PDA

View Full Version : Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix



reenkam
07-11-2007, 10:51 AM
BEST.
MOVIE.
EVER.

:)

kristie911
07-11-2007, 11:29 AM
You suck...I can't see it until Monday afternoon!

No spoilers...please?! :)

SherryTex
07-11-2007, 04:15 PM
Going to see it tonight! How can there be spoilers if everyone's read the book?

MattW
07-11-2007, 04:25 PM
LALALALALA


Imax on Friday night.


LALALALA

Saw at least 3 wizards/witches last night as Transformers let out. The youngest witch was about 40.

aadams73
07-11-2007, 05:42 PM
I hate you all.

I'm not going until next week, in vain hope of avoiding some of those annoying, yappy, little short people.

ChaosTitan
07-11-2007, 06:44 PM
Going to see it tonight! How can there be spoilers if everyone's read the book?

:ROFL:

I was wondering the same thing.

jvc
07-11-2007, 06:47 PM
I'll admit it, I havent read the book.

ChaosTitan
07-11-2007, 06:48 PM
But are you planning to see the movie?

(just curious) ;)

jvc
07-11-2007, 06:50 PM
Of course I'm planning to see the movie, what do you take me for :D . I just haven't got around to reading all the books yet, so much reading to catch up on and not enough time to do it.

Azure Skye
07-11-2007, 06:51 PM
I'm going to see it tonight.

:::happy dance:::

ChaosTitan
07-11-2007, 06:55 PM
Of course I'm planning to see the movie, what do you take me for :D

:Ssh:


Here, have a cookie.

jvc
07-11-2007, 07:04 PM
:Ssh:


Here, have a cookie.
Why thank you, you're too kind : ) . The cookie moster loves his cookies, and anyone else's he can get his claws on.

Provrb1810meggy
07-11-2007, 07:22 PM
I'm seeing it this afternoon. Yay!

Ab_Normal
07-11-2007, 08:12 PM
My daughter was so disappointed in the previous movie that I asked her if she wanted to see this one. "Well, yes, Mom," was her response, "but I'm still going to complain about it afterward." (This is what you get when nerds reproduce, I suppose. :D ) We'll probably go Sunday morning -- it's after payday, and maybe everybody else will be at church.

Norma

Toothpaste
07-11-2007, 08:42 PM
Seeing it tonight!! So excited.

Oddly for some reason Rupert Grint was in town this afternoon. I guess Toronto is the movie city (seriously, we get all these previews etc cause for some reason we just LOVE going to movies here, and of course we have the film festival), still, I thought it was a bit weird.

JoNightshade
07-11-2007, 08:49 PM
::Slowly raises hand:: I haven't read the book either. I read the first HP, said, "Eh, that was okay, but I bet it would make a much better movie." Year or two later, it was a movie, and I thought, "Oh good, let's just do this." I like HP mainly for the monsters/creatures and the visuals, so seeing it in the theatre is a good way to go as far as I'm concerned. I'd never read the series even if it wasn't on film, so I don't consider myself to be breaking some sort of taboo. Although in general, books are usually better than "the movie."

Southern_girl29
07-11-2007, 09:25 PM
We're going this weekend to see it at an IMAX Theater. I'm taking my four-year-old. She's going to love it, and she's super excited about seeing it. I just can't wait. We're going to be in Harry Potter overload for the next few weeks with the book coming out, too.

Provrb1810meggy
07-11-2007, 09:38 PM
Seeing it tonight!! So excited.

Oddly for some reason Rupert Grint was in town this afternoon. I guess Toronto is the movie city (seriously, we get all these previews etc cause for some reason we just LOVE going to movies here, and of course we have the film festival), still, I thought it was a bit weird.

Rupert Grint...was...in....your....town. *swoons*

dclary
07-11-2007, 09:50 PM
I saw it last night. Not bad. My favorite movie of the summer remains Transformers, but there was a lot about this movie to like.

My favorite scene was, probably, the scene that should have been my favorite scene (kudos to the f/x department for living up to it): when the order gets its ass whooped, and the elite, original order shows up to show them how it's done. In a flick of an eye it shows that good can be as bad-ass as bad, and how very much more the kids have to learn in the ways of wizard war.


Also, I was as pissed off at the *significant death* in the film as I was in the book. What a stupid, anticlimatic, lame way to go.

Esopha
07-11-2007, 10:27 PM
I saw the midnight showing! It was frikking awesome! <333

MMcC
07-11-2007, 10:31 PM
Had a blast last night (this morning). The midnight showing is a tradition now.

I was so annoyed with all the dipwad adults who were muttering about it "not being as funny" and "much darker" on the way out. People who refuse to be responsible about what they drag their too-young children to see should be beaten with a Mega-Gulp bucket... still full of soupy, watered down Mountain Dew!

maestrowork
07-11-2007, 10:31 PM
I will probably see it, but it's hardly an "event movie" for me.

Saanen
07-11-2007, 10:55 PM
'Kay, y'all, now I have to see it tonight. Darn it, and here I was expecting to actually get some writing done tonight instead of wasting hours playing tower defense.

Southern_girl29
07-11-2007, 10:56 PM
Had a blast last night (this morning). The midnight showing is a tradition now.

I was so annoyed with all the dipwad adults who were muttering about it "not being as funny" and "much darker" on the way out. People who refuse to be responsible about what they drag their too-young children to see should be beaten with a Mega-Gulp bucket... still full of soupy, watered down Mountain Dew!

Well, most people would probably think my four-year-old is too young to see it, but she knows what's going to happen. I haven't read the book to her, but I've told her about it. She's prepared for it. I'm expecting it to be darker than the others. I still say she's going to love it, no matter what.

dclary
07-11-2007, 10:58 PM
I don't think I'd take a 4-year-old to see this. Between the self-mutilation, the on-screen sex scene, and the bloody gore and violence... it's no kid's movie.

III
07-11-2007, 11:01 PM
They made a book series based on the movies? I bet the books suck.

dclary
07-11-2007, 11:39 PM
Film adaptations usually do, but they put Alan Dean Foster's kids through college, didn't they?

reenkam
07-12-2007, 12:17 AM
My favorite scene was, probably, the scene that should have been my favorite scene (kudos to the f/x department for living up to it): when the order gets its ass whooped, and the elite, original order shows up to show them how it's done. In a flick of an eye it shows that good can be as bad-ass as bad, and how very much more the kids have to learn in the ways of wizard war.


Also, I was as pissed off at the *significant death* in the film as I was in the book. What a stupid, anticlimatic, lame way to go.


That scene was pretty much amazing. I never imagined anything that good when I read. I think they did a great job...I don't think anyone could write well enough to describe something like that. And they were seriously some of the best f/x I've ever seen in my life.

I agree with you about that death, too...it lasted, what, 0.4 seconds? At least in the book it was like 0.7 seconds. I have a feeling that if someone didn't read the book, they'd have no idea what that scene was about in the movie...they definitely needed to add some explaination there.

althrasher
07-12-2007, 06:29 AM
I don't think I'd take a 4-year-old to see this. Between the self-mutilation, the on-screen sex scene, and the bloody gore and violence... it's no kid's movie.

Damn...that's quite some children's book you got hold of there.

Azure Skye
07-12-2007, 06:43 AM
Saw it.

Loved it.

A little slow in the beginning but I still felt the tension building toward the fabulous fight scene. I love you Ralph Fiennes. He's the perfect Voldemort.

And, I love Luna. She's so damn cute.

MMcC
07-12-2007, 06:54 AM
No movie rated above G is appropriate for a four year old, and most four year olds shouldn't be in theaters.

I used to be a film critic and I swear there were times I almost called DYS.

Thump
07-12-2007, 07:02 AM
By far the best of the HP movies :) Just saw it this afternoon! The midnight showing had been sold out so I had to make do with today >_<

I even wore my homemade radish earings! :D I was annoyed that they didn't explain Kreacher's role in drawing Harry to the department of mysteries though.

I loved Luna, I love Bellatrix (she was soooo crazy!), loved Umbridge (that giggle was perfect!)...
Really very little not to like. I'm just sorry that so many good things from the book were cut but then, as much as I'd like it, they can't make a 72h movie, can they?

And OMG! Snape and Lucius Malfoy were YUMMY!

reenkam
07-12-2007, 07:10 AM
I loved Luna, I love Bellatrix (she was soooo crazy!), loved Umbridge (that giggle was perfect!)...

i definitely agree

Luna was insane (in a good way)

Bellatrix was insane (in a totally creepy way)

Umbridge was insane (she was almost as scary as Bellatrix)

and let me just add...WHEN DID VOLDEMORT GET SO SCARY?!

seriously, though. Death Eaters...never EVER going to mess with them.

EVER.

katrina_wooooo
07-12-2007, 07:16 AM
AHHHH What an amazing movie! I'm seeing it again ASAP because it kicked major butt. Luna was absolutely amazing.

And I'm not even going to talk about how jealous I am of Katie Leung. Not even going there.

Got to love Daniel Radcliffe. Larry King <bleh> did a horribly boring interview with him, but he'll be on with Conan O'Brein and I'm definitely watching. :)

MMcC
07-12-2007, 08:35 AM
Did you guys love the reference to Hitler with the big flag bearing Fudge's image? OMG that was so cool.

And that moment when Sirius shouts "good one, James" during the duel and doesn't even miss a beat, but Harry's face falls just a little.

*sigh*

reenkam
07-12-2007, 09:20 AM
And that moment when Sirius shouts "good one, James" during the duel and doesn't even miss a beat, but Harry's face falls just a little.

*sigh*

that was...i don't even know the word for it...

*joins in sighing*

Saanen
07-12-2007, 02:44 PM
OMG, I've got to see this movie! All the showing (all two, pfft) were sold out last night. Well, I'll see it tonight--just 8 hours of boring old work to get through first.

Who directed this one, does anyone remember?

reenkam
07-12-2007, 04:35 PM
Who directed this one, does anyone remember?

Somebody Yates. David, maybe.

Azure Skye
07-12-2007, 05:22 PM
Did you guys love the reference to Hitler with the big flag bearing Fudge's image? OMG that was so cool.


Yes! And the whole bit of Umbridge preaching about loyalty to Minerva.

Britchik
07-12-2007, 06:36 PM
Somebody Yates. David, maybe.
Yep, David Yates. Apparently he's signed up to direct the next one, as well.

I'm going to see this on Sunday! Yay!

SherryTex
07-12-2007, 07:10 PM
will not diss any parent for taking their four year old, we took all five we had at the time to see Return of the King. We are nerds and geeks. We reproduce and we will take over the world. (Now up to eight).

maestrowork
07-12-2007, 07:34 PM
No movie rated above G is appropriate for a four year old, and most four year olds shouldn't be in theaters.

I used to be a film critic and I swear there were times I almost called DYS.


Amen.

I don't understand parents who take their 3yo to a PG-13 movie, and then complain about the film being too scary/violent/sexual/whatever. Know your kids and make the right judgment, but claim responsibility as well.

Southern_girl29
07-12-2007, 08:03 PM
Amen.

I don't understand parents who take their 3yo to a PG-13 movie, and then complain about the film being too scary/violent/sexual/whatever. Know your kids and make the right judgment, but claim responsibility as well.

