One long movie would have been much better.

Rating: Null/10 (16 July 2011)

Part of the problem this movie faced was sustaining tension. It didn't. Nor did it attempt to rebuild tension drained by each scene. Splitting a single book in two was a bad idea to begin with, but this movie not only failed to stand alone, it also failed to live up to the promise of Part I. There should have been a single final movie that matched the book. Part I built tension, and left us all on the edge of our seats, but that tension dissipated, never to be rebuilt.
Part II wasted time on dull one-liners to provide comic relief for tension that wasn't there. Also missing were a sense of doom, fear, a burdensome awareness of menace, fatigue, and the need to fight all-out for an uncertain outcome. As there was no sense of fear or doubt or determination, there was nothing to inspire our encouragement or protectiveness -- and certainly no need for relief from tension, since there is none. There is more groundwork laid for the lame one-liners than there is for the story. Since Part I wasted time on similarly extraneous scenes, why not just combine the two and make one long, excellent movie?
Other problems: rearranging sequences so results are known ahead of time, which deprives us of surprises; abbreviating scenes to minimize tension, which deprives us of payoff; overstating certain emotional phrases, weakening their impact; writing out-of-character lines for players who don't have enough dialogue to restore their integrity; omitting scenes that add gravity; adding lighthearted mugging at bad times, which is confusing. Is this a do-or-die moment? If so, why are you tittering and shrugging? If not, why is there blood everywhere?
There were technical problems (some bad green screen moments, especially) and some weak framing and editing; all this speaks of a rush job. But the weak storytelling and dialogue were what killed this movie.