Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part II

The end of an era. The final chapter. The last adventure. I am, of course, talking about Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part II. And boy, what an era it has been. Grossing $6,369,345,142 (that's a lotta dollar) thus far, the film franchise is one of the most successful in history and has grown and matured along with its first audiences way back in 2001. I'm not the most avid Hazza Potts fan but I have always been quite happy to watch all eight instalments with a reasonably open mind. When I watched Deathly Hallows Part I, I couldn't help thinking that it was merely laying the foundations for the finale and whilst it did romp along at a fair old pace, it lacked a depth that allowed it to stand as a film in its own right. I entered the cinema hoping that this second instalment would end the saga in a dramatic, emotional and fitting way and, in a way, it did. However, I did have several reservations.

On an overall level, I felt that the film lacked the epic quality that I expected it to have. I don't mean that it didn't contain spectacular set pieces (the Hogwarts battle sequences were certainly impressive) or was poorly acted. Something just didn't click for me. It seemed as though the whole narrative was focused on getting from A to B without paying much attention to the bit in the middle – i.e. 75% of the film. I found myself not really caring about the predicaments of the characters because I knew that it was just building up to the final showdown between Harry and Voldermort and they'd be okay in the end. The film was fairly fast-paced but again, each action sequence just seemed like a little scuffle and a steppingstone to the ultimate show-down which we all knew was coming. It was a bit like going to a wedding and having to sit through the whole ceremony just to see the bit you really want to: the kiss.

On another level, I felt that the characterisation was quite shallow – I know it's not a self-contained film but I would have liked to have seen more made of the Harry/Snape relationship. That said, this was the film where the actors peaked in terms of performances and it really felt as though we, the audience, had followed them on their journey from the very beginning, which I suppose we have. It was nice to see the younger actors hold their own against veteran actors such as Maggie Smith and Michael Gambon and shows the new talent which the series has produced. From a technical level, the film was well executed (no thanks to the retro-fitted 3D) and the special effects didn't distract from the action, and I felt quite immersed in the world of the film. A stand-out scene for me was the break-in to Gringotts which gave me a heavy hit of nostalgia as I thought back to Harry's first steps in the bank all those years ago... ah, the memories....ahem.

One of the most uncomfortable moments in the film for me was the final scene, not because it was too emotional or I was welling up but because it was totally, utterly, undeniably, wholly and completely unnecessary. I'm sorry, but it served no purpose apart from being over-sentimental tripe that seemed to be tacked on to the end as a mere afterthought and produced laughs in the screening I was in. Not the ending I was expecting. Despite this shocking ending, it remains a solid film which is both enjoyable and a fitting send-off for the Harry Potter saga.

PS What are the Deathly Hallows?!

Clapper rating: * * *

Transformers: Dark of the Moon

To me, there seem to be three types of action film. Firstly, the action film where everything falls into place nicely: you know who's killing who, why they're doing it, who is on who's team and what the end result will be. Secondly, there is the 'I-sort-of-get-it' action film where a few minutes of mayhem will go by where you don't have a clue what's going on until the explosions stop and some nice, slightly bruised character explains what has happened and what is going to happen next. And finally, there's the full-on, fully-loaded 'what-the-hell-is-going-on' film which makes no attempt to carry any hint of a narrative and hopes that you won't notice by bombarding you with more explosions, gunfire and muscles than in an episode of 'Help! My Army Weapons Store is on Fire”. This is the category in to which Transformers: Dark of the Moon fits.

After the disaster that was Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen, I went to see Transformers 3 expecting more of the same (minus Megan Fox) and, for the most part, that is what I got. The main problem I have with the franchise is that its director, Michael Bay, can not tell a story to save his life and it would seem that he has learnt all he knows about effective narrative construction from the back of a matchbox. The plot starts out in a fairly promising way as we are shown that the real reason for the moon landings was America racing to explore a crashed autobot space craft on the moon. This is as far as I got. Now, before you think that I can't follow even the simplest of stories, I can, and I like to think that I sort of understand Inception, but I can't for the life of me describe the story of the two hours plus that followed the opening sequence. The plot appeared to be held together with cobwebs which were all too frequently blown away (creating random sequences of action, totally unlinked and confusing) by the 'boom, crash, bang' of the latest fight between the Autobots and Decepticons. A one sentence review of this film could easily be Baldrick's war poem from 0:57 in this clip http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ci6Cw8W0Kn0 The final fight sequence was far too long (pushing 25mins) and about half way through I found myself staring blankly at the screen and starting to slip into a coma-like state, as I did with Transformers 2. Not the edge-of-your-seat stuff I'm sure Mr Bay hoped to create.

