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

Half-Blood Prince Movie Reviews v.2



View Poll Results: What did you think of the movie?
A Fantastic Adaptation. I loved everything about this movie. 36 15.52%
B Very Good Adaptation. I enjoyed the movie. A few minor issues but no big deal. 89 38.36%
C A Good Adaptation. I was entertained. Some room for improvement but overall it was fine. 48 20.69%
D Viewable Adaptation. There are lots I would have done differently though. 24 10.34%
E Below Average Adaptation. It needed improvements throughout, unfortunately. 23 9.91%
F - Awful Adaptation. I found the film almost intolerable. There is a great deal wrong with HBP 12 5.17%
Voters: 232. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #281  
Old December 26th, 2009, 11:35 pm
yoshi2542's Avatar
yoshi2542  Male.gif yoshi2542 is offline
Fifth Year
 
Joined: 4680 days
Location: London
Age: 30
Posts: 796
Re: Half-Blood Prince Movie Reviews v.2

Quote:
Originally Posted by lcbaseball22 View Post
Are we talking a literal "window" here? I noticed Noldus said something about a window too...

Note I haven't read the screenplay he mentioned, so that might be the reason for my confusion.
I think in the script Dumbledore mentioned a figurative 'window' that only he could open that would allow for Apparition into and out of Hogwarts. Something like that.


Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #282  
Old December 27th, 2009, 12:58 am
GinnyPotter15  Female.gif GinnyPotter15 is offline
Second Year
 
Joined: 3398 days
Location: Holland
Posts: 154
Re: Half-Blood Prince Movie Reviews v.2

Quote:
Originally Posted by yoshi2542 View Post
I think in the script Dumbledore mentioned a figurative 'window' that only he could open that would allow for Apparition into and out of Hogwarts. Something like that.
But does that mean that he does some sort of spell or whatever this window literally means, so that anyone can apparate in and out of Hogwarts? I still believe it is only Dumbledore who can. After all, it would careless to let anyone apparate into Hogwarts. Someone could figure it out and spread the word and soon enough the death eaters would know.


__________________

It does not do good to dwell on dreams, and forget to live.

'So, did you and Ginny do it?'
Reply With Quote
  #283  
Old December 27th, 2009, 2:00 am
SiriusBlack101  Male.gif SiriusBlack101 is offline
Third Year
 
Joined: 4677 days
Location: United States
Posts: 482
Re: Half-Blood Prince Movie Reviews v.2

I think it may refer to a window of time - similar to what Dumbledore did with the Great Hall during apparation lessons. The window of time would only apply to a certain area, I assume, so Dumbledore had the Astronomy Tower be a part of that.

I guess it could be argued that anyone could then apparate onto the tower, but they'd have to know the "window" was open, which doesn't seem too likely.


Reply With Quote
  #284  
Old December 27th, 2009, 3:22 am
DML1991's Avatar
DML1991  Male.gif DML1991 is offline
Sixth Year
 
Joined: 3660 days
Age: 27
Posts: 1,322
Re: Half-Blood Prince Movie Reviews v.2

Quote:
Originally Posted by GinnyPotter15 View Post
But does that mean that he does some sort of spell or whatever this window literally means, so that anyone can apparate in and out of Hogwarts? I still believe it is only Dumbledore who can. After all, it would careless to let anyone apparate into Hogwarts. Someone could figure it out and spread the word and soon enough the death eaters would know.
No, anyone who knows can. Who is going to know besides Harry and him? Maybe Snape, but Snape isn't going to need to apparate out of there. The fact he was able to create the window is where "well being me has it's privelages" comes from, not him being able to apparate, but apparation being opened up, the window was still open for when Harry apparated back.


Reply With Quote
  #285  
Old December 27th, 2009, 5:16 am
MasterOfDeath's Avatar
MasterOfDeath  Male.gif MasterOfDeath is offline
Zonko's Employee
 
Joined: 4057 days
Age: 29
Posts: 3,145
Re: Half-Blood Prince Movie Reviews v.2

This 'window' concept also explains why they didn't just apparare straight into the hospital wing.


