Chamber of Secrets

Chamber of Secrets (http://www.cosforums.com/index.php)
-   Muggle Studies (http://www.cosforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=21)
-   -   What would you change about the films? (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=129487)

Gemini123 August 4th, 2011 11:51 pm

What would you change about the films?
 
If it were in your control, what would you change about the movies?

DanaSnape August 5th, 2011 3:32 am

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
This could be a long list, but I'll stick with my biggest gripes.

I would go back and make sure Sirius' story wasn't downplayed. I think the movies made him less important than he seems in the books. We weren't given the chance to become emotionally attached in the movies. Non readers probably weren't all that choked up when he died.

More Snape. He never gets enough screen time. He's my favorite character and is played by the best actor in the entire series. Maybe if the screenwriter and directors realized what an important character he really would end up being, this would have been fixed early on.

Pig. I love that little owl in the books and was looking forward to seeing him on screen. I know he's not remotely important, but it was still a bummer.

merrymarge August 5th, 2011 3:40 am

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
I wouldn'd change the first two movies. For film three, I would have more of the back story of the Mauraders. GOF, I would like to add the Quidditch World Cup. We didn't see any of it.. The Weasleys were invited to sit in the Minister of Magic's box along with the Malfoys, but the movie mentioned it was only the Malfoys. I would have changed the ending of movie 5 by having Harry so upset about what happened at the Ministry, when he was throwing stuff in Dumbledore's office.
Movie 6- I wanted to see more of the pensieve scenes and I didn't like the scene with Harry talking to that waitress.

agilefalcon16 August 5th, 2011 4:11 am

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
I wouldn't have changed too much, actually. Maybe I would just have:

-Picked another actor to play Dumbledore instead of Michael Gambon. I never did get used to him after the original actor died. :(

-Made GoF and OoTF each an extra hour longer. The movies were alright on their own, but soo much was left out from the books and some of the scenes were far to short, in my opinion.

-Would have changed Voldemort's appearance. I know the books described him as "snake-like", but having no nose just made him look too strange I thought.

I personally wish they would have made him look more along the lines of how he looked in the first film:

http://media.screened.com/uploads/0/...ie_1_super.jpg


Quote:

Originally Posted by DanaSnape (Post 5806168)
We weren't given the chance to become emotionally attached in the movies. Non readers probably weren't all that choked up when he died.

Yeah, I agree that they should have developed his character a bit more in the films. My brother didn't read any of the books, so I had to explain to him why Harry made such a big deal about his death.

adorey1 August 5th, 2011 4:12 am

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
if i could change the films, it would be to change the representation of the character of Ron, who i've always thought has been misinterpreted unfairly in the films.


He became the comedic funny guy, which is ok, but the Directors really downplayed his strengths. He isn't half as cowardly as the films make him out to be. I hated that Ron didn't stick up for Hermione when Snape called her a know-it-all in the POA film and that Hermione nabbed his line of "if you're going to kill Harry you're going to have to kill us too". I also noticed that Ron's line of "he beat you!" that he yells at Voldemort was cut out in the last film, which is really irritating as i know that Rupert yells that line because i watched the b-roll footage!


I would also have changed the whole Ginny/Harry romance in the 6th film so that it wasn't as cringeworthy to watch. If Yates could have just stuck to the book, then it might have been ok.
I would have much rather have wanted to see a scene with Ginny leaning against Harry's legs, telling Ron and Hermione how she had told Romilda Vane that Harry had a hungarian horntail tattooed on his chest (especially as Ron says "i knew Ginny was lying about that tattoo in DH1!!!!), than have Ginny tie up Harry's shoelaces as if he were a six year old boy.

lexlove1 August 5th, 2011 4:29 am

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by DanaSnape (Post 5806168)
More Snape. He never gets enough screen time. He's my favorite character and is played by the best actor in the entire series. Maybe if the screenwriter and directors realized what an important character he really would end up being, this would have been fixed early on.

I have probably turned into one of the biggest sanpe supporters since DH2(the book) came out!! Although I was moved by the final scenes in the movie, i was still left a little unfulfilled!!! He deserved WAY more action in the movies!!

Quote:

Originally Posted by merrymarge (Post 5806187)
Movie 6- I wanted to see more of the pensieve scenes and I didn't like the scene with Harry talking to that waitress.

I wanted the scene with the Gaunts too!! To see the other side(or any side for that matter) of Tom Riddle's family would have been cool!

taliell August 5th, 2011 5:36 am

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by DanaSnape (Post 5806168)
This could be a long list, but I'll stick with my biggest gripes.

I would go back and make sure Sirius' story wasn't downplayed. I think the movies made him less important than he seems in the books. We weren't given the chance to become emotionally attached in the movies. Non readers probably weren't all that choked up when he died.
More Snape. He never gets enough screen time. He's my favorite character and is played by the best actor in the entire series. Maybe if the screenwriter and directors realized what an important character he really would end up being, this would have been fixed early on.

Pig. I love that little owl in the books and was looking forward to seeing him on screen. I know he's not remotely important, but it was still a bummer.

I just have to say i 100% agree with you on that! Movies 1-5 i didnt read the books. So, like you said, when Siris died it was kind of "oh.. okay..". We didnt really learn that much about him. He wasnt really a character i cared about so much. But when i read the 5th book i was sad when he died because we know more about him.

snugglepot August 5th, 2011 11:01 am

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by adorey1 (Post 5806268)
if i could change the films, it would be to change the representation of the character of Ron, who i've always thought has been misinterpreted unfairly in the films.


He became the comedic funny guy, which is ok, but the Directors really downplayed his strengths. He isn't half as cowardly as the films make him out to be. I hated that Ron didn't stick up for Hermione when Snape called her a know-it-all in the POA film and that Hermione nabbed his line of "if you're going to kill Harry you're going to have to kill us too". I also noticed that Ron's line of "he beat you!" that he yells at Voldemort was cut out in the last film, which is really irritating as i know that Rupert yells that line because i watched the b-roll footage!


I would also have changed the whole Ginny/Harry romance in the 6th film so that it wasn't as cringeworthy to watch. If Yates could have just stuck to the book, then it might have been ok.
I would have much rather have wanted to see a scene with Ginny leaning against Harry's legs, telling Ron and Hermione how she had told Romilda Vane that Harry had a hungarian horntail tattooed on his chest (especially as Ron says "i knew Ginny was lying about that tattoo in DH1!!!!), than have Ginny tie up Harry's shoelaces as if he were a six year old boy.

Everything you said.

I would hire a new scriptwriter who wasn't Hermione-obsessed. There would be no line-stealing and scene-hogging from Miss Granger.

Ron would be his canon self, get his lines and scenes back, and there would be real friendship moments between Harry and him post CoS.

The Harry/Ginny relationship would be foreshadowed (especially in OotP). All their scenes together from the book would be added and Ginny be given decent lines. Along with this there would be no Harry/Hermione or Harry/Luna or Harry/Any other girl (Cough Waitress) bonding scenes!

Harry and Ginny would get their book kisses, passionate and loving, not boring pecks!

The Marauders, their map, their identities and Animagus status plus the meaning of Harry's Patronus explained in the end of PoA.

That's what I can think of now. My main changes would be to Ron, Hermione and Ginny's character portrayal post CoS, Harry/Ginny's relationship, and cutting scenes like the Waitress, Harry/Hermione dance and Luna and the Thestrals.

Pearl_Took August 5th, 2011 11:15 am

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
I'd make the first two films shorter! PS/SS is charming, but is just plain boring at times, IMO - plodding.

I'd also like better exposition. I don't gripe about the Marauders backstory being cut, but I'd like clearer exposition about the Horcruxes, for example.

And good exposition in a film isn't lengthy, either. :cool:

TheDannyT August 5th, 2011 1:13 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
[quote=DanaSnape;5806168]


More Snape. He never gets enough screen time. He's my favorite character and is played by the best actor in the entire series. Maybe if the screenwriter and directors realized what an important character he really would end up being, this would have been fixed early on.



So agree, Way the most interesting character!
:(

blknight7 August 5th, 2011 2:50 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Different Dumbledore. Michael Gambon wasn't bad, but for me Dumbledore was an older man than Gambon portrayed him to be, and was a quiet, but powerful figure.

Not drop characters from existence. Such as 'Witherwings'.

Not put the Patil twins in the same House. Not that it affects the plot, really, but it's a simple fact. Not that hard to get right.

Kreacher's story and reconciliation with Harry et al was not even mentioned. He is sent to tail Mundungus, and then never seen from again. Didn't even show the angry house elves attacking the shins of the Death Eaters in the final battle.

One change I liked in the movie that wasn't exactly in the book was Dobby's last words. "Such a beautiful place...to be with friends...Dobby is happy to be with his friend(s?)....Harry Potter." In the book, he just says "Harry Potter.", but this was a nice touch.

Gemini123 August 5th, 2011 3:12 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
I wouldn't change the first 2 films. They were very true to the book - a bit boring at times, yes but by far my favourites. I like how the gave Snape enough screentime (particularly in PS) and justice to Ron's Character e.g. the Chess scene. In the other movies he's the funny guy, not very brave.
PoA - I would have made it a point to give the Marauder's story. Best part of the book. The scene in the Shrieking Shack was too rushed.
GoF - not my favourite but nothing in particular I would change. Perhaps if the movie just wasn't so rushed.
OotP - Give Sirius's character more importance, show his fustration at being locked up. I would give SWM proper screentime. Harry and Cho's date. And Harry's grief after Sirius's passing. They just cut too much out of this movie!
HBP - More focus on Riddle's past rather than Won Won. A bit more screen time to Snape.
Deathly Hallows part 1 - This was a good movie. Quite true to the book! I just wished they added Lily's letter. And the graffitti at Godric's Hollow, if they made that scene with some touching music, I would cry!
Deathly Hallows part 2 - More importance to all the deaths. A few scenes of Snape's teenage years with Lily. Would make Snape look like less of a saint (they completely overlooked the fact that Snape was the one who told LV about the prophecy - hence the whole remorse element). All of the scenes after that were disappointing including TPT (although the visit to Godric Hollow addition was beautiful)

And I agree with agilefalcon16! I liked the first Voldemort. The Voldemort in the next movies would just make me laugh.

JamesPotter17 August 6th, 2011 5:51 am

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
In a simple sentence. . . I would have kept Chris Columbus as director for all eight of the movies, found a different screen writer than Kloves. I think if it wasn't for Columbus then the whole series might has been ruined. All the other directors were useless i think. Curon got annoying with the bird flying into the Whomping WIllow and getting beat to blue feathers stuff in POA. Mike Newell ruined Voldemort by not giving him snake like eyes and coloring them red! And Yates (although he redeemed himself somewhat) completely ruined the Department of mysteries by only showing the Hall of Prophecies, Basically insulted Dumbledore by excluding his funeral, ruined Fred's Death Scene, And took alot away from the final battle, and King's Cross, didn't give the Prince's Tale all that much for us to understand as well. Like I said he did redeem himself, and I do like most of the movie Pt.1&2. But I think if one director would have made them all they would have turned out more epic, more awesome, and busted more records.

Sergio182 August 6th, 2011 5:58 am

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
I would have added 'Peeves' the poltergeist! he was such a funny character! Sirius should have been more important, I reckon people that don't read the books didn't even get attached to him as much as we did. Snape should have also been in more scenes in the movies, he was so under rated throughout the whole series. The first film should have been longer. And I would put more Quidditch scenes, and if I could change all Half-Blood Prince I would, that was a terrible movie!