However, not all was woefully and disappointingly bad. The level of technical brilliance demonstrated in the CGI really was superb and just goes to show what you can do with $195 million... This was my first 3D film and I have to say that the 3D was impressive in the space sequences and the car chase sequence. Despite this, for the vast majority of the film it served no real purpose, except perhaps making things a little more interesting to look at when the plot had died a hideous death. I'm sure I would have enjoyed it no less if I had seen a 2D screening of it.

And now we get on to Optimus Prime's human counterparts. With Megan Fox gone (nothing to do with the fact she compared the director to Hitler, I'm sure), Michael Bay has replaced her with Victoria's Secret model Rosie Huntington-Whiteley and this, in a way, sums up Bay's approach to the trilogy. Her character is of little importance (apart from being Shia LaBeouf's love interest – very believable, I know) and is simply there to be gazed at by the men in the audience. The first we see of her is a tracking shot of her walking up some stairs in nothing but a shirt and a very skimpy pair of knickers and, to be honest, it continues in this way. Don't get me wrong, I don't have a problem with good looking people in films, but what I do have a problem with is the fact that Bay repeatedly makes reference to her sexuality in the most unsubtle ways possible (an audible laugh went round the audience I was in when a character compared her curves to those of a car...) and in doing so, probably alienates every woman in the audience. Huntington-Whiteley is not in control of her sexuality: the fat, drooling middle-aged man on the back row is. In fact, a guy in front of me summed it up rather nicely when he shouted “she is f**king awesome...” He wasn't talking about her acting.

All in all, Transformers: Dark of the Moon is a marginal improvement on the total trash that was Transformers 2 but it still has major problems with its narrative, characters and overall construction which need to be addressed if ever there is a Transformers 4. Getting rid of Michael Bay would be a good place to start. 

Clapper Rating: *

Bridesmaids

I have never really liked RomComs. I've always found them to be slightly dull, poorly acted and predictable. I find myself sitting there watching the likes of Jennifer Aniston fumbling her way through her love life and thinking “no-one's life is like that.” But maybe that's the point. Maybe that's what I'm missing – a RomCom is a chance on a Sunday night for an overweight 30 something to wallow in her own self-pity and escape from the fact that Mr Right just hasn't arrived in her life yet (but don't worry girls, he will...eventually). It was with this mindset that I went to watch Bridesmaids, the post-feminist answer to The Hangover. I have to say, I was pleasantly surprised.

From the beginning, it was clear that the film was not going to break any narrative conventions or be especially radical with its treatment of women in society. The film follows the life of Annie (Kristen Wiig) who, disillusioned with life after the failure of her cupcake shop, is asked to be the maid of honour at her best friend's wedding. However, things are complicated when Annie meets the other bridesmaids, including Helen (Rose Byrne), who soon becomes her main rival in vying for the top spot in organising the wedding. The story plays itself out with few major surprises and along the way does do what a good comedy should do: make you laugh. The strong performance from Kristen Wiig helped greatly in this and, whilst I only found myself laughing uncontrollably in one or two sequences (namely on board the aeroplane), pretty much every scene contained several nuggets of strong comedy. Even though about 70% of the humour was fairly crude, there were humorous moments which shone through and lifted this film up several levels from the obscene level of humour seen in The Hangover: Part II.

I felt the direction was strong and individual performances (especially from the very funny Melissa McCarthy as Megan) helped to keep the audience involved with the plot. I was rather surprised at the number of male audience members at the screening I went to and, for once, it seemed as though it was not simply boyfriends earning brownie points with their better halves. An indication of a broadening of the RomCom market? Maybe not...

Apart, perhaps, from the dress-fitting sequence, Bridesmaids shows that a modern comedy about a group of women getting together to organise a wedding does not have to lower itself to the depths of offensiveness and vulgarity that The Hangover: Part II demonstrated in such spectacular fashion earlier in the year. Whilst I do appreciate that the two films focus on completely different situations (the stereotypical image of a lad's stag/bachelor party and female wedding preparations) they are, by definition, linked. What the Hangover failed to do, in my opinion, was to rise above the sexist, homophobic, racist and misogynistic jokes in favour of a sharper humour which was not purely based upon drug-dealing monkeys and lady-boy prostitutes. Although Bridesmaids was by no means a social realist film, it at least attempted to address topics such as changing friendships and the empowerment of the modern woman in society. All in all, Bridesmaids is a solid comedy with glimpses of real comic wit, leagues above the lads in Bangkok. 

Clapper Rating: * * * *