you, my friend. Thank you for indulging my long-winded analysis.
There are three other blogs I have planned, for now, at least. Up next: Characters I Love (and Loathe).
Mischief Managed,
Slim Pearl Silver-Feather
