Movie Review: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Pt 1

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Pt. 1 (2010)

Directed by David Yates 

Written by Steve Kloves

Starring Daniel Radcliffe, Michael Gambon, Emma Watson, Rupert Grint, Robbie Coltrane, Tom Felton

Release Date November 19th, 2010 

Published November 18th, 2010

“Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part ..1”.. is by far the most disappointing of the Harry Potter series. Deathly Hallows Part 1 is a dreary series of strung together chases, deaths, deathly amounts of waiting for something important to happen while hidden behind magical walls and plot saves that a first time student of Robert McKee would find cliche Certainly, much of what is wrong with Deathly Hallows Part 1 is a function of being the first half of a full film, Deathly Hallows Part 2 arrives next summer, but what excuse is there for a series that has so far been so strong to offer up such weakness now.

When last we left the Potter series our hero Harry Potter had witnessed the death of his mentor and protector Professor Dumbledore (Michael Gambon). Now, with magical travails spilling over into the real world, Harry is on the run with almost nowhere to hide. Thanks to spies within the Ministry of Magic an early plot to move Harry ends with the death of one key character and the maiming of another beloved supporting player.

This leads Harry wanting to strike out on his own in order to protect the people he cares about. Harry, however, will not be alone as his pals Ron and Hermione are required by plot law to join him on the run as they head for London and eventually into some unknown, magical forest. All the while Snatchers are on the hunt and our beloved trio is at each other's throats over horcruxes, the magical pieces of the soul of the One Who Shall Not Be Named, Lord Voldemort (Ralph Fiennes).

Part of the fun of the Potter series is that kind of pomp and circumstance (“He Who Shall Not Be Named”) and portend. Few films intended for young audiences can sustain as much self seriousness as the Potter series has. Then again, if that self seriousness bogs down as it does in Deathly Hallows Part 1 then what you get is stagnant drama and a whole lot of waiting around while supposed heroes fight the urge to do something heroic.

The angst of child Harry Potter has become the self doubt of the alleged chosen one and while I understand Harry's fears I cannot help but wonder just when Harry will accept fate and become less of a reluctant savior and more of a warrior spoiling for a fight?

There is a scene between Harry and Hermione, in one of their many magical forest hiding places, where Hermione floats the idea of giving up and living out their days in this place. Never mind that the people they supposedly care about are dying and the civilization that Dumbledore gave his life for is being destroyed.

These quibbles do not prevent Deathly Hallows Part 1 from delivering some solid action, drama and a little romance (Harry and Ginny share a lovely, unexpected kiss) from time to time. A showdown with Belatrix Le Strange (Helena Bonham Carter, in full on weird) comes to mind as an example of fine suspense, but this scene takes awhile to arrive.

The budding romance between Hermione and Ron continues to hold promise. There is a wonderful scene in which Ron, seemingly by accident, reveals his love for Hermione without actually saying he loves her. It’s the best piece of acting Rupert Grint has delivered in the series.

Sadly these few pleasures cannot make up for Deathly Hallows Part 1's most damning and surprising failure, a heavy reliance on contrivance. To reveal these contrivances would require spoilers so let me just say that the return of Dobby the House Elf, while it is a wonderful piece of CGI, is among the more convenient elements of the film's final act.

Again, and to be fair, many of the issues I have with Deathly Hallows can be explained away by the fact that the film is really only half over and that we have a whole other movie waiting to finish what this one started. Still, each of the previous six films has managed more drama, suspense, romance and carefree wonders than is in a single frame of Deathly Hallows Part 1. And each of the first six films surely did not fall back on such convenient solutions as Deathly Hallows Part 1 does.

The least of the of the seven Harry Potter films, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1 is an overlong bore filled with portent but no great drama. Laziness takes the place of invention as Deus Ex Machina is employed for what I believe is the first time in any of the Potter films.

Here’s hoping that Director David Yates and writer Steve Kloves work out the kinks for Part 2 because a series as brilliant as the Potter series has been deserves an extraordinary send off. Deathly Hallows Part 1 is hopefully just a minor mishap on the way to something brilliant.

