Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Pt 2: Grading and reviews

[Astraea]

I don't know if anyone has posted this, but I noticed a lack of a Wormtail death scene, am I wrong?

According to a Mugglenet podcast I heard some time ago, they never filmed anything in DH part 2 for Wormtail. They didn't film a death scene for him in part 1, either. It was one of the details that really bothered me - I mean, when I originally saw DH part 1, I assumed that they were saving his death for part 2, and then to have nothing at all...I'm glad I heard it on the podcast and didn't go in expecting it.

RoJoHen, re: The Marauders: Aside from the map, they're never mentioned in the movies, so if you didn't read the books, you wouldn't know who they were. However, the omission of an explanation about the origins of the Marauders' Map (as well as how Lupin knew what it was) really pissed a lot of book fans off. (Personally, if I was going to name one thing from the PoA movie that bugged me, it was the shrunken head/extended bus sequence.)

I'd have to go see it again to decide, but this is definitely in my top half of the movies, and above part 1. The 5th movie remains my favorite (while book 5 is my second-favorite book after Prisoner of Azkaban. Least favorite for both book and movie is Chamber of Secrets.)

For Deathly Hallows part 2, I really enjoyed most of it; I thought the ending of the book was unnecessarily convoluted and that Steve Kloves did the best with the material that he could. I wish Neville had just taken the snake's head off after his speech, and the Molly/Bellatrix fight worked better on-page than on-screen, but Harry snapping the elder wand didn't bother me (though I wish he'd have fixed his own wand first.)

One thing that bothered me a bit that no one else has mentioned: McGonagall's ordering that all the Slytherins be summarily confined to the dungeons for the duration of the battle. So all 100 Slytherins, from ages 11-18, are assumed to be evil? (Granted, the books didn't do a great job with this either, but I've always found it hard to believe that if everyone in the house was so evil, they would've abolished it after the war.)

Finally, a question on something I missed in-movie: How did Snape know where the Trio was in order to plant the Sword of Gryffindor in DH part 1? No Phineas Nigellus in the movie. Or, in the movie, are we supposed to assume that the sword presented itself (at the bottom of the lake?!)

 

[DarthTom]

Finally, a question on something I missed in-movie: How did Snape know where the Trio was in order to plant the Sword of Gryffindor in DH part 1? No Phineas Nigellus in the movie. Or, in the movie, are we supposed to assume that the sword presented itself (at the bottom of the lake?!)

Through a love of Harry's mother I took it that Snape was also mentally connected [even more so than his father was] to Harry from infancy. Snape was essentially a guardian of Harry's throughout his childhood until adulthood.

 

[RoJoHen]

RoJoHen, re: The Marauders: Aside from the map, they're never mentioned in the movies, so if you didn't read the books, you wouldn't know who they were. However, the omission of an explanation about the origins of the Marauders' Map (as well as how Lupin knew what it was) really pissed a lot of book fans off. (Personally, if I was going to name one thing from the PoA movie that bugged me, it was the shrunken head/extended bus sequence.)

Lupin's knowledge of the map is one of those things that really isn't necessary to tell the story. Obviously he has encountered it before, but you don't really need to know when or why.

Honestly, I think the Harry Potter series is one that could actually pull off a decent set of prequel films. There is obviously enough in the books to tell a decent story about James, Lily, and the others of their generation.

One thing that bothered me a bit that no one else has mentioned: McGonagall's ordering that all the Slytherins be summarily confined to the dungeons for the duration of the battle. So all 100 Slytherins, from ages 11-18, are assumed to be evil? (Granted, the books didn't do a great job with this either, but I've always found it hard to believe that if everyone in the house was so evil, they would've abolished it after the war.)

I think it was just a case of "better safe than sorry." I'm sure there were plenty of innocent Slytherins, but they didn't have time to figure that out.

Finally, a question on something I missed in-movie: How did Snape know where the Trio was in order to plant the Sword of Gryffindor in DH part 1? No Phineas Nigellus in the movie. Or, in the movie, are we supposed to assume that the sword presented itself (at the bottom of the lake?!)

There was a line in Part 2 that led me to believe that the sword presented itself to Harry. It was Snape's patronus, however, that helped him locate it.

 

[Lt. Trull]

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).

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.

Ron stating the bleeding obvious when he saw it in action doesn't factor into anything at all.

Except that it tells us that there are multiple invisibility cloaks out there in the world. Not all of them can be a Hallow.

Yeah But, Isn't ron who somewhere some movie said that the other cloaks do not even come close to the quality of the enchantment that is in harry's cloak....

 

[RoJoHen]

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).

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.

Ron stating the bleeding obvious when he saw it in action doesn't factor into anything at all.