Even though I'm taking my four-year-old, I agree with this statement. We are fully prepared to leave if it gets to be too much for her. I've done my research with a Web site that offers reviews for children, and I talked to my best friend, who saw it yesterday. She knows my daughter very well, and she said there is only one scene that might bother her and I could either take her out or cover her eyes. I wouldn't complain about it being too violent, since I decided to take her. But, I think if a parent does research and makes an informed decision, there is nothing wrong with them taking a child, especially if they go into it with the mindset that they might have to leave before the movie is over.

Toothpaste
07-12-2007, 08:17 PM
Loved it! I could go into a greater analysis of what I think they did wrong, and what they did really right, but I wanted to add to the scary thing. Okay, I get scared easily, but this movie, I dunno, it's pretty dark. The dementors in Azkaban had never frightened me before, and this time round . . . the whole opening sequence was pretty creepy, as well as all of Harry's dream sequences. There is a lot more blood in the this one. Not that I didn't love that they did that, but just as a warning.

reenkam
07-12-2007, 09:03 PM
Even though I'm taking my four-year-old, I agree with this statement. We are fully prepared to leave if it gets to be too much for her. I've done my research with a Web site that offers reviews for children, and I talked to my best friend, who saw it yesterday. She knows my daughter very well, and she said there is only one scene that might bother her and I could either take her out or cover her eyes. I wouldn't complain about it being too violent, since I decided to take her. But, I think if a parent does research and makes an informed decision, there is nothing wrong with them taking a child, especially if they go into it with the mindset that they might have to leave before the movie is over.

Yeah, I can only think of one scene that she might have a problem with, and not even because it's particularly horrific or anything. It's more sad, than anything else. But you can kind of see it coming, so if you just had her turn away I think she'd be fine. But, then again, I don't have kids, so...


The dementors in Azkaban had never frightened me before, and this time round . . . the whole opening sequence was pretty creepy, as well as all of Harry's dream sequences.

Yeah, that surprised me. I mean, dementors were kind of scary before, because you knew what they could do, but they were actually scary this time. And it wasn't even a lot of them...

Provrb1810meggy
07-12-2007, 09:27 PM
I saw it yesterday and loved it. I must see it again this weekend, though, to determine where it ranks according to the other movies.

Azraelsbane
07-12-2007, 09:42 PM
I don't think I'd take a 4-year-old to see this. Between the self-mutilation, the on-screen sex scene, and the bloody gore and violence... it's no kid's movie.


I did have a 104 fever when I went to see it yesterday, but... Did I just miss the on screen sex scene or what? And if so, did I miss it in the book too?

reenkam
07-12-2007, 09:48 PM
I don't think I'd take a 4-year-old to see this. Between the self-mutilation, the on-screen sex scene, and the bloody gore and violence... it's no kid's movie.
I did have a 104 fever when I went to see it yesterday, but... Did I just miss the on screen sex scene or what? And if so, did I miss it in the book too?

Yeah, I apparently missed that, too. And the self-mutilation. And the bloody gore...

I had just gotten new contacts...maybe they weren't in right?? :eek:

dclary
07-12-2007, 09:52 PM
Yeah, I apparently missed that, too. And the self-mutilation. And the bloody gore...

I had just gotten new contacts...maybe they weren't in right?? :eek:


Maybe I should have added an "I'm being facetious" emoti in that post. Sheesh.

:poke: /dclary, pushing buttons


But, if you wan't to get extreme: Harry and Cho's kiss was pretty damn passionate for a first kiss. There's your sex. The punishment pen was clearly self-mutilation -- and too close to my memories of my foster daughter's self-carving fetish for my tastes. And when Luna got smashed in the face, she stupefied the guy into tomorrow, but her lip was all gashed and bloody. So it was all there. Maybe in tiny quantities... but if I put just the tiniest piece of poop in my brownie recipe... Would you want those brownies? It's just a little piece.

maestrowork
07-12-2007, 09:57 PM
This just in: One day (Wed) take -- $44.8 million. That's impressive. It beats Transformers ($27M on Tues and $29M on Weds) and perhaps is the all-time best Wednesday opening ever.

reenkam
07-12-2007, 10:01 PM
I did have a 104 fever when I went to see it yesterday, but... Did I just miss the on screen sex scene or what? And if so, did I miss it in the book too?


Maybe I should have added an "I'm being facetious" emoti in that post. Sheesh.

:poke: /dclary, pushing buttons


But, if you wan't to get extreme: Harry and Cho's kiss was pretty damn passionate for a first kiss. There's your sex. The punishment pen was clearly self-mutilation -- and too close to my memories of my foster daughter's self-carving fetish for my tastes. And when Luna got smashed in the face, she stupefied the guy into tomorrow, but her lip was all gashed and bloody. So it was all there. Maybe in tiny quantities... but if I put just the tiniest piece of poop in my brownie recipe... Would you want those brownies? It's just a little piece.

Mmm, I agree with you about that kiss. It was like, 15 minutes long. (I'm exaggerating here, but it was kind of lengthy)

oh, and I was about 92% sure you were kidding...Though, I wouldn't call the pen self-mutilation, cause it was Umbrige's fault... :Shrug:

......and I'm gonna have to pass on that brownie, but thanks for offering....I guess......

dclary
07-12-2007, 10:06 PM
......and I'm gonna have to pass on that brownie, but thanks for offering....I guess......

Good choice. :p

dclary
07-12-2007, 11:07 PM
Judge for yourself:

http://i.thisislondon.co.uk/i/pix/2007/07/34a_12_Harry_243x194.jpg

reenkam
07-12-2007, 11:12 PM
i wonder if she's in pain from the edge of his glasses being pressed into her eye...

dclary
07-12-2007, 11:40 PM
This just in: One day (Wed) take -- $44.8 million. That's impressive. It beats Transformers ($27M on Tues and $29M on Weds) and perhaps is the all-time best Wednesday opening ever.

Looks possible. Spidey-2 had the record at like 40.5 mil.

maestrowork
07-13-2007, 01:00 AM
It may also be a one-day record? Or was it Spider-Man again (weekend)?

katiemac
07-13-2007, 01:08 AM
Spidey-3 holds the biggest day opening at $59 million.
Dead Man's chest has the second biggest, $55 million.
Both of these are also the biggest single-day returns.

The previous biggest Wednesday opening, as mentioned, was Spidey-2, $40 million.

So Harry broke the biggest Wednesday, but didn't crack opening day.

Petroglyph
07-13-2007, 01:15 AM
Huh. I took my 4-year-old to see it and he had a good time. What's nice is that I'm his parent, so I get to make those decisions. He's the youngest of four and so far I haven't raised any delinquents.

Fun, fun, fun.

Toothpaste
07-13-2007, 02:50 AM
Okay I loved the film, don't get me wrong, but was anyone dissapointed with the flashback? That's possible my favourite thing about the book, and I think if you hadn't read it before seeing the movie, the moment would have barely registered!

reenkam
07-13-2007, 03:18 AM
Okay I loved the film, don't get me wrong, but was anyone dissapointed with the flashback? That's possible my favourite thing about the book, and I think if you hadn't read it before seeing the movie, the moment would have barely registered!

What flashback? The one Harry has of Snape? Yeah, that was really really short in the movie. I'm like 95% sure that was supposed to be longer...maybe the scenes were cut? I vaguely remember the mention of a girl playing harry's mom and how she tells James to stop bothering him...or maybe that's just what happened in the book and I'm visualizing it really well...

Tifferbugz
07-13-2007, 03:38 AM
I did have a 104 fever when I went to see it yesterday, but... Did I just miss the on screen sex scene or what? And if so, did I miss it in the book too?

Lol I was thinking the same thing...I guess the kiss was lengthy but I would have been disappointed if they'd made it childish and fake-looking.

I saw the movie last night on the IMAX. It was great, but I wish they'd been able to put more of the book into it. I guess that people would have been sad if they made the movie twice as long though! lol :)

Saanen
07-13-2007, 06:27 AM
I thought it was excellent--probably the best acting in any of the movies so far. I did think the pace was a bit slow, although with so much going on at once maybe that was necessary to keep it from feeling rushed or confusing.

I wish there'd been more about the DA, which I've always felt was the main thrust of the fifth book. I was surprised at what got left out--Ron and Hermione making prefect and Luna's dad's paper spring to mind. Still, there's so much in the book I think they did a good job streamlining it.

That kiss was definitely long for a first kiss, but the teenaged girls in the audience seemed to appreciate it. :)

Writer2011
07-13-2007, 09:11 PM
I'm going tonight and am sort of looking forward to it...these types of movies just don't do it for me though. Give me a horror/slasher type and i'm in hog heaven :)

Writer2011
07-13-2007, 09:12 PM
So they cut stuff out...the book is over 900 pages---would you rather have a seven hour movie? I know I wouldn't.

MMcC
07-13-2007, 11:14 PM
I am always willing to let go when they cut stuff because yeah... most people don't tolerate movies over 2 hours.

Personally, I can sit through loooong movies and enjoy them. I did marathon days for reviewing for ages, and I actually often favored long movies for myself and shorts (under 90 minutes) for kids.

Point taken, and I agree. Now lets hope when all of them are done somebody releases a 24 hour total DVD "uncut, indefinite watching edition" with bloopers so I can kill a long weekend and totally geek out.

MattW
07-14-2007, 09:46 PM
Saw it in IMAX 3D last night. That was fun!

My wife griped about it not being close to the book but she enjoyed nonetheless.

childeroland
07-15-2007, 02:30 AM
Nice 3D finale but the glasses were a little tight.

robeiae
07-15-2007, 06:08 AM
Saw it with the kids this afternoon. It was okay, but not up to snuff. I like all of the previous ones much more.

Head to head, Transformers beat it it all to hell--according to my kids, too.

maestrowork
07-15-2007, 09:42 AM
The first half of Transformers was good -- funny, interesting. Then it just dragged on. I was like "Is there an end to this non-stop action or will I overdose on CGI?" I was really bored by the final half hour.

Writer2011
07-15-2007, 10:36 AM
I am always willing to let go when they cut stuff because yeah... most people don't tolerate movies over 2 hours.

Personally, I can sit through loooong movies and enjoy them. I did marathon days for reviewing for ages, and I actually often favored long movies for myself and shorts (under 90 minutes) for kids.

Point taken, and I agree. Now lets hope when all of them are done somebody releases a 24 hour total DVD "uncut, indefinite watching edition" with bloopers so I can kill a long weekend and totally geek out.
Talk about a marathon---when I first bought the Friday The 13th boxed set (all of the Paramount releases) I watched them one right after the other...then did it again :)

reenkam
07-15-2007, 10:45 AM
Talk about a marathon---when I first bought the Friday The 13th boxed set (all of the Paramount releases) I watched them one right after the other...then did it again :)

I don't know how long that is...but I know someone who watched the LotR trilogy extended version in one day...all 683 minutes of it...

childeroland
07-15-2007, 02:54 PM
I once did a 20+ hour 'Heroes' marathon on Sci-Fi.

MattW
07-15-2007, 04:23 PM
We used to view Star Wars (when there were only 3) with a couple cases of beer and buffalo wings. Take a break after Empire to smoke some cigars, then back to it.

Then it was 4 movies, then 5. Never bothered with all 6 - I'd gotten tired of the new series before then.

