OotP Movie Discussion

What else did you guys like or dislike?

I really liked the Advance Guard scene, and I hope they use that scene as a basis for the DVD menu come November, as PoA used the Knight Bus scene.

In fact, did anyone notice how similar a structure OotP had to both PoA and GoF? It had PoA's beginning and GoF's end, with a PS-CoS style middle in between. Charming, don't you think? ;)

Yeah, I did notice that. But I decided that I liked it anyway.

And what of the Advance Guard scene? Do you think it warrants attention as a DVD menu? :)

Yes, I do.

Personally, I think it's the most vibrant scene in the film. The score for that scene is simply wonderful. :)

Oh, another music freak? Goody.

I liked the music for OOTP. It was an improvement from GOF.\

I loved the Ministry scene. ALL OF IT! :love:

I loved the music in OOTP as well, it made some scenes much better then they would have been imo

Very true, but in many cases, if the music sucks, it drags the movie down with it.

Definitely I can think of a few movies that would have been better if the music had been changed. But I definitely know that if the music had been different for the ministry scenes I would not have liked them nearly as much. I also loved Bellatrix's laugh( when the battle with the order vs the death eaters started) over the music I thought it was very wicked witch like, and fit her character perfectly.

She's the new Wicked Witch, all right.

I've heard from many people that her performance was a bit much, but I think she was brilliant.

I absolutely loved the girl who played Luna, she's one of my favourite characters and I thought they portrayed her quite accurately, minus the fact that they cut out the scene with her and Rita Skeeter writing the story for The Quibbler, and her blowing up Pluto in the planet room (which would have been awesome, I don't like the fact they gave that part to Ginny). And they cut most of the scene with Lily and James! That's my favourite scene in all the books and they left it out. I was crying in the cinema because of that... over all I didn't like it all that much, but really, they can't please everyone.

They tried their best.

I thought that Luna and Bellatrix were both casted perfectly. I'm actually happy they gave the part of blowing up pluto to Ginny because it was one of the few times Ginny got to display her power. I'm disappointed as well that they did not keep in the longer memory, but oh well win some you lose some. I just want to see how Yates pulls over the whole Harry/ Ginny thing in the next movie, and being a huge Harry/Ginny shipper I have high expectations.

Don't we all have high expectations?

I'd have to say, Yates did a fantastic job.

I thought that Luna and Bellatrix were both casted perfectly. I'm actually happy they gave the part of blowing up pluto to Ginny because it was one of the few times Ginny got to display her power. I'm disappointed as well that they did not keep in the longer memory, but oh well win some you lose some. I just want to see how Yates pulls over the whole Harry/ Ginny thing in the next movie, and being a huge Harry/Ginny shipper I have high expectations. Ginny blew up that thing in the DA meeting, Luna got no chance to display her power... oh, and I wish they put in the part where Ginny lies about there being garotting gas in the corridor... I'm not a huge Ginny fan but I've alway liked that part. But it didn't really have huge importance so I can understand it being cut.

Don't we all have high expectations?

I'd have to say, Yates did a fantastic job.


I definitely liked Yates more than the other directors so far, I just wish he had made the movie a but longer and added some more to it.

He was definitely better than the other directors, there's no denying that.

It was a good movie.I love Luna,Belatrix and Tonks.However, for some reason I still love GOF much more than any of the others.In OOTP they gave so little time for me to cry:whistle: I think if they had not filmed OOTP at all but instead giving the time for HBP I wouldn't bother:no: OOTP is a really detailed book and impossible to film in a few hours-in my opinion of course-

OOTP was also the longest book of the series, as I recall. It would be rather difficult to capture all of it on film.

Did anyone else find it funny, how when Kingsley says his line to Fudge, all the actors in the background are just staring around, not quite knowing what to do while Kingsley delivers this long line. It's like they're stumped for what to do and are waiting for Yates to say 'cut'. Imelda Staunton has a ridiculous look on her face, sort of "Hmm, that was unexpected. Oh, well, I'll just stare at Dumbledore's desk with my head cocked for the next few seconds." I would have thought Umbridge would be furious.

Yeah, I saw that, and found it rather unnatural. Kingsley was great, though.

I saw it again yesterday, and i was reminded of something i didnt like, but forgot to mention...when Harry is helping Dudley walk home, it looks more like Dudley has him in a headlock, it looks really stupid.

Hahaha:rotfl: I forgot about that!

Doesn't it look weird though! It supposed to be Harry halping Dudley walk, but hes really low, and it looks like hes in headlock! :lol:

I personally liked Snuffles in this movie.

I've been thinking about SWM for a while now since reading DH. I read a post that said that Yates was actually inspired for leaving out Lily's part in the memory. They said that the audience may figure things out if they saw the entire memory, especially considering a lot of book fans did when they read it.

Even if the full memory was included in this movie, they would still have to show it again in DH, right? People wouldn't remember the specifics of it after 3 years and all the plot that happens from the end of OOTP to the end of DH.

What's important about Lily's involvement at this point in the story is how Harry has her personality, not just her eyes. This is very significant because Harry's thing is love, just like Lily. I would have liked to have seen the full scene for this reason, but HBP is where we learn a lot about Lily as a person. They can use that film to get this point across.

I've made my peace with the cut they made in this scene. Now the butchering of The Lost Prophesy, that's another story. I will never make my peace with that scene. I wanted Dumbledore to say that he had a plan that he kept putting off because he loved Harry too much. I wanted it to be emphasized that it was a "mistake" for Dumbledore to get too attached to Harry, and they should have explained the prophesy better. I've seen the movie with people who had not read the book and they missed half the prophesy and didn't understand it's significance. How they present it is not well-executed. I like their idea of Harry hearing it in the Hall of Prophesies, but it should have been articulated better. Making it sound old was cool and everything, but you can't understand half of what she's saying.

It's my only real problem with the film, except for cheesy dialog here and there.

It was hard for me to disconnect the movie from the book, but I enjoyed it as long as I remembered it was a movie and not the book.
The inaccuracies killed me, my Boyfriend and I saw it together and every we saw an inaccuracy I would nudge him really hard and we'd both get mad.
But overall this was the best movie, in my opinion.
I just didn't like inaccuracy after inaccuracy.
I think something that made up for all of them, though, was when Sirius called Harry James.

Yeah,it was the best part of the movie when Sirius called Harry James:tu:
Also Molly's reaction when Fred and George apparated behind her was so hilarious:lol: and Petunia in her night clothes was so fun to watch:p

Yeah,it was the best part of the movie when Sirius called Harry James:tu:
Also Molly's reaction when Fred and George apparated behind her was so hilarious:lol: and Petunia in her night clothes was so fun to watch:p

And Harry's doubletake when Sirius did that.

When they Apparated the first time into Harry's room was even funnier.

And Harry's doubletake when Sirius did that.
I love his little double take!!

He was like, "What did you just call me?"

I still loved the firework fiasco!

I still loved the firework fiasco!

Oh, thats was cool! I was looking forward to it as well, i can still see Fudge and Umbridge in a big mess :lol: haha

He was like, "What did you just call me?"

Yes! When i first heard it i was thinking "Oh no he didn't!" In that really dramatic way :lol:

Really? Even in the second time around, I didn't notice that. :(

Did anyone else notice that, after Ginny Reductoed the Death Eater in the DoM, we hear faint baby-wailing? That, in my opinion, was a nice little throwback to the book. ;)

Really? Even in the second time around, I didn't notice that. :(

Did anyone else notice that, after Ginny Reductoed the Death Eater in the DoM, we hear faint baby-wailing? That, in my opinion, was a nice little throwback to the book. ;)

i didn't notice that! Although, through the whole film my friend was rustling the packets of the food she was eating from. Oh well :D i am sure i will notice it next time i see it.

I didn't evenrealise Harry was called James lol :( i wish i did, i want to see it, i'll check out youtube.

I loved Sirius' line.."Get away from my godson" And then..to top it off, he punches Lucius! I must say, i really liked that part!

When does Sirius call Harry james?

Just before he dies, Harry does a Protego or Expelliarmus, or some sort of spell, then Sirius says "Good one James!" Then Harry does a doubletake. I loved that bit :D

yeah :lol: i found Luna amusing when the shelves containing the prophecy's in the ministry were crashing down and she just stood there whilst everyone ran looking at them as if were an interesting movie. :lol:
i couldn;t breath as sirius called harry james. tears were forming, i found it so emotional. harry's face!!!!

Did anyone else notice Luna's extreme fixation on nargles in this movie?

Yes, I also liked the fact how she was always thinking about pudding. One of my favourite scenes in the movie is when they're sitting in the thestral drawn carriage and Luna's says vacantly, "I hope there will be pudding." And then the next shot is of her taking a heaping scoop of cake. How nice.:D

Did anyone else find the possession scene a bit... cringe worthy? I was watching it and my mind strayed to the movie "Zoolander" when Mugatu is telling Derek to kill the Malaysian Prime Minister.

And the Room of Requirement's architechture looks suspiciously like that of the trophy room in GoF. I just have to go back and check...

And again for the cringe worthy - Dudley's "Where's your mum Potter?" oh I tried really hard not to laugh. Nicely delivered though.

That's enough for my whining - now to the positives.

One of my favourite Potter movies to date, I loved this movie to bits. First and foremost: I realized that It didn't matter what they did with it, because they kept Hermione's line "emotional range of a teaspoon". Whenever I would turn to my friend and whisper an inconsistency in the film she's say "relax, they kept your favourite line."

I loved the trio, and I am usually not a big fan of Emma as Hermione, but she won me back in this movie. Rupert was incredible as usual, and Dan was fantastic too (except for the dreadful possession scene). Gary Oldman as Sirius was the epitome of awesomeness, everything he said and did was perfect for Sirius. Luna was PERFECT. From the nonfans I talked to she was their favourite part, other than Umbridge. UMBRIDGE was...pure evil. Possibly more evil than Voldemort in this movie.

Did anyone else notice that, after Ginny Reductoed the Death Eater in the DoM, we hear faint baby-wailing? That, in my opinion, was a nice little throwback to the book.

Wow, I didn't even notice that - I'll have to check it out when I go see it again!

I though Ginny was very nicely written into the movie. She even had a couple of lines that weren't two words like "your mean" or "he asked Fleur" or *exchanges look with Hermione*. And the part when they're leaving the Room of Requirement for Christmas holidays and she sort of waits back for Harry, but she sees him eyeing Cho. I was remembered feeling so sad for Ginny.

Anyone else notice Snape's office in this movie is exactly the same as we saw it in CoS? Score one for continuity!

It was? *checks CoS DVD* Yes! I love the continuity in a movie where nearly nothing is carried over except the characters, the set, the general plotline, and um, the Invisibility Cloak (?). I don't even think we've seen the Marauders Map since the third movie.

Did anyone notice that Lucius Malfoy appears to be disarmed twice during the battle in the Death Room? After the other Death Eater is hit by a curse from Sirius, Harry disarms Malfoy. Then Sirius follows with a series of spells (that Lucius blocks) before getting one of that appears to disarm Malfoy.

Though I did notice Malfoy is disarmed while holding a wand in each hand, so maybe he had two for some reason?

Yes i think he has two, he steels them off one Harry's friend

Is Hermione's first proper line in the past four movies "Harry"? I know it is in CoS and OotP... And Im pretty sure it is in PoA/GoF too... the worst one is CoS though *Cringe*

I didnt like the "Get away from my godson *punch*" it seemed too rehursed and not very well delivered.

Is Hermione's first proper line in the past four movies "Harry"? I know it is in CoS and OotP... And Im pretty sure it is in PoA/GoF too... the worst one is CoS though *Cringe*

I didnt like the "Get away from my godson *punch*" it seemed too rehursed and not very well delivered.


I just think it was sort of cliche.

Oh my gosh.. i just watched the fight in the ministry when Sirius dies, the last words he says are "Nice one, James" :upset: but he says it so casually and then theres silence and you only hear the duels...i actually like the way they made Sirius's last words that.

IThe inaccuracies killed me, my Boyfriend and I saw it together and every we saw an inaccuracy I would nudge him really hard and we'd both get mad.
But overall this was the best movie, in my opinion.
I just didn't like inaccuracy after inaccuracy.
I think something that made up for all of them, though, was when Sirius called Harry James.What do you mean by "inaccuracies"? The details that were different from those of the book? Those are no more inaccuracies than mammalian feet are inaccurate fish fins! Indeed, one of the really strong points of this film is the number of things that they added that emphasized the story: that is, how Harry Potter deals with isolation. That is the art of adaptation: things that Rowling used would not have worked on screen were replaced by cinematic devices that told Rowling's story.

Rowling has been very clear that story and theme are much more important to her than are details. She very clearly writes with some story and theme in mind, and then finds details that deliver that story on paper. (These devices do not always work onscreen, but that is a completely separate issue!) Potterverse was invented to tell stories about right vs. easy choices: Rowling did not invent Potterverse and then shoehorn stories into it! (This is the #1 failing of most fantasy: plot and details are created first, and authors do not abandon projects if there is no story.)

Part of what made Order such a strong film is that Yates, Heyman and Goldenberg clearly "got" the story. Just like Prisoner and Goblet, all of the changes emphasized the story just like an "A" essay on the books would do in a literature class. Indeed, if anything, then Order might have overtold the story: Goblet certainly did that! However, I prefer movies to err on the side of over-telling to under-telling!

I didnt like the "Get away from my godson *punch*" it seemed too rehursed and not very well delivered.Hmmm: shouldn't something well rehearsed be well delivered?


Did anyone else find the possession scene a bit... cringe worthy? I was watching it and my mind strayed to the movie "Zoolander" when Mugatu is telling Derek to kill the Malaysian Prime Minister.Quite the opposite, I thought that this scene was done brilliantly. Harry had to act possessed: and they went for the classic "possession" behavior that movies have been using since "The Exorcist." There was no point in doing anything "original": possession only exists in fiction, so people "recognize" it only from fictional depictions!

What was done extremely well here was altering what happens in Harry's head to a conversation between Harry and Voldemort. I have heard some complaints that the montage of scenes went by too quickly for people to appreciate each scene, but that actually would have undermined it: there were two strong themes to the montages, one suggesting a sameness between Harry & Voldemort and one of "happy" moments with the people Harry loved. Dumbledore's line that it was the diferences that mattered was perfect, and then Harry's lines eerily set up something that Rowling later writes.

(It also was cool seeing stuff from the first two films redone as if they were in a real movie, not some cheap "made for TV" Disney schlock!)

That's enough for my whining - now to the positives.

One of my favourite Potter movies to date, I loved this movie to bits. First and foremost: I realized that It didn't matter what they did with it, because they kept Hermione's line "emotional range of a teaspoon". Whenever I would turn to my friend and whisper an inconsistency in the film she's say "relax, they kept your favourite line."Ah, but the cut "Mad Things Girls Do so that Boys can Understand Them"! Still, this movie really would have been hurt by too much humor.....
I loved the trio, and I am usually not a big fan of Emma as Hermione, but she won me back in this movie.I still am not sold on Watson as an actress. The problem is, of course, that we've seen her in just one role. Still, with three different real directors, she comes across as the same, which really suggests that she has only one performance mode.
Rupert was incredible as usual, and Dan was fantastic too (except for the dreadful possession scene).Well, again, if you did not like the possession scene, then it would be the fault of the director and producer, not Radcliffe!

I agree that Grint and Radcliffe both gave strong performances. The girl playing Luna was inspired, too: I have no idea if she has any acting talent but she can do Luna well. My only beef is that a non-reader watching the film would have to be wondering why Harry was mashing with Cho instead of Luna: the thestral scene established an obvious chemistry of some sort between Harry and Luna, whereas Harry barely took his hat of for Cho!
Wow, I didn't even notice that - I'll have to check it out when I go see it again!Hmmmm: it is possible that this was an unauthorized addition to the soundtrack provided by one theater patron!
I though Ginny was very nicely written into the movie. She even had a couple of lines that weren't two words like "your mean" or "he asked Fleur" or *exchanges look with Hermione*. And the part when they're leaving the Room of Requirement for Christmas holidays and she sort of waits back for Harry, but she sees him eyeing Cho. I was remembered feeling so sad for Ginny.That was a subtle bit for fans only! I doubt that many non-readers saw it.

They could have done a couple of other things with Ginny: for example, they could have had her introduce Luna. However, Ginny was not in the scene: Wright was still school aged when this film was shot, so she might not have been able to make that scene. (This is a big drawback when shooting with underage performers!)

At any rate, Ginny is Prince's job: HBP will have to establish why Harry falls for her all by itself. I think that Order offers one lesson: a LOT more has to be done than was done with Harry+Cho, because that did not work at all!
It was? *checks CoS DVD* Yes! I love the continuity in a movie where nearly nothing is carried over except the characters, the set, the general plotline, and um, the Invisibility Cloak (?). I don't even think we've seen the Marauders Map since the third movie.Well, remember that they have had the same producer from the start, and sets fall under "production" as much as "direction." Obviously, Heyman went with the decision to greatly alter the overall settings after the first two films: but that very likely was in response to the first two films getting brutalized in comparisons to Lord of the Rings!

As for the Marauder's Map, it has not been integral to the plot since Prisoner. If they use it again in Prince, then they'll have to establish what it is from scratch. The Map is not like a flying broom or an invisibility cloak: these things have been staples of fantasy forever, and action/adventure audiences "expect" them in a fantasy film. However, the Marauder's Map is a bit more unique, and that will have to be explained to the audience in each film that it is used.


When does Sirius call Harry james?Ah, that was a nice touch: it basically is the last thing that Sirius says! I thought that the film did a really good job of establishing a bond between Harry and Sirius, and also (re-)establishing the fact that Sirius and James had been so close. It made Harry's grief quite palpable.

A pity that they made it clear that Sirius died: what if Rowling shows us that Sirius actually was not dead in the last book? ;)

A pity that they made it clear that Sirius died: what if Rowling shows us that Sirius actually was not dead in the last book? ;)

I know!!! :lol: hang on, JKR had made it clear that Sirius and Dumbledore were dead before book 7...so...:tu:

Well, the AK made it easier for non HP fans to know what happened didnt it, otherwise it just looks like he fell into the veil.

I didnt like the way he floated away, i wanted him to fall backwards and just sort of disappear :(

i think how he fell was pretty good, because we could see the expression on his face, as he looke dat Harry and fell through it. It really added to the emotional content of it in my opinion. If he just fell through and disappeared, then it wouldn't have looked as good, we wouldn;t have really been able to see his face and expression clearly. i loved it :D

A pity that they made it clear that Sirius died: what if Rowling shows us that Sirius actually was not dead in the last book?


I was quite happy because I think it would greatly lessen the impact and emotional blowback of death to have a major charachter magically be not dead. I always thought Harry's line "He must have been dead before he hit the veil..." was the clue that Sirius really was dead, and by Bellatrix's hands. Who knows the extent of Rowling's involvement, but I just have a feeling she would have objected to them showing Sirius actually being killed whereas there was more mystery to it in Order of the Phoenix if it really was a major deviation.

I know!!! :lol: hang on, JKR had made it clear that Sirius and Dumbledore were dead before book 7...so...:tu:True, but not everyone reads her interviews. Even the Leaky Cauldron's big list of questions for the final book included "Is Sirius really dead?"

Of course, in a series like this, a character could be hit with an Avada Kedavra and then plummet 50 meters, and people still might think that the character was alive if a passing parade did not trample the corpse in plain sight! (This is just a hypothetical example, fo course.....)

Well, the AK made it easier for non HP fans to know what happened didnt it, otherwise it just looks like he fell into the veil.Ah, but if you are not a Harry Potter fan, then what is "Avada Kedavra"?
I didnt like the way he floated away, i wanted him to fall backwards and just sort of disappear :(Well, the "ascension" certainly had some metaphysical implications!

I always thought Harry's line "He must have been dead before he hit the veil..." was the clue that Sirius really was dead, and by Bellatrix's hands. When does Harry ever say that?
Who knows the extent of Rowling's involvement, but I just have a feeling she would have objected to them showing Sirius actually being killed whereas there was more mystery to it in Order of the Phoenix if it really was a major deviation.Rowling is not that involved. She recommended that they keep Kreacher, although the fact is that they will have to introduce him from scratch in Prince anyway.

