Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part One (2010)

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part One marks the seventh and penultimate film in the long-running franchise based on the novels from British author J.K. Rowling. Why Part One? Well, never let it be said that the film industry doesn’t know an easy buck when they see it. There’s little doubt that moviegoers who’ve shelled out money for the first six installments are going to line up for the big finale, so cutting it into two parts means double the profits for everyone involved. It’s the same logic that’s being applied to Breaking Dawn, the upcoming two-part Twilight ender.

Fans of these series get to see their favorite characters on-screen for just a while longer, and the bean counters in Hollywood are able to make a few extra trips to the bank. Everyone wins. Or do they?

In the case of previous Harry Potter adaptations, the one-book-to-one-movie ratio seemed to work out nicely. Events flowed along at a reasonable pace, and any source material that was edited out was only missed by those who turned each page with giddy enthusiasm. Having never read the novels, I never felt as though I was missing much. This time around, however, I know damn well that I’m not missing anything, because the filmmakers have combed every inch of the novel for material to pad the running time.

According to Gordon Gekko, “Greed is good.“ That’s not necessarily the case in the world of Harry Potter.

Instead of youthful enthusiasm and a constant sense of wonderment, we’re presented with prolonged scenes of pals Harry Potter (Daniel Radcliffe), Hermione Granger (Emma Watson), and Ron Weasley (Rupert Grint) as they despair, sulk, and despair some more. Someone really should have told screenwriter Steve Kloves that a little melancholy goes a long way.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows picks up after the death of Hogwarts master Albus Dumbledore (Michael Gambon) and the rise to power of Lord Voldemort (Ralph Fiennes) and his sinister henchmen known as Death Eaters. But before He-Who-Should-Not-Be-Named can achieve complete invincibility, he’ll need to dispose of young Harry, something that the good guys have no intention of letting happen.

So Harry and company go on the run, providing us with a look at some of the more barren locales in the UK. Meanwhile, they fight back as best they can by trying to locate and destroy the Horcruxes, magical artifacts which hold the key to Voldemort’s immortality. Don’t expect a final resolution, though, as the big showdown won’t take place until July 15th, 2011 with the release of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part Two.

Director David Yates reports to work for his third film in the series (he’ll also direct Part Two), and with the help of cinematographer Eduardo Serra he creates an increasingly gloomy landscape where the Death Eaters strike down all who oppose them with ruthless efficiency. While the grim tone is appropriate considering Voldemort’s ascension to power, the decision to make the film a two-parter drags the whole movie down and threatens to turn it into the camping trip from hell (considering that Harry and his allies spend about half the movie in a tent).

The standout scene comes when Harry and Hermione share a dance to “O Children” by Nick Cave and the Bad Seeds. It’s a touching moment that reminds viewers how much these two have been through, and that their journey is not yet over. If only the rest of the film plumbed such emotional depths.

If you’ve seen the other films, then there’s no way you’re going to miss Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part One. And if this is your first journey into the world of J.K. Rowling, then you’re going to be hopelessly confused. It’s a series that needs to be experienced in its entirety, making this review (and any like it) an exercise in futility.