ChunkyC
07-15-2007, 05:01 PM
I thought Order of the Phoenix was a fantastic movie. I don't think it started slowly at all. I mean, Dudders and Harry being attacked by Dementors in the first few minutes, Harry called up in front of the Ministry for doing underage magic outside of school and in the presence of a muggle, the smear campaign in the Daily Prophet ... there was tension and intrigue (why is Dumbledore ignoring Harry?) right from the get-go.

Great movie. :)

MattW
07-15-2007, 05:16 PM
(why is Dumbledore ignoring Harry?)Not having read the book, DD's later explanation is not logical.

"By trying too closely to protect you, I would have drawn the attention that only my protection could have saved you from."

Huh? Harry was always in danger, so Dumbledore ignored him for no reason.

reenkam
07-15-2007, 06:29 PM
Not having read the book, DD's later explanation is not logical.

"By trying too closely to protect you, I would have drawn the attention that only my protection could have saved you from."

Huh? Harry was always in danger, so Dumbledore ignored him for no reason.

Yeah, his explaination was kind of bad in the movie. He was saying that he didn't want to be to close to Harry that year because Voldemort might realize and then use Harry (using occlumency that Snape was trying to teach Harry to fight against) to get to Dumbledore and the Order. That's why he ignored him. So that he just seemed like any normal student to Dumbledore through Voldemort's eyes, if he were invading Harry's mind...

Did that make any sense?

Eskimo1990
07-15-2007, 06:55 PM
Saw it opening day, though sadly not at midnight. Saw it again Friday because I'm a big geek like that and loved the film too much. Also planning on seeing it sometime this week again cause my friend was away when it came out. But there was one scene that I did wish was in the film....this is of course if I'm remembering the book correctly...it after they are attacked by the dementors and Harry tells his Aunt and Uncle and his Aunt knows about them...not real important I guess, but I still wished it had been in there. Also the death scene, while still sad (and yes I did cry) I wished it would have been a bit longer....also as someone mentioned before when Sirius says "Good one, James." and continues to fight is sad too, and you can tell it hurts Harry just a bit. But all in all it was an awesome movie and I can't wait for the next book...also for though of you who read the books, I've heard that J.K. Rowling said "Never say never," as in response to there being an 8th book...I hope there is...I'll stop babbling now...

childeroland
07-15-2007, 07:31 PM
SPOILER ALERT












What did everyone think of the way Yates handles who finks out Dumbledore's Army and how that differs from the book?

Toothpaste
07-15-2007, 07:46 PM
That really didn't bother me at all, in fact I thought it was quite clever. What bothered me more was the truncated flashback . . . in fact it goes with my main complaint about the movie. I know the screenwriter thinks the movie was about angst, but me personally, I have always felt it is about the old generation vs the new, and the uncomfortable blurring of the lines. Order of the Phoenix vs Dumbledore's Army. Mrs. Weasley and Dumbledore treating Harry like a kid, and Snape and Sirius like he is a James replacement. Neville's history (conveninently explained away in one sentence). And they really missed that wonderful moment where Hagrid, McGonagal, Dumbledore everyone is gone from Hogwarts and Harry thinks there is no one to turn to and then bam Snape shows up. Sure they did the moment in the film, but without all the others missing it just didn't have that emotional resonance.

Still loved the movie though, don't get me wrong, lol!

ChunkyC
07-15-2007, 08:11 PM
There was so much in the book they just couldn't fit in the movie. Unfortunately, it did leave some of the stuff that did make it in 'underexplained.'

Still a great ride, tho', and superb timing for the release of it and the last book. Can't wait for the Deathly Hallows, I've had it on order since February. :D

maestrowork
07-15-2007, 08:35 PM
They can't possibly fit the whole book in a 2.5-hour movie -- they have use their judgment picking and choosing. But I have objections if the screenwriters CHANGE the plot/character significantly.

Jersey Chick
07-15-2007, 09:23 PM
I saw it last night and, having read the book, I understood it perfectly. My husband, on the other hand, had a ton of questions about things that made very little sense to someone who hadn't read it. Like when Sirius says, "Good one, James." My husband thought it was a slip (like in Star Wars where Mark Hamill yells "Carrie" after blowing up the Death Star and returns to the rebel base). I had to explain a lot that the movie didn't. Of course, if the movie did, it would have been about 12 hours long.

I'm debating about letting my 6 year old see it. She's seen the first 3 (and the shrunken head in the 3rd one freaks her out), but I think it'll be when it comes out on video. That way I don't have her screaming that she's scared and wants to go home 1/2way through it in the theatre.

Can't wait for the book - I'm such an HP nerd it isn't even funny! :)

Toothpaste
07-15-2007, 09:24 PM
Oh I know that (and actually most people I know have said they thought the movie was too short, it was shorter than the others by 20mins). But I think what they left out was what made the book so good to me. It's a complicated book, not really about plot (as can be clearly evidenced when watching the movie), but I think they still focussed too much on the story. I've never been about copying the book exactly, I always get frustrated when the screen writer just hits the plot points, but that was what I thought was going to make this movie unique, because of the lack of plot I thought they were going to be able to really focus in on relationships. And they did a bit. But not in the way that really made this book unique amoungst the other Potter novels.

Just personal opinion.

Oddly I still think it is the best Potter film by far!

Sage
07-15-2007, 10:04 PM
Overall, I thought it was an awesome movie, & much better than GoF. I thought the way they got around cutting things out was pretty effective. There were some things I missed (The Quibbler article, the teachers giving Umbridge hell after the Weasley twins leave, & the O.W.L.s/career advice being almost completely ignored), but overall, I must admit it was a pretty good job. I thought the shortcut they took on Cho & Harry's relationship was pretty smart. The Umbridge-abusing-power and D.A. montages were good for compactly showing how they progressed. Some things I didn't even notice were missing until later ("Hey, Ron's not supposed to be in this scene.... Where was he, again? Oh, yeah, Quidditch. Oh, wow, we haven't got Quidditch. Oh well.")

That all said, this movie could have been a tiny bit longer (I'm sorry, but if I'm spending $6 to $8.50 a movie, I want more for my money. Someone said that few people want to see a movie over two hours. I can't imagine that people really want to see a movie under two hours, do they?). The action moves pretty fast, & unlike other movies I've seen recently (for example, Spidey 3), I didn't ever feel like checking my watch, & I think they could have gotten away with it. A longer movie would allow a few more details to be dropped (it only takes a second to say "I sent the Dementors after Harry"), & a longer reaction to the significant death. Because it wasn't really the death that affected me as much as Harry's reaction in the book, & in the movie that reaction was basically confined to a single scene. So a longer movie (no, not 7 hours, but 2.5 or 3 wouldn't have been excessive. The movie was 2 hours & 17 minutes) would be nice, & maybe let's focus less on things like..., I don't know, flying across London for a few minutes, sweeping shots of Hogwarts, Kreacher's muttering (since he doesn't actually play a role in the plot here), & so on, would give us time for more important things relating to the plot.

One of the biggest complaints I've heard (& felt) about the book was how much Harry yelled & how angry he was, but even though they made a big deal about it at the end, they really underplayed it early--something I was grateful for. But it did make the scene with Voldy & Harry in the Ministry seem more out of place than it would have in the books (where the scene is much shorter & less involved than the movie). It's weird that in the movie--a visual medium--we're TOLD how angry Harry is more than in the book, which told & showed it.

I really liked Umbridge here. I could never imagine her adequately with the "toad-faced" pictures they give in the book & reconciling it with the little girl voice, the pink bow, the kittens on the wall.... But when I read the book again, I will picture the movie Umbridge, & it will work perfectly.

And as much as I liked Umbridge, I loved Luna. I can't imagine the actress in anything else, but as Luna, she was perfect. And I'm so glad she kept a nice big role in the movie (even had a scene added for her so we could explain the threstrals without having to go into Hagrid's lessons).

Jersey Chick
07-15-2007, 10:13 PM
Much as I would love to have had it be longer, it's almost impossible for me to sit in a theatre for that long. My knees ache after about 1/2 an hour and I spend the rest of the time squirming.

It was ok last night, because I was pretty engrossed in the movie - two hours flew by. But then, the pain started and I started squirming. It's okay if I can stretch my legs out and put them up on the seat in front of me, but the guy sitting there last night might have complained ;) That's the problem when you're 35, with the knees of an 80 year old.:(

I'd be happy with a director's cut dvd - stretch out on my sofa, and get lost. Bring on the popcorn then!

reenkam
07-15-2007, 11:12 PM
I pretty sure there will be a lot of extra scenes. Well, I'm hoping at least. I remember seeing production pictures and stuff of things that weren't in the movie. And a lot of lines were cut, apparently, in the final edits. So maybe they'll add on an extra 30 mins for the DVD...that'd be nice.

althrasher
07-16-2007, 05:35 AM
Let me preface all this by saying I LOVED the movie. It was by far the best Potter movie yet.

Now, a couple things they left out that irritated me-

1) The attack on Hagrid/McGonagall--I felt like in the book this was a telling scene for just how crazy things have gone at Hogwarts. Leaving this out I think got rid of some of that dread.

2) The total awesomeness of the Weasly's fireworks. Now, I'm glad they were there, and I did like that scene, but I was really looking forward to the firework "resolutely spelling out the word 'poo'" :tongue

Oh yeah, Sage--they wanted to write Kreacher out of the movie, but JK wouldn't let them. Wonder what that means for book 7...

And I still hate Dumbledore. He doesn't do the Dumbledore in the books justice.

All the casting for this movie was excellent, though. Umbridge, Luna, Tonks, Bellatrix...spot on.

maestrowork
07-16-2007, 05:45 AM
I saw it last night and, having read the book, I understood it perfectly. My husband, on the other hand, had a ton of questions about things that made very little sense to someone who hadn't read it.

I didn't read the book and I did have questions about many things, and some felt like major plot holes for me, but I assumed they're perfectly logical/explained in the book.

Jersey Chick
07-16-2007, 05:54 AM
I didn't read the book and I did have questions about many things, and some felt like major plot holes for me, but I assumed they're perfectly logical/explained in the book.

They were - my husband thought there were plot holes, until I said, "Yes, but this happened, and that happened in the book." Then it made sense. If there are any biggies, let me know - I just finished rereading the book, nerd that I am. :D

ChunkyC
07-16-2007, 06:00 AM
Oh definitely. There was a whole storyline in the book about Ron becoming the starting goalkeeper for the Gryffindor Quiddich team that was completely cut out of the movie. It was a major subplot and really showed Ron changing from being a relatively timid kid to a young man with growing confidence in himself. But in the movie Ron is pretty static as far as character development goes.

But, as has been noted numerous times in this thread, they had to cut something.

katiemac
07-16-2007, 06:03 AM
I pretty sure there will be a lot of extra scenes. Well, I'm hoping at least. I remember seeing production pictures and stuff of things that weren't in the movie. And a lot of lines were cut, apparently, in the final edits. So maybe they'll add on an extra 30 mins for the DVD...that'd be nice.

