Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 1

groovie

Pocketfizz wrote: »

I am excited about the last film next summer.

How long do you think the last movie will be, I mean, there's only 200 pages left in the book (give or take). They could wrap it up in 90 minutes if they wanted. I'd hate to think that they will get all artsy-fartsy because it's flat out action till the end, imho, of course.

maximoose

groovie wrote: »

How long do you think the last movie will be, I mean, there's only 200 pages left in the book (give or take). They could wrap it up in 90 minutes if they wanted. I'd hate to think that they will get all artsy-fartsy because it's flat out action till the end, imho, of course.

One thing I noticed about the trailer is that it shows Harry and Voldemort at the end, with Volde trying to kill and Harry trying to disarm... but it doesnt look like its in the great hall with everyone looking on, it pans out and they look like they're on their own. That will annoy me if they have changed that.

Otacon

maximoose wrote: »

One thing I noticed about the trailer is that it shows Harry and Voldemort at the end, with Volde trying to kill and Harry trying to disarm... but it doesnt look like its in the great hall with everyone looking on, it pans out and they look like they're on their own. That will annoy me if they have changed that.

You may want to spoiler-tag that!

I saw that myself. Hope they set the final fight in the Great Hall as it should be. Harry calling Voldemort 'Tom' was more effective when there were people there to be shocked by it!

constitutionus

Monsieur Folie wrote: »

+1

He did know it was Harry, I reckon. I just think that he was apprehensive about turning him over to Voldemort, when he finally did get the chance. That's what it looked like to me. Malfoy doesn't seem to like where he's ended up at all. I would feel sorry for him, but he deserves it!

thats my feeling too

ive never read the books so i dont know how it pans out but he didnt want to kill dumbedore in the last one (think harry said he saw him lowering his wand) and i get the real feeling he's gonna switch sides. doesnt mean he likes harry and co but isnt the monster he's been built up to be. being a spoitl bully is one thing, being a murderer is quite another. its quite a nice bit of subtlety in this film

i really enjoyed this one.

T'was packed out in vue the night i went meaning there was actually a que for the jaxs in the mens toilets which ive never seen before.

VERY dark though and might be a bit much for the kiddies, one of the few children that was actually at the showing i seen was sitting next to me and near crapped herself at certain points in the film

nothing funnier than seeing a 6 year old girl cry out "JESUS !" in a kids film



what i liked most though was its very much a character peice. yeah theres alot of special efects fun but its the core relationships that keeps you engaged.

certainly had fun with the buergeoning ron/granger exchanges

EDIT.

Oh and i loved that animated segue as well, the best example of something like that ive seen since hellboy 2 and the relaying of the story of the golden army.

cynder

Kimono-Girl wrote: »

went to see it Saturday night! as a lover of the books we both really enjoyed this movie!

i thought it was very well done compared to the previous movies!

I agree.

My daughter pointed out to me the fact that the wand maker has the same name as my user-name on boards, Grindelwald.


Cant wait for the last installment in July.

maximoose

Otacon wrote: »

You may want to spoiler-tag that!

I saw that myself. Hope they set the final fight in the Great Hall as it should be. Harry calling Voldemort 'Tom' was more effective when there were people there to be shocked by it!

Woops, tagged now.. I keep assuming everyone has read the books!

Exactly, a big part of the whole excitement of that part was the shock of everyone and not knowing what was going to happen.

I have a feeling they'll change loads about the final battle to keep it all focused on harry/ron/hermione.

Greyfox

Seen it yesterday and absolutely loved it, found it to be miles better then the last 3 films as it didn't feel like their was loads left out, also for the first time their was actually a sense of dread/darkness, also I think they ended the film in the perfect place

One small critisism is the fact that

we don't get to see Dudley say a nice word to Harry like in the book

Villette

Greyfox wrote: »

Seen it yesterday and absolutely loved it, found it to be miles better then the last 3 films as it didn't feel like their was loads left out, also for the first time their was actually a sense of dread/darkness, also I think they ended the film in the perfect place

One small critisism is the fact that

we don't get to see Dudley say a nice word to Harry like in the book

That was my exact same criticism, I really think it's important in the book. I cried when I read it, although I read the whole book through a curtain of tears and I was almost as bad in the film!

