Harry Potter movie SPOILERS

[luvsJack]

Yes, that bothered me too. Additionally, in the book, Harry tried to attack Snape with the cruciatus curse and Snape defended himself against the curse saying, "No unforgiveable curses for you, Potter" and spoke of him needing to close his mind. He was teaching and protecting Harry as much as he could to the end. I wish they would have included this in the film. It certainly wouldn't have taken much additional screen time.

I kept waiting for that to happen in the movie and was a bit disappointed that it didn't. It really showed that although as different in his delivery of it as night and day; Snape was trying to teach and protect Harry as much as Dumbledore was.

I always think that Snape was such a sad character! He loved Lily so much that he did all of this for her son, who he didn't particularly care for. To love someone that much and know that the love is not returned would have to be a very sad existence.

 

[Kurby]

anyone watching this year in the life of JK?

it's so interesting - it talks about where her ideas come from.

like the dementors came from when her first child was just a baby and she was in a depression and thought everything in her life would be sucked away including her baby - she kept thinking her own baby would die

her mother died when she was about 15 or 16, she hasn't spoken to her father in years.

she doesn't have a middle name - her name is Joanne - the K was suggested by the publishers who said boys wouldn't want to read a book written by a girl so she chose K for her grandmother Kathlene or Kathrine (sorry i'm not rewinding it )

she got the name of a death eather from the church guest book from the church sue attended as a child. wonder who it was.....




wow

 

[JustMickey]

for those of you interested i found some pictures of the guy who will play Bill Wesley.

boy i'm really liking red heads LOL

OOOOHH! He looks pretty much how I imagined.

You are not the only odd man out. I liked the way they did that scene too. I think Harry will be tormented over it in the next film but in the end it plays to the Snape protecting Harry theme very well, as you mentioned.

As for others saying it went against Harry's characater to stay out of sight I don't think it did. We finally see a more mature Harry in this film. He is transforming from a fumbling young wizard who gets by on luck into a purposeful wizard.

To me he was following Dumbledore's orders. Dumbledore told Harry he would only be allowed to help if he (Harry) followed every order given by Dumbledore- even the unthinkable. Harry gave his word that he would. Harry remained true to his word - he followed Dumbledore's orders just as he promised - even in an unthinkable situation.

See that part did bug me. Because in the book, Harry couldn't do anything because he was paralyzed. But it implies that if he had been able to do anything, he would have. I still think it was out of character for him not to try to stun Malfoy or something.

No, the wand belongs to Draco, not Snape, which is why it didn't help Voldermort after he killed Snape.

I was glad they put in the fact that Draco disarmed Dumbledore. I was half-expecting them to leave it out, but it does confirm that at least they will be doing the Hallows theme (as someone else questioned earlier).

They were actually going to have Hary end up with the wand (clearly evident by the scene in Dumbledore's office) but changed it after the 7th book came out when they realized it was crucial for the wand to remain at Hogwarts. Since we never see the burial, it leaves it open that Dumbledore was indeed buried with his wand.

I think the one thing I missed the most was Snape's reaction to Harry calling him a coward when Snape is fleeing with the other Death Eaters. I just felt that was such an important clue to Snape's character, and that over everything else was what convinced me that Snape was good.

I miss that too. I think they just did that scene completely wrong. Snape was really supposed to lose it, but instead they just had him sneering at Harry for trying to use Sectemsempra on him.

 

[Diva of Dragons]

Hi!

Just saw the movie so thought I'd stop in on this thread. Obviously, I have not read the thread yet.

I just want to say that I so badly WANT to LOVE these films but the last one and this one...

This Yates guy took away almost everything that makes HP magical. Like Dobby, Kreature, the Hogwarts ghosts. The editing on this one is horrid. I did not think this one could be worse then the last. Too many liberties taken when all the material is there to begin with. I know it needs to be shortened for film, but I feel like, if I didn't know the book, I'd feel really lost as to what was going on.

DH said...it just felt really flat. It never grabs you and sucks you into their world.

OK, vent over! Well, not so much a vent as a lament. A bit sad....

Thanks for listening.

 

[Kycha]

I'll be missing it. Ever since the digital conversion I don't get ABC.

http://abc.go.com/

http://abcnews.go.com/video/playerIndex

You should be able to find the special online using one of these links. Look under ABC News or JK Rowling: A Year in the Life.

 

[PaMom001]

right you are - and looking on the nerdy side don't ya think lol;

OOOOOOOOO DD will love the picture of the twins.

 

[Kurby]

we're going tonight to see it - i soooooo badly want to bring my video camera so i can watch it over and over again. how long until it's released on dvd LOL

 

[SideshowBob]

anyone watching this year in the life of JK?

it's so interesting - it talks about where her ideas come from.

like the dementors came from when her first child was just a baby and she was in a depression and thought everything in her life would be sucked away including her baby - she kept thinking her own baby would die

her mother died when she was about 15 or 16, she hasn't spoken to her father in years.

she doesn't have a middle name - her name is Joanne - the K was suggested by the publishers who said boys wouldn't want to read a book written by a girl so she chose K for her grandmother Kathlene or Kathrine (sorry i'm not rewinding it )

she got the name of a death eather from the church guest book from the church sue attended as a child. wonder who it was.....




wow

SSB saw the film last night, and then the special right behind it on DVR ... great double-header!

