By Matt Fleming and Jarrod Jones. This is the ANTI-MONITOR podcast, where that’s so wizard, Annie. This week, Jarrod & Birdy take one final look at the wonky-as-all-get-out Harry Potter films with ‘Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2’. And that’s it. Seriously, that’s the whole episode. (Though they managed to sneak in a Buzzfeed quiz, because they’re two very sad individuals.)

As always, be wary for spoilers throughout, and please enjoy.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part II

Image: Warner Bros Pictures

ANTI-MONITOR — MATT: After Chris Columbus started the franchise, the world of Harry Potter got tossed around a bit until someone finally knew how to handle it. Once it got into David Yates’ hands, Warner Bros. understood that it had a cash cow the likes it hadn’t seen since Batman, so that meant it was time to meddle. That means we get a fractured end to to the epic tale of Harry and his Hogwarts friends, leaving us with Deathly Hallows Part 2. If it weren’t for the success of this two-fer, we might have had a more concise Hobbit.

Instead, we have this second-half film that should be the actual second half to a movie. The storytelling is sent off in favor of spectacle, leaving anyone out of J.K. Rowling’s loop stuck to Wikipedia for over two hours. While film and book fans should be jointly enthused by the movie’s action, fan service takes the place of sincere joy, leaving the novice to twiddle their fingers in hopes of conjuring a spell that makes this film shorter. If one has reveled in the lore of Hogwarts and such, this may be the stunning conclusion they’ve longed for, but as a stand-alone movie, this one lives in the land of pure spectacle.

ANTI-MONITOR — JARROD: What can be said about Harry Potter that hasn’t been said a ka-jillion times already, and by more qualified and interested people than myself? I think the ubiquity of the Potter franchise speaks for itself, considering I’ve watched each of the films only once and have read perhaps 35% of the lore and I can still tell you the difference between a Patronus and a Horcrux. (One’s edible, right? Kidding.) If there’s an argument for the overall quality of the book series being superior to the film series, then I’ve definitely already agreed to it, even if my awareness of the lore is only cursory.

Especially after watching Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 for a second time. Splitting up a story into two films may make sound financial sense, and most of the Potter Faithful welcome such moves, but for the rest of us, pulling away from a slow slog of a movie just to wait six months to watch its far more stirring finale feels like a cheat. And that’s been Warner Bros’ gamble for far too long. The only legacy Harry Potter left behind is a legacy of market appeasement.

Image: Warner Bros Pictures

Image: Warner Bros Pictures

CONSENSUS: Whatever magic was found in Potter lore is lost in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2, a drab attempt to squeeze a little more cash out of a tired franchise. — 5 out of 10

Before: “We Watched ‘V FOR VENDETTA’, Because Reasons,” here.

Make sure to subscribe and rate the Anti-Monitor Podcast on iTunes!


Powered by FeedBurner