Slartibartfast August 6th, 2011 6:36 am

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
First two: No major changes here that i can think of.

PoA: Marauder backstory added. It wouldnt have taken long to explain this in the film.

GoF: oh the changes...Recast Barty Crouch Jr. Tennant is awesome but not the guy i had in mind. Also get into how he escaped Azkaban and why. I dont even think Winky is necessary but putting her in wouldnt be bad either. The Weasleys coming to get Harry at Number 4. Great comedy moment there. Introduce Bill. Add the scene where Harry and everyone goes to see Sirius in Hogsmeade. Showing the Quidditch World Cup Match please. Also KEEPING the scene where Snape and Karkaroff are talking about the Dark Marks. Dumbledore explaining Priori Incantatem better.

OotP: Showing a bit more of Grimmauld Place plus more Sirius scenes. Showing Molly's boggart would have been powerful. (we dont even need to SEE it, just know whats going on.) A nice lingering shot on the Locket when cleaning the house. Cut the Grawp subplot that goes no where. Put the entirety of Snape's Worst Memory in there. The Brain Room in the Department of Mysteries. Also the Thestral lesson with Hagrid. And one more thing...PORTABLE SWAMP! Also the St Mungos stuff. I loved that...

HBP: Dumbledore coming to get Harry at the Dursleys and discussing Sirius's will. Adding the other Pensieve scenes. (Hepzibah Smith, The Gaunts, and the Voldy trying to get the DADA job) Cutting most of Draco's working on the Cabinet. (i still think that should have been more suspenseful. They killed the suspense totally.) Having Crabbe and Goyle as girls. (lol) Mollywobbles scene. Man i wanted it so bad! Cutting the Burrow Burning completely and replacing it with Scrimgeour coming to see Harry. Adding more emphasis on the Prince's book. Showing Snape teach DADA. Adding the skirmish at Hogwarts. More emphasis on finding out who the Prince really is. Adding Trewlawney talking about the Prophecy. Dumbledore's Funeral. Having Snape say his famous line. (oh god the anger...)

DH1: Hmmmm...You know, i cant think of much except adding Lupin to come visit at Grimmauld place. (argument need not happen but can..) And Potterwatch. EDIT: OH YEAH! Pettigrew's proper death please.

DH2: A little bit more about Dumbledore's backstory. Not much! Just a bit more. Lupin appearing at Shell Cottage. Showing Fred's death. A bit more of Teenage Snape and Lily in TPT. (just for clarity's sake.) Harry repairing his old wand and then breaking the Elder Wand.

Thats all i can think of right now.

eliza101 August 6th, 2011 11:27 am

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by DanaSnape (Post 5806168)
This could be a long list, but I'll stick with my biggest gripes.

I would go back and make sure Sirius' story wasn't downplayed. I think the movies made him less important than he seems in the books. We weren't given the chance to become emotionally attached in the movies. Non readers probably weren't all that choked up when he died.

More Snape. He never gets enough screen time. He's my favorite character and is played by the best actor in the entire series. Maybe if the screenwriter and directors realized what an important character he really would end up being, this would have been fixed early on.

Pig. I love that little owl in the books and was looking forward to seeing him on screen. I know he's not remotely important, but it was still a bummer.

This is my biggest moan about the films. They sacrifice the characters stories. I don't know if it was because the screenwriter just couldn't adapt the source material and the director replaced the character arcs with actions shots or not, but they cut out what made the books great. It wasn't as if they did not have good actors who could have conveyed the characters, they did. Rickman would have been great at showing how sadistic Snape could be and then showing how he sank so far into evil. The scenes in which he could have shown the effort it took to drag himself up would have been a real revalation of just how good an actor he is. But what did we get, in GOF all he had to do was push Dan Radcliffe's and Rupert Grint's heads into their books. At least Gary Oldman had one scene in which he shone, but we never did get to see him miserabley drunk while stuck in Grimmauld Place. We never got to see Remus torn between his self loathing and his love for Tonks, Arthur and Molly being embarrassed about 'MollyWobbles' or Bill being the hunk that Fleur fancied enough to leave France for, just so she could be close to him. Harry and Ginny, lets not go there. That was embarrassing. Not as embarassing as the whole Ron, Hermione and Lavander thing but close enough. Just how hard could it have been to make one decent film that stuck somewhat close to the book storyline?
One thing to be grateful for, the entire series has been published, this should make it easier for the remakes to know just what to concentrate on. Maybe they will take a leaf out of William Friedkin when he did 'The Exorcist' and go through the books with a highlighter and say,
' This we have to do, this we don't.'

Noldus August 6th, 2011 5:25 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by JamesPotter17 (Post 5809294)
In a simple sentence. . . I would have kept Chris Columbus as director for all eight of the movies, found a different screen writer than Kloves. I think if it wasn't for Columbus then the whole series might has been ruined. All the other directors were useless i think. Curon got annoying with the bird flying into the Whomping WIllow and getting beat to blue feathers stuff in POA. Mike Newell ruined Voldemort by not giving him snake like eyes and coloring them red! And Yates (although he redeemed himself somewhat) completely ruined the Department of mysteries by only showing the Hall of Prophecies, Basically insulted Dumbledore by excluding his funeral, ruined Fred's Death Scene, And took alot away from the final battle, and King's Cross, didn't give the Prince's Tale all that much for us to understand as well. Like I said he did redeem himself, and I do like most of the movie Pt.1&2. But I think if one director would have made them all they would have turned out more epic, more awesome, and busted more records.

You realize, though, that the last five books were much longer and more difficult to adapt than the first two? Columbus wouldn't be allowed to make 4 hour long films to keep every detail and would have had to cut them down too. Maybe he'd split up the books starting from GoF on? In that case I think they would have flopped. Who knows, maybe if Columbus had stayed, we wouldn't reach 8 films?

jallen August 6th, 2011 5:52 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Noldus (Post 5810017)
You realize, though, that the last five books were much longer and more difficult to adapt than the first two? Columbus wouldn't be allowed to make 4 hour long films to keep every detail and would have had to cut them down too. Maybe he'd split up the books starting from GoF on? In that case I think they would have flopped. Who knows, maybe if Columbus had stayed, we wouldn't reach 8 films?

If Columbus had stayed, I find it doubtful that we'd have reached eight (or seven) films. The drop between Philosopher's Stone and Chamber of Secrets is evidence enough that his films were highly unpopular. I don't think the series of films would have been completed had Columbus stayed on the whole time.

Noldus August 6th, 2011 7:03 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by jallen (Post 5810043)
If Columbus had stayed, I find it doubtful that we'd have reached right (or seven) films. The drop between Philosopher's Stone and Chamber of Secrets is evidence enough that his films were highly unpopular. I don't think the series of films would have been completed had Columbus stayed on the whole time.

Yes. Thankfully Cuaron increased the popularity of the series again.

DarMaster98 August 6th, 2011 8:25 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
I wouldn't change anything. The movies were very good directed and created.!!?

ILuvDarkMarks August 7th, 2011 4:00 am

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
PS and CoS stand well as they are, IMO, so I wouldn't change anything there.

PoA completely missed the point of the whole story- the Marauders' backstory. It might help Harry to know why his Patronus is a stag and why Sirius and Peter (and James) are Animagi.

GoF completely fails to explain Barty Crouch Jr.'s role. Winky was necessary, but would have helped a lot. Plus, Voldemort's speech is severely shortened and while Fiennes is the perfect Voldemort, that scene felt rushed and wasn't as powerful as it should have been.

OotP should have included Percy's row with Mr. Weasley. I'm actually fine with all of the changes made in this movie and though it was disappointing not seeing Harry destroying all of Dumbledore's possessions, I think everything was pretty well explained.

HBP might have benefited if they had included more of Voldemort's backstory. If they didn't want to do it through the Pensieve, which would involve more casting for what would have been cameo roles, Dumbledore could have just explained it to Harry. It was my favorite part of HBP and the story needs this info. And I wouldn't have burned down the Burrow; that was just a big mistake.

DH1 is pretty close to perfect. I wouldn't change anything there.

DH2- I'd have Harry repair his own wand and bury the Elder Wand in Dumbledore's tomb. I didn't like him snapping the wand because it almost diminished the wand's power.

Overall, I'd have a stronger connection among the trio. From PoA onward it seems like Harry and Hermione are better friends and Ron is always in the background or made to be Harry's "sidekick." They're called "the trio" for a reason- their friendship is a based on a strong bond among all of them.

Harry and Ginny's relationship could have been fleshed out more as well. HBP doesn't make it look like they're in a relationship at all. Ron and Hermione are better portrayed in DH2 in which they seem to progress through a relationship in a few hours.

ID824 August 7th, 2011 4:39 am

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
I would have included more details from the books.

bellaminx August 7th, 2011 7:14 am

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Sergio182 (Post 5809321)
I would have added 'Peeves' the poltergeist! he was such a funny character! Sirius should have been more important, I reckon people that don't read the books didn't even get attached to him as much as we did. Snape should have also been in more scenes in the movies, he was so under rated throughout the whole series. The first film should have been longer. And I would put more Quidditch scenes, and if I could change all Half-Blood Prince I would, that was a terrible movie!

Me too, I love Peeves. I read somewhere that they cast Rik Mayall and shot some scenes with him but Cris Colombus decided it wasn't working and cut him. I was really upset as I think Mayall would have made a great Peeves. I love his songs (Voldy's gone mouldy, so now let's have fun and Looney, loopy Lupin) and every single time I read the part where he calls Dumbledore Professorhead I almost die laughing.

I would have liked to see more of Dobby- esp his tower of hats in OOTP. I think his death seemed a little forced (my hubby hasn't read the books and never got the big fuss) as you never really saw how many times he showed up help Harry when he needed him.

JimmyPotter August 7th, 2011 1:21 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bellaminx (Post 5811813)
Me too, I love Peeves. I read somewhere that they cast Rik Mayall and shot some scenes with him but Cris Colombus decided it wasn't working and cut him. I was really upset as I think Mayall would have made a great Peeves. I love his songs (Voldy's gone mouldy, so now let's have fun and Looney, loopy Lupin) and every single time I read the part where he calls Dumbledore Professorhead I almost die laughing.

I would have liked to see more of Dobby- esp his tower of hats in OOTP. I think his death seemed a little forced (my hubby hasn't read the books and never got the big fuss) as you never really saw how many times he showed up help Harry when he needed him.

I think one reason they didn't include Peeves is that SS came out a couple years after the first Star Wars prequel and there may have been a concern that Peeves could turn into another Jar Jar.

Deva August 7th, 2011 1:55 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Only i would make them about 5 hours longer.
Is all, thank you!

Alexander1 August 7th, 2011 2:09 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Sergio182 (Post 5809321)
I would have added 'Peeves' the poltergeist! he was such a funny character! Sirius should have been more important, I reckon people that don't read the books didn't even get attached to him as much as we did. Snape should have also been in more scenes in the movies, he was so under rated throughout the whole series. The first film should have been longer. And I would put more Quidditch scenes, and if I could change all Half-Blood Prince I would, that was a terrible movie!

Yes, Rik Mayall was meant to paly him. I heard that he never told his children that he was cut from it, and they thought he was Hagrid:wow:

piemaster10 August 7th, 2011 10:44 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
First of all, I would like to say that every film except the first two would have greatly benefited from an extra 20-30 minuets. I really don't understand why WB doesn't want any of the films to exceed 3 hours. The LOTR films were around 3 hours and that's not including the extended editions!

