Login  
 
 
Go Back   Chamber of Secrets > Harry Potter > Muggle Studies

Things that bothered you about the final film



Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #681  
Old January 3rd, 2012, 8:28 pm
FleurDeLaPointe  Undisclosed.gif FleurDeLaPointe is offline
Banned
 
Joined: 4422 days
Posts: 328
Re: Things that bothered you about the final film

Quote:
Originally Posted by MsJPotter View Post
Wow, what can a person say to this. Except well maybe this, whatever Harry's charaterization...he still needed a wand. [...] Harry still doesn't have a wand though.
So you're implying that despite an explanation of characterization, which was reasonably valid, was less important to the morale of the film/book than Harry absolutely having a wand by the closing shot?

More to the point why does Harry need a wand by the end of the film when everything's done?

I think those two points need answering before this recent discussion goes any further.


Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #682  
Old January 3rd, 2012, 8:42 pm
MerryLore's Avatar
MerryLore  Female.gif MerryLore is offline
Seventh Year
 
Joined: 3219 days
Location: catagorizing Sev's books
Posts: 1,627
Re: Things that bothered you about the final film

From the Alan Rickman as Snape thread.....

Quote:
Originally Posted by ccollinsmith View Post
The films also carried on the revered Hollywood tradition of airbrushing off some of the rough edges from any and all characters who were not the story's villains. As such, we get very little of Dumbledore's unsavory backstory - a backstory at least equally unsavory as Snape's. We never see Sirius descend into incipient alcoholism. We never see Lupin try to beg off of fatherhood. We never see Harry break into the Pensieve (instead, we see him innocently break into Snape's mind by accident). We never get Ron's racist opinions of giants or house elves. And no, we do not get every single Snape lip curl that Harry sees.
Exactly! I was getting ready to post this, but you've stated it much better than i ever could have.

The reason for TPT is because Snape, like most of the regular characters, was glossed over in the previous movies, and once it came time for that scene, they only had so much to fall back on.

ALL of the characters had serious faults, and to a very huge extent, those faults were not shown in the movies. The movies chose to focus on the trio and their battles, romance, and the DADA professor of the year. They left out the complexities and nuances of the regular characters, which is one complaint I had about most of the films. Snape's bigger faults aren't in DH2 because they were never explored to much of an extent in any of the previous films.

They also didn't go into much detail about why Snape thought Harry's father was a "swine" or why he seemed to be much harsher on Harry than the other students - that wasn't developed in the previous films, either. So, when it came to TPT, they only had so much to work with, and it came down to "boy loved girl, girl chose someone else."

The fault is with the previous films, much more than DH2, i think.

And i think TPT was done beautifully, and Rickman did an amazing job with that scene, and every scene he was given.


__________________
avatar by me and WB, banner by Dark_Disciple

When I'm 80 years old and sitting in my rocking chair, I'll be reading Harry Potter.
My family will say to me, “After all this time?”
And I will say, “Always.”
- source unknown
Reply With Quote
  #683  
Old January 3rd, 2012, 10:30 pm
MsJPotter  Undisclosed.gif MsJPotter is offline
Banned
 
Joined: 3337 days
Posts: 526
Re: Things that bothered you about the final film

Quote:
Originally Posted by FleurDeLaPointe View Post
So you're implying that despite an explanation of characterization, which was reasonably valid, was less important to the morale of the film/book than Harry absolutely having a wand by the closing shot?

More to the point why does Harry need a wand by the end of the film when everything's done?

I think those two points need answering before this recent discussion goes any further.
The explanation of characterization was valid in whose eyes? Not mine. I should not question because someone's opinion differs from mine. I also didn't post about morale. I posted about Harry's morals. Slight difference there.
I think Harry needs a wand at the end of the film because he's a wizard and that's what they need to cast spells etc. I think Harry should use his own wand, the one he bought when he was 11 years old from Ollivander. The book had a perfectly good explanation in it as to how Harry ended up using his own wand, I rather liked it. It fitted with Harry characterization as written by his creator. I thought it was out of character for Harry to keep Draco's wand because just off the top of my head...it didn't belong to him. Now am I saying that Harry should have forgotten that Draco was a Death Eater who attempted murder on various people. I am saying that in the book he felt obliged to Narcissa and in the movie he still had that obligation to her and she had no wand.
I think as the compassionate gentleman that Harry was he probably would have given Narcissa possession of Draco's wand so she would have the means to travel home and to function in the WW afterwards. Do I know this for sure, of course not. I just feel that it fits in with Harry's strong moral code. How he felt about Lucius and Draco doesn't come into it. There were the proper authorities to take care of them and we know that Harry spoke up for them. But that's book canon, film canon shows Harry destroying the Elder Wand and I think that that is bad storytelling and bad cinema.
It's bad storytelling IMO because we see in the film just how tough the other Hallows were. They are practically indestructible. Also there is no need in the film to destroy the wand because of possible attacks to gain the wand in the future. Nobody but the Trio knew what the wand was. I think it's bad cinema because it's just an easy out for the screenwriter and director. Instead of having Harry face Dumbledore in the form of his portrait and confront it with the knowledge at Harry could put the Elder Wand away and never be tempted to use it. Something that Dumbledore could not do, thus establishing that Harry was much more moral than Dumbledore, we have Harry snap a splintered twig in half and then throw it into a miraculous chasm that appeared out of nowhere. No, I don't think it worked very well, not when you start to study the little details. Harry was left with a wand that did not belong to him, right or wrong it belonged to Draco and how the heck did Narcissa walk the length of Scotland and England in those heels because she sure as heck did not have a wand to use?
That's my explanation as to why I feel the way I do about the ending of the film.


Reply With Quote
  #684  
Old January 3rd, 2012, 10:30 pm
Noldus  Male.gif Noldus is offline
Fifth Year
 
Joined: 3963 days
Location: North by northwest
Posts: 996
Re: Things that bothered you about the final film

Quote:
Originally Posted by MsJPotter View Post
I don't think the scene worked, precisely because of what we had already been shown on the screen.
Would you mind to elaborate?

