Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: a better movie than it was a book?

I haven't seen HP7.2 in theaters, but in general, the Harry Potter books provide a richness that the movies lack. There are no time or budget constraints on the novels, and characters who get neglected on screen can develop in subtle ways in print. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hollows (the novel) compelled me as much, if not more, than the other books in the series did. I found it riveting, exciting, perfectly paced, heartbreaking, and best of all, it answered all of my questions. Rowling tied up that plot in a way Lost fans can only dream about. 

When I watch the Harry Potter movies, I can't help but notice every time the film diverges from the book, every time something happens differently on screen than it did on the page. I bite my tongue against complaining aloud, "That's not how it happened!" I agonize over deleted scene and lines that stuck in my mind from reading. The movies are certainly fun -- it's great to see Rowling's action sequences and her inventions and magical creatures given life. But I can't help but feel like they're poor, mutilated imitations from a much superior mold.

Few people, it seems, agree with me on this. In searching for articles to cite in this poll, I've mostly come across stories that prize the HP7.2 over the novel that it's based on. Much of the praise for movie comes along with criticism of Rowling's writing in the seventh book. An article titled "How the 'Harry Potter' Movies Succeeded Where the Books Failed" reads, "Rowling’s storytelling couldn't stack up to her setting ... while “darker” things happened, the tone could never quite catch up to the circumstances." The Huffington Post agrees with this assessment of Book 7 -- "to be blunt, this was not J.K. Rowling's best work." 

E! Online gives "Five Reasons the Harry Potter Movies Are (Gasp!) Better Than the Books," including the action scenes, more riveting on screen than on the page, and "brevity" ("Especially by the end, [Rowling] needed better editors to keep her from being long winded"). A reviewer for The Atlantic writes about the eight film, "It’s a pleasant irony that, just as the first installments of Rowling’s oeuvre were better suited to page than screen, the final installments hae reversed the relationship." Harry Potter better told on screen than in print? Well, you already know how I feel about that. What do you think?