Digital Spy

Search Digital Spy
 

DS Forums

 
 
 

Harry Potter films that were most/least loyal to the books?


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 30-10-2013, 13:20
dan_
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: South England
Posts: 938

Which HP films do you think were the most and least loyal to the book they were based on?

I think,

Most:

The Chamber of Secrets - I'm pretty sure about 98% of the book is included in the film, obviously it helps that COS was one of the shorter books but still It's impressive. I don't remember much being cut out at all.

Least:

A toss up between POA, GOF, OOTP & HBP. It's understandable that none of these were completely loyal to the book as these books were the longest and didn't have the opportunity of a 2 parter like DH did. I'll go for HBP - leaving out most of the memories but including all the love stuff was poor, also no battle at the Astronomy Tower!
dan_ is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 30-10-2013, 20:48
treefr0g
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 7,723
I bought all of the audio books this year and would listen to them in the car to and from work.

I was quite surprised that there was very little in the first 2 books that I didn't already know from watching the movies.

From then on there seemed to be larger omissions in the movies and even the odd addition (like Slughorn's story about the fish bowl - beautiful magic).

I don't know whether it's because I'm in a minority that watched all of the movies before reading the books but I cannot fault the movies and what was left out,
treefr0g is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-10-2013, 21:13
Mystical123
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 11,309
I don't know whether it's because I'm in a minority that watched all of the movies before reading the books but I cannot fault the movies and what was left out,
I was an avid fan of the books before watching the movies, and there's plenty I can fault them for having left stuff out. So much interesting, and sometimes even important, stuff was left out.

Of course they had to cut things (especially OotP), but the most annoying thing is that they added in plenty of utter rubbish like the shrunken head voiced by Lenny Henry in PoA, when they could have put interesting bits from the books in instead.

The most unforgiveable thing though is near the end of DH2 - they completely ruined the climax of the final battle, which should have been in the Great Hall with everyone there, but instead was some stupid scenes of Harry and Voldemort basically wrestling and falling down a tower, then outside with no-one watching. Entirely missed the whole point of the very last part of the battle not being about violence or even really magic at all.
Mystical123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-10-2013, 22:40
treefr0g
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 7,723
I was an avid fan of the books before watching the movies, and there's plenty I can fault them for having left stuff out. So much interesting, and sometimes even important, stuff was left out.

Of course they had to cut things (especially OotP), but the most annoying thing is that they added in plenty of utter rubbish like the shrunken head voiced by Lenny Henry in PoA, when they could have put interesting bits from the books in instead.

The most unforgiveable thing though is near the end of DH2 - they completely ruined the climax of the final battle, which should have been in the Great Hall with everyone there, but instead was some stupid scenes of Harry and Voldemort basically wrestling and falling down a tower, then outside with no-one watching. Entirely missed the whole point of the very last part of the battle not being about violence or even really magic at all.
Both of your points I totally agree on. Having seen the films first, I still enjoyed the final battle but if I had read the book first I'm sure that I would have been disappointed.

There are also some very strange little ommisions like no explanation as to where Harrry's piece of mirror came from but I'm sort of glad about those as they were one of the reasons that I read the books - to fill in all the gaps.

One aspect where I did prefer the movies approach was that there was more of a dividing line between the real world and the magical world, e.g Dumbledore not meeting the Dursleys, the Weasleys not meeting the Dursleys and no connection between the Prime minister and the magical world.
treefr0g is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-10-2013, 23:10
nuttytigger
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hamilton, Scotland
Posts: 11,691
I tend to see them as separate entities, so I enjoy both.

However from about 4 onwards there was a LOT missed out of the films, and a lot of things added, like the battle at the Burrow in HPB, doesn't happen in the books, but they felt Christmas etc was too boring in the books, so added the battle.
nuttytigger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-10-2013, 11:48
Fio Montoya
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 7,021
For me, only the last two were most loyal to the books. The others were a major disappointment, but I think if only they had been able to split more of them into two parts, they would have been a lot better. Peeves for example, should never have been omitted. While the casting was perfect and every scene was exactly how I might have imagined it, the films themselves lacked character development that occured in the books, because there was too much to do in just one film. I'm normally against splitting books into more than one movie, because it tends to reek of milking it, but in this case it would have been justified.
Fio Montoya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-10-2013, 11:56
darthtatty
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 141
I know the books were long and they had to leave a few bits out to make the films. Sometimes good, sometimes bad.