Quote:
Originally Posted by MsJPotter View Post
But it didn't belong to him. It's allegiance switched to him, but the actual, physical wand belonged to Draco. Now someone who is supposed to be shown as moral as you say Harry is in this scene wouldn't hold onto something that didn't belong to him.
What's ironic is that you are assuming that he didn't give it back to Draco in the film off-screen, but when it comes to the book, you seem convinced that he did. Whether or not he gave it back was not stated or shown in neither book nor film, yet you keep bringing up your interpretation of it every time you need an argument against the film scene.

Quote:
I just don't see how showing him repairing his wand and telling Ron and Hermione he was going to dispose of the Elder Wand by putting it back where it belonged, wherever he decided that would be would make such a difference to his morality.
Not necessarily, but as you so often say, that would be too subtle. The film scene demonstrated his morality ten times more effectively. In fact, by keeping the book scene I would be far more focused on the flawed logic behind him putting it back where it belonged (appreciate my precise wording here!) for the purpose of avoiding more damage when he could just destroy it and be done with it once and for all. If he is not going to use it, why risk that anyone else can get their hands on it no matter the odds? The risk is still there!

Quote:
He could have given it to Narcissa though.
Instead of saving the world, it's better to "repay" the favour as a gentleman and die in the process?

Quote:
I can't be the only who scratched her/his head as to how Narcissa and family was going to get home and wht the heck they were going to do once they got there. Does aybody think that Harry wouldn't care about her after she saved him in the Forest?
I can't image anyone else scratching their heads over this in such a dramatic moment.

Quote:
Oh I think Radcliffe conveyed very well how upset he was over it. Maybe people would think of it while they were pondering how Snape knew exactly how Lily died.
Please do explain the connection between these scenes.

Quote:
There was no WW witnesses to Voldemort and Harry's fight in the film, no witnesses, no future problem. That wasn't too subtle a point for me to catch, I did notice there was nobody there.
Actually, if you look closely, there are a few bystanders seen in one of the shots.

Quote:
Harry was going to put the Wand away and never use it.
Why have him tell it to Dumbledore if you can show it to the audience? Saves time, expresses the concept clearer and provides a more satisfying transition into the epilogue with the three of them holding hands and figuratively looking into the future...

Quote:
Originally Posted by MsJPotter View Post
The explanation of characterization was valid in whose eyes? Not mine. I should not question because someone's opinion differs from mine. I also didn't post about morale. I posted about Harry's morals.
Why don't you find it valid? And please do not mention Narcissa walking away without a wand again. That has nothing to do with the scene in question.



Last edited by Noldus; January 3rd, 2012 at 10:40 pm.
Reply With Quote
  #685  
Old January 3rd, 2012, 11:09 pm
MsJPotter  Undisclosed.gif MsJPotter is offline
Banned
 
Joined: 3337 days
Posts: 526
Re: Things that bothered you about the final film

Quote:
=Noldus;5959029]Would you mind to elaborate?
I just did. But again,
1. The Hallows were strong magical artifacts. We see this in the films with the Cloak and with the Stone. The cloak looked like it was new despite being centuries old and the Stone survive unscathed fro the effects of being made into a Horcrux and that Horcux being destroyed by the Sword of Gryffindor. There is nothing in canon that says that the Wand could be destroyed by anybody, so no I don't buy it that Harry could destroy the Wand, just like that.
2. Nobody but the Trio knew about the Wand therefore there was no need to worry about future trouble about the Wand. In the film there was no one around when Harry and Voldemort were fighting and Voldemort didn't advertise that he couldn't work the most powerful wand in the world.


Quote:
What's ironic is that you are assuming that he didn't give it back to Draco in the film off-screen, but when it comes to the book, you seem convinced that he did. Whether or not he gave it back was not stated or shown in neither book nrr film, yet you keep bringing up your interpretation of it every time you need an argument against the film scene.
I'm saying that it's open to interpretation. I don't think Harry would have just given Draco's wand back to him. I am saying that there's a very good chance that he gave it to Narcissa. I'm saying that great visual or not in doesn't make sense for the Malfoy's to start hiking down to England. That's a long walk. When something doesn't make sense like that, as far as I'm concerned I don't care if it's the greatest visual in the world, it's ruined for me because it doesn't make sense. Now you may feel differently, that's your right but you don't have the right to tell me that because I think logically about this I'm wrong.

Quote:
Not necessarily, but as you so often say, that would be too subtle. The film scene demonstrated his morality ten times more effectively. In fact, by keeping the book scene I would be far more focused on the flawed logic behind him putting it back where it belonged (appreciate my precise wording here!) for the purpose of avoiding more damage when he could just destroy it and be done with it once and for all.
That is your opinion. I don't share it. For me the scene did not make sense. It did not make sense because it contradicted too much of what had already been shown in the film, in DH1, and even HBP.

Quote:
Instead of saving the world, it's better to "repay" the favour as a gentleman and die in the process?
Harry had already saved the world, that wouldn't have stopped him from being kind to Narcissa. The Wand was more or less a spent force. Nobody knew about it except Harry, Ron and Hermione. What was Harry showing, that he didn't trust himself not to use the Wand in the future?

Quote:
I can't image anyone else scratching their heads over this in such a dramatic moment.
I can well imagine that.

Quote:
Please do explain the connection between these scenes.
That people are more aware of the subtlties than you think. Just as it impressed me that Harry in the film was very upset at the wand being broken, It also impressed me that Snape was remembering something he hadn't seen. Both scenes made an impression, one because it made sense, the other because it didn't.

Quote:
Actually, if you look closely, there are a few bystanders seen in one of the shots.
Not to worry, Harry and Voldemort don't have any dialogue. There's only dead bodies in the shots I saw. I rented the film from Netfix to refresh my memory.