PS/COS - Very faithful to the books but very lacking in the great cinematography that the subsequent films have. But really that's my only complaint.

POA - My second favorite Potter film. Could have explained the marauders story, only a few extra minuets. Also could have explained a bit more about the whole secret keeper concept. Also they could have put the firebolt in earlier... that ending mugshot of Harry flying into the sky is just stupid and by far the worst ending.

GOF - My Least favorite Potter film... by far. My main problem with this one is the comedy. Too much comedy, and none of it is funny! The whole film just feels really... stupid! This film is definitely a massive step back from POA. Alfonso Cauron should have directed it because everything is just too cheesy and annoying.

My next problem with this movie is Michael Gambon's Portrayal of Dumbledore. While I prefer him overall to Harris due to his massive improvement in HBP and DH2 I just can't stand him in this movie. Dumbledore is always supposed to stay calm and in control. In this he actually shouts at Harry which is really out of character.

Next up is what they left out... Dobby really needed to be left in even if it was just one scene because it lessens his importance in DH1. More back story about Barty Crouch/JR would also have been important. Now the most important thing they left out is Fudge not believing Harry and a better delivery of the "Everything's going to change" speech as this really represents a turning point in the series.

OOTP - Ok, I love OOTP but I think that it is a crime to make the longest book of the series into the second shortest. I hate how they show that time has passed by the newspaper articles I think that they could have really fleshed out the story a bit more by including Rita Sceeter, Dobby and showing more of Kreacher. Also Weasley is our king would have been a nice edition but meh.

HPB: I really like HPB because I think it has the perfect balance between character development and story progression. I think that they could have showed more of the Tom Riddle memories just to expand on Voldermort's character and also to explain how Harry finds out about the location of the horcruxes rather than him just dreaming about them.

DH1: Fairly faithful, but Lupin really needed to be developed a bit more. Also Lily's letter would have been nice and maybe an explanation about the mirror.
oh and why didn't Wormtail die?

DH2: More attention could have been directed towards the deaths and also Harry should have fixed his wand with the Elder wand and then snapped it.

That is all :P

Miss_Gaunt August 8th, 2011 11:01 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
I think I would only really make minor changes really. Sometimes the script doesn't always match up to previous films and stuff so I would fix that but there are a few other scenes I would change as well:

I can't really think of anything I'd change in the first two films. They weren't perfect films but they did the books justice I think.

PoA
- I probably would have told 'Eyebrows' Watson to tone it down a bit (goes for GoF and OotP too)
- I'd probably not show the Whomping Willow so much, even if I can understand why it was included.
- Not end with the freeze frame.

GoF:
- Cut out the bit where Karkaroff goes into the Great Hall when the Goblet is there. What was the point of that scene?
- The wand cores were mentioned in PS but I think it would have been good if Dumbledore said that was why Priori Incantatem happened.
- Not have Dumbledore so angry when Harry's name came out of the Goblet.
- Take Harry and Ron to the barbers for a hair cut. :p

OotP
- Make Harry shout if you're going to include Fred and George telling him they heard his dulcet tones and not to bottle up his anger.
- Have Cho cry when she kissed Harry or take that line out altogether.

HBP
- Change the line where Harry told McGonagall that she told him he needed an O in his Potions OWL to 'I thought I had to get an O in my OWL' or something like that.

DH1:
- Cut out the bit where Harry looked at the mirror in Privet Drive and have him pick it up in Grimmauld Place instead. Not strictly book canon but it would make better sense in the context of the films, and he did get it in there in the books.
- I don't think Ron met Dobby in the films so I'd cut out their handshake in Grimmauld Place.
- I don't think it's very clear what's happening when Harry sees into Voldemort's mind at the start so I'd fix that up a wee bit.

DH2:
- Give a plausible explanation of how Snape knew Harry and Hermione where in the Forest of Dean when he left the sword for them.
- Have Harry tell Voldemort he was the master of Elder Wand, although I did like the reveal on the bridge.
- Show Voldemort's rebounding curse a bit better, I don't think its really clear what happened there.
- Better reaction in general to Voldemort's defeat would have been good too.
- Some kind of explanation as to why Harry didn't die. Kings Cross was so disappointing in the film. I'd cut out the bit where Harry called after Dumbledore too. I think by that stage he was too grown up to do that :p.

I think I'd try and handle the horcrux and hallows element a bit better too.
- I liked how Voldemort knew when the Horcruxes were destroyed but would he not have felt the locket or ring and therefore known they were being hunted sooner?
- Harry can hear horcruxes but didn't know about the diary back in CoS or Nagini in Godric's Hollow?
- I'd probably have mentioned the cloak somewhere too, it was pretty much forgotten about despite the name of the film :/

Nielo August 8th, 2011 11:03 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
I tried to stop comparing the films to the books, because I just got frustrated (and it's better for my mental health to see them as an addition to the books), but one thing that I really don't get is why the Burrow burned down in HBP. That just made no sense at all.

SBNB August 8th, 2011 11:57 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
In HBP, I would take out the scene where Ron's house is burned and add more memories about Voldemort. In OOTP, I would have added more details, developed the characters more, and made it darker. In DH2, I would add some resolution to the deathly hallows plot line (and so much more). In DH1, I would make sure Dobby's voice didn't sound so weird. Finally, I would change the second actor who plays Dumbledore.

Sergio182 August 9th, 2011 12:30 am

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by ILuvDarkMarks (Post 5811385)
PS and CoS stand well as they are, IMO, so I wouldn't change anything there.

PoA completely missed the point of the whole story- the Marauders' backstory. It might help Harry to know why his Patronus is a stag and why Sirius and Peter (and James) are Animagi.

GoF completely fails to explain Barty Crouch Jr.'s role. Winky was necessary, but would have helped a lot. Plus, Voldemort's speech is severely shortened and while Fiennes is the perfect Voldemort, that scene felt rushed and wasn't as powerful as it should have been.

OotP should have included Percy's row with Mr. Weasley. I'm actually fine with all of the changes made in this movie and though it was disappointing not seeing Harry destroying all of Dumbledore's possessions, I think everything was pretty well explained.

HBP might have benefited if they had included more of Voldemort's backstory. If they didn't want to do it through the Pensieve, which would involve more casting for what would have been cameo roles, Dumbledore could have just explained it to Harry. It was my favorite part of HBP and the story needs this info. And I wouldn't have burned down the Burrow; that was just a big mistake.

DH1 is pretty close to perfect. I wouldn't change anything there.

DH2- I'd have Harry repair his own wand and bury the Elder Wand in Dumbledore's tomb. I didn't like him snapping the wand because it almost diminished the wand's power.

Overall, I'd have a stronger connection among the trio. From PoA onward it seems like Harry and Hermione are better friends and Ron is always in the background or made to be Harry's "sidekick." They're called "the trio" for a reason- their friendship is a based on a strong bond among all of them.

Harry and Ginny's relationship could have been fleshed out more as well. HBP doesn't make it look like they're in a relationship at all. Ron and Hermione are better portrayed in DH2 in which they seem to progress through a relationship in a few hours.

Couldn't have explained it better :clap:

teddywestside August 9th, 2011 9:20 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
General-All Movies
I don't know if anyone mentioned about this before but in movies, everybody -mostly- is wearing muggle clothes. Even in hogwarts! I really do not understand this. Wizards and witches wear robes, i mean- like all the time. Am i wrong?

silverowl August 12th, 2011 1:53 am

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by piemaster10 (Post 5813025)
First of all, I would like to say that every film except the first two would have greatly benefited from an extra 20-30 minuets. I really don't understand why WB doesn't want any of the films to exceed 3 hours. The LOTR films were around 3 hours and that's not including the extended editions!

This was by far my biggest complaint. Every film could have been out of this world if they just added an extra 15-30 minutes. Every single film ended up at best choppy due to it. I am hoping that in another 15 years there will be a remake in complete 3D, and hopefully they will do a better job adapting the books than these did. LOTR did change some minor items, but by and large was quite faithful to the books.

I also was not completely pleased with either Dumbledore and would have not allowed Hermionee/Watson to stray so far from the books physical description of her character.

LordGrindelwald August 12th, 2011 4:46 am

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
- As far as directors go, I'd keep Cuaron and Yates, but have used someone other than Columbus and Newell. Perhaps Guillelermo del Toro.
- Considerably shorten the first and especially the second films. Both have plodding pacing.
- I'd have tightened the films by cutting out some extraneous characters. Show Tonks and Lupin wed in DH rather than Bill and Fleur, and have Harry stay with Tonks and Lupin in Shell Cottage (and see baby Teddy). Instead of introducing Katie Bell solely to be attacked, have Cho Chang take the necklace instead.
- Include more of Ron's shining moments (like standing up for Harry in the shrieking shack). Conversely, have Hermione not seem so perfect.
- Have Gambon act in the rest of the movies as he did in HBP.
- DH Pt 1 could have more dramatic weight, with Harry doubting Dumbledore's intentions and being tempted by the hallows.
- The broken mirror shard should have been one of the objects Dumbledore bequeaths to Harry in his will. As it is, it's extremely confusing to non-readers.
- The Tom Riddle background was the most interesting part of the HBP book and should have been included a bit more. Maybe not whole pensieve scenes, but at least a montage of Riddle's time at Hogwarts and hunting horcrux objects. Gaunts could be cut though.
- While DH worked well enough split (making for a very exciting exciting 2nd part), I still suspect it would have made one really epic and coherent 3-hour movie, rather than a movie that's all setup plus a movie that's all climax. It could have worked if you have Harry discover the real locket in the cave, cutting out the Ministry heist.

DarkLordRising August 12th, 2011 7:52 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
The whole lack of build up to the Ginny/Harry relationship has to be the main problem for me. I know people have criticised Bonnie Wright but I thought with more scenes in the later films the whole relationship would have seemed a lot more convincing. Personally I liked Bonnie as Ginny, I just felt more time would have benefited it.

The whole Quidditch scene where they first kiss was perfect in the books, I really wish they'd included that story line in HBP.

Nielo August 14th, 2011 2:56 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by teddywestside (Post 5818514)
General-All Movies
I don't know if anyone mentioned about this before but in movies, everybody -mostly- is wearing muggle clothes. Even in hogwarts! I really do not understand this. Wizards and witches wear robes, i mean- like all the time. Am i wrong?

Yeah, that struck me as weird too.
But then again, I never fully understood why wizards/witches seem to have trouble dressing as Muggles (in the books), because underneath their robes, they often seem to be wearing jeans and a t-shirt.

weasley9 August 14th, 2011 6:00 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Cut Bill and Fleur and replace their wedding with Remus and Tonks' and also make Shell Cottage theirs too.

blknight7 August 14th, 2011 7:07 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by weasley9 (Post 5826328)
Cut Bill and Fleur and replace their wedding with Remus and Tonks' and also make Shell Cottage theirs too.

Wait...what? So, basically, change the story from what was in the book?

rosieechan August 14th, 2011 7:18 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Lol, I'd make it exactly like the books, frame-by-frame, line-by-line, if it was possible.

But this:

Quote:

Overall, I'd have a stronger connection among the trio. From PoA onward it seems like Harry and Hermione are better friends and Ron is always in the background or made to be Harry's "sidekick." They're called "the trio" for a reason- their friendship is a based on a strong bond among all of them.