There's an interview with Helen Bonham Carter (Bellatrix) on EW.com, which states that there will be something like six deleted scenes. But a lot of "extended" footage, like Bellatrix dueling with Sirius and taunting Harry, will remain on the cutting room floor (much to her disappointment).

reenkam
07-16-2007, 06:06 AM
There's an interview with Helen Bonham Carter (Bellatrix) on EW.com, which states that there will be something like six deleted scenes. But a lot of "extended" footage, like Bellatrix dueling with Sirius and taunting Harry, will remain on the cutting room floor (much to her disappointment).


that's depressing

katiemac
07-16-2007, 06:10 AM
Don't fret; there's bound to be the super-special extended director's cut DVD (in its own velvet box!), released after everyone's already bought the original.

maestrowork
07-16-2007, 06:20 AM
/SPOILER/

As much as I like this film -- I do think it's one of the best in the series -- the death at the end doesn't affect me the way Cedric's death did. I didn't feel the emotional crunch, and I didn't feel Harry's devastation, and I think that was really a sore point for me.

Plot questions: Sirius is supposed to be on the run, right? Or did I miss something? Why is he hanging around, or is that supposed to be an underground movement (the Order of Phoenix)? And why gathering at Sirius' old house? That, too me, seems like a risky move. Surely Voldemort can find them.

If the other kids can't see the Thestral because they haven't witnessed death, how can they ride on them to the Ministry of Magic?

Who sent the Dementors? They never said.

Who is Helena Bonham Carter's character?

If the Centaurs captured Umbridge, how did she get back? What really happened to her?

What is that veiled archway?

Who made those prophecies (in crystal balls) and what happened when those balls got smashed during the battle? Seems awfully silly to keep them in breakable glass balls on flimsy shelves.

How did the Order of Phoenix know Harry and co. are at the Ministry?

If only Harry could read his prophecy, how did Dumbledore know? Why did he feel like he had to ignore Harry to save him?

I read on Wikipedia about Neville Lonebottom at the end, but they didn't say anything (I don't remember) in the movie.

If they know Lucius Malfoy is a follower of Voldemort, why did they keep him at the Ministry, and why did they keep Draco at Hogwart?

They skimped over a lot of characters -- Ron, Hermione, Draco, McGonagle... would be nice to develop them more. I did like the reveal about Snape and his history with James Potter. That's a nice touch.

katiemac
07-16-2007, 06:36 AM
I haven't seen the film yet, but I can answer these anyway:


As much as I like this film -- I do think it's one of the best in the series -- the death at the end doesn't affect me the way Cedric's death did. I didn't feel the emotional crunch, and I didn't feel Harry's devastation, and I think that was really a sore point for me.

Personally, it didn't hit me that hard in the book. Everyone was so worked up with "someone's going to die, someone's going to die," it was fairly easy to pick out who that person was going to be. And then, the way it happened ... well, that's still under speculation.

Plot questions: Sirius is supposed to be on the run, right? Or did I miss something? Why is he hanging around, or is that supposed to be an underground movement (the Order of Phoenix)? And why gathering at Sirius' old house? That, too me, seems like a risky move. Surely Voldemort can find them.

Phoenix is "underground." In the book, the house is under a spell, which hides it from anyone who doesn't already know it's there. It's the same idea that helped James and Lily Potter hide from Voldemort when Harry was young, until Pettigrew betrayed them (because he knew where they were).

If the other kids can't see the Thestral because they haven't witnessed death, how can they ride on them to the Ministry of Magic?

The book mentions this as being an uncomfortable ride for the other kids, but even though they can't see them they can feel them.


Who sent the Dementors? They never said.

Dolores Umbridge. I believe she thought if she eliminated Harry as a problem, it would serve her well in the ministry.

Who is Helena Bonham Carter's character?

Bellatrix Lestrange, Sirius' cousin. She's been in prison with the other Death Eaters, and is the only female follower of Voldemort.

If the Centaurs captured Umbridge, how did she get back? What really happened to her?

As far as this book is concerned, she's left with the centaurs. But the sixth book makes mention of her back at the Ministry, albeit a little spooked.

What is that veiled archway?

We don't know. Yet. But once you go through it you're "gone".

Who made those prophecies (in crystal balls) and what happened when those balls got smashed during the battle? Seems awfully silly to keep them in breakable glass balls on flimsy shelves.

Prophecies are "recorded" by someone in the ministry, so basically it's a giant hall of records. Pick a fight with JKR on glass part!

How did the Order of Phoenix know Harry and co. are at the Ministry?

Harry tries to contact Sirius to make sure he's really at the Ministry, and speaks to Kreacher through the fire in Umbridge's office to the fire at Grimmwauld Place (Sirius' house). I believe they figure out from Kreacher where the kids have gone.

If only Harry could read his prophecy, how did Dumbledore know? Why did he feel like he had to ignore Harry to save him?

Dumbledore knew the prophecy because Professor Trelawney (Emma Thompson) is the one who made that prophecy, and she predicted it to Dumbledore. Then somebody recorded it for the ministry (though that process is unknown).

I read on Wikipedia about Neville Lonebottom at the end, but they didn't say anything (I don't remember) in the movie.

... Somebody else might need to explain this, since I don't know what they referred to/didn't refer to. Stuff about the prophecy, or his parents, possibly?

If they know Lucius Malfoy is a follower of Voldemort, why did they keep him at the Ministry, and why did they keep Draco at Hogwart?

They knew Lucius *was* a follower of Voldemort, but they were all kinds of tricky and got themselves back into politics (money). There's a lot of backstory about Lucius black mailing and threatening people. As for Draco, there's no reason to think at this point that he would follow Voldemort. If anyone had concerns about keeping him at Hogwarts, Dumbledore would have vetoed that decision. That explanation coming more from the sixth book than anything.

Toothpaste
07-16-2007, 06:46 AM
One or two more things:

Bellatrix also tortured Neville's parents to insanity (also I don't think she is Voldemort's only female follower, just his girl friday)

And to expand on the Lucius thing there is a curse that Voldemort often used to make people do what he wanted against their will. A lot of ex-Death Eaters used that excuse.

The Neville story line was sadly truncated. In the book there is a very sad visit to the hospital where his parents are kept. Really touching, and unfortunately edited out of the film. But of course the most important thing, that it could have been either Harry OR Neville that would be Voldemort's arch nemesis was totally missing. Really stupid. The point was that Voldemort, by going after Harry and not Neville in effect CHOSE Harry (without realising it) to be his rival.

katiemac
07-16-2007, 06:54 AM
Bellatrix also tortured Neville's parents to insanity (also I don't think she is Voldemort's only female follower, just his girl friday)


Agreed. I should have said she's the only female Death Eater, not follower (the entire lineage of Blacks, except for Sirius, were followers of Voldemort). Another trivia piece I just remembered ... Bellatrix's sister, Narcissa, is married to Lucius Malfoy (and Draco's mother). There's a third sister, Andromeda, who is a "blood traitor" because she married a muggle. She hasn't appeared in the books yet, and might not, but Tonks is her daughter, so if they didn't mention, Sirius and Tonks are related.

Toothpaste
07-16-2007, 06:55 AM
Ooh yes, wasn't she Tonks' mum?

althrasher
07-16-2007, 06:59 AM
Narcissa wasn't a death eater? I thought she was...*frantically flips back through GoF...*

Jersey Chick
07-16-2007, 07:00 AM
OK - here goes:



Plot questions: Sirius is supposed to be on the run, right? Or did I miss something? Why is he hanging around, or is that supposed to be an underground movement (the Order of Phoenix)? And why gathering at Sirius' old house? That, too me, seems like a risky move. Surely Voldemort can find them.

Yes - Sirius is still on the run. The house is under a spell so it can't be found on a map, and Dumbledore is the secret keeper for the Order, so only he can tell the house's location.


If the other kids can't see the Thestral because they haven't witnessed death, how can they ride on them to the Ministry of Magic?

My husband asked this too - the thestrals are there, they are invisible. Like when Harry puts on his cloak, he's invisible, but he's still solid. The thestrals are solid.


Who sent the Dementors? They never said.

I'm pretty sure the ministry did, to discredit Harry. I'll have to go back and thumb through the early part of the book (I tend to get what happened in which book screwed up)


Who is Helena Bonham Carter's character?

Bellatrix Lestrange is Sirius's cousin. All these families are related somehow - either blood, or marriage.


If the Centaurs captured Umbridge, how did she get back? What really happened to her?[/quote[

Dumbledore rescued her, but no one knows how or what really happened to her. He just walked into the forest and returned with her.

[quote]What is that veiled archway?

It's never clearly explained - I don't know if it's death or limbo.


Who made those prophecies (in crystal balls) and what happened when those balls got smashed during the battle? Seems awfully silly to keep them in breakable glass balls on flimsy shelves.

The prophecies are about all sorts of stuff - the one about Harry was made my Trelawney, the loony divination teacher. Only she didn't know she'd made it. What they don't tell you in the movie is that the prophecy declaring Harry as Voldemort's equal (and his greatest threat) didn't really declare Harry at all. It stated that Voldemort's equal was born as the month of July died - both Harry and Neville were born at that time. Voldemort created Harry because he chose Harry as the one to fulfill the prophecy (if that makes any sense). The prophecy was then re-labeled to bear Harry's name.


How did the Order of Phoenix know Harry and co. are at the Ministry? Because of Snape, actually. Harry gives him that clue in the movie, and he checks to see where Sirius is. The members of the order were at hq when Snape came calling.


If only Harry could read his prophecy, how did Dumbledore know? Why did he feel like he had to ignore Harry to save him? Dumbledore thought that by distancing Harry, it would keep Harry safe. Dumbeldore knew the prophecy because he'd been there when Trelawney first predicted it (he'd met with her to interview her for the job as Divination teacher, and was about to turn her down when she made the prophecy).


I read on Wikipedia about Neville Lonebottom at the end, but they didn't say anything (I don't remember) in the movie.
Neville could have very easily been Harry. Neville's parents were tortured and driven insane by Bellatrix.


If they know Lucius Malfoy is a follower of Voldemort, why did they keep him at the Ministry, and why did they keep Draco at Hogwart? I don't think they knew until he was unmasked at the Ministry. Only Harry had seen him before that. (I think. I might have to go back and read the GoF.)


They skimped over a lot of characters -- Ron, Hermione, Draco, McGonagle... would be nice to develop them more. I did like the reveal about Snape and his history with James Potter. That's a nice touch. There was so much in Snape's past - James, Sirius, and Lupin picked on Snape mercilessly. Harry sees it all in something called a Pensieve - where memories are poured into a basin and you stick your head into the bowl and "fall" into the memory. Harry sees all kinds of things about his father that he is of two minds about - James is arrogant and cocky - a typical 15 year old boy. Snape is their target. It's almost sad, really. Almost.

I hope that helped fill in some of the holes - there was a bit in the book about Sirius getting stir-crazy from being penned up in the house all the time, that maybe he was sometimes mistaking Harry for James - things like that. :D

katiemac
07-16-2007, 07:01 AM
Yes, thanks Toothpaste; I just remembered that fact myself.

And Narcissa's not a Death Eater, no, but it's never stated if she did any work for them/Voldemort.

scully931
07-16-2007, 07:21 AM
And I still hate Dumbledore. He doesn't do the Dumbledore in the books justice.


:rant: Me too! Where's the TWINKLE?!?! Dumbledore is not a creepy old man!

katiemac
07-16-2007, 07:32 AM
There was so much in Snape's past - James, Sirius, and Lupin picked on Snape mercilessly. Harry sees it all in something called a Pensieve - where memories are poured into a basin and you stick your head into the bowl and "fall" into the memory. Harry sees all kinds of things about his father that he is of two minds about - James is arrogant and cocky - a typical 15 year old boy. Snape is their target. It's almost sad, really. Almost.

