HBP Movie: Scenes that should/could have been in or excluded

Only problem is it wasn't the Trio it was Harry and Hermione, with Ron sitting in the background and only joining them at the end.
That spoilt the ending for me.

Yeah, I guess I should've specified that.

I read somewhere that Ron was sitting away from Harry and Hermione because it was meant foreshadow his seperation from the pair during DH. That makes a bit of sense to me.

I know people love to rag on the Burrow sequence but it has two purposes.

First, most of that entire sequence is about Ginny and Harry, more specially, how far Ginny's willing to go for Harry. This scene, along with scenes I'm sure will make it into Deathly Hallows, represents why Ginny's the one for Harry. Like Harry in that sequence, she didn't even blink. She went into action to stand by Harry's side and not do it alone.

Second, that sequence is also about the danger and how far Voldemort's grip is in the Wizarding world. Even the Burrow, Harry's other sanctuary besides Hogwarts isn't safe. The audience, at the point in the film, needed a reminder of the threat. Just reporting on the various kidnappings wasn't going to cut it. We need a visual clue of the threat.


That's my take on it as well. It was about Ginny and Harry, and it did add a necessary tone of increasing danger. So while I'm not usually for adding scenes not present in the books, I agree this one was necessary, and I think it worked well.

However, if there were 2 things I would have dumped from the movie, it would be Dumbledore asking Harry if he was involved with Hermione, and "You need a shave my friend" -- in my opinion, the most awful line in the movie series so far.

Yeah, I guess I should've specified that.

I read somewhere that Ron was sitting away from Harry and Hermione because it was meant foreshadow his seperation from the pair during DH. That makes a bit of sense to me.

No it doesn't! Ron was under the influence of the Horcrux which is why he lost his temper, fought with Harry and left.
At the end of HBP there was no reason for this to be foreshadowed as Jo didn't do it in the book. In fact, she had Ron be the one to say "We'll be with you!" or whatever that line stolen by Movie-Hermione was!
The whole Horcrux influence was to show how Ron went from that loyal friend to doubting complainer. Even at the beginning of the hunt he was positive until he had the Splinching accident which weakened him physically, and started wearing the locket which got to him mentally and emotionally.
There was no need to foreshadow something . That is just an excuse used to explain why poor Ron got sidelined again, in favour of Kloves' favourite, Hermione!

No it doesn't! Ron was under the influence of the Horcrux which is why he lost his temper, fought with Harry and left.
At the end of HBP there was no reason for this to be foreshadowed as Jo didn't do it in the book. In fact, she had Ron be the one to say "We'll be with you!" or whatever that line stolen by Movie-Hermione was!
The whole Horcrux influence was to show how Ron went from that loyal friend to doubting complainer. Even at the beginning of the hunt he was positive until he had the Splinching accident which weakened him physically, and started wearing the locket which got to him mentally and emotionally.
There was no need to foreshadow something . That is just an excuse used to explain why poor Ron got sidelined again, in favour of Kloves' favourite, Hermione!

Yeah, the ending of the film is very skewed in Hermione's favor, as you mentioned. I'm just think that the whole Ron/Harry and Hermione seperation thing makes sense from a cinematic standpoint because it was pretty melodramatic, and movie viewers eat that stuff up. I know I did ;) For people who like the films but aren't familiar with the books, this placement of the characters might suggest that maybe Hermione is fully onboard with Harry's plan to destroy the remaining Horcruxes while Ron is still feeling apprehensive and uncomfortable with the idea. I don't know, that's just a thought.

I kind of have to seperate the films from the books in order to fully enjoy them both. For example, I think GoF is an absolutely dreadful adaptation, but the film is pretty entertaining and I still enjoy watching it.

Yeah, the ending of the film is very skewed in Hermione's favor, as you mentioned. I'm just think that the whole Ron/Harry and Hermione seperation thing makes sense from a cinematic standpoint because it was pretty melodramatic, and movie viewers eat that stuff up. I know I did ;) For people who like the films but aren't familiar with the books, this placement of the characters might suggest that maybe Hermione is fully onboard with Harry's plan to destroy the remaining Horcruxes while Ron is still feeling apprehensive and uncomfortable with the idea. I don't know, that's just a thought.

I kind of have to seperate the films from the books in order to fully enjoy them both. For example, I think GoF is an absolutely dreadful adaptation, but the film is pretty entertaining and I still enjoy watching it.

I guess you're right about separating book and movie to enjoy the latter.
I find it hard and pick every little thing about the movies where they change things.

The Burrow being set on fire. I didn't quite understand that one.

I wasn't a big fan of the Burrow being set on fire. It wasn't in the book so I think it could have been taken out.

I wasn't a big fan of the Burrow being set on fire. It wasn't in the book so I think it could have been taken out.

I don't have a problem with it not being in the book. It just wasn't well done. That's why it shouldn't have been included. I think they could have used the time better. The only thing I like about it is the way Ginny fearlessly runs after Harry. But even that feels a little underwhelming.

I agree...the Burrow scene was just...weird. All of a sudden Bellatrix and Greyback appear at the Burrow? Isn't it supposed to have a ton of protections around it? I thought it was sorta anti-climatic. But whatever.

I disliked the waitress scene the most; boring and useless!

Oh, I hated the scene at the Burrow. Not only was it unnecessary, but the way they just stand around looking at it helplessly while it's on fire is so infuriating - they're wizards!

Oh, I hated the scene at the Burrow. Not only was it unnecessary, but they way they just stand around looking at it helplessly while it's on fire is so infuriating - they're wizards!

I agree; aguamenti, anyone? That's what they did for Hagrid...

Also, I think that the lovey-dovey aspect of the book was blown out of proportion in the movie...there was just too much. (Although the scene in the hospital wing on Ron's bday? Priceless! :D)

I wish that they would've included one of the deleted scenes...it's when Draco gets up and goes to fetch his DE friends through the cabinet, after the scene in the cave, I believe it would've been. At least they recorded it...the effort was made. :shrug:

I'm going to be pretty unoriginal and go with everyone else - the waitress scene and the Burrow. The former because it was just very unnecessary considering what we sacrificed for the sake of running time, and to be honest not that entertaining. And the Burrow scene just messes up the next movie, in particular the wedding scene.

The Burrow scene - I still can't believe they set it on fire! It was painful to watch! They should have excluded that and had more of a battle at the end, for sure.

Yup, gotta go with the waitress scene too. I would have definitely preferred if Harry was at the Dursleys, but for what it's worth, that scene was set up quite nicely and I liked the atmosphere established. Harry, waiting all by himself, there's a sense of foreboding in the air, and the dark sky seen from earlier. Then Harry and the waitress spoke to eachother, and it fell apart. Nice set up, completely pointless dialogue.

And anytime Harry and Ginny were alone. I know these scenes were important to set up their relationship but it was so awkward that I was almost squirming in my seat. I just couldn't feel any chemistry. Okay, maybe leave in the kiss to establish the blossoming romance, but Ginny tying Harry's shoe could've definitely been left out.