Quote:
Why have him tell it to Dumbledore if you can show it to the audience? Saves time, expresses the concept clearer and provides a more satisfying transition into the epilogue with the three of them holding hands and figuratively looking into the future without Voldemort...
Show what to the audience? Something that IMO doesn't make sense? What's wrong with dialog anyway, I do believe there's dialog while they're standing beside that chasm. I don't think that the concept of Harry being stronger morally than Dumbledore would have been that difficult to grasp myself. The book was split into 2 films just so there would be time. I don't think showing a scene in the office would have taken up any more time than the scene by the chasm frankly.



Last edited by MsJPotter; January 4th, 2012 at 6:57 pm.
Reply With Quote
  #686  
Old January 3rd, 2012, 11:11 pm
FurryDice's Avatar
FurryDice  Female.gif FurryDice is offline
Hogwarts Graduate
 
Joined: 4474 days
Location: Ireland
Age: 35
Posts: 2,591
Re: Things that bothered you about the final film

Quote:
Originally Posted by MerryLore View Post
The reason for TPT is because Snape, like most of the regular characters, was glossed over in the previous movies, and once it came time for that scene, they only had so much to fall back on.
I don't know what the previous films have to do with it. Snape passing on the prophecy and Snape betraying Lily by calling her a mudblood could all have very easily been presented as new information, just as their childhood friendship was. A more accurate version of TPT would only have needed a few more lines - and one of the scenes was already filmed since OotP. It's lazy film-making to whitewash Snape, IMO.

Quote:
ALL of the characters had serious faults, and to a very huge extent, those faults were not shown in the movies. The movies chose to focus on the trio and their battles, romance, and the DADA professor of the year. They left out the complexities and nuances of the regular characters, which is one complaint I had about most of the films. Snape's bigger faults aren't in DH2 because they were never explored to much of an extent in any of the previous films.
I think that the faults of some characters were exaggerated and the faults of some were left out. Example Ron - Ron is not the idiot the movies turn him into, nor is he just a tag-along of the trio. Hermione makes mistakes in the books, but in the movies, she's apparently perfect. Harry doesn't go looking for attention and using his fame to impress girls - "But I am the Chosen One" - Urgh. Urgh. Urgh. Sirius does not ever call Harry "James". Snape doesn't humiliate a teenager about her appearance in the movies. Snape does not sink to the depths of amorality in the movies as he does in the books. Movie Snape is some sad brooding innocent.

Quote:
So, when it came to TPT, they only had so much to work with, and it came down to "boy loved girl, girl chose someone else."
Essentially, that's what the movie version became. Which is a radical change from the canon version, and a whitewashing of Snape. There's a big difference between "boy loved girl, girl loved someone else" and "girl ends friendship because boy is racist and on the way to becoming a criminal". They could very easily have included scenes of exactly why the friendship fell apart. The whole friendship was new material to DH2. That wasn't a part of any of the other books or movies. It wouldn't have killed them to show Snape in the wrong.


__________________

Pic by julvett at deviantart http://julvett.deviantart.com/gallery/2984632
"Relationships are like glass; sometimes it's better to leave them broken than to hurt yourself trying to put them back together." Anonymous
"Like this one time I sort of ran over this girl on her bike. It was the most traumatising event of my life and she’s trying to make it about her leg. Like my pain meant nothing." - Cordelia; Buffy the Vampire Slayer S1Ep11.
Reply With Quote
  #687  
Old January 3rd, 2012, 11:18 pm
MsJPotter  Undisclosed.gif MsJPotter is offline
Banned
 
Joined: 3337 days
Posts: 526
Re: Things that bothered you about the final film

Quote:
Originally Posted by FurryDice View Post
It wouldn't have killed them to show Snape in the wrong.
Too true, and it wouldn't have killed them to have the complete line form the book in Harry's last speech to Al either. If the 'Probably' wasn't that important, why leave it out?


Reply With Quote
  #688  
Old January 3rd, 2012, 11:53 pm
Noldus  Male.gif Noldus is offline
Fifth Year
 
Joined: 3963 days
Location: North by northwest
Posts: 996
Re: Things that bothered you about the final film

Quote:
There is nothig in canon that says that the Wand could be destroyed by anybody, so no I don't buy it that Harry could destroythe Wand, just like that.
Stop referencing canon. There is nothing that says that it can't be destroyed in canon either. See? It gets us nowhere.

Quote:
In the film there was no one around when Harry and Voldemort were fighting.
There were. That's a fact, not a matter of opinion.

Quote:
I'm saying that it's open to interpretation.
No. I said that.


Quote:
I don't think Harry would have just given Draco's wand back to him. I am saying that there's a very good chance that hegave it to Narcissa.
...But in the film they walked away, so his only chance to give it back in the context of the film was for him to catch up with them. It would certainly make for a hilarious comedy, but perhaps not keeping with the spirit of the book. I love the contradiction on your part that you wouldn't want to see Harry placing the wand back in Dumbledore's tomb because it was only implied in canon, but you would have allowed the filmmakers to add a scene that goes against the holy canon. Interesting.


Quote:
I'm saying that great visual or not in doesn't make sense for the Malfoy's to start hiking down to England. That's a long walk. When something doesn't make sense like that, as far as I'm concerned I don't care if it's the greatest visual in the world, it's ruined for me because it doesn't make sense. Now you may feel differently, that's your right but you don't have the right to tell me that because I think logically about this I'm wrong.
No, given that it takes place in a magical setting, this is not a logical assumption as far as I'm concerned. Why can't they apparate away like the other Death Eaters (that is, after they have made their dramatic exit which was done for the purpose of good storytelling), take a portkey, use the floo network or fly on brooms home?


Quote:
Harry had already saved the world, that wouldn't have stopped him from being kind to Narcissa.
Again, she ran away.


Quote:
That people are more aware of the subtlties than you think.
Since when did subtleties win you over? I seem to recall that one of my observations was too subtle for you to catch.