Rowling said that she thought that this was the best of the films. Of course, no doubt many people will think that she had her arm twisted into saying it, but Rowling flatly volunteered the information when she did not have to do so. Order obviously is a book that she'd like to do over if she could, and that might have played a part.

Hmmm: shouldn't something well rehearsed be well delivered?
No not always... Besides I said 'too' rehearsed not 'well' rehearsed. It could have been badly rehearsed hundreds of times as it appeared in the movie.

No not always... Besides I said 'too' rehearsed not 'well' rehearsed. It could have been badly rehearsed hundreds of times as it appeared in the movie.heh, well, it really does not work that way in movies. The scenes are done until the director is satisfied. Yates already has a reputation for doing a large number of takes. Of course, the dialogue is retaped and even digitally altered until the director(s) (and producer[s]) gets what he/she/they want.

So, however it is, it is almost certainly the way that Yates wanted it, especially given that it involves Oldman who is a very capable actor.

It kind of reminded me of Oldman getting stuck with the line "I gotta get me one of those" in Batman Begins. It's a just a cheesy line and nobody could do a really good job with it, but he still makes an admirable effort to get it to work.

Wimsey!!!

Hey, I've been waiting to hear what you thought about the movie! Glad to see you liked it. When I saw it again I took your advice and actually paid attention to the story the movie was telling...funny I guess I was to 'giddy' when I watched it the first time because the isolation I didn't really notice at first lol. What was your favorite scene in the movie and do you like what they did with Grawp (I think I remember you saying you didn't agree with keeping him in.)

I think my fav scene was Dumbledore's Escape, just because I've always loved that scene and I just really enjoyed how Harry was always on one side of the screen and Ron/Hermione were together on the other.

Agree on Goldman's acting (well done, does the best he can with the dialogue he's given). See 6 or more of his other films, and you'll see what a wide range he can do. Amazing.

Couple of questions from the movie which I couldn't find an answer anywhere in the forums:

1. Luna and Harry can see the Thestrals to ride them, but Ron and Hermione and the others? Are they riding them without seeing them?

2. In one of the newspaper scenes where they are shooting pictures of Fudge in the street, I swear the last photographer on the far right is Toby McGuire (who played Spiderman, and coincidentally Peter Parker's job is a photographer.) I think he did a quick cameo as a laugh.

3. Trivia question: what the reward being offered for Sirius Black, again from one of the newspaper scenes?

Wimsey!!!Phrozenone!!
Hey, I've been waiting to hear what you thought about the movie! Glad to see you liked it.I did. I would have done a bit more with Cho, just so that the audience could really grasp that Harry had a pretty powerful crush on her. However, that is my one major criticism. Hopefully, Prince will do a much better job with Harry & Ginny.......
When I saw it again I took your advice and actually paid attention to the story the movie was telling...funny I guess I was to 'giddy' when I watched it the first time because the isolation I didn't really notice at first lol.heh, I can see that. Did it seem like it clubbed you once you were looking for it?
What was your favorite scene in the movie and do you like what they did with Grawp (I think I remember you saying you didn't agree with keeping him in.)Grawp was OK, actually. I think that they might have done a little more to use him thematically: in the book, Grawp is responsible for Hagrid's isolation. Still, the theme of isolation was already pretty strong, and one can overtell a story.

I liked that Grawp was a gentle giant and amused by his ringing bells. That was a nice change from the book, although in one sense it really was not: we do eventually learn that Grawp is a gentle individual by nature. Still, it provided a decent plot device: Hermione knows about Grawp and uses him to get rid of Umbridge. They actually did not need the centaurs, but they were thematic: the native people being restricted (and isolated!) by the imperialist Ministry of Magic. We also got a hint of Ron & Hermione there: it is Ron who flips over Grawp grabbing Hermione much more than Harry.

As for my favorite scene, that is a tough call. I agree with you that Dumbledore's Escape was really good. Luna explaining Thestrals to Harry was very well done. The Occlumency lessons were great: I really liked how they used all those scenes from prior films to remind the audience of what had happened before, and the ones in which Snape himself intrudes are even better! The Harry & Sirius scenes were great. I am not sure what I liked more: Sirius and Harry in front of the tapestry, or Sirius' death and the fight leading into it.

However, I think that my single favorite scene was the Possession scene. That was going to be a tricky one: what Rowling does in the book is wonderful for a book: but it just would not have worked on screen. Converting it into a memory-illustrated argument by Voldemort and rebuttal by Harry was nothing short of brilliant. Instead of having love for one individual be the key to victory, it was Harry remembering unity with people that he loved that drove Voldemort out. Again, this amped up the story: unity (inspired by love) trumps isolation. The rapid montages were very efficient: indeed, they worked almost subliminally. Voldemort's closing threat ("You will lose everything": i.e., you will be, among other things, all alone in the end) was all the more sinister for that.
I just really enjoyed how Harry was always on one side of the screen and Ron/Hermione were together on the other.Do you know, I caught that only subconsciously! My wife pointed it out to me. That was a brilliant cinematic trick. (That being said, I seem to recall somebody [not me!] suggesting it when we had our "Order: Book -> Film" thread!)


I did see the movie a second time on an IMax screen in 3D. The battle sequences are astounding in 3D......

However, I think that my single favorite scene was the Possession scene. That was going to be a tricky one: what Rowling does in the book is wonderful for a book: but it just would not have worked on screen. Converting it into a memory-illustrated argument by Voldemort and rebuttal by Harry was nothing short of brilliant. Instead of having love for one individual be the key to victory, it was Harry remembering unity with people that he loved that drove Voldemort out. Again, this amped up the story: unity (inspired by love) trumps isolation. The rapid montages were very efficient: indeed, they worked almost subliminally. Voldemort's closing threat ("You will lose everything": i.e., you will be, among other things, all alone in the end) was all the more sinister for that.
I think the best thing to come out of that scene is that it fast-forwards the idea that it's philosophies that are at battle throughout the HP series, not a battle of skill and power. It's funny because GoF and OoTP introduced the ideas that Harry might become a wizard of Dumbledore fighting calibur but knowing the end of the series it doesn't come down to this. Instead it will be seeing whose ideals as a human being pervail over another. Upon reflection I find it good that they kept the DD/LV duel so short only to emphasize the certain theme of the battle that Harry will have to face in the future. Changing it to Harry exorcising Voldemort as opposed to him leaving made it clear that Harry is stronger than him in other ways than just battles.

Problem is they really have to emphasize this battle of wills in the next two films in order to prepare the audience for these certain things. Otherwise people will probably leave feeling a bit gypped.

Do you know, I caught that only subconsciously! My wife pointed it out to me. That was a brilliant cinematic trick. (That being said, I seem to recall somebody [not me!] suggesting it when we had our "Order: Book -> Film" thread!)

And Ron and Hermione are always wearing horizontally striped shirts in contrast to Harry's solid ones.

And Ron and Hermione are always wearing horizontally striped shirts in contrast to Harry's solid ones.
Are you implying that they are fat looking?

Are you implying that they are fat looking?

I'm pretty sure you're joking, but to better explain my post, it's just another visual way to show Harry's isolation.

I'm pretty sure you're joking, but to better explain my post, it's just another visual way to show Harry's isolation.
I am joking, but I think at the same time it's a nice visual reminder that R/Hr is more likely than H/Hr for the movie going audience; who might have shipping wars of their own. Me personally even though a nice little isolation tool, to me I found it a bit more annoying than symbolic. It's kind of funny, I guess now I know how all those pinkwearingHermione haters feel like regarding costume decisions.

Ah, but if you are not a Harry Potter fan, then what is "Avada Kedavra"?

Thats different, its been in the films before, people would remember what it does, it got a pretty good explanation from Moody in GoF....

Thats different, its been in the films before, people would remember what it does, it got a pretty good explanation from Moody in GoF....

I don't think they would remember to be honest, it's been 18 months since the last movie was out and casual viewers probably didn't remember it. Also there will have been some people who hadn't watched the last film. By rights, there should have been some sort of introduction to it in the film. Although it may not have mattered as I even remember when reading the book that it was quite obvious that Sirius had died from going through the veil even if I wasn't certain what was behind the veil. Harry's reaction sold the fact that he was dead. So I'm not sure if it matters, plus, 'Aveda kedavra' was said so fast many wouldn't have heard, I think it was probably enough to see him get hit by a spell and float off. I'd like to think general audiences are smart enough to put two and two together, however....

A friend of mine (a non-fan of books and movies) told me the other day that he hated the film as it just didn't make any sense. He asked me what that big 'A' building was in the middle of the sea, and who was that woman who broke out of it and what that wierd veil thing was. At first I considered that maybe he was right and I had filled in the blanks from the books while watching. But when I think about it I'm quite certain that Bellatrix was introduced, the breakout was explained and if the veil wasn't it was pretty self-explanatory that Sirius was dead. Does anybody know the general consensus on how non-book readers have reacted to the film? I've read reviews from a couple of non-book readers who say it made perfect sense and others (like my friend) who just couldn't follow it. I have wondered if it was just that my friend was apparently not up for seeing the film and was 'forced along' by his mates and was not paying proper attention. But it would be interesting to know the consensus of non-book readers.

A final note..I thought about this earlier and realised no one had mentioned this part on the thread....did anyone notice when Harry had to ask Hermione if he could sit with her? Just before McGonnagal and Umbridge's fight, I'm assuming it was meant to imply that Harry had told Mcgonnagal about the detentions. Just wanted to say I thought that was very well done and hit the isolation point on the head, I really felt for him.

I think the best thing to come out of that scene is that it fast-forwards the idea that it's philosophies that are at battle throughout the HP series, not a battle of skill and power.I agree entirely. The element of pity is important, too. Gee, do you think that we might see something like this again? :whistle:
Upon reflection I find it good that they kept the DD/LV duel so short only to emphasize the certain theme of the battle that Harry will have to face in the future. Changing it to Harry exorcising Voldemort as opposed to him leaving made it clear that Harry is stronger than him in other ways than just battles.Again, I agree. Now, I could have happily have watched Voldemort and Dumbledore go at it: they did a really good job of making it look like both of them were straining to the utmost to equal and surpass each other, and the look of surprise on Voldemort's face when Dumbledore (just!) deflects Voldemort's "clincher" is priceless. However, the story is about Harry's mind, not about magic!
Problem is they really have to emphasize this battle of wills in the next two films in order to prepare the audience for these certain things. Otherwise people will probably leave feeling a bit gypped.I agree. However, these are issues for Prince and Hallows: Order could not tell or set up their stories. Still, the conclusion was a nice "teaser": superficially, it is a tacit conclusion to the Order story, with Harry recognizing that he has something (unity through friendship) that Voldemort will never have: but that leads in to the next story of the roles that Harry chooses for the people in his life.

I'm pretty sure you're joking, but to better explain my post, it's just another visual way to show Harry's isolation.Do you know, I think that I picked up on that subconsciously, too. I'll have to look out for it when the DVD comes out. When will that be? (My guess is by the holidays: theater runs are very short these days!)

I don't think they would remember to be honest, it's been 18 months since the last movie was out and casual viewers probably didn't remember it. Also there will have been some people who hadn't watched the last film. By rights, there should have been some sort of introduction to it in the film. Although it may not have mattered as I even remember when reading the book that it was quite obvious that Sirius had died from going through the veil even if I wasn't certain what was behind the veil. Harry's reaction sold the fact that he was dead. So I'm not sure if it matters, plus, 'Aveda kedavra' was said so fast many wouldn't have heard, I think it was probably enough to see him get hit by a spell and float off. I'd like to think general audiences are smart enough to put two and two together, however....

I just thought of another way that it was obvious he had died for those who hadnt picked up on what happened to him yet... As soon as we come out of that silent part, the first thing you hear is Bella saying "I killed Sirius Black! *Mad cackle*"
Now if that didnt make it obvious, i dont know what did.

However, I think that my single favorite scene was the Possession scene. That was going to be a tricky one: what Rowling does in the book is wonderful for a book: but it just would not have worked on screen. Converting it into a memory-illustrated argument by Voldemort and rebuttal by Harry was nothing short of brilliant. Instead of having love for one individual be the key to victory, it was Harry remembering unity with people that he loved that drove Voldemort out. Again, this amped up the story: unity (inspired by love) trumps isolation. The rapid montages were very efficient: indeed, they worked almost subliminally. Voldemort's closing threat ("You will lose everything": i.e., you will be, among other things, all alone in the end) was all the more sinister for that.

Wimsey,

you, DarwinMayflower and Apt Pupil really need to stop making sense! Even if I have small gripe about the films, you all find a way to point out that my gripe is pointless!

I liked your description of the Possession scene because at first I didn't like it. I thought they could do it more like the book, showing Harry in pain and wanting to die, etc.

But the second time, I didn't mind it as much. Like Phrozenone, it took a second watching to like it a little bit more. But still I wasn't that fond of it.

But your explanation and your reminder that Yates was focusing on isolation has now made me realize that I'm wrong . . .again! :grumble:

And it also goes back to the arguments that rage about "adaptation", both on this thread and the DH movie thread. PoA and OoTp did the best job of adapting the books when you realize, as AptPupil said in the DH movie thread, that adapating means getting at the CORE of the book, the theme and taking it from there.

I really enjoyed OoTP and I think that reading these discussions has gone a long way in preparing me for HBP and DH. I think HBP is going to be wonderful because I can see that Yates basically gets it and I thought he brought out wonderful performances in the trio (yeah, even Emma; better than GoF, that's for sure!), especially Dan. I would be happy if Yates did DH, or even if Cuaron did it.

I would be more than happy if Yates directed Deathly Hallows based on his work in OOTP, but after reading it I'd be ecstatic if Cuaron directed. Deathly Hallows Seriously, the Battle of Hogwarts really calls for one of Cuaron's famous extended shots, following Harry through the castle while showing what's going on in the foreground.

I would be more than happy if Yates directed Deathly Hallows based on his work in OOTP, but after reading it I'd be ecstatic if Cuaron directed. Deathly Hallows Seriously, the Battle of Hogwarts really calls for one of Cuaron's famous extended shots, following Harry through the castle while showing what's going on in the foreground.

Oh, well you're in luck, because from what I've heard I'm pretty sure Cuaron is directing DH.
Thankfully.
I loved what he did to Prisoner, honestly.

yeah Cuaron does really well with PoA... my aunt who up until 2 weeks ago had never read the books but only saw the movies... she said that by far PoA was the best one ever. and she is a HUGE movie lover and will criticize EVERYTHING. i just really hope that whoever ends up directing DH puts everything in!!!!

i seriously hope Cuaron does do DH, i love PoA and i'll love DH!! i hope noone else comes in the way

quick question.... does anyone know whoes directing HBP?

yeah Cuaron does really well with PoA... my aunt who up until 2 weeks ago had never read the books but only saw the movies... she said that by far PoA was the best one ever. and she is a HUGE movie lover and will criticize EVERYTHING. i just really hope that whoever ends up directing DH puts everything in!!!!

Well they can't put EVERYthing in. Even if it's three hours long, you'd still need to make some cuts. I would personally cut Xenus Lovegood and his house out completely. Luna could be the one wearing the necklace with the DH symbol and the kids could figure out reading the DH story by themselves, and Olivander and Luna could provide the necessary exposition when found locked up in the dungeon. At this point introducing new characters seems like a foolishly ridiculous idea. I can even see them cutting out the new characters at the Ministry and just focusing on The trio getting past Umbridge (SANS Polyjuice disguises). I can also see them heavily condensing and streamlining the Olivander/Troll stuff as well.

quick question.... does anyone know whoes directing HBP?

David Yates is directing HBP.

I love Daid Yates other stuff he's done so I'm really excited to see waht he does with HBP

Didn't David Yates direct OoTp? So why is he directing HBP as well? ohhh not that i havea problem lol

OK, well here goes - iwas soo psyched up for this movie, and had looked up/spoken on here/heard about it so much..i was actually quite disappointed when it came to the day. i thought it started off great...but then it seemed to drag. it seemed so much less 'fun' and constantly depressing, it was very good in it's own way, but i could sense some other people's boredom, and the few jokes they had just fell flat :(

but, the second time i watched it, i watched each bit as it came..and liked it! i still find that it drags at times, but i think lots of it's done really well too!
i don't know, still a bit unsure. i think it needed more wit, more fun...and didn't try to be so serious all the time - we got the point! lol!

And Ron and Hermione are always wearing horizontally striped shirts in contrast to Harry's solid ones.

at first all i could notice was how much hermioe nkept looking at harry!

i think i was feeling ship-obsessed and paranoid when i first watched it though! lol!

you, DarwinMayflower and Apt Pupil really need to stop making sense! Even if I have small gripe about the films, you all find a way to point out that my gripe is pointless!Our blushes! :blush: But thank you for kind words....

I really enjoyed OoTP and I think that reading these discussions has gone a long way in preparing me for HBP and DH. I think HBP is going to be wonderful because I can see that Yates basically gets it and I thought he brought out wonderful performances in the trio (yeah, even Emma; better than GoF, that's for sure!), especially Dan. I would be happy if Yates did DH, or even if Cuaron did it.My concern for Prince is that Yates has described it as being about sexual revolution. Um, well, the one in my book wasn't, but maybe he got a different copy that I did. Howevefr, that is topic for a different thread!

OK, well here goes - iwas soo psyched up for this movie, and had looked up/spoken on here/heard about it so much..i was actually quite disappointed when it came to the day. i thought it started off great...but then it seemed to drag.I, too, felt that the movie got a little slow in the middle. It was almost like the Columbus films: you were just waiting for someone to say or do something: anything! The Trelawney sacking scene was the worst for this: the pregnant pauses there were just interminable: in fact, I think that I'm sitting through one still.
it seemed so much less 'fun' and constantly depressing, it was very good in it's own way, but i could sense some other people's boredom, and the few jokes they had just fell flat :(This has been a familiar criticism from critics. Ebert in particular basically blasted the movie for lacking the charm and fun of the first two. He closed by hoping that the last two movies were not so grim and dour as Prince: but also with the inkling that maybe Rowling had not intended these to be the happy stories that he initially thought that they were. Well, here is a good example of irony: the next too movies will not be as grim and dour as this one!
i don't know, still a bit unsure. i think it needed more wit, more fun...and didn't try to be so serious all the time - we got the point! lol!I could see the argument that Order overtold Rowling's story. Moreover, I can understand that the continuous grimness was a bit much. However, I suspect that wit or fun would have been counterproductive: the absence of these things from Harry's life was pretty important.
at first all i could notice was how much hermioe nkept looking at harry!I cannot say that I noticed that, but I certainly never noticed Cho looking at Harry....

Seriously, if I had not read the books, then I would have been expecting Harry to jump Luna at the end of the film. Of course, I was expecting Harry to do that when I read Half-Blood Prince! Then that little red-haired tramp ruined it all! :p
i think i was feeling ship-obsessed and paranoid when i first watched it though! lol!Goldenberg and Yates continued what Kloves and Cuarón did with subtle Ron & Hermione flirtings. I wonder if audiences will remember this in 2010?

Goldenberg and Yates continued what Kloves and Cuarón did with subtle Ron & Hermione flirtings. I wonder if audiences will remember this in 2010?

I didn't notice much subtle flirting in this film at all...and that would have been a highlight for me as I found the film so dull and so far from the book. I found the constant "Ronald" really grating...how she can move from there to being in love with him, I don't know.

I didn't notice much subtle flirting in this film at all...and that would have been a highlight for me as I found the film so dull and so far from the book. I found the constant "Ronald" really grating...how she can move from there to being in love with him, I don't know.

Well not so much flirting. I would say that we saw Ron and Hermione together more. Like sometimes they'd be talking together in the Common Room and then Harry would join them. Just subtle things. And Ron was more protective over Hermione. For example, when Grawp picked Hermione up (which may I add was a complete waste of sceen time) Ron was all "Don't touch her again" to Grawp. I definitely would have liked more flirting between the two in the middle of the film when itwas particularly boring.

And agreed. The whole "Ronald" thing kills me every time she says it.

Our blushes! But thank you for kind words....

Your very welcome!

