Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Pt 2: Grading and reviews
- Thread starter Neroon
- Start date
I think the RoR makes the same room every time you want to hide something. Unless you want to hide a human in which case it makes one with hammocks.
Back to Luna, presumably the Order (via Charlie at Shell Cottage) got her in via the secret passage but I think a moment was needed between Harry and Luna that tells you how she got there because she's just there and Harry doesn't even flinch.
Back to Luna, presumably the Order (via Charlie at Shell Cottage) got her in via the secret passage but I think a moment was needed between Harry and Luna that tells you how she got there because she's just there and Harry doesn't even flinch.
This is explained a lot better in the books, in fact in the books Harry sees the Diadem when he goes into hid the half blood prince's potions book, as far as I remember.
As others have pointed out if two people ask for the same thing, they get the same room, so everyone who wants to hide or lose something gets the room full of crap, including Voldemort when he first hid the Diadem.
The films simply do not explain some stuff, which can be a bit frustrating, but you can only put so much exposition in a film. The most obvious one in the whole series is in Prisoner of Azhkabhan, where the film does not bother explaining who the Marauders were!
More comments
I liked that the wand-mastery aspect was deemphasized but the Hallows being so incidental seemed too much at odds with the title and the importance they received near the end of Part 1.
The trio had the invisibility cloak at Gringotts but not (or couldn't use it?) afterwards? Its loss and role as a Hallow could have been more emphasized.
The brief use of Herbology was nice; more specialty-specific magic could have been used.
A nitpick, but Dumbledore could have looked somewhat younger in the scenes set 16 years before rather than just like he did in Half-Blood Prince (Snape did look younger and hence a bit more sympathetic).
I liked that the wand-mastery aspect was deemphasized but the Hallows being so incidental seemed too much at odds with the title and the importance they received near the end of Part 1.
The trio had the invisibility cloak at Gringotts but not (or couldn't use it?) afterwards? Its loss and role as a Hallow could have been more emphasized.
The brief use of Herbology was nice; more specialty-specific magic could have been used.
A nitpick, but Dumbledore could have looked somewhat younger in the scenes set 16 years before rather than just like he did in Half-Blood Prince (Snape did look younger and hence a bit more sympathetic).
I don't remember in the films them actually pointing out it was one of the Deathly Hallows AT ALL. In the books it is made pretty clear that Harry's cloak is probably one of the Hallows, but this does not register in the film.
The stone is also the stone from the ring in HBP, and again in Deathly Hallows the movie this is not explained, but as I said before, only so much exposition can fit in a movie!
Two of the most powerful scenes in the movie was when Molly Weasley killed Bella LeStrange ("You bitch!") and when Neville slayed Nagini with Godric Gryffindor's sword. I wanted so much to applaud and exclaim "YES!" but didn't want to feel like a dumbass amongst the quiet, yet emotionally engaged audience.So I saved my applause for the ending.
Both of those scenes got applause in the IMAX showing at Air & Space I went to.
I have watched Prisoner of Azkaban probably 6 or 7 times. It's probably my second favorite of the entire series.
Is it bad that I don't remember a single thing about any Marauders?
Or are you just talking about the map?
Checkmate
Commodore
You mean aside from the three or four times they flat out said it was one of the Hallows? Which they said directly. In your face. With absolutely no subterfuge or play of words whatsoever.
The second most obvious is the first film, in which Harry gets the invisibility cloak from an anonymous benefactor, but they never tell us who it was.
They said that one of the Hallows was a cloak of invisibility. They never said it was the one that Harry had in his possession, though obviously it can be implied.
Then again, if you remember back to the first movie, Ron exclaims, "That's an invisibility cloak!" as if he had encountered them before.
Checkmate
Commodore
The movies never indicated that the Hallowed cloak had any special property beyond simply granting invisibility. Nor was any interest ever shown in them trying to find it or worrying about where it was (since they already had it).
Ron stating the bleeding obvious when he saw it in action doesn't factor into anything at all.
Ron stating the bleeding obvious when he saw it in action doesn't factor into anything at all.
Which is why you can imply that Harry's cloak is one of the Hallows. However, you said they flat out told us several times that it was, when that is simply not true.
Except that it tells us that there are multiple invisibility cloaks out there in the world. Not all of them can be a Hallow.
Checkmate
Commodore
To paraphrase yourself: "You said that this tells us that multiple invisibility cloaks are out in the world, when this is simply not true."
All it tells us in that Ron recognized that it was a cloak that made you invisible. There's never been a single indication that another one existed in the movies. Nor was the Hallow ever given a special name, unlike say the Elder Wand or Resurrection Stone. It was simple the "Cloak of Invisibility." Which is exactly what Ron identified it as.
Or to put it more directly: In the movies, there was only one Cloak of Invisibility ever shown to exist. It was called that by name, both by Ron and in the stories about the Deathly Hallows.
I'm not sure you know what paraphrasing means.
Ron: "I know what that is. That's an invisibility cloak! They're really rare."
The words he uses indicates to me that Harry's cloak is not the only one in existence.
I'm not saying Harry's cloak isn't the one from the Deathly Hallows story. I'm simply debating what you said about them flat out telling us that Harry's cloak is the Hallowed Cloak of Invisibility. Again, you can imply it, but nobody in any of the movies ever comes right out and says it.
I haven't read the books and remained unspoiled. Even so, I was fairly certain Snape would turn out to be a good guy in the end after the sixth movie, because that was the conclusion which seemed like it would work best narratively given his portrayal in the earlier films.
I was almost----almost----convinced I was wrong when he died with no big revelation. The tear-induced flashbacks later resolved the matter as expected, but that was a nice double-fakeout for a while there.
I was almost----almost----convinced I was wrong when he died with no big revelation. The tear-induced flashbacks later resolved the matter as expected, but that was a nice double-fakeout for a while there.
Roll your eyes all you want. The fact remains, HP 7.2 has broken the record for highest grossing weekend opening, which was my original point and you contested.
Well in HBP that's all that the room is needed for since the DA had been disbanded in OotP and they didn't reform until DH. And in DH it does basically what it is meant for by being the refuge for the students hiding from the Voldemort regime.
Essentially the room is Dumbledore's statement "Those who need help at Hogwarts will find it, they only need ask for it." in a physical form.
At least five months since they passed Christmas and Bill and Fleur were married on August 1.
In the book the battle took place on May 2. So eight months maybe.
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll
