Movie Snape Vs. Book Snape: Why So Different?

[Severely Snapped]

This has been bothering me for a long time; the "protector Snape" trailer pic just pushed me over the edge.

There seems to be a great difference between the Snape character in the Potter books as opposed to the Potter movies, and I don't really get it. It's not just Rickman's portrayal either (which I actually enjoy); it's more a matter of significant omissions in the writing.

Just a couple of examples:

1) In PS/SS, Quirrell tells Harry that Snape saved him at the Quidditch match. In the book, Harry says, "But Snape always seemed to hate me so much, " to which Quirrell replies, "Oh, he does hate you," goes on to tell Harry about the enmity between Snape and James, and then adds, "But he never wanted to see you dead." In the movie, however, all Harry says is, "Snape...tried to...to save me?"

2.) Also in PS/SS, when Harry sees Snape limping and realizes he tried to get past Fluffy the night before. In the book, Snape comes over to the trio just looking for a reason to bust some points from them (how unusual) and confiscates Harry's Quidditch book. But in the movie? He approaches Harry to wish him luck (albeit somewhat stiffly) in the Quidditch match that afternoon. Huh? What's the point of that?

3) In CoS, during the Duelling Club sequence. In the book, Snape tells Draco to shoot the snake at Harry; in the movie, Draco does this on his own.

4) Also in CoS, when Harry and Ron crash the Ford Anglia into the Whomping Willow. In the book, of course, it's Snape who catches them (and as a consequence hears them talking dirt about him) and drags them to his dungeon. Rowling describes Snape's demeanor in this scene as delighted; he's happy as a pig in ---- that they're going to be expelled, and when DD says it's up to McGonagall, Snape looks as though "Christmas had been cancelled." In the movie, however, it's Filch who catches the boys and is salivating at the prospect of their punishment. Snape, however, doesn't appear to take any particular pleasure in the incident; indeed, he comes across as genuinely upset and outraged, as ANY teacher would be at two students who had pulled such a stupid stunt.

THAT's what really bothers me: except for that one incident in the first Potions class, Movie Snape treats Harry pretty much like any student (albeit a high-maintenance one with a penchant for trouble). Come to think of it, with the same exception, Movie Harry treats Snape pretty much like ANY teacher (albeit a very strict and sinister-looking one with a bias toward his own house). But why?

There are more examples; I will add them as I think of them (unless any of you out there find them first.) In the meantime, has anyone else noticed this? Does anyone have any theories as to why?

[lorna]

A couple of thoughts.
First the back story of the dislike between Severus Snape and James Potter has yet to get a mention. There really has been no back story revealed so far. From the movie you wouldn't even think Snape and James knew each other.
I think with Chris Columbus's "focus on the kids" treatment of the story,
he and Kloves jettisioned alot of the adult stuff. 'But when you do that
with the Snape/James Potter stuff you remove Snape's motivation in
singling Harry out personally then he would just come across as some
flat, one dimensional jerk, which the Snape character isn't. And if at the end of the day, Snape's going to wind up something of a hero,
(which could very well be the case) why not start off a little further down the road than the books do.
Second, never underestimate and studio's inability to give credit to the intelligence of it's audience (especially kids). They like their heroes or anti-heroes (in Snape's case) to be fairly clear cut and the idea of a nasty, sarcastic
teacher who bullies his students then turns out to be a good guy anyway is something they could not get their heads around. They may have thought Snape was too political incorrect to played as he's written in the books. So they softened his character up a bit.
The first thought I can live with. They can't do the entire book. Something was going to go or be played down.
The second thought just ticks me off.
And I could be entirely off base.

[Picko]

I think the main problem is time constraints, there's only so much time to develop minor characters in a movie - of which Snape is one. Unfortunately, Snape has lost a bit in the movies but I still think his general ways remain intact.

I'll just have a look at the very good points you brought up :)

1. Whilst this works well in the book I think the sequence would've been ever so slightly bogged down by two much talk. Voldemort wants the stone right now, not in ten minutes time. I think in a movie sense it works alright and we still get the general idea that Harry's surprised that Snape saved him.

2. Just an excuse to show the enmity exists between the two I'd assume. The way its said could also pull someone who hasn't read the books into thinking that it was Snape that was jinxing him because of the forced nature of the exchange.

3. This doesn't really concern me. On one hand the book shows hostility between Snape and Harry and the movie shows the added hostility between Draco and Harry. We still know that Snape hates Harry due to him choosing Draco to duel with him.

Sorry, I can't address point four because I've got to go. I'm sure someone else will though :)

[lilmissmessy]

I agree the films need more of Snape and more of evil Snape. He hates Harry and the films should reflect this properley.