I really liked the film, I thought the acting VASTLY improved - Emma Watson didn't annoy me and for the first time I felt she was Hermione.
I'm glad that they

didn't try to underplay the awfulness of Dobby's death as I think it's a real turning point in the book.

Also agree that you really feel the dread and darkness for the first time, which is essential to the 7th book really. There is a culture of fear and it seems realistically sinister.

Another thing that struck me was it's the first time that JK Rowling's message really shone through in the films.

ztoical

Overly long with no start or ending and a totally wasted supporting cast.

Mickeroo

ztoical wrote: »

Overly long with no start or ending and a totally wasted supporting cast.

Not entirely wasted supporting cast if you acknowledge their bigger roles in other movies. It's got no ending because it's half a film.

saim_saim

hey guys..
I have watched new part of Harry Potter last night... it just osam... i think it is the best part among all... well combination of action suspense and very well story line.... i just love it....

ztoical

Mickeroo wrote: »

Not entirely wasted supporting cast if you acknowledge their bigger roles in other movies. It's got no ending because it's half a film.

I'm well aware it's only the first half but it should still be able to stand alone as a film with a start, middle, and an end even if that end is TBC and the same goes for the cast, there's no point going on about how great they were in the other films, which I actually don't agree with as I feel they've been wasting most of the adult actors and quite a few of the kids since the 3rd film. There are plenty of two parter film series were each film works on its own and as part of the whole. The ending point used for the film didn't feel like a natural break for the story [even more so if you've read the book] and just reeked of keep the cash cow going as long as we can rather then good storytelling.

Otacon

ztoical wrote: »

The ending point used for the film didn't feel like a natural break for the story [even more so if you've read the book] and just reeked of keep the cash cow going as long as we can rather then good storytelling.

Where would you have put it? Out of interest?

Personally, I though they picked the most logical point to finish the first part.

In the book, the thread of Harry searching for Hallows instead of Horcruxes ended when Dobby died. He now knows what is more important. This acts as a natural turning point in the story. It also has a cliffhanger ending, with Voldemort now has the Elder Wand, or the Unbeatable Wand.

What I feel the new movie got wrong or didn't do enough of was

show Harry longing to find the other Hallows, so that sort of loses its effect.

Kiith

Saw it tonight, and enjoyed it. Not the best film, and I wasn't to fond of how little time certain important scenes got, but its one of the better adaptations to date. I loved how they told the '3 Brothers' story though. Probably my favourite part of the film

Looking foward to seeing the last part, as one thing they generally do well is the combat, even if it is far more flashy and quick then it is in the books.

Liam O

Something that kind of annoys me is that in the books the Avada Kedavra is a jet of light that lights up the room and in the movies it just seems so quick. In the books it really makes it seem as terrible as it is and in the movies it just seems like any old spell other than they say the words. It's not that big a deal though I suppose...

Mickeroo

Liam O wrote: »

Something that kind of annoys me is that in the books the Avada Kedavra is a jet of light that lights up the room and in the movies it just seems so quick. In the books it really makes it seem as terrible as it is and in the movies it just seems like any old spell other than they say the words. It's not that big a deal though I suppose...

True that, it's way more menacing in the book. I guess they're trying to make it seem quick and brutal like a gunshot. During the fight scene in the

cafe in london

I remember thinking the actors may as well be holding guns.

Biggins

Went to see it last night and I have to say, while it passed the time, it was in parts far, far too long drawn out and boring.

5 out of ten is what I would give it.

TheDoc

I'm not a HP fan, but the misses is so took her too it there opening weekend.

Have to say I didn't enjoy it as much. I had enjoyed the previous installments from a pure film enjoyment point of view, I've never read the books and have no real fanbase or interest in the franchise.

But the new film felt very drawn out, very boring for large segments, and felt that it could have been done in one film, but they added alot of rubbish to milk the cash cow as such.

The misses said it was good for fans of the series, but for me, there was nothing of interest at all : /

Unfortunately I guess at this stage I'll have to see the next one to see how it ends, and I'll be forced to bring herself along:)

but while the others were enoyable for non fans, this one just wasn't for me, and was so so purposefully drawn out : /

syklops

Just back from seeing this. Must say I really enjoyed it. It was a bit slow in places, but there were also some good laugh out loud moments which was a welcome surprise.

I thought it stayed very true to the book, which is maybe to its detriment, as there were parts of the book that were very slow too. That said, I cant see how they would fit the entire book into one movie, without leaving out loads.

