Way Ahead for Deathly Hallows Movie(s)

There is a difference between the movie being boring and the movie having an unsatisfactory ending, IMHO. I'm still not convinced that either one is going to be the case.

And it is significant that only a couple of chapters have just camping stuff. How much screen time is that really going to take up? It isn't like we are going to be watching an hour of camping angst. It's all going to be broken up by other things...

From the moment when the trio leaves the wedding (chapter 9) everything is just camping until chapter 24. I mean, the three of them, alone, almost no contact with anyone else, no idea of what's going on with Voldemort. Tension. Lack of progress (only one horcrux down). Dark and grim. No difference between Grimmauld Place and the actual camping.

So, if we have about 30 minutes up to the wedding, we still have 1,5 hours of "camping".

[QUOTE=ArryGrotter;5433510]1. Camping: I don't see why people think its tedious either, but the illusion of 'never-ending' would actually be good storytelling, as the trio had no clues what to do next, and for them it probably did seem 'never-ending'

QUOTE]

That's very true, and that was Rowling's intention: to have a dark, grim and never-ending second act (i remember when i read the book for the first time... i reached the middle of the book and i was really thinking she would need at least another book to resolve everything!).
But if you use that as the only material for one entire film, it will be boring. Period.

But the problem is, with one 2.5 hour film, you'd never have enough time and space to do this anyway.

Splitting is the lesser of the two evils.

But the problem is, with one 2.5 hour film, you'd never have enough time and space to do this anyway.

Splitting is the lesser of the two evils.


Sometimes I think the same way. The last act of the book seems to be too big! But I think it CAN be done (surely, you read Wimsey's essay about how to adapt Deathly Hallows). Some material has to go, yes. but that's, for me, the lesser of the two evils.

From the moment when the trio leaves the wedding (chapter 9) everything is just camping until chapter 24. I mean, the three of them, alone, almost no contact with anyone else, no idea of what's going on with Voldemort. Tension. Lack of progress (only one horcrux down). Dark and grim. No difference between Grimmauld Place and the actual camping.

At Grummauld Place they have Kreacher and Lupin, so they aren't technically alone.

At Grimmauld Place that's only 2 short chapters, then they are at the Ministry, then camping for a couple of chapters (which includes the overhearing Griphook), then Godric's Hollow, then another couple of chapters camping (the latter being Silver Doe), then Xeno's and finally one more chapter.

That's less than 7 chapters camping, which are all spaces out. If it was 7 chapters consecutively, I would see a point, but since there is only 2 chapters together max (and they are all parted by at least 2 chapters of 'action') I think that is perfectly alright.

Just wondering, do you have a problem with Shell Cottage? Because that is similar to Grimmauld Place and 'camping'...

Sometimes I think the same way. The last act of the book seems to be too big! But I think it CAN be done (surely, you read Wimsey's essay about how to adapt Deathly Hallows). Some material has to go, yes. but that's, for me, the lesser of the two evils.

Yeah, I read Wimsey's essay. He proposes stripping the story down to it's very basic thematic elements, sacrificing character, depth and story, the result of which would be an economic and neat film but not much more.

Besides, Wimsey was writing under the impression that a single film would be allowed to be 3 hours. Something WB would never allow.

So Grimmauld Place is camping now too? OK then. I don't have a problem with any of it. I don't think it's boring or pointless. I see there being a point to just about everything that is plot driven, theme driven, and character driven. And again... they are not just sitting at Grimmauld Place. They discover the locket, and go to MoM as well.

I don't see how it's going to be boring. Again, I differentiate between something being boring and being unsatisfactory in some other way, whether the ending isn't good or a thematic strand isn't tied up to bring the movie together.

And honestly, I'm not in the editing room so I don't know where they will ultimately decide to end this thing or how they will choose to do it. They may change their minds or they may do it in such a way that it works.

At Grummauld Place they have Kreacher and Lupin, so they aren't technically alone.

At Grimmauld Place that's only 2 short chapters, then they are at the Ministry, then camping for a couple of chapters (which includes the overhearing Griphook), then Godric's Hollow, then another couple of chapters camping (the latter being Silver Doe), then Xeno's and finally one more chapter.

That's less than 7 chapters camping, which are all spaces out. If it was 7 chapters consecutively, I would see a point, but since there is only 2 chapters together max (and they are all parted by at least 2 chapters of 'action') I think that is perfectly alright.

Just wondering, do you have a problem with Shell Cottage? Because that is similar to Grimmauld Place and 'camping'...


Well, when they camp they have sources of information too (Phineas' portrait, and Potterwatch, encounter with Dean,Xeno...).

Yes, actually, the camping goes up to chapter 27 (with the very fitting title: "The Last Hidden Place", referring both to the Horcrux and the end of the camping). But beginning with Malfoy Mannor, they have contact with much more people and the story starts to pick up speed.

And I don't care how many chapters are: they have to fill the whole movie with that!!!

Hey, Peter Jackson made three films of nothing but walking. They did pretty well. ;)

Hey, Peter Jackson made three films of nothing but walking. They did pretty well. ;)

That's true. Three movies just to destroy the ring. Harry will be able to destroy the locket in just one film!:whistle:

Actually, that's a good example: go to The Two Towers. Take out everything except the Gollum-Sam-Frodo storyline. The result is pretty much Deathly Hallows part 1. An endless, unsatisfying and depressing journey of three pathetic characters. But without Gollum.

That's why I made that coment! I like the camping scenes, they are emotionally very strong. And they are made to seem endless, unsuccesful, depressive, grim, dark...

But the problem is that, if you remove the last act from the book, the first movie becomes a somewhat "boring" and unresolved entity. Yes, the second movie will be great, sure. But what about the first one?
Ultra-purists suggesting to add new scenes to "break the monotony". Interesting.

I hardly think that 10 to 15 minutes of camping (if it's even that long) is going to be "monotony". And what about the first one? Even Part 1 should be more exciting than any of the previous films. There is plenty of action and drama in my opinion to make it very satisfying. :cool:

Honestly, I think some are just still ticked about the split and grasping at straws to find reasons to complain about it. :shrug: But whatever...

BTW, the term "purist" is insulting and it's already been asked to stop it's use :relax:
Hey, Peter Jackson made three films of nothing but walking. They did pretty well. ;)

:lol: Good point, MoD :tu:

That's true. Three movies just to destroy the ring. Harry will be able to destroy the locket in just one film!:whistle:

Actually, that's a good example: go to The Two Towers. Take out everything except the Gollum-Sam-Frodo storyline. The result is pretty much Deathly Hallows part 1. An endless, unsatisfying and depressing journey of three pathetic characters. But without Gollum.

Yep and that proves in the right hands, anything is possible. It depends on how cinematic they make the films. Two Towers didn't have much story at all, but through the character-development, music, acting, editing, cinematography, etc, they created something very entertaining and engaging. Though even Two Towers, as a film, had a resolution. Something I want for DH1.

We Tolkienistas did enough analysing for me to be able to tell you that there is 45 mins max of Frodo/Sam/Gollum in TTT. The Ringbearers moved through different countries, encountered different obstacles, wandered into a couple of battles. All broken up with cuts to Aragorn et al in Rohan, fighting another huge battle.

And Gollum rocked.

We Tolkienistas did enough analysing for me to be able to tell you that there is 45 mins max of Frodo/Sam/Gollum in TTT. The Ringbearers moved through different countries, encountered different obstacles, wandered into a couple of battles. All broken up with cuts to Aragorn et al in Rohan, fighting another huge battle.

And Gollum rocked.

LOTR, on the other hand, needed those battles and exotic locations because the character-drama (from the books anyway) and story depth was severely lacking.

DH1 has enough character development and depth, it doesn't need as much of the visuals and battles of Two Towers. Besides, the camping will (hopefully) be spaced with enough epic vistas of surrounding mountainsides and forests to make it feel very cinematic.

I was just providing a bare-bones example that anything could be simplified. If some people think DH1 would be all camping, I was trying to show most of the LOTR trilogy was walking. It depends entirely on how they do it.

Btw, I for one find Gollum very annoying and over the top silly and actually looks quite fake and obviously CG. :whistle: IMO, he makes a mockery of seriously mentally-ill people if you want to go that far...

We Tolkienistas did enough analysing for me to be able to tell you that there is 45 mins max of Frodo/Sam/Gollum in TTT. The Ringbearers moved through different countries, encountered different obstacles, wandered into a couple of battles. All broken up with cuts to Aragorn et al in Rohan, fighting another huge battle.

And Gollum rocked.

Exactly. That's what I meant. The Two Towers did fine because it focused more on Aragorn's more epic storyline. And didn't end on a literal cliffhanger.

Sorry about the term "purist". Yes, I'm not happy about the split and I don't know why I shouldn't explain my reasons. The split affects both movies. And I just made a coment because some fans (who wanted the split) said part 1 might be "dull", "boring" and "endless".

IMO, he makes a mockery of seriously mentally-ill people if you want to go that far...

No idea what you are talking about.

Exactly. That's what I meant. The Two Towers did fine because it focused more on Aragorn's more epic storyline. And didn't end on a literal cliffhanger.

Sorry about the term "purist". Yes, I'm not happy about the split and I don't know why I shouldn't explain my reasons. The split affects both movies. And I just made a coment because some fans (who wanted the split) said part 1 might be "dull", "boring" and "endless".

Well, Frodo didn't really have a story of development in Two Towers, did he? I mean from the book. They had to create a conflict for Frodo in the film, just as they did for Aragorn in the film with his doubt issues.

Harry has a clear issue/problem that is resolved and his character developed right in Dobby's Burial. The book provides the perfect splitting point. I wish they would use it.

Exactly. That's what I meant. The Two Towers did fine because it focused more on Aragorn's more epic storyline.

There was more movement, colour and action in the Rohan scenes, while the drama between the Ringbearers amply filled the lesser amount of time allotted to it.



Harry has a clear issue/problem that is resolved and his character developed right in Dobby's Burial.

True enough, but I still doubt that it is riveting enough to fill several hours.

No idea what you are talking about.

This is off-topic but the scene where he is talking to himself is played for laughs when this type of schizophrenia causes much pain and suffering for many families with mentally-ill members. It's played in such an over-the-top and exaggerated/comical way, I find it distasteful. I don't know if it's played for laughs in the books or not. It's the same in the COS film, they made Dobby whacking himself a comical thing, which I also felt was wrong.

True enough, but I still doubt that it is riveting enough to fill several hours.

First of all, it's not several hours. It's only 2.5 hours. And I'm not suggesting that the film has to be stripped of everything except it's basic thematic bones. I'm just saying this is a conflict that could be built-up throughout the film, come to the surface after we find out about the Hallows and then be resolved after they escape Shell Cottage.

If they end part 1 with a cliffhanger the climax will actually be more satiesfying than the climax of HBP... I can't imagine DH 1 to be worse than that. There are much more action in DH than in HBP. Some of you still think it's going to be boring? Not much important happened in HBP, other than Snape killing Dumbledore and learning about the horcruxes, whereas everything in DH is important and leads to the ending. Most people survived HBP, although it might be boring in parts. DH has a more complex story filled with action here and there. When leaving the cinema after watching part one the non-readers know they need to come back to get the answers. I don't think they will think of it as a bad film, though the reviews will probably point out that fact once again.
When splitting the book into two pieces we should be aware of the fact that they might not work as good on their own as the previous installments.

Yes, I'm not happy about the split and I don't know why I shouldn't explain my reasons. The split affects both movies.

Except there was another thread created for this exact purpose so that the rest of us could carry on a discussion here without constantly coming back to the same debate about the split. :whistle: You can find it here- http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=121286&page=10

The split is final, so there isn't much point in whining out about it, IMO. But then I couldn't be happier that they decided to split. :D Would I have prefered a longer "one-shot" DH? Yeah...but I knew WB would never approve of that, so I still see this as the next best thing really. :tu:


So in somewhat recent news I see that the woman who played Alecto Carrow in HBP is coming back for DH. I hope she has a bigger role this time. I don't believe they even addressed her by name in the last. Hopefully they will make her more than just a glorified extra in DH. :shrug:

Also, I see Fiennes has started filming supposedly. That's cool. It's good they were able to get him back...having to change Voldemort would have kinda sucked :lol: They are filming the battle next, is that right? News has been quite a bit slower than I expected now HBP is out.

I think they are filming the battle this month. It seems most of the actors are set to film this month which suggests to me they are filming the battle. We already know they filmed the parts at Malfoy Manor so if Fiennes is back then they are filming the battle.

I think they are filming the battle this month. It seems most of the actors are set to film this month which suggests to me they are filming the battle. We already know they filmed the parts at Malfoy Manor so if Fiennes is back then they are filming the battle.

That's going to be amazing! I can't wait to see it. It will definitely be unique. I wonder if it will be as epic as the battle in ROTk with wide shots, or if they will shoot it in a more intimate scale with close-ups of one wizard dueling another or a combo of both.

Still, I don't get it. There's so much drama happening during the camping: the trio lost and despairing, Ron's decent into disillusionment, the trio breaking apart, the nerve-racking news from the outside world, etc.

I suspect it will be better in the film since we'll be able to have these epic sweeps of the surrounding countryside.
Actually that would create a poor film. Epic sweeps of the countryside or cinematography in general conveys feelings and emotions to the audience. If we have epic sweeps of the countryside, what would result is a contradiction to what's happening in the tent. Claustrophobia, the pressure of being hunted or possibly surrounded at any moment, the mounting disagreements and hopelessness. It'd be showing an image of openess and exploration coupled with a static scene with zero movement. While it might be comedic, if we are supposed to feel this drama, epic sweeps of the countryside is not the way to go.

Actually that would create a poor film. Epic sweeps of the countryside or cinematography in general conveys feelings and emotions to the audience. If we have epic sweeps of the countryside, what would result is a contradiction to what's happening in the tent. Claustrophobia, the pressure of being hunted or possibly surrounded at any moment, the mounting disagreements and hopelessness. It'd be showing an image of openess and exploration coupled with a static scene with zero movement. While it might be comedic, if we are supposed to feel this drama, epic sweeps of the countryside is not the way to go.

Desolate mountainsides and secluded forests don't convey isolation?

It's not about 'claustrophobia'. It's about being isolated and out of the loop. Lost. The world is so big, they are so small.

Exactly! There's only two chapters where they are doing nothing but camping. The other chapters they visit Gordic's Hollow, Lovegood house, etc.

Besides, the first six books took place entirely in ONE place: Hogwarts and yet none of us got bored or tired of it. Why is camping for a couple chapters such a horrible thing? It's not like they are out on an outing picnic..they are on the run from death eaters.

Still, I don't get it. There's so much drama happening during the camping: the trio lost and despairing, Ron's decent into disillusionment, the trio breaking apart, the nerve-racking news from the outside world, etc.

I suspect it will be better in the film since we'll be able to have these epic sweeps of the surrounding countryside.

Well, I certainly opened a kettle of fish there, didn't I? :lol:

But my comment appears to have been badly misconstrued. I am certainly not suggesting they fling anything overboard or change the story or add anything that's not already there. I was merely suggesting that - visually - it might work better to show what is going on at Hogwarts during the time that the trio is camping and nothing else is going on. They don't have to cut or change anything to accomplish that because it is all in the story - that would just be showing what happened when it happened instead of having someone tell Harry about it at a later time.

Those elements work fine in the book because we have Harry's thoughts carrying us through. There's not really anything happening there that is interesting or moves the story itself forward, but it allows the reader to empathize with Harry's frustration at the lack of progress and there is a lot of character development that occurs. And - to be clear - I am only talking about the sequences where there is nothing happening but the trio sitting around in the tent and trying to figure out where the Horcruxes might be hidden and then packing up and setting up camp in another location each day. The other scenes are fine - Grimmauld Place, Godric's Hollow, Bathilda's house, Shell Cottage, etc... I don't see any problems there at all.

