Potty about the Hallows

I've finally caught up with the frenzied crowds and seen Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Pt 1. I'm a self confessed Harry Potter enthusiast (possibly verging on the slightly obsessive) so the films always invoke huge excitement mixed with trepidation.

The decision to split the final book into two installments was I think a wise one. The book covers far too much action, emotion and character development to squeeze into what would have been a marathon film. What that means, however, is that Pt 1 shoulders the burden of laying down the story which will reach a crescendo in the final film. In Pt 1, nearly a three hour film, the explanation of the Deathly Hallows intertwines with the hunt for horcruxes, whilst the changing relationships of the main characters is well covered, arguably at the expense of some of the other tributary plotlines.


I'd argue that the production team had the difficult task of what to include in this key part of the Potter story, more so than any of the other films, but I think they made their choices well. The film chooses not to fully explore Harry's resentment towards the task that Dumbledore has left him, similarly abandoning Dumbledore's family history and dark past. I don't think the film suffered hugely by this plotline being discarded, as I think its existence in the book itself divided my opinion: at times I wasn't hugely comfortable with Dumbledore's history surfacing.
Interestingly, almost all aspects that were included were the most loyal to the original text that I've seen from any of the films. Great attention was paid to detail; I easily recognised parts of the script word for word from the book itself, which does provide a sense of comfort and familiarity. In particular I'd cite the retrieval of Gryffindor's sword in the forest. Also, the raw emotion displayed when characters are killed certainly brings a tear to the eye.The end of the film was a slight anti-climax for a fan like me, but I attribute that to the book not having a natural separation in the story which the film therefore had to construct. If anything, the image of Voldemort at Dumbledore's tomb creates a sense of desperation to see the rest of the story immediately.


The film demonstrates just how much more mature yet darker the books become as Harry discovers his true fate. Pt 1 is swathed in moody and draining colours, a huge contrast to the grandeur and richness we come to expect from Hogwarts scenes. There is a constant sense of impending danger, and the brief torture scenes in Malfoy Manor are the most shocking from the entire franchise. The special effects are stunning, with an airborne fight scene happening within the first few minutes. Even Dobby and Kreacher are revamped to look more realistic than they did in previous films. For the first time there is also the inclusion of an animation to explain the tale of the Deathly Hallows, which adds a completely new facet to the story. The animation is both understated and simplistic, yet stunningly descriptive. Perhaps the biggest congratulation should go to the three main actors, who in Pt 1 in particular do an incredible job of displaying the emotional trauma and angst that this quest has given them. The dynamics between them are believable and their bond is amazingly realistic, which is essential as they occupy the most amount of screen time. As a result, many popular characters such as the Weasleys, Lupin and Draco are on the screen for mere moments.

It is safe to say that only a true Harry Potter fan would be able to appreciate the film. I re-read the final book recently, so I was up to date on the story and intricacies. Anybody who hasn't read the books or even seen the latest films would potentially struggle with this plot heavy, but necessary, installment. In theory, the story-telling of this film should pave the way for some truly spectacular action scenes in the final film, which Potter is famous for. Overall, a brave effort which easily pays off considering the complexity of the text.

The joy of reading?

For months, I've been struggling to pick up a book and read for the sheer enjoyment. Probably seems quite contradictory considering my first post. I like to think that I'm an avid reader, but recently the desire just hasn't been there. I've got a number of books stacked next to my bed that I just can't bring myself to pick up and start reading. I think it's mainly to do with finishing university in the summer, the fact that I haven't had a set itinerary with things that I HAVE to read. Maybe it's been a bit of a rebellion, knowing that I don't have to read something that has been thrust upon me. Still, it was a bit of a worrying rebellion even for me. Perhaps it was airing more on the side of laziness.

But two days ago, I decided to re-read the final Harry Potter book in anticipation of the film coming out. (I'm a Potter enthusiast to say the least). Unsurprisingly, I completed the book at speed, seemingly giving me the kickstart I needed. God bless J.K. Rowling.

Give it time, I'll be talking about Potter at great length.

Lest We Forget

Today we commemorated the 92nd year of Armistice Day, when the combat of World War One ceased on the 11th hour of the 11th day of the 11th month. Armistice represents all conflicts from the Great War onwards, even holding significance in current hostilities and modern warfare in places like Afghanistan and Iraq.

For some reason, this cause always seems to strike a chord with me on a yearly basis. Aside from the intense pride, it saddens me that with every passing year, personal stories and histories are lost as we grow ever more distant from the generations who fought in both World Wars, and as fewer veterans survive. I have a specific passion for World War One, stemming from reading the literature of the era, especially from the soldiers themselves. Most people would probably recognise the words of Wilfred Owen, Siegfried Sassoon and John McCrae. War literature at it's best is haunting, informative, emotive and effective.