Overall 7/10.

candy-gal1

Have to say, this was great! much more older and adultish than the previous ones, as dark as the last one, great plot and twists, and the HOT Bellatrix lestrange The only bad thing about the film came near the end Anyone whos seen it, you know what im talking about.

syklops

candy-gal1 wrote: »

Have to say, this was great! much more older and adultish than the previous ones, as dark as the last one, great plot and twists, and the HOT Bellatrix lestrange The only bad thing about the film came near the end Anyone whos seen it, you know what im talking about.

Bellatrix was soooooo hot! If I see a poster of her in one of her suggestive poses, its going on the wall.

I also liked the image that Ron got when

the horcrux was turning him against Harry and Hermione, and they were kissing in the nip

That was quite hot too.

Definitely not a kids film.

candy-gal1

syklops wrote: »

Bellatrix was soooooo hot! If I see a poster of her in one of her suggestive poses, its going on the wall.

I also liked the image that Ron got when

the horcrux was turning him against Harry and Hermione, and they were kissing in the nip

That was quite hot too.

Definitely not a kids film.

Ha!! I sooo thought that too, twas a bit risque for Harry potter lol but was very hot yes.
Oh and on the Bellatrix front, oh yess! I dont really like her in any other movie, just HP. Il be looking out for pics myself

syklops

candy-gal1 wrote: »

Ha!! I sooo thought that too, twas a bit risque for Harry potter lol but was very hot yes.
Oh and on the Bellatrix front, oh yess! I dont really like her in any other movie, just HP. Il be looking out for pics myself

PM me if you find any.

I'd become a Death Eater if she tried to recruit me.

Banjo Fella

I really liked it! Definitely my favourite of all the movies. I like how they managed to make it very, very funny in parts, despite working with the series' bleakest book. I loved the animated sequence as the Tale of the Three Brothers was being told. Absolutely gorgeously visualised! The only thing I didn't particularly like about the movie was the casting for Xenophilius Lovegood, he just didn't seem to fit the role and his stage Irish accent was grating.

I've got high hopes for the final part now. Eep, it's going to be the very last big Harry Potter-related event... the end of an era, it certainly makes you feel old.

Otacon wrote: »

There is also what will become known as

the 'Dancing Scene'

. This just does not work and is the weakest scene in the entire movie as it doesn't really serve a purpose.

Hmm, I actually found that to be one of the movie's strongest scenes. Harry and Hermione are still children despite the burden they have to bear. They've been forced to leave their childhood lives at Hogwarts behind, and in that moment they're completely on their own without any plan for finding the horcruxes.

Their situation is so hopeless that even Ron has abandoned them, and they look so lost sitting listlessly in that tent. Then "O' Children" by Nick Cave starts to play on the radio, and for a few minutes they lift each other's spirits, rekindle their friendship and act like children again. Even though it wasn't in the books, I think it was an important scene and they executed it very well.

candy-gal1

syklops wrote: »

PM me if you find any.

I'd become a Death Eater if she tried to recruit me.

lol me too!

Otacon

Banjo Fella wrote: »

Hmm, I actually found that to be one of the movie's strongest scenes. Harry and Hermione are still children despite the burden they have to bear. They've been forced to leave their childhood lives at Hogwarts behind, and in that moment they're completely on their own without any plan for finding the horcruxes.

Their situation is so hopeless that even Ron has abandoned them, and they look so lost sitting listlessly in that tent. Then "O' Children" by Nick Cave starts to play on the radio, and for a few minutes they lift each other's spirits, rekindle their friendship and act like children again. Even though it wasn't in the books, I think it was an important scene and they executed it very well.

I went to see it again this weekend, but unfortunately, this screen still feels wrong. I'm not sure if its the way Daniel Radcliffe plays it, or just how out of place it feels, but it doesn't work in my eyes.

Still think that

Dobby's death was much better in the film than in the book. Giving him that little speech about friendship works very well.

Ant

I'd agree with everything Octacon says about the film in their descriptive review a few pages back. I saw it last night with my girlfriend (both of us watched all the preceding films but haven't read any of the books) and we both enjoyed it.