The Burrow scene - I still can't believe they set it on fire! It was painful to watch! They should have excluded that and had more of a battle at the end, for sure.

^This.

I know they needed an action scene, but it's The Burrow. Anything else would have been better.

Definitely the Burrow scene. It was like a totally useless scene. It contributed nothing, it was never referred to afterward (if your house had burned down, don't you think there'd be some talk of it when you got back to school? Or, some aftermath? It was like it was just thrown in. The Battle of the Astronomy Tower would have been a much better action scene than Bella skipping through the marshes chanting, "I klled Sirius Black. I killed Sirius Black." How lame.


I think I said these before, but, I can't emphasize them too much:



The cafe scene at the beginning - ??????

Neville serving canapes at Slughorn's party.

Bella skipping through the Great Hall kicking the china.

The scene when Harry arrives at the Burrow and Ginny is "looking" for him - why couldn't he have just knocked at the door and the she answeres it and throws her arms around him? That yelling up the stairwell scene was silly. It was like a bad immitation of "The Waltons."

Dumbledore repeating over and over to Harry to get close to Slughorn; to let him "collect" him. After a couple of times, that started to sound a bit wierd. That, and Dumbledore's sudden interest in Harry's lovelife.

I hate the Cafe scene.
Where were the dursleys!? I <3 Them. I think GOF worked without the Dursleys (even though I'd have liked to see them) but I think HBP needed them.

I dislike the way the films portray Neville to /still/ be the dumb clumsy kid. By OOTP (book) Neville is really starting to 'blossom' and I hate the way they don't show this in HBP, for example the 'Slug Club'.

The Shoelace scene at the burrow, was completely unnecessary, and awkward.

The Burning of the Burrow Scene. Eurgh. What was that?
I'd rather have scene Bill Weasley get mauled by Fenrir Greyback.

I dislike the way the films portray Neville to /still/ be the dumb clumsy kid. By OOTP (book) Neville is really starting to 'blossom' and I hate the way they don't show this in HBP, for example the 'Slug Club'.



:agree: i completely agree...i dont understand why they chose to add this into the film..the quote was something like "I didnt make the slug club but i get to help" or something like that...in my opinion that scene does not fit the character that we see in the books

For me, the Ginny Harry kiss scene was all wrong. I love the way it happened in the book, and the movie changed it completely.
Also, as everyone else, the waitress scene in the beginning was completely unnesessary!

I think the teen angst could have been cut in half. While the blooming romances were a huge thing in the book, there were still bigger fish that fried, such as the DD/HP relationship, Half-Blood Prince mystery, and Voldemort memories/Horcruxes.

My gosh YES! My immediate thoughts after first viewing the film was that it seemed to be too light hearted with the teenage romance then my expectations based on the book. Sure I understand the makers had to pick certain stoylines over others but this avenue I thought was just too airy fairy.

I think the waitress scene was to show how Harry is starting to pick up some ladies. After I saw that scene the first time I watched it, I told my friend, "Harry Potter has become Harry Player." :lol: But it was just so unnecessary. They could have used that scene to show Dumbledore picking up Harry at the Dursleys. I really wanted to see that. But, whatev. It didn't bother me that much; it was a bit comical.

Also, I did sorta like the Burrow on fire scene, because it was high-energy and fast-paced...and I loved seeing Lupin and Tonks. But it was just completely unnecessary. It didn't add to the plot; they're all just going to go about their lives. And it's not like the Burrow is gone forever; the wedding is still taking place there and everything. So, they should have excluded that and instead used all that time to put in more Horcrux scenes.
Oh, and I also didn't like that whole Harry/Ginny exchange with her in the bath robe and tying his shoe. :shrug: So unnecessary and just awkward to watch.

Yes, the waitress scene was very unnecessary. I wish they would of replaced that scene with something more important or relevant to the story.

They left out the battle b/c they wanted to avoid repetition since the big battle is in TDH. The burrow scene was pointless, why even have the attack? And The scene with Lupin yelling at Harry about Snape? And yes, the cafe scene at the pointless, I'd rather have the scene at the Burrow at the Book.

Scenes I disliked:
- The Waitress Scene
- The Burning of The Burrow
- Harry and Ginny in The Room of Requirement.

I reckon take those ones out, Fix:

- Snape killing Dumbledore - I dont believe that Harry would have just stood idly by while Dumbledore was being attatcked, even if Smape had told him to stay quiet.

Then add in:

- The Qudditch Final with Harry doing detention... Then have Harry and Ginny's kiss. Do it properly!
- Apparition classes.
- Dumbledore's Funeral - the lit wands scene was moving, but Dumbledore needed a proper send off
- The rest of Tom Riddles life memories.
- More info on the Horcruxes

Then it would almost be perfect.

Ok one thing I see on here: reference to Snape's worst memories. Correction: That was in OOTP and TDH, not HBP.

Anyway, my opinion

What should have been included. Lots of stuff
Dursleys at the start. Plus, "KREACHER WON'T!" The fact that Harry is Kreacher's master now is an important point, sets up for Kreacher telling Harry of the Horcrux
The Gaunts and Riddles: Voldy's backstory is very important, explains his obsession with the founders, his desire for immortality. NO mention of the Gaunts, or the Riddles,
The horcrux talk: I don't think they were identified in the movie, and that was a key aspect of the story.
Bill/Fleur: Their love was important and showed good and love always exists.
The Hogwarts Battle: Without it, having the DEs there when Draco is supposed to kill Dumbledore seemed pointless. Were they just his cheer leading squad?
The funeral: Even an overview. The wand illuminating was nice, but lacked the closure and didn't really show what an important role Dumbledore played. Fawkes leading his lament was missing too.
Ron and Hermoine vowing to stay with Harry: That was a great scene, and it seemed so forced at the end. I agree we do NOT need foreshadowing to Ron's actions!

Scenes that should have been excluded
The waitress scene: Just didn't fit. Harry flirt and ride trains? Harry was never like that! Ugh!
Burning at the Burrow: We KNOW it's dangerous, even non readers know it. We don't need it proven! It was just added at random, and didn't work. Doesn't make sense
Lupin/Tonks: I do like them in canon, in the movie I didn't feel them, I hated hoiw Lupin was portrayed "YOU ARE BLINDED BY HATRED!!" Ugh, Lupin never yelled like that at Harry.
The vandalism scene, replaced by a real battle.
Harry sidling his way to Slughorn. Seriously? I wish they'd quit making Harry LIKING ATTENTION!

In Noctum. They. Should. Not. Have. Deleted. This. It's basically this scene just before Snape kills Dumbledore. Flitwick's having choir practice, and the haunting song (In Noctum) lasts throughout the scene. Snape's in the tower, and Merlin's pants, Alan Rickman out-acted EVERY actor in the movie, just through his facial expression. I was spooked-I literally had goosebumps. I felt like I was watching Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince, not a movie adaptation of it. They should have kept this scene in. I would have enjoyed the movie a lot more with this scene.