At 11 o'clock today I sat in silence and comprehended how vastly different civilisation is because of these wars. In one respect, war damaged the landscape and population of countries irrevocably, causing economic and political turmoil within nations of this planet. On the other hand, the privileged lifestyles and freedom we have today stems from the ironic constrictions of warfare which millions of people endured for the greater good. Despite the passage of time, I sincerely hope that the past sacrifices made are never taken in vain, or mocked, or simply grow stale and become part of a systematic routine. Modern war and terrorism is in the forefront of our minds because of current conflicts which our soldiers are embroiled in, and understandably so. In a way I hope that this encourages people to remember soldiers of the past who withstood a great deal with minimal support. It is with the bonds of humanity that they fought against overwhelming odds, and it is with these bonds that we must honour them.

War appears to be a cyclical force, the taking up of arms against fellow man when words fail. The cycle must be broken. Nobody knows what the future holds, but the past should never be forgotten, and instead should be learned from.

'We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow, loved, and were loved, and now we lie in Flanders Fields...'

Abbey Fever

Who'd have thought that an ITV costume drama could have created the public and critical acclaim which now surrounds Downton Abbey. From the pen of Julian Fellowes, Oscar winner for his Gosford Park screenplay, many would suggest that the success of Downton was a forgone conclusion.

Essentially, the series encapsulates the iconic Edwardian period of British history, an era of social and political change. Downton Abbey is the stately home of the Crawley family, and the drama studies the complex relationships of the home's inhabitants, both the aristocrats and their servant workforce. In broad terms, Downton is perhaps unfairly regarded as the revamped version of the 1970s series Upstairs, Downstairs. 

Downton effortlessly recreates the grandeur of aristocratic life alongside the harsh reality of servitude. The bright, plush 'upstairs' of the house contrasts sharply to the dimly lit servant quarters hidden below the artifice of luxury. The attention to detail regarding costumes, medicinal treatments, transport and even servant activities is to be applauded.

I must confess, I wasn't always an avid fan like I am now. The first episode, which obviously has to establish plotlines and characters, wasn't a huge draw for me, a self-confessed BBC period drama fan. The sinking of the Titanic, the catalyst for the story, was sparsely covered, and the overarching theme of inheritance and bloodlines was confusingly established. By episode three however, the background story was firmly rooted and characters were fully formed, helping to carry the various intertwining bi-stories along. The most focus in the series so far has been on rebellious daughter Lady Mary's fall from grace and her family's attempt to marry her off to preserve the Crawley inheritance and her virtue. In contrast, I feel that Lady Sybil's involvement with the burgeoning suffragette movement could have received more coverage, especially as this is one of the defining moments of the era in which the drama is set.

The cast is of a high standard, particularly Dame Maggie Smith as the Dowager Countess of Grantham. She easily delivers the best one-liners, complementing her portrayal as a traditionalist busybody. Another notable performer is Rob James-Collier, a footman committing dastardly deeds in order to fulfil his desires for a better professional position.

On paper, the characters seem to be two dimensional carbon copies from any other period drama. The interfering matriarch, the hotheaded pretentious youth, the sweet natured working class girl who MUST get together with the sweet but flawed working class man...

Despite this, it is a formula which works spectacularly. Downton explores the complexities of relationships across class and gender lines in a bygone era, evoking a sense of nostalgia within a modern audience who can compare past and present societal norms and mores. Or, quite simply, it is escapist viewing from the bankruptcy and dreariness of the modern world. What Downton does particularly well is to highlight the lack of moral disparities between the aristocratic Crawley family and their servants. Appearances can be deceiving. We are shown the Edwardian traditions and etiquette which attempts to maintain a rigid hierarchy, but are privileged with the knowledge that class and money do not breed model citizens.

I eagerly await the final episode of this series. I hope it lives up to expectations! The second series has already been commissioned, so I'm fully expecting more exploration into women's rights, but significantly World War One. The bar for television period dramas has definitely been raised.

What is in a name?

I was tempted to name this blog 'Musings of an Unjoined Person' but I chickened out, presuming people would think I had no grasp of English grammar. I've always had great difficulty in giving definitive labels, names, decisions and meanings to seemingly inanimate objects. Toys, pets, and academic work all included. I fear that if I do, I'll realise two days later how pretentious or plain my stupid decision was, and curse myself for hesitantly jumping in feet first. Essentially, I have difficulty in categorising anything for fear of how it will be received by other people and wider society generally. A little far-fetched for toys and pet names, but still the same principle. I'm unable to categorise myself, or give assured and definite responses to questions like 'what do you want to DO with your life? What is your favourite book? Where do you want to eat out?'

The personification of being unjoined is from Carson McCullers' 1946 book The Member of the Wedding. Through the character of Frankie, a girl on the cusp of adolescence who struggles to find her place, McCullers is able to express the confusion, loneliness and awakening that everybody must overcome. Frankie is described as an 'unjoined person'; her lack of membership to anything stemming from her disjointed view of herself and her place in society. This quote seemed apt not for self pitying reasons, but for the ease with which it describes that hollow feeling of self doubt and uncertainty which everybody, whether adult or child, has experienced. I would highly recommend this book to anyone and everyone.

I'll try not to be so heavy and philosophical next time, I promise. Instead, I settled on nobody, which is rather apt.