While the film lacks the pace and impact of its predecessors, the director and actors do a good creating the feeling of a bleak, dark, lonely quest with little chance of success. The characters are well-developed and the cinematography is excellent. I would recommend that anyone who has watched - and enjoyed - the other films should go see this in the cinema. While it's not a great film, it's still well worth catching on the big screen.

I don't mind the producers splitting the story into two films but I think it'd work a lot better if we didn't have to wait so long to see Part II.

Baby4

This post has been deleted.

tomissex

There is 7 and I really hope Ron didn't say 3 left cos that would imply they're going to skip one......

The missing 4 are (don't look if you don't want to ruin it!):

Helga Hufflepuff's Cup

,

Rowena Ravenclaw's Diadem

,

Voldemort's snake Nagini

and

Harry himself

All of those are in the second half of the last book so they wouldn't have been touched on yet.

Liam O

tomissex wrote: »

There is 7 and I really hope Ron didn't say 3 left cos that would imply they're going to skip one......

The missing 4 are (don't look if you don't want to ruin it!):

Helga Hufflepuff's Cup

,

Rowena Ravenclaw's Diadem

,

Voldemort's snake Nagini

and

Harry himself

All of those are in the second half of the last book so they wouldn't have been touched on yet.

yeah I was wondering about that, but of course

Harry doesn't know that he's a horcrux

and they may think that

Voldemort is a horcrux himself

or the movie may have already dealt with

Nagini

so they kill the snake off so they don't have to deal with it. It was really confusing though that he said that.

Otacon

When Voldemort died trying to kill Harry as a baby, he used up one of his horcruxes coming back. So there are six horcruxes for them to destroy. They have now done the diary, ring and locket so Ron is right when he said there were 3 left.

Part 2

However, Harry was unintentionally made a horcrux as well so technically there were 8.

Patricide

Ever since heyman took over hes been taking big liberties with the source material. However ever since he took over I found myself actually liking the films, which is surprising cause im very much a nut with the books.

Anyway thought this was hugely enjoyable. Had to wait a bit to see an english version here in germany but for once it was worth it. The trios acting has come on leaps and bounds(ESPECIALLY Radcliffe's, lets face it he was terrible before).

Really looking forward to part 2 now. Anyone know a tentative release date?

Mickeroo

Patricide wrote: »

Really looking forward to part 2 now. Anyone know a tentative release date?

Not til July afaik. No need for such a big gap if ya ask me.

Qwert1

Not nearly enough alan rickman!

Patricide

Mickeroo wrote: »

Not til July afaik. No need for such a big gap if ya ask me.

They want to have dvd sales on this one id imagine.

NickDrake

Anyone know that the 'd' version of the film means.

In the IMC in Dun Laoghaire there is a normal versions and a D version.

Mickeroo

NickDrake wrote: »

Anyone know that the 'd' version of the film means.

In the IMC in Dun Laoghaire there is a normal versions and a D version.

I'm guessing it means those fancy new digital screens some places have installed?? I know my local put in two new screens just before Avatar came out for 3D and such.

Jimbob1977

I've seen all the Harry Potter films, but I've never read the books. I was amazed at the similarities between this film and Lord of the Rings.

If JRR Tolkien was still alive, I think he'd consult his solicitors (although I'm certain he borrowed ideas from previous stories and legends).

• Dumbledore could be Gandalf's twin brother

• Dobbie is a pleasant version of Golem/Smiegel - however they both sneak around and speak in the third person. Dobbie will do this, Dobbie will do that. Never use the word "I".

• The locket has an adverse effect on the wearer - Ron became more aggressive and paranoid. Just like the "Precious" ring in Lord of the Rings.

The first hour was interesting, the middle hour was extremely dull, but the final 25 minutes saved the film and set up Pat Two.

Liam O

Jimbob1977 wrote: »

I've seen all the Harry Potter films, but I've never read the books. I was amazed at the similarities between this film and Lord of the Rings.

If JRR Tolkien was still alive, I think he'd consult his solicitors (although I'm certain he borrowed ideas from previous stories and legends).

• Dumbledore could be Gandalf's twin brother

• Dobbie is a pleasant version of Golem/Smiegel - however they both sneak around and speak in the third person. Dobbie will do this, Dobbie will do that. Never use the word "I".

• The locket has an adverse effect on the wearer - Ron became more aggressive and paranoid. Just like the "Precious" ring in Lord of the Rings.

The first hour was interesting, the middle hour was extremely dull, but the final 25 minutes saved the film and set up Pat Two.