^This.

I know they needed an action scene, but it's The Burrow. Anything else would have been better.


It's mostly that the scene makes no real sense. It doesn't convey why the DE's are there, and what their ultimate purpose is. If you go by Bellatrix, it's simply a ruse to flush out Harry. It doesn't move the plot forward. It was most frustrating because it came seemingly from nowhere and went nowhere. as a scene, I can't decide what purpose it served.

In Noctum. They. Should. Not. Have. Deleted. This. It's basically this scene just before Snape kills Dumbledore. Flitwick's having choir practice, and the haunting song (In Noctum) lasts throughout the scene. Snape's in the tower, and Merlin's pants, Alan Rickman out-acted EVERY actor in the movie, just through his facial expression. I was spooked-I literally had goosebumps. I felt like I was watching Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince, not a movie adaptation of it. They should have kept this scene in. I would have enjoyed the movie a lot more with this scene.

:clap::clap::clap: This!!! The last time I watched the film I paused it as Harry and Dumbledore left the cave and watched "In Noctem" on my computer. I just can't understand why this was cut!! While we're talking about deleted scenes, I also wish the "I don't need luck, I'll be with Dumbledore" and "I'm not worried Harry, I'm with you" bookends had been kept to the cave scene. I thought that would have been a touching addition.

The inclusion of In Noctem *might* have made up for the ridiculously OOC train scene, which was one of my biggest pet peeves in the movie, especially because it follows right after one of my favorite openings of any HP movie (Dumbledore escorting Harry out of the Ministry in the immediate aftermath of OoTP not the bridge collapse).

Harry and Ginny was just completely butchered in this movie and I hate to think what Ron/Hermione shippers would have done if Ron and Hermione's relationship was handled so atrociously. Granted, I don't really love how Harry/Ginny are portrayed in the books (not a fan of the "chest monster" or her shiny hair), but Ginny feeding Harry and dressing him on the staircase? I think more scenes like their initial hug would have been a bit truer to the book that show Harry slowly starting to think of her differently and realizing his feelings. I get that they have to rework things and the film is an adaptation, but their exclusions and inclusions regarding Harry and Ginny completely changed the nature of their relationship and the character of Ginny. As someone who didn't particularly "get" that relationship as it came across in the books, the film certainly didn't help .

The Burrow burning scene was completely unnecessary, but I loathe it more for the awkward scenes that play out inside the Burrow. I think it was the filmmakers attempt to add some "action" to the film since they cut the battle at Hogwarts (a move I understand considering what comes in the final book).

I also would have loved the addition of "Don't call me a coward!"

Harry and Ginny was just completely butchered in this movie and I hate to think what Ron/Hermione shippers would have done if Ron and Hermione's relationship was handled so atrociously. Granted, I don't really love how Harry/Ginny are portrayed in the books (not a fan of the "chest monster" or her shiny hair), but Ginny feeding Harry and dressing him on the staircase? I think more scenes like their initial hug would have been a bit truer to the book that show Harry slowly starting to think of her differently and realizing his feelings. I get that they have to rework things and the film is an adaptation, but their exclusions and inclusions regarding Harry and Ginny completely changed the nature of their relationship and the character of Ginny. As someone who didn't particularly "get" that relationship as it came across in the books, the film certainly didn't help .
I agree on all things you brought up, especially this point. I never particularly enjoyed Ginny/Harry in the books, because I felt it was too sudden. But in the films, it was extremely awkward. The feeding thing and tying shoelace scene made me faceplam. She was trying to flirt, but it just seemed like her trying to mother him.

I think that Harry and Ginny in the Room of Requirment scene should have been done like it is in the books. I don't know how Harry's going to find Ravenclaw's diadem now??? :hmm:

I think that Harry and Ginny in the Room of Requirment scene should have been done like it is in the books. I don't know how Harry's going to find Ravenclaw's diadem now??? :hmm:

My guess is he'll tell Ginny and Ginny'll realize what she saw.

When I saw the movie first time, my reaction was pretty much the same as everyone else's. Too much teenage romance, random burrow scene, lack of end battle.
The Gaunt memory or funeral absence didn't bother me that much, I just couldn't get over the lame ending for a few days.
I was looking forward for the battle with Bill and Greyback and everyone else, and it didn't happen!

When I saw the movie first time, my reaction was pretty much the same as everyone else's. Too much teenage romance, random burrow scene, lack of end battle.
The Gaunt memory or funeral absence didn't bother me that much, I just couldn't get over the lame ending for a few days.
I was looking forward for the battle with Bill and Greyback and everyone else, and it didn't happen!

My thoughts exactly :p As most people, i can't stand the Burrow attack. It should never have been in the movie in my opinion. The teenage romance didn't bother me that much, but the way they handled Harry/Ginny really did. Not a good job on that relationship. And then we have the lack of the Battle at the Astronomy Tower, which they cut, not to make the battle in DH seem repeated. I don't think anyone would mind some wand battle in HBP, it wasn't the most exiting movie...

That said, i do like the movie. But it could have been so much more ;)

In Noctum.

I never saw this before today. Great music, well used.
I suppose there are lots of "deleted scenes" about youtube. I'll go see....

The whole waitress scene should have been excluded, not just because it was cringeworthy but I think it undermined the Harry/Ginny relationship (which already suffered enough later on) just because it made Harry look like he was going after her one minute and Ginny the next, as if Ginny and the waitress were on the same level.

In Noctem should have been in, the song is so beautiful and haunting and one of my favourite HP soundtrack songs and that scene would have been such a dramatic build up.

I also liked one of the other deleted scenes, only small where Harry comes down the stairs from the dormitory and looks at Ginny. I thought that could have been hinting at them having to break up, like a little knowing look between them or something.

I know the Burrow scene gets a lot of stick, but I didn't mind it too much mainly because we got to see Ginny a) go after Harry and b) fight. But I would have preferred the battle at the end of the book to be in in its place.

The whole waitress scene should have been excluded, not just because it was cringeworthy but I think it undermined the Harry/Ginny relationship (which already suffered enough later on) just because it made Harry look like he was going after her one minute and Ginny the next, as if Ginny and the waitress were on the same level.Having long ago been a 16-year old male myself, I can assure you that this is only if you are putting women on two-levels: attractive and unattractive. If it's level 1, then we boys tend to act like fish in an aquarium after something gets past the "it looks like food" criterion.... :p (As Rowling showed us with Harry's bumbling attraction to Cho, Harry certainly was not above simply chasing a pretty face....)

