This was going to continue being a comment to the earlier post, but it got so long I figured I'd turn it into a new thread. Here goes...
Sorry to steal Kat's thunder... I guess it wasn't so much that Harry-as-Horcrux was patently obvious... but if you went on the Intarwebs and read the speculation after HBP, the idea had spread like wildfire by the time I got around to reading the book. So I still give you credit for coming up with the idea on your own before reading other people's conjectures.
I would have liked to see either 1) Neville kill Voldemort, 2) Neville kill Bellatrix (as k mentioned), OR (as I have mentioned to Dani) 3) Prof. McGonagall kill Bellatrix. The latter being because I think she is the female second-in-command foil to Dumbledore as Bellatrix is to Voldemort, and though the scene with Mrs. Weasley is nice enough, I think in terms of literary structure it would be better poetic justice if either McG or Neville did her in.
I did think the action was great starting around page 500 with the beginning of the Battle of Hogwarts, and that had better look awesome in the movie or I'm demanding my money back. I was less enthralled with the 300 pages of camping scenes. Those will be sharply reduced in my remix edition of the books. (Somewhere in here there is a joke about parallels between the Harry Potter books and the Ernest movies... Prisoner of Azkaban = Ernest Goes to Jail, this one = Ernest Goes to Camp... I'm sure there are more.)
I'm OK with Tonks and Lupin dying, but I don't think it was really necessary either way. As Dani noted, it would probably be too big a blow to the Weasley clan if both Arthur and Fred (I think it was Fred who died and George who lost an ear, right?) died. So if Arthur died, I think we'd have to get back Fred... and literarily I kind of like the idea of having the twins get split up (I can't really express why) and Teddy (who even in the phonetic similarity of his name, I think is pretty intentionally supposed to mirror Harry) orphaned. One nice thing about the latter is that it provides nice parallels/resolutions to the fact that Harry was orphaned in the first place, and that his own godfather was killed, simultaneously by virtue of having him become the godfather to the orphaned Teddy.
Re: Dani's question as to Snape: I agree with Cassie Clare that IF the only two choices are really 1) Snape was always good or 2) Snape was always bad, then you have to have it be #1. No question. However, again I would have preferred something with a little more surprise/subtlety, such as 1) Snape was always bad, but redeems himself at the last second (a la Darth Vader in Return of the Jedi) or 2) Snape was always good, but nearly ruins it all in a moment of temptation. (Example imagined scene: He temporarily gets ahold of the Resurrection Stone somehow, perhaps through Voldemort, and is given the opportunity to bring Lily back [just like the character in the legend] if he kills Harry or acts as accessory to such. He turns the stone over and sees her, and nearly gives in, but seeing her causes him to remember her sacrifice and allows him to overcome temptation at the last second. THEN Voldemort kills him.) Or some sort of trickery such as when Snape killed Dumbledore, they really had their roles reversed via Polyjuice Potion or some crap like that, although maybe that would be hokey unless you could figure out a really great way of pulling it off.
BTW, enjoyed Cassie's review... I particularly agreed with her that the quest for the Horcruxes and Hallows should have been folded into the narrative much earlier, even if it wasn't revealed until book 6 or so what the full story was behind these objects. And it would have been much better structurally... as they are now, books 1 through all but the end of 4 are basically like, "Hey, kids! It's another wacky year at Magic Camp!" and the real myth/epic is all crammed into (mostly the last 100 pages of each of) books 5-7.
And in answer to Cassie's question about why it was that Lily's sacrifice was the only one to protect from the A-K curse, when certainly other people had died for their loved ones before... I always assumed it was something like the light side of the Horcrux creation (i.e. a kind of magic that can only be invoked when you voluntarily sacrifice your life), in the same vein as the deeper, older magic of which the White Witch was unaware in Lion/Witch/Wardrobe, that which allowed Aslan to return to life. Is this in keeping with others' thoughts? But it would have been nice if there had been something in HP7 that explicitly revealed that she used this magic or knew about it.