So 1 major character, one minor character and one story arc being vaguely related means they are the same?

I suppose Ron is like Gimli? Hermione legolas and Harry Aragorn? The chosen one. Voldemort is Sauron and Harry must bring the locket to Sauron's lair and destroy it...wait, Harry Potter is nothing like the Lord Of The Rings ffs. Read the books tbh.

Qwert1

Jimbob1977 wrote: »

I've seen all the Harry Potter films, but I've never read the books. I was amazed at the similarities between this film and Lord of the Rings.

If JRR Tolkien was still alive, I think he'd consult his solicitors (although I'm certain he borrowed ideas from previous stories and legends).

• Dumbledore could be Gandalf's twin brother

• Dobbie is a pleasant version of Golem/Smiegel - however they both sneak around and speak in the third person. Dobbie will do this, Dobbie will do that. Never use the word "I".

• The locket has an adverse effect on the wearer - Ron became more aggressive and paranoid. Just like the "Precious" ring in Lord of the Rings.

The first hour was interesting, the middle hour was extremely dull, but the final 25 minutes saved the film and set up Pat Two.

The whole locket having an influence over the wearer is a bit of a cheap steal from LOTR alright, certainly wouldn't consider there to be any significant similarities beyond that. The two are completely different imo. Must also take into account that LOTR set down many standards of the fantasy genre which have been endlessly repeated in books, movies, games etc. ever since.

allandanyways

Otacon wrote: »

When Voldemort died trying to kill Harry as a baby, he used up one of his horcruxes coming back. So there are six horcruxes for them to destroy. They have now done the diary, ring and locket so Ron is right when he said there were 3 left.

Part 2

However, Harry was unintentionally made a horcrux as well so technically there were 8.

*Serious spoilers ahead, just have to respond to Otacon's spoilered bit.*

There are 7. Voldemort himself is not a horcrux, he's mortal. 7 horcruxes are the diary, the ring, the locket, the diadem, the cup, Nagini and Harry.

I think Ron's "There are only 3 left" line was poorly scripted because

they don't realise Nagini is a Horcrux until Snape dies in part 2 (when Dumbledore tells Snape this information) and Harry doesn't realise he's a Horcrux until then either.

I don't think Dumbledore ever specified in the HBP film, as he does in the book that there are 7 Horcruxes, although I could be wrong on that. Just a bit all over the place really. Seems to be quite a bit of debate about that line on other fora as well.

strawberryb0y

Saw this tonight and really didn't like it although I haven't really been a fan of the films anyway. I thought Radcliffe's acting was terrible which obviously spoiled alot of it for me. But in general i just dont think the books translate well to the big screen, I wonder if they realised how difficult they would be to adapt when the franchise first started.

pocketvenus

I think Ron's "There are only 3 left" line was poorly scripted because

they don't realise Nagini is a Horcrux until Snape dies in part 2 (when Dumbledore tells Snape this information) and Harry doesn't realise he's a Horcrux until then either.

I don't think Dumbledore ever specified in the HBP film, as he does in the book that there are 7 Horcruxes, although I could be wrong on that. Just a bit all over the place really. Seems to be quite a bit of debate about that line on other fora as well.[/QUOTE]

Although it is not made clear in this film Harry does know

Nagini is a Horcrux as made clear in the HBP Voldermort wanted to split his soul into 7 however this mean 6 peices were Horcruxes - the ring, diary, the locket, the cup, the diadem, and Nagini but the final 7th piece would have to reside inside Voldermort himself obviously.

I think where the issue arises is that people are forgetting that in Part 1 of the film / book Harry

does not know he is a 7th Horcrux so when Ron mentions there are 3 more to go they think this is an error. However it is not as they still think they only have to destroy Nagini, the cup and diadem.

Otacon

I will spoiler all of this as it refers to the ending of the book.

Voldemort originally wanted to make 7 Horcruxes, as it was a magically-significant number. He succeeded in doing so with the 1. diary, 2. Gaunt's ring, 3. Slytherin's locket, 4. Hufflepuff's cup, 5. Ravenclaw's diadem, 6. Nagini and 7. an object we never find out about. When he tried to kill Harry, he died. He came back using object 7 but in the process of trying to kill Harry, made him number 8.