Mm, yes. It's too bad the movies didn't play up that relationship, as far back as the first one. It's such a major crutch for the sixth novel -- that may not play out as nicely. I read an interview with Yates where he mentions wanting to let Radcliffe "stretch his comedic legs" for the next film. :Wha: ? I think that's the book with the least comedy -- but we'll have to see how it plays out.

Toothpaste
07-16-2007, 07:46 AM
Sigh the flashback is my fav bit, and actually it happens when Harry finally can read Snape's mind in return (after Snape repeatedly reading his during Occulmency lessons) and is then the reason that Snape in white hot rage stops teaching Harry - an episode in the film that was so short and so underplayed that I wonder if anyone got it at all.

In fact the whole lessons thing was so underplayed, its significance is HUGE, and part of the reason that Harry screws up at the end and Voldemort is able to manipulate him into believing Sirius is at the Department of Mysteries. All these huge errors in judgment: the fact that Dumbledore entrusts the lessons to Snape, the fact that Snape quits on Harry because of a personal vendetta, and the fact that Harry is too immature and moody to practice . . . all of that . . . nada. Grr.

Jersey Chick
07-16-2007, 09:40 AM
And part of the memory-thing gives such insight into Snape. His childhood is hinted at being violent (in one memory, Snape is a little boy cowering in a corner while his father's going off on his mother about something) so there's hints of abuse and such. It's no wonder Snape's a little... off... and a wee bit mean to boot.

Writer2011
07-16-2007, 10:27 AM
Did you guys love the reference to Hitler with the big flag bearing Fudge's image? OMG that was so cool.


*sigh*
I saw it but what's so great about Hitler? He was a nut job who murdered tons of Jews. Why for the life of me would anyone put anything about Hitler in a movie...talk about being offended.

As for the movie itself..i'm not a Harry Potter purist by any means but it was average.

Yeah, so the movie is 138 minutes...it could have been shorter. I don't like movies much over 2 hours--but to each his own. And as for how Sirius Black got around, or this and that--just enjoy and stop worrying the pee out of yourself--just accept it and move on

Saanen
07-16-2007, 02:54 PM
aspiringwriter, no one here is suggesting that Hitler is cool. The use of the flag in the movie implied that Fudge and his cronies are using totalitarian-type methods to make people think that he's in utter control and there are no problems. It was a nice image and an effective one.

I don't think this is an excellent movie, either, although I enjoyed it once. The simple fact that those who haven't read the book come away with more questions than answers make it an inferior movie right there. But chastising people for posting about a movie's details in a thread intended for posting about a movie's details--well, come on, if you don't want to join the discussion no one's forcing you.

maestrowork
07-16-2007, 06:49 PM
The prophecies are about all sorts of stuff - the one about Harry was made my Trelawney, the loony divination teacher. Only she didn't know she'd made it. What they don't tell you in the movie is that the prophecy declaring Harry as Voldemort's equal (and his greatest threat) didn't really declare Harry at all. It stated that Voldemort's equal was born as the month of July died - both Harry and Neville were born at that time. Voldemort created Harry because he chose Harry as the one to fulfill the prophecy (if that makes any sense). The prophecy was then re-labeled to bear Harry's name.




Dumbledore knew the prophecy because Professor Trelawney (Emma Thompson) is the one who made that prophecy, and she predicted it to Dumbledore. Then somebody recorded it for the ministry (though that process is unknown).


I have more questions about the prophecy. :) If Dumbledore already knew it, and if Trelawney made it, why did Voldemort have to go through all that trouble going through Harry to get to it: "the only thing he came for that he didn't get" (in the GoF)? I mean, sheesh, just torture Trelawney already. I'm sure it's better explained in the book but the movie just left me scratching my head.

Also, if Umbridge is such a powerful witch, why is she so scared by the fireworks? Why did she so easily get tricked by Harry and Hermione to go into the forest. I personally think that part is out of character for her.

I really enjoyed the movie, by the way. My logical mind just couldn't rest with these questions. :) Also, I really do wish they had developed the characters and relationship more. For example, it would have been nice to see Ron and Hermione get it on a bit. :) I think the movie focuses on the plot too much, but I can sure understand why. It's not easy to fit everything in a 2 hour 17 minutes movie, and they have to cover all the major plot points.

maestrowork
07-16-2007, 06:56 PM
i'm not a Harry Potter purist by any means but it was average.

Yeah, so the movie is 138 minutes...it could have been shorter. I don't like movies much over 2 hours--but to each his own. And as for how Sirius Black got around, or this and that--just enjoy and stop worrying the pee out of yourself--just accept it and move on

You're a true man of contradiction, aren't you? You said it was only average for you (meaning you didn't like it that much either) but you are telling others "oh shut up and just enjoy it"? You said you didn't like movies over 2 hours (and you wanted this one to be shorter) and yet in another thread you said you loved Transformers which, by the way, is 144 minutes.

BTW, I would ask questions any way I want, thank you very much. I paid $10 plus popcorn for this.

Seriously, if you don't want to engage in meaningful discussion, I suggest that you skip these threads and move on.

Jersey Chick
07-16-2007, 06:57 PM
I have more questions about the prophecy. :) If Dumbledore already knew it, and if Trelawney made it, why did Voldemort have to go through all that trouble going through Harry to get to it: "the only thing he came for that he didn't get" (in the GoF)? I mean, sheesh, just torture Trelawney already. I'm sure it's better explained in the book but the movie just left me scratching my head.

Because she's in the Hogwarts castle and Voldemort can't get in there because of all the charms and spells on it. Remember, he is afraid of Dumbledore - who is his equal. That's why Dumbledore wouldn't let Trelawney leave. She is safe at Hogwarts.


Also, if Umbridge is such a powerful witch, why is she so scared by the fireworks? Why did she so easily get tricked by Harry and Hermione to go into the forest. I personally think that part is out of character for her.

The fireworks in the book is soooo much more impressive. And the Weasleys turn a hallway into a huge, stinking swamp. She's got so much to deal with and gets a little frazzled. Plus, she is so determined to crush Dumbledore and prove the Ministry right that (I think) she gets a little drunk with power. That's why she goes with Harry and Hermoine - blinded by the madness.


I really enjoyed the movie, by the way. My logical mind just couldn't rest with these questions. :) Also, I really do wish they had developed the characters and relationship more. For example, it would have been nice to see Ron and Hermione get it on a bit. :) I think the movie focuses on the plot too much, but I can sure understand why. It's not easy to fit everything in a 2 hour 17 minutes movie, and they have to cover all the major plot points.

Yeah - there's so much more - like Harry's relationship with Cho - it fizzles because she's still getting over Cedric's death, and Harry's so frustrated by feeling so powerless, etc. Every relationship suffers from it and it's cool to see how they all band together at the end, despite all the fighting and sniping.

I'd really suggest reading the later books, simply because there is so much more to them, and the movies make a lot more sense as a result. :)

maestrowork
07-16-2007, 07:03 PM
Because she's in the Hogwarts castle and Voldemort can't get in there because of all the charms and spells on it. Remember, he is afraid of Dumbledore - who is his equal. That's why Dumbledore wouldn't let Trelawney leave. She is safe at Hogwarts.


Ah, that explains so much to me. Thanks.



The fireworks in the book is soooo much more impressive. And the Weasleys turn a hallway into a huge, stinking swamp. She's got so much to deal with and gets a little frazzled. Plus, she is so determined to crush Dumbledore and prove the Ministry right that (I think) she gets a little drunk with power. That's why she goes with Harry and Hermoine - blinded by the madness.

None of that really came through to me in the movies.




I'd really suggest reading the later books, simply because there is so much more to them, and the movies make a lot more sense as a result. :)

I think I might. I got a little bored with the first books (they were a little too "kiddie" for me) so I stopped reading. But it seems like the later books are more layered, complex and rich. Now that I've seen the movie, I may pick up the books.

robeiae
07-16-2007, 07:07 PM
Ah, that explains so much to me. Thanks.

Yes. Yes, it does. Hmmm...

maestrowork
07-16-2007, 07:14 PM
Yes. Yes, it does. Hmmm...

Shaddup. ;) It's a good enough explanation because it works within the rules of magic. I have a problem when they break the rules and the characters are out of character. But as long as it stays within the rules -- for example, the whole thing about Hogwarts being a safe place -- it is satisfactory for me. It makes sense now, for example, why Dumbledore is so adamant about keeping Tralawney in the school. Before I thought it was just a power struggle, but this adds more layers to it.

I also have to remember that when they do the spells and charms and magic, etc. the muggles don't see them. For example, the house. Or when they fly through the streets of London.

Southern_girl29
07-16-2007, 07:20 PM
We saw it on Saturday at the IMAX with 3D. That was really cool. We took my four-year-old, who wasn't creeped out by any of it. However, she did get a little bored toward the end, because I think it was just too long for her to sit still. When she watches something at home, she can get up and move around.

Anyway, I liked the movie. I was disappointed by two things. I HATE they left out the scene at St. Mungo's. It should have been in there. I was also disappointed in the way they handled the Weasley's leaving. I need to get the book back out but I believe they mention their joke shop. I think the swamp in the book would have been great in the movie.

I didn't have a problem with anything else they left out. It was my first experience with IMAX, and I loved it, although I did get a little cross-eyed when they were showing the newspapers.

maestrowork
07-16-2007, 07:23 PM
The 3-D gave me a headache afterwards. I think the action sequence in 3-D is neat by very harsh on the eyes. And 15 minutes of that was too long. But I'd go with IMAX whenever I can -- that's the best way to watch a movie.

ChunkyC
07-16-2007, 07:28 PM
You really should read the books, Ray. They keep getting better and better, deeper and more complex as you go along. Phoenix is the most layered of them all so far -- probably more than half of what is in the book didn't make it into the movie. It really would take a six hour miniseries to do Phoenix justice, so no matter what they chose to leave out, it would leave gaping holes in the story when compared to the book.

And the huge hanging banner of Fudge thing -- it reminded me of Big Brother from George Orwell's 1984, another totalitarian leader, which Fudge was most definitely becoming.

Jersey Chick
07-16-2007, 07:34 PM
I never made the connection between Fudge and Big Brother, but now that it's been brought up, I'm wondering how I missed it! :D

The latter books are by far superior - I've been rereading Order and Half-Blood Prince but I can't really be bothered with the earlier ones anymore.

Southern_girl29
07-16-2007, 07:49 PM
I never made the connection between Fudge and Big Brother, but now that it's been brought up, I'm wondering how I missed it! :D

The latter books are by far superior - I've been rereading Order and Half-Blood Prince but I can't really be bothered with the earlier ones anymore.

I'm re-reading the whole series right now so it will all be fresh in my memory for Saturday. I think my favorite book out of the series is Goblets of Fire, although I still love the first one for sentimental reasons. The first movie is my favorite though.

Jersey Chick
07-16-2007, 08:04 PM
The first movie is my favorite, as well - they get so dark and heavy from there on.

As for books, my favorite (for now) is Half-Blood Prince.

And I love the way Rowling plays on words for place names. Genius.