[Jedi Potter]

Well I think it is clear that Snape doesn't like Harry by the way he looks at him. Still, in COS when they descover the writing on the wall you have Snape accusing Harry in front of Dumbledore no less of doing it. That to me still shows he hates him. Sure you have the thing with the Willow but I think that is more because they had to condense that down for time there wasn't much they could do about that. He still gives Harry and evil stare which I thought was a good touch. I wonder what they will do with POA?? There seems to be an indication that he will show up in the DADA like he did in the book (from that picture of Malfoy) and he will be there for the Shrieking Shack scene. That picture of him in front of the trio, well we still aren't sure how that fits in yet and won't really until we see the movie.

[rotsiepots]

If Snape was as bad as he's actually supposed to be, I doubt anyone would take him seriously. He's an ueber villain, that's for sure, but to see an ueber villain on the big screen usually results in quite a bit of unintended humour.

He works well as a literary character because, well, that's what he was always intended to be. His nastiness doesn't translate well to "real life" or the big screen because, let's face it, it's not possible for someone to be that bad without audience wondering what on earth is going on.

[lorna]

I think someone who's never read the books and isn't seeing the film with a Harry Potter fan, wouldn't necessarily know that Snape HATES
Harry. The only real note of personal animosity is in PS/SS when Snape
intones "Harry Potter our new celebrity."
The business in the corrider in COS can also be explained by the fact
Harry is the one discovered with Filtch's cat.
That Draco is chosen to duel Harry, so what. He's Harry's nemesis in the films much more than Snape is. Of course he would be chosen.
Trouble is it's almost impossible now to find someone who not had any
exposure (including exposure to fans who can clue them in on the finer
points) to know how much effect the changes have actually had.

[Dedalus]

I don't agree that there's no indication of them hating each other, though there isn't as much as there should be. I don't think he's portrayed as just another teacher, because even people who have just watched the film, my mum for instance, seem to know he's a right nasty git. It just looks less to us, who have read the books.

But one of the reasons could be time, and that they felt they could omit a lot of his nastiness in the first two films. He is really quite tame in first two books compared to the others. So it wouldn't be too harmful if they skipped that and only made him be as malicious when he needs to be, which is really more a case in the Prisoner of Azkaban, where he was at his peak. There are some things that can be kept in a box until they need them.

[lorna]

One can be a nasty git and not necessarily hate Harry.
While we may see some kind of Snape spazzing out in the Shrieking Shack or the hospital wing I doubt it's going to be as much as strong as in the books.
At the end of the day, Kloves, Cuaruon, Columbus have to had from Rowling a few hints of where these characters are going. How else would you know what to leave in and what not to worry about.
Which could be a very strong reason as to why book Snape and movie Snape don't quite match.
Either he's going to be one of the goodies or the big reveal will be --
Snape's a baddie all along, which would be stronger cinimatically
if he's not been too bad til that point.

[ginnybatbogeysyou]

4) Also in CoS, when Harry and Ron crash the Ford Anglia into the Whomping Willow. In the book, of course, it's Snape who catches them (and as a consequence hears them talking dirt about him) and drags them to his dungeon. Rowling describes Snape's demeanor in this scene as delighted; he's happy as a pig in ---- that they're going to be expelled, and when DD says it's up to McGonagall, Snape looks as though "Christmas had been cancelled." In the movie, however, it's Filch who catches the boys and is salivating at the prospect of their punishment. Snape, however, doesn't appear to take any particular pleasure in the incident; indeed, he comes across as genuinely upset and outraged, as ANY teacher would be at two students who had pulled such a stupid stunt.

I think there just wasn't enough time to make Snape look happy. It would have been very weird if Snape'd have looked happy, becasue there was probably no time to explain it all. They could have had Alan Rickman mumbling something like "Potter's getting kicked out ... finally".
But I think his reaction towards Dumbledore shows how annoying Snape can be.

It still me puzzles why Filch finds them, not Snape.

[Severely Snapped]

I think someone who's never read the books and isn't seeing the film with a Harry Potter fan, wouldn't necessarily know that Snape HATES
Harry. The only real note of personal animosity is in PS/SS when Snape
intones "Harry Potter our new celebrity."

No offense to anyone else who has responded so far, but I believe lorna is the only one who really "gets" what I'm driving at. See, I AM that person who had never read the books before I saw the first film, and I didn't realize, until I did read them, that Snape has a personal dislike of Harry. In fact, I ended my viewing of PS/SS assuming that Snape had only been snarky with Harry in the first class because he felt Harry wasn't paying attention.

The fact remains that in every single instance I can think of from the books wherein Snape and Harry clash on a personal level, it's either been diluted or deleted in the movies. No Harry telling Hagrid, "But he really seems to hate me." No Harry throwing the firecracker in Crabbe's cauldron and Snape glaring at him like he just KNOWS it was him: "I shall make sure that person is expelled." No "shrewd and calculating look" from Snape after Harry is revealed as a parselmouth in CoS. No Snape snarling "GET OUT!" because Harry caught sight of his bloody mangled leg. No DD explaining that James and Snape hated each other, and Snape "wanted to go back to hating your father's memory in peace."