So far in the films then, numbers 1, 2, 3 [and 7] are now gone. As Harry, Ron and Hermione don't know about Harry yet, that leaves 4, 5 and 6 so when Ron says there are three left, its correct [from their POV]

don ramo

Qwert1 wrote: »

The whole locket having an influence over the wearer is a bit of a cheap steal from LOTR alright, certainly wouldn't consider there to be any significant similarities beyond that. The two are completely different imo. Must also take into account that LOTR set down many standards of the fantasy genre which have been endlessly repeated in books, movies, games etc. ever since.

theres always gonna be a bit of stealing, you could say the chase through the forest was similar to one of the twilight films (dunno which one there very vaugue in my brain due to force viewing)

question for someone that read the book, why did hermione use the oblivion spell on her parents (i assume she knew what was gonna happen the next year and didnt want her parents to worry) , and also did harry use a spell on him uncle to make him leave, also how were that able to do that weird transporting thing, did i miss something or was it was never explained,

thought it was a great film, emma watson should get at least an oscar nom for this, she was miles better than the entire cast, at the start when she used the oblivion spell it felt really sad just the look on her face spoke more than words (i didnt like that it wasnt expanded on why she done it), and also the torture scene was done brilliantly (and also more adult themed, which supposedly got cut cause of the kids),

the film really coveyed solitide for the main caracters, and ron practically going mad not knowing what has happened to his family, the scenery was amazing, and really added to the feeling of lonelyness,

i thought it was weird that harry house was still in bits, youd think theyd have leveled it or something,

all in all i thought it was an excellent addition to the series and im really looking forward to the last film,

tomissex

don ramo wrote: »

question for someone that read the book, why did hermione use the oblivion spell on her parents (i assume she knew what was gonna happen the next year and didnt want her parents to worry) , and also did harry use a spell on him uncle to make him leave, also how were that able to do that weird transporting thing, did i miss something or was it was never explained

She did it to protect them. If she never existed to them then they can't be tortured to find out about her whereabouts etc. Also to save them the pain and hurt if she didn't survive.

No he didn't. He explained what was going on in his world and that it wouldn't be safe for them to stay and they eventually listened to him.

Apparating and Disapparating? It's basically a spell but you can only do it when you turn 17, which is why we've never seen the trio do it before.

maximoose

emma watson should get at least an oscar nom for this

oh very dear.

She wasnt acting her usual annoyiny fidgety Hermione and improved a lot, but come on, bit much?!

don ramo

maximoose wrote: »

oh very dear.

She wasnt acting her usual annoyiny fidgety Hermione and improved a lot, but come on, bit much?!

well maybe a bit far i suppose, but i just thought she stood out compared to the rest of the cast,

don ramo

tomissex wrote: »

She did it to protect them. If she never existed to them then they can't be tortured to find out about her whereabouts etc. Also to save them the pain and hurt if she didn't survive.

No he didn't. He explained what was going on in his world and that it wouldn't be safe for them to stay and they eventually listened to him.

Apparating and Disapparating? It's basically a spell but you can only do it when you turn 17, which is why we've never seen the trio do it before.

ah cheers was wondering, i kind aunderstood what was happening with hermoine, but not the others, i think i might start reading the books, probably gives a better understanding,

Patricide

don ramo wrote: »

theres always gonna be a bit of stealing, you could say the chase through the forest was similar to one of the twilight films (dunno which one there very vaugue in my brain due to force viewing)

question for someone that read the book, why did hermione use the oblivion spell on her parents (i assume she knew what was gonna happen the next year and didnt want her parents to worry) , and also did harry use a spell on him uncle to make him leave, also how were that able to do that weird transporting thing, did i miss something or was it was never explained,

thought it was a great film, emma watson should get at least an oscar nom for this, she was miles better than the entire cast, at the start when she used the oblivion spell it felt really sad just the look on her face spoke more than words (i didnt like that it wasnt expanded on why she done it), and also the torture scene was done brilliantly (and also more adult themed, which supposedly got cut cause of the kids),

the film really coveyed solitide for the main caracters, and ron practically going mad not knowing what has happened to his family, the scenery was amazing, and really added to the feeling of lonelyness,

i thought it was weird that harry house was still in bits, youd think theyd have leveled it or something,

all in all i thought it was an excellent addition to the series and im really looking forward to the last film,

Oscar nomination? Seriously?