Now, there is the issue about whether Yates should have wasted so much time on the romance: but as he decided that Prince was a story about sexual politics, I suppose that it does make sense to show us that Harry's not an 11-year old anymore!
I know the Burrow scene gets a lot of stick, but I didn't mind it too much mainly because we got to see Ginny a) go after Harry and b) fight. But I would have preferred the battle at the end of the book to be in in its place.The other thing is that this represents good adaptation. The Burrow scene was a condensation of several things that happen in the book, where we read 3rd hand about "terrorist" events in the wizarding world. On page, that works very well to build a background of tension and fear: but it would not have worked at all on film. Instead, they needed to show us why people were afraid. It also provided a very important "middle" for the Death Eaters, so that when we see them on the Tower, it's not for the first time in two hours. Again, Rowling did this in the book with words: we read reports about Greyback and Bellatrix and other Death Eaters, but we don't actually see them until they turn up on the Tower.

(The deranged "I killed Sirius Black..." was a nice "continuity" bit to remind people of events in prior films, too, although I have no idea how well it worked for Joe and Jane Public.)

In addition, the scene also did what you mentioned: developed Ginny as someone worthy of Harry's interest and affections, as well as develop the possibility that there was a mutual attraction between the two.

So, what this scene did was distill the important information from several parts of the book into one cinematically appealing scene.


My vote for what should/could have been cut: 1. anything and everything to do with Lav-Lav! :cool: Sure, it was funny: but it detracted from the story, and that time could have been far better used building up a mystery about Snape and developing Harry's reflexive animosity towards him. There were plenty of other ways to show Ron & Hermione "missing" each other and the frustration/anger that evolves from that, which could have been melded in with stuff relevant to the actual story.
2. Quidditch! Yes, it was not as pace-killing or boring as it was in the first two films, and it might actually have been visually entertaining; however, cut Lav-Lav, and you cut the need for this, and again open up more space for furthering ??Snape!?!?
3. Spinner's End: The film gave away the end of the movie at the outset. This was less of a problem for the book, as it did a better job of building up the "Whither, Snape?" aspect of the story, but even there it was a bit out-of-place: we should have learned about this at the same time Harry did. The film had to show us Harry learning about it, and the whole "Snape might have been lying" explanation might have seemed more plausible if we hadn't known that Snape wasn't lying.

All the memories and less of the teen angst and relationships!
Oy there's a war going on! lol

Oh Yeah and that bit when they spent ten minutes burning down a house that was never burnt down in the book and served no purpose to the plot or story whatsoever when could have included the Gaunts and/or the scene about Hufflepuff's cup.... ESSENTIALS for the story.

I was so unhappy the first two times I saw HBP because I was simmering in anger over thw butchering of the story and understanding the history of Voldemort, especially because Dumbledore doesn't leave Harry without a clue on how to defeat him. Harry is left with very good information on how to finally defeat Voldemort and they basically made the kid go on the hunt with practically no information when Jo gave us and Harry excellent preparation for Deathly Hallows.

This remains my biggest complaint.

All the memories and less of the teen angst and relationships!
Oy there's a war going on! lol

Oh Yeah and that bit when they spent ten minutes burning down a house that was never burnt down in the book and served no purpose to the plot or story whatsoever when could have included the Gaunts and/or the scene about Hufflepuff's cup.... ESSENTIALS for the story.


The burrow scene was actually 3 minutes.

The burrow scene was actually 3 minutes.

I like hyperbole. lol. :yuhup:

Oh Yeah and that bit when they spent ten minutes burning down a house that was never burnt down in the book and served no purpose to the plot or story whatsoever when could have included the Gaunts and/or the scene about Hufflepuff's cup.... ESSENTIALS for the story.Neither of these had much to do with the story as particulars; indeed, the Gaunt house stuff really was a bit gratuitous in the book. The importance of Horcruxes to the story (in the book) was that they set up the contrast between protagonist and antagonist: Harry's personal political decisions are who to include and who to exclude in different categories; Voldemort's personal political decisions are to (basically) exclude everyone.

Ironically, "butchering" is a good word for what was done: butchers do not randomly hack meat (as we imply by common usage), but trim out particular cuts. That is what Yates did: from a story about Harry's personal politics, he extracted one cut, i.e., Harry's and Friends' sexual politics. Sexual politics are, of course, a very important part of personal politics: but the plot lines showing Harry playing Karl Rove with Draco and Snape, and the plot line showing how Voldemort and Harry fundamentally differ have nothing to do with sexual politics: those are the politics of alliance, enmity and investment.

So, don't cut the house: as I wrote above, that nicely distilled important story and thematic lines into a short, cinematically appealing scene, and that is what good adaptation does. Instead, cut the Quidditch and Lav-Lav: those are very peripheral to the story. All told, that probably frees up 10 minutes for developing ??Draco and ?!?Snape?!?, as well as another scene to develop how Voldemort works alone. (Of course, Rowling went and chucked the last part out of the window in Hallows, but it was important for this story!)
Harry is left with very good information on how to finally defeat Voldemort and they basically made the kid go on the hunt with practically no information when Jo gave us and Harry excellent preparation for Deathly Hallows. Not only is the opposite true, but it is also one of the cruxes of the Deathly Hallows story. The worthwhile point of the Endless Camping Trip is that it develops Harry feeling totally abandoned by Dumbledore: Dumbledore left Harry with almost no information about how to destroy the Horcruxes, and no particulars about where they might be. This spills over into the dynamics with Ron and Hermione: it's not just jealousy regarding Hermione that causes Ron to split, but also anger that Harry had zero clue what they are doing. After all, didn't Dumbledore leave Harry some plan by which to go?

("What" the Horcruxes were really was the least of the issues: what Harry needed to know was, where are they, what do I need to do to get it once I get there, and how do I destroy it? Remember, he goes into Gringotts with only the Cup or "something of Ravenclaw's.")


Indeed, it bears remembering that four years ago, this was one of the issues/questions people had concerning the final story. How was Harry going to figure out how to destroy the Horcruxes? How would he possibly find the Horcruxes given the very vague information that Dumbledore left? A lot of the simple "It's the 3rd Cup on the Right in the Trophy Room" stemmed from this. Also, a lot of the "Dumbledore faked his death" "conspiracy" theory used this: as Dumbledore would not have died leaving Harry so in the dark. (This also was used as evidence against the idea that Snape knew Dumbledore was going to die and that Dumbledore & Snape had planned Snape's action as an emergency contingency!)

Neither of these had much to do with the story as particulars; indeed, the Gaunt house stuff really was a bit gratuitous in the book. The importance of Horcruxes to the story (in the book) was that they set up the contrast between protagonist and antagonist: Harry's personal political decisions are who to include and who to exclude in different categories; Voldemort's personal political decisions are to (basically) exclude everyone.

Ironically, "butchering" is a good word for what was done: butchers do not randomly hack meat (as we imply by common usage), but trim out particular cuts. That is what Yates did: from a story about Harry's personal politics, he extracted one cut, i.e., Harry's and Friends' sexual politics. Sexual politics are, of course, a very important part of personal politics: but the plot lines showing Harry playing Karl Rove with Draco and Snape, and the plot line showing how Voldemort and Harry fundamentally differ have nothing to do with sexual politics: those are the politics of alliance, enmity and investment.

