BKB clearly doesn't understand the difference between "fan" and "fanboy."

There's absolutely nothing wrong with loving a director so much you want to see all of his/her films, regardless of subject matter. My favorite director is Peter Weir, and I'm excited to see any film he deems worthy of his time and craft. Because he has a stellar track record, and his films appeal to me.

BKB, if you were a true fan of, say, Spielberg, you'd want to see a new film of his regardless of its subject matter. Simply because it's a new film by a director you hold dear. And this wouldn't mean you're a fanboy. Just a fan.

Meh. I'm bored by your need to return every conversation to, "OMG! THE INTERNET IS TOO NICE TO CHRISTOPHER NOLAN! AND HE DIRECTS THOSE BATMAN MOVIES! BUT I PREFER MARVEL! GRRRRRR!!"

My only point was: your whole, 'I love Fincher, but I'm not gong to get excited every time he directs a new movie because I'm not a fanboy' angle is stupid.

I don't think there's anything wrong with being a Nolan fanboy, or a fan of any other director's works. I've seen every Nolan film since Batman Begins either at midnight or before it was widely released. Similarly I've been to theaters for everything Spielberg, the Coens, Fincher, Bay, Aronofsky, etc. have made in the last ten years. The way the system works I trust the quality of a movie by the person directing it more than the franchise. Harry Potter has sadly been inconsistent for me.

Okay, yeah, and Harry Potter midnight reviews in t-minus 24 hours. I predict hyperbole.

All things come to an end. And so does the most successful movie franchise of all-time, Harry Potter. When the first film, Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone came out, the hype was immense. Unfortunately, Chris Columbus’ film didn’t live up to it. While being a fairly faithful adaptation of the source material in content it never managed to capture the book’s magical spirit. What the audiences ended up with was a serviceable family flick, but not an adaptation most fans hoped for. The follow-up, Chamber of Secrets, was a clear improvement, yet several of the first film’s flaws were still prevalent. It’s not until Columbus left the franchise as the director and Alfonso Cuaron took the reins for the third movie, Prisoner of Azkaban, that the series finally hit the tone of the books. It was still far away from a perfect adaptation of the third novel, but it’s hard to deny that despite having directed only one Harry Potter film, Cuaron turned out to be the franchise’s biggest influence up to its end, setting up the atmospheric, dark tone of the series.

Looking back at the humble beginnings, it’s hard to believe how much the Harry Potter films have matured and, at last, managed to get an identity of their own, separate from the books. Originally I was disappointed when it was announced that David Yates would direct the final two films. While Order of the Phoenix and Half-Blood Prince were good films, I consider them a step down from Goblet of Fire. I thought the series finale deserved a better filmmaker. Now I am glad to report that Yates learned quite a bit from the two preceding films and delivered a two-part finale that the fans of the series deserve.

As you might notice my wording – it is hard to separate the final two films. Even more than Tarantino’s Kill Bill feature, the two films very much feel like one. Whereas Part 1 delivers the first and the second act of the piece, Part 2 is the slam-banging third act. Considering it is basically just one act of a very long film, it comes as no surprise that it is the shortest Harry Potter movie to date, clocking at exactly 130 minutes, though the felt running time is even much shorter.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 2 starts right where the first part ended – with Voldemort getting hold of the Elder Wand. Our heroes, meanwhile, are preparing for the final search of the Horcruxes which will take them into the depths of the wizards bank Gringotts. Their break-in and eventual escape are visually dazzling sequences which feature one of the best-animated dragons in movie history. After that, it goes straight to Battle of Hogwarts which probably makes up 60% of the entire movie. However, unlike the final showdown of Transformers: Dark of the Moon which seemed to go on forever, this one never feels overlong. Overall, the flick moves at an extremely brisk pace, leaving the viewer at the edge of the seat. Despite containing probably more action scenes than all the preceding seven films taken together, it still finds time for a few quiet, beautifully realized moments, like a very well-executed and touching view into Snape’s most secret memories and a conversation between Harry and Dumbledore (no, he did not come back from the dead). However, the most outstanding aspect of this film is the action. While Rowling’s book is terrific, I must say that Yates’ version of the battle is even more exciting and fully realized. Hogwarts, the magical place that moviegoers got used to is being pretty much destroyed here. All sorts of different creatures are featured in the battle, ranging from giant spiders over Dementors to giants. The battle is pretty merciless too as many beloved characters find their death, though it is all not as emotional as it could have been with the emphasis being mostly on great action.

The cast is terrific once again. Yates brought back almost everyone still alive in the Potter universe, even if some are just blink-and-you’ll-miss cameos. There are returns of Horace Slughorn (Jim Broadbent), Ollivander (John Hurt), Sybil Trelawney (Emma Thompson) and many others. Only a few of the supporting characters actually get memorable scenes, though. One of them is Professor McGonagall (Maggie Smith) who finally becomes part of the action. But most kudos should go to Alan Rickman’s Snape whose scenes in his own memories feature some of his career’s best acting and, in particular, Ralph Fiennes’ Voldemort. Ever since his first appearance in the series, there was something off about Voldemort. While the appearance was pitch-perfect, he never came across as a particularly great villain. Not until this film in which the character finally comes alive. Fiennes plays the insanity, the pure evil, but also the starting weaknesses as the Horcruxes are being destroyed one by one to perfection. At last, Voldemort becomes a great movie villain.

As for our main trio, Dan Radcliffe, Emma Watson and Rupert Grint have really grown into the roles by now. Once again, Watson is the standout among the three, but all three are very convincing in their parts.

The movie’s greatest strength, its incredibly fast pace and well-executed tension is also one of its weaknesses. Afterall, it still feels like a huge finale without a set-up preceding it. It’s like a terrific final part of a great movie, but rarely feels like a separate movie. It really belongs together with Part 1.

The technical department really pulled out all the stops this time. The visual effects here are amazing, even by the franchise’s standards. It’s leaps and bounds ahead of everything else I have seen this year. The first shot of Hogwarts in the movie is simply beautiful. The art direction apartment has done a terrific job bringing the destruction of Hogwarts to life. Eduardo Serra’s cinematography is brilliant and should give him his third Academy Award nomination. Alexandre Desplat’s music is very good too, always playing with John William’s already iconic score.

In the end, when seen together, Deathly Hallows – Part 1 and Part 2 will should be regarded as the series’ well-deserved exciting climax which brings the franchise to a worthy end (after an unworthy beginning). There’s a real sense of closure here, obviously emphasized by the 19-years leap into the future at the film’s end (though the makeup jobs are mostly unconvincing). Even though the overall franchise could have clearly been better if given into the right hands right away, the movie’s final scene still leaves the viewer with a slight sense of sadness and fulfilment as one of the biggest movie franchises of our time comes to its definite (?) end.

The movie’s greatest strength, its incredibly fast pace and well-executed tension is also one of its weaknesses. After all, it still feels like a huge finale without a set-up preceding it. It’s like a terrific final part of a great movie, but rarely feels like a separate movie. It really belongs together with Part 1.

How in the world could they release a 225 minute film theatrically?

That's only like 25 minutes longer than ROTK, which did fine.