My concern for Prince is that Yates has described it as being about sexual revolution. Um, well, the one in my book wasn't, but maybe he got a different copy that I did. Howevefr, that is topic for a different thread!

Well, I think it was either AptPupil or Darwin (and maybe you, but it couldn't be if you are concerned!) that made me feel better about this. That he wasn't really saying it was a "sexual revolution", but that there was going to be sexual politics ("sex, drugs and rock and roll" I think is what he said, and of course Heyman said no drugs. :lol: ). But there was also an interview where he clearly understood that Snape was a big part of it and was eager to delve into all the "ambiguities" (or something like that).

So, I think he gets it. And from what I remember of HBP (and I just read it the week before DH came out), it was a mix of "sexual politics" (well, without the real sex, of course! :p ), and Snape and Draco, etc. So I think he does get it. But I think we can expect to see him concentrating on a lot of the teen love, too, making the film a bit more amusing than OoTP. But I'm sure he'll include DD's death at the end which will be quite the shocker for the non-reader who managed not to hear about the plots of the books!

This has been a familiar criticism from critics. Ebert in particular basically blasted the movie for lacking the charm and fun of the first two. He closed by hoping that the last two movies were not so grim and dour as Prince: but also with the inkling that maybe Rowling had not intended these to be the happy stories that he initially thought that they were. Well, here is a good example of irony: the next too movies will not be as grim and dour as this one!

I thought Ebert's review was quite inane really. No more "magic"!? I guess he doesn't read the books. I am greatful that the films are not as saccharine as the first two. I enjoyed the first two, of course, but will always see those as "children's films" for the most part.

I didn't notice much subtle flirting in this film at all...and that would have been a highlight for me as I found the film so dull and so far from the book.Again, the movie's job is not to replicate the book: it is to tell the same story as the book told. I would argue that the movie told Rowling's story much more concisely than she did (Rowling herself admits that Order was not well-written), and without a lot of the irrelevant detours that Rowling took.
I found the constant "Ronald" really grating...how she can move from there to being in love with him, I don't know.Er, calling a man "Ronald" precludes love?

Seriously, the unrealistic thing about Ron and Hermione is the two of them harboring romantic feelings for each other for that long. I remember teenage romantic attention span, and you measured it with a stop watch, not a calander! How Hermione feels about Ron at 16 should have little bearing on how she feels about him at 17 which in turn should have little bearing on how she feels about him at 18.

That being written, there was a stiff formality and self-awareness to Ron & Hermione's interactions of the sort one sees if something is going to be done with the two characters later in the movie. Of course, nothing is, and I doubt that most viewers will remember it.

For example, when Grawp picked Hermione up (which may I add was a complete waste of sceen time) Ron was all "Don't touch her again" to Grawp. I definitely would have liked more flirting between the two in the middle of the film when itwas particularly boring.Grawp picking up Hermione was not a waste of screen time. It set up why Hermione would try to bring Umbridge out there: she and Grawp seem to have quickly formed a bond, and he might help her with Umbridge.

(Critics have often panned her plan in the book as very weak, and although I think that they miss the point - only Hermione comes up with any idea in that situation - this circumvents that criticism nicely.)
And agreed. The whole "Ronald" thing kills me every time she says it.Er, why? That is his name, and there is meaning in her formal use of it when everyone else calls him Ron.

Well, I think it was either AptPupil or Darwin (and maybe you, but it couldn't be if you are concerned!) that made me feel better about this. That he wasn't really saying it was a "sexual revolution", but that there was going to be sexual politics ("sex, drugs and rock and roll" I think is what he said, and of course Heyman said no drugs. :lol: ).heh, not even firewhiskey or unicorn horn? Seriously, you are correct: it was politics, not revolution: my Freudian slip!

Still, I just do not see how sexual politics unites Voldemort's past, the whitherfors of Draco & Snape and the "what" of the Potions book!
But there was also an interview where he clearly understood that Snape was a big part of it and was eager to delve into all the "ambiguities" (or something like that).Well, good: that is

So, I think he gets it. And from what I remember of HBP (and I just read it the week before DH came out), it was a mix of "sexual politics" (well, without the real sex, of course! :p ), and Snape and Draco, etc. So I think he does get it.Oh, I do not think that sexual politics are absent (with or without the sex: I suppose that is entirely ambiguous, but also entirely unimportant!). However, I think that it is an aspect of the choice of what roles Harry chooses for people in his life. That particular role (and the accompanying politics) is for Ginny Weasley: but the roles that Harry chooses for Voldemort, Draco, Snape and the Half-Blood Prince are quite different!
I thought Ebert's review was quite inane really. No more "magic"!? I guess he doesn't read the books. I am greatful that the films are not as saccharine as the first two. I enjoyed the first two, of course, but will always see those as "children's films" for the most part.Ebert does not read the book. Years ago, he and Gene Siskel discussed whether film critics should read books when movies were adapted from a book. At this point, I forget who argued what (the fact that Siskel was involved means that it was 10+ years ago,and I seem to remember huge hair and collars the size of aircraft carriers, which suggests that it was considerably before that!), but both of them did emphasize that movies should be reviewed as movies. One of them did emphasize that he did not want to read the book in advance, although that was difficult because given his background, he read an awful lot. (I think that was Siskel, but, again, it was a long time ago!)

Now, I know that Ebert has not read the Harry Potter books: not only was he hoping that Half-Blood Prince would be more light-hearted that Order (oops!), but Ebert was quite surprised to see all of the sexual tension between Ron and Hermione in Goblet, as he had just sort of assumed that Hermione was in love with Harry.

I think that Harry Potter might be a weird exception to the "movie critics should not read the books" rule. For 99.9% of the movies out there that are adapted from books (which is a huge proportion of movies, actually), not only have most people never read the book, but most people never heard of the book. Harry Potter is different. Yes, most people have not read the books: however, everybody has heard of them. Moreover, I think that Joe and Jane Public does have an incorrect mental image of the books being Kids Detectives with Magic, and a protagonist who is eternally 12. I do not think that the coming-of-age narrative theme is widely appreciated, even though that really is much more important to the series as a whole than is magic!

So, that is what I suspect Ebert was expecting. So, sexual politics, betrayal and murder ought to really blow his mind in Prince!


ON A SIDE NOTE......

I have been listening to the Order Soundtrack. I found this to be very effective in the movie. What I found almost amusing is that there are parts of the arrangements that are very reminiscent of two Pink Floyd albums: the Wall and Animals. In particular, the parts where big orchestration would give way to a single piano (isolating the music), and numerous "echoing" effects (again, a sound that you hear when alone) were heavily utilized on those two works, and in this soundtrack. (I would have used some acoustic guitar on this soundtrack, as the Floyd did!)

And, of course, the stories told on those two albums are quite similar to the story and background theme of this tale. The Wall is all about isolation and trying to break free of it, whereas Animals is about Animal Farm, an Orwellian tale.

So, the music really complimented the movie well. Of course, for the average Harry Potter fan, Pink Floyd might not mean much: unless they were conceived while their parents were listening to it! :p

I think that Harry Potter might be a weird exception to the "movie critics should not read the books" rule. For 99.9% of the movies out there that are adapted from books (which is a huge proportion of movies, actually), not only have most people never read the book, but most people never heard of the book. Harry Potter is different. Yes, most people have not read the books: however, everybody has heard of them. Moreover, I think that Joe and Jane Public does have an incorrect mental image of the books being Kids Detectives with Magic, and a protagonist who is eternally 12. I do not think that the coming-of-age narrative theme is widely appreciated, even though that really is much more important to the series as a whole than is magic!

I agree with you here. Although, since it's obvious that Harry is growing up, I still don't understand why a non-reader would assume it would all be "oooh and aahh" for all of the films. I mean, did he think that Star Wars was never going to get dark either? And even if you think that, that shouldn't cloud your appreciation for the STORY itself, should it?

It's funny how you called it Kids Detectives with Magic, because I saw the first 3 films first before reading the books and I always thought that there would be countless "Harry Potter and . . ." books because it was like The Hardy Boys. It wasn't until after I read all of the books and went online (in 2005 before HBP came out) that I learned that it was only going to be 7 books and that there was an actual purpose to telling the story.

I didn't notice much subtle flirting in this film at all...and that would have been a highlight for me as I found the film so dull and so far from the book. I found the constant "Ronald" really grating...how she can move from there to being in love with him, I don't know.


I don't really get how Hermione calling Ron "Ronald" means she's not in love with him? On the contrary, I think it's just her way of flirting with him. I'm in love with a girl who always goes by "Jen", and I often call her "Jenny" or "Jennifer". It's just my little way of trying to get her attention.

Seriously, the unrealistic thing about Ron and Hermione is the two of them harboring romantic feelings for each other for that long. I remember teenage romantic attention span, and you measured it with a stop watch, not a calander! How Hermione feels about Ron at 16 should have little bearing on how she feels about him at 17 which in turn should have little bearing on how she feels about him at 18.
Even Ross and Rachel got together after the 3rd season...or was it the 4th season?

Seriously, if I had not read the books, then I would have been expecting Harry to jump Luna at the end of the film. Of course, I was expecting Harry to do that when I read Half-Blood Prince! Then that little red-haired tramp ruined it all! :p


Considering the nature of Luna's scenes with Harry in HBP, and assuming the nonexistence of Ginny continues, and Evanna and Dan continue to play their roles right, it's not illogical to think that history might change. :love: I'm not sure how receptive the other fans might be to that change, though. :lol:

I'm in love with a girl who always goes by "Jen", and I often call her "Jenny" or "Jennifer". It's just my little way of trying to get her attention.That, and "Jenny" always makes a girl sound like she's 7 and "Jen" makes it sound like she's 17!

Even Ross and Rachel got together after the 3rd season...or was it the 4th season?I saw one of the first episodes at an aiport. A friend of mine quipped: "that'll be cancelled by November." I agreed. Well, I suppose it was cancelled by the November of some year.

That also was the last episode I watched! However, I knew other people who watched it, so I have heard about Ross & Rachel. (Didn't they wind up married in the end?)
Considering the nature of Luna's scenes with Harry in HBP, and assuming the nonexistence of Ginny continues, and Evanna and Dan continue to play their roles right, it's not illogical to think that history might change. :love: I'm not sure how receptive the other fans might be to that change, though. :lol:Ginny was far from non-existent in Goblet and Order! It would have been nice if they could have found a way to work in the "chocolate" scene, perhaps over Christmas when Harry is worried about being possessed. They would have had to use flashbacks to Chamber of Secrets, obviously, as I doubt that many people remember that Ginny was possessed by Voldemort 5 years ago!

It also would have fueled the story a bit. The problem is that it would not have helped the plot any. Oh well: Harry+Ginny is Prince's job. Order was not going to do much for that. Goblet certainly did nothing for Harry+Cho, insofar as I can determine.

Ginny was far from non-existent in Goblet and Order! It would have been nice if they could have found a way to work in the "chocolate" scene, perhaps over Christmas when Harry is worried about being possessed. They would have had to use flashbacks to Chamber of Secrets, obviously, as I doubt that many people remember that Ginny was possessed by Voldemort 5 years ago!

It also would have fueled the story a bit. The problem is that it would not have helped the plot any. Oh well: Harry+Ginny is Prince's job. Order was not going to do much for that. Goblet certainly did nothing for Harry+Cho, insofar as I can determine.

I was actually thinking about this, especially in regards to the ongoing discussion of the HBP movie.

Before GoF, non-reader movie watchers would not have known who the heck Cho was, since although she was mentioned briefly in PoA the book, she did not appear in the PoA movie at all. In GoF, the non-reader would have seen Harry notice her on the train, see him notice her (and dribble on himself) in the Great Hall, see him appear to want to ask her to the Ball (when he's talking with Ron about how the girls always hang out in groups), and then finally ask her in the Owlery. Then notice her at the Ball and be depressed. We see her crying over Cedric at the end. That's it. But it's enough for the non-reader.

The non-reader movie watchers would have seen Ginny in every movie, even if it was a small amount of screen time. I think by now most of them would remember that she's Ron's sister (especially with the red hair), and if they have any memory at all, that she was with them at the Quidditch World Cup in GoF.

The only difference is that Harry has basically ignored her in the films, except for CoS and a little attention in OoTP. The readers were revved for H/G in HBP because we figured it was coming, even if we didn't know how.

For the non-reader watching HBP, even after OoTP, it's going to be a CLUNK on the head (kind of like an anvil :p ) because even though they showed reactions of Ginny in OoTP that she obviously still likes Harry (if anyone even remembers that she had a crush on him in CoS, which was only shown briefly in the beginning of the film), they didn't show any interest by Harry in her, except for noticing that she was there, and complimenting her in the D.A.

Which is almost exactly like the books anyway, even if Ginny got more face time, none of that contributed to Harry noticing her as anything more than Ron's sister and a member of the D.A. Sure, there were "literary hints" - description of her eyes in the firelight, they're shared sense of humor. But that wasn't in the films.

I guess this is my long-winded way of saying that no matter how they did it in the films, even if Ginny was shown more in OoTP, it's still going to be an ANVIL if they stick to the book version of it for HBP since Harry showed no interest in Ginny before HBP. And you can't really film all of the literary hints that JKR told us over 5 films and hope that it will all click into place.

I know the books are not romance stories, but I think JKR may have been better off starting a little Harry/Ginny by the end of OoTP that was more obvious - more obvious that Ginny still had feelings for Harry and making Harry notice Ginny more as a "girl" rather than as a fellow D.A. member. Like admitting she's pretty; noticing how she dates a lot (especially after he breaks up with Cho), something. If it was more noticeable, they would have put it in the film and HBP wouldn't be much of an ANVIL for the non-reader.

But woulda, coulda, shoulda.

For the HBP movie they're going to have to show more stuff at the Burrow FIRST, even before Harry's annoyance at Ginny sitting with Dean on the train to Hogwarts. Just like they did with Cho in GoF. It has to be MORE obvious then just annoyance, smelling something in the love potion and then WHAM catching her snogging Dean.

Anyway, that was probably all off-topic. I rambled. Sorry!

I know the books are not romance stories, but I think JKR may have been better off starting a little Harry/Ginny by the end of OoTP that was more obvious - more obvious that Ginny still had feelings for Harry and making Harry notice Ginny more as a "girl" rather than as a fellow D.A. member. Like admitting she's pretty; noticing how she dates a lot (especially after he breaks up with Cho), something. If it was more noticeable, they would have put it in the film and HBP wouldn't be much of an ANVIL for the non-reader.

I didn't have a problem with Harry "suddenly" liking Ginny. Not all romances, especially teenage romances, are developed years and years before they happen. We were just so used to seeing Ron and Hermione working off their sexual tension for 3 books that when Harry is crushing on Ginny for the first time in HBP it seems to come out of nowhere.

I think Ron and Hermione is the exception to the rule regarding teenage romance. They work at a very slow pace. Even in DH when they are "together", it takes them the whole year to kiss. They have an emotional relationship before they have a physical relationship. I really liked that because it made their relationship believable despite their young age. The opposite is true for Harry/Ginny where they get together by kissing, and their relationship comes after.

Ginny is 15 at the start of HBP. Girls change a lot from 13 to 15. It is of no surprise to me that Harry would start to find her attractive once she has grown a bit. In the film they could realistically have Harry do a "my haven't you grown" type of scene, and his attraction would be believable, especially for a teenage boy. Once the attraction is established, their relationship can be developed throughout HBP. I don't see any movie audiences scratching their heads. I think people are just spoiled by all the R/Hr hints they've thrown into the movies since CoS, but R/Hr and H/G are two very different relationship dynamics.

I do wish the character of Ginny was given a bit more to do, and that we saw more of her personality, but I don't view her absence as a handicap. In fact it might just make his sudden attraction more believable if he's spending more time with her than we've ever seen in the past.

In GoF, the non-reader would have seen Harry notice her on the train, see him notice her (and dribble on himself) in the Great Hall, see him appear to want to ask her to the Ball (when he's talking with Ron about how the girls always hang out in groups), and then finally ask her in the Owlery. Then notice her at the Ball and be depressed. We see her crying over Cedric at the end. That's it. But it's enough for the non-reader.The problem for Order was that I do not think that it was enough. Yes, they understood the score in Nov. or Dec. 2005: but that was a long time ago. The biggest flaw with Order was the failure to establish some dynamic between Cho and Harry. They seemed to be relying on our remembering Goblet, but the dynamic needed to be introduced as if from scratch in Order. Rowling herself did that: Cho's intro in Order is similar to her intro in Goblet. If you had not read Goblet, or if you had forgotten Goblet (Goblet was out 3 years before Order, after all), then you could quickly work out that Harry was smitten by Cho, and that he had been.

Now, Order did some related things well: they had flashbacks to Cedric's death, and the frequently shown moving photograph of him in the Room of Requirement. They needed some analogue of this to remind us about Cho, or just to simply "introduce" Harry's crush.
The non-reader movie watchers would have seen Ginny in every movie, even if it was a small amount of screen time. I think by now most of them would remember that she's Ron's sister (especially with the red hair), and if they have any memory at all, that she was with them at the Quidditch World Cup in GoF.Well, Ginny was one of the sextet, so I think that audiences will have some memory of her as a face. However,

The only difference is that Harry has basically ignored her in the films, except for CoS and a little attention in OoTP. The readers were revved for H/G in HBP because we figured it was coming, even if we didn't know how.heh, not everyone! Some of us were expecting it to be Luna: and, of course, there were the Harmonians!

In truth, at 16, Harry could easily have fallen for a girl that he met for the first time that year. Indeed, that would have been much more realistic. (Two years ago, there were complaints that it was unrealistic for Harry to fall suddenly for a girl in whom he had shown no interest in prior years: however, I think that these were younger fans who had not yet experienced the biochemical insanity called teen hormones!) In a movie, the audience expects the love interest to be introduced in each film. We do not need to see James Bond making eyes at a woman in a 2007 movie to expect her to make more than eyes with her in the 2009 movie: in fact, we have forgotten the 2007 Bond girl come 2009! Although Harry Potter is a different series, the audience is not different, and the expectations are not different.

I guess this is my long-winded way of saying that no matter how they did it in the films, even if Ginny was shown more in OoTP, it's still going to be an ANVIL if they stick to the book version of it for HBP since Harry showed no interest in Ginny before HBP. And you can't really film all of the literary hints that JKR told us over 5 films and hope that it will all click into place.Indeed, they could not. People apply Chekhov's Gun to movies much more rigidly than they do to books: and "throwaways" that set up future movies look like poor editing to someone not worrying about the next movie.
I know the books are not romance stories, but I think JKR may have been better off starting a little Harry/Ginny by the end of OoTP that was more obvious - more obvious that Ginny still had feelings for Harry and making Harry notice Ginny more as a "girl" rather than as a fellow D.A. member.Ah, but none of that had happened yet! One of the amusing things about Prince is realizing that Harry has fallen for Ginny but that Harry has not realized it yet: his slight irritation when she goes off to sit with Dean, smelling her perfume in the love potion, etc. Moreover, the fact that Ginny might no longer have these feelings for Harry (because of Dean) fuels the story: Prince is about the roles Harry chooses for people in his life, and if Ginny were plainly interested, then there would be no real story there! It was Harry's arguments with himself (she's off limits, she's with Dean, she's Ron's sister) that are part of the story.
For the HBP movie they're going to have to show more stuff at the Burrow FIRST, even before Harry's annoyance at Ginny sitting with Dean on the train to Hogwarts. Just like they did with Cho in GoF. It has to be MORE obvious then just annoyance, smelling something in the love potion and then WHAM catching her snogging Dean.I agree entirely: the stuff that Rowling summarizes in a couple of sentences needs a full scene. However, that is for the Prince thread! (I think that it might be safe now: it seems that the "Lav Lav is the story" crowd has left the newsgroup!)

Originally Posted by LoonyMagic View Post
And agreed. The whole "Ronald" thing kills me every time she says it.
Er, why? That is his name, and there is meaning in her formal use of it when everyone else calls him Ron.

I think it's jsut becuase she does it sound patrnosing - and she doesn't in the book! lol! i don't mind it too much though...becuase in many ways it's quite cute, like how she singles him out by calling him his real name and sort of has her own little feleigns about him.
she doesn't do it to anyone else like that! lol!