__________________
"I wrote this for me, you know. I never wrote this with a focus group of children in mind. I wrote it totally for me and I'm an adult so maybe it's not so surprising."
JK Rowling on Adults liking Harry Potter; 1999

Hufflepuff through and through! On COS and Pottermore!
Fair, Just, Loyal and unafraid of Toil

Reply With Quote
  #286  
Old December 27th, 2009, 1:24 pm
Wimsey's Avatar
Wimsey  Male.gif Wimsey is offline
Curse Breaker
 
Joined: 5037 days
Location: What day is it?
Posts: 7,036
Re: Half-Blood Prince Movie Reviews v.2

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrfutterman View Post
For non-readers, Dumbledore could have been pleading with the trusted Snape for his life, and for Snape to turn against Draco, Bellatrix, etc., only to be betrayed (that is Harry's interpretation of events, after all).
Also, because we were "shown" early in the film that Snape really is loyal to the Death Eaters, the audience "knew" that this was going to happen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrfutterman View Post
But audiences cannot be given that info at this point. They have to believe what Harry believes.
Given the story being told, then, yes. Had they gone for a story closer to the one in the book, then it might have been better if the audience was uncertain as to whether Harry was correct or not: but the film still needed to know Harry's view that Snape is working for the enemy and not for Dumbledore.

Rehashing this will be a trick for DH2, as audiences will not remember these details from 30 months before. However, how best to bring audiences up to speed is a topic for the DH threads!


Regardless, the scene lost a lot of the power that it could have had. It worked pretty well for me, but only because I am a fan. For the majority of the audience, it must have seemed fait accompli.


__________________
(It doubles for The Hobbit, too!)
If in the first act you have hung a pistol on the wall, then in the following one it should be fired. Otherwise don't put it there. - A. P. Chekhov, Gurlyand's Reminiscences, and who knew why the Dog was long before the Shack!
Reply With Quote
  #287  
Old December 28th, 2009, 4:55 am
jeffski  Undisclosed.gif jeffski is offline
First Year
 
Joined: 3294 days
Posts: 5
Re: Half-Blood Prince Movie Reviews v.2

well didnt mean to open a can of worms...
but I was only speaking of the way that scene was shown in the movie....
In the movie (lets forget our book knowledge folks) the impression is given that dumbledore is able to apparate in and out of hogwarts "being me has certain advantages". If dumbledore "opened a window" for apparation in the script, it doesnt matter. The veiwer did not see it. It ended up on the editing room floor. Also harry doing the apparation on the way back was not shown. the veiwer (a non_bookie...is that a term? lol) can only cometo the conclusion that dumbledore apparated himself and harry out of hogwarts and back into hogwarts, reguardless of weakened by the potion or wandless. Thats what was shown on the screen. Apparation is always shown as wandless btw.

so anyway my point being is that I was watching the dvd with a non-bookie and he paused the movie when dumbledore was falling from the tower and asked me...'Why didnt he do the disappearing
thingy? Did he let himself get killed?" So anyway....at the end of the movie he was a bit puzzled as to why harry didnt catch on to that... when he so easily caught it himself. So now he is thinking that maybe dumbledore will be reborn like his bird. haha.....or that harry will talk it over with maggie smith and together they will figure out that rickman wasnt evil. (he doesnt even call them by their characters names haha.) So I agree with whomever said that it is crucial that the veiwer believes what harry believes, that snape is evil. I'm not sure that happened. They were so concerned with dumbledore ending up in astronamy tower quickly. We were told before the movie came out that They were not going to put the battle scenes with mcgonagall and company fighting the death eaters in the tower, in this move. THey didnt want compete with the battle for hogwarts, in the next movie.
Explanation???...I flat out think that it was JUST simply a mistake. Something ended up on the editing room floor that in hindsight....probably shouldnt have



Last edited by jeffski; December 28th, 2009 at 12:06 pm. Reason: spelling
Reply With Quote
  #288  
Old December 28th, 2009, 9:25 am
lesleyit  Female.gif lesleyit is offline
First Year
 
Joined: 4810 days
Location: UK
Age: 60
Posts: 33
Re: Half-Blood Prince Movie Reviews v.2

I hated this movie. I had looked forward to it for ages and saw it on opening night. I was very disappointed to say the least. The DVD has just been released here so I bought it in the hope that the film would be better for a second viewing. It wasn't!

It bears so little relation to the book that I just found it annoying. They cut out a major battle and add a battle that was not there. There was so little about the horcruxes. Harry was given no guidance from Dumbledore about what they might be. Dumbledore was not buried with his wand and so you can tell that they are going to have to rip Deathly Hallows to shreds when they make that. These are just a few of the very many inconsistencies that wind me up. I could go on but why bother?