So, don't cut the house: as I wrote above, that nicely distilled important story and thematic lines into a short, cinematically appealing scene, and that is what good adaptation does. Instead, cut the Quidditch and Lav-Lav: those are very peripheral to the story. All told, that probably frees up 10 minutes for developing ??Draco and ?!?Snape?!?, as well as another scene to develop how Voldemort works alone. (Of course, Rowling went and chucked the last part out of the window in Hallows, but it was important for this story!)
Not only is the opposite true, but it is also one of the cruxes of the Deathly Hallows story. The worthwhile point of the Endless Camping Trip is that it develops Harry feeling totally abandoned by Dumbledore: Dumbledore left Harry with almost no information about how to destroy the Horcruxes, and no particulars about where they might be. This spills over into the dynamics with Ron and Hermione: it's not just jealousy regarding Hermione that causes Ron to split, but also anger that Harry had zero clue what they are doing. After all, didn't Dumbledore leave Harry some plan by which to go?

("What" the Horcruxes were really was the least of the issues: what Harry needed to know was, where are they, what do I need to do to get it once I get there, and how do I destroy it? Remember, he goes into Gringotts with only the Cup or "something of Ravenclaw's.")


Indeed, it bears remembering that four years ago, this was one of the issues/questions people had concerning the final story. How was Harry going to figure out how to destroy the Horcruxes? How would he possibly find the Horcruxes given the very vague information that Dumbledore left? A lot of the simple "It's the 3rd Cup on the Right in the Trophy Room" stemmed from this. Also, a lot of the "Dumbledore faked his death" "conspiracy" theory used this: as Dumbledore would not have died leaving Harry so in the dark. (This also was used as evidence against the idea that Snape knew Dumbledore was going to die and that Dumbledore & Snape had planned Snape's action as an emergency contingency!)

I was not clear in my post based on the 6 paragraphs you needed to disagree with me.

Harry has enough excellent information to logically deduce ON HIS OWN what needs to be done in the hunt for Voldemort. Harry understands Voldemort (something else cut from the film) it is his understanding his enemy that helps him know what to look for, and where to look.

Harry's frustration is the same as Ron's (except that he is far less vocal about it).... it isn't perfectly clear or laid out. On top of that he is having a crisis because everything he finds out about Dumbledore after his death contradicts the Dumbledore he knew, admired, and loved in life.

HBP canon doesn't really leave Harry without a clue. It leaves him with a challenge.

The movie left our hero about two steps from clueless.

HBP canon doesn't really leave Harry without a clue. It leaves him with a challenge. But Harry's frustration and anger at Dumbledore stems from the fact that he is without a clue: Harry simply has no idea how to destroy the Horcrux he has nor has he any decent ideas about where to find any of the others.

Moreover, this was a problem for the next story (and thus a topic for a thread about the possible shortcomings of Hallows 1!). The Prince film had to worry about developing that story (Harry's personal politics, or some variant thereof), not developing plot for the next story (Harry's role in the Greater Good.) Setting up plot for two films later would not have been a good investment of time. Cutting scenes like Lav-Lav that didn't really contribute to the Prince story would have been the way to go.

In OOP, I really wish that it had been Dobby that told Harry about the room of requirement, not Neville. Dobby could have turned up and informed Harry that he's working at Hogwarts and that he is there to help him with anything. Then Harry tells him they need a room for the DA, and Dobby shows. I can imagine a hilarious, frantic Dobby running to Harry just before Umbridge arrives to bust them all.

I'm not surprised, though, because it seems that the filmmakers treat house elves in exactly the same way as wizards do. Like if they don't even exist. They were even going to keep Kreacher out of OOP.

I didn't like the way Neville just sort of stumbled onto the room or requirement. They missed a real opportunity for some good laughs.

oh, this an hbp thread. oops.

I wanted Dobby to take Harry to the RoR but the way Neville found it set it up for DH2 if they are going to keep that RoR scene in. I would have liked Slughorn's initial scene to have been shorter, I didn't think we needed to see all the bits being put to rights.

I wanted Dobby to take Harry to the RoR but the way Neville found it set it up for DH2 if they are going to keep that RoR scene in. I would have liked Slughorn's initial scene to have been shorter, I didn't think we needed to see all the bits being put to rights.



I think that scene is kept because they have to have a 'big magic scene' at the beginning of each HP movie. It's kind of a signature move. Keeping the "This is a magical movie" theme going.

I wanted Dobby to take Harry to the RoR but the way Neville found it set it up for DH2 if they are going to keep that RoR scene in. I would have liked Slughorn's initial scene to have been shorter, I didn't think we needed to see all the bits being put to rights.ajna has the right of it. However, it is not so much as "this is a magical movie" as it is "this is a story in which magic is a common plot device." It's just Chekhov's Rule in reverse: a gun fired in a story should be shown hanging on the wall first. This puts the "there is a lot of magic here!" gun firmly on the wall. (Rowling's books are usually exemplars at following Chekhov's Rule, too.)

Moreover, shortening the magical "fixing" of the room would have saved a handful of seconds, tops. Shaving seconds from scenes does not add up to allowing for an additional scene elsewhere in the film: you really have to shave minutes or whole scenes to do that. And introducing Slughorn (as well as setting up the idea that he's possibly a little "dodgier" than your standard Hogwarts teacher) was a very important set of guns to put on the wall, so this scene was a must.

Now, any of the Lav-Lav scenes on the other hand..... :rolleyes:

Moreover, shortening the magical "fixing" of the room would have saved a handful of seconds, tops. Shaving seconds from scenes does not add up to allowing for an additional scene elsewhere in the film: you really have to shave minutes or whole scenes to do that. And introducing Slughorn (as well as setting up the idea that he's possibly a little "dodgier" than your standard Hogwarts teacher) was a very important set of guns to put on the wall, so this scene was a must.

Now, any of the Lav-Lav scenes on the other hand..... :rolleyes:

Do you just mean any mention of Lav-Lav, whether she is on screen or not? I'm a bit curious what Lav-Lav scenes people think need to be cut. Don't get me wrong, I definitely think the romance was a bit overdone in the film, but there were really very few large scenes with her. Most are quite brief and the initial setup was nicely done, I thought. She gives him a hello in Diagon Alley he hardly acknowledges, then there is the Quidditch tryout, which I think is quite fun (unnecessary perhaps, but fun, and the movies still need to be fun). After their embrace at the Quidditch celebration, she is really only referenced (in the corridor with Harry or the library with Harry and Hermione) or seen in passing more than anything else (the train, the corridors) until Ron is poisoned. Obviously, this is an important part of Ron's character development and setup to his growing closer with Hermione. So those who say to cut down/remove all Lav-Lav scenes, what scenes did you find most unnecessary and in need of trimming?

