Verified by 
The latest and final Harry Potter movie is terrific.* But does it pack the moral punch of the book?
Those who have read J.K. Rowling's series on Harry Potter know that Harry morally matures through the stories. He becomes increasingly aware of the effects of his actions on others and grows in compassion for his enemies. Raised as an isolated, freakish child, he matures into a member of a community--responsible and responsive to the needs of others.
Philip Womack, of the Telegraph, argues that the new Potter movie offers a better narrative than the book. The book is bogged down by too much detail and digressions on characters and their histories. New York Times film reviewer, Manohla Dargis, points out how the Hollywood blockbuster genre requires an emphasis on action over content and that the Potter movies maintained their story integrity. I beg to differ.
Life is lived in the details, so perhaps the lack of detail speaks to the shortcomings of movies in general. Movies are good for depicting a scene, for dazzling special effects, and moving action along. But this is not enough for a great story. There has to be meaning making and explanation. Too much of this was missing from the movies.
Sacrificing dialogue for action was especially apparent in this last film. During critical points of dialogue in the book, the movie script has the characters merely glancing at one another. Instead of the competitive dialogue between Harry and Voldemort at the climax in the book, in the film they fly around Hogwarts in an inexplicable embrace. Instead of depicting how in the book the Hogwarts community and the invaders witness the final confrontation between Harry and Voldemort, the film isolates the two to face each other alone. Here occurs one of several logical disconnects in the film-how does the community become aware of what ultimately happened?
Most importantly, a virtuous person is virtuous in and for the community. Harry Potter sacrifices himself for the wellbeing of others. Keeping the community in the final scene emphasizes this. The film removes the community from the action and makes it seem like some individualistic, I-am-going-to-beat-you-because-I'm-a-cooler-guy cowboy shoot-out instead of the ultimate sacrifice of love.
In fact, the explicit moral messages in the books were left out of most of the movies. The overall, repeated moral theme was that Harry's uniqueness and strength came from the love shown by his mother and his friendships. Love conquers all. How often have you heard that in the films? You might be able to infer it on your own, but you could infer instead an individualistic message like ‘perseverance wins out' or ‘never give up.' (Our research shows that children often don't get the intended message from a story and instead infer an unintended message. Hmm, it seems that the script writers had the same problem.) But Rowling's message is communal, not individualistic. Harry could not do what he did without loving support. And he did it for the community as a responsible member of the community, not for himself as a cool guy. These are very different moralities.
And so the films, although exciting and powerful, leave out the most vital and inspiring elements of the stories. After you see the latest film, I urge you to (re)read the book. The movie is good but the book is better.
*although it may be hard to understand if you did not at least see The Deathly Hallows-Part 1