Finally, for those who didn't get it the first time, I'll recopy my complaints and revisions of the finishing-off of Voldemort for your consideration:
"I had forgotten this, but Wikipedia has thoughtfully reminded me that Harry didn't really kill Voldemort... the A-K curse rebounded on him b/c the Elder Wand was loyal to Harry. Now, even if we are accepting the fact that Harry came back from the dead [which I still think is a cop-out, though I think it would sit better with me if it were presented in a dreamier, fuzzier, more out-of-body-experience-was-that-even-real? sort of way that cut out some of those pages of dialogue], this does not satisfy me.
"Anyway, this is what I propose. Harry comes in, more or less as written, except that he has managed to grab the ring with the Resurrection Stone back as he comes out of the forest, thereby tying up that plot hole (as anyone familiar with the Lord of the Rings or Wagner's Ring Cycle knows, a powerful ring, if lost but not destroyed, will always be found again). Voldemort still has the Elder Wand at this point. So Harry gets it somehow... let's say Voldemort points the wand at him and tries the A-K curse, but instead of the way it's written in the book (hits Harry's spell, bounces back, and kills him), the spell just fizzles. He refuses to believe Harry was right (in the needlessly long number of pages of dialogue between him and Harry that have just transpired), and tries again. Again, the curse refuses to fly out of the wand. Harry (with Draco's wand) then casts an Expelliarmus (so we still get this, which happened in the book, and I think is a nice touch as we mentioned). The Elder Wand flies out of V's hand and goes directly to Harry, smashing the wand he won from Draco in the process (I think this is kind of nice as it has symmetry -- Harry became the master of the wand by disarming Draco but did not actually get the Elder Wand, and now as it returns to him it destroys the wand he actually got from Malfoy) (also nice as if you assume Malfoy to be an evil foil to Harry, it parallels the damage to Harry's own wand earlier in the book).
"At any rate, however it plays out, Harry is now carrying all three of the Hallows -- thus he is presumably truly the master of death now if you buy the legend and/or if you assume he deserves this from sacrificing his life previously (I think this is also a nice touch -- that SOMEONE gets all three Hallows at some point). Voldemort, now desperate, either gets another wand from somewhere or uses his own original wand (I forget if he still has it at this point) and tries one more time (a third time, which I think is a nice magical number) with the A-K curse. Now the curse rebounds (I like the idea that the Elder Wand acts half on its own and Harry casts an unknown protective charm without actually speaking, but this point is negotiable), and Voldemort is knocked down, disarmed, and weakened, but not killed. Thus, to some extent it mirrors their first encounter -- but this time V is defenseless and Harry is at the height of his power. Harry expresses regret that it has to be this way, but knows that neither can live while the other survives, etc. He raises the Elder Wand and says "Avada-" (I think this would be the only time Harry uses the killing curse, right?) -- but before he finishes, the wand again acts on its own and completes the curse for him. I sort of like this b/c it adds some ambiguity to Harry's character -- i.e., he is willing to use the A-K curse (which is nice with all the symbolism of part of him being in Voldemort and vice versa) -- and he is more active in killing Voldemort than is written, but in some sense he is not fully responsible, as he never actually completes the curse, thus symbolizing how fate has to some extent forced his hand in this regard.
"Subsequently, Harry uses the Elder Wand to destroy the Resurrection Stone (I think this is allowed according to the rest of the myth in the book), and as already written, he also uses it to fix his own wand, then re-buries the Elder Wand with Dumbledore and keeps only the Invisibility Cloak. Thus (wow, I only just realized this parallel and have officially just blown myself away), just as at the end of the very first book where he got the Sorceror's/Philosopher's Stone from the mirror (i.e., he got the stone because he needed it but had no desire to use it), he proves himself to be the worthy master of all three Deathly Hallows solely by virtue of his willingness to give up the title.
"Much tidier, I think..."