Moreover, it seems to work both ways. There are many instances in the first two books wherein Harry, or often both Harry and Ron, make nasty comments about Snape or references to how much they dislike him: "You think we've got nothing better to do in Potions than listen to Snape?" (Ron, CoS) "Let's get out of here before Snape tries to frame us for something else." (Harry, CoS) "Maybe he got sacked! Nobody likes him..." (Ron, CoS) "What can he do to you?" "Knowing Snape, something foul." (Ron & Harry, CoS) But none of these comments are in the movies. The whole flavor of the relationship between Snape and Harry, and by default, between Snape and the trio, is very different.

Second, never underestimate and studio's inability to give credit to the intelligence of it's audience (especially kids). They like their heroes or anti-heroes (in Snape's case) to be fairly clear cut and the idea of a nasty, sarcastic
teacher who bullies his students then turns out to be a good guy anyway is something they could not get their heads around. They may have thought Snape was too political incorrect to played as he's written in the books. So they softened his character up a bit.

I have a terrible suspicion that you're right, lorna. How typical of a bunch of suits at Warner Brothers to think we, or even viewers much younger, couldn't understand the difference between "not nice" and "totally evil." Gee, guys, we got it when we read the books, didn't we? :rolleyes:

Of course, your first theory could be true as well. Perhaps they've had to jettison much of the Snape/Marauders/Lily backstory for time constraints, and, without that context, Snape's personal vendetta wouldn't make any sense. But...if it's so unimportant they can delete it outright, why is JKR wasting so much time on it in the books?

[Jedi Potter]

Actually I saw the movies first as well, and I saw Snape as at least not liking Harry I wasn't sure why though since they never explained that. I do think we will get a little more of it in POA but that is just my guess.

[lorna]

Well I'm betting POA is going to be the signpost telling us where the
films will be going with the Snape/Harry relationship and the Marauder/Lily backstory.
It's possible they were waiting to reveal a lot of the information in the Shrieking Shack scenes (logical place for any big reveals).
I would agree, Severely, Snape hating James Potter and his son Harry is very important. Rowling has had something about it in every book.
She's gone out of her way to show us the hows and whys (Snape's Worst Memory for example) of how everyone got to where they are today. So I can't believe it's unimportant. For crying out loud, every mistake Snape has made (stopping Harry's lessons, threatening to hand Black to the Dementors) has at it's root his hatred of James Potter. For all we know it's one of the reasons he became a Death Eater and I can't fathom anyone being stupid enough to leave Snape
flashing that Dark Mark in Fudge's face out of GOF.
Now I do have a a bit of hope that since there's been some fairly knowledgable critics arguing that WB has been wasting their adults
actors (why bother hiring Alan Rickman to play a complicated character
if your not going to complicate the character) and dumbing down the films to much. POA (the book) has Snape in it more anyway, Cuaron not Columbus is directing (so we shouldn't be inflicted with another 20 minute Hagrid love in, if we see some Snape love in I swear I will vomit)
So maybe we'll see more of book Snape. OTOH there is that wierd Snape protecting the kids photo but it could certainly that's exactly why
Snape went to the Shrieking Shack to begin with.
Just a question. Do you think cutting the extended potions scene into
PS/SS would have made it clearer Snape had something personal against Harry. I think it might have.

[Weatherby]

I don't think anyone missed the point really.
Rickman did a pretty good job getting Snape across considering how little characterisation was done for most of the characters. The new photo of Snape with protecting the trio is suspicious though. Perhaps it's because he thinks he's going to rescue them? No I suppose not since that's the wrong setting.

[trickcy]

I agree that the difference between the movie Snape and book Snape is a lot. Even in the duelling club, while duelling against Lockthart, in the book he barely bows and just nods whereas Gilderoy is supposed to twirl whereas it is not so in the movie.

[sunnypotter]

Severely Snapped - I totally agree. When I first read the books, I pictured Snape as soo extremely hateful and mean. He is no way near as mean in the movies. My only idea is that JKR has tipped off the directors to something we dont know about Snape and therefore they must keep him tolerable.

[Inkwolf]

I agree that the book Snape isn't much like the movie Snape, but there's actually a pretty defensible and logical reason for it...

The reason could be: the book HARRY is different from the movie Harry! I mean, the movie Harry wouldn't steal from Snape's office, deliberately break school rules, throw firecrackers into other people's potions, mouth off, goof off in class....

The movie Harry is a total boy scout.

No wonder Snape doesn't hate him as much. :D


Actually, the James back story has to come out eventually...if it isn't an issue in PoA, it will certainly become one in OoP...assuming they get that far making the films...and assuming they don't whitewash James the way they have Harry.

[silver ink pot]

lorna wrote:

Do you think cutting the extended potions scene into
PS/SS would have made it clearer Snape had something personal against Harry. I think it might have.


