Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2

A massively ambitious cinematic saga comes to a close this summer with the release of series capper Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2. It's the eighth movie in a franchise that began just over a decade ago. That's impressive stamina for any series and especially for one that boasts such a large returning cast and very expensive effects work. It's still amazing that all these years and movies later, this series has managed to hold on to its three leads (Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, Rupert Grint), even as they've grown from little kids to young adults. What a grand accomplishment, but also, for me, the ultimate downfall of this final chapter.

The trio of actors who have played series heroes Harry, Hermione, and Ron through all eight movies still suck at acting. There's no nice way to put it. They're still awkward in front of the camera and not in a convincing way that adds depth to their characters. Their line deliveries remain stilted and there's really no way to justify such wooden acting. They're just not very good. And while I was willing to give a pass to the previous instalment based on the absolutely awesome visuals and deft pacing, this final Harry Potter adventure is difficult to embrace because it's all about the emotional experience and emotions are not well sold by bad acting.

Adapted from the second chunk of JK Rowling's seventh and final Harry Potter novel, Deathly Hallows: Part 2 is really all about an assault on Hogwarts and the final showdown between Harry and serpentine villain Voldemort. There's not much more than that, since Part 1 dealt with all the setup, leaving this movie to focus on the epic finale. So with little plot to get through, Part 2 rather clumsily fills in all the narrative blanks while trying to continually capitalize on the weepy emotions that are automatically applied to a movie about the long awaited end.

Director David Yates, a Harry Potter veteran by now who's helmed half of the features, leaves plenty of room between action sequences to dwell on the bittersweet fact that this really is the last time these characters will share the big screen. Giving the audience time to say goodbye certainly makes sense and wringing whatever drama one can from the proceedings is the right idea, but if I can't believe the characters, then I can't connect to the drama. It's a simple complaint that sums up my response to this movie.

The final chapter insists that colossal amounts of emotional commitment are prerequisites for enjoying the movie, so when the ending drags on and on in hopes of upping the ante and making us crave victory more than ever before, it feels wrong to be more maddened than moved. But such was my response, since my emotional commitment hit an all-time low as this movie prepared to wrap things up. The harder Yates and Radcliffe and Watson and Grint try to squeeze emotion from a situation, the harder it becomes for me to be swept up in the touchy-feely fun of it all.

With its themes of love and fate and friendship and family, this franchise has always had a gooey emotional core. It originated in Rowling's novels, which sell the emotion quite effectively early on. But this movie series fails in this department for me and it is here, in nostalgic "it all ends" (as the tagline states) territory, that Deathly Hallows: Part 2 spends most of its time. And rightfully so, of course, since parting ways with such a gargantuan franchise should be marked by moments of tender sweetness. I just wish those moments weren't so routinely stalled by the primitive acting abilities of Radcliffe, Watson, and Grint.

They are certainly the weakest links in the bunch, a distinction that isn't helped by their ubiquitous presence in these movies, but it isn't like the acting vets are exactly lighting up the screen, either. Certain great British thesps like David Thewlis and Jim Broadbent are very good in their roles, but they're barely present in this stuffed movie. Michael Gambon does show up as the late Albus Dumbledore and, as usual, he provides the most interesting and carefully tuned presence of the entire cast. Alan Rickman does his usual shtick as the pasty-faced Snape, who has vacillated back and forth between good and evil so many times that his arc has begun to feel a tad ridiculous.

On the other side of the fence is Ralph Fiennes, whose portrayal of super evil wizard Voldemort is more irritating than intimidating. Fiennes has usually had to work with small amounts of screen time in the past, but he's heavily involved in this movie, much to the detriment of the conflict. Voldemort simply isn't all too interesting to watch. He seethes with rage and frustration, but after all these movies and chats about how evil he is, I really don't get what all the fuss is about. Voldemort worked better as an unseen or at least underseen presence. The front-and-centre version is just a bore.

This may seem like a lot of negativity (and it is!), but my problems with this movie and the franchise as a whole all boil down to one very specific issue. Beyond the bad acting by the leads, there's still some good stuff to like here. The effects work (both sound and visual) is quite brilliant and Yates still knows how to stage an action sequence. With help from cinematographer Eduardo Serra, the set-pieces achieve a smooth, imaginative feel. And the instantly recognizable musical theme first brought to the screen by John Williams is effectively employed here. Things certainly look pretty and sound intriguing, even as they clearly feel like neither.

So Harry Potter's cinematic journey makes its final stop on the long, emotionally distant, though visually attractive train ride that is the metaphorical backbone of this series. As a closing nod to fans and a final frustration for me, Yates and screenwriter Steve Kloves employ Rowling's hokey, unnecessary, and altogether silly epilogue that is intended to wrap the series up with no questions left unanswered and no mystery left to uncover. Instead, we're just treated (probably not the right word) to a new batch of awful kiddie performers. After eight movies, this tidy ending looks back on all the grand adventures experienced by Harry, Hermione, and Ron, and shows us that little has changed after all. We're back in a train station, cringing at the horrid performances of a few kids who will surely get better with age. Right? As Radcliffe, Watson, and Grint have proven, that assumption can be quite premature. This series has come a long way since its 2001 debut, but as the weak lead performances attest, there's a big difference between growing up and aging gracefully.