Harry Potter et les reliques de la mort - 1ère partie

J'ai vu les quatre premiers Potter, les suivants ne m'ont pas attiré en tant que non-fan. J'ai seulement aperçu la première partie de "Deathly Hollows" pour ses affiches alléchantes dans le style "Dark Knight". Et je me suis ennuyé à mourir. Le début de la série nous présentait les personnages, un bel environnement cinématographique, et pour le troisième film de Cuarón, un voyage cinématographique sombre et magnifique avec beaucoup d'astuces de mise en scène. Les films avaient leur propre histoire, ils déplaçaient toujours le spectateur quelque part. En comparaison, "Deathly Hollows Part I" n'est qu'un plat masturbatoire sans créativité, filmé esclave fidèlelement à l'œuvre originale dont je ne connais pas la qualité, mais si elle est similaire, alors tant pis pour l'obscurité. (18/11/2010)

La partie la mieux jouée de toutes, ce qui ne change cependant pas le fait que le scénario ne vaut pas grand-chose et que l'intrigue est bien plus lente et laborieuse que dans le livre. Par rapport aux scènes magnifiques (l'introduction, l'histoire des trois frères, le ministère, la destruction des horcruxes...), il y a vraiment beaucoup de plans qui sont franchement dérangeants et qui semblent tirés d'un autre film (la danse dans la tente et tous les autres moments où la moitié de la salle éclate de rire). À cause de cela, il n'a pas été possible non plus de transmettre à l'écran l'atmosphère étouffante de tension permanente, de peur et d'angoisse qui devrait poursuivre les héros à chaque pas. La première partie des reliques n'est pas capable de fonctionner seule et ne suscite chez le spectateur qu'un sentiment de calme avant la tempête, ce qui, au moins en moi, suscite l'espoir que la deuxième partie sera réellement riche en action, dynamique et palpitante. (20/11/2010)

I don't know if this is a fantasy tribute to Satantango, but the fact is that, if all the shots were thrown out where the characters were mindlessly stumbling or looking soulfully into nothingness, there would be about 30 minutes of film left and I would have a hard time defending its purpose. The entire Harry Potter series has since become an unbearably stretched and non-inventive spectacle on the silver screen, which includes purposeful piling of meaningless branches and the creation of soap opera odor. Yet even in terms of character rendering, it is poor and dead tired, without sparkle and anything that would keep a person’s attention who does not look at it as an overpriced illustration of a book. Utterly useless, boring, and I dare say even a stupid half-part. (10/07/2011)

The world of magic has entered truly the darkest times, but despite what random critical outbursts might suggest, it has absolutely nothing to do with the quality of the film adaptation. Yates and Kloves had a challenging task of transforming the "slower and more talkative" part of the Relics into a separate explosive blockbuster. The director stood out with incredible bravura, and whether the Trio is leaving home, the Tale of the Three Brothers is being told, or the horcrux is being destroyed, the magical atmosphere literally shines from the screen. However, Kloves' screenplay occasionally takes shortcuts, and if I didn't have the source material loaded backwards and forwards, I would be quite lost. But even though Bill and Fleur become members of the Order from minute to minute, when they were omitted in the Prince, and Minister Scrimgeour steps onto the scene only to quickly descend from it, the criticisms are hard to find in the consequences. The overall impression for me screams that from four hundred pages full of expectations of great things and the fulfillment of smaller ongoing goals, an epic fantasy full of intoxicating moments and such sincere private drama has been created that it takes one's breath away. The Phoenix and the Prince have gained a successful companion, and if David Yates was the king after the previous installment, he has slowly run out of room to climb. (27/11/2010)

The seventh book is unnecessarily, although readably, drawn-out in the first half; and the second half has a fateful finale as we like them best. It’s movie adaptation has only got half way so far (somewhere around page four hundred of about six hundred), but it’s already better than the book at least in that Yates succeeded in approaching it in a way that doesn’t come across like unnecessarily watered down porridge. And if so, certainly less than the book is. Thanks to the convincing (!) emotions, the finally acting well central trio, the great atmosphere and Desplat, it works wonderfully. It’s true that there are a few scenes that stand out in quality above the others, but even so, the movie works primarily and mainly as a whole. But still, it is evident that where the creators dared to let their fantasy loose and not to stick word for word to the book, the movie is clearly at its best. Now all I can wish for is for Yates to manage to deal with the special effects-full, epic second part, while not forgetting those emotions and characters. If he manages that, we’ll have something to look forward to. But if he doesn’t, we will really have something to “look forward to". (18/11/2010)