ON A SIDE NOTE......

I have been listening to the Order Soundtrack. I found this to be very effective in the movie. What I found almost amusing is that there are parts of the arrangements that are very reminiscent of two Pink Floyd albums: the Wall and Animals. In particular, the parts where big orchestration would give way to a single piano (isolating the music), and numerous "echoing" effects (again, a sound that you hear when alone) were heavily utilized on those two works, and in this soundtrack. (I would have used some acoustic guitar on this soundtrack, as the Floyd did!)

And, of course, the stories told on those two albums are quite similar to the story and background theme of this tale. The Wall is all about isolation and trying to break free of it, whereas Animals is about Animal Farm, an Orwellian tale.

So, the music really complimented the movie well. Of course, for the average Harry Potter fan, Pink Floyd might not mean much: unless they were conceived while their parents were listening to it! :p


It's interesting you mention the soundtrack because I agree it does work well in the film, as a standalone though I'm not so sure. I remember when watching the film the track that stood out the most to me was 'The Room of Requirement' and 'Professor Umbridge'. Now The RoR is a little repetitive and after listening to it a while it gets boring, but it's still a good song.

Hooper has kept insisting there's a Possession theme but my question is..WHAT IS IT! lol I mean I listened to the song but I couldn't pick out specific theme and he says it runs through the Soundtrack but maybe it's just hidden. A theme to me is something that represents a character and/or event and maybe I just have to see the movie again to actually pick out what that theme is. Something Williams did was he made it pretty clear what particular themes were (And I know you're not a big fan of Williams Wimsey so I'll change the subject :p)

One thing I will say however, is Hooper's score is closer to what Williams established in the first three than Doyle's soundtrack. It feels magical (If that makes any sense at all) and it works well on screen and as a whole I enjoyed it more than Doyle's, COS, and PS/SS. So I guess the soundtrack places in the same place as the movies do for me. POA and then OOTP..which is a good thing I suppose.

ANYWAYS back to the movie....

I was talking to a friend of mine the other day. He's read the books and has seen all the movies and upon first viewing HATED OOTP (HE says he has to watch it again to see if he really hates it or not). He tells me that he doesn't understand why they're making each book into a movie because not all the books have cinematic flair. OOTP was tough to do and Yates did a good job, but the movie DID have people falling asleep (I think the only viewing I saw where people didn't fall asleep was that advanced screening I saw with nothing but fans.) I don't think people were expecting the movie to be such a downer (And the same can be said for reading the book.)

One thing I just don't understand though is this constant hate of Gambon's Dumbledore. (Not on this board but on every other Harry Potter board its ridiculous) Is it the fact that people just can't except change or is it they go into the movie expecting to hate him so they just notice nothing but the "bad" You'd think now that we know about his character more people will see he's more canon that we first thought and I think he did an amazing job in this film. I mean the 'He's to serious in the fight with Dumbledore" or 'Why is he ignoring Harry like that' just bothers me. Did they just forget to notice how emotional he was trying to help Harry through the Possession? I mean I loved when he he basically tells Harry it's what makes him and Voldemort different that's the key and I agree with you the Possession scene is amazing.

Anyways just be ranting...I'll go now....:whistle:

I don't know if you've seen this yet, but check out his picture of james and lily. It was obvioulsy cut from the movie. We can only hope it will be in deleted scenes!

http://www.movieprints.co.uk/image.php?id=199657&idx=7&fromsearch=true

I was a bit disappointed with the movie myself. First of all, the movie left out several elementso f the movie that made them more fun:like the quidditch matches and the hogsmeade trips. Also even the main plot points were short of details. While watching the movie I was really looking forward to the ministry of magic scene, but was disappointed when I saw that they went straight into the prophecy room. OotP was the longest book (870 pages) and the shortest movie (2hrs. 18 mins.). Although I did not like how they changed the dorector every other movie, I hope they change it one more time so we can hopefully look forward to a better made movie in 2008.

I don't judge the movies with my own eyes. Due to my filter of reading the books I will never be able to judge the quality of the film objectively. My mind is always "filling things in" and I tend to give the movies quite a pass for that.

However, I do judge them by what my non-reader friends think. All of them, without exception, have said that they liked OOtP best (or best next to PoA) out of all of the films. The six people I've spoken to felt Goblet seemed more rushed, and didn't really have many plot related questions. (I did get one "what's the deal with that pink headed girl?" though!)

As for my own subjective view, I liked this one best out of the films...second to PoA in beauty and execution, but first in quality of acting and transferral of material. Yes, things were shortened, tweaked, or taken out altogether. But the use of lines I recognized from the book was wonderful, and though Rupert only had about three lines, I felt he was finally his book self. The essence of the story was preserved, and unfortunately Jo's world is too dense and rich to ever be captured fully on film. We can hope only for the essence. I think this movie was a success.

I was a bit disappointed with the movie myself. First of all, the movie left out several elementso f the movie that made them more fun:like the quidditch matches and the hogsmeade trips. Also even the main plot points were short of details. While watching the movie I was really looking forward to the ministry of magic scene, but was disappointed when I saw that they went straight into the prophecy room. OotP was the longest book (870 pages) and the shortest movie (2hrs. 18 mins.). Although I did not like how they changed the dorector every other movie, I hope they change it one more time so we can hopefully look forward to a better made movie in 2008.

Well unfortunately for you, Yates (who directed OotP) is back to direct HBP.

Well unfortunately for you, Yates (who directed OotP) is back to direct HBP.

whyy oh whyy!!!! He better do good then! lol, what can i do anyway :p

My favourite movie so far, I think Yates and the new script writer really got the spirit of the book, despite the cuts and changes to a BIG book.

1.) Amazing additions to the cast with Loona and Umbridge
2.) Deliciously better-with-each-movie Voldemort
3.) Best new "Dumbledore" actor performance
and most importantly
4.) Some actual acting from the trio in the shape of Daniel Radcliffe adding depth to Harry, after basically smiling/shouting/waving the wand and saying Latin spells his way in the past 4 movies.

whyy oh whyy!!!! He better do good then! lol, what can i do anyway :p

I think this'll be better. Yates said hte next one will be much mroe fun...and he's very good at getting behind the story of the books. Also, he'll learn from his 'mistakes' this time and understand...plus he's good with canon!
I'm really hoping so anyway! lol!

MY only problem with OOTP was that i felt he overdid the feeligns of isolation and made it slightly boring, imo, because of such a down feeling throughout. If the next one's dark but fun...well, i htink THAT could be a very good movie!

He did really seem to focus on the isolated Harry, also I think there was too much screen time spent on Umbridge, I know shes intergral to plot of OOTP inparticular, its just I think that the film could have been made ore lighthearted if some Umbridge bits had been left out and more Ron and Hermione parts put in(I love their whole realtionship)

Each new movie is always my favorite, so yes, OotP is my favorite. I didn't really like the whole blaming Cho for the DA being found thing.

And I've gone to see it twice, and both times, when Fudge says, "He's back." everyone in the audience goes, "DUH."

When I went to go see Ootp there was 2 things I wanted to see and that was Fred and George leaving the castle, and even more important to me was the fight at the end with the order, death eaters, dumbledore, and voldemort.

And I have to say I was blown away by the fight. I was getting chills down my back from when they started running from the death eaters. It was amazing. Obviousaly the movie wasn't perfect, but it was great. I just can't wait till I get the dvd so I can watch the fight over and over again....."Get away from God Son"

Ok guys I just finished watching the final battle again on YouTube (I know I know BAD me...I'm totally against pirating..but it was there..and I'm weak :sad:) It wasn't in the best quality but it was pretty good and I just realized how much I LOVE this scene.

I now think the battle was the perfect length (I started watching where Sirius comes in and punches Lucius) because it gets your blood pumping but doesn't last to long where you get bored. And besides Harry Potter isn't about action...it's all about the internal struggle as a wise one name Wimsey once said.

I don't know why but I start :D<---- everytime Dumbledore appears in the flame. I never noticed that look of fear that appeared on Voldemorts face when he saw Dumbledore. The fight itself is AMAZING. I remember when I first saw it I was like eh...second time...ok...third...oohhh...fourth...NICCEEE!!!... and now I'm just like BRILLIANT! lol. It sucks that we won't REALLY have a fight of this magnitude ever again in Harry Potter.

I noticed that there is no music going on during Voldermorts/Dumbledore's fued and it works really well. I loved how Voldemort used Dumbledore's own spell against him knocking him back and shattering all the glass. Oh yeah the water ball...awesome. Giant fire snake...awesome. Dumbledore chopping giant fire snake head off...WHOO HOO!

I just loved how Harry is kinda just walking in the background though lol. It's like...Dumbledore's trying to protect you the least you can do is stay back lol. It's interesting to watch this scene because it isn't a typical battle. Dumbledore in no way is trying to defeat Voldemort (Like most fights of this size usually are)..he's trying to protect Harry and that's his whole motive. Voldemorts trying to kill them both and Dumbledore could've EASILY finished him off if he wanted too. (You know harden the water ball...make sure he's frozen..smash it against a wall...no more Voldermort :lol:)

Ok I just had to go through a fan geek mode..ok..back to productive discussion now lol

Also I would've LOVED to see this in 3D...but alas I never got the chance :(

This movie was absolutely amazing.

Harry: All I have to say is one word: AMAZING! He brought out all the emotion and it was perfect. I loved his performance.
Sirius: Awesome! I teared up watching his death. :upset: I loved the way he and Harry were so close. It was as if Sirius was actually Harry's father. It was amazing!
Dumbledore: I have to say that Gambon did great in this movie. Out off all three that he was in, this was his best performance by far.
Ron and Hermione: Awesome!
Bellatrix: I though I was going to have nightmares she scared the living daylights out of me. Very good performance.
Luna: Perfect!

The whole DOM scene was so cool. I loved all of the fighting and everything about it. Dumbledore and Voldemort's fight was so awesome to watch. The possestion scene scared me. it was so sad watching all of Harry's memories of him and Sirius. Sirius punching Lucius was probably the best part in the entire movie! Harry visions= creepy. Harry and Cho's kiss could have been alot better.

Best Harry Potter movie so far! :clap:

Dumbledore chopping giant fire snake head off...WHOO HOO!

Really? I missed that, *Cough*Foreshadowinganyone?*Cough*

I loved OotP although it could be alot better. I just hope yates does a great job on the last 2.

Really? I missed that, *Cough*Foreshadowinganyone?*Cough*

oohh yeah I didn't think about that :tu:

I didn't know what Dumbledore was doing there until I read an interview with the guy over the special effects (His name escapes me). Dumbledore chops the snakes head off, then throws the fire back at Voldemort (Which he blocks), right before Dumbledore wraps him in the water ball.

A few comments about the film:

One thing that seemed to stand out in Order of the Phoenix was the score. The much maligned Hooper crafted a better musical narrative than Doyle did, more varied and compatible with the film. Doyle's work might have fit any movie, but Hooper's is distinctly Potter.

Also, I felt that Dumbledore appeared more like the book character and less like the oddly vulnerable man portrayed in Goblet of Fire (his reaction when Harry's name is disgorged from the goblet comes to mind). Here, however, he's back in form, confronting Voldemort in the Atrium with the same delicious understatement that Rowling conveyed in the book. Emotionally restrained, he masks the immensity of his power, revealing little to his opponent. Part of Voldemort's fear of Dumbledore must come from the fact that he doesn't know the true ability of his former headmaster.

Thankfully, Yates has picked up where Mike Newell left off in the handling of Voldemort, taking the less is more approach. Readers will recall how little was said in the Atrium scene; the moment was too important for words. Yates obviously agreed. Also, he reminds us that Voldemort's weaknesses are methodical, not technical. The possession sequence was nicely done, even if the addition of Voldemort's threat was a bit trite (made for trailer line).

I wish that more time had been spent on the crucial discussion between Dumbledore and Harry at the end. To the audience, all the prophecy is now is a glass sphere that was smashed and quickly forgotten as the battle escalated. Shame, really, to treat an important plot point so haphazardly. Maybe they're saving further explanations for the next film. Anyway, Harry comes across as Mr. Petulant Teenager ("I understand how you're feeling"..."No you don't"), and the audience learns nothing.

Well what can i say, this film was AMAZING, the graphics when fighting Voldemort were brilliant and Daniel's acting throughout was superb. The only problem for me was how much it strayed from the book, Dobby especially comes to mind because a lot of him was cut out. After reading the book again to be ready and fresh for the movie and then seeing a lot of the parts cut out was quite upsetting. :'( BUT, It was still an absolutely amazing film with ace actors and actresses and I recommend it to anyone! :D *Thumbs Up* =]

Ok guys I just finished watching the final battle again on YouTube (I know I know BAD me...I'm totally against pirating..but it was there..and I'm weak :sad:) It wasn't in the best quality but it was pretty good and I just realized how much I LOVE this scene.

I now think the battle was the perfect length (I started watching where Sirius comes in and punches Lucius) because it gets your blood pumping but doesn't last to long where you get bored. And besides Harry Potter isn't about action...it's all about the internal struggle as a wise one name Wimsey once said.

I don't know why but I start :D<---- everytime Dumbledore appears in the flame. I never noticed that look of fear that appeared on Voldemorts face when he saw Dumbledore. The fight itself is AMAZING. I remember when I first saw it I was like eh...second time...ok...third...oohhh...fourth...NICCEEE!!!... and now I'm just like BRILLIANT! lol. It sucks that we won't REALLY have a fight of this magnitude ever again in Harry Potter.

I noticed that there is no music going on during Voldermorts/Dumbledore's fued and it works really well. I loved how Voldemort used Dumbledore's own spell against him knocking him back and shattering all the glass. Oh yeah the water ball...awesome. Giant fire snake...awesome. Dumbledore chopping giant fire snake head off...WHOO HOO!

I just loved how Harry is kinda just walking in the background though lol. It's like...Dumbledore's trying to protect you the least you can do is stay back lol. It's interesting to watch this scene because it isn't a typical battle. Dumbledore in no way is trying to defeat Voldemort (Like most fights of this size usually are)..he's trying to protect Harry and that's his whole motive. Voldemorts trying to kill them both and Dumbledore could've EASILY finished him off if he wanted too. (You know harden the water ball...make sure he's frozen..smash it against a wall...no more Voldermort :lol:)

Ok I just had to go through a fan geek mode..ok..back to productive discussion now lol

Also I would've LOVED to see this in 3D...but alas I never got the chance :(


I agree with you on this. The climax just gets better and better everytime you see it. The first time I saw it, I was upset because there were so many things they left out....:( it's a curse....I wish I could go to the Harry Potter movies without being upset. I would just like to enjoy them, ya know? But alas.....but man.....that ENTIRE duel with voldemort and dumbledore! I'm just entranced when I watch it! It's visually stunning! and, yes, I too get this grin of triumph when dumbledore comes through the fire. He just looks so impressivly intimidating!:cool:

And one more thing! The possesion scene will always be my favorite! It wasn't spot on, but for once, I wasn't bothered by it. Because that scene is what Harry Potter is about in a nutshell and I LOVED how they portrayed the themes of love and sacrifice. It was just (*sigh*)...brilliant....bless the writers for this....

I don't know if you've seen this yet, but check out his picture of james and lily. It was obvioulsy cut from the movie. We can only hope it will be in deleted scenes!

http://www.movieprints.co.uk/image.php?id=199657&idx=7&fromsearch=true

Thanks for the picture. You know, it did kind of throw me when I watched the movie - there was such a big to-do when they cast the young Marauders, Wormtail, Snape and Lily, and then I saw OoTP and . . . nothing! Well, barely anything. But from the picture, it looks as if they did film the whole of Snape's Worst Memory and then decided that it didn't work somehow. So, yes, I HOPE HOPE HOPE it's on the deleted scenes!

Ok, I went to see it for the second time last week, but this time it was at the IMAX (in London) and of course the big 3D ending too!

Simply put it was truly amazing, seeing it so large and covering all your field of vision was a whole new cinema experience (yes, ok, it was my first IMAX trip).

One of the best none-3D parts was obviously the broom ride along the Thames. But everything really took on a more involving feel that drew you in. Grimauld Place stood out a lot more for me this time as did Nagini’s attack on Arthur, which seemed a lot more graphic and scary this time round. But the 3D was just incredible, the falling & smashing prophecies landing all around made most people move about and the running around the DoM really worked well too.

In short, even if you’ve seen it 10 times already in regular cinema’s, still do your best to see it on an IMAX.

I really hope the do all of HBP in 3D.

But from the picture, it looks as if they did film the whole of Snape's Worst Memory and then decided that it didn't work somehow. So, yes, I HOPE HOPE HOPE it's on the deleted scenes!Regardless of how much they ever intended to show, they would probably have filmed the whole sequence. That would have given them the most material with which to work.

I thought that the scene worked just fine. The young Snape looked like a young version of the older one, so there was no mistaking who he was. Harry identifies James (although it might have been more effective if Radcliffe had played James, too), and we see James' cruelty to Snape.

The disjointed nature of the scene also worked well. It was in keeping both with the nature of Harry's "visions" (from dreams or Voldemort, or when Snape is rummaging through Harry's head), and it also was cinematically effective, as it maintained the disjointed feeling of the whole story-telling.

Of course, it is just possible that this scene will be revisited in the future..... ;)


Oh, and I saw it in 3D, too. It is really cool! It did not require the whole movie being in 3D: if Prince has a 3D version, then it should be for the Cave and the Battle, really.

I tried searching for possible plot holes that OOTP has created or issues from the films that will make HBP and DH more difficult for the filmmakers, but I couldn't find anything.

So I'll post it here:

First off, I did like the movie a lot, some things were slow and overdone but overall very good. The last 30 min of the film is great.

Now on to some pretty sticky issues I have with OOTP:

1. No mention of Regulus anywhere. Even though we have the scene with Harry and Sirius I can't even find Regulus in the Black family tree!!, this will take some exposition in HBP or DH movies that all filmakers hate to do.

2. No cleaning of Grimmauld Place, therefore, no mention or visual of the locket. Another lost opportunity to set things up for the future movies.

3. No Mundungus Fletcher aka "Dung" so I wonder how the things that happen in DH will be made possible and another thing that will need to be changed from the books. (Mirror and locket)

4. Sirius doesn't give Harry the two way mirror. This is a key thing, bah!, another thing they will change from the books.

5. The DA uses Levicorpus in the movie, but this spell was supposed to be found by Harry in SWM and/or the Prince's book. SO WHY IS IT IN THE MOVIE?

6. Small thing but I hated it every time I saw it. They use a Muggle pencil to write down their names in the Hog's Head. Say what?!

7. Another small thing I disliked, why they changed the coaches we saw in POA to these open coaches? (the ones the thestrals pull)

8. No Snape calling Lily a Mudblood. This was the point of the memory!!, I hope they shoot the whole thing and we'll see it in Movie 7.

9. No Fawkes in the fight between DD and Voldy. It would have been cool to see Fawkes take one for DD.

10. The DA (Ron, Her, Ginny, Luna, Neville) use skiving snacks to defeat the Inquisitional squad instead of curses, wasn't the whole point that they were learning how to defend themselves from Harry??!!

11. Harry/Cho, by not having Marietta, Harry distances himself from Cho because she rats on them, but later he finds out that Umbridge used Veritaserum on her. Does that mean that Harry/Cho is still on in the movies?

12. Lucius holds the prophecy!!, since Harry heard the prophecy by holding it, does it mean that movie-Lucius knows the prophecy as well?, dumb thing to do. In the book Lucius never gets the prophecy. This is so dumb I can't believe it.

13. Bad luck. Hermione, Ron and Ginny don't suffer the injuries at the MOM, what gives?

14. Dumbledore doesn't capture the Death Eaters in the MOM. He appears in the Attrium only, so in the movie we think the DE got away?! This could have been made more clearly by having DD appear in the Death Room.

15. Hermione is not in touch with Viktor.

There are more things but I think these are the ones that bugged me the most for now.

