• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS, PART 2 (July 2011): News, etc.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS, PART 2 (July 2011): News, e

The first week will be pre-booking only at our fleapit, so I'm embarking tonight on a re-watch of the whole series before going to see the new one in the second week...

Damn, but everybody looks so different in HP&TPS....
 
Re: HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS, PART 2 (July 2011): News, e

I have to ask, can wizards be killed by bullets/explosions?
 
Re: HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS, PART 2 (July 2011): News, e

Yeah, they're still human. In fact:

Someone is killed in an explosion in the final book/movie
 
Re: HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS, PART 2 (July 2011): News, e

So that begs the question... why not just shoot the bad guys? I know it is a children's fantasy book but I cannot resist thinking about that scenario. The wizarding world is supposed to be just an underground of our, normal, world. So why does no one have a gun?
 
Re: HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS, PART 2 (July 2011): News, e

The wizarding world tends to reject muggle technology. Why bother with a gun, when you have ten times the power of one in your wand?
 
Re: HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS, PART 2 (July 2011): News, e

The wizarding world tends to reject muggle technology. Why bother with a gun, when you have ten times the power of one in your wand?
Because the other guy can just deflect it. Yeah, you can deflect bullets too, but compare a massive barrage of bullets and artillery to a barrage of spells.
 
Re: HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS, PART 2 (July 2011): News, e

They haven't problems with magic enhanced muggle weapons, like the Sword of Gryffindor and stuff.

Maybe someone should have come up with Magitek devices: Take existing muggle tech and weapons and then enhance them with magic.
 
Last edited:
Re: HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS, PART 2 (July 2011): News, e

They have problem with magic enhanced muggle weapons, like the Sword of Gryffindor and stuff.

Maybe someone should have come up with Magitek devices: Take existing muggle tech and weapons and then enhance them with magic.

Sounds like Arthur Weasley might've been up to it-if Rowling had thought to somehow put it in the books.
 
Re: HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS, PART 2 (July 2011): News, e

Peter Pettigrew's treatment earned a big WTF from me as he wasn't even in the movie although he hadn't been killed at Malfoys mansion in the previous movie.

My main quibble with the movie actually.
 
Re: HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS, PART 2 (July 2011): News, e

The wizarding world is supposed to be just an underground of our, normal, world.
It's not really underground so much as a completely separate world; the wizards, as depicted, neither know nor care much about the Muggle world, including technology (though most electronics are said not to work in magic-heavy areas anyway).
 
Re: HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS, PART 2 (July 2011): News, e

I think he meant world in the literal sense.
 
Re: HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS, PART 2 (July 2011): News, e

Okay, just got back, here are my thoughts.

I personally loved it and that's a huge surprise because I was severely let down by the book. I felt like JKR started beginning to drink her own kool-aid and the editors became yes men or something like that. But I thought the final book was a horrible way to capstone the series and as someone who's been a fan of the series since I was nine (I'm 22 now), I was very saddened by that fact. However, combined with part one (and I really want them to be combined one day), they stand as the one example in my mind as an adaption being better than the book.

Looking back on it, some of my biggest problems with the movie were problems I had with the book, so I can't fault it for that. All of the changes that I distinctly recalled as changes worked for me. Like Voldemort and Harry dueling rather than trading verbal barbs (Harry Potter ≠ Spider-Man) and then sending one spell each at each other and then it being done with. Their duel worked much better cinematically and it served as a great climax to the series rather than a curse hitting Voldemort and him just slumping over. Ron and Hermione's kiss being the culmination of a very emotional moment, rather than her just getting hot and bothered by the memory of Ron speaking parselmouth in the middle of active combat. Those were the two biggest changes that stuck out in my head. Oh. and the final scene in the present being between Harry, Ron and Hermione rather than Harry and the former Headmasters of Hogwarts. One of my biggest problems with the book was that even when the book was coming to a close, JKR tossed out his anchors and the friendship between Harry, Ron and Hermione was omitted for plot. That's a pet peeve. If you have to throw out your sense of character to move the plot, you probably have no business writing plots.

The performances from everyone were spot on and they really all put on their A-Game. I am probably the only person who wasn't entirely convinced of Alan Rickman as Snape. Frankly the deadpan delivery can only take you so far and that's really all he's shown us throughout the films. The Prince's Tale scene changed all of that. It didn't replace the deadpan delivery of previous films, but it sold the scene for me and I'm thankful for that. And once again, I must praise the kids for really coming into their own. Dan, Rupert, Emma, Matthew, and Evanna all proved that they were meant to play their roles, which is truly remarkable seeing as the first four were cast when they were like 10. The only real weak link for me was Bonnie Wright as Ginny. Granted she had very little to work with, but she has absolutely no chemistry with Daniel Radcliffe, which generally wouldn't be a problem, but it was only made worse by his killer chemistry with Emma and Evanna. Only judging by the films, I could see him with both Luna and Hermione before Ginny (actually, judging from the books, I could see Luna as well, but that's a different story). I wasn't a fan of Ginny and Harry in the books and the movie didn't sell me on it.

One scene that still didn't work for me was the Epilogue. It was just as clumsy, fanfic-y and relatively pointless as in the book. I really didn't care about 19 years later as much as I didn't care about the present and I still don't. It also smelt like Sequel Fodder (I know it isn't, but the movie really felt that way... fanfic-ers on your marks!). Considering a lot of stuff that didn't work for me in the book (Lupin's Death, the battle sequences, Molly taking down LeStrange, and some other stuff in the first movie) worked in the movie, I was hoping this would be one of them. I was sorely disappointed. Then again, it's a problem with the book. I would have much rather seen a couple chapters with some resolution. The book more or less ended with the climax, which is unfortunate, especially with spending nearly seven full books setting it all up. And since adding things seemed to help this movie greatly, I would have liked it to have been a half hour or so longer and add in some characters stuff, which I felt was the only thing that this movie was lacking. It was paced too quickly and only clocking in at just over two hours, there was room for some padding.

My only real regret is that I didn't take off work and see it at the midnight showing like a bunch of my friends did. I saw it at a 10 o'clock matinee (which fairly had more people in it than usual), but still didn't have the "event" status like a night show would. I'm tempted to see it again on my next day off at night. There were several scenes that would have been enhanced by thunderous applause and what not (much like Lord of the Rings). While this was a movie, it was also an event, an event that marks the end of something that defined a lot of people in my age braket. And despite the problems I had with the series, I can't tell you how thankful I am for JKR for opening my imagination and helping me believe in magic.
 
Re: HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS, PART 2 (July 2011): News, e

The wizarding world is supposed to be just an underground of our, normal, world. So why does no one have a gun?
Everything I've seen seems to indicate that the 'wizarding world' is an extradimensional space adjacent to the real world. Yes, they can and do practice magic in the real world, but places like Hogwart's, Diagon Alley, and Platform 9-3⁄4 are clearly "outside" the real world.

As for guns, they're probably not used because they'd be easily thwarted with a simple spell. Much like you don't bring a knife to a gunfight, you don't bring a gun to a wizard duel.

That said, I don't understand why they used direct magical attacks. Magic has so much more potential than OMGlazerz.
 
Re: HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS, PART 2 (July 2011): News, e

transfiguring this thread to the polling and continued discussion thread here.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top