My main complaint about the film is the final fight between HP and Voldemort.
They went ott for the special effects-all the chasing about etc and then missed the important bit of them battling with everyone in the great hall surrounding them.
In the books I loved the final duel but the film version just fell flat IMO.
darthtatty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-10-2013, 12:23
lordOfTime
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: County Durham
Posts: 13,506
For me the first and the last 2 are the most "loyal" to the books. Obviously things are missed out of all the books. The Deathday party in Chamber of Secrets is just one example.


I know the books were long and they had to leave a few bits out to make the films. Sometimes good, sometimes bad.

My main complaint about the film is the final fight between HP and Voldemort.
They went ott for the special effects-all the chasing about etc and then missed the important bit of them battling with everyone in the great hall surrounding them.
In the books I loved the final duel but the film version just fell flat IMO.
Yea when comparing the 2 endings, the movie version is the second best of the 2. But I think the movie version is sweet as I like the way it wraps up 3 things very nicely.

First. Voldemort and Harry, duelling on their own, they grab their wands and it's a nice effect. Then the music score kicks in and the screenplay slows. Nagini is about to bite Hermoine and Ron who are both running and aiming spells at the Snake but it's no good. The Duel between Harry and Voldemort could go either way, but the Snake is about to win. The Snake makes it's final charge... and then Neville the Hero saves the day with the Sword of Gryffindor cleanly chops off the Snakes head saving not only their lives but possibly Harry's too.

Harry and Voldemort know what's happened and have stopped duelling. The Dark Lord has no more Horcruxes left and is at the end of the tether. That I think is why Harry was able to win the last duel. Voldemort lost everything and was on his own while Harry had a major pschological advantage.

All that in one glorious minute. Mind you, I take your point about one thing... The first few times I saw it, it did seem to pass in a blur and I'm wondering "Hang on... what just happened?" I don't know if anyone else had that feeling too,.
lordOfTime is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2013, 15:54
Granny McSmith
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Sherlocked
Posts: 11,032
I read the books before I saw the films, both fairly recently. I was initially nagged into reading them by a young relative, and then became totally hooked and besotted by the books, and watched the films out of curiosity about how different/similar they were.

I really don't know if I hadn't read the books first whether I'd know what was going on in the films.

In POA, for instance, the film never spells out who the Marauders were, who Prongs was and what was the connection to Harry's Patronus, or why Sirius and Pettigrew were unregistered animagi. Would I have picked that up if I didn't know already? I'm not sure. I know it's not essential, but it's part of the whole backstory that makes the books so alive and so riveting.

In the film of GOF, Sirius hardly appears, but the huge emotional blow to Harry in OotP when Sirius is lost rests on us knowing how close they've become. Would I have felt the emotion if I hadn't known all that?

And (I might be misremembering here) in the film of OotP doesn't Sirius at one point say to Harry "I'm sorry, but you're on your own"? (When he's speaking from the fire). Sirius would never, ever, have said that! (You may be able to tell I've thought about Sirius a good bit )

And the mirror really annoyed me. No explanation at all for where it had come from, in the film.

Having said all that, there were one or two moments in the films that I thought were excellent. I'm thinking particularly of When Hermione Obliviated her parents. Such understated emotion it brought tears to my eyes.
Granny McSmith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2013, 19:21
treefr0g
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 7,723
I read the books before I saw the films, both fairly recently. I was initially nagged into reading them by a young relative, and then became totally hooked and besotted by the books, and watched the films out of curiosity about how different/similar they were.

I really don't know if I hadn't read the books first whether I'd know what was going on in the films.

