*SPOILER ALERT*
So, I, like most Harry Potter fanatics, saw the new movie at a midnight show. After seeing on the big screen I gotta say, I was a little disappointed. First off, I thought the movie itself was a bit lazy. I felt the key elements of the story were neglected for some ridiculous CGI battle scenes. (Why did Harry’s and Voldemort’s heads get squished together, for example?) Where did the Hallows go? Where was the over-powering message of love? These elements were present, I’ll be the first to admit, but they seemed rushed to me.
Second, I realized I wasn’t a huge fan of the ending anyway. It was too neat, too convenient. ‘But it was a film adaptation of a book written for kids,’ you’ll say. ‘Pssh,’ I say. So here’s how it should have ended:
After Harry comes to terms with the necessity of his own death, he should have marched right on down there to ol’ Voldemort and let himself be killed. So far, the movie did alright. Then, however, there was this whole bit about Harry coming back from the dead (apparently because he was protected by love, which was seriously underplayed in the film). That’s the part they should have left out. Harry should have just died. He should have given his life to weaken Voldemort. The resurrection and subsequent happy life that Harry enjoys immediately thereafter seemed too neat and convenient to me. Not only that but it seemed to implement some sort of economy of exchange, suggesting that giving your life to fight evil will result in some sort of ultimate reward. I also couldn’t help but wonder what it was that actually separated Harry Potter from Tom Riddle to begin with? If it was love and Harry’s mother died to protect him, isn’t Voldemort’s greatest crime something like being an orphan or having lousy parents?
But I digress. Harry should have faced his death and died a hero. Voldemort should have carried Harry’s lifeless body back to Hogwarts where Neville would deliver a fantastic speech about Harry’s legacy. In essence, Neville would argue that Harry’s life was unimportant. His legacy of fighting evil could not be stopped even by death. If Harry was gone, then others would take his place. Neville would raise the sword of Gryffindor over his head and lead a new charge. As the two sides collide, the credits would roll.
This would obviously be a much less satisfying resolution to the story for many people, but Rowling herself demonstrated just how devastating resolution can be. The epilogue, in both its written and cinematic expressions, was terrible. It proves without a doubt that stories that are too clearly resolved ruin our hopes for the unpredictability of life. Do we actually want to know that everything is okay? Or is there not something beautiful about the uncertainty of the future? Sure, Harry could have survived and lived to fight Voldemort on his own. He could have (and did) come back from the dead and take it all on himself. He could be the Christ-figure who comes to save the world. But isn’t the beauty of this story that people die fighting with Harry? That people are inspired by Harry’s decisions to take responsibility for themselves?
We need more uncertain endings. We need less heroes. We need the Boy-Who-Lived to be the Boy-Who-Died. Then maybe we can start living ourselves.