From: Emailaaronainsley@countermail.invalid   
      
   On Wed, 27 Jul 2011 20:13:46 -0400, Chan Welbourne wrote:   
      
   > Sirius Black formulated the question :   
   >> On Wed, 27 Jul 2011 16:48:30 -0400, Chan Welbourne wrote:   
   >   
   >>>> Grade: C   
   >>>   
   >>> C+   
   >   
   >> Look, I have to admit, two of the three showings I went had   
   >> PotterBookNutts shouting out the lines from the book. Then there were   
   >> the non book readers who apparently had not read a preview or seen a   
   >> trailer, they kept gasping at all the death.   
   >   
   >> It was enough to gag a mongoose I tell ya'!   
   >   
   > Roger Ebert (Chicago Sun-Times): "'Harry Potter' now possesses an end   
   > that befits the most profitable series in movie history. ... [A] solid   
   > and satisfying conclusion."   
      
   Ebert can have "solid and satisfying" I wanted more.   
      
   > Kenneth Turan (LA Times): "'Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows --   
   > Part 2' turns out to be more than the last of its kind. Almost   
   > magically, it ends up being one of the best of the series as well."   
   >   
   > David Edelstein (New York Magazine): "Expecto Patronum, it is! 'HPATDH   
   > 2' works like a charm."   
   >   
   > Peter Rainer (Christian Science Monitor): "The collective emotion   
   > arising from the last installment of the "Harry Potter" franchise ...   
   > is a sense of loss. Even for those of us who have not found the films   
   > transcendent, there is some regret."   
   >   
   > *Salon (Andrew O'Hehir): "[T]his final installment, driven far less by   
   > acting and characterization than any of the preceding seven, fails the   
   > Peter Jackson test of becoming an affecting and absorbing work on its   
   > own terms."   
      
   This.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)