Movie Review Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (2005) 

Directed by Mike Newell 

Written by Steve Kloves 

Starring Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, Rupert Grint, Robbie Coltrane, Ralph Fiennes, Michael Gambon

Release Date November 18th, 2005

Published November 17th, 2005 

Four movies, three different directors and not one slip in quality.  This is the extraordinary track record of the Harry Potter film series. I am of the belief that a visionary director is the necessary component in making a great film series. George Lucas may not have directed all of the Star Wars films but his vision was constant and his aims achieved. Peter Jackson's imprint is the lasting legacy of the Lord of The Rings series.

What the producers of Harry Potter have achieved is astonishing for not having one director guiding the series with one singular vision. What Harry Potter does have is the brilliant work of author J.K Rowling whose hand in shaping the films made from her books cannot be underestimated. Even as she allowed each of three directors to bring something of their own aesthetic to each film, it is Rowling's imagination that finally ends up on the screen and it's the reason why Potter will go down as one of the greatest film series ever.

Harry Potter and The Goblet of Fire thrusts you right back into the world of Harry Potter (Daniel Radcliffe) as our hero reunites with friends Hermione (Emma Watson) and Ron (Rupert Grint) for year four at Hogwarts school of magic. Upon their arrival, after a brief and surprisingly dangerous visit to the Quidditch World Cup, they are informed that things are going to be different this year.

This year Hogwarts is playing host to the legendary Triwizard Tournament, a dangerous and deadly trial that introduces two other schools of magic heretofore unknown to us. From France the Beauxbaton Academy with female students as lithe and lovely as their school's name. On the other hand Belgium's Durmastrang students are as menacing as their school name and notably features the stern charismatic presence of Quidditch champion Viktor Krump.

For the Triwizard Tournament each of the schools will place names in the ominous Goblet of Fire, which will magically choose which students will represent their school in the tournament. Because of an age limit Harry, Ron and Hermione are not eligible for the tournament, or so we are told. Viktor Krum from Durmstrang, Fleur De La Course (Clemence Poesy) from Beauxbaton and Cedric Diggory from Hogwarts are supposed to be the only competitors however the Goblet has other ideas. Somehow, the name Harry Potter escapes the Goblet and, rules or not, Harry is forced into the tournament.

Harry did not submit his name for the tournament and one of the mysteries of the plot is who did put him in the tournament and what nefarious reasoning was behind it? Was it the new Dark Arts professor MadEye Moody (Brenden Gleeson), or was it the shady headmaster of Durmstrang Igor Karkaroff (Predrag Bjelac) who has a secret tie to the dark lord Voldemort? It certainly was not Ron or Hermione who were afraid for Harry's safety and in Ron's case a little jealous.

The Triwizard Tournament is yet another of the many visual wonders of the Potter series. Though the dragons of the first challenge are only okay in terms of CGI creativity, the chase scene they are part of is the film's first exciting moment. The underwater challenge, featuring some very unappealing mermaids, is, without a doubt, the best of the film's action. Using magic provided in a way by MadEye Moody, Harry grows gills, allowing him to remain underwater as long or longer than his fellow competitors. The challenge involves saving his closest friends from drowning. Not only does Harry save Ron's life but when Fleur is unable to continue with the challenge Harry risks his life to save one of Beaubaton's students as well.

The final challenge, an ever shifting maze leading to the tournament cup is only a mere precursor for the film's finale which features our first ever look at a living, breathing Lord Voldemort in the person of Ralph Fiennes. If this showdown is a bit of letdown-- it features a dreadful talking killer bit by Fiennes-- it's likely because we have three more chapters left in this film series, plenty of time before we have the true final throwdown.

The main subplot of Goblet of Fire is the ever quickening maturity of our heroic trio. As big a challenge as the Triwizard Tournament is, it may pale in adolescent comparison to the kids' first ever school dance, the Yule Ball. For Harry and Ron, finding a date may be more fearful and daunting than any evil magic they have faced. For Hermione it's only slightly better since she landed the most sought after date in the school, Viktor Krum.

Director Mike Newell, the third director to tackle a Potter movie, is the first British director to try his hand at this very English series and his Englishness comes through in the film's aesthetic. Britain is stereotypically gray and wet and such is the look of The Goblet of Fire often gray and wet. There is very little color and very little light which is also a function of this story's tone which is darker than the films that preceded it. Even in comic moments like Harry's uncomfortable bathing encounter with the ghostly Moaning Myrtle (Shirley Henderson) the look of the scene is so dark and gray you can barely see Myrtle's non-corporeal form.