Quote:
Just as it impressed me that Harry in the film was very upset at the wand being broken, It also impressed me that Snape was remembering something he hadn't seen. Both scenes made an impression, one because it made sense, the other because it didn't.
Yes, one scene made an impression because it was emotional, even if it didn't make sense. The other...was a forgettable afterthought. Did Daniel Radliffe convey that he was upset at the wand being broken outside the range of sad music? Yes I'm referencing one of your posts here, but only to demonstrate how much sense that comment made and how rude that was towards Dan's acting abilities...

Quote:
Not to worry, Harry and Voldemort don't have any dialogue. There's only dead bodies in the shots I saw. I rented the film from Netfix to refresh my memory.
Look again and be amazed upon discovering it.

Quote:
Show what to the audience? Something that IMO doesn't make sense? What's wrong with dialog anyway, I do believe there's dialog while they're standing beside that chasm. I don't think that the concept of Harry being stronger morally than Dumbledore would have been that difficult to grasp myself.
Dumbledore's past was basically glossed over, leaving such a contrast between the characters unnecessary to keep.

The dialogue in that scene was central to the plot of the film.

Quote:
The book was split into 2 films just so there would be time. I don't think showing a scene in the office would have taken up any more time than the scene by the chasm frankly.
Write an alternative script excerpt and see for yourself that it would take up more time, but keep the Elder Wand explanation. Otherwise it's not fair to compare.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Noldus View Post
There is nothing that says that it can't be destroyed in canon either.
But I suppose it could get destroyed by a canon. Boom!


Reply With Quote
  #689  
Old January 4th, 2012, 12:09 am
TreacleTartlet  Female.gif TreacleTartlet is offline
Assistant to Professor Snape
 
Joined: 5279 days
Posts: 2,036
Re: Things that bothered you about the final film

Quote:
Originally Posted by MsJPotter View Post
Harry was left with a wand that did not belong to him, right or wrong it belonged to Draco and how the heck did Narcissa walk the length of Scotland and England in those heels because she sure as heck did not have a wand to use?
As I understood it Draco's wand did belong to Harry according to wandlore, as it changed it's allegiance. Ollivander explains.

"This was the wand of Draco Malfoy."
"Was?" repeated Harry. "Isn't it still his?"
"Perhaps not. If you took it -"
-"I did"-
-"then it may be yours. Of course, the manner of taking matters. Much also depends upon the wand itself. In general, however, where a wand has been won, it's allegiance will change."
(DH, The Wandmaker)

I think it would be a bit pointless owning a wand whose allegiance had changed to someone else.

Also wizards don't require a wand in order to travel as there are many other means. They could have used the Floo network from Hogsmeade; or taken broomsticks,or used the Thestrals in the forest. However, if a wand was required there were many dead wizards laying around after the battle, so there were also many wands laying around to pick up. So I doubt Narcissa had to walk very far.



Last edited by TreacleTartlet; January 4th, 2012 at 1:08 am.
Reply With Quote
  #690  
Old January 4th, 2012, 12:31 am
MsJPotter  Undisclosed.gif MsJPotter is offline
Banned
 
Joined: 3337 days
Posts: 526
Re: Things that bothered you about the final film

Quote:
=Noldus;5959088]Stop referencing canon. There is nothing that says that it can't be destroyed in canon either. See? It gets us nowhere.
Please don't tell what I can or cannot reference. Canon is applicable because I assume at some time Kloves did look at the book. We see 2 wands damaged in the books. Ron's first wand and Harry's wand. Both times the wands are damged in an accident. Nobody snaps them in half deliberately. If it's not in canon, then as far as I'm concerned it's not part of the WW as created by Rowling.



Quote:
There were. That's a fact, not a matter of opinion.
There was still no dialog to hear.


Quote:
No. I said that.
Well so did I.


Quote:
...But in the film they walked away, so his only chance to give it back in the context of the film was for him to catch up with them. It would certainly make for a hilarious comedy, but perhaps not keeping with the spirit of the book. I love the contradiction on your part that you wouldn't want to see Harry placing the wand back in Dumbledore's tomb because it was only implied in canon, but you would have allowed the filmmakers to add a scene that goes against the holy canon. Interesting.
And as far as I'm concerned that's one of the things the film got wrong. Are you having trouble understanding that I think that the events in a film should be connected. And when they don't connect in a rational manner that is, IMO not cinematic. The Malfoys leaving is just one flaw as far as I am concerned. Yes, it made a great visual, it did not make great sense. It doesn't have to be holy canon to make sense.


Quote:
No, given that it takes place in a magical setting, this is not a logical assumption as far as I'm concerned. Why can't they apparate away like the other Death Eaters (that is, after they have made their dramatic exit which was done for the purpose of good storytelling), take a portkey, use the floo network or fly on brooms home?
They have no wands to apparate with, there are no portkeys, who would let them into their homes to use their Floo powder, and I didn't see any handy brooms, did you. They are walking, from Scotland to England and no it doesn't make a great deal of sense. Being magical does not protect you from blisters and watching a magical film does not mean I checked my brain at the door.

Quote:
Again, she ran away.
No, she walked away, in the middle of nowhere. Where the nearest village would know she and her family had been supporters of the late unlamented Voldemort. It's not my fault that scene does not make sense in spite of the visuals.

Quote:
Since when did subtleties win you over? I seem to recall that one of my observations was too subtle for you to catch.
Subtleties always win me over, it's just that what you call subtleties I call bad film making.

Quote:
Yes, one scene made an impression because it was emotional, even if it didn't make sense. The other...was a forgettable afterthought. Did Daniel Radliffe convey that he was upset at the wand being broken outside the range of sad music? Yes I'm referencing one of your posts here, but only to demonstrate how much sense that comment made and how rude that was towards Dan's acting abilities...
Yes, I thought he did it rather well myself. I've always thought so.


Quote:
Look again and be amazed upon discovering it.
I just did, no dialog and nothing about that film amazed me. I'm sad to say, I wanted to be amazed

Quote:
Dumbledore's past was basically glossed over, leaving such a contrast between the characters unnecessary to keep.