Ron and Lavender getting together is a part of the plot so it did need to be included. Personally, after they get together, I thought most of the discussion about and scenes with her were unneeded. It felt like spelling out and telling more than just showing. We already get that she's kind of a silly girl and I think glances in the hallway while talking about something else more central to the plot would have been better than Ron describing their relationship as "chemical" or Hermione all put out in the library. I think it does a bit of disservice to the actors really (as by this film Emma is pretty good at conveying her emotions with just a look) and detracts from the major plot. Everything up until their getting together I thought was spot on though!

In 'Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince' FILM, do you think it was a mistake to

1) Completely miss the scene with Hepzibah Smith's Hufflepuff cup and,

2) Modify the scene in which Harry hides Snape's potions book in the ROR so that Ginny is the hider and Harry never sees the bust with the diadem on top?

Do you think this will really affect the way in which Harry finds the Horcruxes in the last movie?

I suppose we will soon find out in the final film!

Thoughts?

I wish they added the scene about Voldemort's mother. So people could feel small sympathy for Voldy, at least and so we'd understand his history. I also wish they showed the part where Voldemort's introduced to Helga's Cup and Salazar's Locket....

And the relationships in HBP kind of annoyed me. I wish they portrayed Ginny differently, specially with Dean, I wish they'd break-up in the movie. And I wish they added the scene where Ginny confronts Ron about him being so prude or overprotective, that way we see why he went on with Lavander so quickly.

Do you think this will really affect the way in which Harry finds the Horcruxes in the last movie?... Thoughts?No. Remember, that was shown 2 years ago: if the Tiara or Cup had been shown, then the audiences would have long since forgotten them. The Hallows film was going to have to introduce them from scratch regardless of whether they'd been in the films before or not. Indeed, with a 2-part Hallows, they had to be introduced in part 2: audiences would get lost (as they did with Matrix II/III) if important elements for part 2 were left as "remembered" from 6 months ago.

Now, that stuff still could have been useful for the film if it had been telling the story about Harry's personal politics: it shows how the Antagonist operates fundamentally differently than does the Protagonist. However, Yates changed the story to one about sexual politics, and Voldemort's solipsistic scheming was not relevant to that story.


Do you just mean any mention of Lav-Lav, whether she is on screen or not? ... Ron and Lavender getting together is a part of the plot so it did need to be included. Part of the plot (and I am not positive that I'd even qualify it as that!) is not always part of the story; the story is about Harry's personal politics, and really the whole Lav-Lav stuff would have fit in with that in the book if Harry had taken a more active role in trying to mediate (a type of politicking) between Hermione and Ron.

As these things are "in for the penny, in for the pound" (that is, if you don't do it all, then there is no point in doing any of it at all), it would have been better to cut this and put in Harry's interactions with Scrimgeour (the choice of mentors: Dumbledore vs. the Minister) and/or Voldemort's past (emphasizing the contrast between Voldemort's operating alone and solely for his own purposes with Harry's willingness to work with others and general desire to benefit others).

Personally, I think that they could have beefed up Harry+Ginny by integrating that more with the Quest for Sluggy's Memory: in particular, they should have used Ginny as a way to spur Harry to get the memory AND provide Sluggy with a reminder of Lily. After all, this was the big firing of the "You Have Your Mother's Eyes" gun! Aragog was extraneous (even if "Spinner's End" was a good running metaphorical gag and great foreshadowing throughout the book: but that wouldn't work on film!) and the film could have killed 2 birds with 1 stone here.

Part of the plot (and I am not positive that I'd even qualify it as that!) is not always part of the story; the story is about Harry's personal politics, and really the whole Lav-Lav stuff would have fit in with that in the book if Harry had taken a more active role in trying to mediate (a type of politicking) between Hermione and Ron.

I guess what makes up the plot is open to interpretation. I always just consider HBP as the book where they all grow up. The story for me is about the transition to adulthood. I always think of the plot as the "whys" and "hows" of the story, the events that play out and cause conflict. I don't know if it fits with the technical definition, but that's what I meant when I referred to plot. Everything that Harry and his friends discover - about themselves, about Voldemort, about Snape, about Sluggy - are all a part of that plot to me. Perhaps I just read it at too simple a level. To each their own.

I understand your reasoning, but disagree with the "in for the penny, in for the pound" argument. While I do think the film concerned itself far too much with the romance (I remember even reading one review that called it a "romantic comedy"!), I believe that showing the characters growing up in that way was important to the film. However, as I stated above, I think it was far too heavy-handed and a few simple scenes would have conveyed that aspect of the plot well enough. It did NOT need to be 50% of the film. Removing unnecessary scenes/dialogue would have allowed for more important scenes that, as you said, would have juxtaposed Voldemort and Harry's interactions with other people.

wimsey wrote:

"My vote for what should/could have been cut:
1. anything and everything to do with Lav-Lav! Sure, it was funny: but it detracted from the story, and that time could have been far better used building up a mystery about Snape and developing Harry's reflexive animosity towards him. There were plenty of other ways to show Ron & Hermione "missing" each other and the frustration/anger that evolves from that, which could have been melded in with stuff relevant to the actual story.

3. Spinner's End: The film gave away the end of the movie at the outset. This was less of a problem for the book, as it did a better job of building up the "Whither, Snape?" aspect of the story, but even there it was a bit out-of-place: we should have learned about this at the same time Harry did. The film had to show us Harry learning about it, and the whole "Snape might have been lying" explanation might have seemed more plausible if we hadn't known that Snape wasn't lying."

These suggestions are very concrete and interesting, but in the end I cannot help thinking that you seem to imply that the story is just about Harry alone.
This is of course one way of looking at it, but although Harry is the protagonist, I think the story is about much more than Harry and I'm glad the film reflected this.

I'm sure that building up Harry's hatred towards Snape would have been a good way to create tension and misdirection (especially for those who don't read the books) and it's also an easier way to structure the film.
Still; letting the film reflect purely Harry's kind of view makes for a much less nuanced characterization - I found the image you get of Snape in this film more interesting and more multi-dimensional than what you get when you follow the misdirection of the book. Since the film makers decided to follow several characters point of view, I find that you get a much wider range of characterizations and more substance to the film on repeated viewings.

I agree that there are several things I would have cut in the story or used for something else, since the film - like every other HP film except OoTP - could use a little trimming. But I prefer to cut or contract elements containing pure exposition, like the explanation of the vanishing cabinet at the Burrow, or contracting some of the scenes already shown.

So, don't cut the house: as I wrote above, that nicely distilled important story and thematic lines into a short, cinematically appealing scene, and that is what good adaptation does. Instead, cut the Quidditch and Lav-Lav: those are very peripheral to the story.