Harry and Ginny's relationship could have been fleshed out more as well. HBP doesn't make it look like they're in a relationship at all. Ron and Hermione are better portrayed in DH2 in which they seem to progress through a relationship in a few hours.
Totally.

Dobbyfan619 August 14th, 2011 7:57 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Prisoner of Askaban:
-Include the Marauders' backstory.

Goblet of Fire:
- Extend the third task scene in the Triwizard tournament to make it more exciting and have that real sense of danger that was felt in the book.
- Have Dobby give Harry the gillyweed for the second task instead of Neville.
- A better portrayal of Dumbledore by Michael Gambon and a better explanation of Priori Incantatem.

Order of the Phoenix:
- Show more of the Department of Mysteries.
- Have Harry throw Dumbledore's stuff around like he did in the book to emphasize how angry he was about Sirius' death.
- Have Dobby show Harry the Room of Requirement for the DA meetings.

Half-Blood Prince:
- More emphasis on Voldemort's backstory and less on the romance.
- Take out the beginning scene between Harry and the waitress and instead, include the part where Harry learns that he has inherited Grimmauld place and Kreacher from Sirius.
- Develop the relationship between Harry and Ginny in a better way.
- Cut out the scene where the Burrow is burned down.

Deathly Hallows: Part 1:
- Include Kreacher's Tale and Wormtail's death.

Deathly Hallows: Part 2:
- More explanation on the Deathly Hallows and why Harry survived.
- Include Dumbledore's backstory.
- Leave the part where Neville kills Nagini just like it is in the book.
- Include what Harry tells Voldemort before Voldemort dies and have a better reaction from everyone at Hogwarts once Harry defeats him.
- Have Harry fix his phoenix wand with the Elder Wand.

All in all, I would have added a bit more time to every movie after the first and second movies. Also, I wouldn't make Hermione do or say things that she didn't do or say in the books like for example, in Deathly Hallows: Part 2, she is seen as the one who has the idea of escaping from Gringotts on the dragon when it was really Harry who thought of that. Not to mention the lines that Ron has in the books which are said by Hermione in the movies.

ecrhoad August 14th, 2011 8:26 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by rosieechan (Post 5826420)
Lol, I'd make it exactly like the books, frame-by-frame, line-by-line, if it was possible.

Same here. Whenever i finish a movie i complain about any change from the book


Quote:

Originally Posted by Dobbyfan619 (Post 5826457)
Goblet of Fire:
- Extend the third task scene in the Triwizard tournament to make it more exciting and have that real sense of danger that was felt in the book.
- Have Dobby give Harry the gillyweed for the second task instead of Neville.
- A better portrayal of Dumbledore by Michael Gambon and a better explanation of Priori Incantatem.

I wish they had included Ludo Bagman. That was a dissapointment to me

Pensieve_Seeker August 18th, 2011 6:14 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
I'd have Rupert enunciate his lines more clearly.

EvieBlackthorn August 18th, 2011 7:05 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
The way they did Harry and Ginny's relationship. I think they destroyed it in the movies and some of the scenes were just plain stupid and awkward (Like when she was doing his shoelaces for him in HBP. . Like what the hell !?!) and they messed up all their kissing scenes (I can't believe they changed Harry's birthday kiss in DH. .) and you could totally tell they just rushed the more 'romantic'/coupley scenes. I just felt the whole thing was stupid and it didn't do either of the characters justice.

TheScribbler August 18th, 2011 7:15 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
I might get a different actor to play Seamus, or at least have Devon Murray speak his lines slower and more clearly. Seamus' lines are mostly fantastic, but the first time watching the movies I had a hard time understanding just what Devon was saying!

rosieechan August 18th, 2011 8:21 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by EvieBlackthorn (Post 5836362)
The way they did Harry and Ginny's relationship. I think they destroyed it in the movies and some of the scenes were just plain stupid and awkward (Like when she was doing his shoelaces for him in HBP. . Like what the hell !?!) and they messed up all their kissing scenes (I can't believe they changed Harry's birthday kiss in DH. .) and you could totally tell they just rushed the more 'romantic'/coupley scenes. I just felt the whole thing was stupid and it didn't do either of the characters justice.

Mhm, I agree. I feel that this drawing exhibits the comparison of both relationships:

http://fc01.deviantart.net/fs71/f/20...ug-d40edko.jpg

Wimsey August 20th, 2011 11:33 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by EvieBlackthorn (Post 5836362)
The way they did Harry and Ginny's relationship. I think they destroyed it in the movies and some of the scenes were just plain stupid and awkward ..... I just felt the whole thing was stupid and it didn't do either of the characters justice.

What the movies did wasn't very good. However, what the books did was even worse: I'd go so far as to state that Harry+Ginny was written pretty awfully. (Part of the reason why people here had such problems with it 6 years ago stemmed from this, although a bigger part was the "Harmonians.") Of course, romance was far and away the weakest aspect of the HP series: one could argue that if Rowling had written that part better, then there would not have been so many Harmonians.

Of course, if I could have changed anything about Prince, then it would have been to make the story like the one in the book: Harry's choices in personal politics. Sexual politics are only one part of personal politics. However, sexual politics do not encompass Harry's enmities with Draco and Snape, or his dealing with different rivals to be his mentor (especially from Scrimgeour, but also Slughorn), and simply the contrasts between Harry & Voldemort. "Dumbledore's Man, through and through" really was the summary line for the story.

SilverDoe_ August 22nd, 2011 6:48 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
I completely agree about Harry and Ginny's relationship. That drawing sums it up pretty well.

ID824 August 22nd, 2011 7:24 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Wimsey (Post 5842144)
What the movies did wasn't very good. However, what the books did was even worse: I'd go so far as to state that Harry+Ginny was written pretty awfully. (Part of the reason why people here had such problems with it 6 years ago stemmed from this, although a bigger part was the "Harmonians.") Of course, romance was far and away the weakest aspect of the HP series: one could argue that if Rowling had written that part better, then there would not have been so many Harmonians.

Of course, if I could have changed anything about Prince, then it would have been to make the story like the one in the book: Harry's choices in personal politics. Sexual politics are only one part of personal politics. However, sexual politics do not encompass Harry's enmities with Draco and Snape, or his dealing with different rivals to be his mentor (especially from Scrimgeour, but also Slughorn), and simply the contrasts between Harry & Voldemort. "Dumbledore's Man, through and through" really was the summary line for the story.

I couldn't agree with this more. As much as I'm not a "fan girl" when it comes to the romance side of these books, I REALLY wish JK would have included more dialogue here. I know it would have added several more pages to the books, but it would have done so much more to build those characters and those relationships. Everything Harry did was so reactionary... it wasn't until HBP that he started being more forceful in his personal politics.

rosieechan August 22nd, 2011 8:49 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Wimsey (Post 5842144)
What the movies did wasn't very good. However, what the books did was even worse: I'd go so far as to state that Harry+Ginny was written pretty awfully. (Part of the reason why people here had such problems with it 6 years ago stemmed from this, although a bigger part was the "Harmonians.") Of course, romance was far and away the weakest aspect of the HP series: one could argue that if Rowling had written that part better, then there would not have been so many Harmonians.

Mm...I disagree. Harry/Ginny has always been there...very subtle, but there. I don't think it's developed as well as say, Ron/Hermione, but the issue was that Ginny wasn't a main character as Ron or Hermione thus we don't see as much of her as we would have liked. And yes, romance wasn't an important aspect in HP as much. But it's not like it came out of the blue.

I don't really think that there would be less H/Hr fans. Personally, I think that wouldn't change because Hermione would still be Harry's best friend and fans would still be inclined to put the main male and the main female character together.

The movies are a different story, however. There have been SOME moments where you could possibly see H/G, but a lot of Ginny's lines were taken down, and HBP made the relationship awkward...mostly because Ginny's character wasn't as funny and witty as in the books - which is why Harry was even attracted to her in the first place. It's like the only point of her was to be his love interest - not the girl who makes him laugh and interacts with him on a friendship level as well as a romantic one.

NoobTwinz5 August 24th, 2011 8:25 am

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Movie 1 - Have Dumbledore say what he saw in the Mirror of Erised. I think that would have been kind of funny, Lol.

Movie 2 - Not sure.

Movie 3 - Explain the Marauders. I don't think we really figure out who they are exactly, except Wormtail and Padfoot.

Movie 4 - Have Dumbledore be a little calmer.... He wouldn't roar in the Great Hall for Harry Potter, he wouldn't strangle Harry in the trophy room, he wouldn't bark at Moody, he wouldn't act so confused and worried, and he would not bark at the champions to "Gather round. QUICKLY!" I mean, was that really necessary? Also make the ending a little better... less cheesy....

Movie 5 - I would make the duel between Dumbledore and Voldemort a bit different. I would have the statues come to life and have Fawkes come and swallow the Killing Curse for Dumbledore. I would also have Voldemort call Bellatrix "Bella". I don't know, but I found that really weird for some reason... Lol. And I would have Harry go berserk in Dumbledore's office, having him break the instruments and such. Oh yes, and Dumbledore would not bark at the students... "Don't you all have studying to do?!?!?!?! [You little retards....]"

Movie 6 - Have Dumbledore go to the Dursleys' instead of picking Harry up at the cafe. I would have loved to see the Dursleys again. I would have more of the memories, particularly the Gaunts and Lord Voldemort's Request. I'm not sure the second one is too, too important, but it would be cool. Also at the as they come out of the cave, I would have Dumbledore say, "I am not worried, Harry. I am with you." They filmed that but deleted it....

Movie 7: Part 1 - Keep in the Dursleys Departing scene (they deleted it). Have the vision of Voldemort going to find Gregorovitch but instead finding the German mother and her two children in his old house, and then killing them. Have Voldemort go to Godric's Hollow and have his flashback to Hallowe'en, 1981. I would have loved to have seen the full scene. Have Grindelwald not tell Voldemort about the Elder Wand, and have Voldemort kill him. Oh yes, and keep in Dean Thomas.

Movie 7: Part 2 - Have the WB logo up in flames. (I'm not sure if that would work well with the Snape opening, but in the last one, it was all rusting and about to break, and now it's all silver and clean and new?) Lengthen Voldemort's anxiety attack: Have him interrogate the goblin and then kill everyone. The Prince's Tale: If they were showing Lily dying, I wish they would have shown James being killed for once.... I think they give Lily way more screentime than James; also, give James glasses in the beginning! King's Cross: Have Dumbledore in purple robes. I think that would look very good with this new Dumbledore, what with his white, untethered beard; and I think Michael Gambon could pull it off. He didn't have be Dumbledore the White! ... Not have Bellatrix explode. Let Harry have the very last line.... I was kind of annoyed that they gave him the last line in every other movie BUT this one. Come on, Albus.... "Ready." ...? D:

PatronusLight95 August 29th, 2011 2:47 am

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Movies 1 and 2: Shorten them.
Movie 3: More Marauders. Otherwise, this movie is perfection! :)
Movie 4: Add Winky and Dobby as well as Hermione's S.P.E.W. Reveal Rita being an Animagus
Movie 5: Add Harry and Cho's date, Harry's interview with Rita, a longer Department of Mysteries battle, as in showing the Time, Thought, and Planet chambers.
Movie 6: Add the House of Gaunt scene, Albus's funeral.
Movie 7 and 8: Pretty good adaption-wise, no complaints there.

I also hate how they handled Harry's character in the last few films. They mostly focused on his angsty, rebellious, and humorous sides to his personality, neglecting to show his softer and compassionate sides, as if those sides were the only things in his personality. It really evident in the last scene in Movie 8 where he snaps the Elder Wand in half and throws it over the bridge, It's like he shows disrespect to the wand's previous owner, Albus.