Based on the book by JK Rowling? I don't think so!

A badly scripted, money-making vehicle for Warner Brothers, which features some characters with the same names as characters in an excellent book by JK Rowling. I give the movie a Z!


__________________


Just theorising!
Reply With Quote
  #289  
Old December 28th, 2009, 5:33 pm
CrazyMuggle  Undisclosed.gif CrazyMuggle is offline
Second Year
 
Joined: 4959 days
Posts: 262
Re: Half-Blood Prince Movie Reviews v.2

Quote:
Originally Posted by lesleyit View Post
It bears so little relation to the book that I just found it annoying. They cut out a major battle and add a battle that was not there. There was so little about the horcruxes. Harry was given no guidance from Dumbledore about what they might be. Dumbledore was not buried with his wand and so you can tell that they are going to have to rip Deathly Hallows to shreds when they make that. These are just a few of the very many inconsistencies that wind me up. I could go on but why bother?

Based on the book by JK Rowling? I don't think so!

A badly scripted, money-making vehicle for Warner Brothers, which features some characters with the same names as characters in an excellent book by JK Rowling. I give the movie a Z!
Wow, a little harsh? How does it bear little resemblance to the book? Let's not be overdramatic (I completely respect opinions but this seems extreme.) All of these films, whether loved or hated, are at least are faithful to the spirit of the books series; considered other book-to-film adaptations we're lucky that these are as faithful to the source material as they are. Now, addressing a few of your points:

- "They cut out a major battle and add a battle that was not there"; There was no major battle in the book. A "scuffle" would be a more appropriate term. Harry did not even witness most of it, as everyone explained it to him the next day. This movie is from Harry's POV. Plus it's been confirmed that the battle scene in Deathly Hallows Part II will be around 30 minutes or more so this would have become redundant.

- "There was so little about the horcruxes"; There's was enough to set them up. Slughorn explains what they are, how they are made and hints at the number Tom Riddle eventually made ("7"). In the next TWO movies there will be plenty of time to address them and this makes Harry's task all the more challenging. There is plenty more time to detail what they could be and where they might be (most of which Harry didn't even discover until the 7th book).

- "Dumbledore was not buried with his wand and so you can tell that they are going to have to rip Deathly Hallows to shreds when they make that." Couldn't this be shown in (and more than likely will be) in Deathly Hallows when it is relevant? The funeral would have ruined the pacing but I'm more than certain that they will address where the wand is when Voldemort discovers it. That's the next film's job.

Now I'm not saying this film was perfect and as a huge fan of the book there were parts where I was disappointed. However to say it is nothing like the book makes very little sense; SO much from the book was left in and I could create a LONG list covering that. It matched the tone well (the dark moments with the lighter comedic/romantic moments.) Deathly Hallows will take care of anything not covered in HBP in its 5 hours+ running time.


__________________
"You're a woman, Harry"
Reply With Quote
  #290  
Old December 28th, 2009, 6:14 pm
GinnyPotter15  Female.gif GinnyPotter15 is offline
Second Year
 
Joined: 3398 days
Location: Holland
Posts: 154
Re: Half-Blood Prince Movie Reviews v.2

Quote:
Originally Posted by CrazyMuggle View Post
Harry did not even witness most of it, as everyone explained it to him the next day. This movie is from Harry's POV.
it isn't really Harry's point of view, just like the book isn't. There's a narrator. After all, in many of the movies there are little scenes that the audience gets to see, when Harry doesn't. (who puts Harry's name in the GOF, Malfoy and the vanishing cabinet).


__________________

It does not do good to dwell on dreams, and forget to live.

'So, did you and Ginny do it?'
Reply With Quote
  #291  
Old December 28th, 2009, 6:25 pm
mrfutterman  Undisclosed.gif mrfutterman is offline
Fifth Year
 
Joined: 4148 days
Posts: 968
Re: Half-Blood Prince Movie Reviews v.2

Quote:
Originally Posted by lesleyit View Post
They cut out a major battle and add a battle that was not there.
There is no major battle in HBP, film or book.


