The saga of the world’s favourite teen sorcerer comes to a satisfying conclusion in Harry Potter & the Deathly Hallows: Part 2.  It’s not an amazing, life-changing, tear-jerking, surprising conclusion (I mean, we all read the books, right?), but a fitting and faithful finale nonetheless.

One can only hope the creators resist the temptation to make Harry Potter: the Next Generation or something of the sort, especially after I was quoted in The Washington Times saying there is “no room for a sequel, prequel or reboot.”  Well, since the principals involved have all become as rich as Croesus, perhaps we’re safe for the moment.  But one never knows what the future will bring…

Deathly Hallows Part 2 consists of almost constant action, paced so effectively that the two hours-plus race by.  Plot?  I’m afraid you’ll have to fill in the blanks yourself, but then again…who would go to a film entitled “Part 2” if you haven’t already seen Part 1?  I’m not about to quibble over some inconsistencies or illogicalities (is that a word?  Google says yes!) or story twists that leave one in need of a narrative chiropractor.  Frankly, I read all the novels in the hectic summer of 2009 and enjoyed them, but I don’t really recall specific details, so—although I knew roughly how it came out (Harry defeats Voldemort)—I wasn’t mentally comparing the film with the novel throughout. I guess there were some different things, but nothing really significant, it’s not like Ron or Hermoine got killed or something of that sort.  

However, although I’ve just characterised Part 2 as all-action, no-story, that doesn’t mean the film is devoid of drama.  One of the nice things about the Harry Potter series is the continuity that’s been maintained over 10 years, with only one major replacement in the cast (Michael Gambon taking over as Dumbledore after the death of Richard Harris, and that was so long ago that Gambon is probably the Dumbledore most people recognise).  In addition to the heroic trio of Harry, Ron, and Hermoine, the familiar characters of Draco Malfoy (hiss), Neville Longbottom, Luna Lovegood (so cute), Snape (hiss…or not?), Professor McGonagall, and Hagrid—to name a few—all wrap up their Hogwartsian careers in fine fettle.  

There are also moments of genuine emotion and humour (the latter was especially absent in Part One).  I’m not talking about the “omg Ron kissed Hermoine” stuff, or even the more overt speechifying, but subtler touches, such as the understated attraction between Neville and Luna, the gallant defense of Hogwarts by its superannuated faculty and immature students, and—on the humourous side—Harry describing the afterlife as “it looks like King’s Cross Station, only…cleaner.  And without all the trains.”  The balance of spectacle and human drama is tilted in favour of spectacle, no doubt about it, but this isn’t a soulless orgy of CGI violence by any means.  Again, our residual good feelings about the characters and almost familial manner in which we view them after 14 years (of the novels) and 10 years (of films) certainly contribute to the impact of Deathly Hallows: Part 2.  It isn’t “just a movie,” it’s the culmination of an epic.

As I mentioned in my discussion of Deathly Hallows: Part 1 last year, the Harry Potter movies are not exactly a film “series” a la the James Bond or Batman films—which share a common protagonist but aren’t too scrupulous about sustaining a consistent “world view” from film to film—but are essentially a single story arc with a defined beginning and end.  Many people (the early adopters) eagerly awaited each successive novel and film as they were issued, while others like myself came late to the game, reading the books in a relatively short period, and watching the already-released films in a similar compressed time frame: at least I had the experience of anticipating the final three Harry Potter movies, which came out after I’d finished the novels and the first five films.

Reviewing Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2 is a rather bootless task, since anyone who cares about the film has probably already seen it, and those who don’t care are probably not interested in reading about it.  Two quick comments though:

Is there some sort of rule that every 3D movie must have a flying sequence?  Even films which “logically” shouldn’t involve flying (cf Rango, set in an approximation of the Old West) manage to shoe-horn in one or more long scenes in which the camera goes zooming around through the sky.  Deathly Hallows: Part 2 has several of these (I saw this in a “flat” version but maybe someday I’ll watch it in 3D just to experience what are reportedly some effective in-depth images).

The film’s conclusion is faithful to the novel, depicting Harry and his wife Ginny, as well as married couple Ron and Hermoine (well, one assumes they’ve legalised their relationships and aren’t just living in sin) seeing their children off to Hogwarts, “19 years later.”  Reaction to this sequence seems to be mixed, with some commenters suggesting the shot of the 3 comrades standing on the rubble-strewn bridge to Hogwarts would have been a more powerful ending (certainly it’s a more dramatic image), but others applauding the film’s fealty to the source novel.   Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, Rupert Grint, and Bonnie Wright were all “aged” for this scene (apparently via CGI, although one would think makeup would have been sufficient, since no one’s appearance changed radically).  It occurred to me that it would have been a clever touch to either (a) have the characters played by entirely different actors who more or less resemble Radcliffe, et al., or—as a lark— (b) have the characters played by “name” performers who don’t resemble the original actors at all (for instance, Simon Pegg as Ron, Liam Neeson as Harry, etc.).

While I’m not enough of a Potter fanatic to have gone out to the midnight showing, nor to brave the Friday night or Saturday crowds, the fact I saw this film on just its third day of general release should indicate my sincere affection for the Harry Potter saga.  We all knew the end was coming, didn’t we?  But at least we can say the series concluded on a respectable, dignified, entertaining, well-made, and satisfying note.