*** Deleted By Moderator ***
The biggest opening ever. That says a lot for a movie, as well as its fans. Before "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part 2" even saw its opening weekend, the franchise's grand finale had already taken in $43.5 million for midnight shows nationwide. Fans are a funny thing. Of course, it helps when the movie is actually good.
Good is an understatement, it seems. So far, "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part 2" has an insanely impressive 96-percent rating on film review aggregator site Rotten Tomatoes. That ranks the film as the sixth best reviewed movie so far for 2011. I have to wonder if those numbers would change, based on the number of reviews the film has received. At last look, "Harry Potter" had 237 reviews logged into the site, the most out of any film in the top 10. The international action flick "13 Assassins" was in second place with 92 reviews. That's quite a gap, and quite an achievement.
However, was the 3D trip really necessary? Our own Grant Clauser didn't seem to think that the 3D added much to his midnight viewing. However, plenty of fans were begging to differ. Did critics agree? Let's see if 3D added any magic to the overall "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part 2" experience.
Here is what Warner Bros. says:
"In the epic finale, the battle between the good and evil forces of the wizarding world escalates into an all-out war. The stakes have never been higher and no one is safe. But it is Harry Potter who may be called upon to make the ultimate sacrifice as he draws closer to the climactic showdown with Lord Voldemort… It all ends here."
Here is what critics say:
"I'll say now that the 3D wasn't overplayed either. The talented David Yates, as we suspected he might, resisted any urge to have wands jutting out in the audience's faces every five minutes. You might question the logic of converting a film with such a sombre palette into 3D, but a colour-saturated childhood flashback sequence and some mightily impressive cursed fire came across a treat... Some will, no doubt, enjoy the extra dimension (just as Warner Bros will, no doubt, enjoy the extra moolah it generates), but I wouldn't have thought you'd be missing out should you prompt to go for a glasses-free 2D screening. If you can find one, that is." - Louisa Mellor, Den of Geek
"At times, this film looks better than it has any right to. There are shots that are simply beautiful, and the visuals are almost a character in themselves. As with the previous films, Yates uses the colors of the world to convey emotion. The majority of the time the film looks grey, with occasional blue hues, until a pivotal change happens and colors explode into the scene. It is almost the exact opposite of Columbus' visual style, which was loaded with rich and lush colors... While that may make for an interesting visual look, it is not one that works well with 3D." - Ryan Fleming, Digital Trends
"As for the 3D: This film is a quality post-conversion 3D job, I'll give it that, but it's a post-conversion 3D job nonetheless. It doesn't detract from the film – but for me, it didn't really enhance it, either. The movie would be just as good in 2D – just like the rest of the films in the series have been." - Kofi Outlaw, Screen Rant
Photos: © 2011 Warner Bros. Ent.
Harry Potter Publishing Rights © J.K.R.
Harry Potter characters, names and related indicia are trademarks of and © Warner Bros. Ent. All Rights Reserved.