Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 2

I saw Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 2 in iMax 3D. Huge screen! Square shaped, which is odd, but huge. One of the guys said more than six stories and I believe it.

The 3D part was, well, the opening credits was the most 3D part of the movie. Which is sad. The rest of the movie had extra depth, but didn’t really use 3D too much. Parts of it gave me a headache (the dizzying ride into the bank’s vault. Still cool though). Avator’s 3D effects were a lot better.

You have to watch the previous one; it doesn’t summarize previous events at all.

The movie was really good. I loved pretty much all of it. The action is non-stop. There are no slow moments (There were a few slow moments in the last movie.) If they could have combined the two and made a four-hour movie, the balance between action and non-action parts would have been perfect.

The move stuck pretty close to the book, even if it did skim over somethings. It’s hard to pick just one favorite scene or part. The part when Mama Weasley kills Bellatrix was pretty good. The ride into the bank’s vaults was good (would be perfect as a theme park ride, btw). The part where he talks the ghost into revealing the location of the Ravenclaw diadem is good.

One of the best is Snape’s death and seeing his memories after. I don’t think the memories do the justice to the depth of his love for Harry’s mother, Lily, but it was still very, very good. Snape is such a well-done character, from villain to loyal hero (loyal to Dumbledore and the memory of Lily). If I have to pick a favorite part, this would be it.

I don’t remember the dragon part from the book, but it was pretty good. A lot of deaths happened off-stage (Fred, Mr. Weasly) and I am kind of disappointed about that.

For me, the ending was a little confusing. In the book, if I remember right (I might not, it’s been awhile since I read it) the end is about love. Okay, yes, it’s about the wand, but also about love. In the movie, Neville kills the snake, the duel between Harry & Voldemort resumes, and Voldemort dies. Did anyone else find it different from the book?

The epilogue was the same as in the book, but the way they aged everyone was utterly ridiculous. Not convincing at all!

Even if I’ve said so before, it bears repeating:

I loved the move!

I got no complaints.

Complete Guide to Writing Fantasy: Themes, King Arthur and Clichés

I used to think fantasy started with Tolkien, but now I realize it originated with King Arthur.

The Complete Guide to Writing Fantasy talks about the origins of fantasy. It mentions the Romantic Tradition and King Arthur.

The story of King Arthur involves:

1) Commoner who is really a king

2) Old Wizard who guides the hero

3) Enchanted sword or other artifact of magic

4) A quest for a relic, sometimes a vessel, with powers on a godlike scale

5) Diverse companions

I am positively stunned. I never realized this before. Everyone knows the story of King Arthur. Who has not read The Once and Future King by TH White? And even if you haven’t, most people still know the story!

King Arthur predates Tolkien, but it has nearly every fantasy clichés and archetype. I can’t even begin to count the number of stories that have all those things.

David Eddings, of course. Tolkien. A Wizard of Earthsea by Ursula K. Le Guin. Wheel of Time series by Robert Jordon. Riddle-Master  by Patricia A. McKillip.  I am sure there are lots and lots of others I can’t think of right now.

Harry Potter, even. He isn’t a king, but he is a famous commoner. Dumbledore Old Wizard who guides the hero. Every book has an artifact and a quest, and friends to help him!

But despite all that, Harry Potter is nothing like King Arthur or Tolkien. The worlds could not be more different.

So do these surface similarities matter?  Are they really clichés that are better not repeated? Or themes on which you can have endless varieties?