What bugged me was those STUUUUUPID UUUUUGLY BACKPACKS that they have the students carrying while in their robes. They're seen in a few scenes and it just takes you out of the believability of the world for a bit. Especially when they're all the same brand but in different obnoxiously vibrant primary colours. I also didn't like the filtering style of all the Occlumency stuff. It had that cheap cheezy overfiltered feel that you get from mediocre TV shows like CSI and such. Same for the 3D movement of the newspaper headlines. That too resembled the kind of graphics that you tend to see used on tv shows--usually the kind that pop up on E! when they have celebrity top 100 lists, etc. Maybe seeing each paper float and plop onto the previous one or something like that might have been better as it would have felt more exclusively cinematic.

One thing I thought that was really cool was how the big W during the twins' departure is basically the Ministry's M logo turned upside down. Another great visual metaphor was seeing Umbridge walk out into the courtyard from a small mini door of one of the great oak doors when sacking Trelawney and then watching Dumbledore walk out with both large doors magically swinging open. I also thought Umbridge crucifying Hagrid's door with her perfume was really cute and quite funny.

One thing I thought that was really cool was how the big W during the twins' departure is basically the Ministry's M logo turned upside down. Another great visual metaphor was seeing Umbridge walk out into the courtyard from a small mini door of one of the great oak doors when sacking Trelawney and the watching Dumbledore walking out with both large dorrs magically swinging open. I also though Umbridge crucifying Hagrid's door with her perfume was really cute and quite funny.

I didn't notice the Weasley twin's W until the second time I saw it, and I was think in my head, OH MY GOSH!! IT'S A W!!! :lol: Luckily, I didn't scream it out loud in the movie theatre :lol: And I always enjoying the little quirks of Umbridge :lol:

7. Another small thing I disliked, why they changed the coaches we saw in POA to these open coaches? (the ones the thestrals pull)

I believe they were closed in POA because it was raining and I'm pretty sure they're usually opened like that.

I can't remember...was Percy introduced or not? I have a strange feeling he wasn't so if you don't know the books and movies viewers would have no idea that was Ron's brother....:hmm:

I can't remember...was Percy introduced or not? I have a strange feeling he wasn't so if you don't know the books and movies viewers would have no idea that was Ron's brother....:hmm:

He appeared twice in the film (once in Dumbledore's office, and once after the possession scene), but he is never mentioned or acknowledged by anyone.

Percy's fall-out from his family is also not shown or implied, so there won't be that scene in Movie 7 that I won't spoil if you haven't finished the book, but it's one of the most powerful scenes in the book and now it will have to be changed and given a different meaning.

I think the movie wasted time in a lot of irrelevant stuff and missed opportunities to set-up important PLOT devices for the last two movies. Why o why do they do this?

I loved how it seemed that Harry and Sirius were alot closer in the movie than the book. I wish it was like that in the book.

Percy's fall-out from his family is also not shown or implied, so there won't be that scene in Movie 7 that I won't spoil if you haven't finished the book, but it's one of the most powerful scenes in the book and now it will have to be changed and given a different meaning.


I think it was implied, but not in the way it should have. My friend who has never read the books (except PS) whispered to me " Is that Percy? But what's he doing with the Ministry?"...and then later said "He's betraying everyone!" in a very dramatic way...:eer:. I think it was mainly implied that he was with the Ministry, and in this film Ministry = a lot of the bad guys.

Now on to some pretty sticky issues I have with OOTP:

mmmmmmmmmmmmm sticky :drool:

1. No mention of Regulus anywhere. Even though we have the scene with Harry and Sirius I can't even find Regulus in the Black family tree!!, this will take some exposition in HBP or DH movies that all filmakers hate to do.

Yeah they can easily do this some other way. Heck they'll probably just wait until the DH movie to do this actually lol

2. No cleaning of Grimmauld Place, therefore, no mention or visual of the locket. Another lost opportunity to set things up for the future movies.

Once again there are ways to show it in the next two. If I remember correctly there was an interview with Yates and Dan where the topic came up about the locket. He said he was going to add it into the HBP movie. (Just have Kreacher drop it or something by mistake lol...I dunno)

3. No Mundungus Fletcher aka "Dung" so I wonder how the things that happen in DH will be made possible and another thing that will need to be changed from the books. (Mirror and locket)

They'll probably have someone else do the all those things for him I wonder who it'll be those...hmmmmmmmmmmm

4. Sirius doesn't give Harry the two way mirror. This is a key thing, bah!, another thing they will change from the books.

It's not necessarily a key thing. They can write around it I think, because I did with my little DH screenplay :p

5. The DA uses Levicorpus in the movie, but this spell was supposed to be found by Harry in SWM and/or the Prince's book. SO WHY IS IT IN THE MOVIE?

Guess they didn't think about it. Then again the spell is barely heard at all in the movie if you aren't paying attention (I didn't notice it the 1st time really) that I'm sure most casual audience won't even notice that they're the same spell.

6. Small thing but I hated it every time I saw it. They use a Muggle pencil to write down their names in the Hog's Head. Say what?!

Didn't notice that lol...how dare them!

7. Another small thing I disliked, why they changed the coaches we saw in POA to these open coaches? (the ones the thestrals pull)

I think they only reason they did that was so Harry can see Cho and the whole introduction to Luna thing.

8. No Snape calling Lily a Mudblood. This was the point of the memory!!, I hope they shoot the whole thing and we'll see it in Movie 7.

Well they shot the whole thing, but I'm sure Yates, just like me when I read the book, thought it was about Harry's father teasing Snape. I had no idea about the Lily thing so I think it's a forgivable mistake. The whole scene is shot so they can easily show the whole thing in DH. Think about it. In the book Harry saw it in the Pensieve so he got to see the whole thing, in the movie Snape stopped him from seeing any further which makes sense because I'm sure right now he doesn't want Harry to know the rest of it. So what happens in the book is opposite really. Harry will actually see more of the memory instead of avoiding it like he does in the book.

9. No Fawkes in the fight between DD and Voldy. It would have been cool to see Fawkes take one for DD.

Yeah Fawkes would've been nice...but I still think the fight is amazing. hehehe could you see little Fawkes jumping up and taking on that giant fire snake...now THAT would've been awesome.

10. The DA (Ron, Her, Ginny, Luna, Neville) use skiving snacks to defeat the Inquisitional squad instead of curses, wasn't the whole point that they were learning how to defend themselves from Harry??!!

Well there are more ways to defend yourself than curses, plus it made for a cute Ron/Hermione moment :love: (I see what you're saying though :) )

11. Harry/Cho, by not having Marietta, Harry distances himself from Cho because she rats on them, but later he finds out that Umbridge used Veritaserum on her. Does that mean that Harry/Cho is still on in the movies?

You know what though, the Harry and Cho thing wasn't really that important anyways. They had...what...2 scenes together....you never really got he liked her at all that much. I'm sure they'll be cordial (That's if they even bring her back), but they can say during the time he thought Cho did in by herself his eye changed to a little red head :tu:

12. Lucius holds the prophecy!!, since Harry heard the prophecy by holding it, does it mean that movie-Lucius knows the prophecy as well?, dumb thing to do. In the book Lucius never gets the prophecy. This is so dumb I can't believe it.

I think the prophecy can only be heard by the owners when they touch it. Atleast that's the impression I got. Only Harry and Voldemort while holding it can actually hear it. I actually liked that he gave it to him, only because that shows how much Harry cares for his friends (I think I remember reading on the script that afterwards Lucius says "Kill The Spares" before Sirius arrives). Besides the fact that Lucius had it and dropped it makes Voldemorts anger for him all the more enjoyable lol

13. Bad luck. Hermione, Ron and Ginny don't suffer the injuries at the MOM, what gives?

No no...Hermione broke a nail...Ron busted a toe...and a shard of glass from all the falling prophecies got in Ginny's ear...you didn't notice that? :err:

14. Dumbledore doesn't capture the Death Eaters in the MOM. He appears in the Attrium only, so in the movie we think the DE got away?! This could have been made more clearly by having DD appear in the Death Room.

I think you can assume that the Order got them. IT wasn't that many Death Eaters and by the time Sirius died most of them were knocked out anyways.

15. Hermione is not in touch with Viktor.

I doubt they'll bring Viktor back anyways lol so that's not really a lose...although it would've been hilarious for her to bring him up and see Ron's reaction. Oh well...maybe next time :)

I think it was implied, but not in the way it should have. My friend who has never read the books (except PS) whispered to me " Is that Percy? But what's he doing with the Ministry?"...and then later said "He's betraying everyone!" in a very dramatic way...:eer:. I think it was mainly implied that he was with the Ministry, and in this film Ministry = a lot of the bad guys.

Yeah and we have a whole movie before the finale to show how much of a git Percy is aswell. Just because some things didn't make it in OOTP...doesn't mean it can't be moved (Look at the Quidditch....moved to HBP...wonder how they'll make that one work though). So I think Percy's betrayal will be magnified in the next film

One thing I thought was actually better in the movie than the book - Umbridge! I thought when I saw the 'in production' pics that this woman was no where CLOSE to being the froggy Umbridge of the book - but she did great things with that part - much more sweetly cruel than I imagined.

Now on to some pretty sticky issues I have with OOTP:

1. No mention of Regulus anywhere. Even though we have the scene with Harry and Sirius I can't even find Regulus in the Black family tree!!, this will take some exposition in HBP or DH movies that all filmakers hate to do.
Well, I don't think this is really something that can't be fixed in 7. Personally I hope they cut the whole fake locket, Regulus, Kreacher, Ministry storyline and just have the real one in HBP, saving a lot of time and energy that isn't necessary for a film.
2. No cleaning of Grimmauld Place, therefore, no mention or visual of the locket. Another lost opportunity to set things up for the future movies.
They don't really have to foreshadow in the movies like they do in the books. I was glad there were no cleaning scenes, I thought they were boring, but that's just me.
3. No Mundungus Fletcher aka "Dung" so I wonder how the things that happen in DH will be made possible and another thing that will need to be changed from the books. (Mirror and locket)
I think Dung will be cut even if they keep the R.A.B. storyline since he is basically a middle man and can be easily worked around.
4. Sirius doesn't give Harry the two way mirror. This is a key thing, bah!, another thing they will change from the books.
I wish that they put this in because I wanted to see Harry smash it. I thought it was very sad in the book when he believes whole-heartedly that he will see Sirius again, and then when he realizes he can't he breaks the mirror. As for DH, Sirius could always leave it to him in his will and Harry could break it in some other way.
5. The DA uses Levicorpus in the movie, but this spell was supposed to be found by Harry in SWM and/or the Prince's book. SO WHY IS IT IN THE MOVIE?
This was sort of annoying, but it's only a little detail. It simply just means they can't include it in HBP as a new spell. It annoyed me more that it didn't hang the person upside down like it's supposed to.
7. Another small thing I disliked, why they changed the coaches we saw in POA to these open coaches? (the ones the thestrals pull)
I think they were just closed in POA because it was raining. That's what I assumed.
8. No Snape calling Lily a Mudblood. This was the point of the memory!!, I hope they shoot the whole thing and we'll see it in Movie 7.
I was mad that this part was cut too, but again it's not really necessary to show it in OOTP. It would have to be shown again in DH regardless since the audience wouldn't remember the details of a movie they saw 3 years ago and it's the most important memory in the Lily/Snape relationship. I was hoping to see it, but I don't think it's that huge of a cut to be honest.
9. No Fawkes in the fight between DD and Voldy. It would have been cool to see Fawkes take one for DD.
I miss Fawkes as well. I also wanted to see the shield that Voldy created. I was more mad that they cut Voldy's and DD's conversation. At the very least I wanted these three lines:
V:"You do not seek to kill me Dumbledore?"
DD: ""Indeed your failure to understand that there are things much worse than death has always been your greatest weakness –"
V:"If death means nothing DD, than kill the boy."
11. Harry/Cho, by not having Marietta, Harry distances himself from Cho because she rats on them, but later he finds out that Umbridge used Veritaserum on her. Does that mean that Harry/Cho is still on in the movies?
That was sort of skirted over. Even when they reveal the use of veritaserum, it assumes the audience knows what veritaserum is and that Cho's last name is Chang. The resolution of their relationship was not very well-done.
12. Lucius holds the prophecy!!, since Harry heard the prophecy by holding it, does it mean that movie-Lucius knows the prophecy as well?, dumb thing to do. In the book Lucius never gets the prophecy. This is so dumb I can't believe it.
Not that big of a deal. What I gather from the movie, only those who are the subjects of the prophesy can retrieve it, and I think that rule would extend to hearing it as well. Harry would have given Lucius the prophesy in the book had the order not shown up at the exact moment he almost put it in his hands. So, I don't see this as a stretch. It will make Voldemort's anger with him even more understandable considering he personally breaks it.
13. Bad luck. Hermione, Ron and Ginny don't suffer the injuries at the MOM, what gives?
I agree with this. Their injuries should have been included, it makes the Deatheaters seem less threatening and it makes the whole battle a little unrealistic. It's funny considering Yates commented on making the magic seem real so it's threatening. Well wouldn't Hermione almost dying from a curse bring a nice reality check to the whole situation. It also would have saved us from seeing Emma struggling with the Deatheater, which I found to be cringe-worthy acting.

In a sort of related note I think the possession would have worked better without Ron and Hermione looking on. Had they both been knocked out, they wouldn't have been there at all. They looked sort of out of place, and it's unrealistic that they wouldn't be freaking out that Harry's basically dying in front of their eyes. They just look sad like they've accepted his death, while their book characters would never have just accepted it. It seems very off to me. They could've kept the memories and everything without their presence.
15. Hermione is not in touch with Viktor.
I think Viktors gone for good, and honestly he's already served his purpose. It isn't essential that she's not in touch with him, and he would have to be reintroduced. I wasn't upset about this.

I miss Fawkes as well. I also wanted to see the shield that Voldy created. I was more mad that they cut Voldy's and DD's conversation. At the very least I wanted these three lines:
V:"You do not seek to kill me Dumbledore?"
DD: ""Indeed your failure to understand that there are things much worse than death has always been your greatest weakness –"
V:"If death means nothing DD, than kill the boy."

If they had kept that part of the scene in, and the rest of it was the same as we saw, I would have been slightly more satisfied with the scene. Ah well. If wishes were horses . . .

I can't wait for the DVD to come out, I'm going to get the Two-disk special edition, and I am really hopping a lot of the stuff missing from the movie are in the deleted scenes, because there were some good ones.

I can't wait for the DVD to come out, I'm going to get the Two-disk special edition, and I am really hopping a lot of the stuff missing from the movie are in the deleted scenes, because there were some good ones.

Yes!! Me too, i can't wait!!!! I think the missing will be in the deleted scenes, because thats whats happened with the previous movie DVD's.

Oh yes, I can't wait for the DVD! I saw the movie on IMAX last weekend and it was AMAZING! It made me appreciate the film more, because the image was so clear and the sound so crisp. This movie is really really good and it's major flaw is not what's on the screen but what was cut. I'm a bit warmer towards Snape's Worst memory in the movie though because my DAD who has ADD and doesn't really like these kinds of movies and doesn't know very much about HP, understood Snape's Worst memory in the movie, so if he understands it, then the movie did its job!

I just wished they keep more of Voldemort's and Dumbledore's lines during their fight and extended the scene in Dumbledore's office at the end, and Sirius mirror and all that but oh well.

Here's hoping for the DVD! Any word on if they filmed any of those scenes? Like did they film the full office scene? What about Sirius mirror? I know they filmed all of Snape's Worst memory.

Oh yes, I can't wait for the DVD! I saw the movie on IMAX last weekend and it was AMAZING! It made me appreciate the film more, because the image was so clear and the sound so crisp. This movie is really really good and it's major flaw is not what's on the screen but what was cut. I'm a bit warmer towards Snape's Worst memory in the movie though because my DAD who has ADD and doesn't really like these kinds of movies and doesn't know very much about HP, understood Snape's Worst memory in the movie, so if he understands it, then the movie did its job!

I just wished they keep more of Voldemort's and Dumbledore's lines during their fight and extended the scene in Dumbledore's office at the end, and Sirius mirror and all that but oh well.

Here's hoping for the DVD! Any word on if they filmed any of those scenes? Like did they film the full office scene? What about Sirius mirror? I know they filmed all of Snape's Worst memory.

They normally film heaps of footage, most of which we will never see. I know for GOF they filmed all the 'constant vigilance' stuff, a scene on a balcony where DD and Harry talk about Priori Incantatem and lots of other stuff, just so when they edit it they have as much footage to splice together as possible. The only things that are going to be on the DVD will probably be stuff that has been through post-production, things that were cut late, a lot of the raw footage, which is the majority of what they filmed (the rest of the '3-hour film' Yates said he had shot), will never be seen, at least I doubt it will be. Just because we've seen set pictures/promotional photos, doesn't mean the scenes are going to be included. I wouldn't get your hopes up.

Watching the final duel again, does it annoy anyone else how badly Yates used the camera in this scene? I mean he has this massive set, these tall actors in flapping costumes casting huge spells at each other, and
he spends 90% of it showing them in close up! I mean, at least Newell gave us a wide angle of Harry and Voldys wands connecting in the graveyard, but here Yates simply shows us one of them casting a spell, and then cuts to the other responding. The obvious splicing together of different takes is really obvious in that scene, like when DD starts walking forward, his wand connected to Voldemorts, yet in the next shot he has suddenly stopped, or DDs beard constantly getting shorter/longer between shots or how when Voldy apparates behind Harry, the expression on his face changes from a smirk to a grimace as the angle changes. It is just sloppy. I really think some wider angles and less screen-filling close-ups would have made this scene a lot more impressive. The bit with the broken glass was a bit better, with the shot of Voldemort standing, hurling the glass at DD, who is kneeling with his wand raised, but the whole thing would really have benefited form dragging the camera back a bit. It feels so static and awkward the way Yates did it, the complete opposite of the book, where the duelists were apparating and moving around a lot. I suppose Yates' version has a sense of desperation about it, how it's quite hard to follow and quite fast-paced, but as a set-piece it's not very impressive IMO. Certainly not when you've seen it more than once.

Mrs. Figg is my hero. Wasn't that rain hat and slicker a fabulous ensemble? Seriously, the costuming for the movie was fantastic!

Loved Umbridge and Trelawney. I also loved Luna, though I have been holding a grudge against her because I wanted that part sooooo bad...but I suppose I should forgive her since I didn't even go to auditions or anything.

I want all the raw footage on my DVD! haha, wouldn't that be awesome? A little tedious, but awesome. I really am a HP freak, eh?

Yeah! You really are a HP freak :p :D :LOL: You wanted Luna's part and had a grudge against Evanna even though you didn't go to the auditions haha :tu:

. I also loved Luna, though I have been holding a grudge against her because I wanted that part sooooo bad...but I suppose I should forgive her since I didn't even go to auditions or anything.

I want all the raw footage on my DVD! haha, wouldn't that be awesome? A little tedious, but awesome. I really am a HP freak, eh?

Ahhh bless :lol: :p well, actually i really didn't like katie leung at first because she was cast as cho...i wanted to be cast as cho!!!!! :lol: ha ha.

I can't wait for the dvd to come out.....i really want it.....

Ahhh bless :lol: :p well, actually i really didn't like katie leung at first because she was cast as cho...i wanted to be cast as cho!!!!! :lol: ha ha.

Hmmmmm, now i wonder why that might be?.....:hmm: I can't think of a reason why you might want to be cast as Cho! Hmmmmm..guess i'll have to think a bit harder....

:p Hehehe!

Hmmmmm, now i wonder why that might be?.....:hmm: I can't think of a reason why you might want to be cast as Cho! Hmmmmm..guess i'll have to think a bit harder....

:p Hehehe!

haha :lol: she got you there sticky!! :lol:

Hmmmmm, now i wonder why that might be?.....:hmm: I can't think of a reason why you might want to be cast as Cho! Hmmmmm..guess i'll have to think a bit harder....

:p Hehehe!

Grrr you popcornz!!!!!! :lol: Yup you got me there.....:D

I can't remember...was Percy introduced or not? I have a strange feeling he wasn't so if you don't know the books and movies viewers would have no idea that was Ron's brother....:hmm:It never is relevant that Percy is Ron's brother. Including the same actor as a sort of "continuity extra" across films is just a biscuit for Harry Potter fans. However, as Percy's actions have no bearing on the story, it was not worth introducing in the film.

