Overall a good movie, despite the wait for the 2nd installment

Rating: 8/10 (19 November 2010)

As most of the people have, I just returned from the theater and am writing my review. Now lets start out with what I thought was good about the film: 1.The acting is much better than previous movies, especially Emma Watson 2. This movie captures all major details of the book, only leaving very minor things out and changing a few 3.The movie is good at capturing your attention and definitely does not seem as long as the 140 minutes it runs 4. There isn't really anything that inappropriate in this movie, it is only PG-13 because of violence (which isn't even that bad) so you could bring your children if you wished 5. The action scenes are well done. Although sometimes they can be difficult to follow, they still include the suspense you want them to in order to elevate what happens next. And if you cant follow them...it's a book and movie that is largely based on action, why would you be watching it then? 6. Even if you're not the most die-hard Harry Potter fan, you should be able to follow along quite well without even having read the books. (Although I have read all of them, that part is coming from my numerous friends who also saw it) 7. It is difficult to make a movie based off of a book, because people always complain that people who haven't read the book can't follow along, or that people who have see that they've left out details, but with the plot of J.K Rowling combined with the directing of Yates, it works out nicely.
And, since every movie has them, the negatives. There aren't too many, and most of these are just minor things, but here they are anyway 1. This movie is long. As I said earlier it is appropriate for most audiences, but younger children,who are generally easier distracted, may get bored despite how interesting the movie is 2. Not really a complaint about the movie itself, but it is sold out almost everywhere, so you may not get to pick your seats. Now I can handle a movie from anywhere in the theater, but if you sit near the front row it may be quite painful to look straight up for 2 hours. And since it is such a large screen you may miss some of the action if you sit too close. But, as I said, this doesn't have anything to do with the actual movie 3. Now a lot of people complained about this and obviously I am going to also. The end is pretty good, they added some extra action to make it more exciting, but no matter how good the ending of a movie is, I doubt you can capture that suspense in your audience for 8 months. And the ending didn't really seem to excite me much, If you've read the book, then you know what is coming and it won't be as exciting.
4. Which leads me to my next complaint. Of course I have this one. 8 months? You have to wait that long for part two to come out? By that time most people will have forgotten a lot of what happened in the movie (especially if you didn't read the book) and you will probably have to watch it again on a DVD. Now technically 8 months isn't tooo long to wait, we've waited longer for sequels to movies just as popular, but if it is another part of the movie instead of a separate movie, that is kind of long. But I guess I would rather watch a movie that you had to wait for which is fully complete and good, than a movie that is 3 and a half hours long and so cramped that half of what happens in the book is left out. And this is the last book, so not exactly the time to be leaving out details.
Moral of the story? Despite my complaints and the wait, a good movie. Should entertain you for a good 2 hours, and no really major flaws. And besides, complaining about how long part 2 is going to take to come out doesn't have to actually do anything with part 1. So if you want to go see J.K Rowling's great novel in the form of a film, go to the theater...that is if it isn't sold out yet.