Noldus August 29th, 2011 4:55 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by PatronusLight95 (Post 5857481)
It really evident in the last scene in Movie 8 where he snaps the Elder Wand in half and throws it over the bridge, It's like he shows disrespect to the wand's previous owner, Albus.

The alternative is that someone else will get their hands on it, which Dumbledore never wanted. Snapping the wand in half is a heroic act and shows that he doesn't seek power.

mrfutterman August 29th, 2011 5:42 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by rosieechan (Post 5845562)
.... a lot of Ginny's lines were taken down, and HBP made the relationship awkward...mostly because Ginny's character wasn't as funny and witty as in the books - which is why Harry was even attracted to her in the first place...

What was funny or witty about Ginny in the books?

The author's main emphasis on Harry's attraction to Ginny - if memory serves - is her good looks.

Lotoc_Sabbath August 29th, 2011 6:17 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
I'd make the movies under 2 hours 20 longer, I'0d make each movie last between 2h 30 and 2h 40, in that time there would really be so much you could put in, especially, very especially in DH2 where many things are rushed.

I'd change not all but more or less 70-80% of non-canon things included in the films. Somethings I admit are done because the film is different from the book, and I have generally no probs with changing some sets, but for sure I'd change,add or take away things like:
-Harry snapping elder wand
-Cos and GoF ending: R-E-M-O-V-E
-No dursleys in many films, in particular HBP
-More quidditch
-More serious romance and less "raging hormones" even if I'd keep some because it made HBP very nice and enjoyable
-More voldemort background
-DH-Horcrux battle
-DD backstory
-More Sirius, Ron, Snape, McGonagoll, malfoy, Ginny and twins and very less non canon characters or lines
-Marauders backstory
-Add many, many CANON episodes in GoF: All the crouch story especially
-Longer snape worst memory and prince's tale
-No grawp since it really has nothing to do with the story, put pix instead such a great character which can make humor


the list could get little longer but I think this are the main things.

danpot321 August 29th, 2011 11:41 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Keep the final showdown between Harry and Voldemort in DHP2 as it was in the book. I do understand that the way they did it was probably more suited for film than the in-book version, however the latter really packed a strong emotional punch with me which I feel the portrayal they went with lacked.

The main problem I have with things left out of certain films is how it affects the inter-film continuity. For example, Dobby being introduced in CoS and then only appearing again basically for the sake of his fan-service death scene (which I did love). It's always felt to me that each film has been treated as simply an adaptation of that particular book, much like basically a 'highlights show' of the book in question rather than part of a continuing series. This makes it difficult for me to view the films as it's own separate 'series' from the books when continuity and consistency between them is lacking in some ways.

PandoraTrilling August 30th, 2011 12:44 am

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
DH2 - I wish that this movie had been longer and included more from the book.

I would like to have seen Harry winning Kreacher's loyalty. They should have evacuated the younger students like they did in the book instead of keeping everyone and shoving the Slytherins off to the basement. Fred's death would have been an intense moment. I wish that the movie had included more of the battle between Bellatrix and Molly. That wasn't as satisfying as it could've been. The final battle between Harry and Voldemort should have been in front of everyone and just a tad closer to the book.

I'd like to have seen the moment after the battle with Harry, Ron and Hermione in the Headmaster's Office, including Harry repairing his holly wand. I'd also like to have seen more of the epilogue, with all of Ron's remarks as they were in the book.

StaceysChain August 31st, 2011 7:36 am

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Well to start off, I would keep Hogwarts the same in every movie - using the one in Deathly Hallows Part 2, I think that's the best Hogwarts. I'd also choose different actresses for Ginny, Cho and Narcissa. I'd probably cast Hermione Norris as Narcissa. And I'd call Nigel Dennis Creevey instead. Also I'd completely cut Lupin and Tonk's relationship and Teddy.

Philosopher's Stone/Chamber of Secrets - make them shorter, more visually appealing/stunning, less cheesy and more scary.

Prisoner of Azkaban - Have Lupin explain the Marauders backstory and the significance of Harry's patronus at the end. Make Lupin's werewolf form something similar to the werewolf in Doctor Who or Van Helsing, have the dementors from Order of the Phoenix onwards and generally make the special effects more real (I think they looked really cheap in this film). And not put in an annoying high-pitched wail every time someone moves their wand!

Goblet of Fire - Make it longer, include the Rita Skeeter/Hagrid being a half-giant sub-plot, make the graveyard scene longer, keep the priori incantatem explanation and the scene with Fudge at the end as well as Harry giving Fred and George his Triwizard winnings. And maybe include Bertha Jorkins as well.

Order of the Phoenix - again, make it longer, swap Mrs Figg with Lupin or Arthur (with the excuse that the last patrol was late). Have a love triangle between Ginny/Harry/Cho (for example, make Cho willingly betray the DA, she and Harry have an argument and Ginny consoles him), have a scene where Neville, Ginny and Luna distract Umbridge (while Harry, Ron and Hermione try to get to London through her fireplace) but get caught. Cut out Grawp, make Umbridge confess she sent the dementors either in her office or the forest. Have a longer battle scene between the DA and Death eaters (similar to how it was in the book) and then the Order and Death Eaters too. And last but not least, make Harry see Snape's worst memory in the pensieve in Snape's office, have him see James bully Snape and Snape calling Lily a mudblood and before the film ends (after the scene with Luna), have a scene where Lupin consoles Harry about Sirius's death, James and Lily's relationship and how James and Sirius supported him when they found out he was a werewolf.

Half-Blood Prince - Include both scenes with the Gaunts, have Dumbledore theory that Voldemort used artefacts belonging to Slytherin, Hufflepuff and Ravenclaw. Cut out the scene with the waitress and include the Dursleys instead. Introduce Bill at the burrow and explain to Harry that he and Fleur met at Gringotts a couple of years ago and are getting married, then have Bill mauled by Greyback during the attack of the burrow scene. Also, I'd make references to the prophecy, definitely keep the "In Noctem" scene in the film, have Ron join Harry and Hermione on the tower (and have some of Hermione's lines) and maybe include Dumbledore's funeral as well.

Deathly Hallows Part 1 - Harry finds the piece of the mirror shard at Grimmauld Place
(he goes into Sirius's room, steps on the shard, picks it up and looks up sees the shadow of a mirror on the wall, then looks down again to see Aberforth's eye in the shard). Also I would make the Malfoy Manor scene less comedic and more intense (with Bellatrix actually kicking Hermione, Ron screaming and cutting Luna and Dobby's stupid lines).

Deathly Hallows Part 2 - As with Goblet of Fire and Order of the Phoenix, make it longer. Have a scene at the beginning with Ron and Hermione discussing her torture (with her showing him Bellatrix's hair). Have a scene where Harry discusses Dumbledore's past, secrets and whether he cared for Harry with Ron and Hermione and says that he has the cloak, Voldemort has the elder wand and he doesn't know or care where the stone is. Have Aberforth explain Dumbledore's past accompanied by a flashback, then have Dumbledore explaining his reasons and guilt and asking Harry for forgiveness during King's cross. Have a longer fight during both battles of Hogwarts (showing Dumbledore's army against Snatchers after the covered bridge collapsed, and show Mcgonagall against a giant during the first half and have Neville and Luna get cornered by Death Eaters and saved by Hagrid during the second half). Include Fred's death (only exclude Percy and just let him be with George), include Snape and Lily's argument in the prince's tale, have Bellatrix die like she did in the book, and have a longer fight between Harry and Voldemort - for example Voldemort could chase Harry in smoke form (like in the video game) after their confortation on the stairs, they come to an isolated corridor where Voldemort taunts Harry and Harry retaliates by revealing Snape's true loyalties - I'd also keep the "Why do you live?" scene. Oh and I'd totally cut out Voldemort's awful laugh and hug during Neville's speech and I'd make Harry mend his own wand before snapping the elder wand in half.

rogue_bludger September 3rd, 2011 11:00 am

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
not alot, i love all the films, i do have a few minor issues but the one thing i would do would be to give bonnie wright better stage direction, i think she looks the part but when ever shes in a scene she seems to wooden for me and i blame the director not enough direction, she kinda spoils the scene i think Whenever shes in it

horcrux4 September 3rd, 2011 5:40 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
I think I'd abandon the attitude of 'movie audiences have the attention span of a goldfish and after 3 lines of dialogue start playing with their I-phones' and add some essential exposition. Particularly with regard to the Marauders' Map, the horcruxes, the hallows and Dumbledore's back story.

I'd also have made Ginny much livelier from OotP onwards, and added a lot more passion or enthusiasm to their 'romance' scenes. They all seemed very flat. And I'd cut the unneccessary additional scenes like the Burrow burning and the waitress at the station and put back some of the helpful or fun scenes like the Pensieve memories and Albus collecting Harry from the Dursleys.

Hagrid442 December 11th, 2011 9:04 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
I don't think I could really add anything. One thing that's mentioned is the addition of Peeves. It would have added so much comic relief. I see that Columbus cut him out after filming scenes with this guy, Rik Mayall, didn't go so well. Were they that bad? Anyway, since CC did that, it forced the other directors into not including the character as well. Hindsight's 20/20, but I think Robert Carlyle despite his well-documented disdain for the series would have made a great Peeves. Of course that's from seeing his masterful work as Rumplestiltskin in Once Upon a Time. lol

peter333 December 12th, 2011 12:28 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
I would change Hermione calling Ron "Ronald".

WHEN did she EVER do that in the books?


Of course, I would change Ron`s, Dumbledore`s and Harry`s behavior.

StaceysChain December 12th, 2011 12:37 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by peter333 (Post 5946324)
I would change Hermione calling Ron "Ronald".

WHEN did she EVER do that in the books?

Quite a few times if I remember correctly.

peter333 December 12th, 2011 1:06 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by StaceysChain (Post 5946325)
Quite a few times if I remember correctly.


Well, I hereby beg you to give me quotes. I am pretty sure, book Hermione called Ron "Ronald" only once through the
entire series - in DH, when he came back, after he destroyed the locket.

Other than that, he was always Ron to her.

StaceysChain December 12th, 2011 1:32 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by peter333 (Post 5946328)
Well, I hereby beg you to give me quotes. I am pretty sure, book Hermione called Ron "Ronald" only once through the
entire series - in DH, when he came back, after he destroyed the locket.

Other than that, he was always Ron to her.

Maybe I'm getting confused since I've not watched the films or read the books in a while - I did say if I remember correctly. Why does it bother you anyway?

peter333 December 12th, 2011 3:09 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by StaceysChain (Post 5946335)
Maybe I'm getting confused since I've not watched the films or read the books in a while - I did say if I remember correctly. Why does it bother you anyway?

Hi!:wave:

I am just kind of a hardrock-honest-to-heart-canon-proof HP fan :)

And that goes for the books primarily.

WHY does it bother me?
Good question.
See, in the books
Ron was always just "Ron" to both Harry and Hermione.
I dislike
the movies
for making him somewhat enstranged, Hermione calling him Ronald.
Notice, how we never hear her in the movies call Harry "Henry", or "Harry James".

It changes their relationship. That is what bothers me. Hermione calling Ron "Ronald" changes their
friendship.
It gives us an impression that she is not close to him, or that she maybe, say, despises him.
While reading the books I got the impression that Hermione was equally close to both Harry and Ron,
and that the boys were maybe a wee bit closer to each other as friends.
Later on,
Ron and Hermione developed some kind of crush,true,but there was no need
to call each other formally.