A line that I missed/thought was needed was the one along the lines, "Isn't seven the most powerfully magical number?" ... I always thought that it really emphasized why he made them.

SSB has truly heard the books 8 times since the last film (what I listen to to/from work) and this was the first time that I really, really knew in depth before a film came out. Some parts were so powerful to SEE on film for first time that I had goose bumps, and thought that the special effects were far superior to some of the earlier films. Did find myself wanting to insert missing lines, though... ha-ha!

 

[Kurby]

Its my turn. Woo hoo.

I'm sitting in the theater right now typing on my blackberry. (don't ya just love technology)


I can tell you that where I Am. It doesn't look like Harry potter is all that popular

Its only playing on 2 screens. It starts in about 5 minutes and less then 1/3 full

I've read all the posts and am really looking forward to this

Ohhh. The lights just dimmed.

Are ya when its over

 

[Kurby]

i just got home and here's my thoughts

over all - it was a pretty good movie.

the acting was much better then OOTP which seemed choppy and stiff.

the burning of the burrow - wth. it wasn't in the book as said before and it doesn't make any sense. why do it.

i actually liked the little bit at the beginning. i thought it was cute and showed that harry is getting older and is becoming someone that others are attracted to though i didn't get him bring (and leaving) the magical paper outside where it can and was seen by a muggle.

i was ok with harry not being frozen at the end - he trusted dumbledore and was told to go get snape which he didn't actually do but when snape came behind him and told him shhhhh harry trusted that snape was there to help though i'm confused as to why he didn't start stunning them all when they came down the stairs - why wait to attack them until they are in the grounds?

though i could chalk that up to harry being in shock???

i would have like to have seen mccormack pawing hermine in the back ground to justify her hiding on him but i guess that scene was ok.

the scenes with lavender were all but pointless - not that i wanted the focus to be on them but it just seemed thrown in there. you didn't see them enough to accept that ron was tired of her.

there wasn't much with harry and ginny - i would have like to have seen them at least cuddling in the common room at least once.

and just how is harry going to find the diadem(sp) in the room of requirements if he wasn't the one to put it on the wig when he hid his book.

the movie was called the half blood prince and frankly it fell very short. dh hasnt' read the book and i had to explane on the way home why snape was the half blood prince. and why did harry carry it into the washroom with him - snape saw it and could have taken it then and there.

i HATED the scene with harry and dumbledore and the potion. there wasn't any torment there at all. there wasn't any forcing dumbledore to drink it harry just asked him too and promised to give him water after. i mean how hard would it have been to add some tormented dialogue in there.

i get the wand thing over dumbledores body - i didn't like it but i get it- the combined love or whever from all their wands forced the "lords" mark to vanish.

that was actually never addressed in the book - how does the mark go away??


the missing memories should have been in there - you hardly even noticed that "Tom" was wearing the ring - it didn't make an impact if you didn't know he already murdered someone to get it.

and is it me or did that ring not even look like it was described in the book??


shouldn't it have had the symbol of the 3 hallows? the wand, clock and ring?
or am i remembering that wrong?

over all i liked it - dh was confused with some things so if you havent read the book it doesn't seem to flow as well

 

[luvsJack]

i just got home and here's my thoughts

over all - it was a pretty good movie.

the acting was much better then OOTP which seemed choppy and stiff.

the burning of the burrow - wth. it wasn't in the book as said before and it doesn't make any sense. why do it.

i actually liked the little bit at the beginning. i thought it was cute and showed that harry is getting older and is becoming someone that others are attracted to though i didn't get him bring (and leaving) the magical paper outside where it can and was seen by a muggle.

i was ok with harry not being frozen at the end - he trusted dumbledore and was told to go get snape which he didn't actually do but when snape came behind him and told him shhhhh harry trusted that snape was there to help though i'm confused as to why he didn't start stunning them all when they came down the stairs - why wait to attack them until they are in the grounds?

though i could chalk that up to harry being in shock???

i would have like to have seen mccormack pawing hermine in the back ground to justify her hiding on him but i guess that scene was ok.

the scenes with lavender were all but pointless - not that i wanted the focus to be on them but it just seemed thrown in there. you didn't see them enough to accept that ron was tired of her.

there wasn't much with harry and ginny - i would have like to have seen them at least cuddling in the common room at least once.

and just how is harry going to find the diadem(sp) in the room of requirements if he wasn't the one to put it on the wig when he hid his book.