Salem
07-16-2007, 08:10 PM
Of course I realize some things have to be omitted in order to keep the movie time to a minimum, but I was disappointed that they left out Mundungus Fletcher! He would have been so much fun to have in the movie! Other than that and no St Mungos I have little to bicker about.

Southern_girl29
07-16-2007, 08:44 PM
Of course I realize some things have to be omitted in order to keep the movie time to a minimum, but I was disappointed that they left out Mundungus Fletcher! He would have been so much fun to have in the movie! Other than that and no St Mungos I have little to bicker about.

This reminds me of Mrs. Figg. In the books, she has been around the whole time. She's the one who used to watch Harry while the Dursleys went out and did things with Dudley. She wasn't just put into place to watch Harry after Voldemort came back. Of course, I don't really have a problem with the way they handled it; your post just reminded me of that.

Duncan J Macdonald
07-16-2007, 09:46 PM
Originally Posted by Jersey Chick http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1477046#post1477046)
Because she's in the Hogwarts castle and Voldemort can't get in there because of all the charms and spells on it. Remember, he is afraid of Dumbledore - who is his equal. That's why Dumbledore wouldn't let Trelawney leave. She is safe at Hogwarts.



Ah, that explains so much to me. Thanks.
It's more than that. Professor Trelawney does not remember her Prophecies once she's given them. Dumbledore doesn't keep her on the faculty so that no one else can get the Prophecy from her, but rather because she is an Authentic Prophet, and he wants to control the area where she may Prophecize again, and by extension, those who will be able to hear them. Note Trelawney's Prophecy in The Prisoner of Azkaban -- once she's done, she has no memory of it.**

In the Wizarding World, recorded Prophices can only be heard by 1) those who heard them originally (Dumbledore and, in this case, Snape{but only a part of it, as he was chased away}) and 2) the subject of the prophecy (in this case, Voldemort, Harry, and Neville).
So, Voldemort had to influence Harry (since he couldn't coerce Dumbledore and he couldn't reach Neville) to go get the Prophecy recording for him from the Ministry.









**From Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, Chapter 16, Professor Trelawney's Prediction: 'THE DARK LORD LIES ALONE AND FRIENDLESS, ABANDONED BY HIS FOLLOWERS. HIS SERVANT HAS BEEN CHAINED THESE TWELVE YEARS. TONIGHT, BEFORE MIDNIGHT ... THE SERVANT WILL BREAK FREE AND SET OUT TO REJOIN HIS MASTER. THE DARK LORD WILL RISE AGAIN WITH HIS SERVANT'S AID, GREATER AND MORE TERRIBLE THAT EVER HE WAS. TONIGHT ... BEFORE MIDNIGHT ... THE SERVANT WILL SET OUT TO REJOIN HIS MASTER ...'
Professor Trelawney's head fell forward onto her chest. She made a grunting sort of noise. Harry sat there, staring at her. Then quite suddenly, Professor Trelawney's head snapped up again.
'I'm so sorry, dear boy,' she said dreamily. 'The heat of the day, you know… I drifted off for a moment…'
Harry stood there, still staring.
'Is there anything wrong, my dear?'
'You – you just told me that the – the Dark Lord's going to rise again… that his servant's going to go back to him…'
Professor Trelawney looked thoroughly startled.
'The Dark Lord? He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named? My dear boy, that's hardly something to joke about … rise again, indeed…'
'But you just said it! You said the Dark Lord…'
'I think you must have dozed off too, dear!' said Professor Trelawney.
'I would certainly not presume to predict anything quite as far-fetched as that!'

katiemac
07-16-2007, 10:29 PM
In the Wizarding World, recorded Prophices can only be heard by 1) those who heard them originally (Dumbledore and, in this case, Snape{but only a part of it, as he was chased away}) and 2) the subject of the prophecy (in this case, Voldemort, Harry, and Neville).
So, Voldemort had to influence Harry (since he couldn't coerce Dumbledore and he couldn't reach Neville) to go get the Prophecy recording for him from the Ministry.

I'm going to argue semantics here, just to be more clear. The prophecy can be heard by anyone, but only the people who the prophecy involves can retrieve it from the record room. Since Harry's and Voldemort's names were on it, they were they only two people who could get it. So, they trick Harry into going to the Ministry, since Voldemort couldn't waltz in there himself (although... apparently he could).

I don't know if Neville could get it? I think since they went ahead and labeled the prophecy "Harry Potter" (after Voldemort attacked), that gave up any chance of Neville being able to get it.

Ray, I don't know where you stopped reading, but if you decide do continue you may want to start with Goblet of Fire. (I'd say Prisoner of Azkaban, but I don't want to push you too far back.) I can think of a few points from that book, at least, that still haven't played out completely.

Writer2011
07-16-2007, 11:26 PM
You're a true man of contradiction, aren't you? You said it was only average for you (meaning you didn't like it that much either) but you are telling others "oh shut up and just enjoy it"? You said you didn't like movies over 2 hours (and you wanted this one to be shorter) and yet in another thread you said you loved Transformers which, by the way, is 144 minutes.

BTW, I would ask questions any way I want, thank you very much. I paid $10 plus popcorn for this.

Seriously, if you don't want to engage in meaningful discussion, I suggest that you skip these threads and move on.
I'm entitled to say anything I want on here.

Yes Transformers was long and I wish it had of been shorter.

As for paying $10--that's your own fault.

maestrowork
07-16-2007, 11:37 PM
In the Wizarding World, recorded Prophices can only be heard by 1) those who heard them originally (Dumbledore and, in this case, Snape{but only a part of it, as he was chased away}) and 2) the subject of the prophecy (in this case, Voldemort, Harry, and Neville).
So, Voldemort had to influence Harry (since he couldn't coerce Dumbledore and he couldn't reach Neville) to go get the Prophecy recording for him from the Ministry.

Wait, wait... then Voldemort shouldn't need Harry to get the prophecy because he should be able to retrieve it himself because he is one of the subjects. No?

Jersey Chick
07-16-2007, 11:45 PM
Egads - I'd have to go look that up.

I forgot about the other prophecies - but I always thought it was mostly to keep Voldemort from getting her. She's not a great seer, as seen (yuk yuk) by the fact that Dumbledore originally wasn't going to hire her because she was a disappointment.

maestrowork
07-16-2007, 11:48 PM
Don't you love it when some bozo like me is trying to poke holes? :) Rowling and Co. should hire me as their script/book advisor. LOL.

robeiae
07-16-2007, 11:51 PM
This is why I prefer Dan Brown. No plot holes.

katiemac
07-16-2007, 11:59 PM
Wait, wait... then Voldemort shouldn't need Harry to get the prophecy because he should be able to retrieve it himself because he is one of the subjects. No?

That's true, yeah. But in the book Voldemort's laying low, since nobody except Dumbledore and the Order of the Phoenix believes he's back. He can't just show up in the ministry and get it himself. Tricking Harry to the ministry is two birds with one stone kind of deal, V. gets the prophecy and the Death Eaters kill Harry.

BUT... Voldemort shows up anyway when his Death Eaters are in trouble, so yes, that does go all bunk. Tricking Harry, though, was one of the only ways V. could get him out of Hogwarts and out from Dumbledore's watch.


Don't you love it when some bozo like me is trying to poke holes? :)

Poking holes is all right. I'll be the first one to say when something doesn't make sense. Although I'll give Rowling credit in the sense that a lot of previous "huh?" moments can get cleared up in a later book. I doubt this ministry thing can get resolved, though. ;)

I think what was neat about this book was that everyone made mistakes. The heroes don't really save the day. Harry made huge mistakes, Sirius, Dumbledore. The whole situation would have played out better if they'd acted differently.

maestrowork
07-17-2007, 12:15 AM
BUT... Voldemort shows up anyway when his Death Eaters are in trouble, so yes, that does go all bunk. Tricking Harry, though, was one of the only ways V. could get him out of Hogwarts and out from Dumbledore's watch.


That's a whole other hole I want to poke. Hogwarts and Dumbledore protect Harry, right? But what about the summer when Harry is back with the Dursleys? If the Ministry can send the Dementors to Harry, then Voldemort sure can use that time frame, when Harry is out in the Muggle's world, to trap/kill Harry. If nothing else, V. and his Death Eaters just look very incompetent.

Southern_girl29
07-17-2007, 12:16 AM
BUT... Voldemort shows up anyway when his Death Eaters are in trouble, so yes, that does go all bunk. Tricking Harry, though, was one of the only ways V. could get him out of Hogwarts and out from Dumbledore's watch.



I don't think Voldemort showing up makes it go all bunk at all. I think that he was able to see that it was going wrong, that they weren't able to get the prophecy, so he came to get Harry if he could.

Southern_girl29
07-17-2007, 12:18 AM
That's a whole other hole I want to poke. Hogwarts and Dumbledore protect Harry, right? But what about the summer when Harry is back with the Dursleys? If the Ministry can send the Dementors to Harry, then Voldemort sure can use that time frame, when Harry is out in the Muggle's world, to trap/kill Harry. If nothing else, V. and his Death Eaters just look very incompetent.

Dumbledore has placed a spell on the Dursley house to keep Harry safe until he reaches legal age in the wizarding world. At the end of Half Blood Prince, he only has a few months to return to Privet Drive before he becomes of age and the protection will no longer help him.

Jersey Chick
07-17-2007, 12:19 AM
That's a whole other hole I want to poke. Hogwarts and Dumbledore protect Harry, right? But what about the summer when Harry is back with the Dursleys? If the Ministry can send the Dementors to Harry, then Voldemort sure can use that time frame, when Harry is out in the Muggle's world, to trap/kill Harry. If nothing else, V. and his Death Eaters just look very incompetent.

That is also explained - the house is under a protective charm that lasts until Harry is of age (I think that was the cutoff date), provided that the Dursleys allow Harry back. Remember, Harry's mother and his aunt are sisters - so she knows about magic, but I think it skipped over her. Still, she's made some sort of promise to watch over Harry (she gets a letter in the beginning of Phoenix reminding her of her promise.)

maestrowork
07-17-2007, 12:22 AM
Dumbledore has placed a spell on the Dursley house to keep Harry safe until he reaches legal age in the wizarding world. At the end of Half Blood Prince, he only has a few months to return to Privet Drive before he becomes of age and the protection will no longer help him.

But Harry isn't confined in the house. He could go out, walk around, etc. And that was precisely where he was attacked by the Dementors.

And why not just keep Harry at Hogwarts the whole time anyway? He is not necessarily having a good time with the Dursleys.

That's the thing, we all want to explain it away but no matter how I look at it, some things just don't come together. But that's okay. I still enjoyed myself.

sassandgroove
07-17-2007, 12:24 AM
So they cut stuff out...the book is over 900 pages---would you rather have a seven hour movie? I know I wouldn't.
No need to get snippy...It was shorter than the last one and the book was longer. No I don't want a 7 hour movie, but I could have done 15 or 20 more minutes if it meant getting some of the stuff I liked from the book in there. Like the 4th movie, it seemed rushed to me and some of the things they omitted I thought were important, like Kretcher's role in the conspiracy. Snapes Background, more with the DA, and Ron and Hermione.

katiemac
07-17-2007, 12:29 AM
But Harry isn't confined in the house. He could go out, walk around, etc. And that was precisely where he was attacked by the Dementors.