This bothers me.
Why make it formal?
Why would Hermione call people differently?
Does she call Ginny "Ginevra"? No.

Does she call her boyfriend Viktor some other name? No.
All people in the world call him Viktor and so does she.

So
why do this weird change?
What are the writers trying to prove to us?
It gives me the impression
that Hermione either dislikes Ron or has some weird issues with him.
It is weird since the beginning of the PoA movie.
That was the first time she called him Ronald, while talking about Lupin`s suitcase on the train.
It just
does not fit.

Makes me feel like they are trying to put Ron down even more. As if his stupid scared faces weren`t enough of disgrace to Ron`s character :(
However, the Trio`s relationships are so screwed up in the movies, I should not even waste my time complaining about
a tiny fragment of all that mess :(

So,
if someone suggests that something occures in the books and I do not see the very thing in the books, I will require a proof.
That is all.
Nothing personal.
It is as simple as this. If you wrote that Harry is a hopeless romantic, I would DEFINITELY
ask you to provide qutoes from the books that prove this.
Other example:As I have written on the H/Hr dance subject, it is not how book-Harry and book-Hermione would act,
and
I wrote the very specific examples from the books, where we can read with our own eyes how uncomfortable Harry
always is around dancing.
He is also uncomfortable around crying girls, even a crying Hermione.
So that is all there is to it:
If you think that book-Hermione calls Ron "Ronald", I would like
to see a proof...
Personally , I cannot find any other Ronald scene in the books, except the one in DH, after Ron returned.

...
On other matter:
I would change lots of things as far as the relationships go.
Of course, I would change Albus`s personality in the movies. I would let him act calmly, affectionately, lovingly,
smart,
wise,
cool.

I would change Hermione`s style in the first 4 movies. I mean, come on, if Alyson Hannigan can
pull of both a nerd,
and a hot chick, why cannot Emma Watson?

I would love to see a nerd-like Hermione who changes into a beautiful girl in GoF.
Sadly,
the movies never gave us this.

I would definitely let RON be a brave and smart guy that he is in the books.
I would
also change his friendship with Harry to be more like it is in the books.

Changes I would love to make:

SS:
Seamus rum scene - cut it, or change it.

CoS:
Ron being SCARED of the Howler. This I would change to what it REALLY was in the book.
The Weasleys looking around checking out the Burrow as if they are there for the first time.
Ginny - more screen time, more acting!

PoA:
I would make Ron stop doing stupid scared faces. Make him look brave and give him his brave lines.
Cut Ron`s stupid face after Harry and Hermione returned from the Time Turner adventure.
Cut the whole Albus hitting Ron`s wounded leg scene!
Give Hermione a different outfit during the Time Turner scenes. Like, say, a nerdy sweater or something.
More Marauders backstory.
Sirius should definitely not laugh all the time.

GoF
Hermione should look more nerdy and geeky before she comes to the Ball all beautiful.
Quidditch World Cup - at least a bit of the game should be there.
Harry should not be left alone to see the Dark Mark. He just happened to be the one who saw Crouch Jr. I did not like it.
More Crouch backstory.
More sadness at the end of the movie.
More Harry-Dumbledore connecting and bonding, more wise talk from Sirius in the fire and from Dumbledore. Not just that nonsense.
Snape should NEVER hurt the students physically!!!!! NEVER! Book-Snape never does that.

OotP:
Harry should rage at the end and break stuff in Albus` office.
Cho should not have been the traitor.
Harry-Cho fight should have been there.
Ginny should act more like book-Ginny.
Snape should, again NOT hurt Harry physically! No shoving Harry around! That is something book-Snape just never does.


HBP
More book-like Ginny.
Harry comforting Hermione should be cut.
Cut burning down the Burrow.
More real Albus/Harry scenes!

DH
DUMBLEDORE!...King`s Cross!...
Ron/Hermione kiss should be visible.
Harry should not ask what should he do in the King Cross Scene.
Albus-backstory and more Hallows.
Fred`s death.
More cheering after Harry defeated Voldy for good. Or at least SOME cheering!
Less horrible make-up in the last scene.

StaceysChain December 12th, 2011 4:40 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by peter333 (Post 5946356)
Hi!:wave:

I am just kind of a hardrock-honest-to-heart-canon-proof kind of HP fan :)

And that goes for the books primarily.

WHY does it bother me?
Good question.
See, in the books
Ron was always just "Ron" to both Harry and Hermione.
I dislike
the movies
for making him somewhat enstranged, Hermione calling him Ronald.
Notice, how we never hear her in the movies call Harry "Henry", or "Harry James".

It changes their relationship. That is what bothers me. Hermione calling Ron "Ronald" changes their
friendship.
It gives us an impression that she is not close to him, or that she maybe, say, despises him.
While reading the books I got the impression that Hermione was equally close to both Harry and Ron,
and that the boys were maybe a wee bit closer to each other as friends.
Later on,
Ron and Hermione developed some kind of crush,true,but there was no need
to call each other formally.

This bothers me.
Why make it formal?
Why would Hermione call people differently?
Does she call Ginny "Ginevra"? No.
Does she call her boyfriend Viktor some other name? No.
All people in the world call him Viktor and so does she.
So
why do this weird change?
What are the writers trying to prove to us?
It gives me the impression
that Hermione either dislikes Ron or has some weird issues with him.
It is weird since the beginning of the PoA movie.
That was the first time she called him Ronald, while talking about Lupin`s suitcase on the train.
It just
does not fit.

Wow really? That's interesting. Fair enough if that's what you think, each is to their own :). I personally never had a problem with it. In fact to me, Hermione calling Ron formally in the films was just another foreshadowing their relationship. Because in my personal experience, people who are in a relationship (or attracted to each other) call their partner/the person they are attracted to formally when they're trying to prove a point or are annoyed at them etc. In the films Hermione calls Ron "Ronald" when she's either angry at him, or when she's pointing something out to him (like on the train in POA since Lupin's name was obviously on the suitcase - Ron just didn't look) I've seen this happen many times. My mum does it to my dad, she calls him "Phil" during a normal conversation, but when she's angry at him or trying to prove a point she calls him "Philip". So I personally think that the writers are trying another way express Hermione's feeling for Ron by making her call him "Ronald".

Sorry if that's weird, but that's what I think ;)

decarus December 12th, 2011 8:02 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Yeah i actually think the opposite. Hermione calling Ron, Ronald, is sort of a way to show their closeness because she is the only one that did it. It shows that there relationship is different.

rogue_bludger December 12th, 2011 8:36 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by decarus (Post 5946447)
Yeah i actually think the opposite. Hermione calling Ron, Ronald, is sort of a way to show their closeness because she is the only one that did it. It shows that there relationship is different.

yes i have to agree with this

peter333 December 13th, 2011 12:25 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by StaceysChain (Post 5946393)
in my personal experience, people who are in a relationship (or attracted to each other) call their partner/the person they are attracted to formally when they're trying to prove a point or are annoyed at them etc. In the films Hermione calls Ron "Ronald" when she's either angry at him, or when she's pointing something out to him (like on the train in POA since Lupin's name was obviously on the suitcase - Ron just didn't look) I've seen this happen many times. My mum does it to my dad, she calls him "Phil" during a normal conversation, but when she's angry at him or trying to prove a point she calls him "Philip". So I personally think that the writers are trying another way express Hermione's feeling for Ron by making her call him "Ronald".

Sorry if that's weird, but that's what I think ;)

I understand. I am just too obsessed with the HP books. True , in the US movies and sitcoms I see a lot of scenes
where a person calls another person formally when annoyed.
I have no problem with your life experience being similar :)

However, Harry Potter is not an american sitcom.
It is a
story of its own, taking place in the early nineties, in England, and the books show us clearly,
that
Hermione never calls anyone differently, not even her other boyfriend.

In PoA it really struck me. I saw such a beautiful friendship while reading the train scene in the book.
The movie, however, offers me a Hermione being all like:
You Ronald, you are so ignorant, you!...

...Oh well.

Quote:

Originally Posted by decarus (Post 5946447)
Yeah i actually think the opposite. Hermione calling Ron, Ronald, is sort of a way to show their closeness because she is the only one that did it. It shows that there relationship is different.

Actually, she is not the only one in the movies.
There are other people who call him Ronald too.
His mother does this, when
she is angry at him.
I prefer the book version, where Hermione and Ron really like each other and she never puts him down because of stupid reasons like when he did not notice Lupin`s suitcase.

:)

MerryLore December 13th, 2011 3:02 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by peter333 (Post 5946988)
Hermione never calls anyone differently, not even her other boyfriend.

I'm sorry - I'm confused. Do you mean Viktor Krum? I don't think there was a longer version of his name. Come to think of it, though, Viktorius kind of fits, but I don't think it's canon.

My guess is that if Harry's first name were actually Henry, Hermione would have called him that when she was annoyed with him. I think one of Hermione's flaws was coming across as a "know-it-all" and the film had her use Ron's full name to show us that part of her personality.

deathlyhallows3 December 20th, 2011 11:04 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Include the circular room with the spinning walls and add more chambers at the Ministry of Magic in Order of the Phoenix

peter333 December 21st, 2011 5:08 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by MerryLore (Post 5947018)
I'm sorry - I'm confused. Do you mean Viktor Krum? I don't think there was a longer version of his name. Come to think of it, though, Viktorius kind of fits, but I don't think it's canon.

My guess is that if Harry's first name were actually Henry, Hermione would have called him that when she was annoyed with him. I think one of Hermione's flaws was coming across as a "know-it-all" and the film had her use Ron's full name to show us that part of her personality.

Well, except for the fact, that there is NO PART OF HER PERSONALITY in the books that uses his full name.

And sure, it is nice to see her as a know it all in the movies - by why at the expense of Ron?

Sharpturn December 21st, 2011 6:51 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
In Prisoner of Azkaban, the explanation of who Sirius was, and how he and Lupin related to each other and to Harry's life was abysmal. And people who haven't read the books in my family, I have had to explain the maurauder's map to, because they had NO idea how Lupin figured out how to work it.

The Marauder's were important to the third, and they basically skipped them. Seeing as how we meet all of their transfigured sides, and see or at least make reference to their human selves, that should have been explained, even in small detail.

The firebolt should have come when it was supposed to, not at the end.




Also, didn't they mention in the first book that Harry's name was just Harry? That was in Chapter 1, I think, where the Dursley's are using it to judge the Potters for being common?

mrfutterman December 21st, 2011 8:36 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Sharpturn (Post 5951775)
The firebolt should have come when it was supposed to, not at the end.

This was an excellent adaptational decision.

Had I read the book first, I would have deduced that Sirius was a good guy once it is established that the firebolt is not jinxed: it's blatantly obvious. All other candidates as senders of the firebolt are dismissed by Hermione, who is the author's "voice". It is made very clear that Sirius sent the firebolt, and once it is clear that it is AOK then it follows that his intentions must be good and that Evil!Sirius! is a false trail.

Without that info, film audiences still think that Sirius is a villain until the great revelations of the Shrieking Shack scene (I half expected Lupin to be killed by Sirius, in defence of the kids).

Do Potter fans never read or watch mysteries and crime thrillers?

I disagree with your other points too. Film audiences no more needed an explanation of how Lupin knew about the map than they did about how the twins worked out how to use it.

