Not showing Moody's death works in the film works for me. It's much more of a shock to hear about it after the fact, as others are arriving mostly safe and sound, than to see it actually happen.
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1 - Discuss and Grade
- Thread starter Dream
- Start date
Brendan Gleeson was a lot of fun as Moody in the limited time he had on screen. The actor who played Bill Weasley is his son.
Strangely, Bill looks just like the Weasley twins. I see a family resemblance there.
I do too. It's a good piece of casting.
Particularly when they all seemed to have really long hair in The Goblet of Fire.
Yeah. What's up with those? From what I've seen, they didn't even add any new scenes to The Prisoner of Azkaban or The Goblet of Fire. At least, the running time listed on the back didn't change. What gives?
The more I think about it, the more I doubt that The Deathly Hallows really needed to be split into 2 films. From a film-only perspective, it just feels like so little happens in Part 1 and they spend a lot of time explaining a bunch of extraneous book elements that they were suddenly dumping back in after cutting them out of all the previous films.
I believe it would have detracted from Dobby's death at the end of the movie if they had shown a semi important character die at the beginning. I think saving the goods such as deaths of characters at the end of the HP movies works to their benifit. Far greater way to end and more emotional impact.
OK, show of hands! Who liked Dobby more than Mad-Eye?
....Anyone?...
....Anyone?...
While it isn't perfect, I saw DH1 as a character piece, more than anything else -- which is why I wasn't all that disappointed that relatively little happened on a narrative level. I liked that the films finally focused almost entirely on The Trio. Though I can definitely see why the change of pace (literally) feels too drastic for some.
I think part of the issue is that so much happens right away -- the Sky Battle, the Death Eaters meeting, the wedding, the attack, the flight into London, to Grimmauld Place, then into the forest -- that the subsequent scenes seem much slower by comparison.
You're gonna hate the ending battle then if they stick to the books.
Never read the books and don't want too. It can make understanding the films a little harder because the gaps between movies and just how many they are I forget details of the story. I know Harry wins of course in the end but I don't know how though I have my ideas...
I look forward to not knowing whats going to happen in HP DH Part 2.
One last thing one thing that bugs me about this genre is writers seem to have an unlimited supply of Deus ex machina.
It's the sort of thing that works better on the page: in the book, there's basically a whole chapter of Harry and co. waiting around as one team after another returns, where she keeps building up to who isn't coming back. It happens a lot quicker on film, so a lot of the effect is lost.
We see
Fred's death; Harry, Percy, and George are all there when the explosion goes off.
*sheepishly raises hand*
Or at least, I found his death more affecting than Mad-eye's. In most stories, the death of the innocent is much sadder and more impactive. Dobby has always been portrayed as the most innocent character going, so the emotional pull of his death is more significant. I can't say I 'felt' for Mad-eye at all, either in the book or the film.
In fairness in the book, Harry, Ron, and Hermione don't have a lot of food and water to go on. Hermione mentions that's a law (Gamp's Law of Magic or something) where things like food and water can't be conjured up, along with three other things. Ron brings this up late in the book to impress some people. Funny bit.
^ I did not remember that. Thanks. But didn't Harry conjure water at the end of the HPB film, though? After Dumbledore drank the poison?
Boring.
Yeah, he's misremembering the law slightly - the law involved food, not water. The Augamenti spell gives you water, and features in the DH book, too. http://www.beyondhogwarts.com/harry-potter/articles/the-five-principal-exceptions-to-gamps-law.html
The food thing was a fudge to add jeopardy, but it is consistent with the books' history. We've seen that food is one commodity that is still bought and sold, and at Hogwarts the food is transported onto the tables from the kitchens underneath, not created from nothing.
The Forest of Dean is a bit more famous than most forests.
It's not filler. But the story that Part I is telling is the story of Ron, Harry, and Hermione fully resolving their outstanding relationship issues and confronting their own mortality -- which is necessary for them to get in the right place, psychologically, to be able to defeat Voldemort.
Not all important stories are about the plot, after all.
I liked them both. But the thing about Dobby is, he represents Harry's childhood innocence. The death of Dobby therefore is an important thematic event, far moreso than Mad Eye's -- in burying Dobby, Harry is burying the last of his childhood and is coming to accept his own mortality.
Excellent, thanks! And I'd even been trying to remember that site for the past week -- so double-bonus.
One thing: I know the site presents it as reasonable conjecture, but Exception #3 says "Intentional Curse Damage" and even provides the example of Snape using the Sectumsempra curse on George. But didn't Snape heal Draco after Harry used the curse?
Similar threads