The spell goes back to the fact that Harry's mother gives up her life for him. Since the sister took him in, it extended that spell. So it's not the house that's under protection. It's the fact that, while Harry's under his aunt and uncle's care, he's safe from V. and the Death Eaters. (When he turns 18, they can't "legally" care for him, so the spell doesn't work.) But beyond that, noting is explained in the details of the spell or about what would happen should V. actually try to attack him while at his aunt and uncle's.

And since it's a spell against V. and the Death Eaters, not any other enemies (like Umbridge, sending the dementors).

ETA: It is mentioned that Dumbledore's preference is for him to remain at the Dursely's. Something about, as long as he returns to the Dursleys every once in awhile, he has a safe place to stay. I think the specifics are yet-to-be revealed; it was hinted a bit at the end of the last book.

Okay, kicking myself off this thread now to go do some actual work! ;)

Jersey Chick
07-17-2007, 12:30 AM
But Harry isn't confined in the house. He could go out, walk around, etc. And that was precisely where he was attacked by the Dementors.

And why not just keep Harry at Hogwarts the whole time anyway? He is not necessarily having a good time with the Dursleys.

That's the thing, we all want to explain it away but no matter how I look at it, some things just don't come together. But that's okay. I still enjoyed myself.


Damn, I think you got me on that one! :D He's safe in the house, but now I wonder about the rest of the time... rats...

Southern_girl29
07-17-2007, 12:48 AM
The spell goes back to the fact that Harry's mother gives up her life for him. Since the sister took him in, it extended that spell. So it's not the house that's under protection. It's the fact that, while Harry's under his aunt and uncle's care, he's safe from V. and the Death Eaters. (When he turns 18, they can't "legally" care for him, so the spell doesn't work.) But beyond that, noting is explained in the details of the spell or about what would happen should V. actually try to attack him while at his aunt and uncle's.

And since it's a spell against V. and the Death Eaters, not any other enemies (like Umbridge, sending the dementors).

ETA: It is mentioned that Dumbledore's preference is for him to remain at the Dursely's. Something about, as long as he returns to the Dursleys every once in awhile, he has a safe place to stay. I think the specifics are yet-to-be revealed; it was hinted a bit at the end of the last book.

Okay, kicking myself off this thread now to go do some actual work! ;)

Harry tells Ron and Hermione that he's going back to Privet Drive at the end of the Half Blood Prince. I think more will be explained about it in the new book, too. He says he's going back because Dumbledore wanted him, too.

I think you're right about being under their care and not in the same house. I didn't read it that way, but it's been a while since I've read the last two. I hope to get onto those in the next day or two.

Toothpaste
07-17-2007, 12:53 AM
Yes Dumbledore insists that Harry goes home each summer. We don't really know why. We may find out in A WEEK!!!! Ehem. Kind of excited.

Anyway, Mrs. Figg is a witch who has no magic powers, a squib, and she was sent to live on Harry's street ever since he was dropped off to keep an eye on him. When things get worse after book 4, the Order of the Phoenix actually take turns spying on him, Harry doesn't know (and man does he get pissed off when he finds out). In fact the Dementor attack happened when one of the wizards who was supposed to be on duty leaves his post to do some business (he's a nice guy, but a bit of a shady underworld character). So when Harry is away from the house, he still is protected. Sort of.

dclary
07-17-2007, 12:56 AM
Yes Dumbledore insists that Harry goes home each summer. We don't really know why. We may find out in A WEEK!!!! Ehem. Kind of excited.

Anyway, Mrs. Figg is a witch who has no magic powers, a squib, and she was sent to live on Harry's street ever since he was dropped off to keep an eye on him. When things get worse after book 4, the Order of the Phoenix actually take turns spying on him, Harry doesn't know (and man does he get pissed off when he finds out). So when Harry is away from the house, he still is protected. Sort of.

I thought in Goblet or Phoenix Dumbledore explained that Harry had to live with family for his mother's protective magic to still have effect. He was hoping that going to live with Sirius would count, which is another reason why Black had to die, to keep the Muggles in the picture.

ChunkyC
07-17-2007, 01:11 AM
But Harry isn't confined in the house. He could go out, walk around, etc. And that was precisely where he was attacked by the Dementors.
Would you stay under that roof with those nutbars if you could sneak out for a few minutes? ;)

I'd have to check, but I do believe in the book it's more clear Harry knows he's not as safe if he wanders out, but being an angst ridden teenager who can't stand his living arrangement, he takes a risk and it costs him dearly. How many of our own teenage kids do stupid things? I think this bit rings quite true.

sassandgroove
07-17-2007, 01:39 AM
The way I understood it, as long as Harry goes to the Durlsey's every year even for just a little while, then the spell is effective. That's why he can go off and spend the rest of the summer with the Weasley's and at Sirus' house. That part is always condensed in the movies, and it makes it seem like he goes to the Weasley's or to Sirus' at the end of summer. Or in the 4th at the leaky cauldron.

sassandgroove
07-17-2007, 01:50 AM
Spoilers*******




I saw it but what's so great about Hitler? He was a nut job who murdered tons of Jews. Why for the life of me would anyone put anything about Hitler in a movie...talk about being offended.
She was talking about the banner of Fudge in the Ministry of Magic hinting at how he was acting like a dictator or big brother.

As for the movie itself..i'm not a Harry Potter purist by any means but it was average.

Yeah, so the movie is 138 minutes...it could have been shorter. I don't like movies much over 2 hours--but to each his own. And as for how Sirius Black got around, or this and that--just enjoy and stop worrying the pee out of yourself--just accept it and move onUm...we're here for the purpose of discussing that and more. It is fun.


Shaddup. ;) It's a good enough explanation because it works within the rules of magic. I have a problem when they break the rules and the characters are out of character. But as long as it stays within the rules -- for example, the whole thing about Hogwarts being a safe place -- it is satisfactory for me. It makes sense now, for example, why Dumbledore is so adamant about keeping Tralawney in the school. Before I thought it was just a power struggle, but this adds more layers to it.

I also have to remember that when they do the spells and charms and magic, etc. the muggles don't see them. For example, the house. Or when they fly through the streets of London.
I forget why I quoted this but Trelawny doesn't remember her prophecies. Dumbledore wants her near him, not out where just anyone could hear subsequent prophecies.

Oh...Oh... Ray, Sirus isn't really going around that much. He's in his house that is being used as the headquarters for the Order of the Pheonix and is hidden. They don't go into it much but in the book he is really frustrated becuase he is a man of action and feels trapped. In the fight scene in the end I got a sense that he is enjoying himself that he can finally be out and active and DOING something. He makes one comment to Harry in the movie about giving his house to be used for the headquaterts as the only useful thing he's been able to do, other than that the movie didn't touch on his frustation much. THe thing at the train station, he goes in disguise as the dog. In the book Draco sees him and tells his father.

Toothpaste
07-17-2007, 02:36 AM
Actually I still think the spell on the Dursley house hasn't been fully explained yet, or maybe I'm just not satisfied with it. I just think that Petunia has more to do with it than we've been told yet. Could be wrong though. Been known to happen. No seriously, it has! Weird I know.

maestrowork
07-17-2007, 03:29 AM
Well, to me the spell of the house/Dursleys is not satisfactory yet, and maybe Rowling will fully disclose the mystery in Book 7. Or maybe not.

Jersey Chick
07-17-2007, 03:52 AM
Are you going to hold the house spell against HP? Communist! ;)

maestrowork
07-17-2007, 03:54 AM
Fascist!

Jersey Chick
07-17-2007, 04:30 AM
Goof!

(i couldn't think of another "ist") :)

Sage
07-17-2007, 04:57 AM
Actually I still think the spell on the Dursley house hasn't been fully explained yet, or maybe I'm just not satisfied with it. I just think that Petunia has more to do with it than we've been told yet. Could be wrong though. Been known to happen. No seriously, it has! Weird I know.
My understanding is that it's not really a spell as much as magic in general. Old magic, that Voldemort doesn't understand, or so Dumbledore tells us all the time. Lily gave her life for Harry, which is why he was protected in the first four books/movies from Voldy's touch. When Petunia accept Harry into the Dursley's home, knowing what that entailed (as Dumbledore left a note with him ("Remember my last [letter]," Dumbledore's Howler tells her at the beginning of book 5)), she furthered that protection onto the time Harry's away from school (as long as he spends a minimum amount of time at the Dursleys... two weeks a year, I believe it is). In book 5, Dumbledore explains this to Harry, & it is repeated at the beginning of book 6 to the Dursley's, so they will accept Harry back the next summer until he turns 17 (the wizarding age of adulthood), when the magic will have no effect anymore. Harry had no idea of this magic until the end of book 5, a mistake Dumbledore admits he has made, along with not sharing the prophecy 'til that time.

maestrowork
07-17-2007, 05:17 AM
Well, I guess we'll have to find out what the letter said. I always find it odd that the Dursleys would endure the whole thing, especially since they despise Harry so much. So there must be something really big that they can't just say no...

kristie911
07-17-2007, 05:43 AM
Ugh...I just finally saw the movie today. Now I have six frickin' pages of this thread to read. <sigh> Better get started.

Christine N.
07-17-2007, 06:25 AM
I forget why I quoted this but Trelawny doesn't remember her prophecies. Dumbledore wants her near him, not out where just anyone could hear subsequent prophecies.



Mor importantly, Voldemort could use a memory charm to pull the prohpecy out of her, like he did to Bertha Jorkins...oh, but wait, you DIDN'T see that in the bloody FOURTH movie, because they left it OUT!

Anyway, yes, we don't yet know what was in the letter DD sent to Petunia. As long as he can call the place where his mother's blood lives home, even for just one day a year, the protection will remain. (HBP)

Until he turns seventeen. Then all bets are off. Which brings us to Book 7.

Jersey Chick
07-17-2007, 06:35 AM
5 DAYS! :e2woo:

Then we can take a few days to read it, and come back to talk about it (cause you know that's gonna happen), and really make heads spin! :)

reenkam
07-17-2007, 07:04 AM
5 DAYS! :e2woo:

Then we can take a few days to read it, and come back to talk about it (cause you know that's gonna happen), and really make heads spin! :)

I think my own excitement has reached a point that I can't feel anymore...it's almost ridiculous. And I have a TEST this week. I'm thinking answers will read "Harry Potter" for pretty much every question.

I'm definitely not taking a few days to read though. You know that someone's going to start annoucing endings somewhere. I'm getting the book at midnight, going home, shutting myself in my room, and reading through the whole thing. There will be no tv, no internet, no chances for a spoiled ending.

:)

Jersey Chick
07-17-2007, 07:13 AM
Oh, get this - my daughter's going to Vermont for a long weekend with her grandma, and my husband was going to keep our two year old occupied so I can read HP the moment it shows up at my house. Perfect, right? Well, wait a minute -a friend of mine is getting married on the 28th. His bachelor party is.....



dramatic pause



you know where this is going, right?


SATURDAY! And it's a golf outing, so my husband - who of course, was invited - is leaving here at 8 am to play freakin' golf. So I'll spend all day trying to keep my son from eating HP. I'm going to have to avoid any and all media until he goes to bed.

then I read all night... hee hee

Southern_girl29
07-17-2007, 08:17 AM
Oh, get this - my daughter's going to Vermont for a long weekend with her grandma, and my husband was going to keep our two year old occupied so I can read HP the moment it shows up at my house. Perfect, right? Well, wait a minute -a friend of mine is getting married on the 28th. His bachelor party is.....



dramatic pause



you know where this is going, right?