The contributions of writer Steven Cloves cannot be understated. When producers first received the book from J.K Rowling and found it was an eye-popping 734 pages there was talk of splitting it into two films. However, with director Mike Newell only signed on for one picture it was put to Cloves to pare the book's many plots and subplots into one script and keep it to the series average two and a half hour runtime. 

Kloves' work is extraordinary if you are like me and have only watched the movies. I was impressed with the speed with which we were drawn back into this story. However, some fans of the book are finding some of their favorite subplots, including encounters with Harry's non-wizard family, the Dursleys, and a plot involving Ron's little sister Ginny, missing from the film. There is apparently a whole beginning of the book that was cut, likely in favor of getting back to Hogwarts quicker, that many fans are rather upset about.

Regardless of the few criticisms from hardcore Potter book fans, I doubt director Mike Newell could have made a better version of The Goblet of Fire even in two movies. The characters have deepened, the story has progressed well and while I prefer Alfonso Cuaron's warm inviting visuals, Goblet is better than its immediate predecessor in terms of preparing audiences for what is coming next.

The best compliment you can give a film that is intent on supplying sequels is to say you cannot wait to see what happens next. Well, I cannot wait to see what happens next. Harry Potter and The Order Of The Phoenix comes out in 2007, which feels like an eternity away. I would consider reading the book but I don't want to be disappointed by the cut corners that will be necessary in adapting that book for the screen. I don't want to be disappointed the way some Potter acolytes are disappointed with Goblet of Fire.

It's not a disappointment in terms of outright dislike. Rather, most Potter book fans are going to enjoy this adaptation. It's more of a longing to see played out before them all that they had imagined from the book. Not seeing some of their favorite characters or subplots has dampened some of the enthusiasm for the film but overall fans should be satisfied with Goblet of Fire.

What comes next in the Potter series is likely to be a bigger challenge behind the scenes than in anything in the story. Harry Potter and The Order of The Phoenix is scheduled for theaters in 2007. It will be the first of the series to not feature a script by Steven Kloves who is taking time to direct his own feature called The Curious Incident of The Dog In the Night. The script for Phoenix will be penned by Michael Goldenberg best known for 2003's Peter Pan and the Jodie Foster movie Contact.

Even more daunting is that the new director will be David Yates, a television veteran who will make his big screen debut in one of the most highly anticipated franchise offerings in history. Even a seasoned veteran might be a little frightened by such a task.

Movie Review The Good Shepherd

The Good Shepherd (2006)

Directed by Robert DeNiro 

Written by Eric Roth

Starring Matt Damon, Alec Baldwin, Michael Gambon, Joe Pesci, Eddie Redmayne 

Release Date December 22nd, 2006

Published December 21st, 2006

Playing a super spy has been great for Matt Damon's career. As secret agent Jason Bourne, Damon has found world wide stardom and massive blockbuster returns. Now for his latest super spy role, Damon goes an entirely different direction. As Edward Wilson the protagonist of The Good Shepherd, Damon helps track the founding of the Central Intelligence Agency and the rise of real life spycraft.

With no karate moves, or even a gun, Damon crafts yet another exceptionally watchable spy character; though not one likely to be sequelize.

Edward Wilson's (Matt Damon) initiation into the spy game was heartbreaking. Wilson was approached by an FBI agent (Alec Baldwin) and informed that his favorite professor (Michael Gambon) was a Nazi sympathizer. Using his trusted position in the professors inner circle, Wilson attended a party with the professor and a Nazi intelligence officer during which Wilson steals the evidence necessary to hang his mentor.

Of course were you to believe any of what you see in the spy game, you are not really much of a spy. Robert De Niro's unique, sometimes breathtaking, always absorbing spy drama The Good Shepherd is filled with twists and turns that will leave lesser audience members dazed and confused. With a complicated time shifting narrative, and a close to the vest, poker faced performance from Matt Damon, The Good Shepherd can, at times, seem impenetrable. Audiences willing to invest in the film's complications will be rewarded with one of the better spy pictures they've seen in a long while.