The dialogue in that scene was central to the plot of the film.
Then all the more reason to include the scene in the headmaster's office. Move that central dialog to there. There was no special reason to be on the bridge, unless it was to show that chasm. Where the heck did it come from?

Quote:
Write an alternative script excerpt and see for yourself that it would take up more time, but keep the Elder Wand explanation. Otherwise it's not fair to compare.
I don't want to write the scene. I can read it in the book. I'm quite satisfied with that scene and even if it took twice as long as the lingering shots of Hogwart rubble I would still have preferred a scene shot in the office. I make no apologies for liking canon and preferring book to to the film. I don't have to. I'm allowed to have my own opinion. I'm even allowed to post it here. I'm allowed to state what did not make sense to me, even if my opinions different from you.


Reply With Quote
  #691  
Old January 4th, 2012, 12:35 am
silver ink pot's Avatar
silver ink pot  Female.gif silver ink pot is offline
Assistant to Professor Snape
 
Joined: 6082 days
Location: Shining Snape's Halo
Age: 59
Posts: 9,778
Re: Things that bothered you about the final film

I really don't think the filmmakers are departing from the books that much in terms of either the Elder Wand or Draco's wand:
DH

“Hawthorn and unicorn hair. Ten inches precisely. Reasonably springy. This was the wand of Draco Malfoy.”

“Was?” repeated Harry. “Isn’t it still his?”

“Perhaps not. If you took it –”

“—I did – ”

“—then it may be yours. Of course, the manner of taking matters. Much also depends upon the wand itself. In general, however, where a wand has been won, its allegiance will change.”

There was a silence in the room, except for the distant rushing of the sea.

“You talk about wands like they’ve got feelings,” said Harry, “like they can think for themselves.”

“The wand chooses the wizard,” said Ollivander. “That much has always been clear to those of us who have studied wandlore.”



Also this, which seems to prove what the movie states, that Draco's wand had become Harry's new wand:

DHHarry looked down at the hawthorn wand that had once belonged to Draco Malfoy. He had been surprised, but pleased to discover that it worked for him at least as well as Hermione's had done. Remembering what Ollivander had told them of the secretworkings of wands, Harry thought he knew what Hermione's problem was: She had not won the walnut wand's allegiance by taking it personally from Bellatrix.


Harry knew that Draco's wand was his, while Hermione had not "won allegiance" from Bellatrix's wand.

It was no longer Draco's wand but Harry's, and I think they grasped that fact when writing the screenplay. It wasn't stealing anyway, since it was taken during the battle at Malfoy Manor which was a life and death situation. But according to Harry in the book (see quote above) the wand changed allegiance after he took it from Draco, so it's up to the wand to decide, not the person.

ETA: That's the whole point of Voldemort trying to use other people's wands and it doesn't work for him! Why? Because the wand doesn't see him as the rightful master - that's part of the magic of wandlore, in my opinion. Otherwise any wizard could use any wand and it would always work perfectly, but that's not the case.

Another interesting thing in terms of the movies is that they showed the parallellism between Draco and Harry and their relationship with both Snape and Voldemort.
  • Harry and Draco are both protected by Snape in HBP, and disillusioned in DH2
  • Harry and Draco are both "chosen" by Voldemort
  • Harry and Draco share the same wand, and are both Master of the Elder Wand
  • And in the movie they show this connection not only through the wands, but through physically interacting with Voldemort ~ Draco is forced to hug the Dark Lord and is visibly repulsed by it, and Harry has his free-fall hug with Voldie which is creepy and violent, before the final duel (which he wins using Draco's old wand).


__________________


"It may have escaped your notice, but life isn't fair."
~ Severus Snape, OotP movie


Severus Snape ~ Bloomsbury Books Favorite HP Character

Severmore ~ NEW Harry Potter Network ~ LJ Dungeon

Last edited by silver ink pot; January 4th, 2012 at 12:41 am.
Reply With Quote
  #692  
Old January 4th, 2012, 1:11 am
Noldus  Male.gif Noldus is offline
Fifth Year
 
Joined: 3963 days
Location: North by northwest
Posts: 996
Re: Things that bothered you about the final film

Quote:
We see 2 wands damaged in the books. Ron's first wand and Harry's wand. Both times the wands are damged in an accident. Nobody snaps them in half deliberately. If it's not in canon, then as far as I'm concerned it's not part of the WW as created by Rowling.
It's still up to interpretation.


Quote:
There was still no dialog to hear.
I was referring to bystanders. Some are barely visible in the background.


Quote:
Are you having trouble understanding that I think that the events in a film should be connected.
No. You just mentioned it for the first time now. Either that or your posts were too vague and contradictory for me to get that point.


Quote:
And when they don't connect in a rational manner that is, IMO not cinematic.
For once I agree, but luckily the events in DH 2 did connect. I know there were a few inconcistencies such as Luna's sudden appearance at Hogwarts, but overall it was coherent and flowed well. In my perhaps not so humble opinion.



Quote:
They have no wands to apparate with, there are no portkeys, who would let them into their homes to use their Floo powder, and I didn't see any handy brooms, did you.
As pointed out by TreacleTartlet, they could just pick up some wands on the ground and apparate away. Do they even need a wand to do that in the films?


Quote:
They are walking, from Scotland to England and no it doesn't make a great deal of sense.
That's merely an interpretation on your part. An enjoyable interpretation, I must say.


Quote:
Being magical does not protect you from blisters and watching a magical film does not mean I checked my brain at the door.
Are you implying that taking the setting into consideration equals checking one's brain at the door?


Quote:
Subtleties always win me over, it's just that what you call subtleties I call bad film making.
Do continue to call it bad filmmaking. I'm not gonna win you over, but I don't think I have bad tastes if I may say so myself.

Quote:
Yes, I thought he did it rather well myself. I've always thought so.
Apparently not when sensing the horcruxes...Or perhaps I misread it.




Quote:
I just did, no dialog and nothing about that film amazed me. I'm sad to say, I wanted to be amazed
As Rowling has pointed out, some fans would still be complaining about book/film differences even if the films were 6 hours long.