In POA, for instance, the film never spells out who the Marauders were, who Prongs was and what was the connection to Harry's Patronus, or why Sirius and Pettigrew were unregistered animagi. Would I have picked that up if I didn't know already? I'm not sure. I know it's not essential, but it's part of the whole backstory that makes the books so alive and so riveting.

In the film of GOF, Sirius hardly appears, but the huge emotional blow to Harry in OotP when Sirius is lost rests on us knowing how close they've become. Would I have felt the emotion if I hadn't known all that?

And (I might be misremembering here) in the film of OotP doesn't Sirius at one point say to Harry "I'm sorry, but you're on your own"? (When he's speaking from the fire). Sirius would never, ever, have said that! (You may be able to tell I've thought about Sirius a good bit )

And the mirror really annoyed me. No explanation at all for where it had come from, in the film.

Having said all that, there were one or two moments in the films that I thought were excellent. I'm thinking particularly of When Hermione Obliviated her parents. Such understated emotion it brought tears to my eyes.
Yes, in the book I seem to remember the obliviation being a temporary measure whereas in the movie it came across as terminal. I think that the scene was made even more emotional by the amazing soundtrack of the last two films.

Having seen the movies before reading the books I was also very surprised when I got to the end of the books and Snape didn't say to Harry "You have your mother's eyes". I had up until then felt that all the other times that people had said this to Harry was leading up to this moment. I always wondered what JKR thought about this and whether she regrets not having it in the book.

In fact it is a lot of the more emotional moments that I feel we're improved in the movies, another example being in COS when Hermione sees Harry and Ron for the first time after being petrified and runs through the great hall. This scene always brings a tear to my eye whereas it is barely mentioned in the book.

Another really small and pedantic point where I think the movie gets it right is when Hagrid says "You're a wizard, Harry". imo, it is better than the book version, "Harry, you're a wizard".
treefr0g is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2013, 19:30
Virgil Tracy
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 19,531
the bits I miss most are Voldemort's back story , there's a lot more in the books .


.
Virgil Tracy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2013, 12:45
Granny McSmith
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Sherlocked
Posts: 11,032

Another really small and pedantic point where I think the movie gets it right is when Hagrid says "You're a wizard, Harry". imo, it is better than the book version, "Harry, you're a wizard".
I agree with that.

Re the Snape thing - in the book when Snape dies we still don't know Snape's story, so it's a bit of a puzzle why he wants Harry to look at him. Then, later, when Harry looks in the Pensieve, we realise what Snape must have meant, given the references to Harry having his mother's eyes throughout the books.

I love the way Rowling has things referring back to something previously mentioned. The first thing I did when I'd read the books was read them again to trace all the clues I'd missed as to what would finally happen.
Granny McSmith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2013, 15:04
Rorschach
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Folkestone
Posts: 9,654
I'm thinking particularly of When Hermione Obliviated her parents. Such understated emotion it brought tears to my eyes.
Personally I thought the film murdered that scene.

They expressed her spell by having her disappear from photos in her parents house, which would have left her parents extremely confused.

Instead of a well composed picture with Hermione on the left and her mother on the right they would have her mother sitting awkwardly to the right of the picture for no reason. One photo was just of Hermione, a close up of her as a baby and then changed to a blank picture! What the hell will her parents think when they find they have taken and framed a close up picture of an empty chair?

And the worst will surely be any class photos she has, following the rules seen she will disappear from the photo and her parents will wonder why they have a photograph of lots of other peoples children?
Rorschach is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2013, 16:25
lordOfTime
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: County Durham
Posts: 13,506
Personally I thought the film murdered that scene.

They expressed her spell by having her disappear from photos in her parents house, which would have left her parents extremely confused.

Instead of a well composed picture with Hermione on the left and her mother on the right they would have her mother sitting awkwardly to the right of the picture for no reason. One photo was just of Hermione, a close up of her as a baby and then changed to a blank picture! What the hell will her parents think when they find they have taken and framed a close up picture of an empty chair?