Charting the founding of the CIA with the fictional story of a man who became that institution's backbone, The Good Shepherd indulges in some spy cliches but justifies those cliches by acting as if this film invented them. Check the multi-layered double talk that Damon engages in throughout. If you are paying attention you might be able to decipher what the characters are saying. If however, your attention span doesn't allow for languid pacing and complicated scripting, you might want to sit this one out.

The Good Shepherd draws you in slowly and rewards you with a movie watching experience that is absorbing and almost hypnotic. Damon's performance is aloof but daringly so. His Edward Wilson is consistently duplicitous and frighteningly quiet and calculating. At the same time, the secretive nature of the character is seductive. He puzzles you with his elusiveness so that in the rare moment that we catch an emotion flash across his face; it nearly takes your breath away.

Robert DeNiro's direction of The Good Shepherd is precise without ever becoming mechanical. His warm, dark visual style works at  odds with a coldly efficient story. The Good Shepherd is classic, old school filmmaking, reminiscent of the kind of complex storytelling prevalent in the 60's and early 70's when movies weren't dominated by the need to satisfy younger demographics. This is a smart, adult minded movie that works at its own pace. If it drags in the middle; it's as much a function of the modern attention span as it is DeNiro's expensive form of storytelling.

The Good Shepherd is an absorbing, though slightly overlong, spy tale that features yet another career-making performance by Matt Damon. Robert DeNiro's direction is understated and underestimated. All of those years working with Scorsese have paid off in DeNiro's great eye and scene setting ability. And, thankfully, the story is as strong as the acting and direction.

The Good Shepherd needs a bit of a trim around the middle, but overall, this is an easy film to recommend. A smart, adult minded thriller with a classical sense of how to tell a story.

Movie Review The Book of Eli

The Book of Eli (2010) 

Directed by The Hughes Brothers 

Written by Gary Whitta 

Starring Denzel Washington, Gary Oldman, Mila Kunis, Ray Stevenson, Jennifer Beals, Michael Gambon

Release Date January 15th, 2010 

Published January 14th, 2010 

I would characterize myself as an agnostic. I don't believe in a higher power but I am open to the idea that I myself am not all-knowing. How does my lack of faith inform my criticism? It doesn't really. The fact is Hollywood gives so little consideration to religion that it rarely comes up in a review. The new post-apocalyptic thriller The Book of Eli is, arguably, the most religious and faithful movie I have seen since I have been a critic. Rarely has religion been so unquestioningly treated in a movie and in all places, a big budget, ultra-violent, Denzel Washington thriller.

In The Book of Eli Denzel Washington plays the Eli of the title. Sometime in the distant future the world is a wasteland and Eli is simply walking. He knows where he is headed, west, but what he intends to find at the end of his journey, even he doesn't know. Eli is protecting a book that he is convinced can save what is left of humanity. Eli's travels take him through the tiny, barely civilized fiefdom of a man named Carnegie (Gary Oldman). Having discovered a rare source of clean water, Carnegie has used it as a way to create a small kingdom that he protects with roving gangs of motorcycle riding henchmen.

The henchmen are searching for a book that Carnegie is desperate to get his hands on and wouldn't you know it, it's the same book that Eli is desperate to carry west. These two were destined to meet and fight and surely one or both of them will die. Standing between the two is Carnegie's daughter Solara (Mila Kunis) who is drawn to Eli's quiet purpose driven life but also wants to protect her mother (Jennifer Beals) from her father's violent tendencies. She joins up with Eli in hope that he will teach her the fighting skill he uses to protect the book.

Directed by the brilliant brother duo Albert and Allen Hughes, The Book of Eli is gritty yet stylish in its post-apocalypse. The Hughes Brothers are masters of atmosphere and tense showdowns and when Denzel backs up under a shadowy overpass to fight off some cannibalistic bad guys, the flash of his super-cool sword cutting body after body is an awesome sight.

Denzel Washington is perfectly cast as Eli, a man of devout faith who prays nightly and knows the bible by heart. In this future the bible has been all but destroyed and Eli is a last man of faith. Carnegie too seems a man of faith but is really a charlatan who hopes to use faith as Roman Emperors did to control a weak minded populace. This tension drives the conflict as does the book Eli is carrying is a classic MacGuffin with a strong pay off.