I agree with you in theory. It does nicely wrap up the idea of imminent threat, peril and danger. The main problem I have with the scene is that it is just a bad scene. Not so much that it wasn't in the book. It just feels wrong. There doesn't seem to be much point to the attack, and the house burning down feels wrong also. I would have preferred to see the house struck badly but not completely burned. Especially since it appears again in the next film in tact. (I guess it would explain why the interior looks different in some ways than in CoS, PoA, and GoF, though. ) I know everyone thinks Carter's Bellatrix is brilliant, but to me she comes off as a petulant child. I suppose she is meant to, but it's hard to understand the point in this film of her mocking Harry "Come and get me!" luring him out, and then just giving up the attack. The entire attack in itself feels questionable and flat to me. I didn't do a very good job of explaining this though.

I agree with you in theory. It does nicely wrap up the idea of imminent threat, peril and danger. The main problem I have with the scene is that it is just a bad scene. Not so much that it wasn't in the book. It just feels wrong. There doesn't seem to be much point to the attack, and the house burning down feels wrong also. I would have preferred to see the house struck badly but not completely burned. Especially since it appears again in the next film in tact. (I guess it would explain why the interior looks different in some ways than in CoS, PoA, and GoF, though. ) I know everyone thinks Carter's Bellatrix is brilliant, but to me she comes off as a petulant child. I suppose she is meant to, but it's hard to understand the point in this film of her mocking Harry "Come and get me!" luring him out, and then just giving up the attack. The entire attack in itself feels questionable and flat to me. I didn't do a very good job of explaining this though.

Or we could have had a mini duel here and Bill Weasley could be properly defaced by Greyback. I agree that as it stands, their attack was pointless because they just up and leave like it's not worth it or something. I get that this was the replacement for the battle at Hogwarts since it would be repetitive of DH2's battle, but a duel similar to the one in the Ministry in OotP would have been okay, I think. And I think it still would be a proper introduction to the upcoming Wizarding War.

This is something that I wish they had kept. It was one of my very favorite moments from the book, when Voldemort (no longer Tom Riddle) comes to Hogwarts to ask Dumbledore for the Defense Against the Dark Arts post. Lots of good dialogue they could have had. And it sure as hell was more important than half the stuff they included in the movie.

I totally think they should have added a scene where Harry got some punishment or perhaps be scolded by any teacher after cursing Draco in the bathroom. I know it's not really necessary, but I felt that it was inappropriate to show that cursing other students, and almost killing them was an unpunishable behaviour. Also it didn't help that he had his first kiss with Ginny right after cursing Draco, it came across to me as if he were being rewarded for his action, :shrug:.

The scene in the beginning with Harry and the waitress could have be excluded. Way too awkward and it definitely didn't match Harry's personality.

I totally think they should have added a scene where Harry got some punishment or perhaps be scolded by any teacher after cursing Draco in the bathroom.

Actually, I agree. I don't know why they decided it was appropriate to shift the tone from dead serious to romantic. It would have been a perfect time to insert the detention with Snape, which would have reinforced the hatred between Snape and Harry and how much Snape loathed James and Sirius, in between these two scenes.

The scene in the beginning with Harry and the waitress. Way too awkward.

While it was awkward and made his sudden crush on Ginny feel cheap, I definitely prefer the setting over the safety of the Dursley's home because it immediately set up the romantic tone of the film and also the danger lurking around everywhere. The railway station was a perfect setting for Dumbledore to pick up Harry as they later meet at King's Cross.

Actually, I agree. I don't know why they decided it was appropriate to shift the tone from dead serious to romantic. It would have been a perfect time to insert the detention with Snape, which would have reinforced the hatred between Snape and Harry and how much Snape loathed James and Sirius, in between these two scenes.
The problem with this, though, is that Harry already had his potions book with him; therefore, there couldn't be any "Bring me all your books, Potter" because Harry would've had to hand over his book right then and there. There also would've had to have been an earlier scene with Ron's quill messing up and misspelling words for the Roonil Wazlib part and, imo, it wouldn't have worked cinematically.

The problem with this, though, is that Harry already had his potions book with him; therefore, there couldn't be any "Bring me all your books, Potter" because Harry would've had to hand over his book right then and there. There also would've had to have been an earlier scene with Ron's quill messing up and misspelling words for the Roonil Wazlib part and, imo, it wouldn't have worked cinematically.

It need not have been exactly like the book. Even a single line would have worked; instead of Snape just looking at him and saying absolutely nothing, he could told him how dark the magic he'd used is, and how much he underestimated him, and ask where he'd learnt it (which would also make Harry's hiding the book more understandable and important). Or even have other teachers rushing into the bathroom and getting shocked at Harry's action, etc. Just any gesture to show how serious the book and the spell are.

It need not have been exactly like the book. Even a single line would have worked; instead of Snape just looking at him and saying absolutely nothing, he could told him how dark the magic he'd used is, and how much he underestimated him, and ask where he'd learnt it (which would also make Harry's hiding the book more understandable and important). Or even have other teachers rushing into the bathroom and getting shocked at Harry's action, etc. Just any gesture to show how serious the book and the spell are.

I thought the sight of Draco bleeding on the floor showed very clearly how serious the spell was. And the following scene showed Harry's rejection of the book. To have Snape standing over Draco's almost-corpse, and wasting time talking about anything at all, would have diluted the impact of Harry's action.

Show, don't tell.

That said, the connection between the book and Snape and the HBP name/title, was not well executed. The dots were not joined up.

Or we could have had a mini duel here and Bill Weasley could be properly defaced by Greyback. I agree that as it stands, their attack was pointless because they just up and leave like it's not worth it or something. I get that this was the replacement for the battle at Hogwarts since it would be repetitive of DH2's battle, but a duel similar to the one in the Ministry in OotP would have been okay, I think. And I think it still would be a proper introduction to the upcoming Wizarding War.

I don't think I will ever understand the Burning Burrow scene personally. I know they wanted to put in something to replace the Battle of the Astronomy Tower, as they felt it would be too like the Battle of Hogwarts. But in the same turn, couldn't the Burning Burrow scene be likened to the attack on Lovegood's house?

Neither of these had much to do with the story as particulars; indeed, the Gaunt house stuff really was a bit gratuitous in the book. The importance of Horcruxes to the story (in the book) was that they set up the contrast between protagonist and antagonist: Harry's personal political decisions are who to include and who to exclude in different categories; Voldemort's personal political decisions are to (basically) exclude everyone.

What I like about the story of the Gaunts is the haunting quality it gives to the story. It's a bit like Wuthering Heights in its family dynamics. ;) It also gives it an "oldness," a real sense of Voldermort's almost "ancient" history, so to speak, even if it is only about seventy years before the story. I like this element of the obscure memories and how difficult they must have been to obtain. It gives an eerie depth to the story, especially with the poignancy of Merope's life and mistakes. It isn't strictly needed to tell about the Horcruxes, perhaps, but if sensitively handled these scenes could have given a haunting and heartbreaking element to the film. How and if this could have worked alongside the other material, I am not sure. But I felt more time was needed on the Horcruxes because they are the whole point of the last book and the reason for the perilous adventure at the end of the sixth.