I think the movie wasted time in a lot of irrelevant stuff and missed opportunities to set-up important PLOT devices for the last two movies. Why o why do they do this?Because they know that audiences will have only very general memories of this movie in Nov. 2008 and July 2010. Anything important in Prince and Hallows will have to be introduced in those movies from scratch, anyway.

Moreover, it irritates audiences when movies include things that are not germane to that story or plots. So, these things would have made Order a worse movie than it was, and they could not have helped Prince or Hallows.

As for irrelevant stuff, there was none in this movie. EVERYTHING was pertinent to the story and the primary plots.

I loved how it seemed that Harry and Sirius were alot closer in the movie than the book. I wish it was like that in the book.Actually, I think that it was like this in the book, but the book was not very well written, so it might have been easy to miss.


Now on to some pretty sticky issues I have with OOTP:

1. No mention of Regulus anywhere. Even though we have the scene with Harry and Sirius I can't even find Regulus in the Black family tree!!, this will take some exposition in HBP or DH movies that all filmakers hate to do.Remember, a lot of people who read the books completely missed Regulus, too. I know quite a few people who complained that he should have been introduced in prior books. The problem was that they had simply forgotten him.
2. No cleaning of Grimmauld Place, therefore, no mention or visual of the locket. Another lost opportunity to set things up for the future movies.As we know from Pirates 2 and 3, audiences do not remember such things. There was NO discussion about the significance of the lockets in Pirates 2, yet they proved to be important in 3!
3. No Mundungus Fletcher aka "Dung" so I wonder how the things that happen in DH will be made possible and another thing that will need to be changed from the books. (Mirror and locket)If it is kept, then it will have to be introduced from scratch in Hallows: audiences would not remember stuff from three years before! That would be like giving college seniors a test that had questions from classes they took as freshmen: they'd throw fits!
4. Sirius doesn't give Harry the two way mirror. This is a key thing, bah!, another thing they will change from the books.Again, if they opt to keep the mirror, then it has to be introduced in Hallows. However, it would be easy to get away without using it at all.
5. The DA uses Levicorpus in the movie, but this spell was supposed to be found by Harry in SWM and/or the Prince's book. SO WHY IS IT IN THE MOVIE?It's a spell. Harry learning it in Prince is not important.
6. Small thing but I hated it every time I saw it. They use a Muggle pencil to write down their names in the Hog's Head. Say what?!They have pencil-cases in the books, too.
8. No Snape calling Lily a Mudblood. This was the point of the memory!!, I hope they shoot the whole thing and we'll see it in Movie 7.We know now that it was part of the memory: however, about half of the people on this newsgroup bitterly and vehemently denied this interpretation as of 5 weeks ago!
10. The DA (Ron, Her, Ginny, Luna, Neville) use skiving snacks to defeat the Inquisitional squad instead of curses, wasn't the whole point that they were learning how to defend themselves from Harry??!!Having Ron use his brain was much better than that, and also made for easier exposition. The snack boxes had been introduced, after all: and why introduce something if it is not going to be used? (See my signature!)
11. Harry/Cho, by not having Marietta, Harry distances himself from Cho because she rats on them, but later he finds out that Umbridge used Veritaserum on her. Does that mean that Harry/Cho is still on in the movies?Of course not! Marrietta had to be cut. The problem was that Cho was reduced to Marietta. Hopefully the makers of HBP will note that this did not work, and seriously consider cutting Lav-Lav from Prince!
12. Lucius holds the prophecy!!, since Harry heard the prophecy by holding it, does it mean that movie-Lucius knows the prophecy as well?, dumb thing to do. In the book Lucius never gets the prophecy. This is so dumb I can't believe it.Of course not! We would have heard it, right? It shows Harry was not willing to let his friends die, which is important to the story.
13. Bad luck. Hermione, Ron and Ginny don't suffer the injuries at the MOM, what gives?What purpose would that have served for the story or plot?

Indeed, the movie did a good job of reducing the Storm-Trooper syndrome of the book: the Death Eaters were nowhere near as buffoonish as they are in the book.
14. Dumbledore doesn't capture the Death Eaters in the MOM. He appears in the Attrium only, so in the movie we think the DE got away?! This could have been made more clearly by having DD appear in the Death Room.The Order had overcome the Death Eaters.
15. Hermione is not in touch with Viktor.So? Who is Viktor, anyway? The audience does not remember him anymore.

Seriously, this movie did a very good job of portraying Rowling's story of the choices that Harry Potter makes concerning isolation vs. unity. That was the movies job. It is not there to inform the audience about Potterverse trivia: as we know from Hallows, Rowling, herself, goes for theme over trivia!

When audiences see Prince and Hallows, they will remember only general things about the prior movies. Much of what you complain about is the absence of things that will be important in those movies. Well, those movies must introduce those things on their own, or the audience will have no idea what they are, except for the hardcore fans. If only hardcore fans were seeing the films, then they'd be box office catastrophes!


EDIT: OR.... what Phrozenone wrote!

It never is relevant that Percy is Ron's brother. Including the same actor as a sort of "continuity extra" across films is just a biscuit for Harry Potter fans. However, as Percy's actions have no bearing on the story, it was not worth introducing in the film.
It is nice that they did that for the book readers though. I found a lot of things in this film that were there for viewers to catch. Like the crown on Mr. Weasley's head at christmas (Weasley is our King). It is kind of fun to go back through the second time and notice things that you didn't before.

and seriously consider cutting Lav-Lav from Prince!
(:clap:)

Seriously, this movie did a very good job of portraying Rowling's story of the choices that Harry Potter makes concerning isolation vs. unity.
I agree. I think the screenwriter did an amazing job of adapting the book. He kept the major themes and stayed true to the book. It must have been a very hard job to do because of the length of the book. I believe he even said that it was painful for him to cut the "Weasley is our King" plot from the movie since he really liked it in the book. Yet, the important thing is,is that he did cut it. Even though he would have liked to see it, he did what was best for the storyline. One can only hope that Kloves and Yates will see that with a certian sub-plot of Prince that they seem so enthralled about. :sigh:

Of course not! We would have heard it, right? It shows Harry was not willing to let his friends die, which is important to the story.

I did not like the idea of Harry giving the Prophecy to Lucius, but since they did include it, I think the visual effect was right.

The Prophecy on the shelf was shining; all the time Harry was carrying it, it was shining; the minute Harry gave it to Lucius - the light went out. Then with a little "outside help" (:lol:) Lucius broke the Prophecy, never getting to hear it, and unable to present it to his master. Since Bellatrix was the only DE who got away, I'm not sure it would have mattered anyway. :D

Of course not! Marrietta had to be cut. The problem was that Cho was reduced to Marietta. Hopefully the makers of HBP will note that this did not work, and seriously consider cutting Lav-Lav from Prince!

Actually, there's a lot of hype around casting the role of Lav-Lav. The top 5 candidates are going to have special screen tests with Rupert (which will involve kissing) to see which one has the most chemistry with him.

Sorry, she will no be cut. And I'm glad! :p Remembering Ron and Lav-Lav snogging like a couple of eels was just hilarious and this movie is going to need to keep some of the humor because the ending is going to be a little dark. :relax:

Actually, there's a lot of hype around casting the role of Lav-Lav. The top 5 candidates are going to have special screen tests with Rupert (which will involve kissing) to see which one has the most chemistry with him.

Sorry, she will no be cut. And I'm glad! :p Remembering Ron and Lav-Lav snogging like a couple of eels was just hilarious and this movie is going to need to keep some of the humor because the ending is going to be a little dark. :relax:

Yeah, but if they're considering cutting Scrimgeour, but are going at length to make the Lav-Lav thing happen, there's a serious economical problem there.

Yeah, but if they're considering cutting Scrimgeour, but are going at length to make the Lav-Lav thing happen, there's a serious economical problem there.
I'm not surprised. Kloves did a horrible job with the politics in GOF. There was no discrimination storyline, no problems with international relations, no abuse of power by Barty Crouch, and no parting of the ways. While all of these do not add to the plot, technically neither does the Yule Ball. I'm not the least bit surprised that Kloves is going to cut the political drama for a little more teenage romance. The great thing about the book series is how Jo sort of parallels WWII and Hitler's rise to power, and none of it was all of a sudden. She built up the take-over of the Ministry by showing their incompetence on many levels, and she built up the prejudice. Now if HBP does absolutely nothing to set this up for DH, they will either have to cut the Muggleborn persecution (which would be horrendous), or it will just come out of left field (their little storyline in CoS will not be enough).

Yeah, but if they're considering cutting Scrimgeour, but are going at length to make the Lav-Lav thing happen, there's a serious economical problem there.


Scrimgeour was interesting, and continued the issue of the Ministry having their heads, well, you know where, but if he wasn't in it, it wouldn't ruin the story for me. It really wasn't germane to the ultimate point of the plot, which was the Horcruxes and Snape. Yes, it adds a certain quality to it, and I love the "Dumbledore's man" aspect of it (see my Sig!). And while Lav-Lav didn't also contribute to the ultimate plot, it's way more entertaining (IMHO, of course).

I don't know if this has been brought up or not, but how do you guys feel about what happens with Cho Chang in the movie, her telling about the DA under the influence of veritiserum (however you spell it)?
I thought that made things kind of unfair for her. Basically everyone in the DA hates her, and it wasn't her fault that Umbridge tricked her into drinking it.

Once Harry hears from Snape that Cho had taken veritiserum, he looks surprised (and surely felt bad about being mean to her, once he realizes she had not told on her own free will). How do you think this is going to play out in movie 6? Do you think they are just going to drop Cho from the movies, and put all the focus on Ginny? I think this would be a bad choice. I feel that for 6, Harry should apologize to Cho (because that's just the type of person Harry is). Then, they should show Cho getting jealous of Hermione, since that is what happened in the book, but they completely abandoned that part in the movie. So in 6, I think Harry and Cho get back together, have an argument about Hermione, and then break up...clearing the path from Harry & Ginny. This way, Harry and Cho's breakup would make more sense, because to me it just doesn't seem likely that Harry would carrying on being upset with her after finding out that it wasn't her fault.

I don't know if this has been brought up or not, but how do you guys feel about what happens with Cho Chang in the movie, her telling about the DA under the influence of veritiserum (however you spell it)?
I thought that made things kind of unfair for her. Basically everyone in the DA hates her, and it wasn't her fault that Umbridge tricked her into drinking it.
I thought so too. I did not like that she was veritiserumed into it. We see Harry and Hermione find out but there is no resolution there. Then Cho's character just becomes irrelevant. I think it would have been much better if she would have just caved under pressure and threat of her mom's job at the ministrey. That way it takes care of her, she looks like the "bad guy" and there is a resolution to her story. I did not like the way she was handled at all...

Do you think they are just going to drop Cho from the movies, and put all the focus on Ginny?

I think this is exactly what they'll do. Cho was only slightly mentioned in HBP anyway.

I think this would be a bad choice. I feel that for 6, Harry should apologize to Cho (because that's just the type of person Harry is). Then, they should show Cho getting jealous of Hermione, since that is what happened in the book, but they completely abandoned that part in the movie. So in 6, I think Harry and Cho get back together, have an argument about Hermione, and then break up...clearing the path from Harry & Ginny. This way, Harry and Cho's breakup would make more sense, because to me it just doesn't seem likely that Harry would carrying on being upset with her after finding out that it wasn't her fault.

Well, there must have been a reason for not including this in OotP. I would think that it is because it is irrelevant to the plot. I don't think that the audience will care any more. Kloves and Yates would do better to put more focus on Ginny who is to become a bigger part in the film.

I've seen OOTP three times now and I still can't get what Fred and George said after Umbridge's speech during the start of term feast. She said something about all of them being really good friends and I thought they said, "not likely", but then it sounded a bit like "slightly"

Could someone let me know what they really said, please?

Much thanks in advance

Sorry, she will no be cut. And I'm glad! :p Remembering Ron and Lav-Lav snogging like a couple of eels was just hilarious and this movie is going to need to keep some of the humor because the ending is going to be a little dark. :relax:Some people found it funny. I know many others who found it a bit pathetic.

The shame of it is that the important thematic parts of "Lav-Lav" do not actually include Lavender. It is all about Ron and Hermione trying to get the other one to choose him/her, but not actually initiating the choice him/herself. The only way that they can tie it to the story is if they have Harry try to actively get them to make the choice in the same way that he is trying to get them to choose to see Draco and Snape as credible enemies, or even himself to choose Ginny as a lover.

People have suggested that it can all be set up with a few looks and glances: but that did NOT work with Harry+Cho in Order. If a movie wants to set up romances (petty or otherwise), then there has to be a lot more work put into it. Given the way Order was done, Harry should have been mashing with Luna, not Cho: we got the scene establishing a connection between those two, but never one doing that for Harry & Cho. (Yes, that was in a prior movie: but, seriously, people have better things to do that remember adventure movies from 19 months ago!)

Yeah, but if they're considering cutting Scrimgeour, but are going at length to make the Lav-Lav thing happen, there's a serious economical problem there.I would not say "economical," but they would be compromising the story. One of the important parts of the Half-Blood Prince story is Harry choosing Dumbledore over the Ministry as a mentor/protector/ally.

I'm not surprised. Kloves did a horrible job with the politics in GOF. There was no discrimination storyline, no problems with international relations, no abuse of power by Barty Crouch, and no parting of the ways.None of that was relevant to the Goblet story: that was a story about Right vs. Easy choices of personal valour and bravery for Harry Potter. The discrimination storyline was Rowling's neat little device of using the stories of prior books as thematic counterpoints in other books: Harry Potter's choices of loyalties (which include personal creeds) was the story of Chamber, and it is a theme throughout the series. However, Rowling gets away with this by putting in one part theme for every three or four parts story. So, the themes do not obfuscate the story. A movie does not have the luxury: putting in any counterpunctual theme would upset that balance and leave the audience confused about exactly what the story was.

On the issue of Order, I do think that Order falsifies the common claim that audiences would not understand what was happening in Order because Goblet did not show Fudge and Dumbledore fall out at the end. Order set up the problem perfectly: there was a succinct summary of what the Ministry was doing in reaction to Voldemort's return. As perverse luck would have it, this is very similar to what a couple of major governments have done in recent years, so this was pretty familiar to the audience. However, even without that, how the wizard government was reacting was plainly stated. Moreover, if Goblet had shown Fudge and Dumbledore fall out, and then if Order had not made this clear, then the audience would have been completely confused. Even Rowling did not depend on this: in the book, Harry assumes that Fudge's people are working against Voldemort, and Harry (and the reader) is informed otherwise.
While all of these do not add to the plot, technically neither does the Yule Ball.The Yule Ball was part of the story, though: dragons actually are not as scary as girls. Having Harry be forced to ask out a girl on whom he has a crush is every bit as difficult and valiant as taking on the dragon. The big difference? None of us ever had to take on a dragon, but we all have to ask out someone at some point in our lives!
I'm not the least bit surprised that Kloves is going to cut the political drama for a little more teenage romance.It is Yates who seems to be keen to do this. Moreover, casting is the job of the producer, so Heyman obviously is keen to do it.
The great thing about the book series is how Jo sort of parallels WWII and Hitler's rise to power, and none of it was all of a sudden. She built up the take-over of the Ministry by showing their incompetence on many levels, and she built up the prejudice. Now if HBP does absolutely nothing to set this up for DH, they will either have to cut the Muggleborn persecution (which would be horrendous), or it will just come out of left field (their little storyline in CoS will not be enough).Again, Prince CANNOT build up anything for Hallows. Chekhov's Rules apply to single films/books/plays: the gun put on the wall must be fired in that movie, and the gun fired late must be put on the wall in that movie. There is no announcement at the beginning of a Harry Potter film that there will be seemingly extraneous elements that people must remember for 18 months!

Also, if you check up on the DH Movie thread, then you will see that many of us advocate cutting that side adventure. The classist/racist theme can be in the background, and it can be introduced entirely within that film. In fact, it must be introduced in that film if the audience is to understand it. It must be important in any film that it is introduced, or audiences will condemn it as bad filmmaking. However, the important thing to remember is that Hallows is not a story about classism or racisim per se.

Scrimgeour was interesting, and continued the issue of the Ministry having their heads, well, you know where, but if he wasn't in it, it wouldn't ruin the story for me. It really wasn't germane to the ultimate point of the plot, which was the Horcruxes and Snape.Story is just as important as plot. Indeed, as the epilogue of Hallows shows us, story and theme are much more important to Rowling than are plots and details!

Yes, it adds a certain quality to it, and I love the "Dumbledore's man" aspect of it (see my Sig!). And while Lav-Lav didn't also contribute to the ultimate plot, it's way more entertaining (IMHO, of course).But why wouldn't Harry & Ginny be more entertaining? Everyone has had a Lavender and everyone has been a Lavender. Do we need to be reminded of these follies? I think that "Lav-Lav" will make far more people squirm uncomfortably than it will make people laugh! Hermione and Ron are uncomfortable enough for people: for those who were insecure about the other sex, then it is another set of bad memories, and for those who were not, then you want to shout "WOULD YOU TWO JUST <BLEEP> ALREADY!!!!!" (Actually, it probably induces both reactions in many of us! :p)

In contrast, Harry + Ginny offers better laughs (especially in Harry's imagination, which can be shown visually), and it would tend to remind people of positive romantic experiences. It is part of the story: Harry has to make hard choices where Ginny is concerned. And, it involves the protagonist, not a couple of secondary character and some random third party. The random third party did not work too well with the protagonist in Order: it will be disastrous with a secondary character.

As for the "Dumbledore's Man," I would say that this line is Rowling's "signature line" for this particular story, just as "only real loyalty" signed Chamber, "you discovered the truth" signed Prisoner or "you showed courage that few others have shown" signed Goblet. Still, I could see reworking the lines about Harry seeing that viewing Voldemort as prey rather than predator was like marching into the arena instead of being dragged into the arena looking the same, but actually having all the difference in the world into the "signature line." It would have to be a bit more succinct than what I have just done, though..... :cool:

I don't know if this has been brought up or not, but how do you guys feel about what happens with Cho Chang in the movie, her telling about the DA under the influence of veritiserum (however you spell it)? I did not like it simply because I thought that Harry should have driven Cho into doing it. Harry's inability to get over himself (and his own self-isolation) is what drives Cho away from him, and this could be shown easily enough on screen. Where both Rowling and Goldberg/Yates/Heyman messed up is not using that. Instead, both went for completely arbitrary resolutions: Rowling with a non-character called Marietta, and G/Y/H with truth serum. So, Harry's character did not induce the key plot moment in either telling of the story, meaning that the events contributed only to the plot and not the story.
Once Harry hears from Snape that Cho had taken veritiserum, he looks surprised (and surely felt bad about being mean to her, once he realizes she had not told on her own free will). How do you think this is going to play out in movie 6? Do you think they are just going to drop Cho from the movies, and put all the focus on Ginny? I think this would be a bad choice. I feel that for 6, Harry should apologize to Cho (because that's just the type of person Harry is).The audience will not remember Cho any better than they remember the last Bond girl when they see Prince. It is water under the bridge. Moreover, what would an apology have to do with Prince's story? It is not a story about forgiveness, but about alotting people roles in life.

On the romance score, Prince should focus on Harry realizing that Ginny is the girl for him, and then show him wrestling with this choice given the obstacles: Ron's neandertalic attitudes towards his sister, Ginny having a boyfriend already, etc. Past girlfriends are completely irrelevant at that point. This actually would offer the opportunity for some visual humor (some of Harry's thoughts in the book are very funny when you step away from them, and they can be adapted in some way or another). I think that there is far more fodder for story, theme, and humor in Harry+Ginny than in Lav-Lav, and there certainly is no more point in revisiting Cho than there is in trying to discover what your prom date did with his/her life!


Hmmm..... We seem to be straying from the topic of Order proper, but I suppose that this is all discussion stemming from Order. Still, should some of these things be moved to the Prince thread?