Reply With Quote
  #292  
Old December 29th, 2009, 9:19 pm
Wimsey's Avatar
Wimsey  Male.gif Wimsey is offline
Curse Breaker
 
Joined: 5037 days
Location: What day is it?
Posts: 7,036
Re: Half-Blood Prince Movie Reviews v.2

Quote:
Originally Posted by lesleyit View Post
Based on the book by JK Rowling? I don't think so!
Isn't the real issue whether it told Rowling's story? Books are no more movies than fish are lizards. A carnivore, however, is a carnivore and a story is a story, regardless of the media in which they lurk.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CrazyMuggle View Post
Quote:
Dumbledore was not buried with his wand and so you can tell that they are going to have to rip Deathly Hallows to shreds when they make that.
Couldn't this be shown in (and more than likely will be) in Deathly Hallows when it is relevant? The funeral would have ruined the pacing but I'm more than certain that they will address where the wand is when Voldemort discovers it. That's the next film's job.
I would add to this that the "wand lighting" over Dumbledore's body was a far more cinematic expression of the funeral than any funeral could have been: it showed, rather than attempted to tell, the emotions of the protagonist and the student body.

And you are spot on regarding the Wand issue. In a rare appropriate use of double negatives, it was not not buried with Dumbledore, as Dumbledore's burial is not shown. Indeed, I do not remember that the HBP book ever specified where Dumbledore's wand was: insofar as I remember, the first time that we are told that it was buried with him is in DH. I seem to recall that a couple of the "Snape is Evil" hypotheses revolved around the fact that Dumbledore's Wand was missing.

Regardless, setting up where the Wand is will be a task for DH2. There is little point in doing it in DH1: that is 6 months too early and the audience will not remember some oblique and (apparently) meaningless reference to Dumbledore's wand after that much time. (Of course, if they can find some way to work it into what is happening in the first half of DH1, then more power to them!)

Quote:
Originally Posted by GinnyPotter15 View Post
it isn't really Harry's point of view, just like the book isn't. There's a narrator.
The book is from Harry's point of view: it is a 3rd person single-protagonist subjective narrative. We read Harry's thoughts, get Harry's insights (and miss his lack of insights) and the adjectives/adverbs reflect Harry's biases. If you replaced the "Harry/he/him" with "I/me" and adjusted the verbs accordingly, the novels would read fine as first person subjectives, with the exceptions of a couple of points in Stone, the first two chapters in Prince and the opening chapter in Hallows. (Even the opening chapter of Goblet has Harry present via a link through Voldemort.)

Movies cannot quite do that: but for the most part they have been faithful about showing us only what Harry might witness. Without a narration, we do not hear his thoughts: but, as the movie Adaptation stresses, never resort to a narrator! (The narrator even emphasized that.... )


__________________
(It doubles for The Hobbit, too!)
If in the first act you have hung a pistol on the wall, then in the following one it should be fired. Otherwise don't put it there. - A. P. Chekhov, Gurlyand's Reminiscences, and who knew why the Dog was long before the Shack!

Last edited by Wimsey; December 29th, 2009 at 9:23 pm.
Reply With Quote
  #293  
Old December 30th, 2009, 6:49 am
JustAnIllusion's Avatar
JustAnIllusion  Female.gif JustAnIllusion is offline
Fourth Year
 
Joined: 4134 days
Location: Montauk
Age: 27
Posts: 507
Re: Half-Blood Prince Movie Reviews v.2

Quote:
Originally Posted by GinnyPotter15 View Post
it isn't really Harry's point of view, just like the book isn't. There's a narrator. After all, in many of the movies there are little scenes that the audience gets to see, when Harry doesn't. (who puts Harry's name in the GOF, Malfoy and the vanishing cabinet).
Well, yes, but the narrator in both the books and the movies is a third person limited; as my creative writing teacher says, it's like a person speaking from a certain character's shoulder. We see things as he sees them. They're almost always from Harry's point of view, even if the book and movie are third person, and when we deviate (in HBP, specifically) we see things to prove Harry's points.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wimsey View Post
The book is from Harry's point of view: it is a 3rd person single-protagonist subjective narrative. We read Harry's thoughts, get Harry's insights (and miss his lack of insights) and the adjectives/adverbs reflect Harry's biases. If you replaced the "Harry/he/him" with "I/me" and adjusted the verbs accordingly, the novels would read fine as first person subjectives, with the exceptions of a couple of points in Stone, the first two chapters in Prince and the opening chapter in Hallows. (Even the opening chapter of Goblet has Harry present via a link through Voldemort.)

Movies cannot quite do that: but for the most part they have been faithful about showing us only what Harry might witness. Without a narration, we do not hear his thoughts: but, as the movie Adaptation stresses, never resort to a narrator! (The narrator even emphasized that.... )
I agree! What I was trying to say, but much more eloquently put .


__________________


"WHAT THE DEVIL IS GOING ON HERE?"
-AVPM.
Reply With Quote
  #294  
Old December 30th, 2009, 8:06 pm
jan74  Male.gif jan74 is offline
Second Year
 
Joined: 3242 days
Location: Vestby, Norway
Posts: 175
Re: Half-Blood Prince Movie Reviews v.2

About the point of view in HBP: In the book we almost exclusively see Harry's point of view. In the film the dominant point of view is Harry Potter or the narrator, but you also get other people's point of view, most notably Malfoy and in a few instances Snape. This ability of the film to distribute the point of view between different characters is in my opionion one of its major strengths.


Reply With Quote
  #295  
Old May 13th, 2010, 8:29 pm
jan74  Male.gif jan74 is offline
Second Year
 
Joined: 3242 days
Location: Vestby, Norway
Posts: 175
Re: Half-Blood Prince Movie Reviews v.2

A bit late for a film review, but I'm doing it anyway.

I thoroughly enjoyed Half-Blood Prince and if it hadn't been for the odd indulgence, some unneccessary explanations and the mixed performance in some of the scenes with Harry & Ginny, I would have given it an A. As it is, it's a B.

I enjoyed Half Blood Prince both as a film and a book, but I liked the film for slightly different reasons. When I read the book I liked the comedy, but I enjoyed it mostly for the mystery and excitement surrounding the background of Tom Riddle and his horcruxes, the question of Snape's allegiance and the intense ending (the cave and so forth).

The film takes a different angle by focusing more on characterization and the emotional drama and struggles of the various characters, something I found highly engaging. It also puts some aspects of the storylines and characters which are less prominent in the book front and center and evolves them into very moving storylines. It downplays the mystery plots, but what is shown is both compelling and intriguing. Alan Rickman shows Snape as a character which can be thoroughly enigmatic, but also deeply moving and human and Frank Dillane gave an unexpected treat in his chilling performance as the young Tom Riddle, a confident and extremely studious manipulator.

Of all the HP films to date this delivered the best acting. There were so many great performances, not the least Michael Gambon, but I was also happy that the romantic comedy aspect gave both Rupert Grint and Emma Watson an opportunity to shine. Dan Radcliffe and Bonnie Wright unfortunately don't seem to be comfortable with doing scenes just the two of them and this results in some rather mediocre scenes from time to time.

The cinematography was particularly beautiful in this film and made for many memorable shots, but it wouldn't have been nearly so enjoyable if not the cinematography, the general character/atmosphere of the film and the music suited each other as well as they did.


Reply With Quote
  #296  
Old May 15th, 2010, 10:55 am
JustMeWayne  Undisclosed.gif JustMeWayne is offline
First Year
 
Joined: 3363 days
Posts: 81
Re: Half-Blood Prince Movie Reviews v.2

Personally, I feel that one reason why they chose to remove some of the Horcrux information was that it didn't contribute to this movie at all. In the book, JK Rowling gave us a teaser of DH by making us wonder about the Horcruxes. However, what people fail to realize is that the story in HBP is about Dumbledore dying and Harry finally growing up. It is not about Horcruxes, and thus, the film chose to devote more time to help the main trio grow up emotionally, and leave the Horcruxes for DH1.
And it makes sense, as while we know EVERYTHING about Horcruxes, the general theatre-going audience won't really care about them, and given the 18 months break between HBP and DH, most would have already forgotten that there were such a thing as Horcruxes. So why waste time introducing something that would have to be re-introduced in the next film? The Horcruxes still had to be in HBP as Dumbledore died because of the locket, but as long the audience realized that the Locket is some sort of treasure that Dumbledore is finding, then the main story arc in HBP is accounted for.
I do believe that Hermione would explain more about the Horcruxes once they meet at the Burrow in DH, as I recall that Hermione accio-ed books about Horcruxes from Dumbledore's study in the book.


Reply With Quote
  #297  
Old May 16th, 2010, 8:28 am
HPFanNewbie  Female.gif HPFanNewbie is offline
Second Year
 
Joined: 3241 days
Location: CA
Posts: 101
Re: Half-Blood Prince Movie Reviews v.2

Every time I watch it I am thoroughly irritated when Harry asks DD what horcruxes are and DD says they could be anything, the most common place or object. We know from the books DD does not believe Voldemort used just anything to make his horcruxes. On top of that he tells harry the ring belonged to Voldemort's mother, but the locket was hers. The ring belonged to his grandfather. I have no ideas on why they changed those things.

I was most disappointed by the butchering of Harry and Ginny's relationship development and the lack of DD teaching Harry the keys to success in defeating Voldemort. They did such a poor job of explaining horcruxes someone asked me if DD had time to make one to save himself.


Reply With Quote
  #298  
Old May 16th, 2010, 1:05 pm
oierem  Undisclosed.gif oierem is offline
Second Year
 
Joined: 3832 days
Posts: 171
Re: Half-Blood Prince Movie Reviews v.2

Quote:
Originally Posted by HPFanNewbie View Post
Every time I watch it I am thoroughly irritated when Harry asks DD what horcruxes are and DD says they could be anything, the most common place or object. We know from the books DD does not believe Voldemort used just anything to make his horcruxes. On top of that he tells harry the ring belonged to Voldemort's mother, but the locket was hers. The ring belonged to his grandfather. I have no ideas on why they changed those things.
I agree with that. That line seems to indicate that anything can be a Horcrux.

Anyway, I can understand why they cut out all that information (it doesn't crontribute to the movie) but my problem with that is that they never establish a clear path to destroy Voldemort. In the book you know that you have to destroy a certain number of horcruxes (some of them are already identified), and then kill Voldemort. That gives a sense of "now, we are getting to the end".

However, in the movies, it is not clear how many Horcruxes are there, or what are they, so the path to destroy Voldemort is not so clear. And that, after 5 previous movies fighting Voldemort, is a problem.


Reply With Quote
  #299  
Old May 17th, 2010, 9:20 am
yoshi2542's Avatar
yoshi2542  Male.gif yoshi2542 is offline
Fifth Year
 
Joined: 4680 days
Location: London
Age: 30
Posts: 796
Re: Half-Blood Prince Movie Reviews v.2

Quote:
Originally Posted by oierem View Post
I agree with that. That line seems to indicate that anything can be a Horcrux.
That is true though isn't it? I know Voldemort chose items of importance to him, but theoretically any old thing can be a horcrux.

Quote:
Anyway, I can understand why they cut out all that information (it doesn't crontribute to the movie) but my problem with that is that they never establish a clear path to destroy Voldemort. In the book you know that you have to destroy a certain number of horcruxes (some of them are already identified), and then kill Voldemort. That gives a sense of "now, we are getting to the end".

However, in the movies, it is not clear how many Horcruxes are there, or what are they, so the path to destroy Voldemort is not so clear. And that, after 5 previous movies fighting Voldemort, is a problem.
Had they set all this up in HBP, they would have had to reintroduce it all in DH anyway, I guess they didn't want to drag out the movie with too much exposition.


Reply With Quote
  #300  
Old May 17th, 2010, 10:04 am
oierem  Undisclosed.gif oierem is offline
Second Year
 
Joined: 3832 days
Posts: 171
Re: Half-Blood Prince Movie Reviews v.2

Quote:
Originally Posted by yoshi2542 View Post
That is true though isn't it? I know Voldemort chose items of importance to him, but theoretically any old thing can be a horcrux.



Had they set all this up in HBP, they would have had to reintroduce it all in DH anyway, I guess they didn't want to drag out the movie with too much exposition.
I know, but the lack of information makes it feel like "let's have another fight with Voldemort", who always escapes at the end. I don't know, but for the regular viewer, I'm sure that the HP movies are some sort of unconnected episodes always fighting the same bad guy and with no trace of an ending. What I liked about HPB book was that it established exactly what to do to destroy Voldemort once and for all.

And we still have one more movie in which "nothing" will be achieved.


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 7:17 pm.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Original content is Copyright MMII - MMVIII, CoSForums.com. All Rights Reserved.
Other content (posts, images, etc) is Copyright its respective owners.