I don't think that would work as well for the film to just show the trio camping and nothing else going on and then have Neville pop up in part 2 and just tell them everything that he, Ginny, and Luna were doing with the DA at Hogwarts during that time. Nor do I think that would be a good place to throw in a flashback that might confuse the viewing audience because that is where the story really starts to move along. I think it would make more sense for them to actually show what is going on at Hogwarts at the time that it is happening and intersperse those scenes with the trio sitting around their tent because all of that was happening around the same time frame. I think that would serve to put more emphasis on the trio's frustration because it would provide an excellent contrast to the trio's isolation and lack of progress with the secondary trio being in the middle of the action at Hogwarts and being able to actually do something.

I think they are filming the battle this month. It seems most of the actors are set to film this month which suggests to me they are filming the battle. We already know they filmed the parts at Malfoy Manor so if Fiennes is back then they are filming the battle.

I posted that a few pages back, but it seems to have gotten overlooked. :lol: It does sound like they're going to be filming the battle this month because they have quite a few of the adult actors filming this month as well as the younger actors like Devon Murray. And Chris Ranking was talking about doing night shoots this month as well - which would coincide with the battle at Hogwarts happening at night.

Desolate mountainsides and secluded forests don't convey isolation?
If you are factoring in "epic sweeps" then no they do not convey isolation. Epic "sweeps" convey movement, openess and travel. If we are talking about desolate mountainsides or secluded forests, static shots are needed, not "sweeps". Might be me just nitpicky, but I'm usually a bit more precise with regards to analyzing cinematography.

If you are factoring in "epic sweeps" then no they do not convey isolation. Epic "sweeps" convey movement, openess and travel. If we are talking about desolate mountainsides or secluded forests, static shots are needed, not "sweeps". Might be me just nitpicky, but I'm usually a bit more precise with regards to analyzing cinematography.

I think either would work. As you suggest, a claustrophobic, static scene would work really well, perhaps in the parts of the film where Harry and Hermione feel they are stuck at a dead end when they finally convince themselves that going to Godics Hollow is a good idea but then again so would the 'sweeping shots' suggested b MasterofDeath. These would work really well at the beginning of the film, just after the ministry scene when they first start camping. It would really convey the feeling that the trio have a huge task in a huge world and that they are, really quite small.

I wondered how they would do the scenes inside Harry's head, were he see's Voldemort and what he's planning. Personally, I really disliked how they went about doing that in OotP, wonder if it will be the same in DH?

Yeah, the camping scenes should start off with sweeping shots and then transcend into static and claustrophobic as their mission gets more and more desperate.

I wondered how they would do the scenes inside Harry's head, were he see's Voldemort and what he's planning. Personally, I really disliked how they went about doing that in OotP, wonder if it will be the same in DH?

I am excited to see how they will handle it too. In OOTP those visions inside Harry's head were very short and dreamy whereas they need to be longer and feel more real in DH. Nonetheless, I liked the way they handled it in OOTP, but they need to come up with something new and refreshing for DH.

I am excited to see how they will handle it too. In OOTP those visions inside Harry's head were very short and dreamy whereas they need to be longer and feel more real in DH. Nonetheless, I liked the way they handled it in OOTP, but they need to come up with something new and refreshing for DH.

I was okay with how it was done on OOTP. I do hope they show the visions and connection with voldemort again.

As for interspersing camping scenes with the action at hogwarts, meesha, I think that could work.

Yeah, the camping scenes should start off with sweeping shots and then transcend into static and claustrophobic as their mission gets more and more desperate.

Agreed. But then there should be a climax and a resolution to the story.

I really feel like the climax and resolution to DH1 will be finding out what the hallows are. It will be like the thought clicking in their heads about the hallows and what Voldemort was searching for the whole time.

It isn't going to be complete resolution, but none of the Harry Potters are complete resolution because Voldemort is still out there. It is like the resolution at the end of the first Lord of the Rings where there was resolution, but they were still in trouble at the end.

If they do it right i think it could work. HPs are never going to be great films, but it will be good.

^ Most of the Harry Potter movies are great.

I really feel like the climax and resolution to DH1 will be finding out what the hallows are. It will be like the thought clicking in their heads about the hallows and what Voldemort was searching for the whole time.

But that climax is, in itself an anticlimax. Harry realises what the hallows are and thn decides not to act on it. Maybe they'll just show his realisation in the first film then leave his reaction to the second.

I really feel like the climax and resolution to DH1 will be finding out what the hallows are. It will be like the thought clicking in their heads about the hallows and what Voldemort was searching for the whole time.

It isn't going to be complete resolution, but none of the Harry Potters are complete resolution because Voldemort is still out there. It is like the resolution at the end of the first Lord of the Rings where there was resolution, but they were still in trouble at the end.

If they do it right i think it could work. HPs are never going to be great films, but it will be good.


decarus, I thought they already determined the split point to be at malfoy manor, when the trio gets captured by the snatchers. If that is the case, the scene at lovegood's home would be much earlier than when the actual movie would end.

I realize that if it was as in the books that would not be the end of the film, but, and i am just speculating about this, i think that the Lovegood house scene and the snatcher chase scene ending with the trios capture right before Malfoy Manor will all be one scene. I don't think there will be a pause between these two moments. I don't have any solid proof of this at all, so it is simply speculation, but i have thought for some time that moving the Lovegood scene makes the most sense regardless.

This would mean that the trio would be at the Lovegood's, learn of the hallows, Harry would realize they have two and Voldemort is searching for the third. The Lovegood's house will then be attacked by the snatcher/death eaters who will chase them from the house eventually capturing them somewhere in the woods. During this chase scene Harry will see in Voldemort's mind as he does in the book and Voldemort will gain the elder wand here at the end of DH1 instead of Harry seeing this while they are in Malfoy Manor.

Absolutely, total speculation, but based on the little news we have on these scenes, sounds good to me. Once again though, total speculation.

I realize that if it was as in the books that would not be the end of the film, but, and i am just speculating about this, i think that the Lovegood house scene and the snatcher chase scene ending with the trios capture right before Malfoy Manor will all be one scene. I don't think there will be a pause between these two moments. I don't have any solid proof of this at all, so it is simply speculation, but i have thought for some time that moving the Lovegood scene makes the most sense regardless.

This would mean that the trio would be at the Lovegood's, learn of the hallows, Harry would realize they have two and Voldemort is searching for the third. The Lovegood's house will then be attacked by the snatcher/death eaters who will chase them from the house eventually capturing them somewhere in the woods. During this chase scene Harry will see in Voldemort's mind as he does in the book and Voldemort will gain the elder wand here at the end of DH1 instead of Harry seeing this while they are in Malfoy Manor.

Absolutely, total speculation, but based on the little news we have on these scenes, sounds good to me. Once again though, total speculation.

i like this idea too.
however, will it seem as modifying the book too much? i remember a report about how this film is going to stay true to the books, and nothing major is going to me modified.
however, this is good, as the pace will be there, from discovering about the hallows, to thinking of what voldemort has found, and to being captured, there wont be a pause, and it will help bring out the climax.

decarus, I thought they already determined the split point to be at malfoy manor, when the trio gets captured by the snatchers. If that is the case, the scene at lovegood's home would be much earlier than when the actual movie would end.

I agree. I think it makes the most sense for the visit to Lovegood's home to occur earlier in the film and then show how much time has passed since then with Harry becoming increasingly obsessed with the Hallows. I think it is significant that they are captured because Harry messes up and says Voldemort's name.

However, in thinking about the situation of the trio being captured and the events leading to Dobby's death, I think they have quite a bit to work with in terms of ending part 1 with the capture. Harry snapping out of his obsession over the Hallows comes about because of both events. It was his obsession that led to them being captured because, in his excitement over the realization that he was right about Voldemort searching for the Elder wand, he forgets about the Taboo and says Voldemort's name. That also leads to Dobby being killed trying to rescue them.

I think they can use that to show some resolution in part 1 with the trio being captured with Harry acknowledging that it was his fault - if he hadn't been so obsessed by the Hallows and forgotten about the Taboo, they wouldn't have been captured. The beginning of part 2 could then recap that with Harry reaffirming his resolve to find and destroy the Horcruxes as he buries Dobby.

i don't know that the here lies dobby a free house elf scene will be in the movie as dobby hasn't appeared since the COS movie

True which makes the movies not as good as they could have been.The relationship Dobby-Harry is kinda special and they messed that up sadly.On the other hand i still believe the deaths of Tonks and Lupin were not as spectacular in the books as they should have been.Being battle scenes i think the movie will dwell more on those.

decarus, I thought they already determined the split point to be at malfoy manor, when the trio gets captured by the snatchers. If that is the case, the scene at lovegood's home would be much earlier than when the actual movie would end.

Not true. Those scenes are only 1 chapter apart.

i like this idea too.
however, will it seem as modifying the book too much? i remember a report about how this film is going to stay true to the books, and nothing major is going to me modified.
however, this is good, as the pace will be there, from discovering about the hallows, to thinking of what voldemort has found, and to being captured, there wont be a pause, and it will help bring out the climax.

What a major change is is sort of subjective though. What we may consider a major change they may not. I don't think that this would be a huge change these instances only being one chapter apart as ArryGrotter said. The biggest change, as meesha has pointed out, would be the loss of the time Harry spends obsessing over the hallows in that chapter which leads him to say Voldemort's name.

I just think it fits all the news we have, but like i said it is still very much speculation because we don't have enough information about these scenes.

I do see the necessity to sort of find an arc for this film that leads somewhere and not just have the trio running around like chickens with their heads cut off and this sort of search for the symbol and the attempt to try and find out what Voldemort is up to may be that arc. We do need more information though. I know i am ready to get some more on set news or behind the scenes pictures. It's been awhile.

PS. The thing is i do see the problem caused by the split and if we assume that it is confirmed that DH1 will end right before Malfoy Manor that means that the Lovegood scene is the final big scene of the film. The chapter after that the trio returns to the tent and Harry figures out that he has two of the hallows and that Voldemort is searching for the third. Then in the book it states that Harry is obsessed and weeks creep on without getting any closer to anything while Harry obsesses over the hallows and Ron and Hermione discuss the horcruxes. Then the trio listen to Potterwatch for the first time and afterward Harry says Voldemort's name.

I just think it seems unlikely that they are going to add this weeks that creep by in there and then have the trio get captured and that be the end of the film. I just think that would be an anticlimactic ending as someone suggested above and the Lovegood scene being the last big scene may be the climax they are looking for. I don't know, we will just have to wait and see.

Not true. Those scenes are only 1 chapter apart.

Within the time frame, they are several months apart though - that is what is significant. They visit Xenophilius right after Christmas and they are captured by the snatchers in April - during the Easter holidays. I think the film needs to show those months where Harry becomes more and more disconnected from Ron and Hermione due to his obsession with the Hallows and how that becomes more important to him than looking for the Horcruxes. I think there should definitely be some space between those two scenes to show that several months pass in between because that is significant to the story.

The climax of part 1 should emphasize how Harry's obsession has caused them to get captured because that is part of what snaps him out of that obsession. He screws up big time there and that should be shown in the film. I don't think that would be anticlimactic at all - it's a tense moment with the trio trying to figure out how to escape. It sounds as though they are going to make that an actual chase scene rather than a moment where they are caught unprepared in the tent, but I think either would work fine because it is a tense moment either way. I think it is feasible for them to adapt it to include the both. For example - the trio being away from the tent to gather wood or perhaps fishing and talking about what they heard on Potterwatch. Harry is very excited and says that Voldemort is looking for the Elder wand. The snatchers show up and the trio race back to the tent - some fighting, shooting spells over their shoulders, etc... - hoping to be able to get there and have time to put the protective enchantments back in place. They reach the tent and Harry berates himself for forgetting about the Taboo while Ron douses the lights with the deluminator - with the screen going black as they are plunged into darkness - but before they can do anything else, they hear Greyback call out - “We know you’re in there! You’ve got half a dozen wands pointing at you and we don’t care who we curse!”

If the chase scene comes straight after the escape from Lovegod's house we lose important time frame. If they do it this way, I'll be wondering why the trio don't apparate from the house as in the book.
If the chase scene comes 5 finutes after the escape the film will lack any kind of climax. Nonetheless, a cliffhanger ending doesn't necessarily need a proper climax. Therefore, I want them to follow the book here. It is important to emphasize on Harry's obsession with the Hallows in both films.

If the chase scene comes straight after the escape from Lovegod's house we lose important time frame. If they do it this way, I'll be wondering why the trio don't apparate from the house as in the book.
Presumably, the story would be changed so that an anti-Apparation spell, like the one used by the snatchers in the book, will be placed on the area around the Lovegood house, so the Trio have to run to get out from under it's effect.

I don't see why it's so important for Harry to obsess over the Hallows for months rather than just a few minutes. The temptation is just the same, as is the threat it poses to the Horcrux mission.

Presumably, the story would be changed so that an anti-Apparation spell, like the one used by the snatchers in the book, will be placed on the area around the Lovegood house, so the Trio have to run to get out from under it's effect.


I see, though they need to make it clear that they can't apparate from the house.


I don't see why it's so important for Harry to obsess over the Hallows for months rather than just a few minutes. The temptation is just the same, as is the threat it poses to the Horcrux mission.

It's important because it's the title of the films. They need to empasize on his obsession. Two minutes with chatting right before they are attacked will not be enough imo. My proposal is to make a montage of the following months to show this. The editor Mark Day is an expert on such things ;)

It's important because it's the title of the films. They need to empasize on his obsession. Two minutes with chatting right before they are attacked will not be enough imo. My proposal is to make a montage of the following months to show this. The editor Mark Day is an expert on such things ;)

A montage is a good idea, that'll also emphasise the vast amount of waiting around they had to do, with the film the temptations might be to go from action to action, to keep it fast paced but your idea would show how stagnant the mission became, almost as a result of Harry's hallow obsession.

I can see why people think that the "Here lies Dobby" scene might be a little less emotional in the movie than in the book, but they might change that up a bit. I wonder if Dobby will be in more movie scenes than in the book so they can fix the emotional factor.

I can see why people think that the "Here lies Dobby" scene might be a little less emotional in the movie than in the book, but they might change that up a bit. I wonder if Dobby will be in more movie scenes than in the book so they can fix the emotional factor.

That seems to be irrelevant, because if he is included in more scenes, it will be in the first movie. It's like building Harry and Dumbledore's relationship in Order of the Phoenix.

That seems to be irrelevant, because if he is included in more scenes, it will be in the first movie. It's like building Harry and Dumbledore's relationship in Order of the Phoenix.

It's relevant because people will remember him from DH 1. The gap between the films isn't that huge. If he isn't in DH 1 his appearance at Malfoy Manor will seem very random. "Oh, what's the name of that cute elf? I think he was in another film I saw years ago."

It's relevant because people will remember him from DH 1. The gap between the films isn't that huge. If he isn't in DH 1 his appearance at Malfoy Manor will seem very random. "Oh, what's the name of that cute elf? I think he was in another film I saw years ago."

Exactly. If he doesn't get a good reintroduction, his death will hit with a lot less impact than it did in the book, and it will be (and I mean directly toward that scene) a failed adaptation. We all remember the impact it hit most of the HP fans when it happened in the book. In the movie, if they don't add Dobby in more scenes, I have a feeling the reaction won't hit very well. It will be like "meh, a death of a character I hardly remember."

It's relevant because people will remember him from DH 1. The gap between the films isn't that huge. If he isn't in DH 1 his appearance at Malfoy Manor will seem very random. "Oh, what's the name of that cute elf? I think he was in another film I saw years ago."

It has nothing to do with being remembered, strictly speaking.
Yes people will remember him but there is no emotional attachment. The emotional aspect has to be created within the film. Remember the begining of HBP, establishing the relationship between Harry and Dumbledore, and all those moments of Dumbledore caring about Harry. Without those scenes, people would remember Dumbledore ("that old wizard") from previous films, but there would be no emotional attachment.

In short, having an emotional and important death happening in the opening of a movie is a bad idea.

Exactly. If he doesn't get a good reintroduction, his death will hit with a lot less impact than it did in the book, and it will be (and I mean directly toward that scene) a failed adaptation. We all remember the impact it hit most of the HP fans when it happened in the book. In the movie, if they don't add Dobby in more scenes, I have a feeling the reaction won't hit very well. It will be like "meh, a death of a character I hardly remember."

I agree. They need to establish Harry's connection to Dobby in particular because that is where the impact of Dobby's death stems from - Harry's grief. They need to make it believable that Harry would grieve over this little elf. Where they place the scene doesn't matter as long as the audience understands why Harry is grieving, IMO.

Really, they should have begun fixing that mistake in HBP and included both Dobby and Kreacher to properly build up Harry's relationship with both and show the distinction between the two. But I think they can accomplish that in DH part 1 - based on their comments acknowledging the mistake in cutting Dobby, they have something in mind for that.

I am really looking forward to this film, it should be really excellent. I heard that they are going all out and including just about everything to make a big impact because it's the last of the HP series. I am so excited for it to come out. Hurry up next year!

I doubt they will include absolutely everything.

Haven't we discussed the sadness of Dobby's death earlier? In the book Dobby suddenly came to rescue. As far as I remember he didn't turn up before that. It was still very sad because we remembered him from the previous books. It's the same with the film. We will remember this beloved character from DH 1 and COS. The sadness of the scene depends on the acting, the music, the script, the direction etc imo.

I agree. They need to establish Harry's connection to Dobby in particular because that is where the impact of Dobby's death stems from - Harry's grief. They need to make it believable that Harry would grieve over this little elf. Where they place the scene doesn't matter as long as the audience understands why Harry is grieving, IMO.

Really, they should have begun fixing that mistake in HBP and included both Dobby and Kreacher to properly build up Harry's relationship with both and show the distinction between the two. But I think they can accomplish that in DH part 1 - based on their comments acknowledging the mistake in cutting Dobby, they have something in mind for that.

I agree that reintroduction was not done in HBP and the slack will have to be picked up in DH1.

I doubt they will include absolutely everything.

Haven't we discussed the sadness of Dobby's death earlier? In the book Dobby suddenly came to rescue. As far as I remember he didn't turn up before that. It was still very sad because we remembered him from the previous books. It's the same with the film. We will remember this beloved character from DH 1 and COS. The sadness of the scene depends on the acting, the music, the script, the direction etc imo.

I feel like the average movie-goer, who has probably not read the books, may or may not remember Dobby. Like my brother, who has seen the movies probably once each and has never read the books, when DH1 happens and Dobby shows up to save the day, even someone saying "Hey...its Dobby!" may not be enough to remind him who Dobby is exactly. It should have been done in HBP, but it was not so a scene(s) need to be dedicated to Dobby's reintroduction at some point.

-JR

The re-introduction of Dobby can be done in DH 1. It's actually better than having him in HBP because the film would be too long and the gap between HBP and DH 2 is too big. If Dobby is in part 1 the majority of the movie-goers will most likely know who he is when he comes to rescue in part 2.

The re-introduction of Dobby can be done in DH 1. It's actually better than having him in HBP because the film would be too long and the gap between HBP and DH 2 is too big. If Dobby is in part 1 the majority of the movie-goers will most likely know who he is when he comes to rescue in part 2.

This is about the 10th time this topic has come up... :whistle: But I agree, this should be sufficient to make him recognizable. And more likley than not the audience have read the books anyways, so we're only talking a small portion of the audience this would even be an issue for.

I'd like to see Dobby assisting Neville, Ginny, and Luna as they carry out Dumbledore's Army. He could be there helping them and going against the regime and Carrows.

I'd like to see Dobby assisting Neville, Ginny, and Luna as they carry out Dumbledore's Army. He could be there helping them and going against the regime and Carrows.

Good idea :tu:

Good idea :tu:

It's the only way the audience can really connect with Dobby. Otherwise, his death will just fall flat.

It's the only way the audience can really connect with Dobby. Otherwise, his death will just fall flat.

But since that would be part of the first movie and the death comes in the second one, it WILL fall flat. There is just no time for the audience to build up a connection with Dobby. It has nothing to do with just recognizing the character.

But since that would be part of the first movie and the death comes in the second one, it WILL fall flat. There is just no time for the audience to build up a connection with Dobby. It has nothing to do with just recognizing the character.

Absolutely not.

Look at Dumbledore - I know he's a bad example - but I despised the Dumbledore in the fourth and fifth and I cared for him so deeply in the sixth.

Dobby is a creature whom you pity - he WILL be able to tear at heartstrings. A small, helpful, and brave little elf who saves the lives of people will not fall flat if done correctly [with John Williams returning, it could be amazing]. I trust Kloves. He's done some major character expositions in HBP (Lily's story, Hermione's parents, etc). Just have Dobby help the DA in DH1, and it should be fine.

He'll save their lives so his death will doubtless be poignant whether he's remembered or not, perhaps some people won't recognise him when he is summoned to the cellar but I think enough of a realtionship will be built up by his heroic act. Of course in the books much of the poigniancy came from his dedication for Harry, I'm sure they'll find a way of representing this.

But since that would be part of the first movie and the death comes in the second one, it WILL fall flat. There is just no time for the audience to build up a connection with Dobby. It has nothing to do with just recognizing the character.

I agree. You can't just shove some Jar-Jar Binks character in the first movie for 5 minutes and expect people to care. I'd rather they cut him and replace him with a human character, Luna, Ollivander, anyone really. I struggle to see the audience caring about a little CGI blob, especially one as annoying as Dobby.

You're comparing the monstrosity that is Jar-Jar to Dobby? I'm sorry, but I find that completely uncalled for and extremely unfair.

The re-introduction of Dobby can be done in DH 1. It's actually better than having him in HBP because the film would be too long and the gap between HBP and DH 2 is too big. If Dobby is in part 1 the majority of the movie-goers will most likely know who he is when he comes to rescue in part 2.

I think they can make it work by reintroducing Dobby in DH part 1, but I do think it would have been better to reintroduce him in HBP as well as including him in part 1. HBP provided a better opportunity for developing the relationship between Harry and Dobby because they already had material to use for that - Elf Tails - and there were other scenes that Dobby could have been worked into believably. Same goes for Kreacher. Really, they should have kept Dobby in GOF and we should have seen both elves in OOTP as well. HBP would have been the best choice in terms of working the house-elves back into the story and showing the differences in Harry's relationship with each of them - particularly for Dobby because there were more opportunities. It will be more difficult to do that with Dobby in DH part 1 because they're going to have to find a way to include him and cram three books worth of development for Harry's relationship with him into the film - and they have to accomplish that before the trio break into the Ministry because the trio will be isolated from everyone else after that. And they already have Kreacher at Grimmauld Place so it seems likely that they'll have to find a way to work Dobby in with the wedding stuff. It's not an impossible task, but more difficult than it would have been to reintroduce him in HBP and then add something to remind the audience of who he is in DH part 1.

This is about the 10th time this topic has come up... :whistle: But I agree, this should be sufficient to make him recognizable. And more likley than not the audience have read the books anyways, so we're only talking a small portion of the audience this would even be an issue for.

Well, there hasn't been much news to discuss about the movie so we might as well speculate about the things we don't know about yet. At least we haven't had to resort to discussing the layout of the grounds or hair yet. :lol:

There is some news though. I was checking out the cast list on Mugglenet's DH page and they have Alex Crockford listed as playing Charlie Weasley. This has not been confirmed through any official channels - the source is the cast list on IMDB. Alex Crockford played Charlie Weasley in POA for the photograph of the entire Weasley family in Egypt - and he apparently filmed some other stuff for POA that was cut from an older interview with him. It may be that IMDB just included him on the cast list because he was in POA, but the actor does have enough resemblance to the other actors cast for the Weasley family to pass for a sibling - much more so than the guy they cast as Bill for that photo in POA. I had difficulty in figuring out which was supposed to be Charlie and which was supposed to be Percy in that photo actually - they look quite a bit alike. So it is feasible they could bring him back if he's available - and it would be awesome to have the entire Weasley family in DH. I can't find any official confirmation about it though.

[QUOTE=Sacred_Memories;5436123]Absolutely not.

Look at Dumbledore - I know he's a bad example - but I despised the Dumbledore in the fourth and fifth and I cared for him so deeply in the sixth.
QUOTE]

You cared for Dumbledore in Prince because the movie established a strong relationship between Harry and Dumbledore from the very first scene.

I'd like to see Dobby assisting Neville, Ginny, and Luna as they carry out Dumbledore's Army. He could be there helping them and going against the regime and Carrows.

That's a great idea. I've always felt they should show what's going on at Hogwarts in part 1 instead of just having Neville just tell Harry about it near the end of part 2. That would be a good way to develop Dobby's character.

Absolutely not.

Look at Dumbledore - I know he's a bad example - but I despised the Dumbledore in the fourth and fifth and I cared for him so deeply in the sixth.

Dobby is a creature whom you pity - he WILL be able to tear at heartstrings. A small, helpful, and brave little elf who saves the lives of people will not fall flat if done correctly [with John Williams returning, it could be amazing]. I trust Kloves. He's done some major character expositions in HBP (Lily's story, Hermione's parents, etc). Just have Dobby help the DA in DH1, and it should be fine.

I agree. The circumstances will draw sympathy from the audience because Dobby sacrifices himself to save them. I do think they need to find a way to show Harry interacting with Dobby to develop their relationship, but showing Dobby helping the DA at Hogwarts would build on that as well as giving him some additional character development. Not to mention the opportunity to show how house-elves can do things that wizards cannot - like apparating at Hogwarts - which will probably come up with Kreacher telling them about escaping from the cave. That would also set up how Dobby can rescue them because he can apparate where they cannot.

I have a bad feeling about how they'll handle Dobby in DH1.

I agree. The circumstances will draw sympathy from the audience because Dobby sacrifices himself to save them. .

Well, Dobby doesn't actually sacrifice himself. He's killed in the process of trying to save them.

If you've seen Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, did you feel sorry about that friend of Indy who dies in the opening scene? He died trying to save his friend too.

You cared for Dumbledore in Prince because the movie established a strong relationship between Harry and Dumbledore from the very first scene.

I think there was more emotional impact with learning that Harry's parents had died at the beginning of the first film than they achieved with Dumbledore's death at the end of HBP - Dumbledore's death fell flat for a lot of people because they did not do a good job in developing his relationship with Harry and underplayed Snape's betrayal. Having Dan just stand there watching didn't help - that whole sequence was handled very poorly. We didn't see James and Lily get murdered in the first film, but the reactions of Dumbledore, McGonagall, and Hagrid made that a very emotional moment. It's not where such a scene is placed that matters - it is the performances that make the most difference, IMO - particularly with a situation like this where the emotional impact stems from how the death effects the other characters. I do have some concerns about Dan being able to pull that off, but I think Rupert and Emma will do a great job with that.

Well, Dobby doesn't actually sacrifice himself. He's killed in the process of trying to save them.

If you've seen Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, did you feel sorry about that friend of Indy who dies in the opening scene? He died trying to save his friend too.

Of course I did - it was a very emotional moment. It is still a sacrifice after all. Wu Han knew what he was risking there. The same holds true for Dobby in rescuing Harry and the others from Malfoy Manor.

I agree with you that, overall, they did a rather poor job with Dumbledore in HBP, but they did try to establish a bond between Dumbledore and Harry (the opening "flashback", Dumbledore's concern about Harry's love live, and the scene before the cave sequence). The impact of Dumbledore's death, if any, came from those moments, not from previous movies.

Btw, do you really think that Dobby's death should have the same emotional impact as Wu Han's? (that is, 10 seconds of sadness and then everyone forgets about him)

I agree with you that, overall, they did a rather poor job with Dumbledore in HBP, but they did try to establish a bond between Dumbledore and Harry (the opening "flashback", Dumbledore's concern about Harry's love live, and the scene before the cave sequence). The impact of Dumbledore's death, if any, came from those moments, not from previous movies.

I found those moments to be extremely forced and awkward so they did not contribute to the impact at all. If anything, that detracted from it, IMO. The scene of Dumbledore's murder and Harry chasing Snape were very poorly done overall and there was very little emotional impact there. The emotional impact stemmed from the reactions of everyone else when Harry gets back to the castle and they were gathered around Dumbledore's body. Excellent performances from Maggie Smith, Rupert, Emma, Matthew Lewis, Evanna Lynch, etc... made that a very emotional moment and that's what saved that in the film because it would have had no impact at all without that, IMO.

Btw, do you really think that Dobby's death should have the same emotional impact as Wu Han's? (that is, 10 seconds of sadness and then everyone forgets about him)

Well, there was more impact from Wu Han's death than that for me, but no, I don't think the two are exactly the same. Wu Han's death was tragic with the circumstances and it has an effect because he was Indy's friend and he died to save him. Dobby's death has an impact on Harry for that as well as the added impact of being part of what snaps Harry out of his obsession with the Hallows. It won't be a situation of Dobby being killed and them leaving his body behind as they save themselves. They will be burying Dobby as well and that will be very emotional with their reactions to his death and the burial.

I think - for the majority - the impact of Dobby's death is more towards how that effects Harry and his friends. I do think they need to do something to establish that relationship to show why they are effected by it, but it is their reaction that will be most significant for the emotional impact.

You're comparing the monstrosity that is Jar-Jar to Dobby? I'm sorry, but I find that completely uncalled for and extremely unfair.

Really? To me they're both comedy CGI creatures who bumble around for most of the time they're on screen/on page. I don't see how a film audience will see them differently. What is it about this squeaky voiced little goblin that will endear him to audiences so strongly?

I have a bad feeling about how they'll handle Dobby in DH1.

To be honest, I doubt that even the world's greatest directors, if they applied themselves to the HP series and used all their skills, could do anything to "handle" Dobby in any positive way.

I doubt they will include absolutely everything.

I doubt it as well, I was just repeating what I heard :)

Really? To me they're both comedy CGI creatures who bumble around for most of the time they're on screen/on page. I don't see how a film audience will see them differently. What is it about this squeaky voiced little goblin that will endear him to audiences so strongly?
I actually would agree, but then again i have never been a fan of Dobby and i know he is a favorite of some.

I like Dobby as well, I wish he was in the books more, but I wouldn't really compare him to Jar Jar or whatever it was.

He'll save their lives so his death will doubtless be poignant whether he's remembered or not, perhaps some people won't recognise him when he is summoned to the cellar but I think enough of a realtionship will be built up by his heroic act. Of course in the books much of the poigniancy came from his dedication for Harry, I'm sure they'll find a way of representing this.

I want to agree with you so badly but I don't know if a poignant and heroic act is going to be enough with a character that few who have not read the books will remember from CoS.

-JR

I want to agree with you so badly but I don't know if a poignant and heroic act is going to be enough with a character that few who have not read the books will remember from CoS.

-JR

I agree with you on this as well. People who have only seen the movies will probably hardly remember Dobby from the second film. It's a shame they have left Dobby out of the films because it might set a lot of confusion for the non-book readers when the movie comes out. I hope they portray it well.

Previously on Deathly Hallows (Part1)...................

Is that how Deathly Hallows Part 2 will start?

Since the movie will be split into two, I was wondering how Part two will start since it will obviously have connections to Part 1. Will they be doing some sort of recall/flashbacks of Part 1 before proceeding with Part 2? Since DH 1 will be released November of 2010 and DH 2 on July 2011, moviegoers may not recall where they left off..

It was a random thought. Part 2 is like still two years form now.. but anyway, what do you guys think? How will hey connect DH 1 to DH 2?

Previously on Deathly Hallows (Part1)...................

Is that how Deathly Hallows Part 2 will start?

Since the movie will be split into two, I was wondering how Part two will start since it will obviously have connections to Part 1. Will they be doing some sort of recall/flashbacks of Part 1 before proceeding with Part 2? Since DH 1 will be released November of 2010 and DH 2 on July 2011, moviegoers may not recall where they left off..

It was a random thought. Part 2 is like still two years form now.. but anyway, what do you guys think? How will hey connect DH 1 to DH 2?

I would be very surprised if that is how they started DH2. They are not that far apart from each others release dates, and seeing as how the audience is expected to remember HP films 1-6 prior to seeing DH1, they would expect the same from the audience being aware of the first 6/7 films.

It's not like there is a recap in every sequel for any given series, IE star wars, LOTR, the Matrix, Indiana Jones. It is the audiences responsibility to be aware of what is going on in the previous films before watching the most recent film, not the film makers. If they recapped the series every new movie, then there would not be a large reason for any casual film goer to go back and watch the previous films. Same goes for a TV series. They don't recap what happened the previous week cause they want you to go out an watch the product they have made previously relating to the most current release.

As for how DH2 will start, well, I expect there to be an intro of some sort to present the viewer an idea of where we are picking up from the last film, other than that all there should be is a title screen showing Harry Potter & the Deathly Hallows Part Two, just the same as we have seen in many other movie series.

----

In regards to the Dobby death not being as "emotional" or not having the connection to the audience because he was not shown in the previous movies very much, heres my 2 cents.

I don't see how after all that takes place in Malfoy Manor anyone can not feel the connection to Dobby and saddened by his death, regardless of if there was any further development of his relationship with anyone in the movie, specifically Harry. He died so that everyone else who was prisoner in the cellar could escape torture and likely death. With dobby's heroic efforts to save 7 people, none of whom he is obligated to do anything for, then sacrifices himself to safely get the trio out of the Manor...well I don't know what else needs to be said or done. ACTIONS SPEAK LOADER THAN WORDS. You could have Dobby in the films as much as you want aside from what we saw in CoS. But it doesn't change the fact that Harry and Dobby have been connected since year 2 through what they went through with each other. The connection is there, it is not the film makers responsiblity to recap every movie before. There is simply too much storyline and info.

If Dobby was say for example some other Elf, completley unknown to the viewer. Someone for example like Winky, then yes there would be a disconnect from the viewer to the story. Where did Winky come from, why is she so loyal to Harry, why would she sacrifice herself for somone she doens't even know or has ever met? Well she wouldn't, but Dobby would, if you want to know why then I would suggest familiarizing yourself with the previous movies/books. Thats why they are there, to present us with the initial info for the "Arc" in the story.

As I said above, it is the viewers responsibility to compile all the info on the story to be able to understand what is going on. It is not as if the story is a short one, therefore how could they re-introduce anyone or everyone who has one thing or another to do with the plot of the next film. (IE Grey Lady, Peter Petigrew, Fenrir, Bloody Baron, harrys blood connection from GoF, Umbridge, all minor things that have an impact later on but could not all be re-introduced). They couldn't, it is impossible. Thats why there are two DH films and 6 previous, there is simply too much info to recap to put into any movie.

It's not like there is a recap in every sequel for any given series, IE star wars, LOTR, the Matrix, Indiana Jones.

Not the best example, seeing as every Star Wars film opens with a massive wall of text that tells you what's going on before the story begins. LOTR sort of half-reintroduced things as well, what with the Gandalf death scene being revisited at the start of Two Towers, and opened ROTK with a big flashback to show how Smeagol became Gollum. The Matrix didn't do anything like that (just one of many terrible decisions on those movies) and Indy never needed any kind of recall from sequel to sequel. Yates is going to have to do something to bring the audience up to speed, or we'll have another Matrix Revolutions on our hands.

LOTR sort of half-reintroduced things as well, what with the Gandalf death scene being revisited at the start of Two Towers, and opened ROTK with a big flashback to show how Smeagol became Gollum.

In both of those scences we found out NEW info that we didn't know previously, they were not a recap of everything or anything only insight.

Yes Star Wars does lay out what happened previously, but also where we are currently in the story, the planet, why they are there who is there. So it isn't just a recap of what took place in the last movie. Yes there is a small recap, of about 3-5 scentences? Dosn't seem like much of a recap. But alright I will say there was some sort of one.

You want better examples alright. How about toy story, batman, spiderman, mission impossibe, Ice Age, James Bond, Shrek, almost any given tv series, pirates of the carribean... No recap or anything of the sort in any of those.

Yates is going to have to do something to bring the audience up to speed, or we'll have another Matrix Revolutions on our hands.

So many pessimists on here in regards to the last films. Not trying to single you out, just wondering why so many people seem to WANT the last films to be bad? I don't expect anymore or any less from what I have seen in the other films. I take them for what they are, adaptations of a very complex, entertaining and original series of books. I have always loved the movies, they have yet to dissapoint me beyond repair or hope of getting a great 7th film.

You want better examples alright. How about toy story, batman, spiderman, mission impossibe, Ice Age, James Bond, Shrek, almost any given tv series, pirates of the carribean... No recap or anything of the sort in any of those.

Of course, a great many franchises can have each entry stand alone, but Deathly Hallows is not two stand alone entries. Comparing DH parts 1 and 2 to Dr No and From Russia with Love is not really sensible. DH is one story split in two, not two stand alone films. We're not talking about a sequel with a brand new story and some familiar faces, we're finishing what was started in the first part. Would you expect to take a 6 month break between two episodes of 24 and not be given a 'previously on' montage when the show returns?

Not trying to single you out, just wondering why so many people seem to WANT the last films to be bad? I don't expect anymore or any less from what I have seen in the other films.

I don't think any of us want the films to be bad per se. I do fully expect them to turn out that way, simply based on the silly decision to split one story into two and the fact that an unremarkable (and that's being generous) director is in charge.

Agrred with yoshi. I am pessimist, based on what they did in HPB and their decission about the split point. I just feel that DH is by far the most cinematic HP book, and that it could be adapted to a GOOD movie. Sadly, it seems they're not doing that.

Previously on Deathly Hallows (Part1)...................

Is that how Deathly Hallows Part 2 will start?

Since the movie will be split into two, I was wondering how Part two will start since it will obviously have connections to Part 1. Will they be doing some sort of recall/flashbacks of Part 1 before proceeding with Part 2? Since DH 1 will be released November of 2010 and DH 2 on July 2011, moviegoers may not recall where they left off..

It was a random thought. Part 2 is like still two years form now.. but anyway, what do you guys think? How will hey connect DH 1 to DH 2?

I believe I read an interview a while back in which the producers said they have no intention of doing a "previously on..." and that they don't believe any sort of recap will really be needed...Thank God. :tu: I must say, I agree...that would be quite an un-interesting way to start. :whistle:

The majority of viewers have likely read the books and if they haven't they should watch the previous films if they can't remember. It's their responsiblity to be caught up, NOT the director ;) I suspect most have the common sense to do this anyways before watching a sequel. :p


So many pessimists on here in regards to the last films. Not trying to single you out, just wondering why so many people seem to WANT the last films to be bad? I don't expect anymore or any less from what I have seen in the other films. I take them for what they are, adaptations of a very complex, entertaining and original series of books. I have always loved the movies, they have yet to dissapoint me beyond repair or hope of getting a great 7th film.

Yep, I'm def with you there :tu: Oh I know, it's annoying...really does seem there are just some who simply WANT them to be failures. :relax:

Agrred with yoshi. I am pessimist, based on what they did in HPB and their decission about the split point. I just feel that DH is by far the most cinematic HP book, and that it could be adapted to a GOOD movie. Sadly, it seems they're not doing that.

Well that's just it, you havn't even seen the movie yet and you have a pre-determined result of what you think the movie will be like.

Here is my opinion, I could care less about where the split is, I would rather have a bad split somewhere than not ahve a split at all and try and put everything into one bad movie as opposed to two good movies.

In terms of previous films and what they brought to the table, No, they did not measure up to the books. Yes, they did leave out some major but mostly minor yet very entertaining parts. Finally NO, I did not go into a single HP movie having expectations that it would be even close to the amount of enjoyment I got from the books. There is the underlying fact. I have a realistic expectation of each movie, I don't expect it to be as good or even close to the book, I don't expect them to be 100% accurate and loyal to the books. I do expect to see this: a condensed, adapted, visually appealing, musically enjoyable, less complex, more action-packed, less "inner-though" involved film that is true to the story (mostly) and is above all more HP entertainment. So far that is what I have got from every film and I have enjoyed them all a lot.

We are very lucky to have such a great series from books, do I even have to mention series like twilight, chronicles of narnia, spiderman? All horrible films, all from great books. I see the HP fandom as being lucky in that regard.

Here is how I relate the book of say OotP for example when compared to the movie. With both the book and movie on the same scale of 1-10, 10 being amazing and 1 being horrible.
OotP Book - 10
OotP Movie - 6

or how about CoS

CoS Book - 9
CoS movie - 5

The pattern is generally constant, with me anyways, when trying to compare how good any given book is to it's movie.


The majority of viewers have likely read the books and if they haven't they should watch the previous films if they can't remember. It's their responsiblity to be caught up, NOT the director ;) I suspect most have the common sense to do this anyways before watching a sequel. :p



Yep, I'm with you there :tu: Oh I know, It really does seem like there are just some who simply WANT the films to be failures. :rolleyes: :relax:

Glad to see I am not the only one here who thinks this. Although I give everyone who posts their feelings the benefit of the doubt. I want the movies to be as great as possible, I simply walk into each movie knowing full well what my expectations are. Others seem to want to strive for the very best or nothing at all which results often pessimistic opinions, which is great, it only shows how passionate everyone is about the HP saga. Not unlike myself. I do have certain expectations of the movies, they are usually met, thats a result of my acceptence of an imperfect film and not a film that is line for line the same as the books. Cause I know that would be nearly impossible to do.

Either way, I cannot wait to see DH 1 and 2. Regardless of the decisions the film makers and writers make. I have not been let down by any movie thus far, due to my realistic and less than perfect expectations of the films. I simply take them for what they are. See above for specifics.

I don't have time to watch the previous episodes every time I want to watch a movie which is part of a saga. And I'm NOT the exception.

Well that's just it, you havn't even seen the movie yet and you have a pre-determined result of what you think the movie will be like.

Finally NO, I did not go into a single HP movie having expectations that it would be even close to the amount of enjoyment I got from the books. There is the underlying fact. I have a realistic expectation of each movie, I don't expect it to be as good or even close to the book, I don't expect them to be 100% accurate and loyal to the books..

So you do have a pre-determined idea of what you expect from the movie:whistle:

I don't expect movies to be as good as the books. I just want to see a good movie. Is that too much?

So you do have a pre-determined idea of what you expect from the movie:whistle:

I don't expect movies to be as good as the books. I just want to see a good movie. Is that too much?

I do of course. Who doesn't for any given movie? What I mean is that many HP fans have an unrealistic expectation of what the movie should be and not what it is going to be.

My pre-determined notions about the HP movies are based on the facts that I know they won't be as good as the books. I don't expect them to be line for line out of the book, like many others do. Thats why I am never really dissapointed if they leave out one thing or another.

Everyone is different, and everyone is entitled to be informed as little or as much as they want in any given storyline. But the film makers can't re-introduce everything they have already provided previously. Thats why they made the first 6 movies in the first place. In addition to the loads of cash they get from 8 movies.

But they don't have to re-introduce everything from the previous movies. They just have to make each movie work on its own. That's how a movie works, as a story on its own, even if it is part of a bigger arc. (btw, Rowling does re-introduce the necesary plot elements in the books)

If they are going to show the trio split up for example, they have to establish the friendship between them, so we can react emotionally to Ron leaving. You can't just assume that they are friends from the previous movies. That's why Ron doesn't leave in the first chapter of the book. Rowling doesn't asume you will be affected if Ron leaves because you read the previous books.

Here is my opinion, I could care less about where the split is, I would rather have a bad split somewhere than not ahve a split at all and try and put everything into one bad movie as opposed to two good movies.

Exactly! :agree:

In terms of previous films and what they brought to the table, No, they did not measure up to the books. Yes, they did leave out some major but mostly minor yet very entertaining parts. Finally NO, I did not go into a single HP movie having expectations that it would be even close to the amount of enjoyment I got from the books. There is the underlying fact. I have a realistic expectation of each movie, I don't expect it to be as good or even close to the book, I don't expect them to be 100% accurate and loyal to the books. I do expect to see this: a condensed, adapted, visually appealing, musically enjoyable, less complex, more action-packed, less "inner-though" involved film that is true to the story (mostly) and is above all more HP entertainment. So far that is what I have got from every film and I have enjoyed them all a lot.

I agree. :tu:

I've never expected them to be better than the books. I was however disappointed by OotP cause I felt it wasn't even close to on par with the book. But I admit I've enjoyed each and every film and even GoF (which is actually the worst, IMO) is watchable and mostly enjoyable.

However, that being said...I'm a bit concerned my expections for this last (2 Part) film are TOO high after being so thrilled with HBP!!! :scared:

I mean, as tall of an order as it is considering DH is such an excellent book, I actually believe the film could potentially surpass it, cause the book is just sooo cinematic I think if they do it right the visuals and all could really enhance the material. :drool: But we'll have to wait and see.

I do of course. Who doesn't for any given movie? What I mean is that the HP fan has an unrealistic expectation of what the movie should be and not what it is going to be.

My pre-determined notions about the HP movies are based on the facts that I know they won't be as good as the books. I don't expect them to be line for line out of the book, like many others do. Thats why I am never really dissapointed if they leave out one thing or another.

My pre-determined notions about DH are based on the previous movie(s).

And I don't WANT them to be line for line out of the book! I (should) expect a proper adaptation.

I actually am more optimistic about the DH adaptations than I have been for the previous HP movies mainly because now that we have the split, the producers won't be forced to cut things out due to time contstraints like they had to in the past. Before they announced the split, I remember reading that they were actually considering cutting out the entire godric's hollow sequence!!!

So far, all the news that has come from the filming has been so encouraging. We will get dobby and the whole scene at shell cottage ( I was afraid dobby would be nixed all together.) We are going to get xenophilius (another character I thought they might have cut just like the cut out all the gaunts in the last one), grindewald, and even the tottenham court road scene that I thought would be cut for sure. We are even getting the whole ministry of magic scene with cattermole, etc. The only sequence so far that I would have liked to see but will probably not make it in is the back story of the diadem and harry talking to the ghost. Overall, though I think we will actually be getting a fairly faithful adaptation this time around that will hopefully do more justice to the books than some of the previous films

My pre-determined notions about DH are based on the previous movie(s).

And I don't WANT them to be line for line out of the book! I (should) expect a proper adaptation.

We are in agreement there. I loved all 6 previous films, I thought they were all perfectly fine adaptations. Others on here besides you and I, have unrealistic expectations for certain things in the films because of what they got from the books, this contributes to people actually WANTING the film to be bad and if they don't then they are overly critical of things that just won't happen (ie reintroducing characters, summarizing books 1-6, splitting the films at the exact right time((there is none)), adding things, taking out things, what person plays what character...) That is all I am trying to say.

I actually am more optimistic about the DH adaptations than I have been for the previous HP movies mainly because now that we have the split, the producers won't be forced to cut things out due to time contstraints like they had to in the past. Before they announced the split

Exactly :tu:

I remember reading that they were actually considering cutting out the entire godric's hollow sequence!!!