None of that was relevant to the Goblet story: that was a story about Right vs. Easy choices of personal valour and bravery for Harry Potter. The discrimination storyline was Rowling's neat little device of using the stories of prior books as thematic counterpoints in other books: Harry Potter's choices of loyalties (which include personal creeds) was the story of Chamber, and it is a theme throughout the series.
It wasn't relevant to the story, but omitting all of it makes Goblet a very shallow film. There's no depth; everything is very simple and stereotypical. I was not at all impressed with Kloves' script for that movie. The dialog was very bad. I also disliked how Newell put effort into mainstreaming Harry Potter: too much focus on action, not enough focus on Voldemort's rise, and the simplification of all the characters (Barty Crouch Jr. was a psycho rather than a scared kid, Harry was the hero who made no mistakes - they omitted him throwing the button at Ron, they made it him who saved Cedric instead of vice-versa, he decided to take the cup together instead of Cedric, there was no controversy over saving the hostages in the second task, etc. Hermione was not a real character. Rita had no bite to her. Krum was a beefy, suave, and stupid jock instead of an awkward, shy, young man who dislikes his fame. Then of course there's Dumbledore as the grumpy old man).

I wouldn't complain at all about cutting the political storylines if they had put any depth into the storylines they kept. Cuaron and Yates were able to make short films that simplified the story yet managed to keep them unique and capture the feel of the books.

You may not care about little details, but there are certain things that just bug me:
1) Psychotic Barty Crouch Jr. and his tongue spasm, which I assume was added so that the apparently stupid audience could make the connection that he was polyjuicing as Moody (obviously seeing him transform from Moody to Barty Jr. is not enough to make the audience understand)
2) Ron knowing about the dragons and the circuitous route he goes about telling Harry. Why? Why couldn't they just have Ron apologize because he saw the dragons at the first task? What was the point of having him see them before? It makes him look like a jerk for not coming straight out and telling Harry about the dragons. Not to mention that book!Hermione would never go through that ridiculous he said-she said nonsense, but would tell Ron to tell Harry himself, since it's the only way they will work out their problems. She says that to Harry in the book. In fact, I would have preferred they kept her conversation with Harry at the lake, in the book, about Ron's behaviour. It could have replaced this he said-she said scene and the bridge scene before the 2nd task (which is horrible!). It would have added plenty of characterization to Ron, Harry, and Hermione; they could have discussed the first task and Harry's worries, and she could have told him that Hagrid told her that he wanted to meet Harry. Nothing lost, lots gained!
3) Hermione laughing at Ron's dress robes is so out-of-character. Ron's poor. Is it funny to laugh at people who can't afford better clothes? Newell saw an opportunity to make Ron's embarrassment funny and jumped at it. In the book, Ron is dealing with his poor status compared with Harry, who has a lot of money, and Malfoy who prides himself on his wealth and his father's position at the ministry. This outfit just adds to his feeling of worthlessness and his overall insecurity.
4) Krum doesn't crucio Cedric, Wormtail must have taken morphine before cutting off his arm since he's completely fine with it, Harry doesn't break his leg before going to the graveyard, Muggles aren't tortured at the QWC, and Voldemort doesn't hurt any of his Death Eaters. Cutting all these out really helped in toning down the film.

I have many more complaints, but I'll keep them out of this thread. I just felt that as a film GOF is very superficial. There's no genuine emotion, no real characters, no subtlety, no horror, no darkness, and it is full of cliches, very bad dialog, and some bad acting (horrendous in Emma's case).

The difference with OOTP was that Yates and Goldenberg clearly cared about the characters and the emotions of the book, and they wanted to make them real. The result is that I felt more of a connection to the characters, therefore I was more invested in the story. GOF's story was much better than OOTP's story and should have made a better movie, but it was badly handled.
I don't know if this has been brought up or not, but how do you guys feel about what happens with Cho Chang in the movie, her telling about the DA under the influence of veritiserum (however you spell it)?
I thought that made things kind of unfair for her. Basically everyone in the DA hates her, and it wasn't her fault that Umbridge tricked her into drinking it. It was too rushed. I was glad that they changed the snitch to be Cho as it simplified her break-up with Harry and it further justified her inclusion in the film. However, they did not give her story a very good resolution. We find out that she was Veritaserumed into it from Snape's short comment in Umbridge's office. He says that Umbridge used the last of the potion on "Miss Chang". The general audience would need to be paying very close attention to catch this and even if they did, they would have to know that Cho's last name is Chang and what Veritaserum does! I'm really curious how much of the general audience realized that she was forced to tell the truth. It also leaves the relationship of Cho/Harry open, since the only reason he stopped talking to her was because he thought she betrayed him.

Of course for HBP they will probably just cut her completely, which is prefectly fine; it was OOTP's job to give her a clear resolution. Harry may comment on how his relationship with Cho "sort of fell apart" or something, but it's not really necessary.

I've seen OOTP three times now and I still can't get what Fred and George said after Umbridge's speech during the start of term feast. She said something about all of them being really good friends and I thought they said, "not likely", but then it sounded a bit like "slightly"

Could someone let me know what they really said, please?

Much thanks in advance
I heard it as "That's likely" in a sarcastic tone.I agree, Shuichi.

It wasn't relevant to the story, but omitting all of it makes Goblet a very shallow film. There's no depth; everything is very simple and stereotypical. I was not at all impressed with Kloves' script for that movie. The dialog was very bad. I also disliked how Newell put effort into mainstreaming Harry Potter: too much focus on action, not enough focus on Voldemort's rise, and the simplification of all the characters (Barty Crouch Jr. was a psycho rather than a scared kid, Harry was the hero who made no mistakes - they omitted him throwing the button at Ron, they made it him who saved Cedric instead of vice-versa, he decided to take the cup together instead of Cedric, there was no controversy over saving the hostages in the second task, etc. Hermione was not a real character. Rita had no bite to her. Krum was a beefy, suave, and stupid jock instead of an awkward, shy, young man who dislikes his fame. Then of course there's Dumbledore as the grumpy old man).

I wouldn't complain at all about cutting the political storylines if they had put any depth into the storylines they kept. Cuaron and Yates were able to make short films that simplified the story yet managed to keep them unique and capture the feel of the books.

You may not care about little details, but there are certain things that just bug me:
1) Psychotic Barty Crouch Jr. and his tongue spasm, which I assume was added so that the apparently stupid audience could make the connection that he was polyjuicing as Moody (obviously seeing him transform from Moody to Barty Jr. is not enough to make the audience understand)
2) Ron knowing about the dragons and the circuitous route he goes about telling Harry. Why? Why couldn't they just have Ron apologize because he saw the dragons at the first task? What was the point of having him see them before? It makes him look like a jerk for not coming straight out and telling Harry about the dragons. Not to mention that book!Hermione would never go through that ridiculous he said-she said nonsense, but would tell Ron to tell Harry himself, since it's the only way they will work out their problems. She says that to Harry in the book. In fact, I would have preferred they kept her conversation with Harry at the lake, in the book, about Ron's behaviour. It could have replaced this he said-she said scene and the bridge scene before the 2nd task (which is horrible!). It would have added plenty of characterization to Ron, Harry, and Hermione; they could have discussed the first task and Harry's worries, and she could have told him that Hagrid told her that he wanted to meet Harry. Nothing lost, lots gained!
3) Hermione laughing at Ron's dress robes is so out-of-character. Ron's poor. Is it funny to laugh at people who can't afford better clothes? Newell saw an opportunity to make Ron's embarrassment funny and jumped at it. In the book, Ron is dealing with his poor status compared with Harry, who has a lot of money, and Malfoy who prides himself on his wealth and his father's position at the ministry. This outfit just adds to his feeling of worthlessness and his overall insecurity.
4) Krum doesn't crucio Cedric, Wormtail must have taken morphine before cutting off his arm since he's completely fine with it, Harry doesn't break his leg before going to the graveyard, Muggles aren't tortured at the QWC, and Voldemort doesn't hurt any of his Death Eaters. Cutting all these out really helped in toning down the film.
I have many more complaints, but I'll keep them out of this thread. I just felt that as a film GOF is very superficial. There's no genuine emotion, no real characters, no subtlety, no horror, no darkness, and it is full of cliches, very bad dialog, and some bad acting (horrendous in Emma's case).

The difference with OOTP was that Yates and Goldenberg clearly cared about the characters and the emotions of the book, and they wanted to make them real. The result is that I felt more of a connection to the characters, therefore I was more invested in the story. GOF's story was much better than OOTP's story and should have made a better movie, but it was badly handled.

Bumblybee - my assessments exactly. When you called GoF "shallow" that is exactly the word that I've been looking for to describe it. While I may have slightly enjoyed some specific scenes in GoF, for the most part it was awful and very disappointing.

In great contrast with OoTP, which managed to stick with the theme of the book without dumbing it down. What happened to Kloves on GoF? He did pretty okay with PoA because the basic story was still there (and Cuaron was magnificent).

Now he's back for HBP and it still makes me a little worried, although we still have Yates so maybe that will help.

It wasn't relevant to the story, but omitting all of it makes Goblet a very shallow film. There's no depth; everything is very simple and stereotypical.Well, this really is not the place to discuss Goblet. Suffice it to say that Goblet told its story. The "depth" that you crave probably would have come across to other people as the movie not being able to decide what story it was trying to tell. The film had to commit to one story or another, and they committed to Rowling's story, not one of her subthemes.

As for the depth, Goblet was critically acclaimed and very popular among audiences. It was criticized for overtelling the story, and for having an overlong ending, as well as for the absurdity of the utterly barbaric Triwizard Tournament. However, the pluses were deemed to far outweigh these minuses. Goblet's popularity is especially obvious in the return audience for Order: despite the poorer movie season, Order has sold 93% of Goblet's tickets in the US, and probably about the same overseas. So, clearly, Goblet left people interested in Order. (If people do not like a movie, then they do not see its sequel: the audience of any sequel reflects primarily the popularity of the prior movie).

Along these lines, we can look at how audiences are responding to Order and compare that to how they responded to Goblet. That will tell us a lot about how well Prince will do in 15 months.

Box Office Mojo provides a good measure of public reaction: although it is a site for movie geeks (and thus people who evaluate movies with a better appreciation for films as a story-telling and art medium than Joe and Jane Public), it has proven to reflect overall opinion much better than do opening weekend polls (which are strongly biased towards sampling people predisposed to liking a movie). Here is how Goblet did there: 63.9%
25.0%
4.6%
1.6%
5.0%With over 3100 respondents, the error bars are small: the proportion of people who gave it A's is somewhere between 62.2% and 65.5%

As of today, BoM provides the following proportions for Order: 66.6%
21.9%
4.3%
1.4%
5.8%With nearly 1800 respondants so far, the error bars are a little bigger: the "true" proportion of A's is between 64.4% and 68.8%. The proportions positive (A or B: those are the grades associated with people being interested in more at BoM) is about the same.

So, although we Potter fans might bicker about lost details just as Spidey and Tolkien fans did, Joe and Jane Public does not seem to care: they like the last two movies. Order therefore is leaving Prince with a good audience. Just as long as they do not do anything stupid like include Lavender Brown, Prince should leave Hallows a big audience, too! :cool:

Bumblybee - my assessments exactly. When you called GoF "shallow" that is exactly the word that I've been looking for to describe it. While I may have slightly enjoyed some specific scenes in GoF, for the most part it was awful and very disappointing.Only for some Harry Potter fans. The general agreement was that it was as good if not better than Prisoner, and orders of magnitude better than the two Columbus films.
In great contrast with OoTP, which managed to stick with the theme of the book without dumbing it down.Neither Goblet nor Order dumbed down the story. Goblet's story simply is a much simpler one: brave, valiant choices are the right ones. It is much less cerebral than choices surrounding isolation and unity. Order also is a story with strong political overtones, whereas the Goblet story lacks any: the political tones there were theme, not story, and they were counterpoint to other HP stories (including, as we learn, Order and Hallows).
What happened to Kloves on GoF? He did pretty okay with PoA because the basic story was still there (and Cuaron was magnificent). You are assigning too much credit/blame on the script! The director is EXTREMELY important for the final product: more so than the scriptwriter, as many a Hollywood sage can tell you! There are legendary stories about the differences between Josh Wheedon and directors of his scripts. The scriptwriter provides the basics, but it is the director who does something with it. Kloves' scripts for Stone and Chamber actually were not bad: but it was Columbus' awful direction (expanding the Quidditch scenes to well over 5 minutes, and directing the dialog with long pauses appropriate for comedies rather than action/adventure) the buried the story. I've read versions of Kloves' scripts for those two films online, and you can see both of Rowling's stories in them fairly clearly: but Columbus buried both with by emphasizing the "filler" over the story.

Now, Goblet is probably the simplest of the Harry Potter stories, except perhaps for Stone. Choices about loyalties, truths, isolation, persons and greater good all are much trickier issues for which it is much easier to stand back and say: the other side has a point. With bravery and valour, this simply is not the case. All of Harry's choices are pretty straightforward: the brave, valiant decision is the right one. It is hard because of personal risk, either to safety or simply pride.

Would the movie have been improved by sneaking in Order's story as a theme? No. It would have left people wondering what the point of the tale was. Again, a smattering of it (and there really is only a smattering in the book) works fine to accentuate a story, but a smattering in the movie is about what we got: Fudge arguing with Dumbledore about what to do following Crouch's death gives the political theme the same weight relative to the actual story as it got in the book. The difference is that the book gave us more of everything.

So, was Goblet a simpler movie than Order? Yes: but the story to Goblet (in book and movie) was simpler than that of Order from the word go. Goblet left Rowling's pen that way, and it made it on to film that way.

Kloves' scripts for Stone and Chamber actually were not bad: but it was Columbus' awful direction (expanding the Quidditch scenes to well over 5 minutes, and directing the dialog with long pauses appropriate for comedies rather than action/adventure) the buried the story. I've read versions of Kloves' scripts for those two films online, and you can see both of Rowling's stories in them fairly clearly...


I'd like to read those...they may help me with this: http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=110787

You are assigning too much credit/blame on the script! The director is EXTREMELY important for the final product: more so than the scriptwriter, as many a Hollywood sage can tell you! There are legendary stories about the differences between Josh Wheedon and directors of his scripts. The scriptwriter provides the basics, but it is the director who does something with it. Kloves' scripts for Stone and Chamber actually were not bad: but it was Columbus' awful direction (expanding the Quidditch scenes to well over 5 minutes, and directing the dialog with long pauses appropriate for comedies rather than action/adventure) the buried the story. I've read versions of Kloves' scripts for those two films online, and you can see both of Rowling's stories in them fairly clearly: but Columbus buried both with by emphasizing the "filler" over the story.

Now, Goblet is probably the simplest of the Harry Potter stories, except perhaps for Stone. Choices about loyalties, truths, isolation, persons and greater good all are much trickier issues for which it is much easier to stand back and say: the other side has a point. With bravery and valour, this simply is not the case. All of Harry's choices are pretty straightforward: the brave, valiant decision is the right one. It is hard because of personal risk, either to safety or simply pride.

Would the movie have been improved by sneaking in Order's story as a theme? No. It would have left people wondering what the point of the tale was. Again, a smattering of it (and there really is only a smattering in the book) works fine to accentuate a story, but a smattering in the movie is about what we got: Fudge arguing with Dumbledore about what to do following Crouch's death gives the political theme the same weight relative to the actual story as it got in the book. The difference is that the book gave us more of everything.

So, was Goblet a simpler movie than Order? Yes: but the story to Goblet (in book and movie) was simpler than that of Order from the word go. Goblet left Rowling's pen that way, and it made it on to film that way.

I've tried to give leeway for the scriptwriter. I understand that Newell had a lot to do with it as well. But honestly, it must have been Kloves idea to cut out Winky and Bertha Jorkins and make Barty Crouch Jr. a psychotic tongue wagging idiot!

I don't feel that GoF the novel was "simpler" than OoTP. It was so complex that JKR fudged it and had to re-write 2/3 of it! It was a complex mystery. Order had no complex mystery. It was complex in theme - the political themes - yes, but not the same thing.

So, no, I disagree - GoF was not the simpler of the two, at least not from that point of view. Maybe it's just apples and oranges.

I don't think that the GoF movie gave us the themes either. Ron and Harry hardly fought, the tasks were just action/adventure (the maze was particularly deplorable). And then we have the Yule Ball. That's it for about 2/3 of the film. The graveyard scene was okay, but I blame Newell for not giving it more bite. I only blame Kloves for not taking the time to weave the story better. I mean, maybe you could still leave out Winky, etc., but do a much better job with the Crouches as characters. Crouch Sr. was not what he was in the book and he looked like Hitler. Crouch Jr. was a joke. Again, partially blamed on Kloves for writing it that way and partially blame Newell for the rest.

But we'll have to agree to disagree.

The only thing that holds hope for HBP is that Yates is directing and he did a good job on OoTp. So, like Kloves and Cuaron, we may just get a good movie.

Could we focus on OotP again? There are other threads, in which the films and directors can be compared. :)

I just came back from the theaters, having seen OotP for the 3rd time, and I really believe it's the best of the films so far. A LOT of the dialogue is straight from the book and the casting for the new characters couldn't have been better. I also noticed that the random black kid from PoA was in this film (he's in the background of a few DA scenes) and Crabbe is REALLY tall (along with Dean!) The Hall of Prophecies scene is the prob the best scene in the series so far (the possession, DD vs. Voldie, Sirius and Harry, etc.) and I believe this film has the best trio moments. On a side note... did anyone notice that Harry's bed seems to change positions with each film? Sometimes it's up against the wall and other times it's in the center of the room (unless I'm just imagining things... it's possible.)

Honestly, this all cuts down to who is going to be the bigger buyer for the movies.
Who do they want to please more, millions of Harry Potter fans who will be angrier if they cut out more of the romance, or do they want to cater to the millions of people who have never picked up a Harry Potter book and are seeing the movies for sheer pleasure of Witches and Wizards waving a stick of wood and brewing love potions, as far as they know.

Was that happened in the theatre I had been or what?? In Harry, Ron and Hermione's scene while they were sneaking into Umbridge's room to use her fire then Umbridge came in, they cut it suddenly and we saw Luna ,Ginny and a boy graping Neville telling Umbridge he was helping the Weasley girl. Did it happened to you too?? There must be a scene explaining Ginny, Luna being caught and pushing them inside the room not popping suddenly in the scene, right??

That's just one example of unbelievably terrible editing.

I hated it when Sirius called Harry James before he died... He never does that in the books. Why did they put that in??? It made Sirius look a little touched in his head... Also they don't show him as a young and restless man. I would have liked to have seen him as he was portrayed in the books. That is the Sirius I fell in love with...But otherwise I loved each and every hug between Harry and Sirius :drool:.. It made the movie for me. I loved loved the movie over all. "Step away from my godson!!!!" Sirius Black Rocks!!!

I hated it when Sirius called Harry James before he died... He never does that in the books. Why did they put that in??? It made Sirius look a little touched in his head...

I think it fit CanonSirius perfectly. He was a bit touched in the head or atleast he was on edge from all the alcohol.

I think it fit CanonSirius perfectly. He was a bit touched in the head or atleast he was on edge from all the alcohol.
I agree. I thought it was a good line. It was sad. Sirius was living in the past throughout OOTP. He was trying to live through the trio (as Hermione points out to Harry), he was lonely, and he was constantly reminded of his life as a 15-year-old because he had to live in 12 Grimmauld Place again. He was also pretty unstable and rushed into battle trying to escape his isolation. The last time he would have fought would be 14 years previously, before going to Azkaban. He may have fought alongside James many times and he was simply caught up in the moment and his past. Harry is almost an exact physical copy of his father and Sirius' mind slipped a bit and he thought he had his best friend back. What makes it sadder is that it was just before he died and even until the very end he missed his best friend.

That showed CanonSirius.
That was PERFECT.
That made up for everything they MISSED at 12 Grimmauld.