Quote:
Then all the more reason to include the scene in the headmaster's office. Move that central dialog to there. There was no special reason to be on the bridge, unless it was to show that chasm. Where the heck did it come from?
It couldn't be because it looked better visually?


Quote:
I'm allowed to have my own opinion. I'm even allowed to post it here. I'm allowed to state what did not make sense to me, even if my opinions different from you.
Certainly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MsJPotter View Post
Too true, and it wouldn't have killed them to have the complete line form the book in Harry's last speech to Al either. If the 'Probably' wasn't that important, why leave it out?
If it wasn't that important, why keep it? Same deal.



Last edited by Noldus; January 4th, 2012 at 1:14 am.
Reply With Quote
  #693  
Old January 4th, 2012, 1:31 am
FleurDeLaPointe  Undisclosed.gif FleurDeLaPointe is offline
Banned
 
Joined: 4422 days
Posts: 328
Re: Things that bothered you about the final film

Quote:
Originally Posted by MsJPotter View Post
The explanation of characterization was valid in whose eyes? Not mine.
Ah, but I said reasonably valid. Slight difference there. Reasonably means that most people would reasonably accept it.
Quote:
[...]the film[...]11 years old[...]The book[...]as written by his creator. [...] in the book [...] that's book canon, film canon[...]
That's pretty much all I got from your paragraph there. You could have been more succinct and said that, but from above we can emphasize this. How often in the films has Harry's wand been a centre of attention aside from the two instances of him choosing the wand and GoF? Nearly entering a decade of HP films, why should the wand be emphasized in the films when it didn't have precedent in almost 9 years of film? Is the story about Harry's wand or possession of a wand? The films are about Harry.
Quote:
It's bad storytelling IMO because we see in the film just how tough the other Hallows were.
The hallows were never tough in the film. Perhaps you misinterpreted, they were revered yes and I imagine care was taken to them in order to preserve them...but they were far from being tough. Much like faberge eggs.
Quote:
easy out for the screenwriter and director. Instead of having Harry face Dumbledore in the form of his portrait and confront it with the knowledge at Harry could put the Elder Wand away and never be tempted to use it.
Sure it was an easy out, I'll admit that. The alternative would be a harder and let's face it...a convoluted scene that would have lost the audience and more importantly not entertain the audience. I imagine these films were made to entertain first than to be completely faithfully unbending to canon. However we had our Dumbledore "exit stage left" moment, do you really think having a second "Dumbeldore/Harry talk" would be good filmmaking only for the sake of satisfying canon? It could be if done right, anything can be when done right, but that'd be like having Neo meet the Architect again in Matrix Revolutions right after he saved Trinity. Not warranted but also redundant.
Quote:
we have Harry snap a splintered twig in half and then throw it[...]No, I don't think it worked very well, not when you start to study the little details.
Actually I think that you really mean is when you start studying the wrong details. How else to explain the defiance of seeking power like Voldemort than to have Harry just treat this powerful wand as nothing but a twig and tossing it? That's a small detail. Think inside the film, not inside the book.



Last edited by FleurDeLaPointe; January 4th, 2012 at 1:35 am.
Reply With Quote
  #694  
Old January 4th, 2012, 3:23 am
SusanBones's Avatar
SusanBones  Female.gif SusanBones is offline
Inconceivable!
 
Joined: 5598 days
Location: in a galaxy far, far away
Posts: 4,090
Re: Things that bothered you about the final film

Could we have a little more discussion and less of a war here? People are entitled to their opinion. We are not here to prove whether someone else is right or wrong. The thread is to discuss what bothered you in the last film, which is a matter of personal taste and not something that is right or wrong.


__________________


avatar artwork by Ruth Sanderson
Reply With Quote
  #695  
Old January 4th, 2012, 5:26 am
MinervasCat's Avatar
MinervasCat  Female.gif MinervasCat is offline
Professor Snape's Most Favored House Elf
 
Joined: 4631 days
Location: Snuggled in Sevvy's pocket.
Posts: 1,558
Re: Things that bothered you about the final film

I thought that more practiced wizards could do magic without wands. Something as mundane as apparating back home, lighting a fire, or cooking a meal shouldn't have taken that much talent, so I would assume that the Malfoys would have been able to make out OK. These were not adolescents who needed their wands to do "everyday" magic. Then, once Ollivander got his shop open again, they could just hop over there an buy new wands. Unless Lucius was going back to jail again for being a DE...

Also, I thought it was acceptable for a wand to be won and it didn't matter that the person winning it didn't pay money for it. They "paid for it" by winning it from the other wizard. So, I don't think Harry would have had any qualms about keeping Draco's wand, if he wanted to. More than likely, since the movie didn't show him mending his old wand, he'd have just bought a new one.

A few other scenes that really bugged me, though, were:

Luna just appearing in the Room of Requirement, being there when Harry and Co. arrived.

How did Voldemort capture Hagrid?

Where was Grawp? (He had to be shown, taking up all kinds of time in OotP, even though they were going to cut out Kreacher, who plays a very important role in DH 2, then they don't even show him fighting the evil giants).

Not comfortable with Voldemort's hugging Draco -- just didn't fit, even though I can see what they might have been trying to do by having Draco not respond...showing that he wasn't coming to Voldemort's side or because of Lucius, he was only coming to his mother because she called to him.

The "vaporizing" of Bellatrix, Nagini, and Voldemort. I think, especially with Voldemort, it would have been better to show that they were "only human" after all and died like everyone else.

Neville had a big speech, but I don't think it was as big a moment as it could have been if they had used the book scene instead.

Aberforth and the background story on Dumbledore -- I didn't quite feel comfortable with it and also, what was with Aberforth and the shield charm? Where did that come from? Why?