I totally agree, lorna! I especially liked the extended potions scene, and couldn't believe the way Chris Columbus decided to edit it! I loved the part where Snape sits down across from Harry an stares at him. That is so typical of Snape and so intimidating to Harry in the books, but they cut it out. Also, he yells at Hermione and tells her to put her hand down. Why they didn't have more potions scenes and less "castle hallway" scenes is beyond me - I guess they needed to justify the staircase footage. :lol:

At any rate, Severely Snapped, I totally understand how you feel. But I think JKR has a hand in these movies - at least she says she does. On the interview that comes with CoS, she talks about how the screenwriter is a "good guesser" and how she's told him more than anyone. So there must be a reason. I don't have much problem with Snape's portrayal, except that there is not enough for Alan Rickman to do!

One more thing: the books are written from Harry's point of view, and therefore a child's point of view. We learn things as they unfold for Harry. In the books, Harry doesn't seem to even think about Snape except that they "hate" eachother. It isn't until the 4th book that Harry learns that Snape was a Death Eater, and he begins to see him a little differently. I do know that children think most authority figures are mean to them. If you look at the movie version of Chamber of Secrets and listen to what Snape says to Harry Ron, is it any worse than what Molly Weasley does? She threatens to do something to him if he puts "another toe out of line." She threatens to bring Ron straight home. Snape tells them the same thing, only he is Snape and, therefore, more forbidding in Harry's eyes. In the movie, they made him seem more worried, which I thought was perfect - in the book, he just seems angry, but that is Harry's point of view.

I think Snape is a protector. I'm sorry, I do. I think the movie versions seem toned down because there just hasn't been enough of the Snape-Harry interaction we are used to. Like someone said on another thread (I think it was Whizbang): You have to take what Snape says and pull away all the sarcasm and the put-downs, and see what you are left with, see what he actually does. I agree with that in the books. In the movies, you have to see what they have left in, and deduce future interactions from there.

I like the scene before the Quidditch match in Sorcerer's Stone, I guess because it fits my theories of Snape as a future father-figure, lol. It will be interesting to see PoA, the movie, and see the extent of the protectiveness. He was, after all trying to save the children from a werewolf and an escaped murderer who happened to break Ron's leg. I'm hoping they'll leave the part in when he calls Harry 'Precious Potter' whom everyone is trying to protect, but who breaks every rule by going to Hogsmeade, where the Dementors are, after all. You've got to admit that Harry totally lies to Snape, and even Lupin, whom many see as a father -figure, gets angry at Harry after the Marauder's Map scene.

Fom looking at the "Snape Protector" still photo, I wonder if they are going to let Snape stay awake during the Shrieking Shack scene? I feel that would be an improvement. I've always thought that having him passed out and floating on a tether was sort of unsatisfying. I always want him to see Pettigrew's transformation. I've always imagined a screenwriter saying to JKR, "What do you mean he's out cold? For the whole scene? Can we wake him up or something?"

[lorna]

Inkwolf - even with the smiley face, you make a good point. Harry is hardly the same kid in the film is he. He kind of just stands there most of the time while the story happens around him. I would submit that is also WB attempting to keep the story as kid friendly and pc as possible.
Can't have your little hero misbehaving.
silver ink pot -- you reminded me of one of my favorite Snape moments
the business of him telling Harry off for going to Hogsmeade.
I especially enjoy it because Lupin comes in right after and tells Harry
THE SAME DARN THING -- other people put their necks on the line for him, only for Harry to do whatever he feels like. Only Lupin gets kudos for being Harry's surrogate parent while Snape is the mean teacher.
Be interesting to see if it stays in or stays in as is.

[silver ink pot]

Hi, Lorna ;)

You and I are on the same page about Snape and Lupin!

Maybe because I have children, and I know JKR does too, I think I see this differently than alot of younger people here.

My children love parents who act like pals, who are on a first-name basis. I call some parents, "Party Parents." They are the ones who never say no to some whim the children have, even if it means driving across town in a blizzard for pizza. I would put Sirius Black in this category: the 'brother-figure' as Dumbledore classified him. What these parents have trouble with is ever saying "No." If their child has trouble at school - it has to be the teacher's fault because little "precious" is always right. They despise authority themselves, so they teach their children to be contemptuous of it in their teachers, coaches, etc.

My gosh, I sound like such an old-fashioned person, writing this! And I'm not - I'm a kid at heart myself, which is what I'm doing here! But it interests me that Sirius has so much trouble with other adults. I know it is partly because he was locked up so young, and never had a life, but his attitude toward Snape and Molly is that they are overprotective of Harry. But why is he so cavalier about Harry?

All I know is, I have a daughter about to go to college, and if I had said "yes, sweetie" every time she wanted to go out or skip homework, she would be in trouble now! :rolleyes: I know I have been sarcastic once or twice myself (maybe more, cough, cough) because parents often have to be like "guardians" which is what we are! We are like gate-keepers, lol. I've known some parents who think of me as "mean" because I sometimes say no. I've even had others offer to buy my children expensive video games just because I told them to wait until Christmas! So sometimes a parent may seem like a Grinch! Wahoo Dores!

