Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part 1 - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part 1 Reviews

Page 3 of 14
November 29, 2010
The grimness of Deathly Hallows replaces the lighthearted tone of the previous films ... how much of an improvement this is depends on how serious you thought the series should be.
Full Review | Original Score: 7.5/10
November 29, 2010
Part 1 concludes with good and evil evenly balanced, both sides having suffered losses in pursuit of ultimate victory.
Full Review | Original Score: 4/5
November 27, 2010
'With a name like 'Lovegood' I'm the luckiest woman with a profile on Match.com,' said Luna. 'The second-luckiest,' said Moonraker's Holly Goodhead.
Full Review | Original Score: C+
November 27, 2010
The actors possess their best chemistry yet (as well they should--they've practically shared each other's Pablum), and the chemistry shows. You now can fully feel just how high the stakes have become.
Full Review | Original Score: A-
November 27, 2010
The decision to split it into two movies couldn't have paid off more. Yates finally has the time to spend with Harry, Ron, and Hermione that's he hasn't had lately, and the movie is 100 percent better for it.
Full Review | Original Score: 3/4
November 27, 2010
In Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1, the tone has completed its change. The initial innocence, playfulness, and fresh discovery of magic is long gone. Horror now prevails.
Full Review | Original Score: 2.5/5
November 27, 2010
A stop gap, not a movie.
Full Review | Original Score: 2/4
November 25, 2010
Deathly Hallows Part 1 is a damn fine piece of film - if I had the faintest idea what was going on in it, I might have enjoyed it even more.
Full Review | Original Score: 3.5/5
November 24, 2010
Has too many plot threads to follow in its willy-nilly efforts to set the stage for the real ending.
Full Review | Original Score: 2.5/5
November 24, 2010
The plot is one long, boring slog to nowhere. Yes, that reflects what is in this section of the book, but that is absolutely no excuse for this.
Full Review | Original Score: C
November 24, 2010
It may be the scariest, but it's also one of the strongest in the series.
Full Review | Original Score: 8/10
November 23, 2010
Do your homework before walking in; you'll be better off for it.
Full Review | Original Score: B
November 23, 2010
Not wild about this "Harry". Half the book equals half the entertainment.
Full Review | Original Score: 5/10
November 22, 2010
It's not without its faults, but those glitches are largely irrelevant because it ticks all the boxes Potter-heads want to see ticked.
Full Review | Original Score: 4/5
November 22, 2010
David Yates's third crack at the franchise goes to a dark, interesting place, even if the whole enterprise feels rather played-out, so last decade.
Full Review | Original Score: 3/4
November 22, 2010
On its own, it's the worst film in the series since the first two... I suspect it will wear well. It was never meant to be a stand-alone movie, after all.
Full Review | Original Score: 6/10
November 22, 2010
The trouble with Harry, as becomes clear from this seventh and penultimate installment, is not that we have lost the plot -- the film is as tangled and as corkscrewed as Bonham Carter's hair -- but that we are in danger of losing everything else.
November 22, 2010
A water-treading sequel with no emotional momentum ostensibly serving as a setup for next summer's grand finale
Full Review | Original Score: 3/4
November 22, 2010
It's essentially a horror movie, set in the belly of the beast, almost literally: The film's not 10 minutes old before a giant constrictor opens its fanged jaws and swallows the camera lens -- and us -- whole, plunging the screen into darkness.
Full Review | Original Score: 3/4
November 22, 2010
If its total success can only be properly measured upon arrival of the conclusion in July, the fact that Part 1 makes that worth waiting for should be taken as some kind of victory.
Full Review | Original Score: 3/5
Page 3 of 14