Harry/Voldemort dueling scene -- way too long. They could have fought for a while outside, then worked their way into the Great Hall where everyone could have watched the finale in awe. Harry could have confronted him with the true ownership of the Elder Wand and Snape's loyalty to Dumbledore. I still think those types of jabs at Voldemort's ego hurt more that anything. I think they were part of what helped to weaken him, because he realized he didn't know everything and wasn't as all powerful as he thought he was. It would have also shown Harry conveying to everyone listening that Snape was Dumbledore's man for all those years.

I did like that Harry broke the Elder Wand in two, pretty much saying "Here's an end to it." Unlike those before him (even Dumbledore) who'd kept it because of it's legendary power, Harry wanted to see it finished.


__________________

I held you in my arms, although I knew that death
Had already taken you. I held you close, hoping for a faint heartbeat or breath
To prove me wrong.
But, you were still, and could not hear or see
My grief, my tears, my heartbreak knowing that the rest of my life would be
Spent without you.
Reply With Quote
  #696  
Old January 4th, 2012, 11:05 am
Pearl_Took's Avatar
Pearl_Took  Female.gif Pearl_Took is offline
Zonko's Employee
 
Joined: 4503 days
Location: The Shire
Posts: 3,634
Re: Things that bothered you about the final film

Quote:
Originally Posted by FurryDice View Post
It wouldn't have killed them to show Snape in the wrong.
If the film-makers were going to show Snape calling Lily Mudblood, then it's only fair they also show the context in which he called her that, i.e. he was being bullied by James at the time. The scene shows neither boy in a pleasant light. Showing this might have helped the audience get a glimpse of why Snape took a wrong turn in his youth, but I don't think it would have been aided the portrayal of Harry's father in the final film. So I can understand why the film-makers axed all of that.

By its very nature, an adaptation simplifies and compresses the source material. I've never seen any TV of film adaptation of a book which didn't do either of those two things, to some degree.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MinervasCat View Post
A few other scenes that really bugged me, though, were:

Luna just appearing in the Room of Requirement, being there when Harry and Co. arrived.
Not as bad as the 'now you see them, now you don't' barrels in The Two Towers ...

Quote:
How did Voldemort capture Hagrid?
Happened off-screen. There's a lot of chaos going on ...

Quote:
Where was Grawp? (He had to be shown, taking up all kinds of time in OotP, even though they were going to cut out Kreacher, who plays a very important role in DH 2, then they don't even show him fighting the evil giants).
I can't agree that Grawp was needed in this film. He was quite fun in OotP but he's never appeared since!

Quote:
Not comfortable with Voldemort's hugging Draco -- just didn't fit, even though I can see what they might have been trying to do by having Draco not respond...showing that he wasn't coming to Voldemort's side or because of Lucius, he was only coming to his mother because she called to him.
I thought this was hilarious. In a good way. To me it just showed that Film Voldemort was kind of losing it.

Quote:
The "vaporizing" of Bellatrix, Nagini, and Voldemort. I think, especially with Voldemort, it would have been better to show that they were "only human" after all and died like everyone else.
I can justify the 'vaporising', particularly of Voldemort, as I thought it showed how splitting his soul the way he did had resulted in his complete destruction. But I do think I'd have preferred a more gritty and shocking end for both him and Bella ... I liked the Molly/Bella fight in the film but I also wanted more!

Nagini's end was cool, though, and consistent with the way we saw the other film Horcruxes destroyed.

Quote:
Neville had a big speech, but I don't think it was as big a moment as it could have been if they had used the book scene instead.
I liked Nev's speech more on subsequent viewings. I do think that in this instance sticking to canon would have been even more cinematic though. So, I agree!

Quote:
Harry/Voldemort dueling scene -- way too long. They could have fought for a while outside, then worked their way into the Great Hall where everyone could have watched the finale in awe. Harry could have confronted him with the true ownership of the Elder Wand and Snape's loyalty to Dumbledore. I still think those types of jabs at Voldemort's ego hurt more that anything. I think they were part of what helped to weaken him, because he realized he didn't know everything and wasn't as all powerful as he thought he was. It would have also shown Harry conveying to everyone listening that Snape was Dumbledore's man for all those years.
I have mixed feelings about this. I like the final confrontation between them in the book but I am not sure it would have played very well on screen. Too wordy.

Quote:
I did like that Harry broke the Elder Wand in two, pretty much saying "Here's an end to it." Unlike those before him (even Dumbledore) who'd kept it because of it's legendary power, Harry wanted to see it finished.


__________________
Reply With Quote
  #697  
Old January 4th, 2012, 11:49 am
OldMotherCrow's Avatar
OldMotherCrow  Female.gif OldMotherCrow is offline
Sixth Year
 
Joined: 4177 days
Location: Here. I'm pretty sure of it.
Posts: 1,297
Re: Things that bothered you about the final film

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pearl_Took View Post
If the film-makers were going to show Snape calling Lily Mudblood, then it's only fair they also show the context in which he called her that, i.e. he was being bullied by James at the time. The scene shows neither boy in a pleasant light. Showing this might have helped the audience get a glimpse of why Snape took a wrong turn in his youth, but I don't think it would have been aided the portrayal of Harry's father in the final film. So I can understand why the film-makers axed all of that.
Whoa. I certainly did not get from the books that James caused Snape to take a wrong turn, so i wouldn't want a movie that would cause such a gross misrepresentation of what happened in the book; Snape seems to have been into the Death Eater Wannabes long before SWM, so if there is cause and effect I'd put it at the other way around (cart before horse, and all that). Editing it all down to make sense in a film might be difficult, but still possible. The Marauders tale probably belonged mostly to PoA, GoF and OotP, where in the books it was explained what they were up to and why, but didn't get the atttention it deserved (though Lupin's tale would have done well in DH, I think). TPT allowed Snape his confession for his part in it, in my opinion, especially about what he had done to estrange Lily. I think excising that from the film would drastically change Snape, as he is then portrayed as an innocent who never reached enlightenment because he didn't need to; and Lily would be drastically changed, as she is reduced from a strong girl struggling against bigotry and learning to stand up for herself, to a mere object of a crush. Sad fate for Harry's mom, in my opinion, and for Harry's character as well, because that in turn changes his character because he is no longer relating to any of the other characters for the same reasons as the books.