And the worst will surely be any class photos she has, following the rules seen she will disappear from the photo and her parents will wonder why they have a photograph of lots of other peoples children?
They'd think whatever Hermoine wanted them to think. She didn't obliviate their memories and then just leave them in the house. She gave them a burning desire to travel the world (Australia for instance) thereby making sure they stayed away from Voldemort's snatchers.

The photos were probably disregarded with nothing more than a strange feeling of deja vu and then stacked away.

Come to think of it, I wonder what the difference in particular is. between Obliviate and the Imperious Curse.
lordOfTime is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2013, 16:35
mimicole
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 33,736

Having said all that, there were one or two moments in the films that I thought were excellent. I'm thinking particularly of When Hermione Obliviated her parents. Such understated emotion it brought tears to my eyes.
I had a little tear when Hermione cast that spell too.

I must re-watch the films again.
mimicole is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2013, 18:48
zwixxx
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,301
I had a little tear when Hermione cast that spell too.

I must re-watch the films again.
if you're planning on doing a big Potter rewatch you might be interested in this: http://www.friendsinyourhead.com/potter/
- a 24 hour stream commentary spectacular happening in early December.
zwixxx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2013, 23:52
astrum89
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Liverpool
Posts: 38
I think the most loyal and disloyal films were both from book seven.

Deathly Hallows part 1 was incredibly close to the book and it seemed like the scenes that were added were very well placed (Hermione's memory spell, dancing in the tent etc.)

Deathly Hallows part 2 was fairly true to the book until the trio reach Hogwarts and then things get very different. Whilst previous films have left stuff out and added their own content it never really affected the plot. That is what was so jarring about the end of hallows part 2, the book was rewritten.

I think what annoyed me was that the changes weren't about timing they were obviously due to studio influence. Harry's battle with Voldemort was extended and included a lot of duelling and falling off turrets. Harry was never powerful enough to duel with Voldemort and the only reason he could defeat him was because of the alliance of the elder wand. The studio obviously wanted to make Harry seem like more of a conventional hero which wasn't the original sentiment, Harry was brave, not powerful.

I can still watch Hallows part 2 and enjoy it but only by disregarding the book and film as separate entities.
astrum89 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2013, 23:57
CrazyLoop
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 13,874
I think the most loyal and disloyal films were both from book seven.

Deathly Hallows part 1 was incredibly close to the book and it seemed like the scenes that were added were very well placed (Hermione's memory spell, dancing in the tent etc.)

Deathly Hallows part 2 was fairly true to the book until the trio reach Hogwarts and then things get very different. Whilst previous films have left stuff out and added their own content it never really affected the plot. That is what was so jarring about the end of hallows part 2, the book was rewritten.

I think what annoyed me was that the changes weren't about timing they were obviously due to studio influence. Harry's battle with Voldemort was extended and included a lot of duelling and falling off turrets. Harry was never powerful enough to duel with Voldemort and the only reason he could defeat him was because of the alliance of the elder wand. The studio obviously wanted to make Harry seem like more of a conventional hero which wasn't the original sentiment, Harry was brave, not powerful.

I can still watch Hallows part 2 and enjoy it but only by disregarding the book and film as separate entities.
I completely agree with you. I hate hwo they did that outside battle where nobody saw him die and how he snapped the wand in two and threw it away. That's not how it was in the book
CrazyLoop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2013, 08:43
sarahj1986
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Warwickshire
Posts: 5,257
Ive said this before in previous threads, for me as a reader before a watcher I do take for granted that having read the books first I do know whats going to happen and so bits missed out of the film are already in my mind. All 8 films could be argued as most/least loyal against the books because they all had bits missing, some for me were more important than others.

I think if we are to go with what is missing/altered then the last 2 deathly hallows are least loyal, as a reader they missed out great chunks of Voldemorts and Snapes story from it, these were the bits I enjoyed reading the most. Why Voldemort created the Horcrux was a massive thing in the book and why each one was chosen, or accidently chosen, it allowed us readers to piece things together and connected the earlier books to the final story, the film seemed to lack this details. I also felt like the first was very rushed from the wedding to them breaking into the ministry, the book gave great details of the plan and had a good chapter based within the ministry the film covered this in about 5 minutes. The ending was also a huge let down, we as reader know how Voldermort died, where and how, the film for me didn't hold true to that.