Cutting scenes like Lav-Lav that didn't really contribute to the Prince story would have been the way to go.
I agree, but I feel that even Harry/Ginny wasn't done well at all. If they wanted to focus on it, they should have omitted all the "furtive" glances (it's no more furtive when you're staring at someone for more than two minutes.) and cheesy flirting (tart feeding and shoe lace tying. Need I say more?). Rather, focus on scenes like the Room of Requirement, which really showed the depth of the Harry/Ginny relationship. Even though I initially disliked it, I have to admit now that the Room of Requirement scene was very nicely done. Harry and Ginny were meant to be a serious couple from the start, that's why they're so torn up about leaving each other in DH. So, cut all the annoying teenage romance scenes, which-forgive me for saying this-should belong to a teen movie like Twilight.

I loved HBP for being a generally dark book, war is brewing, Voldemort is rising, and spreading his terror throughout the Wizarding World. Families were being murdered every other day, and so on. If they had kept certain scenes, it would really set the tone of the movie. You don't have to be faithful to the books, but keep the essence of it. The essence of HBP was dark, but the movie didn't show that. If they'd kept the Gaunt house scene, it would have been better.

But the bone I have to pick is, was taking out In Noctem. I'm sorry, but I really can't forgive them for deleting such an awesome scene. It set the WHOLE mood, and the whole time I was watching the scene, I was thinking: "Why didn't they keep "In Noctem" in?!!?"

"In Noctem" - which scene is that? (Sorry to sound dim!)

"In Noctem" - which scene is that? (Sorry to sound dim!)

The song I believe??? Not sure.

I don't think I will ever understand the Burning Burrow scene personally. I know they wanted to put in something to replace the Battle of the Astronomy Tower, as they felt it would be too like the Battle of Hogwarts. But in the same turn, couldn't the Burning Burrow scene be likened to the attack on Lovegood's house?

Very true. I was never a fan of the Burning Burrow scene, and fast forward it everytime I watch the movie, partially because I don't feel it really adds anything to the plot. What annoys me is they put in this scene, instead of something that was actually written in the book. But let's face it, they wanted to put in action to keep the movie interesting. I believe focusing more on the Battle on the Astronomy Tower would have been more entertaining, but that could just be me.

I wish they would have added more about Voldemort's back story, specifically the Gaunts and the horcruxes.

"In Noctem" - which scene is that? (Sorry to sound dim!)

The song , I believe??? Not sure.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2DpK6Z5z2Q

I agree. Beautiful, haunting song and scene/group of scenes; I do recognise it from the deleted scenes now. Thanks for posting the link.

The burning burrow is the only thing the films have ever done that I really disagree with (apart from the soppy line and standing ovation to Hagrid at the end of COS). There is so much other great material in HBP that would have been better. But I do like the film very much apart from that, and despite the rather inadequate Horcrux scenes.

Well, let's see,

Making Snape DADA teacher and no DADA classes: I'M GETTING MY GUN!

Burning Burrow: They showed the Death Eaters attacking at the beginning, so it's pointless.

The waitress: ***? I always skip this part.

Bellatrix at the end: I know it wasn't in the book,
but it was AWESOME! I thought she wasn't in the book enough.

No battle/no funeral: Snape and the DEs walking out of Hogwarts
just seemed mostly dull to me. Bella was the best part of that sequence.
I've been thinking about the funeral. Just having the teachers and DA would
have sufficed.

BTW, I thought that Harry and Hermione should have seen
the portrait of Eileen Prince. The HBP plot was really, mostly in the background.

Here's one

The movie is called half-blood prince, yet where was the half blood prince reveal? That was a big bombshell in the book, the big reveal that SNAPE was the half blood prince. yet it's not mentioned in the movie!!

The sixth movie might as well be called "Harry Potter and the romantic comedy"

My favourite book, and so much richness got watered down

Here's one

The movie is called half-blood prince, yet where was the half blood prince reveal? That was a big bombshell in the book, the big reveal that SNAPE was the half blood prince. yet it's not mentioned in the movie!!

The sixth movie might as well be called "Harry Potter and the romantic comedy"

My favourite book, and so much richness got watered down

I'm pretty sure it was revealed in the movie nearly as same as the book. Harry goes chasing after Snape, tries Sectumsempra, etc. on him and movie Snape says "You dare use my own spells against me, Potter? Yes--I'm the Half-Blood Prince."

Was it? OK, if that's true then I must be remembering wrong, it's been a few years.

Something I thought:

There were aurors AT THE SCHOOL so how did the Death Eaters STILL GET IN? Was the auror asleep at the switch or something?

Seems a bit hard to believe, considering they walked in and vandalized!

The aurors at the school seemed unncessary, why not have them just at Hogsmeade?

The Death Eaters got in via the vanishing cabinet in the Room of Requirement. You see Bellatrix, Greyback and the Carrows entering Borgin and Burkes, then appearing in the Room of Requirement quite clearly in the film.

The romance in the movie. Ron and Lavender's scenes were good, but I feel like some of those scenes could be cut to add more important stuff (ex. More Tom Riddle memories).

Harry and Ginny's relationship needs a complete re-work!

I'm fine that they left the funeral out, but I feel like the "battle" in the movie....Wasn't a battle. Bill getting attack by Greyback, Remus and Tonks....I just feel like we didn't focus on these characters enough.

The Burrow getting attacked was completely pointless.

I agree that the attack on the Burrow made no sense. I mean, what exactly was Bellatrix going to do? Kill Harry Potter against the explicit command of the Dark Lord himself?

I think it was just a device put in the film to get an action sequence in before the end. The rest of the movie is very much driven by comedy or by plot exposition.

It's still one of the better movies in the series, I think. Or, Felix does :p

I agree that the attack on the Burrow made no sense. I mean, what exactly was Bellatrix going to do? Kill Harry Potter against the explicit command of the Dark Lord himself?

I think it was just a device put in the film to get an action sequence in before the end. The rest of the movie is very much driven by comedy or by plot exposition.

It's still one of the better movies in the series, I think. Or, Felix does :p

I know. The minister and Percy coming to the Burrow would have been a lot more interesting, IMO. Percy's ostracising his family is barely(if at all) in any of the movies. They would of made up for it, in my mind, if that scene was in the movie. Maybe to just explain why Percy is never there!

Yea, that's just a drawback to book to screen adaptations. You have to keep the viewer interested throughout, not all viewers have read the book and would prefer more eye candy then plot.

It's not bad. :)

I despised the Burrow scene. Liked Harry and Hermione talking on the stairs and the cut away shot. I liked Harry talking to Slughorn in Hagrid's hut. Ron's lovesick/potion reaction. I always like the little things.

There are some interesting hints that I liked that I didn't notice first time round.

On the train, Draco talks about "throwing myself off the Astronomy tower". In the cut-away following Harry consoling Hermione, the camera pans up to Draco - on the Astronomy tower. A chilling prelude of what's to come.