Though I am not a believer, religion in movies doesn't bother me. In fact, I am more often irritated with movies that pretend religion doesn't exist. Characters in horror films rarely seem to pray when faced with certain death. Sci-fi too often belittles the millions of people of faith in favor of technology as a pseudo-religion.

It is terribly unrealistic for movies to ignore the millions of earnest believers who attend dutifully to their faith. The Book of Eli is the rare movie that takes religion and faith deathly seriously and while the hardcore violence may not exactly be Christ-like, it is in service of a character who is serious about his faith in God.

The Book of Eli is intense and violent but also devout and earnest about Eli's faith. Religious folk may be turned off by the grit and violence but they will no doubt appreciate the Hughes Brothers straight forward portrayal of Eli as a solemn, faithful soldier in service of God.

If the God stuff makes you uncomfortable, you can still appreciate the very cool ways in which the Hughes Brothers frame Denzel Washington slicing and dicing bad guys. Whether it's the stellar overpass scene or a Tarantino-esque bar fight scene, The Hughes Brother and Denzel know how to get their violence on.

The Book of Eli is gritty, bloody, tense and faithful all in one terrific movie.

Movie Review The Omen (2006)

The Omen (2006) 

Directed by John Moore 

Written by David Seitzer 

Starring Julia Stiles, Liev Schreiber, Mia Farrow, David Thewlis, Michael Gambon 

Release Date June 6th, 2006 

Published June 5th, 2006 

666 is the number of the beast. It's also the number hiding somewhere on the body of five year old Damien Thorn. You see, Damien is not in fact the son of Robert and Katherine Thorn, played by Liev Schreiber and Julia Stiles. On the day his son was to be born Robert Thorn arrived at a religious hospital in Rome to find his son had died at birth. The doctors waited till Robert arrived before telling his wife Catherine (Julia Stiles). There was however a secondary motive to not telling her. A small child was born simultaneously in the hospital to a mother who died while giving birth.

The priest in charge of the hospital makes a deal with Robert to adopt this child in secret and raise him as his own. If all of this sounds rather convenient, you have no idea how right you are. Cut to five years later and young Damien is a slightly creepy looking five year old with no outwardly sinister ambitions until his birthday. At the party Damien's nanny suddenly decides to hang herself in front of the entire crowd of children and parents. Only young Damien seems unaffected by this scene.

Following this disturbing event Robert is visited by a crazed priest, Father Brennen (Pete Postlethwaite). Babbling about how Robert needs to accept Christ as his savior, Father Brennen wishes to explain to Robert that his child Damien is actually the son of the devil. Upon Father Brennen's ghastly death a photographer (David Thewlis) makes a terrifying discovery that will lead he and Robert across the globe to uncover his sons true nature. Meanwhile young Damien and his new nanny Mrs. Baylock (Mia Farrow) set there sights on poor Katherine.

At first The Omen 2006 is a slavishly devoted retelling of the original story. However, director John Moore eventually finds his own way of making The Omen his. Through the use of some exquisite art direction, location shooting and cinematography, The Omen develops a steadily chilling atmosphere that grows exponentially more shocking and genuinely scary as the movie progresses.

John Moore's first film was a forgettable remake of the Jimmy Stewart flick Flight Of The Phoenix. That film never gave any indication that Moore had this kind of directorial talent. His eye for visual splendor in The Omen is exquisite here, where it was desperately muted in Flight of the Phoenix. Moore draws genuine scares not from the usual bait and switch histrionics of cats leaping from the shadows and music stabs but from crafting atmosphere and artful misdirection.

The film evokes the original The Omen with stars Schreiber and Stiles bringing echoes of Gregory Peck and Remick to live but never surpassing the legends from the original. Only Mia Farrow as Mrs. Baylock truly stands apart from the original film. That is mostly because of the oddity of her casting. Ms. Farrow is well known as the mother of Satan's child in 1969's Rosemary's Baby. Her casting in The Omen is a terrific inside joke for horror fans.

Because so little is changed from the original The Omen is a directorial revelation. Only John Moore's direction provides the opportunity for updating this material and that is a challenge that Moore meets and surpasses. The Omen 2006 is a visual horror nightmare that improves on familiar material with directorial flourish worthy of masters class. I never would have expected this from John Moore but after The Omen I cannot wait to see what he could do with original material.