Saw it again just barely. Love it! Everytime I see it, the more I love it! Daniel....wow....standing ovation for this guy. He has really come around in this one. Not that he couldn't act before but he gets better and better with every movie. Imelda Staunton! wow. I told my sister that even though this is the third time watching this, that I still want to hit her toady face everytime she opens her mouth! amazing. The entire climax is awesome! everytime I see it I want to go running (until sirius dies and the whole possesion thing. Then I want to cry myself to sleep) But it's just sooooo good! The interaction with Hermione and Ron was simply perfect. They actually flirt!:love: I can't wait to see the entire drama with them in 6 and 7!:lol: At first I was upset with cho not getting enough screen time. But after watching it again, I see that it doesn't matter. Harry doesn't ever end up with her and even when they are together(in the book) they never are really together. It was always on again, off again. So, for a movie they handeled it really well.
Also, I am STILL bothered by two things:
-no serious injuries in the d.o.m.(come on people! it's a miracle they all came out alive let alone coming out unscathed!)
- Harry not shedding one tear for his godfather ( I wanted ONE moment, wether in dumbledores office or not, to feel dread and mourning over the weight of the prophecy and the death of a loved one. we saw more emotion from harry when cedric died and I think harry not having a moment for sirius, insulting.)

Other than that, by far the best movie so far! love! Love! Love!

p.s. fred and george are seriously the role models in this film!:cool:

I've seen this movie for almost more than ten times that the lady in the theather's entrance expects me everyday of the showing days... :lol:

I just noticed the girl in Divination class (where Trelawney predicts Umbridge's danger). Is she Cho CHang? seated near Malfoy, Crabbe, and Goyle?

Certainly not because, Cho's betrayal was not up until after the holidays and the fact that she was only forced.
SO you reckon that was Genevieve Gaunt back for the role of Pansy? Maybe she's just not credited... Or maybe she's a random girl, made to look like Pansy or the previous actress?

moderators, if I'm not in the right thread kindly inform me.
Thanks

Yates managed to give an important role, or a cool scene, to all the characters, even the minor one, like the twins, the little Nigel, Luna, Filch.

that's in my opinion the best HP movie. too short of course, but the plot is here, the most important things are explained. & the athmosphere is so great. besides, i've never laughed so much in a HP movie.

I was kind of upset that Fawkes wasn't included in this movie. I was excited that they were going to have Fawkes fly in front of Dumbledore and take the Killing Curse for him.

I was kind of upset that Fawkes wasn't included in this movie. I was excited that they were going to have Fawkes fly in front of Dumbledore and take the Killing Curse for him.


Fawkes was included in this movie during Dumbledore's escape. I also would've liked to have seen him take the Killing Curse though.

Fawkes was included in this movie during Dumbledore's escape. I also would've liked to have seen him take the Killing Curse though.

Oops I forgot about that part. Okay I was upset he wasn't included in the DOM scene. That would have been great. :)

That's just one example of unbelievably terrible editing.eh, not really. It would have slowed down the pace of the film to bring the whole gang of conspirators together first. Having them just all get cornered in Umbridge's office saved time. The movie was already almost two hours old at that point, and audiences start getting very fidgetty at the two hour mark!

Yates managed to give an important role, or a cool scene, to all the characters, even the minor one, like the twins, the little Nigel, Luna, Filch.

that's in my opinion the best HP movie. too short of course, but the plot is here, the most important things are explained. & the athmosphere is so great. besides, i've never laughed so much in a HP movie.The one thing that the movie omitted was some introduction to Harry+Cho. Indeed, it really needed an introduction for Cho herself: something comparable to what the movie gave Luna. Although the movie actually ran a bit long, tighter editing of the middle (where the pacing lags a bit) could have bought the time.

Other than that, I tend to agree. I still think that Prisoner is the better movie, but Order is a superior adaptation in that its original work needed much more modification (starting with EDITING :cool:) than did Prisoner's.

It's doing 88+% positive, with 66% A's at Box Office Mojo. People who saw this will be back for Prince!

I hated it when Sirius called Harry James before he died... He never does that in the books. Why did they put that in??? It made Sirius look a little touched in his head...To add to what others wrote, the issue of whether Sirius is "touched" and whether he sort of confuses Harry with James comes up in the books. It's pretty clear that Sirius does sort of see Harry as James returned: in part, because Sirius dearly wishes that it were so. Hermione explains it well: Sirius had been so alone for so long that his perceptions were a little out-of-whack.

This line actually was very powerful and developed a lot of character in a few words.

Fawkes was included in this movie during Dumbledore's escape. heh, just remember this when people complain that small details from past movies would be remembered by Joe and Jane Public when they see Prince and Hallows! Even the fans do not remember all of the things in the movies a matter of weeks (or even days) later!

I also would've liked to have seen him take the Killing Curse though.Oops I forgot about that part. Okay I was upset he wasn't included in the DOM scene. That would have been great. :)This would have been a bit tough to explain to the audience: remember, they do not know which particular spells kill and which ones just hurl people all over, and they also do not know what a Phoenix is. They might have thought that it was a spell that turns an adult into an infant! (Yes, Avada Kedavra was explained in the prior movie: but see immediately above!)

I think that the bigger problem is that it might have made Dumbledore look a little weaker in the eyes of the audience: Dumbledore survives only because of timely intercession by a 3rd party. Having Dumbledore hold off Voldemort entirely on his own shows you that the two are pretty evenly matched. (They did a really good job of showing Dumbledore and Voldemort both straining to overcome each other: and the lock of disappointed surprise of Voldemort's face when Dumbledore shields himself and Harry from the glass shards was brilliant!)


I just noticed the girl in Divination class (where Trelawney predicts Umbridge's danger). Is she Cho CHang? seated near Malfoy, Crabbe, and Goyle?

Certainly not because, Cho's betrayal was not up until after the holidays and the fact that she was only forced.
SO you reckon that was Genevieve Gaunt back for the role of Pansy? Maybe she's just not credited... Or maybe she's a random girl, made to look like Pansy or the previous actress?Has Pansy ever been in the movies? I mean, I'm sure that they labeled one of the continuity extras "Pansy" because, well... just because!

eh, not really. It would have slowed down the pace of the film to bring the whole gang of conspirators together first. Having them just all get cornered in Umbridge's office saved time. The movie was already almost two hours old at that point, and audiences start getting very fidgetty at the two hour mark!

I agree it would not have been a good idea to show all that, but it was painfully obvious they they orginally did intend it to show all of it. A good edit wouldn't have even let you known they filmed all that other stuff.

I agree it would not have been a good idea to show all that, but it was painfully obvious they they orginally did intend it to show all of it. A good edit wouldn't have even let you known they filmed all that other stuff.

Yeah. It could have been smoother, but it was still better than Rowling's overcooked version with Ron going to the transfiguration department, Garroting Gas and etc.

Update: Well, since there's a theatre right next to my house, I just saw the film one last time before it leaves theatres and this is my verdict: after seeing it three times, it's still freaking awesome!

What happened to DD's glasses??? Did he suddenly get LASIX treatment or something? I was watching it, and kept thinking there was something not quite right, and then I realised what it was!!

I didn't like the cuts, there was (imo) a lot missing that's important later on: Petunia knowing about dementors and DD's howler, info on Neville's parents, no mention of Regulus on the Black family tree, DD didn't tell Harry that LV only heard half of the prophesy etc etc

This is the shortest of the films, and I think it could have done with being longer... I think there was too much left out. I went to see the film with my bf (who's not a HP reader) and I kept having to explain bits to him as he was getting a bit lost in places. It's ok for we readers who know the full story, but I can see the non-readers-but-film-watchers getting a bit lost in the next two when things happen that were talked about in the OOTP books but not the films...

I agree with you that the movie was a little obscure for non-readers and till the end of it many non-readers just didn't know how the plot had developed: Was Voldemort torturing Sirius a trap or not? Why did the members of the Orders come to rescue in time? And the duel between DD & Voldemort was a little disappointing to me. I think the film could've been made a little longer, maybe 3 hours could've told a more detailed and convincing story, esp to non-readers.
Besides, Snape's worst memory was too short--only a few seconds:no: And young Lily was absent....
On the other hand, I so liked the cast. Gambon had made a great progress since his performance in GoF(But I still miss Harris; he was exactly what Dumbledore should be like!) Kinsley's line"he's got style"was so funny that the whole cinema laughed:lol:
Snape's "Obviously" and "No idea~"were funny too. I so love Rickman's performance!
Luna Lovegood was way prettier than I imagined. Her style was so special, so attractive that once I liked her more than Hermione. Evanna was good.
Looking forward to HBP then!

Kinsley's line"he's got style"was so funny that the whole cinema laughed
Snape's "Obviously" and "No idea~"were funny too. I so love Rickman's performance!
Luna Lovegood was way prettier than I imagined. Her style was so special, so attractive that once I liked her more than Hermione. Evanna was good.
It happened here too :D All the theatre laughed on Kingsley's and Snape's comments..I liked Ron eating in an awful way. ;) I didn't like what Kingsley was wearing..I can't imagine him as a Minister of Magic after watching the movie. Luna was the best. She did Luna as I imagined but I didn't like Bellatrix so much, she must be more cruel.

Oh my gosh it was sooo funny when Kingsley said that :lol: haha.

Luna was awesome!!! I liked Bellatrix i think she did a good job.

I have a question for you guys concerning the final duel between Dumbledore and Voldemort. There's been alot of disagreement on various websites about who actually 'won' the battle.

Now from what I remember in the book it was a stale mate....aswell as in the movie. I never got the idea that Dumbledore 'lost' because if he had've both he and Harry would be dead. The whole point of the fight was Voldemort trying to kill them and Dumbledore just trying to protect Harry...which he does really well. I got that Voldemort realized he couldn't get to Harry by force because everything he threw at Dumbledore was blocked so he decided to attack Harry from the inside where Dumbledore couldn't get. (Hence the 'You've lost old man' line)

I was just wondering what you guys think from watching the scene. Yes it does show Dumbledore weakening, but he stood his ground pretty well imo and Voldemort knew he had no chance.

At first I thought Dumbledore looked a little weak, but it's really perfectly done because he is powerful and clearly wins but he's still human. He's not a GOD. If they portrayed him like Superman, people would be completely confused when he dies in HBP.

Yes i completely agree with the "master Of Death" :p sorry, i had to say that.

I do agree though, that scene has been directed very well, because it shows you what the book says and that DD is not a superhero.

When Voldemort says 'By which time I shall be gone, and you...*moves left arm* shall be dead'.
What the arm movement means? Or daes it just look cool?

I think that was a kind of 'mock-salute' to Dumbledore before they dueled.

I think that was a kind of 'mock-salute' to Dumbledore before they dueled.

Yeah, good 'ol Tom was always a sucker for the niceties. :lol:

Nothing like showing manners to a man you're about to murder. :whistle:

I have a question for you guys concerning the final duel between Dumbledore and Voldemort. There's been alot of disagreement on various websites about who actually 'won' the battle.

Now from what I remember in the book it was a stale mate....aswell as in the movie. I never got the idea that Dumbledore 'lost' because if he had've both he and Harry would be dead. The whole point of the fight was Voldemort trying to kill them and Dumbledore just trying to protect Harry...which he does really well. I got that Voldemort realized he couldn't get to Harry by force because everything he threw at Dumbledore was blocked so he decided to attack Harry from the inside where Dumbledore couldn't get. (Hence the 'You've lost old man' line)

I was just wondering what you guys think from watching the scene. Yes it does show Dumbledore weakening, but he stood his ground pretty well imo and Voldemort knew he had no chance.

Voldemort retreated. That spells LOSER.

Not necessarily. Retreat is sometimes the better option in warfare, as it allows one to conserve military strength to fight another day, which is exactly what Voldemort was doing. He was not ready to take on the Wizarding World like he did in DH at that very moment. His people were not in place, his forces were not ready to secure the wizarding world. Had he stayed and fought, he would have lost by default. By leaing, he earned a minor defeat, but saved himself from a major one.

I have a question for you guys concerning the final duel between Dumbledore and Voldemort. There's been alot of disagreement on various websites about who actually 'won' the battle.

Now from what I remember in the book it was a stale mate....aswell as in the movie. I never got the idea that Dumbledore 'lost' because if he had've both he and Harry would be dead. The whole point of the fight was Voldemort trying to kill them and Dumbledore just trying to protect Harry...which he does really well. I got that Voldemort realized he couldn't get to Harry by force because everything he threw at Dumbledore was blocked so he decided to attack Harry from the inside where Dumbledore couldn't get. (Hence the 'You've lost old man' line)

I was just wondering what you guys think from watching the scene. Yes it does show Dumbledore weakening, but he stood his ground pretty well imo and Voldemort knew he had no chance.
It's things like the duel between Voldemort and Dumbledore that brings up the idea of how much information did JKR let out for consideration into the screenplay. Like I said before, I think it was a very good idea that they shortened the battle both thematically and cinematically in order to allow more time for Harry to fight the posession which represents his own power to love and his own life philosophy prevailing over Voldemort's which in turn becomes more revelent in DH since Harry never becomes a Dumbledore Calibur spellcaster.

While in the novel it only proves how powerful Dumbledore is in comparison to Riddle, it does bring up an idea of the age gap between the two, that if Voldemort keeps on the power-level to reach Dumbledore's age, he might be even more powerful and skilled than Dumbledore. I think the film reflects that Dumbledore is aging and therefore a bit less powerful looking as seen in the fight, his face looks a bit weathered. But at the same time his face looking concerned rather than relaxed plays right into his words to Harry when he was posessed. I think picturing being as calm and cool as the novel only to have that very same Dumbledore concerned look when Harry's posessed just moments later would be too much of a contrast for the audience. They must show that he is concerned and more to the point (even foreshadowning HBP) he's in a position where he's willing to protect Harry even with his very own life. Probably because only he is aware that only Harry can defeat Voldemort, not him.

How the film played out the "winner" of the duel almost did make it stalemated. With Dumbledore down and Voldemort taking a more abstract way of attack knowing force cannot work, I think both were defeated in their own ways. I would have liked for Dumbledore to have stayed his ground, even have kept standing even after Voldemort's glass barrage attack, but it's still good as it is if only to show that Voldemort is gaining more of a presence of power in the wizarding world to have at least bring the great Dumbledore to his knees. A presence that was sorely lacking in the closing chapters of GoF.

I think that is a good way of summarising it. If Dumbledore hadn't had to keep pushing Harry backwards and shielding him, I think he would have easily beaten Voldemort, but as it was, he simply had to go on the defensive until the aurors arrive. Every spell he cast was to either counter one of Voldemorts or to incapacitate him. All of Voldemort's spells were countered by Dumbledore, it is only the fact that Harry was so close and so vulnerable that stopped him from really trying to take Voldemort down.

I love how Dumbledore just stands up after shredding all that glass, with a sort of defiant glare on his face. Voldemort actually looks a little frightened when he sees the old man stop his clincher.

When Voldemort says 'By which time I shall be gone, and you...*moves left arm* shall be dead'.
What the arm movement means? Or daes it just look cool?

It kind of looked like someone cocking their gun in front of you right before a gun fight.. To me it was kind of like "bring it on".

When Voldemort says 'By which time I shall be gone, and you...*moves left arm* shall be dead'.
What the arm movement means? Or daes it just look cool?

When I saw that, I just thought it was part of Voldemort's typical body language; He likes to make grand gestures. So...yes, it just looks cool :tu:

I love the part where it looks like Voldemort "absorbs" Dumbledore's spell, then pushes it out again in full force, causing all the windows to shatter. I really felt his power then. I think that's important to show what a serious enemy the Order is facing, and I'm glad the movie-makers were able to do that.

Voldemort and Dumbledore's duel was definatly the highlight of the film. I think this part was the best performance by Micheal Gambon out of all three movies! :clap:

You know something I just thought about and find hilarious?

This whole time we've seen Sirius dead and didn't even realize. In the main trailors for this film, they show Sirius standing in front of the veil, which we know now is the point where he's hit by the curse. They also always showed Bellatrix firing the Avada Kadavra curse. So they basically had in the trailer for the film Sirius's death but we were none the wiser lol.

Also basically the whole Voldemort/Dumbledore thing was in. We saw Dumbledore coming out the fire and Voldemort bowing to him. We see the wands connecting, fire snake, glimpse of the water ball with Voldemort in it, mirrors shattering, Dumbledore turning the glass into sand (Well we just see Dumbledore and sand blowing in his face) and of course "You will lose everything" lol...no need to watch the movie's huh? :p lol j/k

Also basically the whole Voldemort/Dumbledore thing was in. We saw Dumbledore coming out the fire and Voldemort bowing to him. We see the wands connecting, fire snake, glimpse of the water ball with Voldemort in it, mirrors shattering, Dumbledore turning the glass into sand (Well we just see Dumbledore and sand blowing in his face) and of course "You will lose everything" lol...no need to watch the movie's huh? :p lol j/k

Did you notice that they changed a fair bit from those trailers? We had a different reading of DDs "incontravertible" line (I preferred the louder, more bold reading), a different shot of Dumbledore coming out of the fire, a voiceover for the decree saying Umbridge had replaced Dumbledore, the "don't fight him, Harry" bit (which I assume was a sort of hallucination created by Voldemort, but I guess it must not have worked on screen, it would be hard to know if DD was actually saying that or not), a different scream when Voldemort shatters the glass (in the international trailer), a close-up of Moody during the battle, as well as a close-up of Lupin casting a spell. There's obviously a lot that was not set in stone till quite late.

Did you notice that they changed a fair bit from those trailers? We had a different reading of DDs "incontravertible" line (I preferred the louder, more bold reading), a different shot of Dumbledore coming out of the fire, a voiceover for the decree saying Umbridge had replaced Dumbledore, the "don't fight him, Harry" bit (which I assume was a sort of hallucination created by Voldemort, but I guess it must not have worked on screen, it would be hard to know if DD was actually saying that or not), a different scream when Voldemort shatters the glass (in the international trailer), a close-up of Moody during the battle, as well as a close-up of Lupin casting a spell. There's obviously a lot that was not set in stone till quite late.

I noticed that too. Alot of what was in the trailers seemed to be taken out of the film. I was wondering what the part when Dumbledore says, "Don't fight him Harry, you can't win" was? I don't remember that being in the movie. By the looks of it, it looks like they were in Dumbledore's office when he said that.

What are your favourite scenes? What did you like/not like? Discuss everything about the film here!
I must most looking forward to the fight between Dumbledore and Voldemort. I did enjoy it very much but there is one thing I would change: I would have made it so Dumbledore didn't seem like he was struggling against Voldemort. In the book Dumbledore was calm until Voldemort disappears so that is what I would change. But, it was still a great battle!

I was soo lookin forward to Dumbledore talking to Harry about the prophercy but it didn't come :( but Hey!! My friends wanted to read the books after she had watched this film. So that was good.

I noticed that too. Alot of what was in the trailers seemed to be taken out of the film. I was wondering what the part when Dumbledore says, "Don't fight him Harry, you can't win" was? I don't remember that being in the movie. By the looks of it, it looks like they were in Dumbledore's office when he said that.

That line was definetely from the possession scene. DD is in the same position as when he says "It isn't how you are alike, it's how you are not", and you can see the atrium walls in the background. I think they probably experimented a lot with the possession, this line was probably Voldemort trying to make Harry give up by having him think DD is saying this, I remember in the test screening version of the film, DD said a lot more about love, but this was cut down massively to a single line. I also recall that the test reviews mentioned Dumbledore saying in his office that the reason he had been avoiding Harry all year was because, "Every time I looked into your eyes, I was reminded of everything we have to lose", or words to that effect. Maybe we'll see that stuff on the DVD.

At first I thought Dumbledore looked a little weak, but it's really perfectly done because he is powerful and clearly wins but he's still human. He's not a GOD. If they portrayed him like Superman, people would be completely confused when he dies in HBP.

That's what I thought as well, but overall he was portrayed a lot better than he was in the last movie. Balanced for the most part, powerful, yet still human.

As for the movie itself, it was a huge improvement over GOF, the writing was better for the most part, the humor was spread out better and the acting was improved as well.

What are your favourite scenes? What did you like/not like? Discuss everything about the film here!

The scene that stood out the most for me and loved was the harry and luna conversation on the forest with the thestral walking about. It was well done. The begining of the movie with the whole dry grass thing that made you feel like you were in Africa with the lions, the demented dudley before the dementors even got to him, the tunnel that they get attacked in that looked like a city alley, to the suburb houses they came to, and the dursley odd/bad acting was bad. The setting looked so different and the dementors, that it made me think if this was a harry potter movie. I couldn't believe my eyes when I was watching these scenes. I was thinking what happened? I found the movie to be boring and long mostly.