I could have sworn that I saw OotP on ABC TV with the Marauders bullying Snape in it. I hope by the time DH2 rolls around on TV, that means they plan on putting Snape's action of calling Lily a Mudblood into the film so there will be a proper context for their characters and relationships.


__________________
".... You've chosen your way, I've chosen mine."
I love Lily because she chooses a path to match her convictions, and chooses to live her life fighting for what is right. It is our choices that show who we truly are.

"UNTIL THE VERY END"
-- JK Rowling to Harry Potter fans at the beginning of Deathly Hallows, and James Potter to his son at the end of Deathly Hallows.
Reply With Quote
  #698  
Old January 4th, 2012, 12:22 pm
Pearl_Took's Avatar
Pearl_Took  Female.gif Pearl_Took is offline
Zonko's Employee
 
Joined: 4503 days
Location: The Shire
Posts: 3,634
Re: Things that bothered you about the final film

Quote:
Originally Posted by OldMotherCrow View Post
Whoa. I certainly did not get from the books that James caused Snape to take a wrong turn
That is not what I said. What I said was that SWM gives a context as to why Snape hurled a racial insult at Lily. And, personally, I don't think the film narrative needed any of that.

Quote:
I think excising that from the film would drastically change Snape, as he is then portrayed as an innocent who never reached enlightenment because he didn't need to; and Lily would be drastically changed, as she is reduced from a strong girl struggling against bigotry and learning to stand up for herself, to a mere object of a crush. Sad fate for Harry's mom, in my opinion, and for Harry's character as well, because that in turn changes his character because he is no longer relating to any of the other characters for the same reasons as the books.
We'll just have to agree to disagree on Film Snape's portrayal. And I don't agree at all that the films reduced Lily's character in such a way. Nowhere is she portrayed as a 'mere object of a crush'. The Lily childhood scenes were touching, and while Geraldine Somerville doesn't have much screen time, she does a lot with it! I really like her Lily, who comes over as a strong, loving woman.

I need to think of something that actually bothers me in the film because this is getting off-topic ...


__________________
Reply With Quote
  #699  
Old January 4th, 2012, 1:24 pm
OldMotherCrow's Avatar
OldMotherCrow  Female.gif OldMotherCrow is offline
Sixth Year
 
Joined: 4177 days
Location: Here. I'm pretty sure of it.
Posts: 1,297
Re: Things that bothered you about the final film

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pearl_Took View Post
That is not what I said. What I said was that SWM gives a context as to why Snape hurled a racial insult at Lily. And, personally, I don't think the film narrative needed any of that.
Sorry, but it seemed to me that that was what you were saying: "If the film-makers were going to show Snape calling Lily Mudblood, then it's only fair they also show the context in which he called her that, i.e. he was being bullied by James at the time." I think Snape's bigotry went beyond just a reaction to James-- I think that's what the Death Eater wannabe gang that Snape belonged to and calling other Mugglebborns "Mudblood" would have provided the context for his treatment of Lily, as I think TPT showed. I think that would be a proper context to show why Snape would call Lily "Mudblood". I thought that was a very important part of the book, as TPT seems to me to be the first time Snape owned up to his part in events, rather than simple go on and on about James did this or James did that. If Snape turning on Lily was going to be shown as a reaction to James bullying Snape, I think the context of SWM would also have to be explored to put the context into context, so backstory of the Marauders, the werewolf incident, Snape stalking Lupin to get at James, young Snape's love of Dark Arts, Mulciber and Avery, Snape's refusal to listen to lily's concerns, the Death Eater wannabe club, "Mudblood" directed at Muggleborns, the terror of the first war, how Lily wouldn't say Voldemrot's name-- all of that becomes important to provide context. For a movie, though, things often need to be distilled to fit the medium. I'd be very wary of reducing Snape's and Lily's end of friendship down to Snape only used "Mudblood" because James was bullying him. I think it misses the point of the context TPT provided.


__________________
".... You've chosen your way, I've chosen mine."
I love Lily because she chooses a path to match her convictions, and chooses to live her life fighting for what is right. It is our choices that show who we truly are.

"UNTIL THE VERY END"
-- JK Rowling to Harry Potter fans at the beginning of Deathly Hallows, and James Potter to his son at the end of Deathly Hallows.
Reply With Quote
  #700  
Old January 4th, 2012, 1:49 pm
Wab's Avatar
Wab  Undisclosed.gif Wab is offline
The Next Great Adventurer
 
Joined: 5991 days
Location: Mornington Crescent
Posts: 15,280
Re: Things that bothered you about the final film

Quote:
Originally Posted by OldMotherCrow View Post
Whoa. I certainly did not get from the books that James caused Snape to take a wrong turn, so i wouldn't want a movie that would cause such a gross misrepresentation of what happened in the book; Snape seems to have been into the Death Eater Wannabes long before SWM, so if there is cause and effect I'd put it at the other way around (cart before horse, and all that). Editing it all down to make sense in a film might be difficult, but still possible. The Marauders tale probably belonged mostly to PoA, GoF and OotP, where in the books it was explained what they were up to and why, but didn't get the atttention it deserved (though Lupin's tale would have done well in DH, I think).
The impression I got from the books is that Snape's motivations (if they can be simply expressed) boil down to anger. It's a common recruitment tool in RL extremist groups -- find people who feel or are badly treated and give that anger an external target. Snape was angry at the world and James' bullying gave him a concrete target.

And, yes, based on the book and the 2008 prequel James was at times a bully.


__________________
A patriot is someone who wants the best for his country, including the best laws and the best ideals. It's something other people should call you -- you shouldn't call yourself that. People who call themselves patriots are usually liars. -- Donald Woods

You got what anybody gets . . . You got a lifetime. -- Death of the Endless
Reply With Quote
Reply
Go Back  Chamber of Secrets > Harry Potter > Muggle Studies

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 7:00 am.


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.