Except that it tells us that there are multiple invisibility cloaks out there in the world. Not all of them can be a Hallow.

Yeah But, Isn't ron who somewhere some movie said that the other cloaks do not even come close to the quality of the enchantment that is in harry's cloak....

I don't think he has ever said anything like that.

 

[HoneyBLilly]

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.

Yeah But, Isn't ron who somewhere some movie said that the other cloaks do not even come close to the quality of the enchantment that is in harry's cloak....

I don't think he has ever said anything like that.

No.

But Dumbledore said something close to that in the book.

 

[RoJoHen]

That's fine, but I still don't know if it's fair to even use the book as backup here. The movies need to stand on their own.

 

[HoneyBLilly]

Oh but the movies would not exist without the books.

Things like Sirius' two-way mirror, and the Cloak, and Teddy Lupin have to rely on the books to be there for the story.

In the movies Teddy Lupin was only mentioned once in a brief second, Sirius' two-way mirror wasn't even introduced until the beginning of Deathly Hallows part 1, and a lot of the Cloak's information was cut out.

 

[RoJoHen]

In the movies Teddy Lupin was only mentioned once in a brief second, Sirius' two-way mirror wasn't even introduced until the beginning of Deathly Hallows part 1, and a lot of the Cloak's information was cut out.

And yet, I managed to understand these things just fine without having the knowledge from the books. I may not have had extensive knowledge, but I had enough to get what was going on.

You don't (and you shouldn't) need the books to be able to understand the movies.

 

[HoneyBLilly]

You don't (and you shouldn't) need the books to be able to understand the movies.

True.

Lord of the Rings is an example of that, although I have since read the books and found that I prefer the movies much more.

 

[Photoman15]

Honestly, I think the Harry Potter series is one that could actually pull off a decent set of prequel films. There is obviously enough in the books to tell a decent story about James, Lily, and the others of their generation.

I thought this about two years ago. This could be JKs next books. "James Potter and the .........". Besides what was told in flashbacks and such, I'm sure there are many other stories that can be intertwined with that to make a 7 book series (and movies).

 

[RoJoHen]

Honestly, I think the Harry Potter series is one that could actually pull off a decent set of prequel films. There is obviously enough in the books to tell a decent story about James, Lily, and the others of their generation.

I thought this about two years ago. This could be JKs next books. "James Potter and the .........". Besides what was told in flashbacks and such, I'm sure there are many other stories that can be intertwined with that to make a 7 book series (and movies).

I think it would play out a lot like the Star Wars prequels (in format, not quality), where we see the previous generation's adventures and the original rise of Lord Voldemort. The backstory is rich enough that we could have some seriously stellar stories.

 

[USS KG5]

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.

Yeah But, Isn't ron who somewhere some movie said that the other cloaks do not even come close to the quality of the enchantment that is in harry's cloak....

I don't think he has ever said anything like that.

Ron says it in the book I think.

 

[USS KG5]

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.

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.

I don't recall that? In fact if I remember correctly until they are actually wearing it in Gringotts the cloak does not feature, though it is discussed in the books as being one of the Hallows, and it is certainly implied in the film.

All the films contain bits that are not explained fully that are covered in the books. There are quite a few of these in Deathly Hallows, most have come up in this thread, like: -

1. Harry's cloak being a Hallow.
2. Dumbledore's sister and family history.
3. The resurrection stone and Gaunt's ring.

and so on, doesn't really matter, it just adds depth for those who have read the books.

 

[Shazam!]

I read the books. Harry is knob, Hermione is always crying and Ron is an idiot.

 

[USS KG5]

I read the books. Harry is knob, Hermione is always crying and Ron is an idiot.

Yup, the main characters are definitely two teenage boys and a teenage girl.

Rowling writes them pretty well in this respect.

 

[C_Miller]

I read the books. Harry is knob, Hermione is always crying and Ron is an idiot.

Yup, the main characters are definitely two teenage boys and a teenage girl.

Rowling writes them pretty well in this respect.

I have never met a teenager that acted like those characters did in Book 6 and 7.

 

[Ayelbourne]

I have never met a teenager that acted like those characters did in Book 6 and 7.

Thats because the teenagers you've met were most likely never in this kind of situation.

 

[DarthPipes]

I read the books. Harry is knob, Hermione is always crying and Ron is an idiot.

Yup, the main characters are definitely two teenage boys and a teenage girl.

Rowling writes them pretty well in this respect.

I have never met a teenager that acted like those characters did in Book 6 and 7.

You've never met a teenager who had to go through what they went through either.

 

[Silvercrest]

I did!

Well, aside from the whole magical world/secret powers/parents killed/cruel family/prophecy/dark lord thing.

Okay, maybe not.