Sharpturn December 21st, 2011 8:42 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by mrfutterman (Post 5951824)

I disagree with your other points too. Film audiences no more needed an explanation of how Lupin knew about the map than they did about how the twins worked out how to use it.

So you really don't think that by avoiding the explanation of the marauders, (which is avoiding the explanation of how Lupin knew about the map), was avoiding the main point of that story?

For me, POA had two purposes. To explain the past by introducing Sirius and the Marauders. And to put Pettigrew in place for book 4. And they failed in the first one really, because we met all four of the marauders, but it was never explained what they were.

Taquiq December 21st, 2011 9:57 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
I would have put Peeves in the films, especially that line at the end of DH! :clap:

mrfutterman December 21st, 2011 10:06 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Sharpturn (Post 5951826)
So you really don't think that by avoiding the explanation of the marauders, (which is avoiding the explanation of how Lupin knew about the map), was avoiding the main point of that story?

For me, POA had two purposes. To explain the past by introducing Sirius and the Marauders. And to put Pettigrew in place for book 4. And they failed in the first one really, because we met all four of the marauders, but it was never explained what they were.

The Marauders are an (expendable) subplot of PoA which is about Harry discovering the truth behind the story he has been told, and acting upon the truth he discovers, and therefore finding a father figure.

Not dissimilar both plotwise and storywise to Great Expectations, which has been filmed very successfully without the various subplots and minor characters.

Sharpturn December 21st, 2011 10:14 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by mrfutterman (Post 5951873)
The Marauders are an (expendable) subplot of PoA which is about Harry discovering the truth behind the story he has been told, and acting upon the truth he discovers, and therefore finding a father figure.

Not dissimilar both plotwise and storywise to Great Expectations, which has been filmed very successfully without the various subplots and minor characters.

It might have been expendable, but it was still information that was good to have. It would explain a lot of the relationships between the Marauders. Why it was so dastardly that Pettigrew betrayed them. Why they picked Pettigrew in the first place to defend them. While it was shown in the movies later in Snape's memories, It would have been nice to expound upon the subplot in order to have a better understanding of how things in the present came to be as they are.

FleurDeLaPointe December 22nd, 2011 2:52 am

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Sharpturn (Post 5951879)
It might have been expendable, but it was still information that was good to have. It would explain a lot of the relationships between the Marauders. Why it was so dastardly that Pettigrew betrayed them. Why they picked Pettigrew in the first place to defend them. While it was shown in the movies later in Snape's memories, It would have been nice to expound upon the subplot in order to have a better understanding of how things in the present came to be as they are.

Read this

http://hp-essays.livejournal.com/242482.html

And then see if you still believe that the Maurader's explanation was not there.

Sharpturn December 22nd, 2011 5:00 am

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by FleurDeLaPointe (Post 5952069)
Read this

http://hp-essays.livejournal.com/242482.html

And then see if you still believe that the Maurader's explanation was not there.

I still believe that the Marauder's explanation was not there. There was a plethora of information about James and his relation to them. But.. what I'm saying is that I would have liked acknowledgement, specifically, that they were the Marauders.

There's a difference between being friends in school, and being in a clique.

It's easy for those of us who have read the books to extrapolate the information, but for those who couldn't be bothered or convinced to read the books, the information about the Marauders isn't as easily accessible. I know the films aren't meant to be a stand alone, that they are an adaptation, and are best watched after reading the books, that's not always the case.

I'm saying I would change it for that purpose alone. Because if I had a dollar for every time I had to explain it. There shouldn't be a need for any explanation, and that's the thing that I've been asked most about. So clearly for those who haven't read the books for whatever reason, it is not being explained to an adequate level. And I would personally change that about the films.

Goddess_Clio December 22nd, 2011 5:20 am

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
[Quoted from two posts]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sharpturn (Post 5952107)
It might have been expendable, but it was still information that was good to have. It would explain a lot of the relationships between the Marauders. Why it was so dastardly that Pettigrew betrayed them. Why they picked Pettigrew in the first place to defend them.

...

I still believe that the Marauder's explanation was not there...

It's easy for those of us who have read the books to extrapolate the information, but for those who couldn't be bothered or convinced to read the books, the information about the Marauders isn't as easily accessible.

I didn't read the books until after I saw POA - the film - and I understood everything that was going on. Explaining that the marauders were a gang that ran around the school causing mischief wasn't necessary to audience's understanding that James, Lupin, Sirius and Peter were all friends in school. Lupin stated that he knew James and Lily while in school, at the end it became clear that Lupin and Sirius had been good friends, and in all the Shrieking Shack exposition it's explained that Peter was apart of their group. It all made sense to me. Whether they were "the marauders" or not didn't matter to me as much as understanding that they had been good friends.

As far as Peter's "dastardly" deed of turning on his friends, I thought it was pretty dastardly whether I knew he was in the marauder's gang or not - he was James's friend and had betrayed him and I got that from the film alone. And as far as why James and Lily picked Peter as their secret keeper to begin with it was explained in the exposition at the end of the film just as in the book - Sirius was the original plan and Peter was chosen as SK instead so that Sirius (the obvious choice) could be the decoy.

I understood that all from the movie. Whether the marauders were apart of the film or not didn't matter. Neither did knowing how Fred or George could work the map, as a viewer I just went with it. It's only after the fact (and after I red the books six or seven times) that I began wondering how they had figured it out.

FleurDeLaPointe December 22nd, 2011 11:00 am

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by peter333 (Post 5946988)
I understand. I am just too obsessed with the HP books. True , in the US movies and sitcoms I see a lot of scenes
where a person calls another person formally when annoyed.
I have no problem with your life experience being similar :)

However, Harry Potter is not an american sitcom.
It is a
story of its own, taking place in the early nineties, in England, and the books show us clearly,
that
Hermione never calls anyone differently, not even her other boyfriend.

I think you are mistaken to think that calling someone person formally is strictly a US sitcom characteristic. From what I understand the British Sitcom "League of Gentlemen" also exhibited a quality of a similar nature, so really, you're idea that Harry Potter is somehow "better off" not using a trope that is American is not valid.
Quote:

Actually, she is not the only one in the movies.
There are other people who call him Ronald too.
His mother does this, when
she is angry at him.
I prefer the book version, where Hermione and Ron really like each other and she never puts him down because of stupid reasons like when he did not notice Lupin`s suitcase.

:)
Well you do have to understand, sometimes calling someone by their full name is a term of endearment, not annoyance. Considering how caring and motherly Hermoine is sometimes to Harry and especially Ron, it's not out of line of her to act like his mother by calling him by his full first name.

Also I think I remember countless times where Hermione probably puts down Ron for even less than what you stated.

Goddess_Clio December 22nd, 2011 5:27 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by FleurDeLaPointe (Post 5952164)
Well you do have to understand, sometimes calling someone by their full name is a term of endearment, not annoyance. Considering how caring and motherly Hermoine is sometimes to Harry and especially Ron, it's not out of line of her to act like his mother by calling him by his full first name.

I agree with this. I call my best friend by her full first name (Christina) when I'm teasing her, when I give her birthday cards or when I think it would be silly or funny. I would call my ex by his full first name (Stephen) as a term of endearment.

I never meant the full first name in either scenario as a put-down or used it to belittle them and I never thought that Hermione in the films was using it to put Ron down but in a motherly sort of way. I interpreted it as doing what I did with my ex and what a lot of people do with their significant others in refering to them by their full first name. I more thought of it as a clue that she sort of was starting to like Ron as more than a friend in POA.

Martok December 23rd, 2011 7:14 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
I'd have Harry do something with the wand he purchased earlier in Philosopher's Stone, other than sticking it into the troll's nose that is. Everyone else is doing magic at some point in the movie. Everyone but Harry.

Cut the Mandrake lesson from Chamber of Secrets. Again we're given way too much information on the plants that isn't needed. Again, there's not really a payoff.
Oh and recast Ginny Weasley before it's too late.

Offer an explaination what the heck happened in the graveyard duel in Goblet of Fire. It feels too much like an deus ex machina.

Resolve the dementor attack in Order of the Phoenix.

The Death Eater attack on the Burrow in Half Blood Prince doesn't make much sense to me. Were they after Harry again? Why wasn't Voldemort with them then? He still does want to kill Harry himself, doesn't he? You could remove that entire scene without any impact on the movie.
And I think they went a little to far with the digital color correction on this film.

Put the deleted scene back in where the trio discusses horcruxes in Deathly Hallows, Part 1.

I think Dumbledore should have had to convince Harry that he's not dead in the King's Cross scene from Hallows, Part 2. Because everything's pointing in the direction that he is. He's in a different place, a dead person is talking to him, his glasses are missing and he wears different clothes. And then he says: "I have to go back, haven't I?" What makes him think that he'll be able to?

MissGryffindor December 24th, 2011 2:34 am

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Generally, make it obvious from OotP/HBP onwards that it is Ginny and NOT Hermione that Harry is in love with, because that is the main area in which the books and films are out of sync.

I would include more of the Marauders' background. Specifically, the full flashback in Snape's Worst Memory and the aftermath of this for Harry, and the Marauders contribution mentioned in PoA.

HBP - I would stick to the book and make Harry/Ginny less of a surprise.

I would also let Ron and Hermione get together the way they did in the book. I think it made it much clearer how Hermione was waiting for Ron to grow up.

I would also portray Sirius differently in OotP. In the book, he is depressed and suffering from alcoholism. In no way does this reflect in the film. Also, he NEVER, EVER calls Harry 'James', no matter how confused Molly thinks he is.

And finally, for some light relief I would add in the scene in HBP where Harry arrives at The Burrow and overhears Arthur refer to Molly as 'Mollywobbles'.

Martok December 24th, 2011 4:17 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by MissGryffindor (Post 5952871)
Generally, make it obvious from OotP/HBP onwards that it is Ginny and NOT Hermione that Harry is in love with, because that is the main area in which the books and films are out of sync.

I thought it was pretty obvious already. They even had a scene in Prince where Harry explicitely denies that there's something going on with Hermione. The only problem I have with the romances is that I don't buy why Harry falls for Ginny. Part of the problem is that they are stuck with an actress that was initially cast as an extra and not as Harry's love intrest.

LyraLovegood December 24th, 2011 4:35 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by MissGryffindor (Post 5952871)
Generally, make it obvious from OotP/HBP onwards that it is Ginny and NOT Hermione that Harry is in love with, because that is the main area in which the books and films are out of sync.

I agree with the poster above, I think it is just as clear or moreso in the movie that Harry is in love with Ginny and has a more fraternal love for Hermione. Especially in that scene in the empty classroom after Lavender starts snogging Ron. Hermione asks Harry if that's how he feels when he sees Ginny with Dean. To me that pins down the point that Hermione is in love with Ron, and Harry is in love with Ginny quite firmly.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MissGryffindor (Post 5952871)
I would also portray Sirius differently in OotP. In the book, he is depressed and suffering from alcoholism. In no way does this reflect in the film.

Depressed, yes. But alcoholic? Where in the book is there any hint that Sirius has an alcohol problem? I only remember him providing drinks for the whole group while they're waiting and worrying about Arthur in St. Mungo's.

Pensieve_Seeker December 25th, 2011 9:39 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by FleurDeLaPointe (Post 5952069)
Read this

http://hp-essays.livejournal.com/242482.html

And then see if you still believe that the Maurader's explanation was not there.

I had never read this person's essay until just now, yet I have used the same terms/clues to describe who the Mauraders were as he did.

Noldus December 27th, 2011 6:40 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Martok (Post 5952710)
I'd have Harry do something with the wand he purchased earlier in Philosopher's Stone, other than sticking it into the troll's nose that is. Everyone else is doing magic at some point in the movie. Everyone but Harry.

Cut the Mandrake lesson from Chamber of Secrets. Again we're given way too much information on the plants that isn't needed. Again, there's not really a payoff.
Oh and recast Ginny Weasley before it's too late.

Offer an explaination what the heck happened in the graveyard duel in Goblet of Fire. It feels too much like an deus ex machina.

Resolve the dementor attack in Order of the Phoenix.

The Death Eater attack on the Burrow in Half Blood Prince doesn't make much sense to me. Were they after Harry again? Why wasn't Voldemort with them then? He still does want to kill Harry himself, doesn't he? You could remove that entire scene without any impact on the movie.
And I think they went a little to far with the digital color correction on this film.

Put the deleted scene back in where the trio discusses horcruxes in Deathly Hallows, Part 1.

I think Dumbledore should have had to convince Harry that he's not dead in the King's Cross scene from Hallows, Part 2. Because everything's pointing in the direction that he is. He's in a different place, a dead person is talking to him, his glasses are missing and he wears different clothes. And then he says: "I have to go back, haven't I?" What makes him think that he'll be able to?

All good points from a storytelling perspective.

GillyweedFan December 29th, 2011 12:03 am

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
The thing I would change is something simple, but probably troublesome for the actors and crew.

In the first two films, I liked the way the cast+crew actually travelled to sets that looked like Hogwarts. Key examples are The Training Grounds, the corridor outside Moaning Myrtles and that courtyard by Transfiguration (Yes, this was present fleetingly in GoF too.)

I don't like how from OoTp onwards, they use those horrible corridor sets that look clearly made up by a studio team, the one outside the Room of Requirement bugging me a lot. It just doesn't look like a natural castle. I was joyed to see the return of the Gloucester Cathedral corridor in HBP, but again, that wasn't for long.

So the change I'd make would be to have more scenes filmed outside the studios and in different castle like locations.

MinervasCat December 29th, 2011 3:15 am

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
I definitely agree with the scenery changes. I liked the Gothic styles of the first two movies. I also wondered about the change from the moving staircases, which were specifically mentioned in the books, to those circular things. I guess they just made for better "videography."

I didn't care much for the change from the school uniforms to Muggle clothing. Again, JKR was specific that the witches and wizards wore robes and not Muggle clothes. Most efforts by magical beings not familiar with Muggles to dress in Muggle clothing were hilarious.

One of my major pet peeves has always been the "burning of the Burrow" scene and the chase through the swamp. That was such a needless waste of time, IMO. It did not add to the film, was not in the book, and the time could have been used for something else.

Speaking of peeves, I would have liked to have seen Peeves the Poltergeist in the films. Again, he was in the books and so much a part of Hogwarts that I thought it was a shame he wasn't included. I have read, though, that they weren't even going to include Kreacher until Ms Rowling informed them how much of an important part he played in DH.

More Snape! As a Snape fan, I just think he got really short changed in the films as compared to the amount of page space he gets in the books.

mrfutterman December 29th, 2011 9:22 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by MinervasCat (Post 5955291)
I liked the Gothic styles of the first two movies.

What was "Gothic" about the Columbus films?

TrueRavenclaw December 30th, 2011 8:07 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
I would change the actress which played Lilly Evan in the Deathly Hallows part 2, her eyes disappoint me.

leah49 December 30th, 2011 8:08 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by TrueRavenclaw (Post 5956012)
I would change the actress which played Lilly Evan in the Deathly Hallows part 2, her eyes disappoint me.

Or at least make them blue to match Dan's.

FurryDice January 3rd, 2012 8:01 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Mainly, characterisation. I love the characters as they are in the books, and the movie versions are unrecognisable as the book characters. :sigh:
I like the casting, just not the scripting and characterisation for some of the characters.
In particular, the way the movies have mishandled the trio. The trio are a unit in the books. Harry is the hero, Ron and Hermione are both sidekicks. Movie-version, cliche-fest - Harry and Hermione are the hero and heroine, Ron is shunted into the background, dim-witted comic relief. Hermione actually has flaws in the books, and is much more likeable for not being perfect, and Harry doesn't like fame - "But I am the Chosen One"?? Really? I can't imagine Harry saying that. He said it to a drunken Slughorn to get the memory from him, I doubt he would treat it so lightly, knowing what it cost, over someone fancying him.


Quote:

Originally Posted by Martok (Post 5952710)
The Death Eater attack on the Burrow in Half Blood Prince doesn't make much sense to me. Were they after Harry again? Why wasn't Voldemort with them then? He still does want to kill Harry himself, doesn't he? You could remove that entire scene without any impact on the movie.


I think it was a replacement for all the attacks that were reported and discussed during the year in the book. However, it makes little sense in that the Burrow was there again in DH, and as you say, were they after Harry, was Voldemort with them? If they wanted to show an attack, they could have showed an attack on one of the premises in Hogsmeade during one of the Hogsmeade visits.

Quote:

I think Dumbledore should have had to convince Harry that he's not dead in the King's Cross scene from Hallows, Part 2. Because everything's pointing in the direction that he is. He's in a different place, a dead person is talking to him, his glasses are missing and he wears different clothes. And then he says: "I have to go back, haven't I?" What makes him think that he'll be able to?
I was wondering that, too. Dumbledore never actually told Harry he wasn't dead, nor did Harry ask about it. Is it included in the extended/deleted scenes on the DVD?


Quote:

Originally Posted by MissGryffindor (Post 5952871)
Generally, make it obvious from OotP/HBP onwards that it is Ginny and NOT Hermione that Harry is in love with, because that is the main area in which the books and films are out of sync.

:agree: Less of the idea of playing the trio as some kind of love triangle.


Quote:

HBP - I would stick to the book and make Harry/Ginny less of a surprise.

They could have included some cute scenes between Harry and Ginny in OotP - like the chocolate in the library incident, or a variation on it. They could have built up chemistry by having them interact more, rather than the cringey way they went about it. Harry gets scenes talking to lots of other characters - added scenes, some of them, and they couldn't have included a scene of him talking to his HBP love interest?


Quote:

Also, he NEVER, EVER calls Harry 'James', no matter how confused Molly thinks he is.

I agree - I don't know why they had to throw that in.

tru0001 January 5th, 2012 1:02 am

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
For me I really think they should have kept one of Molly's greatest moments out of the film... when Molly sees her boggart!
It really shows that "love" and "family" theme that has been displayed in the books. I really wished Molly's character was more two-sided as well so to speak since she didn't really break down anywhere where in the books she broke down when she saw her boggart, when George lost an ear, when Fred died.
But other than that I loved Molly in the films.

hmmmm other things...
I wish they were able to make Ginny grow more as a main character than a side character. I know its not Bonnie's fault but the character wasn't written well in the Film Adaptations.

Oh and Tonks... well now even though I see film Nymphadora in the Books I thought if she looked liked Alice from the Film version of the Twilight Saga with pink hair instead of Brunette she'd look more like Tonks but hey that's just my opinion.

jbwarner86 January 5th, 2012 5:59 am

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
I've thought about this a lot, and I really think Jo's writing style is too dense and multi-layered to have all the major story points conveyed in a series of movies. Even at two-and-a-half hours each, they couldn't fit in a huge amount of important plot points (who the Marauders were, Barty Crouch Jr. getting dementor-kissed, how the Fidelius Charm works, etc.), and while I understand it was important to streamline the story, it was a shame to see all those character-enriching side stories get dumped (Hermione and S.P.E.W., Ron's Quidditch jitters, the relationship between Tonks and Lupin, and so on). It seems minor, but it plays a huge part in endearing the characters to the audience.

So the way I would have done the adaptations would be not as live-action movies, but as seven animated TV miniseries, each one devoted to one book. The nice thing about animation is you aren't bound by the restrictions of live actors - you can age the characters as you need to, and not worry about how long it takes to get it all done. Special effects are less of a hassle - you don't have to spend so much extra time and effort on creating CGI characters like Dobby and Firenze, since you can just draw them instead. And by making each book a multi-part miniseries, you've got a good three or four hours to tell the story, broken up into smaller chunks so it doesn't get monotonous.

Maybe it's just my love of animation, but I'd really love to see the books re-adapted this way someday in the future.

PoFoSho March 29th, 2012 7:36 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
What would I change about the films? A LOT OF THINGS.
From the director, to the lighting in 5, 6, and 7, to plot wholes, lines left out of the books, lines from the books that were included but altered, movie Ginny! blahhh. A lot.
Don't get me wrong though, the movies are still amazing--just not comparable to the books, but we know this already. :P

coppertop1 March 29th, 2012 11:34 pm

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Hagrid442 (Post 5945954)
I don't think I could really add anything. One thing that's mentioned is the addition of Peeves. It would have added so much comic relief. I see that Columbus cut him out after filming scenes with this guy, Rik Mayall, didn't go so well. Were they that bad? Anyway, since CC did that, it forced the other directors into not including the character as well. Hindsight's 20/20, but I think Robert Carlyle despite his well-documented disdain for the series would have made a great Peeves. Of course that's from seeing his masterful work as Rumplestiltskin in Once Upon a Time. lol

I'd love to have had Peeves in the movies, and we know Carlyle does an awesome crazy (BIG OUAT fan here), I think he'd be great as Peeves.

My main criticisms are in movies 3, 4 and 6. I'd say:

POA: MARAUDERS BACK STORY!! WHY did they delete that? It explained everything, the map, scabbers. ETC. Also, LOSE THE SHRUNKEN HEADS!! This isn't Mexico or some place it's England. They drive me insane. Students ARE allowed in Three Broomsticks, it's the main hangout. I loved the book POA, but the movie is my least favourite.
GOF: Crouch's backstory, and Rita Skeeeter reveal. Also calm down, Dumbledore!
OOTP: The Quibbler story (but having cut out Skeeter's story they had to drop that), WHY was Cho the snitch? I didn't like that, it adds more fuel to the haters! I wish Harry amped up the angst. And more Kreacher!
HBP: Cut down the teen romance scenes, and add the Gaunts and Horcrux scenes. No burning down the burrow or flirting with some random waitress. And what was with Harry all I am the chosen one? WAY OOC!

And what did they do to Flitwick? I thought it was supposed to be somewhat older, he looked so strange, like a different character after COS. He looked too young!

Goddess_Clio March 30th, 2012 2:14 am

Re: What would you change about the films?
 
1) Higher a better script writer. Steve Kloves probably did his best but the characterizations were way off, even for a book to screen adaptation. He ruined so many great charactes.

2) Recast Harry. Dan just wasn't Harry to me after POA; he was short, he was styled very weird by makeup and costume, his acting was iffy at best... I'd say recast the whole trio but I think Rupert would have done better had his part been improved by a different screen writer and I don't actually have too many complaints about Emma. Most of the student-aged actors were fairly wooden, it's just Dan was the worst since he carried the movies.

3) LOVE Alan Rickman but I would have loved him as Snape even more had he been about... 20 years younger. :shrug: Whayahgunnado? (My new obession is Adrian Brody as Snape :D but I do love Alan in the role)


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 9:26 pm.

Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

Original content is Copyright MMII - MMVIII, CoSForums.com. All Rights Reserved.
Other content (posts, images, etc) is Copyright its respective owners.