Snape is certainly unfair to Harry and his friends, that is, when he isn't "searching the park and the forest" looking for them.

In the movies, they are using Snape's appearance and voice as the "bad" side more, and highlighting his more teacher/protector qualities in his actions. I don't think this is bad, since this is a movie and they have to pick and choose what to show.

[Fuchsia]

her people put their necks on the line for him, only for Harry to do whatever he feels like. Only Lupin gets kudos for being Harry's surrogate parent while Snape is the mean teacher.
Be interesting to see if it stays in or stays in as is.


The difference is that Lupin does it to teach Harry while Snape does it to punish. Lupin never tried to get him expelled simply for his own pleasure in doing so.

[Valerie]

What do people think a punishment is? It's a teaching method.
Not a particularly nice one but it is one.
And exactly what are all those detentions that get handed out.
What is happening when McGonagall takes points away from a student's
house?
And where does Snape ever actually say "Gee I think it would FUN to expell a student today" Certainly not during the conversation post Hogsmeade.
And as far as that expelling thing, I hear it threatened alot but never seems to happen. Case in point -- Harry and Draco both take off on their brooms when told not to. The result, well pureblood Draco is still around and Harry got himself a Nimbus 2000.
I hear ya, silver ink pot. And I agree. You can be a parent or their buddy. Personally my kids had lots of buddies, they didn't need another one. And I'm sure I was thought to be the orge many times.
So what. Goes with the job. But now my kids are grown and can take care of themselves. And now we can do the buddy thing. And do.

[GryffindorSeeker]

I've noticed that in the movies Snape is less hateful than in the books. I don't know why this is though.

[silver ink pot]

Hi, Valerie! Thanks for the kind words - I'm glad I'm not alone!


I think JKR is playing with the whole idea of what is being authoritative because you really ARE, like Snape, or because you are a rich pureblood, like Malfoy, or because you think you are, like Umbridge. Also, she is exploring what is cruel and what is "tough" teaching?

I think Umbridge was probably a revelation to alot of people who liked to think of Snape as cruel and unusual. What's the worst thing he did? He made Neville disembowel toads. Hmmm, let's see, I had to do that in 7th grade - it was called dissection for biology class. Of course, :shrug: the toads weren't still alive. But anyway, what's the worst thing Umbridge did? She tortured Harry night after night, drawing blood. Snape never did anything violent to Harry until the Pensieve scene, and he was certainly provoked by Harry's behavior. We all know that Snape may be acting hateful towards Harry because he knows the Dark Lord can read his mind. If he was ever to let down his guard and become more affectionate with Harry, it could put the entire Order in danger. I have a feeling that JKR is a fan of spy and war movies, in which people are not what they seem.

There is an old movie with Lon Chaney called British Intelligence, in which Lon Chaney played a double spy. He tells another spy that he finds it easier to pretend if he is the same way to everyone, even his allies, and then he won't forget how to act. I laughed out loud when I heard that line! It was shown on Turner Classic Movies back in October. Maybe they'll show it again.

Another movie that reminds me of Snape is Stalag 17. William Holden plays a character that rubs everyone the wrong way - basically because he is smarter than all the prisoners in a Nazi war camp during WWII. Not only can Holden 'brew" liquor in a still, but he builds a telescope, has a trunk full of loot, including cuckoo clocks, and he knows how to bribe the guards to get whatever he wants. The other prisoners know there is a spy among them, and turn on Holden because he is a lone wolf. Then, after they've beaten him half to death and shunned him, he catches the real spy, a totally unlikely person, gets revenge, and becomes a hero by helping a tortured man escape the camp. It's all about redemption, which JKR mentions over and over in regard to Dumbledore giving people second chances.

I'll mention just one other movie - For a Few Dollars More - with Lee Van Cleef and Clint ("Dirty Harry") Eastwood. Watch the Lee Van Cleef character!!! He not only looks like Snape, down to the dark suit and the forbidding attitude, but he and Clint Eastwood certainly have a love/hate, student/teacher, young tough guy/old tough guy relationship! Also, the villain is truly horrible and Voldemort-like in his love of killing women and babies! I won't ruin the plot, but Lee Van Cleef has a very interesting reason for hunting down "El Indio" - one that might have implications for the Harry Potter story. Of course, this is a very violent movie, and not everyone's cup of tea. You'll have to decide, but I think this movie is very similar to the Harry/Snape relationship. Magnificent music, too!

[lorna]

excuse me, how did I get to be Valerie, moderators?
believe I'm nowhere near Texas.

[Fuchsia]

The fact of the matter is Snape does not teach every student in the same way. Nor does Lupin. They both go beyond the norm with Harry. They wouldn't and don't treat every student like that.
It's Minvera's duty to watch over Harry more as she's his head of house. Snape can cross the line sometimes. How many other students does he try to feed poison or truth serums to?
The movie left all of this out and focuses more on the hateful looks.
I still think that his treatment of Harry has little to do with his education.

[eVaNeScEnCe]

Well, when I first read the books, particularly the SS, I too was taken aback at how different Snape was from the movie version one (I had watched the movies first). The book-Snape definitely has more depth and development and I guess you can argue that it is difficult to include this in the movies due to the time-constraints. However, I wish they wouldn't have altered the scenes in the movie that DID feature the few interactions between Snape and Harry. Take the first Potions lesson, for example. In the book, Snape pounces on Harry for no reason and starts docking points for every question he doesn't respond to. That scene clearly introduces Snape as the unjust and spiteful character that is prevalent throughout the series. In the movie, however, it is *dumbed down* and we are made to believe that Snape's initial attack is triggered mainly by Harry's obvious lack of attention, which actually justifies Snape's rude behavior instead of reinforcing it. In my opinion, all this does is give the audience a wrong and invalid perception of Snape from the start. Perhaps they did that for the purpose of making him more appealing, but I see no reason for having done so. Snape is supposed to be a slimy and unpleasant man. That is blatantly obvious in the books, and the movies can't (or shouldn't) overlook that, particularly when it might serve an as an important backstory later on (which of course, it does)
*sigh* This is one of the many reasons movie adaptations irk me.

[silver ink pot]

excuse me, how did I get to be Valerie, moderators?
believe I'm nowhere near Texas.
Good Grief, Lorna! Was that you instead of Valerie? :lol:

:scared: :whistle: :rolleyes:

What happened, I wonder?

[Ali]

Good Grief, Lorna! Was that you instead of Valerie? :lol:

:scared: :whistle: :rolleyes:

What happened, I wonder?
It was a a glitch in the Matrix.. sorry about that.

[Puffskein]

you reminded me of one of my favorite Snape moments
the business of him telling Harry off for going to Hogsmeade.
I especially enjoy it because Lupin comes in right after and tells Harry
THE SAME DARN THING -- other people put their necks on the line for him, only for Harry to do whatever he feels like. Only Lupin gets kudos for being Harry's surrogate parent while Snape is the mean teacher.

The reason for that is obvious. Snape abuses the memory of Harry's beloved parents while Lupin respects it. Aren't we all more likely to listen to people who act as if they like us and those we admire?

I'm not sure if Inkwolf's point really matters. If Book Harry was a complete saint, wouldn't Snape still hate him for being his father's son? Have another look at the first potions lesson. Snape took points off Harry for not advising someone he wasn't working with! How do you justify that? Harry hadn't (knowingly, which is surely what counts) done anything to make Snape hate him then. And look at how he treats Hermione. When did Molly or Lupin ever treat anyone like that? Snape may care but he's still not a nice man!

[UselessCharmMaster]

No, he isn't. He's a terribly mean, unpleasant, unjust, unfair man, and a horribly behaving teacher who would be immediately sacked for every school I know. :shrug: And we like him b/c he's mean. We love hating him! :D But the movie Snape is just a strict, unfriendly teacher - not a cruel slimy git we'd like to see.

[Puffskein]

And look at how he treats Hermione. When did Molly or Lupin ever treat anyone like that?

Hem, hem...before the Sevages leap upon me with all the less admirable things Lupin's done to Snape, I'll explain why they're not as bad as what Snape did to Hermione.

Exhibit A - Childhood Bullying
Lupin's spinelesness in dealing with his friends is a bad thing, I admit. But did he take part in any active abuse to Snape? Here's what he said to Sirius: "Did I ever tell you to lay off Snape? Did I have the guts to tell you I thought what you were doing was out of order?" (Quote from my own memory with my italics) Unless Lupin is much more of a hypocrite than I will let myself think, he didn't do any of those things he thought were out of order. Except...

Exhibit B - The Map
My main excuse for this is that Snape WAS sticking his nose in other people's business. Excuse that how you will. And Lupin was young and rather silly then (but not as much as his friends). He hasn't done anything like that as a responsible adult except...

Exhibit C - The Boggart
Firstly, the Boggart Snape would never have existed if it wasn't for Neville's fear of Snape. And how is Lupin to blame for Neville's fear of Snape? You could say Snape brought the Boggart on himself for terrorising the poor kid! What did Hermione do to bring Snape's insults on herself? She answered a question he put to the class, and she got hit with a curse! No comparison. Secondly, at least Lupin didn't actually show Snape the Boggart, whereas Snape insulted Hermione's teeth TO HER FACE. That's just scummy.

Exhibit D - What Snape did to Lupin
OK, Snape helped Lupin by making the potion, but he didn't do it off his own bat, did he? Then he spent the whole year plotting to rob Lupin of his livelihood, and ended up threatening to rob him of his soul! Next to that, what's Hermione done to Snape?

[lorna]

are we talking about move vs book snape now or are we just doing our usual Sevages vs Maudie thing?
but I'm going to comment anyway
Lupin's behavior has a name --- it's called enabling and whole books are written about that set of behaviors, usually in reference to alcoholic or abusive families. At the end of the day, enabling behaviour is just a responsible for the situation as the abusive behavior.
So yeh, Lupin is a responsible if no other reason than he was prefect and had some authority. But there were other reasons for him to step up and he chose not to.

The only evidence we have for Snape sneaking around is from Sirius
Black. He's not a reliable source. In the pensieve scene Snape doesn't intially notice the Marauders tries to leave when he spots them.

Snape doesn't get buys from me about his comment on Hermoine's teeth and his behavior to Neville. But that doesn't mean other people get buys for bad behavior just because they don't like Snape.

And I have gone back and read the passage where Snape talks to Harry about being in Hogsmeade.
Sadly, with what we now know, Snape was right about harry's dad wasn't he. James was arrogant, he did strut, and he did break rules.
What he's wrong about is that Harry is like his dad.
And I stand by my comment that Snape and Lupin are telling Harry the same thing. Not every kid responds to the touchy-feely approach although I suspect most educators would like to think they do.
It works for some kids and others just laugh at you when you turn your back.

TheWizard --- "glitch in the Matrix":lol: thanks for sorting that out

[UselessCharmMaster]

Exhibit B - The Map
My main excuse for this is that Snape WAS sticking his nose in other people's business. Excuse that how you will.

In this scene we have a teacher trying to find if Harry's been to Hogsmeade without permission or not. OK, he would be pleased if he could punish Harry. But sorry, Harry had no right to go to Hogsmeade, and everyone believed Sirius the crazy murderer was after him. I can't call it "sticking his nose in others people's business". Harry's a student, and Snape a teacher, and one who had already saved Harry's butt.
And if you insist - then Lupin was doing exactly the same - sticking his nose in Harry's business. But hey, Snape's a slimy git, and Lupin's a nice werewolf, so he's all right! :grumble:

[muggleguest]

Another indication that the movie/Snape is more obviously a good guy is that the entire bullying-Neville stuff is gone. Zip. Zilch. Nada. Nowhere to be seen.

The movie/Snape is also not shown in the classroom nearly often enough. That is, after all, mostly where Harry encounters him. You don't get the feeling that you do in the books that Snape is a Potions Master and that potions are important. Personally I think that potions will prove to be important in the future books. The movies are going to have a lot of catch-up to do with characterization.

[lorna]

mugglequest brings up a good point -- is Snape going to be bullying or doing something to Neville specifically to explain the boggart scene in the film or are we just going to have Neville saying something like
"my biggest fear is Professor Snape"
cause mugglequest is right. if you went by the films only, Snape has
done nothing to Neville specifically

[Wild Rose]

How many other students does he try to feed poison or truth serums to?


He doesn't do this to Harry. He says he is going to, but he never even comes close to. Do you really think he would risk poisoning a student? He claims he will, but I think it is more of a threat to keep a disobedient little brat in line.

@-'-,--------

[Wild Rose]

Then he spent the whole year plotting to rob Lupin of his livelihood, and ended up threatening to rob him of his soul!

We don't know that he spent the whole year trying to rob Lupin of his livelihood. However, we do know that he told the Slytherins about Lupin's condition after Lupin failed to take his Wolfsbane potion, changing into a werewolf and endangering the students. I mean, if Sirius hadn't been there, I wonder what the wolf could have done?
And I believe that it is implied, from the way Snape brings him the potion, that it isn't the first time he has forgotten, just the first time he has forgotten and Snape hasn't forced him to remember.

He threatened Lupin with the Dementors when he throught that Lupin had been helping a dangerous mass murderer into the school.

At least, the above is my take on the matter. Make of it what you will.

@-'-,---------

[RectilinearP]

I'm also a fan who saw the movies first.

Movie Snape is definitely nicer than Book Snape. They really should have left the Potions class scene the way it was. Snape docking points for taking notes (which we all know is the opposite of paying attention) and Harry talking back.

I miss all of Harry's sarcastic comments.

silver ink pot -- you reminded me of one of my favorite Snape moments the business of him telling Harry off for going to Hogsmeade.
I especially enjoy it because Lupin comes in right after and tells Harry
THE SAME DARN THING -- other people put their necks on the line for him, only for Harry to do whatever he feels like. Only Lupin gets kudos for being Harry's surrogate parent while Snape is the mean teacher.
Be interesting to see if it stays in or stays in as is.

I liked that part too. ("What would your head have been doing in Hogsmead, Potter? Your head is not allowed in Hogsmead.") I didn't think Snape came off as simply trying to be mean in that part. They should keep that in the movie as is.

mugglequest brings up a good point -- is Snape going to be bullying or doing something to Neville specifically to explain the boggart scene in the film or are we just going to have Neville saying something like
"my biggest fear is Professor Snape"
cause mugglequest is right. if you went by the films only, Snape has
done nothing to Neville specifically

They're going to have to put a Potions class room scene before the boggart. Otherwise it isn't going to make sense for Neville's worst fear to be a teacher. Especially in retrospect when GOF comes out. Is a mean teacher scarier than what happened to his parents?