Not to mention The Deathly Hallows!!! :err: I mean, could you imagine that?! :huh: It would be a film in which the title has no relevance!!! :p

So, it's certainly for the best that they had the sense to split the book :tu:

So far, all the news that has come from the filming has been so encouraging. We will get dobby and the whole scene at shell cottage ( I was afraid dobby would be nixed all together.) We are going to get xenophilius (another character I thought they might have cut just like the cut out all the gaunts in the last one), grindewald, and even the tottenham court road scene that I thought would be cut for sure. We are even getting the whole ministry of magic scene with cattermole, etc. The only sequence so far that I would have liked to see but will probably not make it in is the back story of the diadem and harry talking to the ghost. Overall, though I think we will actually be getting a fairly faithful adaptation this time around that will hopefully do more justice to the books than some of the previous films

Yep, it is shaping up to be quite fantastic! :clap:

Alright I don't know if this has been discussed before, I know I brought it up once and no one seemed to notice or were busy with other topics. Either way, the only concerns I have are for HOW they will invlove two main aspects of the plot into this film?

1 - Horcruxes and what they might be? How will Harry/trio be introduced to any leads on any other horcruxes and what they might be? This was never discussed in HBP movie with Dumbledore like it was in the book. Trio finds out about horcruxes as follows, correct me if I am wrong.

Nagingi - Dumbldore discussion HBP.
Diadem - Grey Lady, xenophillus's sculpture, and the memory of voldemort returning to hogwarts to apply for DADA position.
Locket - Regalus and Kreacher after Dumbledore initally.
Cup - Malfoy Manor, Bella's paranoia.
Book - destroyed
Ring - destroyed
Harry - Snapes memories

I guess the real issues only would be with Nagini and the Diadem? The questions still remain how will the two be introduced with no DD discussing and memories fro HBP?

2 - Sirius's Mirror How will this also be introduced?

Lying in Sirius's bedroom with note, broken other connecting piece given to Aberforth, knowing Harry would stumble across it in Grimmauld Place? Seems like a leap to me.

Alright I don't know if this has been discussed before, I know I brought it up once and no one seemed to notice or were busy with other topics. Either way, the only concerns I have are for HOW they will invlove two main aspects of the plot into this film?

1 - Horcruxes and what they might be? How will Harry/trio be introduced to any leads on any other horcruxes and what they might be? This was never discussed in HBP movie with Dumbledore like it was in the book. Trio finds out about horcruxes as follows, correct me if I am wrong.

Nagingi - Dumbldore discussion HBP.
Diadem - Grey Lady, xenophillus's sculpture, and the memory of voldemort returning to hogwarts to apply for DADA position.
Locket - Regalus and Kreacher after Dumbledore initally.
Cup - Malfoy Manor, Bella's paranoia.
Book - destroyed
Ring - destroyed
Harry - Snapes memories

I guess the real issues only would be with Nagini and the Diadem? The questions still remain how will the two be introduced with no DD discussing and memories fro HBP?

2 - Sirius's Mirror How will this also be introduced?

Lying in Sirius's bedroom with note, broken other connecting piece given to Aberforth, knowing Harry would stumble across it in Grimmauld Place? Seems like a leap to me.

Yes, both have discussed many times actually...and if I recall correctly, then I believe the common assumptions for these are as follows :)

1.

Through Harry's connection with Voldemort's mind? Not sure how but I think they could make this work. :hmm: It's hard to say for this one though...I just hope that Kloves had something in mind when he decided development of the horcruxes could take a backburner in HBP :whistle:

2.

Through Dumbledore's will...or so we think, seems to be the most logical method of intro anyways. But who knows what they'll decide.

Diadem - Grey Lady, xenophillus's sculpture, and the memory of voldemort returning to hogwarts to apply for DADA position.

2 - Sirius's Mirror How will this also be introduced?

Lying in Sirius's bedroom with note, broken other connecting piece given to Aberforth, knowing Harry would stumble across it in Grimmauld Place? Seems like a leap to me.

First, with the Diadem. I think they will include Voldemort's memory as the general way of doing this, however, I think they will actually show Voldemort taking the Diadem and hiding it so people are slapped in the face with the Diadem being a Horcrux.

As for the Mirror shard, I think Harry will find the broken mirror somehow, maybe in Grimmauld Place and Alberforth will just happen to have a matching mirror like in the book. If I recall correctly, the book never goes into detail about how Alberforth gets his end does it?

-JR

If I recall correctly, the book never goes into detail about how Alberforth gets his end does it?

-JR

Pretty sure you're right, harry just kind of puts the blues eyes of aberforth and the mirror on the mantle piece or somthing together and thats all they really say, I think. Havn't read 7 in a while, re-reading the series at 3 right now.

Pretty sure you're right, harry just kind of puts the blues eyes of aberforth and the mirror on the mantle piece or somthing together and thats all they really say, I think. Havn't read 7 in a while, re-reading the series at 3 right now.

Same...I'm about half way through 2.

1.
Through Harry's connection with Voldemort's mind? Not sure how but I think they could make this work. :hmm: It's hard to say for this one though...I just hope that Kloves had something in mind when he decided development of the horcruxes could take a backburner in HBP :whistle:
2.

Through Dumbledore's will...or so we think, seems to be the most logical method of intro anyways. But who knows what they'll decide.

The first possibilty for Nagini could be very acurate. I can see them simply having a few flashes into Voldys mind right after they escape Gringotts with the cup and he finds out they are hunting the horcruxes. He would of course be thinking of his hiding spots and might say or do somthing to imply his protection of Nagini.

Although heres the thing I just thought of, once the trio SEES nagini in a magic bubble in the shreaking shack where snape dies, they will also know then that the snake is a horcrux. Which could also work, and be much easier. All they would need to do is discuss it among themselves for a moment. The mind connection would also work but this seems more simple. Thats what they will probably go for.
--
As for DD's will, yeah that would work easily. Although it doesn't seem like it would fit there though. Why would he leave a connecting mirror you need to be ALIVE to use in his Last Will and Testement? Could work but doens't seem to fit.

First, with the Diadem. I think they will include Voldemort's memory as the general way of doing this, however, I think they will actually show Voldemort taking the Diadem and hiding it so people are slapped in the face with the Diadem being a Horcrux.

As for the Mirror shard, I think Harry will find the broken mirror somehow, maybe in Grimmauld Place and Alberforth will just happen to have a matching mirror like in the book. If I recall correctly, the book never goes into detail about how Alberforth gets his end does it?

-JR

For the diadem, yeah that would work well. Has it been confirmed there is no Grey Lady/Bloody Baron storyline? Also, wouldn't that be a memory of him hiding the diadem and not really a connection of his active current feelings that starts the mind black out episodes for harry?

It seems like the diadem has the most question marks and potential complcations. They really neglected it in HBP movie with the change in RoR hiding the book, and the lack of memory on Voldys inqury for DADA position and possibly no grey lady if what I read below is confirmed?
--
For the mirror, I think it will also just been laying around broken in Grimmauld place and he will glance and see a blue eye in a piece on the floor. Then will look again and see nothing, but he will pick it up and second guess himself, then keep it for later discussion with trio or simply to have. He obviously would think it was DD, this would work perfect after reading the initial info on DDs past and then the letter from lily in sirius's room.

It is possible that Dobby could give Harry the mirror during his birthday. I don't know if i really like the idea, but it would be a way to show Dobby for a moment and introduce the mirror. It isn't actually necessary to connect the mirror to Sirius in the films so they could connect it to Dobby.

I am not really sure how they are going to make the connection to the horcruxes because in HBP they made it seem like they could just be anything. I wonder if Harry will look at some other memories of Dumbledores or if they will read something in a book. There are possibilities. I sort of dislike the idea that Harry will just see them all in Voldemort's mind though really they will only find the locket in DH1 and then won't find a second one until Gringott's Bank. They could have Bellatrix mention that it is the cup while they are at Malfoy Manor and maybe then they will make the connection that it could be something of Ravenclaw's. The snake Harry could see in Voldemort's mind.

It is possible that Dobby could give Harry the mirror during his birthday. I don't know if i really like the idea, but it would be a way to show Dobby for a moment and introduce the mirror. It isn't actually necessary to connect the mirror to Sirius in the films so they could connect it to Dobby.


I like this idea, it is simple and cuts out the "middle man" in aberforth for that part of the story. It could aslo re-introduce dobby to the story, I don't see him being re-introduced at any other juncture till Malfoy Manor.

I am very sure that whatever the film makers decide, they will make sure it will be as simple as possible to involve the horcruxes (specifically nagini and the diadem) and the mirror in the story.

For the mirror - Dobby gives it to harry and explains its use, or harry finds it on the floor somewhere at grimmauld place and spies a blue eye of aberforth who he thinks could have been DD and he keeps it and uses it later.

For nagini - this could go a few ways. The film makers don't do anything and the trio just sees nagini in a magic bubble at voldys side in the shack and they come up with the solution nagini is a horcrux. Or they simply clue the audience in to the snakes importance via anger from voldy, harry connection sees or hears somthing involving nagini being a horcrux or that voldy has simply become very protective of the snake suddenly.

For the diadem - there are so many ways this could go. It is really hard to narrow just one down. I think the film makers will again try to keep it simple. Hard to know what they will and will not involve with this. IE grey lady/bloody baron, mind connection, memory.

As for DD's will, yeah that would work easily. Although it doesn't seem like it would fit there though. Why would he leave a connecting mirror you need to be ALIVE to use in his Last Will and Testement? Could work but doens't seem to fit.
Good point, but Dumbledore's didn't intend to use the mirror himself, did he? My memory of the book is fuzzy right now, but I seem to remember him getting the one half from Sirius (was this before or after Sirius died?) and then for some reason giving it to his brother, Aberforth. :hmm: So then a logical way for Harry to get the other half seems to be if Dumbledore leaves it to Harry through his will. :)

If you haven't seen the claymation of DH that someone put on Youtube, I recommend checking it out. It's really quite incredible for amatuer work. And they did this very thing and they also had some ingenius ideas for "fixing" other issues, though I can't recall what they all were.

They could also have Snape tell Harry as Snape is dying to kill the snake. This would be a way to actually show Snape helping Harry instead of all of it being shown in memories. Have him say something like Dumbledore said kill the snake. I don't know, but it's an idea.

Good point, but Dumbledore's didn't intend to use the mirror himself, did he? My memory of the book is fuzzy right now, but I seem to remember him getting the one half from Sirius (was this before or after Sirius died?) and then for some reason giving it to his brother, Aberforth. :hmm: So then a logical way for Harry to get the other half seems to be if Dumbledore leaves it to Harry through his will. :)

Pretty sure it was given to Harry during christmas in book5 but he smashed it after seeing it at the bottom of his trunk after getting back from the MoM.

Good point you make as well. However if the movies involve scrimgour then won't he and the ministry have kept and investigated anything that DD left in his will for anything suspiscious? If that was true then wouldn't they find two-way mirror from a dead now dead person unusual? Unless it specifically said somthing that they didn't find to be unusual.

Pretty sure it was given to Harry during christmas in book5 but he smashed it after seeing it at the bottom of his trunk after getting back from the MoM.

Good point you make as well. However if the movies involve scrimgour then won't he and the ministry have kept and investigated anything that DD left in his will for anything suspiscious? If that was true then wouldn't they find two-way mirror from a dead now dead person unusual? Unless it specifically said somthing that they didn't find to be unusual.

No, sorry...I think used too many pro-nouns and confused you :lol: I was referring to Dumbledore and not Harry. :) Yes, I know that Harry got the one half from Sirius for Christmas in OotP. What I can't quite recall is how Albus and/or Aberforth ended up with the other half. :whistle:

No, sorry...I used too many pro-nouns in the last post and confused you :lol: I was referring to Dumbledore and not Harry. I know Harry got the one half from Sirius for Christmas in OotP. What I can't quite recall though is how Albus and/or Aberforth ended up with the other half. :whistle:

Oh right, yeah I do not recall ever hearing anything about the other piece. Just when we are introduced to it at the end of DH in the Hog's Head.

But yeah I suppose that could work also. Just another item left to Harry. Although whether or not the ministry would find it unusual is another thing.

Oh right, yeah I do not recall ever hearing anything about the other piece. Just when we are introduced to it at the end of DH in the Hog's Head.

But yeah I suppose that could work also. Just another item left to Harry. Although whether or not the ministry would find it unusual is another thing.

Hmm, good point. :hmm:

I'm not sure any of us thought of that before. :whistle: If we did I think we just figured the filmmakers wouldn't bother with a detail like that (they rarely do) and the audience wouldn't really care or stop to ask. BTW, I'm just telling you what general consensuses seem to be from what I've noticed in the 600 days (according to my profile) that I've been a member of the forum. :) Jeez, has it really been that long?! :err:

Anyways, the idea to introduce the mirror as another item left to Harry is what most of us assume will be the case I think. But it's entirely possible we could be very wrong...hell, maybe they'll scrap it completely. :shrug: But I hope not, doing so would just create more complications.

Hmm, good point. :hmm:

I'm not sure any of us thought of that before. :whistle: If we did I think we just figured the filmmakers wouldn't bother with a detail like that (they rarely do) and the audience wouldn't really care or stop to ask. BTW, I'm just telling you what general consensuses seem to be from what I've noticed in the 600 days (according to my profile) that I've been a member of the forum.

Yeah I am sure whatever they do, it will be fairly simple. But they do have a decent amount of space for story, either way I guess we just have to wait.

I never thought about how they would introduce the mirror. I wonder if they will leave it out completely? I really hope they don't though.

I never thought about how they would introduce the mirror. I wonder if they will leave it out completely? I really hope they don't though.

Well, I believe that some of us kicked around the idea of them scrapping the mirror and just having Harry call for Dobby...but Dobby isn't his property like Kreacher so I'm not sure this would make sense. Of course, I bet loyal Dobby would come if he knew Harry needed help. :)

But I'm pretty sure Aberforth has been confirmed...and without the mirror there isn't much point for him, so I presume they'll include it. :tu:

Unless of course, they are using Aberforth simply for the exposition of Dumbledore's back story... :hmm: That'd be quite a waste though, IMO

There are also a few photos of them at Shell Cottage with Harry holding something that could be the mirror. This isn't complete confirmation, of course, but most likely that is what it is.

There are also a few photos of them at Shell Cottage with Harry holding something that could be the mirror. This isn't complete confirmation, of course, but most likely that is what it is.

Sounds promising to keeping the mirror in the story. Unless Dan was checking his hair or somthing for the shot?! Ha. That would be a let down.

Sorry if this has been posted before.

It has been confirmed that the first footage from DH will be on the special edition HBP DVD/Blu-Ray.

It says so on the back cover (http://www.snitchseeker.com/harry-potter-news/first-deathly-hallows-footage-attached-half-blood-prince-special-edition-dvd-set-68692/) of the DVD/Blu-Ray.

No, sorry...I think used too many pro-nouns and confused you :lol: I was referring to Dumbledore and not Harry. :) Yes, I know that Harry got the one half from Sirius for Christmas in OotP. What I can't quite recall is how Albus and/or Aberforth ended up with the other half. :whistle:

In the books - Harry gets one of the mirrors from Sirius over Christmas in OOTP. In HBP, Harry sees Mundungus with Aberforth in Hogsmeade and they caught him with a lot of things he had stolen from Grimmauld Place - Mundungus disapparates before Harry can do anything about it. In DH, Aberforth reveals that he bought the other mirror from Mundungus the day Harry saw them in Hogsmeade together and Dumbledore explained what it was and how it worked to him.

