Sort by: Showing 9 items
Decade: Rating: List Type:
Worst to Best
It doesn't necessarily feel as outdated as the Philosopher's Stone could do occasionally, but I do honestly still think this is the weakest entry in the franchise. Which is a bit surprising actually, seeing as I do like the book a lot more, because of it's much darker turn.
It is just as fun and entertaining as the first film. Everything that was great with it, is present here as well, but sadly, some of the weaknesses are as well. It is also a little too fast-paced from time to time. So it falls under the first film by a nose length.
It is my favorite out of the books. Which is why it is a bit sad that I think it is one of the weaker films. It is great in many ways, though. It's very funny, nearly every scene with Jim Broadbent's scene-stealing Horace Slughorn is hilarious. There are some teenager moments that are great, and the finale is touching and strong.
But. It basically ruined my favorite thing about the book. The relationship between Harry Potter and Ginny Weasley. It is just awkward in the film. There is no chemistry or anything whatsoever. Such a disappointment.
It is not one of the better films in this beloved franchise, but it is still, perhaps, one of the most loved ones. Simply because it is the beginning. It is the start of the Harry Potter franchise. The beginning of a generation that would last a decade. Like the newer films, it is a fun, fast-paced fantasy adventure with a wonderful cast that entertains in every possible way.
But it is still one of the weakest entries in the series, despite being the first one, for a couple of reasons. One might be that it is simply a bit too fast. That characters don't have enough time to establish themselves, and the acting from the young stars gets a bit goofy. It is also seemingly a bit outdated in comparison to the effects of other films.
While it does introduce us to some of the romance in the franchise, things are really starting to get dark in this film. Which has to do with that they did mostly leave out all of the more lighter things from the book, mainly focusing on getting the main story right. Which is fine. Things get darker from this point on and it was a wise choice to focus on that.
It is pretty much just as good as Goblet of Fire. I do however think it is a bigger feat, seeing as they took the longest book and descended it into one of the shortest films in the franchise. Which I am totally okay with, surprisingly enough. There are really not that many important moments let out, all though I do, perhaps, wish they would have showed more of the order.
Otherwise, it is quite like Goblet of Fire. It goes straight to the point, only allowing a few romantic detours. Imelda Staunton is terrifying as Dolores Umbridge, creating one of the most hated characters in film history.
It's a difficult task to make another film in a very much beloved universe, and to completely shy away from the characters that greatly participated in making this universe so wonderful. Thankfully Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them does a great job in establishing its own world within the Harry Potter universe. It manages to be its own thing entirely without the need of any prior knowledge to JK. Rowling's franchise. This is thanks to a different sort of world building.
We're presented to a great cast of charming characters that makes the transition from our favourite Harry Potter characters to these new ones. Eddie Redmayne is perfectly cast as Newt Scamander, Katherine Waterston is cute, Dan Fogler is fun and Colin Farrell is outstanding. The creatures in this film, the "fantastic beasts", are not necessarily as imaginative as one would think, but some of them are so amusingly adoreable that I'm willing to more or less overlook their boring design. It falls a bit short when it comes to rank among the best Harry Potter films, but as a beginning of a new series of films, this is a good start.
While I do love what David Yates accomplished to do with his last two Harry Potter films, I would have been intrigued to see that Alfonso Cuarón would have managed to do with even darker Harry Potter material. Because he goes in a whole different direction than any of the other Harry Potter directors, and creates an atmospheric and visually beautiful, magical universe.
It also throws in two of my favorite actors in David Thewlis and Gary Oldman, who both deliver terrific performances. The acting have also improved a lot since the first two films, and there is basically only one moment where I can really feel that Daniel Radcliffe's acting is way off. Other than that, this is also a fast-paced adventure, but a much more emotional one as well.
A Potter movie for the fans. Seeing as I'm a huge fan of the books, this really was the Potter movie I've been waiting for. And it shows that the split was really needed. It's beautifully slow-paced, and it really catches the atmosphere of the book. It's dark and gritty. It's sad, and visually stunning. The action sequences are breathtaking and the cast have really grown in their roles. There are several emotional moments that is completely devastating, and which breaks my heart every time.
It is a bit sad too see that it didn't get as appreciated as it should, but I take it that if you were to fully love this film, you would have to be a fan of the book as well. Because this is a love letter to the fans, and it is a perfect set up for the grand finale.
Outtake from my review:
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2 is a visual feast, unlike anything I've seen recently. It is an epic. It's a spectacular blockbuster. The action is huge and massive, and there is no denying that David Yates have done an incredible job. To be able to portray 'the battle of Hogwarts' on the big screen, couldn't have been an easy job, seeing how big it actually is. But it certainly couldn't have been done any better. Then there is thing's that doesn't always get mentioned. It is beautifully photographed, the editing is superb, the set is massive, but gorgeous. The score from Alexandre Desplat is suting and amazing. But I did have a huge grin on my face when those well-known tones from John Williams legendary score came up from time to time.
Now, I feel like saying so much more. But, the truth is, I'm actually quite speechless. Yes, I know that I have said a lot now, but there is so much more I want to say. I want everyone to know what a masterpiece this is. What an emotional triumph it is. But I'm not sure if I have all the correct words for it, and I am a lousy reviewer. Anyway. This is one of my favourite films of all time, and is easily going to be on the top spot for my 2011 list. "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2" is more than anyone could have dared to hope for. It is the ending the franchise deserves, it is a love letter to the fans and a perfect way to conclude ten years of Harry Potter films. I don't remember exactly who said it, or the exactly how the quote was, but 2001 - 2011 will in film history be counted as the 'Harry Potter years'.
You can read the rest here.
The Harry Potter films ranked
7 votesFilm Franchises Ranked (8 lists)
list by Bml93
Published 3 years, 5 months ago
People who voted for this also voted for
Filmography of Gary Oldman: From Best to Worst
Most Successful Movies of... Liam Neeson
[Director] Stanley Kubrick Films: Best to Worst
I got a makeover!
Differences from books to movies: Harry Potter
Favorite Female Characters/Performances of 2016
Name Meanings from Harry Potter Series
Movies you don't want spoiled
Walt Disney Classics - From Best to Worst.
More lists from Bml93
David Fincher Films - Ranked
Saw Films - Ranked
Kristen Stewart - Best to Worst - Actress
2010 Films - Best to Worst
Christopher Nolan Films - Ranked
Tim Burton Films - Ranked
Steven Spielberg Films - Ranked