[Sineed]

Mugglequest made a good point about the catch-up they'll have to do in the movies for the characters' actions to make sense.

I read the books first and then saw the movies (more or less) many times due to an obsessive daughter (though if I am, say, in the kitchen when the duelling scene comes on, she knows to get me). Then when I went back and re-read the books, I was shaken by how nasty book Snape was. And not just the behaviour either; he's not supposed to look so good. (On another thread, someone called Alan Rickman's Snape "Gothtastically hot." I can't think of a better description.)

But I think they abbreviated the character for the sake of brevity. They've kept the focus on the kids to keep the movies under 3 hours.

The one omission that really bothered me was in the duelling scene, when they omitted Snape whispering in Draco's ear before he conjures the snake. I thought that was a key moment in the story, and possibly an important clue; ie, did Snape suspect Harry of being a parseltongue, or what? And it would have added 10 seconds to the film.

[DrummerboyDT]

I think what Kloves is trying to do is make Snape more mysterious to people who have never read the books. I thought Snape was a mean guy in the movies, but I thought that McGonnagal taking away 50 points each from Harry, Ron, and Hermione was harsher than anything that Snape did in PS/SS. I'm usually to reading Snape say, "Silence, 10 points will be taken away from Gryffindor." I don't even think the movies it mentions that Snape's head of the Slytherin group. Alan Rickman does a great job though and I think that the third movie will show more of who Snape really is.

[Sineed]

Yes, I have to agree that Alan Rickman is nearly perfect as Snape. (The fact that he is more attractive than the book Snape doesn't bother me all that much...)

[cleansweep11]

I think the "Protector Snape" from the trailer is Just a clip from snape's version of events(when he tells fudge).

The Movies have to cut alot out. Seemingly pointless things like snape taking harry's book,etc have to be cut out. JKR is greatly consulted for the movies. Its possible they were trying to show that snapes not all bad for future books. I agree that he's alot less mean but the movies shift every thing around. JKR's said she knows somethings have to be changed and that she doesn't have a problem with that. This seems to be one of those things as she is letting it happen.

[Crackpot]

I think the "Protector Snape" from the trailer is Just a clip from snape's version of events(when he tells fudge).

The Movies have to cut alot out. Seemingly pointless things like snape taking harry's book,etc have to be cut out. JKR is greatly consulted for the movies. Its possible they were trying to show that snapes not all bad for future books. I agree that he's alot less mean but the movies shift every thing around. JKR's said she knows somethings have to be changed and that she doesn't have a problem with that. This seems to be one of those things as she is letting it happen.


Normally, I'd be inclined to agree, but look at some of the unnecessary trash they've put in instead of following canon--extending the flying car bit in CoS? That was cheesy and pointless, and instead of trying to crush in one more action sequence, they could've used those five minutes throughout the movie to do some actual character development. It's the second movie and almost everyone is still a one-dimensional character.

It wouldn't have been that time consuming to at least have Severus act as nasty as he does in the books, when he actually is in the movies... :grumble: As gothtastically hot as Rickman is as Snape, I love canon Snape more. Bring back the snarkiness!

[SnowyOwl]

I really hope Cuaron has upped the nastiness of Snape's character. One of my biggest complaints about the movies is the lack of development of some of the main characters--not to mention lack of movement other than head shakes/nods. If they keep going, it's going to be odd when the trio attacks him. Snape needs to really have earned that expelliarmus, as he did in the books.

I'm really, really hoping that the Shrieking Shack scene is very similar to the book.

[Ultraviolet]

Films tend to require more drama than books as you have to imagine less on the screen. Snapes character came across in a very calm manner for the first two films compiared to the books. It's possible that they wanted to show Snapes more mean side develope as the film series progressed and could make the acting that little more simplistic. Going from a mean Snape to a very mean Snape without his character exceeding the nastiness of Voldemort would be difficult to portray in the film. So I think they might have just made Snape a little mean so that they can make him meaner later on.

[lorna]

I'm sorry. Still think you have to back to the lack of backstory. Snape isn't a "meany" just because it's convenient to the plot or because he punishes harry. He hates Harry because he hated Harry's father
can't see the two as separate people and so is "mean"
to Harry. ( and that can be open to interpretation as has been pointed out on this and other threads)
Without that
there's no motivation for movie Snape to single Harry out the way book Snape does.
And if the backstory is gone, then I guess it makes sense
to push Snape's myteriousnes to the foreground and the nastiness into the background. (but I do miss his comments -- I too want to hear the no part of your should be in Hogsmeade bit)
Now we may get some backstory in POA but I won't be
holding my breath for all that much.
Frankly the story of Snape and the Marauders is a movie in itself.