So, here's an idea for how they can work that into the seventh film. Both Mundungus and Aberforth have been confirmed. They can adapt the discovery that Mundungus was stealing things from Grimmauld Place to fit for DH - they already have an existing scene in the book where Kreacher tells them how Mundungus took "treasures" from the house. That's how Harry finds out Umbridge has the locket - he sends Kreacher after Mungungus and then Mundungus tells them he gave the locket to Umbridge.

That gives a couple of possibilities. Dobby is a very good option - as someone suggested above - because that brings in the connection between Aberforth and Dobby. It was Aberforth who sent Dobby to rescue the trio from Malfoy Manor after Harry saw his eye in the mirror and asked for help. So it would make sense in that context for him to also have Dobby give Harry the other mirror because Dumbledore told him what the mirrors were and how they worked.

They could also have Harry find the mirror at Grimmauld Place already broken with Kreacher explaining that Mungungus was stealing and broke one of the mirrors - perhaps as Kreacher tried to stop him from taking things. Or Harry could break the mirror himself - getting mad because he only has one so he can't use it to communicate or thinking he could use it to communicate with Sirius only to be told that Mundungus stole the other one and flinging it across the room in anger. And then Harry decides to keep a piece of it because he thinks he saw Dumbledore's eye in it.

Since Aberforth did ask Dumbledore about the mirror, they could also make that part of Dumbledore's will and have Aberforth explain to them later that he bought both mirrors from Mundungus and Dumbledore took one to give to Harry and asked him to use the other to keep an eye on Harry.

I think using Dobby would make the most sense because that gives them an opportunity to work Dobby into DH part 1 in a plausible way. He could show up at #4 Privet Dr. or even the Burrow to deliver the mirror to Harry. There are various options they can go with for the mirror getting broken - I don't think it would be that difficult for them to come up with a plausible scenario for that.

When Harry touched the ring in HBP he saw a flash of the snake. Dumbledore said that dark magic leaves traces. Harry, Ron and Hermione can easily figure out that Nagini is a horcrux. More reasons are already said :)

When Harry touched the ring in HBP he saw a flash of the snake. Dumbledore said that dark magic leaves traces. Harry, Ron and Hermione can easily figure out that Nagini is a horcrux. More reasons are already said :)

That may be enough for people like us who post on this forum, but for the average movie-goer whom they will be trying to please, will not remember this flash of a snake and won't get it without more explanation.

-JR

That may be enough for people like us who post on this forum, but for the average movie-goer whom they will be trying to please, will not remember this flash of a snake and won't get it without more explanation.

-JR

Yeah the explinations of the mirror, diadem and nagini need to be clear yet simple. All the while remaining in sync with the rest of the plot.

What you say is a likely possibility sure, but there needs to be discussion or clarification as to how the info came to present itself to the trio in the movie, and in turn the audience in the theater.

I think that once they have something of Slytherins and something of Hufflepuffs. I don't think it is too great of a leap for them to search for something of Ravenclaws. Harry makes this leap in the book to look for the diadem, so i think it is reasonable for him to make it in the film.

I sort of like the idea of Snape telling Harry to kill the snake as Snape is dying. Snape was told this by Dumbledore and it could then be shown in his memories. We would also then visually see Snape helping Harry besides it all being in memories. Harry will then realize the snake is the final horcrux and tell Neville.

They may, of course, just explain what they left out of what Dumbledore thought the horxruxes were in some sort of dialogue and just leave it at that. This is something i wish they had explained a little bit better in HBP.

They may, of course, just explain what they left out of what Dumbledore thought the horxruxes were in some sort of dialogue and just leave it at that. This is something i wish they had explained a little bit better in HBP.

This is my only gripe with HBP. They could have included one or two scentences about what possible objects or a trend in the objects for the remaining horcruxes might have been. It would have made things so much easier, now that DD is not there, info could be conveyed a number of different ways.

These seem like the most obvious for the movie to me, for the two horcruxes and the mirror.

Diadem - As decarus said before, the trio could very well simply put two and two together and discover after the locket with a big S and a goblet that they know is from one of the founders that the remaining horcruxes are from the founders also. IE diadem they saw on Xeno's sculpture. The question remains, how do they know it is in the RoR with no memory from Voldy asking about the DADA job? Ginny maybe, or they go along with the Grey Lady plot and Binns info leading them to the RoR?

Nagini - The Snape idea is very good it could kind of spoil whose side he is on then and there as opposed to after the memories, but they are very close so it seems to make sense. Or the trio can simply see once they are in the shrieking shack that Nagini is in a magic bubble, the trio discusses this and come to the conclusion it is a horcrux.

Mirror - I think dobby giving it to harry and explaining a bit of info about it would be good and to the point, also simple. It would cut out Aberforth for that though, which isn't a huge deal. Or Harry will find it in Grimmauld place borken on the floor and catch a glimpse of a blue eye in one of the pieces. Then he would keep it and question it later. This would fit considering that the Dumbledore accusations in the newspaper and in the vague letter in sirius's room had introduced to the story.

This is the way I see it happening, which are the most simple and clear ways to involve all these things neglected in previous films. The underlined parts are what I think will be the most likely methods they involve these parts of the story in the film.

I guess it would sort of spoil which side Snape is on, but like you said, Harry watches the memories very soon after so it might just be the beginning of the revelation which would lead back to Harry walking out to his 'death' and repeating what Snape said to Neville on the way out.

That may be enough for people like us who post on this forum, but for the average movie-goer whom they will be trying to please, will not remember this flash of a snake and won't get it without more explanation.

-JR

That flash of the snake is a subtle hint you can catch upon a second or third view. Harry can tell Ron and Hermione about what he saw when he touched the ring. They can imply that such dark magic leaves traces and, thus, figure out that Voldemort's snake is a horcrux. Harry saw the orphanage memory where Tom Riddle was very proud because he could speak to snakes. In addition, when they see how protected Nagini is it will be quite obvious. The average movie-goer will probably get it when the trio do.

Snape telling Harry about it can also work.

I think the directors will try and show the trio's horcrux hunt as pretty confusing, at the time they weren't sure what/where the next horcrux will be. When they figure it out I think it will be quite easy for this to be portrayed to the audience. It would be easy to show Nagini in every shot with Voldemort so the audience becomes accustomed to who she is. I hope they don't miss out the fact that Neville kills her.

I just came up with a great idea! I'm not sure if anybody have said this before me, but wouldn't it be great if they made Jo play a small part in the final part? Just make her a witch in the background or something, just for the fun of it? That would be so awesome! Just picture it, Harry duelling a Death Eater in the final battle, and suddenly a witch comes in the backround fighting her own Death Eater (of course she wins!)

Does everybody else think this was a stupid idea? Or has it been suggested before?

I just came up with a great idea! I'm not sure if anybody have said this before me, but wouldn't it be great if they made Jo play a small part in the final part? Just make her a witch in the background or something, just for the fun of it? That would be so awesome! Just picture it, Harry duelling a Death Eater in the final battle, and suddenly a witch comes in the backround fighting her own Death Eater (of course she wins!)

Does everybody else think this was a stupid idea? Or has it been suggested before?

That may be breaking the fourth wall a bit much, but I wouldn't mind. It would be pretty cool.

Everyone loves good old Professor Pomona Sprout, without whom, many would still be petrified. But her role in the films does not seem to do her character justice. Miriam Margolyesan did an excellent job portraying her in CoS, and I am ridiculously happy she is going to be back for DH. But why the 4 film gap? They brought back Warwick Davis as Professor Filius Flitwick for all the films (well if you count him as the choir director in PoA). Would it have been too hard to bring her back? No one said she had to have lines. She could just be in the background. The same could also be said with Zoë Wanamaker as Madam Rolanda Hooch. She too did a fantastic job playing her role, and I am rather mad as of right now, she has not been asked to come back for DH. They both made the fist two films amazing, and I think the rest of movies would have been a lot better to have them in. I think with the revenue WB is making from the Potter franchise, it would not have even "made a dent in their wallet" to hire them again. So how do you feel? Do you think the movies would have been better with them?

http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/harrypotter/images/e/e8/Professor_Sprout.jpg

That may be breaking the fourth wall a bit much, but I wouldn't mind. It would be pretty cool.
:tu: i would love to see that.

Everyone loves good old Professor Pomona Sprout, without whom, many would still be petrified. But her role in the films does not seem to do her character justice. Miriam Margolyesan did an excellent job portraying her in CoS, and I am ridiculously happy she is going to be back for DH. But why the 4 film gap? They brought back Warwick Davis as Professor Filius Flitwick for all the films (well if you count him as the choir director in PoA). Would it have been too hard to bring her back? No one said she had to have lines. She could just be in the background. The same could also be said with Zoë Wanamaker as Madam Rolanda Hooch. She too did a fantastic job playing her role, and I am rather mad as of right now, she has not been asked to come back for DH. They both made the fist two films amazing, and I think the rest of movies would have been a lot better to have them in. I think with the revenue WB is making from the Potter franchise, it would not have even "made a dent in their wallet" to hire them again. So how do you feel? Do you think the movies would have been better with them?

http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/harrypotter/images/e/e8/Professor_Sprout.jpg

I'm pretty sure it was confirmed long ago that she'd make a return for DH. :whistle:

Afterall, she's needed for "defensive herbology"- lobbing snargaluff pods, venemous tentacula, etc over the wall during the Battle. ;) :D

I just came up with a great idea! I'm not sure if anybody have said this before me, but wouldn't it be great if they made Jo play a small part in the final part? Just make her a witch in the background or something, just for the fun of it? That would be so awesome! Just picture it, Harry duelling a Death Eater in the final battle, and suddenly a witch comes in the backround fighting her own Death Eater (of course she wins!)

Does everybody else think this was a stupid idea? Or has it been suggested before?

I'm pretty sure she will not be in DH. I mean, she was asked to play Lily in the mirror in PS, but said no because she don't want to be in the films.

I really am not cut out to be an actress, even one who just has to stand there and wave. I would have messed it up somehow.

She don't think she can act, she is convinced she will ruin it all :lol:

Or has it been suggested before?It has been suggested before. Jo was asked to play Harry's mum on PS/SS but refused to do so because she was afraid to destroy the scene. If one truly has no talent for acting that is indeed possible, but I assume in a movie with such variable levels of talent and experience of the actor team, that might even had worked still.

ETA: Lilleby just posted the same, sorry! :lol:

I'm pretty sure it was confirmed long ago that she'd make a return for DH. :whistle:

Afterall, she's needed for "defensive herbology"- lobbing snargaluff pods, venemous tentacula, etc over the wall during the Battle. ;) :D
Note the part where I said "I was ridiculously happy when I heard she would be back for DH" ;)

But yeah, I want to see her running with Mandrakes to throw over the wall :D

So how do you feel? Do you think the movies would have been better with them?

Of course the films would not be superior with the inclusion of Professor Sprout and Madam Hooch! How, exactly, does seeing a character without dialogue in the background of a scene effect the quality of the entire film?

They both made the fist two films amazing, and I think the rest of movies would have been a lot better to have them in. I think with the revenue WB is making from the Potter franchise, it would not have even "made a dent in their wallet" to hire them again. So how do you feel? Do you think the movies would have been better with them?
The thing is with filmmaking if you introduce a character, they have to have a certain function in the film. So that means a beginning, a middle and an end with said character, otherwise it's dead weight and in some respect also dead weight in the audience's mindshare. It's like buying a computer printer with a cup holder. Why would you need a cup holder? It make the printer better in some aspects but not it's intended use.

Even though you mentioned just two minor characters, me personally I would not like to have to encounter a line up of minor characters during the film just because they were there, or supposed to be there. Otherwise it disrupts the flow of an already adapted work.

However I am one to give the benefit of the doubt and therefore would admit that if done "right", a cameo could not hurt at all. Given the extended split of the DH, all these cameos "might" work out, but I'm using that term in the loosest sense of the word. But who knows, I've been wrong before!

The same could also be said with Zoë Wanamaker as Madam Rolanda Hooch. She too did a fantastic job playing her role, and I am rather mad as of right now, she has not been asked to come back for DH.

Does Madam Hooch play any type of role in DH? I haven't read the book in a while, but is she even mentioned? If I am wrong and she does have a role, I would love to see Wanamaker back!

-JR

Note the part where I said "I was ridiculously happy when I heard she would be back for DH" ;)

But yeah, I want to see her running with Mandrakes to throw over the wall :D

Ooops, my bad. :lol:

You see, it was really late and this was the only part that registered in my brain, I thought you were still talking about Professor Sprout :whistle:

She did a fantastic job playing her role, and I am rather mad as of right now, she has not been asked to come back for DH


Anyways...there are 2 news items-

http://www.snitchseeker.com/harry-potter-news/rade-serbedzija-film-deathly-hallows-gregorovitch-scenes-november-68723/

http://www.snitchseeker.com/harry-potter-news/video-jamie-campbell-bower-talks-grindelwald-dumbledore-deathly-hallows-68725/

Ooops, my bad. :lol:

You see, it was really late and this was the only part that registered in my brain, I thought you were still talking about Professor Sprout :whistle:




Anyways...there are 2 news items-

http://www.snitchseeker.com/harry-potter-news/rade-serbedzija-film-deathly-hallows-gregorovitch-scenes-november-68723/

http://www.snitchseeker.com/harry-potter-news/video-jamie-campbell-bower-talks-grindelwald-dumbledore-deathly-hallows-68725/
Yeah, I started talking about Madam Hooch. Sorry, I should have started a new paragraph :P

I was so happy to hear that JCB was cast as Gridewald. I loved him in Sweeney Todd, and I think he will be great in New Moon (yes I plan on seeing it :P )

Yeah, I started talking about Madam Hooch. Sorry, I should have started a new paragraph :P

I was so happy to hear that JCB was cast as Gridewald. I loved him in Sweeney Todd, and I think he will be great in New Moon (yes I plan on seeing it :P )

Hmm...he was in Sweeny Todd? I'll have to rent it and evaluate his performance :p

-JR

Hmm...he was in Sweeny Todd? I'll have to rent it and evaluate his performance That film was disgusting. I can usually stand violence and such, but for some reason that film really grossed me out.

I think they both look good as their parts though in DH.

I was so happy to hear that JCB was cast as Gridewald. I loved him in Sweeney Todd, and I think he will be great in New Moon (yes I plan on seeing it :P )

Never seen his acting, but I think he looks really feminine...I guess that kinda fits for Grindelwald and his relationship with DD though :lol:

Except, I was happy to read in that article that they aren't going to delibrately shed light on their sexuality. There really is no need to. :shrug:


As for the other guy, I already posted in the casting thread for him that I thought he was great as Boris "The Blade" in the movie Snatch.

I'm sure he'll do fine...and hopefully this young kid, Jamie Campbell Bower, will do great as well :tu:

The same could also be said with Zoë Wanamaker as Madam Rolanda Hooch. She too did a fantastic job playing her role, and I am rather mad as of right now, she has not been asked to come back for DH.

Zoe was asked back for CoS, but complained at how she didn't get any dialogue. She was never asked back for another film since.

Zoe was asked back for CoS, but complained at how she didn't get any dialogue. She was never asked back for another film since.

that's awful.....i kinda hated how quidditch wasn't in half the movies as much as it should've been........there was only like one scene, maybe, for all the movies.....i feel that they just left out entirely too much for my taste.....

Zoe was asked back for CoS, but complained at how she didn't get any dialogue. She was never asked back for another film since.

It would be so easy for Kloves to write in one single line. There was quidditch in COS. Why wasn't there a referee? Now it's too late for her to make an appearance again. No one, perhaps not even all the readers, will remember her face if her role only involves shooting a few spells. That's pity!

I wish Andromeda Black was the one to kill Bellatrix...

I wish Andromeda Black was the one to kill Bellatrix... I sort of like that they have Molly actually do some fighting, so i hope they keep her killing Bellatrix. I do wish they had left the bit in HBP where McGonagall is stunned by the deatheaters. I guess we will get some McGonagall fighting in DH so that will be good.

I wish Andromeda Black was the one to kill Bellatrix...

Who?! I can't say I recall any Andromeda from the books...and the person I think you're talking of is a portrait (in other words dead) :lol:

Anyways, I rather like it as Molly. :p The only other I'd approve of would be Neville...as revenge for the torture of his parents naturally.

Who?! I can't say I recall any Andromeda from the books...and the person I think you're talking of is a portrait (in other words dead)

Andromeda Black is the sister of Bellatrix and Narcissa remember? She was blasted of the family black portrait because she married a muggle or muggleborn (not sure) Ted Tonks.

Molly kicked Bellatrix's *ss in that fight and I love her line.
That was a great scene from the book!

Andromeda Black is the sister of Bellatrix and Narcissa remember? She was blasted of the family black portrait because she married a muggle or muggleborn (not sure) Ted Tonks.

Molly kicked Bellatrix's *ss in that fight and I love her line.
That was a great scene from the book!

Yeah, completely forgot about her, that's how much of an impression she made. And was she ever more than just talked about in the books?

I forsee no problems with including that line (even if for some absurd reason DH was PG) but if so they're going to have very angry fans. :elaugh:

And was she ever more than just talked about in the books?

Yes, we see her on pages 65-66 of the US DH hardback after Harry and Hagrid have made it safely to the Tonks household. ;) She is mentioned again in the books, but we don't see her.

Oh, I see. So, Sacred_Memories, can I ask why you'd rather have this insignificant character over Molly...be the one to kill Bellatrix? :err: I don't think it makes sense for a character briefly mentioned a few times and only seen on page once to be given such a momentous task.

And far as I know she hasn't been in any of the films and she surely won't be more than a glorified extra in DH (if her character is included at all) Doesn't it make much more sense to stick with the book here and have Molly (a well established character) protect her daughter? ;)

Oh, I see. So, Sacred_Memories, can I ask why you'd rather have this insignificant character over Molly...be the one to kill Bellatrix? :err: I don't think it makes sense for a character briefly mentioned a few times and only seen on page once to be given such a momentous task.

And far as I know she hasn't been in any of the films and she surely won't be more than a glorified extra in DH (if her character is included at all) Doesn't it make much more sense to stick with the book here and have Molly (a well established character) protect her daughter? ;)
:tu:agreed. i dont think its good to have sisters trying to kill each other. I would believe that even after they severed ties, there would be some emotional bond between them. Andromeda wouldn't deliberately go out to kill Bellatrix. I dont think Andromeda would be featured in the films, as it would only add confusion. Andromeda is described as looking almost like Bellatrix, only with softer features. And she does not have any important lines, apart from showing how Ted cares for Tonks and has confidence in her.
How would you find an actress that looks almost like Helena but slightly different?

Kinda DH related, Bonnie Wright has been romanticly linked to Jamie Campbell Bower‎ or Gellert Grindelwald in DH. Do we have a Harry Potter love connection???

-JR

Obviously Andromeda can't kill Bellatrix, but she would have been much more fitting in Deathly Hallows, IMO. Andromeda and Bellatrix hated each other, and I would have liked to see Andromeda watch her daughter die at the hands of her own sister.

I have always been fascinated with the Black sisters.

I have always been fascinated with the Black sisters.So it seems!

My objections to Molly center around some basic principles of story-telling. Hung guns should be fired later and fired guns should be hung beforehand. Just pulling a gun out of the blue and firing it is the story-telling sin of being arbitrary. (Yes, it was in the book, but it was bad: in fact, that might have been the single lowest point in the narrative.)

Andromeda satisfies arbitrariness: even though Andromeda's development borders on non-existent, what little there is all sets up a hatred between the two sisters. Had the book informed us that Bellatrix killed Tonks, then it all would have been there.

However, the Andromeda Problem basically stems from what you mention: I've just cited all of her character development. Another important storytelling principle is symmetry. It was bad enough having a tertiary character like Molly kill the antagonist's second-in-command: but a character that cannot even be described as quaternary would fare worse. It would be as if the Witch King had been killed by Rohan Rider #1025! (Remember him? The blond guy with the green cloak on a horse, shouted "DEATH" at one point, waved a spear and a sword a bit.) The WK had to be taken down by people close to Théoden (niece and sword-thain): Leader Evil takes down Leader Good, Leader Good's lieutenants take down Leader Evil.

(Again, Molly is not much better: she's like Grimbold in this example.)

As I noted long ago, there is a simple solution that is not only symmetric and non-arbitrary, but also thematic: Ron and Hermione. The Gun is on the Wall: Bellatrix nearly kills Hermione and Hermione uses the outcome to break into Bellatrix's vault while using Bellatrix's wand;
Symmetry: Protagonist kills antagonist; so, have the protagonist's two lieutenants kill the antagonist's lieutenant;
Theme: Bellatrix is self-entitled bigoted aristocracy; Hermione is talented commoner being denied by self-entitled aristocrats and Ron is the enlightened (who thought one could write that? :p) aristocrat supporting the rights of the common-person: it is the Muggleborn Registration condensed.It even could be used to foreshadow: you do not have Hermione or Ron simply Avada Kedavra Bellatrix, but have Bellatrix basically kill herself in some backfiring that results from Bellatrix greedily pursuing (say) Hermione and momentarily forgets Ron.

In some ways, this is similar to the challenge that Jackson, Boyens & Walsh faced with the destruction of the Ring. In the book, it is arbitrary. On film, it was not just firing of a hung gun and thematic but also (in multiple ways) symmetrical. Now, it is less important: the audience really will not care too much about Bellatrix with the death of Voldemort so near; still, retaining what the book does will mean that the ending will be diminished somewhat.

Wimsey and what do you think of my idea of Bellatrix killed by McGonagall?

Wimsey, I doubt all but a few actually care about that whole thing with a hung gun or whatever. As it is written is fine- Ginny was in danger and her mother, Molly, comes to her defense. It makes perfect sense so why even consider a change? :huh: Anyways, we're getting off topic...

Wimsey and what do you think of my idea of Bellatrix killed by McGonagall?That could work if something is set up between Bella & McGonagall before hand. My concern then is, can this be introduced while furthering one of the remaining plots (at this point, finding the remaining Horcrux, unravelling ??Snape??, and finishing off Voldemort) and/or the story?

This might seem unnecessary. However, they cannot just introduce McGonagal out of the blue when Harry gets to Hogwarts if she is to have any effective screen presence. Now, how to introduce McGonagall is another issue altogether. Still, if they break from the single-protagonist narrative to show goings-on at Hogwarts, then perhaps they can introduce McGonagall there, and set up something between Bellatrix and McGonagall at the same time. At the risk of making a horrid pun, they have to think two birds with one stone throughout this adaptation.

So, McGonagall would not be my first choice: but she also would not be the worst choice!

So it seems!

My objections to Molly center around some basic principles of story-telling. Hung guns should be fired later and fired guns should be hung beforehand. Just pulling a gun out of the blue and firing it is the story-telling sin of being arbitrary. (Yes, it was in the book, but it was bad: in fact, that might have been the single lowest point in the narrative.)

Andromeda satisfies arbitrariness: even though Andromeda's development borders on non-existent, what little there is all sets up a hatred between the two sisters. Had the book informed us that Bellatrix killed Tonks, then it all would have been there.

However, the Andromeda Problem basically stems from what you mention: I've just cited all of her character development. Another important storytelling principle is symmetry. It was bad enough having a tertiary character like Molly kill the antagonist's second-in-command: but a character that cannot even be described as quaternary would fare worse. It would be as if the Witch King had been killed by Rohan Rider #1025! (Remember him? The blond guy with the green cloak on a horse, shouted "DEATH" at one point, waved a spear and a sword a bit.) The WK had to be taken down by people close to Théoden (niece and sword-thain): Leader Evil takes down Leader Good, Leader Good's lieutenants take down Leader Evil.

(Again, Molly is not much better: she's like Grimbold in this example.)

As I noted long ago, there is a simple solution that is not only symmetric and non-arbitrary, but also thematic: Ron and Hermione. The Gun is on the Wall: Bellatrix nearly kills Hermione and Hermione uses the outcome to break into Bellatrix's vault while using Bellatrix's wand;
Symmetry: Protagonist kills antagonist; so, have the protagonist's two lieutenants kill the antagonist's lieutenant;
Theme: Bellatrix is self-entitled bigoted aristocracy; Hermione is talented commoner being denied by self-entitled aristocrats and Ron is the enlightened (who thought one could write that? :p) aristocrat supporting the rights of the common-person: it is the Muggleborn Registration condensed.It even could be used to foreshadow: you do not have Hermione or Ron simply Avada Kedavra Bellatrix, but have Bellatrix basically kill herself in some backfiring that results from Bellatrix greedily pursuing (say) Hermione and momentarily forgets Ron.

In some ways, this is similar to the challenge that Jackson, Boyens & Walsh faced with the destruction of the Ring. In the book, it is arbitrary. On film, it was not just firing of a hung gun and thematic but also (in multiple ways) symmetrical. Now, it is less important: the audience really will not care too much about Bellatrix with the death of Voldemort so near; still, retaining what the book does will mean that the ending will be diminished somewhat.

Actually if a random Rohan man killed the Witchking, the thematic point made would be ROHAN and Theoden's decision to lead the Rohirrim to Minas Tirith destroying the Witch-king. Rohan-man number whatever would represent the Rohan and their army as a whole. It would still work, actually. It woulden't have been as dramatic or AS themeaticly satisfying as Eowyn and Merry killing him, but it would still have made thematic and maybe even a little dramatic sense because it ties into the greater conception of Rohan itself.

But here we go again. Comparing LOTR to DH. It cannot be done, IMO. As you yourself have said: LOTR is plot-driven, HP is character-driven. The characters in LOTR are props used to tell a story. The story in HP is a prop used to develop characters. Characters and their backgrounds and developments ARE important in HP.

Think about it. Did Grimbold have ANY backstory at all? Is he the father of a secondary character or even a major character? Does he have a family that we meet? I haven't read LOTR so I can't answer for sure but I would assume no.

Now, Andromenda and Molly both are developed and fleshed out much more than Rohan guy 2345345 or whatever. They are both mothers, both have lost a child. Bam. Right there, you still retain the theme of the power of motherhood AND you have an emotional resonance with the audience.

In-case anyone is wondering, I support Molly killing Bellatrix as in the book. I see no reason to change this. HP is a series with an on-going story. Molly has been portayed for 7 movies as the caring loving, strong overbearing mother. This gun was hung ages ago and was reinforced with every subsequent film. I see no problem with it. The concept of a mother defending her child is not too difficult to understand. Even a mother bear attending the film will understand it. This was very obviously what Rowling was trying to say with this scene, it was perfectly set-up in the books, adapated sufficently in the films and I see no issue here. There are greater issues pertaining to book-film transitions we need to worry about, IMO.

In-case anyone is wondering, I support Molly killing Bellatrix as in the book. I see no reason to change this. HP is a series with an on-going story. Molly has been portayed for 7 movies as the caring loving, strong overbearing mother. This gun was hung ages ago and was reinforced with every subsequent film. I see no problem with it. The concept of a mother defending her child is not too difficult to understand. Even a mother bear attending the film will understand it. This was very obviously what Rowling was trying to say with this scene, it was perfectly set-up in the books, adapated sufficently in the films and I seeo no issue here. There are greater issues pertaining to book-film transitions we need to worry about.

Great point, Vince :tu:

Yes, the only "gun" that "needs to be hung" is esbtablishing Molly as a mother who obviously cares for the safety of her children and as you said, this was done ages ago and been re-inforced. Whether or not Molly and Bella actually have a past with each other is irrelevant... :relax:

Before the release of Deathly Hallows, I was convinced Bellatrix would die at the hands of McGonagall.

Before the release of Deathly Hallows, I was convinced Bellatrix would die at the hands of McGonagall.

Perhaps she does in the film? I don't like the idea, though. I want Molly to kill her as in the book :cool:

"NOT MY DAUGHTER, YOU ******!"

:lol:

Should be epic.

"NOT MY DAUGHTER, YOU ******!"

:lol:

Should be epic.

Hopefully they won't censor you know what :p
They even censored such a commom word here...

Everyone is going to laugh if she says that. I am fine with it either way. I really just hope that they show the kids fighting some and not just the adults. I don't really think that line was that interesting. I did like that they actually showed Molly fighting in the book and i would like to see that in the film.

I think sufficent back-story has been created between Bella and Molly to make the one killing the other seem plausable. She had enough motivation. Perhaps they'll play slightly with the chronology and have Fred's death closer to when Molly goes after Bellatrix to make it clear that she was remembering her son when duelling her. I dount they'll censor Molly's line but anything can happen I suppose.

Zoe was asked back for CoS, but complained at how she didn't get any dialogue. She was never asked back for another film since.
WOW! What the heck? To any true Harry Potter fan, just being on screen for a second is enough to satisfy.

And I am SO excited to see McGonagall fight! Maggie does such a fantastic job with the role, so I am so happy she gets some action.

Let's hope they make the McGonagall vs Snape duel as epic as int he book as a pre-climax

Let's hope they make the McGonagall vs Snape duel as epic as int he book as a pre-climax

I thought that was one of the best duels actually, even better than the one spell showdown we got between harry and voldemort. We actually get to see some magic with that faceoff.

In an attempt to bring this topic back a little...

Is Bellatrix being killed by Molly an important part of the story as a whole? I think if Bellatrix was "forgotten" about by the reader during the fight and them mentioned later as part of the dead like Lupin and Tonks, would the story really be different at all? I don't think so.

Will they show this happening in DH2 though? Yes, I think so. The reason why I think this is not so much that it helps the story but more to the fact that no director is going to let Helena Bonham Carter be a villian in their movie and not let this superb actor do a death sequence. The audience will not care so much WHO kills her but WHEN she is killed. I have no doubt she is going to be absolutly freakin crazy in that scene and the audience will cheer when she is killed. I think even if "random Hogwarts student #64" kills Bellatrix, the audience will cheer. I don't think they will do that, I think it will be left to Julie Walters (Molly) as a "think you" for her part in the movies.

-JR

I thought that was one of the best duels actually, even better than the one spell showdown we got between harry and voldemort. We actually get to see some magic with that faceoff.

Yeah, was almost on par with Dumbledore vs. Voldy...and it was advanced magic too, not just basic Expelliarmus, Stupefy, Protego, etc :p

This is very off topic but in the correct thread so...one of the scenes I REALLLLLLY hope they do not cut from the film is when Harry does the crucio spell on one of the carrows in the common room after they spit on McGonagall. I always loved that sequence it just went to show how concealed yet strong the connection between Harry and McGonagall was, we never really saw a lot of her (not enough for my liking) movies/books and she was always one of my favorite teachers. (it is very possible they will exclude it seeing as how the plot associated with this specific scene centers around the diadem, which in itself has many holes to fill for the movie)

This is very off topic but in the correct thread so...one of the scenes I REALLLLLLY hope they do not cut from the film is when Harry does the crucio spell on one of the carrows in the common room after they spit on McGonagall. I always loved that sequence it just went to show how concealed yet strong the connection between Harry and McGonagall was, we never really saw a lot of her (not enough for my liking) movies/books and she was always one of my favorite teachers. (it is very possible they will exclude it seeing as how the plot associated with this specific scene centers around the diadem, which in itself has many holes to fill for the movie)

I agree, and actually that's a heck of a lot more on topic than what people were previously going on about with making radical changes that don't make sense and they obviously won't do :relax: Yeah, I hope they keep this too :tu: Hmm, didn't think consider that with the diadem :hmm:

This is very off topic but in the correct thread so...one of the scenes I REALLLLLLY hope they do not cut from the film is when Harry does the crucio spell on one of the carrows in the common room after they spit on McGonagall. I always loved that sequence it just went to show how concealed yet strong the connection between Harry and McGonagall was, we never really saw a lot of her (not enough for my liking) movies/books and she was always one of my favorite teachers. (it is very possible they will exclude it seeing as how the plot associated with this specific scene centers around the diadem, which in itself has many holes to fill for the movie)

I agree that this scene would indeed be very cool, but seeing as how the diadem is kind of a wild card, I have feeling this scene may not make it. I think that the diadem, amoung all the mysteries with DH, is probably going to be the hardest to tie in because of pointless changes to HBP and the RoR.