The first book, being the smallest probably contained the most content from the book to the film, some details were missed out but overall I felt like it was a good overview.
sarahj1986 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2013, 09:32
Granny McSmith
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Sherlocked
Posts: 11,032
I think the most loyal and disloyal films were both from book seven.

Deathly Hallows part 1 was incredibly close to the book and it seemed like the scenes that were added were very well placed (Hermione's memory spell, dancing in the tent etc.)

Deathly Hallows part 2 was fairly true to the book until the trio reach Hogwarts and then things get very different. Whilst previous films have left stuff out and added their own content it never really affected the plot. That is what was so jarring about the end of hallows part 2, the book was rewritten.

I think what annoyed me was that the changes weren't about timing they were obviously due to studio influence. Harry's battle with Voldemort was extended and included a lot of duelling and falling off turrets. Harry was never powerful enough to duel with Voldemort and the only reason he could defeat him was because of the alliance of the elder wand. The studio obviously wanted to make Harry seem like more of a conventional hero which wasn't the original sentiment, Harry was brave, not powerful.

I can still watch Hallows part 2 and enjoy it but only by disregarding the book and film as separate entities.
I agree with this.


I could re-watch the films quite happily on a wet winters afternoon when I'm feeling under the weather, (indeed, I'm saving them for just such an eventuality), but for real enjoyment and satisfaction I'll re-read the books.

It's a bit sad that so much of the complexity and depth of the story is missed out of the films, and some things bafflingly inserted (The Death -Eaters attacking The Burrow in THBP for instance), but I suppose it was unavoidable.
Granny McSmith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2013, 12:09
lordOfTime
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: County Durham
Posts: 13,506
I think the most loyal and disloyal films were both from book seven.

Deathly Hallows part 1 was incredibly close to the book and it seemed like the scenes that were added were very well placed (Hermione's memory spell, dancing in the tent etc.)

Deathly Hallows part 2 was fairly true to the book until the trio reach Hogwarts and then things get very different. Whilst previous films have left stuff out and added their own content it never really affected the plot. That is what was so jarring about the end of hallows part 2, the book was rewritten.

I think what annoyed me was that the changes weren't about timing they were obviously due to studio influence. Harry's battle with Voldemort was extended and included a lot of duelling and falling off turrets. Harry was never powerful enough to duel with Voldemort and the only reason he could defeat him was because of the alliance of the elder wand. The studio obviously wanted to make Harry seem like more of a conventional hero which wasn't the original sentiment, Harry was brave, not powerful.

I can still watch Hallows part 2 and enjoy it but only by disregarding the book and film as separate entities.
I guess I'm going to have the minority view in this thread but I do disagree. Harry was a very powerful young wizard, and Hermoine a Powerful witch. He'd already proven he could duel with Voldemort in Goblet of Fire. Yes he'd found out by accident/desperation he could duel with the Expelliarmus charm and he had the remnants of people from his past come out of the Priori-incontatem, but it was Harry's skill that kept the killing curse away from him.

Plus, under Professor Lupin's guidance, he was able to produce a Patronus and became very skilled at it, which was magic well beyond Harry's years.

I think what was on Harry's side in the final battle was a psychological advantage of A) Knowing that he'd matched the greatest dark wizard of all time at the Graveyard in Goblet of Fire and B) Knowing that every last Horcrux had been destroyed and that now, he and Voldemort were on equal footing.

There's no doubt that Harry always had help, and the prophecy could so easily have been fixed on Neville, but for me he was definitely skilled enough to beat Voldemort in a duel.
lordOfTime is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2013, 12:53
computermaster
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,618
Most loyal - Chamber of Secrets

Least loyal - OOTP.
computermaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2013, 13:04
Granny McSmith
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Sherlocked
Posts: 11,032
I guess I'm going to have the minority view in this thread but I do disagree. Harry was a very powerful young wizard, and Hermoine a Powerful witch. He'd already proven he could duel with Voldemort in Goblet of Fire. Yes he'd found out by accident/desperation he could duel with the Expelliarmus charm and he had the remnants of people from his past come out of the Priori-incontatem, but it was Harry's skill that kept the killing curse away from him.

