Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1 (2010) [New York Times Review]

By A.O. Scott
For most of this film Voldemort’s forces are very much in the ascendant. The production design is dense with visual allusions to 20th-century totalitarianism, while the battered and dispersed good guys carry some of the romance of guerrilla resistance, taking to the countryside and living rough as they search for weak spots in their enemy’s strategy. They also pop into nonmagical neighborhoods of London, visits that add a jolt of realism to this fantasy. The brilliant composer Alexandre Desplat has constructed a haunting, spooky sonic atmosphere with only an occasional splash of youthful whimsy.

Not that “Deathly Hallows” is grim, exactly. But it is, to an unusual and somewhat risky degree, sadder and slower than the earlier films. It is also much less of a showcase (or bank vault, as the case may be) for the middle and senior generations of British actors. Many of the familiar faces show up — including Ralph Fiennes as Voldemort, Helena Bonham Carter as Bellatrix LeStrange, and, of course, Alan Rickman as Severus Snape — but they move along after a scene or two. So do the two notable newcomers, Bill Nighy as a government official and Rhys Ifans as Xenophilius Lovegood, a wondrously eccentric underground journalist and father to the ethereal (and in this movie, briefly glimpsed) Luna (Evanna Lynch).
The movie, in other words, belongs solidly to Mr. Radcliffe, Mr. Grint and Ms. Watson, who have grown into nimble actors, capable of nuances of feeling that would do their elders proud. One of the great pleasures of this penultimate “Potter” movie is the anticipation of stellar post-“Potter” careers for all three of them.
While there is still one more film to go (Part 2 is scheduled for release in July), this one manages to be both a steppingstone and a reasonably satisfying experience in its own right. Some plot elements are handled with busy, “DaVinci Code”-like mumbo jumbo as the three friends must hunt down not only a bunch of horcruxes, but also the mysterious objects alluded to in the title. The deathly hallows at least provide the occasion for a lovely animated sequence, much as the inevitable preliminary battle scenes allow for episodes of explosive wand work. Even though it ends in the middle, “Deathly Hallows: Part 1” finds notes of anxious suspense and grave emotion to send its characters, and its fans, into the last round. The sorrow you experience may well be a premonition of the imminent end of a long and, for the most part, delightful relationship.
Watch a scene here.

SHOOT: I enjoyed the enlarged roles of Harry, Ron and Hermione, but I found the flick far too slow, making it feel like a European movie, almost French arthouse at times, and as such, a downer.  There are moments of magic which add spark to the plot, but perhaps the idea was to slowly and tentatively chew through and savour the last of the series.  Audiences don't seem to be complaining, Deathly Hallows conjured up $125.1 million in its opening weekend,  the biggest initial moneymaker of the series, and the sixth highest grosser of all time. But in terms of estimated attendance Hallows is slightly behind the first movie,“Sorcerer’s Apprentice” [2001] and the fourth, “Goblet of Fire" [2005].