-JR

Hmmm. The diadem is going to be tricky in DH. Well, I do have faith because they (I think it was Yates or Heyman) said that they would probably work Dobby into the story a bit more, so I think they will do the same with the diadem (We should really just call it V-Daddy's Tiara :P ). And I am 99% sure "random Hogwarts student #64" will not kill Bellatrix, we all know it's going to be "random Hogwarts student 44" :P. On a serious note, I do think Molly will be the one to polish her off. And I do think they will show her killing Tonks to make it more dramatic. The whole "Harry saw Lupin and Tonks dead without seeing their death" thing really didn't flow with me too much in the book. Tonks deserves justice since they did a bad job with her in HBP.

WOW! What the heck? To any true Harry Potter fan, just being on screen for a second is enough to satisfy.

Re: Zoe Wanamaker as Madam Hooch, I would hardly expect each and every cast member to be 'a true Harry Potter fan', especially someone in a cameo role (although Zoe is a talented actress with a long career).

And I am SO excited to see McGonagall fight! Maggie does such a fantastic job with the role, so I am so happy she gets some action.

Dame Maggie has battled breast cancer in recent years. :( I thought she looked ill in the HBP film, actually, very pale and drawn. I hope she is doing well during DH filming ... :tu:

Dame Maggie has battled breast cancer in recent years. :( I thought she looked ill in the HBP film, actually, very pale and drawn. I hope she is doing well during DH filming ... :tu:

I believe that I read that she actually filmed HBP while undergoing treatment. I really can't imagine anyone else in the role of McGonagall now - the Harry Potter franchise has really done an excellent job with casting and keeping everything consistent throughout the series.

I believe that I read that she actually filmed HBP while undergoing treatment. I really can't imagine anyone else in the role of McGonagall now - the Harry Potter franchise has really done an excellent job with casting and keeping everything consistent throughout the series.
I want to even say I just read she was wearing a wig during filming. I would be really upset if she could not do her role. She does it so beautifully!

Just read the Wedding set report: http://community.livejournal.com/ohnotheydidnt/40402758.html

Everything sounds so awesome!

I think they're still gonna have Bill attacked (even if its just mentioned) and Hermione's parent scene thing - not to sure about that quite yet :shrug:

Just read the Wedding set report: http://community.livejournal.com/ohnotheydidnt/40402758.html

Everything sounds so awesome!

I think they're still gonna have Bill attacked (even if its just mentioned) and Hermione's parent scene thing - not to sure about that quite yet :shrug:

Whoa!! Even Madame Maxine made an appearance!! I don't remember her doing so in the book but it kinda makes sense since Fleur seems to be such a noble student at her school. Plus it's always good to see old characters coming back.:tu:

What I don't like though is the fact that Bill seems to be attacked long before the wedding. I had hoped that they'd take some liberty here and have the attack occur at the wedding instead.

Just read the Wedding set report: http://community.livejournal.com/ohnotheydidnt/40402758.html

Everything sounds so awesome!

I think they're still gonna have Bill attacked (even if its just mentioned) and Hermione's parent scene thing - not to sure about that quite yet :shrug:

Thanks for posting that, Arry...I hadn't seen it yet. It seems legit :tu:


I must say it sounds like it's going to be very unique with a lovely array of colors. :cool: Something I noticed is there was no mention of Victor Krum. :hmm: I though maybe this was who Hermione is dancing with that upsets Ron, but if so why isn't he mentioned by name? Oh well, not that important...just I thought I heard they were bring back that Bulgarian actor. BTW, so glad they're keeping the Kingsley patronus bit! :D

Although, something that was brought up in the shack-

It sounds like it's just going to be an orby talking thing as opposed to a corporeal patronus. Doesn't this contradict for like the Silver Doe later on? :whistle: Oh well, I guess they've contradicted the patronus form so many times already it doesn't matter :lol: But I prefer animal form :sigh:

In-case anyone is wondering, I support Molly killing Bellatrix as in the book. I see no reason to change this. HP is a series with an on-going story. Molly has been portayed for 7 movies as the caring loving, strong overbearing mother. This gun was hung ages ago and was reinforced with every subsequent film. I see no problem with it. The concept of a mother defending her child is not too difficult to understand. Even a mother bear attending the film will understand it. This was very obviously what Rowling was trying to say with this scene, it was perfectly set-up in the books, adapated sufficently in the films and I see no issue here. There are greater issues pertaining to book-film transitions we need to worry about, IMO.

I agree. Molly going after Bellatrix was something that Jo started setting up from her introduction - particularly with GOF and OOTP demonstrating how overprotective Molly could be and her fears of what would happen to her children because of the war. Not to mention Harry comparing Molly to a saber-toothed tiger. :lol: I think the theory that it would be Neville avenging his parents distracted readers from that set up, but I think that it did work out best for it to be Molly in the end. Having Neville do it would have just been revenge and it wouldn't have made much sense within the context of the battle. Molly rushing to the defense of her child was much more positive and made more sense overall, IMO. With the development of Molly's character as very overprotective, it just fit perfectly. One of my favorite moments from DH - I really hope they do it justice in the film.

I think that is something that anyone can understand - a parent defending their children is pretty much a universal concept. Parents will understand it because they would do the same if it was their child. Kids will understand it because they know their parents would do the same if it was them.

Thanks for posting that, Arry...I hadn't seen it yet. It seems legit :tu:


I must say it sounds like it's going to be very unique with a lovely array of colors. Something I noticed is there was no mention of Victor Krum. :hmm: I though maybe this was who Hermione is dancing with that upsets Ron, but if so why isn't he mentioned by name? Oh well, not that important...just I thought I heard they were bring back that Bulgarian actor.

I noticed there were quite a few errors in that report in regards to the characters and story - i.e. Luna writing and editing the Quibbler instead of her father, not knowing who the twins were, the constant reference to the Burrow as the "Burrows", etc... It doesn't seem that person has actually read the books yet. Nothing wrong with that of course, but that would be my guess as to why they didn't name the person Hermione was dancing with. They probably didn't know who the character was. My guess would be that it was Krum - which would be consistent with Ron's reaction.

That being said, I'm not sure how that change will play out. Then again, they have to do something to establish Ron's feelings for Hermione after making it appear that he wasn't interested in her in HBP. Having Hermione dance with Krum does tie into the series overall with a connection to GOF and Ron's jealous reaction to Hermione going to the Yule Ball with Krum. It might be that they're going to use that as a means to establish Ron's feelings by showing his jealousy of Krum. And that could also tie in with his later reaction with the locket and his fear that Hermione would prefer to be with Harry.

BTW, so glad they're keeping the Kingsley patronus bit! :D

Although, something that was brought up in the shack-

it sounds like it's just going to be an orby talking thing as opposed to a corporeal patronus. Doesn't this contradict for like the Silver Doe later on? Oh well, I guess they've contradicted the patronus form so many times already it doesn't matter :lol: But I prefer the animal form :sigh:

Not necessarily. The patronus is something that would be added in post production as a special effect. This is just a set report about the actual filming. Whatever is being seen there is not what will be seen in the final film. Remember the set report from HBP about the bird scene? The initial report was that Hermione made a wind blow towards Ron - the birds were added in post production. They probably have something there for filming to mark where the patronus will be, but it will look very different once the CGI is complete.

I noticed there were quite a few errors in that report in regards to the characters and story - i.e. Luna writing and editing the Quibbler instead of her father, not knowing who the twins were, the constant reference to the Burrow as the "Burrows", etc... It doesn't seem that person has actually read the books yet. Nothing wrong with that of course, but that would be my guess as to why they didn't name the person Hermione was dancing with. They probably didn't know who the character was. My guess would be that it was Krum - which would be consistent with Ron's reaction.

That being said, I'm not sure how that change will play out. Then again, they have to do something to establish Ron's feelings for Hermione after making it appear that he wasn't interested in her in HBP. Having Hermione dance with Krum does tie into the series overall with a connection to GOF and Ron's jealous reaction to Hermione going to the Yule Ball with Krum. It might be that they're going to use that as a means to establish Ron's feelings by showing his jealousy of Krum. And that could also tie in with his later reaction with the locket and his fear that Hermione would prefer to be with Harry.



Not necessarily. The patronus is something that would be added in post production as a special effect. This is just a set report about the actual filming. Whatever is being seen there is not what will be seen in the final film. Remember the set report from HBP about the bird scene? The initial report was that Hermione made a wind blow towards Ron - the birds were added in post production. They probably have something there for filming to mark where the patronus will be, but it will look very different once the CGI is complete.

Ah, both good points as always, meesha! :tu:

Yes, that could very well be. Although, with the patronus I was referring to how in the past it seems the filmmakers have been inconsistent and sometimes it's been more like a shield looking thing and others corporeal. Think the dementor attack in OotP vs. DA lesson in OotP ;)

Ah, both good points as always, meesha! :tu:

Yes, that could very well be. Although, with the patronus I was referring to how in the past it seems the filmmakers have been inconsistent and sometimes it's been more like a shield looking thing and others corporeal. Think the dementor attack in OotP vs. DA lesson in OotP ;)

Well, they did introduce the concept of "shield forms" for a patronus in OOTP with the DA meetings, but Harry did make the distinction between that and the corporeal patronus. Even with that concept in the films, it wouldn't make much sense to use a "shield form" as a means of communication though. I think it is most likely that the animal form for Kingsley's patronus will simply be added in post production when they do the CGI.

I am always so leery of set reports because there is no way to corroborate what they say in them. Everything seems to be consistent with what we know, but it is almost like they are telling a story instead of doing a set report.

They weren't like they did a scene of people entering the tent with the twins and Bill and Fleur, a scene of Hermione and someone dancing while Ron gets jealous, and the scene where the patronus comes and says the ministry is fallen. It seems that they only saw them film these three scenes and not the entire wedding. They didn't even mention Bill and Fleur actually getting married or Harry speaking to anyone.

It seems as if they are suggesting that Ginny isn't a bridesmaid unless they weren't aware that she was one of the gaggle of girls entering the tent.

Also what is up with the photos that are supposed to be Hermione's home where they will film the scene where she modifies their memories. There is a baby seat in the room and such. Hermione is an only child, so i am not really sure what those photos are about.

PS. They also used just a light for the patronus in those photos of what we all think is the silver doe scene.

So in Deathly Hallows part 1, which part are they gonna end it?

:lol: We really need an official confirmation.

So who else is excited to read from the set report that they brought back Frances de la Tour as Madame Maxime for the wedding scene? I was upset they did not have her in some sort of flashback to "Hagrid's Giant Adventure" in OotP. I think it will be funny to see them dance again. I wonder if Jo had them get married in the end?

I think that is exciting that we will possibly see Hagrid and Madame Maxime dance.

It seems as if everyone is worried that because they didn't mention Ron and Hermione dancing this means they won't dance as they do in the book. I am not sure that we can completely infer this based on this report. It actually seems like this person only saw three scenes from the wedding and not the entire wedding scene.

I don't know what to think.

So who else is excited to read from the set report that they brought back Frances de la Tour as Madame Maxime for the wedding scene?

I'm thrilled! I would love to see Hagrid with baby giants!

The bridesmaid in blue must be Giselle.
The person Hermione dances with must be the Bulgarian Bonbon.

I'm glad she's in red - enough of that insufferable pink!

Sounds great so far!

I don't understand why they destroyed the Burrow just to bring it back? Are there no consequences in this world?

I don't understand why they destroyed the Burrow just to bring it back? Are there no consequences in this world?

It sounds stupid. I'd liked them to live at Grimmauld's place as a consequence to their house being burned down. It's like the film makers hadn't read DH when making HBP...

I don't understand why they destroyed the Burrow just to bring it back? Are there no consequences in this world?

The Burrow wasn't destroyed, it was just on fire. In reality if a house is on fire the fire can be put out and the house cleaned up and redecorated.

We didn't see them put the fire out in HBP but then we didn't see it burn to the ground either, they might have easily doused the flames (magically ofc!) after the initial shock.

The Burrow wasn't destroyed, it was just on fire. In reality if a house is on fire the fire can be put out and the house cleaned up and redecorated.

We didn't see them put the fire out in HBP but then we didn't see it burn to the ground either, they might have easily doused the flames (magically ofc!) after the initial shock.

They did nothing apart from looking sad and shocked. They should have tried to save the house from the very beginning it was set on fire. Stupid screenplay!

Just read the Wedding set report: http://community.livejournal.com/ohnotheydidnt/40402758.html

Everything sounds so awesome!

I think they're still gonna have Bill attacked (even if its just mentioned) and Hermione's parent scene thing - not to sure about that quite yet :shrug:

oh, so Bill and Fleur are getting married in the movie! I thought it'd be Tonks and Lupin's wedding. I just watched HBP today and I got the idea from that scene at the burrow where she calls him sweetheart or sth like.

Thanks for posting that, Arry...I hadn't seen it yet. It seems legit :tu:


I must say it sounds like it's going to be very unique with a lovely array of colors. :cool: Something I noticed is there was no mention of Victor Krum. :hmm: I though maybe this was who Hermione is dancing with that upsets Ron, but if so why isn't he mentioned by name? Oh well, not that important...just I thought I heard they were bring back that Bulgarian actor. BTW, so glad they're keeping the Kingsley patronus bit! :D

Although, something that was brought up in the shack-

It sounds like it's just going to be an orby talking thing as opposed to a corporeal patronus. Doesn't this contradict for like the Silver Doe later on? :whistle: Oh well, I guess they've contradicted the patronus form so many times already it doesn't matter :lol: But I prefer animal form :sigh:

Yeah I noticed they didn't mention Krum but I do recall that they brought back Krum for DH so I would think Hermione would be dancing with him and that would get Ron jealous. Maybe whoever did the set report wasn't sure.

As for the patronus, maybe they will change it later when they do the cgi and we will get the animal form. At least I hope so!

I doubt that the person who wrote the set report saw them filming the entire wedding scene. I think there is more going on in the wedding than this and the order of the scenes will probably be different as well. What the person wrote is surely true, although he/she obviously misunderstood a few things, e.g. by saying Luna is the editor for the Quibbler.

The effects will be added in post-production. However, one can't expect the last films to be 100 % canon and keep in every single detail. The patronus form doesn't really matter to me.

Leaky (http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/2009/10/28/43-principal-cast-members-due-on-set-of-deathly-hallows-tomorrow) is reporting that there will a major scene filmed tomorrow comprising of 43 principal cast members. I wonder what scene it will be?

Leaky (http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/2009/10/28/43-principal-cast-members-due-on-set-of-deathly-hallows-tomorrow) is reporting that there will a major scene filmed tomorrow comprising of 43 principal cast members. I wonder what scene it will be?

Cool....might it be The Battle of Hogwarts?! :drool:

This could be the Harry/Voldemort duel or when they are in the dinning hall or when they are all outside hogwarts when Voldemort brings Harry's body back. There aren't that many scenes in the battle where everyone is there.

I do hope that they keep everyone standing around the edge during the duel like it was in the book. I think i liked that.

Wow a major scene with 43 main actors! I wish I could be a fly on the wall for that day!

-JR