Good, but lacking the gravitas required to be Great.

Rating: Null/10 (13 July 2011)

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows part II was always going to be big and epic and pompous, all of which it delivers. It was also going to be the movie that ends the Harry Potter series, which is something it struggles with a bit more.
Beginning with a brief flashback of part 1's final shot, the movie picks of exactly were the last ended. It does so though, without ever feeling forced or abrupt, rather letting the first five or ten minutes be conversations (Griphook and Ollivander respectively) before turning the heat on. After that, the movie attacks you with such ferocity you barely breathe until the ending scene.
However, the action is always controlled. This could easily have been destroyed by trying to make it into a classic war movie, but though Yates dips in with plenty of battle scenes, he never goes the full Michael Bay. All in all, you end up feeling they might have shown more, letting a few key deaths happen off screen, but for the all-important PG-rating.
As for following the book, from the start of it keeps the distance needed to make it film able whilst still remaining true to the material. As we near the end of the battle it differs even more, yet still letting the events happen more or less like in the novel, and though it differs most in the climactic showdown, fans of the novel will be delighted to know the epilogue is translated nearly word by word.
The performances are stellar; Maggie Smith shines, as does Matthew Lewis and Radcliff does his best to carry the movie, a feat in which he mostly succeeds. For me though, the standout actors are, of course, Alan Rickman, giving his Snape a whole new dimension, but also, possibly surprising; Cieran Hinds as Aberforth Dumbledore. It isn't a big role, but he portrays it with such charisma and gravitas (especially one fantastic shot) I ended up wondering if he wouldn't have made a better Albus than Gambon. Alas, to late for that now.
Despite this I have only given it a 6. Why? Because it lacks the soul and warmth it should have had. Sure there are scenes (the forest springs to mind at once) that puts pressure on your tear canals, but it isn't enough, there is not a strong enough feeling of conclusion, it just doesn't quite deliver. In the end, it never manages to top the ending from Philosophers Stone.
As a conclusion, it is the same old criticism that has plagued the movie-series – the books were better. And though it is magnificently grand and spectacular, it sadly never really becomes the "Return of the King" it ought to have been.