Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part II: Movie Review

"Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part II"/Rated PG-13/Warner Bros./Dir. by David Yates/130 min.

WARNING: There be spoilers ahead. If you haven't read the book "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows", you may not want to continue.

After 11 years and 8 films, the Harry Potter movie saga is at an end. While every installment has brought new mysteries to light and provided ample character development, they have all been a prelude to a battle. So, the question is, does the movie get it right. Director David Yates has been, for my money, the best thing that could've happened to this series, delivering movies that are faithful, yet fresh and creative. Thankfully, he is at the helm here again and he gets is almost perfect. It's a small "almost", but I'll get to that in a moment.

More than any of the other films, this is an action movie. It's a war film. There isn't much in the line of character development because the characters have been developed over the course of the previous chapters (with a couple key exceptions). It's pretty much a race to the battle for Hogwarts, but it's a thrilling race. The story begins exactly where Part 1 ended, with Voldemort holding the mythical Elder Wand, one of the three "Deathly Hallows" (magical objects that make their holder a master over death) and Harry is still looking for and destroying horcruxes (objects that hold a small piece of Voldemort's soul). Harry's search brings him back to Gringotts bank, but this time it's not to make a withdrawl, it's a bank heist.

Among the many wonderful performances in this film, one of the most delightful is Helena Bonham Carter, who has already shown us that she can be totally crazy as Bellatrix Lestrange, but in this scene is playing Hermione morphed into Bellatrix thanks to a polyjuice potion. Hermione's shyness and awkward walk in high heels are spot on.

After a bout with self-replicating gold and a ride on a giant dragon, the film moves us quickly back to Hogwarts, but it isn't the magical place that Harry once considered a home away from home. It's a darkened police state, with students being marched and those who dared stand up for what's right are beaten into submission. It's on this dark canvas that the battle for the future of wizarding kind happens and it's here where the movie's greatest and (few) weakest moments occur.

Let me preface this with a note about the running time. Deathly Hallows Part II is the shortest of all the Harry Potter movies, where it really should have been the longest. The final battle is both glorious and hurried. While I appreciate the idea of giving the audience a feel for the havoc of war, there are moments that could have been given a little more weight. For example, Molly Weasley (the wonderful Julie Walters) and the aforementioned Beatrix Lestrange have an epic battle in the book after Beatrix attempts to kill Molly's daughter. It's a pivotal moment in the book and easily one of the most triumphant scenes in the series. However, in the film it's boiled down to about 30 seconds, with momma bear Weasley having her Ripley from "Aliens" moment and ending as quickly as it started. Since the whole series has been leading to these types of moments, I would've gladly sat for another 20 minutes just to enjoy the grandeur of these scenes a little more.

This is a small complaint. The number of scenes that are pitch perfect far outweigh these scenes and, frankly, it's a great compliment to the books and the movie that the only complaint I have is that I wanted more. The highlight for me was the scene where Snape's motivations are finally revealed. It's one of the finest performances I've ever seen from Alan Rickman and that's truly saying something.

Overall, I loved it. Neville was great, Luna was great (plus it was implied that they become a couple, which was something I always wanted from the books), McGongall was AWESOME! It was a very satisfying ending to one of the best fantasy series in the history of film. That's not hyperbole, it's fact.

Grade: A

Midnight in Paris - Movie Review

"Midnight in Paris"/Sony Classics/94 min./Rated PG-13/Dir. by Woody Allen

Over the past 45 years, Woody Allen has directed 45 films, making him one of the most prolific living American directors. Unfortunately, his films have also been pretty uneven. His unique voice can often tightwalk a dangerous line between insightful and whiny. In fact, some of his earlier, more acclaimed films I find almost impossible to get through. His films of the 80's, including "Hannah and Her Sisters" and "Radio Days" were my previous favorites of his. It's not a coincidence that these films didn't star him (although he was a supporting actor in "Hannah"). His voice as a writer is much less, for lack of a better word, nebbish-like than his voice as an actor. Plus, I just find it totally implausible when he casts himself as a heart-throb (possibly the only failing that he and Adam Sandler share).

That having been said, "Midnight in Paris" is my new favorite. It's light, but surprisingly profound. A comedy that tastes bubbly, but manages to nourish beyond the fizz.

The premise is pretty high-concept for Allen. A successful Hollywood screenwriter named Gil (Owen Wilson) is visiting Paris with his high-maintenance fiancee (Rachel McAdams). While very taken with the city, he can't help but fantasize about what it was like in the 20's, when Paris was the epicenter for the greatest artists and writers of the time. His fiancee tolerates his nostalgic attitude all the while keeping an eye to a pseudo-intellectual former professor of hers (played with a great American accent by Brit, Michael Sheen).

One evening Gil separates himself from the group to walk through the streets of the city of lights, only to discover that every night at midnight a car arrives at a certain set of steps to whisk him off to Paris in the 20's. Wilson plays befuddled with a warm charm as he meets his idols, including Ernest Hemingway, F.Scott and Zelda Fitzgerald and Cole Porter. However, when he leaves the group from the 20's, he's instantly transported back to 2011.

As I said, it's pretty high-concept for Allen, but the plot conceits give the film a misty warmth that permeates every scene, regardless of the time period. It's such a blast to see how different and how similar the two time periods are and Owen Wilson is the perfect "everyman" to take us on the journey. His natural stammer mimics Allen's trademark nervousness, but it feels more born out of innocence than Allen's does. Wilson is just happy to be along for this ride and every shocked reaction and star-struck interaction feels honest and sincere.

Speaking of honesty, one of the runaway terrific performances in this movie (and that's saying a lot with a cast this extraordinary) belongs to Corey Stoll as Hemingway. As he uses the language of love and courage and bravery, Stoll is every bit the personality I've always envisioned Hemingway to be. He gives the master author an authority that makes the audience just as mesmerized as Gil is.

It would be easy to dismiss "Midnight in Paris" as a nostalgic love letter to the grand history of the city, however Allen does so much more than cast a loving eye back in time. It's a love letter to art, to the creative spirit. It's a love letter to optimism and to courageously meeting the world with conviction of purpose. I adore the ways the ideas of the strength of love and the nobility of art are presented in this film. Plus, it's just a lot of fun.

"Midnight in Paris" is the anti-summer film. In a season where movies are judged by explosions per minute and opening weekend grosses, this is a movie that uses words and ideas to thrill. It's every bit the source of eye-candy and movie-going excitement that any other special-effects extravaganza is, it just nourished the mind and the soul as well. I loved this movie.

Grade: A