Plus, under Professor Lupin's guidance, he was able to produce a Patronus and became very skilled at it, which was magic well beyond Harry's years.

I think what was on Harry's side in the final battle was a psychological advantage of A) Knowing that he'd matched the greatest dark wizard of all time at the Graveyard in Goblet of Fire and B) Knowing that every last Horcrux had been destroyed and that now, he and Voldemort were on equal footing.

There's no doubt that Harry always had help, and the prophecy could so easily have been fixed on Neville, but for me he was definitely skilled enough to beat Voldemort in a duel.
In the GoF didn't the twin wands play a part? As well as the effects of Lily's protection?

Harry was certainly powerful, but it was his sheer courage that won the day in the end.

The prophecy plotline one of the main reasons why I was so overwhelmed by the books. If Voldemort had ignored it, he would never have created his own Nemesis. If it hadn't been for Snape begging him to spare Lily, he would have killed her without giving her the chance for self-sacrifice. If he had decided on Neville he wouldn't have hesitated to kill everyone in sight, (including Neville's Gran, I daresay).

The way it was played out was like a Greek tragedy - a product of individual choice, yet somehow inevitable.

And that was only one of the things going on!

But I'm way off topic - I suppose I feel that the films, though fine in their way, as I said, are just nowhere near a patch on the books.
Granny McSmith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2013, 19:34
-x-kacie-x-
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 425
The most loyal films were Philosophers Stone and Chamber of Secrets.

Least loyal for me was Order of the Phoenix. The big battle at the end of that book in the Department of Mysteries was one of my favourite bits from the book, yet in the films it was a brief bit of running away from some shelves falling over and glass balls smashing. Majorly disappointing, didn't even get to see Ron with the brain!

Another thing I wish they had included in the films was in Goblet of Fire when Hermione is doing S.P.E.W and Ron and Harry constantly take the mickey out of it and also Ron calling Victor Krum "Vicky"
-x-kacie-x- is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2013, 21:12
lordOfTime
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: County Durham
Posts: 13,506
In the GoF didn't the twin wands play a part? As well as the effects of Lily's protection?

Harry was certainly powerful, but it was his sheer courage that won the day in the end.

The prophecy plotline one of the main reasons why I was so overwhelmed by the books. If Voldemort had ignored it, he would never have created his own Nemesis. If it hadn't been for Snape begging him to spare Lily, he would have killed her without giving her the chance for self-sacrifice. If he had decided on Neville he wouldn't have hesitated to kill everyone in sight, (including Neville's Gran, I daresay).

The way it was played out was like a Greek tragedy - a product of individual choice, yet somehow inevitable.

And that was only one of the things going on!

But I'm way off topic - I suppose I feel that the films, though fine in their way, as I said, are just nowhere near a patch on the books.
Priori-incontatem definitely occured in the movie. And Yes I'd imagine Lily's protection would have confused Voldemort if Harry had been beaten.

When Harry sacrificed himself in Deathly Hallows, and went to Clean Kings Cross (I cant think of the word for where he was ) he could very well have chosen to stay there, at the time, the odds were against him back in the land of the living, but Harry never got the chance to find this out because he achieved Priori-incontatem, the matching of the 2 wands

One of the things that gets me about the books is the narrative is so simplified compared to the books.

Shell Cottage for example at the beginning of DH2 for example. There is at least an entire page of dialogue on Harry's decision, to focus first on Hallows and Horcruxes and some dialogue for Bill Weasley in conversation in Harry. The film, gets through it with one little line "I need to talk to the Goblin".

Also, The Prince's Tale, though very well done, is really just a rushed sequence of memories, which sounds a little harsh as it's a 6 minute segment, but you really have to read the chapter of the book to understand it fully.
lordOfTime is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
 
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:43.