Movie inconsistencies

[Harrysahorcrux]

it was REALLY annoying when they changed how the flu powder worked on sirius' head in the 5th compared to the fourth..... that was EXTREMELY annoying

Originally Posted by crazymystery

Yup, the moving of the portrait really got to me, becuase the Gryffindor common room was in an open space and the hogwarts grounds changed with the third film which i noticed

yeah, but i think that the grounds are changed for the better, no? That was a little annoying, but at least it wasnt like the portrait or anything

[Pumpkin Juice]

Originally Posted by ladykrystyna

I liked his hair best in PoA - it had somewhat of a style, but it had the messy look from the books. I didn't like it in OoTP - it wasn't messy enough. I think they were trying to make him look more mature, but I don't think it worked. Especially because I remember Mrs. Weasley in the book asking Harry if his hair ever stayed neat (or something like that). And in the movie, it was like plastered to his head!

I thought it was because Daniel Radcliffe did a movie inbetween GoF and OotP where they chopped all his hair off thus he didn't have the longer locks for the fifth. I think them saying it was to make Harry look older was a cop-out, especially when they've been so worried about him looking too old for the part. They just didn't want to admit it was because he'd done another film and had his hair chopped.

[Blofeld]

Yep, he chopped his locks for December Boys.

[Pumpkin Juice]

Another inconsistency that I just remembered was Padfoot. Padfoot was not the same dog in OotP as he was in PoA. PoA was a computer animated dog. OotP looked like they found a real dog.

[HarysGran]

I noticed that Dumbledore did not wear his trademark glasses in OOTP movie. Don't think new Dumbledore likes being Dumbledore. He was rough with Harry in GOF,which was not right for the character.

[CrazyMuggle]

Originally Posted by Pumpkin Juice

Another inconsistency that I just remembered was Padfoot. Padfoot was not the same dog in OotP as he was in PoA. PoA was a computer animated dog. OotP looked like they found a real dog.

I don't think that was a real dog in OotP. I think it was CGI as well.

[katishere]

The one thing that really made me mad the most out of all the film screw-ups was how they portrayed Tom the barman in PoA. What was that weird hunch-back guy suppose to be?? In the first movie they show Tom the way he's suppose to be-- just a nice little old man who own the bar. Why didn't they keep it that way?? Now they have some guy who looks like Dr.Frankenstien's assistant not a barman. I see no reason at all why that would help the movie.

[Hanmo]

Harry's scar looks different in each movie.

[Pumpkin Juice]

Yeah, it bothered me that they changed Tom too. Though he is described as toothless in the books. They also changed the girls who played the Patel twins.

[Blofeld]

Draco's voice deepens and rises several times in CoS.

[LudwigVan]

I liked what the did with the wands. Before GoF they where just sticks of wood, now they are weay cooler.
The Fat-Lady portrait bugged me too. And the change on Filtwick rage me up. I really liked the firstone.
And for the Expelliarmus, i think many wizards can do a powerfulone and back you up some feets, but all of them? nah i don't think so.

[Blofeld]

Well, in the book, all three of them did it, so I'm guessing there was a mistranslation from page to screen...

[LudwigVan]

Another thing that almost made me stand up and leave they theatre was in OotP (which is so bad edited) when the fly London. They fly too LOW, come on some realism here, please! they could have signed anyone an autograph when they were flying near the SHIP

[Blofeld]

Yes, but it was a nice visual, though...

[Pumpkin Juice]

The only thing that bugged me about Draco's voice in CoS was that it was so much deeper in Diagon Alley at the very beginning than it was during the rest of the film. Knowing the kids were growing and voices were changing, they should have filmed the scenes in order, imo.

[loonyluna0114]

The fat Lady does my head in, why change it? just why? plus when Dawn French did it in the third film, she waasnt even in a pink dress, I think that they should have stuck with how it was in the first two films as I think she was perfect

[Kashman]

It will be interesting to see how they are going to introduce the Severus/Lily story line as this is a hughly important part to the complete story, other parts such as Dobby, the 2 way mirror, the locket can be changed slightly but for them to just suddenly show that Serverus loved Lily seem lame but I suppose the film makers are more concerned about the wider audience not the REAL Harry Potter fans!

[skedaddle]

They're going to have to change how Ron and Hermoine get together in the 7th film as well, considering they didn't put SPEW into the 5th movie. Maybe they'll mention Hermoines love for the House Elves in the 6th or 7th movies, so that when Ron insists he lets them go during the battle and Hermoine kisses him, it won't be as weird.

[popcornzyum]

Originally Posted by skedaddle

They're going to have to change how Ron and Hermoine get together in the 7th film as well, considering they didn't put SPEW into the 5th movie. Maybe they'll mention Hermoines love for the House Elves in the 6th or 7th movies, so that when Ron insists he lets them go during the battle and Hermoine kisses him, it won't be as weird.

Or they might just make them kiss for no reason.

[jammi567]

Originally Posted by popcornzyum

Or they might just make them kiss for no reason.

Or they might make them kiss after building up the relationship in DH, not involving SPEW that no-one in the film audience (and some in the book audience) care about! Along with Ginny and Harry! Somehow...