the movie was called the half blood prince and frankly it fell very short. dh hasnt' read the book and i had to explane on the way home why snape was the half blood prince. and why did harry carry it into the washroom with him - snape saw it and could have taken it then and there.

i HATED the scene with harry and dumbledore and the potion. there wasn't any torment there at all. there wasn't any forcing dumbledore to drink it harry just asked him too and promised to give him water after. i mean how hard would it have been to add some tormented dialogue in there.

i get the wand thing over dumbledores body - i didn't like it but i get it- the combined love or whever from all their wands forced the "lords" mark to vanish.

that was actually never addressed in the book - how does the mark go away??


the missing memories should have been in there - you hardly even noticed that "Tom" was wearing the ring - it didn't make an impact if you didn't know he already murdered someone to get it.

and is it me or did that ring not even look like it was described in the book??


shouldn't it have had the symbol of the 3 hallows? the wand, clock and ring?
or am i remembering that wrong?

over all i liked it - dh was confused with some things so if you havent read the book it doesn't seem to flow as well

The 3 hallows are the Invisibility Cloak, the Resurrection Stone and the Elder Wand. I have been trying to remember if the resurrection stone was the stone in the ring or not.

 

[Kurby]

Yes it was. Dumbledore told Harry that voldimort must not haved known about the hallowes becaused he turned the ring into a horcroux

 

[PaMom001]

The 3 hallows are the Invisibility Cloak, the Resurrection Stone and the Elder Wand. I have been trying to remember if the resurrection stone was the stone in the ring or not.

I thought the resurrection stone was some unto itself. I was not aware that the resurrection stone was part of the ring. I thought that the stone on the ring was broken whenever Dumbledore tried to get the ring off of his finger.

 

[Kurby]

the stone is part of the ring - remember when dumbledore put the ring in the snitch and harry opens it when he's on his way to meet his death. he puts the ring on and his family appear to be with him until the end

 

[PaMom001]

I didn't realize that what fell out was the ring. I thought it was just the stone.

 

[JustMickey]

Yes I just re-read the King's Cross chapter, Dumbledore said that when he found the ring, he tried to use the Resurrection Stone, forgetting that it was probably cursed because it was a Horcrux.

 

[disney1990]

OH MY GOD - you're the one - you're the one in a million that hasn't read the book

LOL just kidding

Count me in as another person that has not read the HP books. Although I have seen every movie -- just not enough time to read the books.

My DH on the other hand has read and reread and reread all the books -- he's retired - duh!

 

[dicar123]

LOL! I was looking for the diadem when Harry and Ginny were in the Room of Requirement! Just dorky that way, I guess.

 

[Terry36]

I went agn today....I took dd and her friend.

I really missed seeing the following:

Jenny flying into the commentator box after the Quittich game when the commentator had been talking bad about the team;

Luna's commentating of another quittich game

the wailing and crying of Dumbledore in the cave

the budding love relationship btwn Jenny and Harry

the continual crying of his Phoenix those were very impt to the movie

burial for Dumbledore

these were some of my observations.

 

[JenM]

When Snape told Harry not to say anything, I thought that it gave the impression that he was going to help Dumbledore. Remember that Dumbledore trusted Snape always and Harry knew that. In OOTP, Harry even sought help from Snape to check on Sirrus. He didn't like Snape, but because Snape was in the OOTP and because of Dumbledore's never wavering trust, he would have assumed he was going to help.

I guess I am the odd man out on this scene, because I liked the way they did it. I think, for someone that had not read the book, it gave more surprise to what happened.(that is assuming there is someone out there who had not been told what was going to happen by someone who had read the book) Again, it gave the impression that Snape was there to help not to harm.

OTOH, knowing how it all plays out in the end; it also showed Snape's was protection of Harry. If Belatrix or the others had known Harry was there, he would have been toast. We haven't been shown that protection a whole lot in the movies; except for in the first movie when he was trying to undue the spell on Harry's broom during Quidditch.

I completely agree. I think Harry believed that Snape was trying to help Dumbledore when he shushed him. That's completely what it looked like. And let's face it, he was protecting Harry.

And I thought Alan Rickman just owned that scene. Knowing the full story behind it after reading DH, it just had so much more meaning and he played it beautifully. I was practically welling up watching it, so I know I'm never going to make it through The Prince's Tale in DH.

I enjoyed the movie. I knew about most of the changes going in, so I was ready for it. The only scene I really would have swapped out was the waitress scene for Dumbledore visiting the Dursleys. I loved that scene, and it was certainly more important to the overall story.

I thought Jim Broadbent was brilliant as Slughorn, and I thought the kid playing Lavender was hilarious.

I knew the funeral had been cut, so I was ready for that, and I'm fine with waiting for DH to get the full-out Hogwarts battle. I loved the new scene everyone raising their wands to extinguish the Dark Mark. It was the light putting out the dark, which is a good foreshadow to what's to come in the Battle for Hogwarts.

Definitely enjoyed it, hoping to catch it at the IMAX in a few weeks.