Live Q&As

You're quite right. But I guess since just about everyone who will see Part I is also going to see Part II, I'm not sure I feel awfully cheated by it. What do others think?

Actually, the Potter books are among the most challenged in the country by parents who  feel that because of the wizarding content, they should not be on library shelves. I think every parent should make these individual decision for themselves obviously. But I think the reason that my kids will, as parents, read the Potter books to their kids, is because they are fundamentally about the battle between good and evil. They provide a road map for dealing with adversity ... although one can certainly hope that none of our kids ever encounter as much adversity as Harry and his kin do. I think Rowling includes many literary references in her books, including biblical ones

I have to say that the three of them are AMAZING in this movie. It is not a film about affects or action, really. It's a character driven vehicle and if any one of them had been cheesy, it would have fallen apart. It is played in close-ups and they are so affecting. There's a moment very early on when Hermione is leaving her parents and the look on Emma Watson's face is riveting. The problem, of course, is to what extent can you see Radcliffe and not think Harry. But the three of them have pulled off TERRIFIC, nuanced, sublte performances that show they are actors worthy of careers.

This was a rich topic with the kids I saw the movie with. There are favorite scenes from the books that don't make it into the movie (I wish the scene where Dudley and Harry say goodbye had been included), but I think the movies stand as works with artistic merit. The first two were literally true to the books. I think since Prisoner of Azkaban, they have been aesthetically true to the spirit of the books. So, are there scenes you will miss; sure. But I don't think many people will feel that the movie doesn't do justice to the book ... or rather the first 2/3 of the book.

I gotta be honest. I saw the movie the first time last Thursday in advance of my interview with Felton and I saw it in a screening room, not a big theater and I spent the rest of the day feeling bereft because it is such an emotionally draining movie and it ends without the payoff. It's as if someone gave you the book, let you read 2/3 of it and then took it away from you. But when I saw it on Monday in a theater full of people, there seemed to be a greater sense of being on a journey. All I can say is that Part II has so much good stuff to cover that I hope they do it justice, but I'm sure they will.

And Rupert Grint has done a few movies. And of course Ralph Fiennes, Alan Rickman and others had rich careers before the series. I do think part of what is so affecting about this movie, at least to me as a mother, was to see these kids fully grown. Should have said this before, but Radcliffe is great in the graveyard scene. It would have been so easy to overplay it.

I'm not sure that you can technically have an "adults only screening" although there are some theaters having 3 a.m. or 3:30 a.m. screenings tomorrow morning. Probably a safe bet that you won't have too many 10-year-olds there.

On that subject, it is rated PG-13 mostly for the themes of loss and despair that permeate the movie. There are laugh lines to be sure (the seven harrys is wicked). But it's not a movie for 7-year-olds, not because of violence or the necking or anything like that, but just because it's too profound for them.

They were filmed back to back. Although they are still tweaking Part II and David Yates has said that he may bring everyone back to shoot a few scenes in December. But by and large the second movie is in post production.

Oh I think they have to the epilogue, in my  humble opinion. (What Harry and Ginny named their son totally got me!)  And I think they'll find a very creative way to handle it. (The way they render the Tale of the Three Brothers as a fairy tale is truly lovely.

I sobbed through much of it the first time I saw it. But again that was not in a full theater. It was a very limited screening. So it may not be a three-hanky movie for everyone, but definitely tuck a tissue in your cape pocket!

I believe there are some theaters that tonight are screening movies 5, 6 and 7 back t0 back to back. So I'm absolutely certain that they will re-release Part I for an uber double-feature experience. My 14-year-old son has predicted (correctly, I'm sure) that the two movies will be released in one DVD combo pack. For what it's worth, when I talked to Tom Felton, he said that he and the entire cast thought the "two movie" approach was the right one because there was no way they could do justice to it in one movie. (Certainly not in one movie of less than 4.5 hours!)

Tough question, but I think that Ann Hornaday makes a compelling point in her review today that Emma Watson comes into her own in this film. But it's just by a nose. This is a Harry-Ron-Hermione vehicle. Nobody else is in more than two scenes. The success of the movie rested completely on their ability to make us believe their relationship, their pain, their kinship.

Actually, I think there was much more snogging in six, with the Harry/Ginny story line. There's one Harry/Ginny snogging scene but that scene is completely stolen by Fred (or is it George?). There's a very tender dancing scene involving Harry and Hermione in the forest but it is the definition of "just friends" and then there's the "necking" scene that plays out of Ron's fears as he's trying to destroy the horcrux. It's very stylized.

It's darker because there's no escaping that this is the windup for the epic battle. And while we all know how it ends, everyone in the movie does a darn good job of convincing us that THEY don't know how it ends. The time in the forest and the visit to Godric's Hollow is just bleak and sad and painful to watch. But it's all those things because you care so deeply about the characters and because the actors and director and screenwriter have been so true to the heart and soul of the story.

This is a total no brainer for me. You read the books first. It's the source material. I think the movies are terrific but let's not forget that this is J.K. Rowling's world. I have twin sons and we started reading the first book as a read-aloud when they were 7. We finished the last book the summer when they were 11 and I wish every kid could have four years of their childhood's defined by the excitement of what was happening next. I think part of the problem is that many 7-year-olds can read the first book on their own but because they are all published now, they are reading the later books as 7 or 8-year-olds and they haven't had the chance to grow up that harry has.

Dudley's in the movie, for the blink of an eye. Actually, it's Neville (who is also in for just the blink of an eye) who looks like he's grown about two feet and slimmed down.

I'm not sure I agree. It is ultimately Harry's movie and I don't consider him a ginger. But Fred and George (who again are only in a handful of scenes) do steal the ones they're in. (You may never think of a toothbrush quite the same way after seeing this movie).

That may in fact be one of the scenes that Yates wants to redo and that scene would probably be easier to reshoot than say the battle. (If Mrs. Weasley doesn't get to use the b-word when she's fighting Bellatrix, I will be totally bummed).

A number of people have written in to say that Radcliffe was great in Equus. And I really hope he has a great career, but let's face it, we all know what's the first line of his obit.

Just checked and Cinema and Drafthouse, which is still around, isn't screening it. I understand the anti-kid sentiment but honestly, I think once the strains of the music kick in, everyone will be glued to the screen

The epilogue was definitely not the last thing she wrote. And I have to say that I think the beauty of these books is how tightly woven they are. How a seemingly passing reference in book 2 becomes an integral part of book 6. I think lots of people were worried that book 7 couldn't possibly live up to expectations and the fact that it exceeded them speaks for her talent as an author. Is she capable of a clunkily turned phrase? Yes, absolutely. But if there's anything more beautiful or moving or satisfying than the Snape chapter in book 7, I'm not sure what it would be.

I can see where that would be true. Harry seems to have shed all vestiges of boyhood in this one. That's not quite true of Ron, but that's part of his charm. You think that Ron will never quite really grow up.

We'll see. But for now, go and enjoy these really fine young actors truly inhabiting their characters.

Amen. I think there would be a riot if someone's cell went off during this movie