SATURDAY! And it's a golf outing, so my husband - who of course, was invited - is leaving here at 8 am to play freakin' golf. So I'll spend all day trying to keep my son from eating HP. I'm going to have to avoid any and all media until he goes to bed.

then I read all night... hee hee

Oh, I'm so sorry. My husband is going to keep Tessa occupied while I read. Yippee!!!! I almost thought about seeing if my parents could keep her, send my husband to something he's wanted to do for a long time, and be at home all night long. I guess we'll see.

I'm going to a book release party Friday night, but I won't actually get my book until Saturday when it comes from Amazon. I really hope I'm not tempted to buy two books, one at the book release party and the other from Amazon. LOL.

I can't wait to come back here and talk about it. I just can't believe how excited I am about this book.

Jersey Chick
07-17-2007, 09:23 AM
Oh, me too - the Wegman's out here is closing at noon and reopening as Diagon Alley at midnight. They're going to serve butter beer and chocolate frogs and I feel like such a nerd, but I think it sounds cool. I'd love to take my daughter, but I think it's just too late for her (we let her stay up on New Year's Eve - she made it to 10:30). But I'm kind of tempted to go myself.

reenkam
07-17-2007, 09:45 AM
Oh, me too - the Wegman's out here is closing at noon and reopening as Diagon Alley at midnight. They're going to serve butter beer and chocolate frogs and I feel like such a nerd, but I think it sounds cool. I'd love to take my daughter, but I think it's just too late for her (we let her stay up on New Year's Eve - she made it to 10:30). But I'm kind of tempted to go myself.

:Jaw: BUTTER BEER?!
:Jaw: CHOCOLATE FROGS?!

The Barnes and Noble near me doesn't have anything like that. They have costumes and stickers and stamps and tattos and prizes and stuff, and then they have cookies and brownies from Starbucks, but nothing Hogsmeade-esque.

Southern_girl29
07-17-2007, 09:53 AM
Oh, me too - the Wegman's out here is closing at noon and reopening as Diagon Alley at midnight. They're going to serve butter beer and chocolate frogs and I feel like such a nerd, but I think it sounds cool. I'd love to take my daughter, but I think it's just too late for her (we let her stay up on New Year's Eve - she made it to 10:30). But I'm kind of tempted to go myself.


I hardly ever let Tessa stay up that late, but I figure this is a once in a lifetime kind of thing. She loves the movies, and I'm reading the first book to her now. Hastings is our bookstore, and it's actually going to start its festivities about 8 p.m. that night. We'll go but I don't know if we'll actually stay until midnight.

I'm doing a story about it for the newspaper, and when I talked to the manager at Hastings, she said they tried to make butterbeer for the last book. She said they made it with ginger ale and butterscotch syrup, and it was nasty. So, they're going to do something different, with cat's blood and frog's blood.

They're having costume contests for adults and children. Tessa's going to be Hermione. My husband and I aren't dressing up. They're also having a trivia contest for kids and adults. I'm so going to participate in that, though. I think I'll do a good job.

Bufty
07-17-2007, 04:36 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong but is the release due Saturday night at midnight -no matter where you live? Australia first, then us over here, then you over there....

Jersey Chick
07-17-2007, 05:42 PM
Oh, don't even get me going on time differences - I have enough trouble with 12:01am Saturday (that's still Friday night to me - I have visions of showing up either a day too early or a day too late!)

I don't know if I'd like butterbeer, I just wonder what it tastes like. I'm still trying to decide if we're going. My daughter's leaving kind of early for Vermont on Saturday and if she's over-tired she'll either sleep the whole way or she'll be whiny mess and my mom'll kill me when they get back...

ChunkyC
07-17-2007, 06:23 PM
I'm like a kid myself in anticipation of this book. :D

The town where I work, Banff Alberta, is currently ranked the #1 Harry-est town in Canada (http://www.amazon.ca/gp/feature.html/ref=pd_zg_hp_mc_lg_ht/701-9290029-0419528?ie=UTF8&docId=1000072171&pf_rd_m=A3DWYIK6Y9EEQB&pf_rd_s=right-5&pf_rd_r=01D2WY98RAWS06KMFBZC&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=288469701&pf_rd_i=915398) by Amazon dot ca. Per capita, Banff has pre-ordered the most copies of Hallows in the country. I live in Canmore and we're #11.

Of course this is only Amazon orders. Our local bookstores (1 each in Banff and Canmore) report they've taken more pre-orders than for any other Potter book in the series, and are staying open past midnight so folks can grab 'em right away.

Jersey Chick
07-17-2007, 06:40 PM
When Phoenix came out, my husband was going out with one of his friends, so I asked him if he'd swing by our Borders and pick up a copy for me (I didn't trust Amazon yet - fool that I was). I was perfectly okay with it if he didn't feel like it - and not in the "I'll still be mad at you if you don't way."

Well, he was feeling brave, so he went. Got home at about 2am and swore he would never, ever do it again. So, now I do the Amazon thing - hopefully it'll be here before noon on Saturday.

Keith Olbermann did a story on HP and the general consensus is that the majority of people are going to read the last pages first, to see who's left. Not me - I don't want to know until I've read the entire book. What's the point in ruining it on the first shot?

My house will be news-dark Saturday. I don't want to know anything about it until I get to read it myself. Should be an adventure.

sunna
07-17-2007, 06:48 PM
Keith Olbermann did a story on HP and the general consensus is that the majority of people are going to read the last pages first, to see who's left.

Read the last pages first?!?!?

I cannot imagine doing that. I will, however, stay up all night reading it, and probably read it again a few days later. Which may be a bit crazy, but what the hell. I'm actually annoyed that I have two parties I'm invited to this saturday....I want to stay home and read.

Amazon better ship my copy on time, that's all I gotta say.

Southern_girl29
07-17-2007, 06:49 PM
My mom summed it up perfectly when she said I was like a kid at Christmas over this book. I just can't wait. I think the best thing about the Harry Potter books for me is that they take me back in time to when I was a little kid and I would get lost in a book. I wouldn't be aware of anything going on around me; I was wherever that book took me. Since I've been an adult, not too many books have held that power over me, except the Harry Potter ones.

I'll probably read the last pages first. I'm just that way. I do that with most books I read. I like to know what's going to happen, so I can see how the author got there. It doesn't ruin the book for me either, because for me, a book is the sum of all its parts.

Southern_girl29
07-17-2007, 06:51 PM
Amazon better ship my copy on time, that's all I gotta say.

Yeah, me too. This is the first Harry Potter book I've ordered from Amazon, and I'm going to be so mad if it doesn't get here on time.

Jersey Chick
07-17-2007, 06:53 PM
I'll probably read the last pages first. I'm just that way. I do that with most books I read. I like to know what's going to happen, so I can see how the author got there. It doesn't ruin the book for me either, because for me, a book is the sum of all its parts.

Reminds me of Billy Crystal's character in When Harry Met Sally. He said he read the last pages first because, if he died before finishing the book, he'd know how it ended. :)


I ordered Half Blood Prince from Amazon and had it by about 9am on the day of the release. Hopefully they'll be equally reliable this go-round.

Toothpaste
07-17-2007, 06:59 PM
I wonder if they hire extra strong mailmen just for the 21st? Or maybe this is Toothpaste's wishful thinking . . .

Jack_Roberts
07-17-2007, 07:31 PM
Last pages 1st? Tempting. I've thought of that.
I think I'll resist the urge. I hope.

I just hope the Trio and Ginny survive. How could I sit through movie 6 next year, knowing one of them dies? AAAGGH!

I'm going nuts over this book.

ChunkyC
07-17-2007, 07:33 PM
I'll probably read the last pages first. I'm just that way. I do that with most books I read. I like to know what's going to happen, so I can see how the author got there. It doesn't ruin the book for me either, because for me, a book is the sum of all its parts.
Nope, never, not in a million years will I do that. I want to experience it the way the author intended it to be experienced. If I read the end first, I'd never know what it was like to read the book the way the author wrote it, with all the emotional ups and downs that I'd go through as a result.

No, I just couldn't read a book out of order. It'd be like watching the seventh game of the World Series and already knowing who won. Where's the excitement in that? :)

Jersey Chick
07-17-2007, 07:34 PM
Nope, never, not in a million years will I do that. I want to experience it the way the author intended it to be experienced. If I read the end first, I'd never know what it was like to read the book the way the author wrote it, with all the emotional ups and downs that I'd go through as a result.

It's your copy of the book and you can read it any way you like, but I just couldn't do that. It'd be like watching the seventh game of the World Series and already knowing who won. Where's the excitement in that? :)

Yes - but if it was the Yankees in game 7... (who am I kidding? With the way they're playing this season, they'll be watching it like the rest of us)

I agree - once I've read the book, I'll be able to reread it knowing what happens and I'll still enjoy it - I reread Half-Blood knowing how it ended and it's still a great book.

Can't wait! Can't wait! Can't wait!

ChunkyC
07-17-2007, 07:36 PM
Sure, I've re-read books often and enjoyed them thoroughly the second+ go-round (Lord of the Rings, for example). But the first time through will always be a unique experience.

To each their own. So long as you enjoy it, I guess that's the bottom line. :)

Jersey Chick
07-17-2007, 07:37 PM
Me, too, also. I'll sit and read from page one, chewing my nails the whole time...

maestrowork
07-17-2007, 07:41 PM
Read the last pages first?!?!?


Oh you know there will be millions of people who do that.

My mom always reads the last page/chapter first when she reads fiction. Drives me crazy.

maestrowork
07-17-2007, 07:43 PM
If I read the end first, I'd never know what it was like to read the book the way the author wrote it....

But... but... I'm sure that's why Rowling designed it, though.... she probably had the ending in mind first. I'm pretty sure of that.

sunna
07-17-2007, 08:09 PM
Oh you know there will be millions of people who do that.

My mom always reads the last page/chapter first when she reads fiction. Drives me crazy.

Yep, me mum does the same thing. I don't think it would exactly ruin it for me, but I just don't experience that edge-of-my-couch excitement when I already know what's going to happen. I like being surprised.

I just looked up the terms of my order on Amazon, and they gurantee on-time shipment, or it's free. Interesting...

I'm definitely going to have to cut the partying short this Saturday. Hell with fireworks. :tongue

Southern_girl29
07-17-2007, 08:10 PM
But... but... I'm sure that's why Rowling designed it, though.... she probably had the ending in mind first. I'm pretty sure of that.

She said she always knew the last word of the book was going to be "scar." However, I read somewhere that she changed her mind about it at the last minute and it's something different now.

I think one of the reasons I like to read the ending first is I hate surprises. I just hate them, always have.

ChunkyC
07-17-2007, 09:18 PM
I love that surprise, that revelation with all the weight of what has come before driving it. There's nothing better than that OMG! moment when a story comes full circle and delivers the coup de gras. It's like the moment in game six of the 1986 World Series when....

for the three Amazonian tribesmen who don't know ... *SPOILER ALERT*

...Bill Buckner on his wonky ankles booted that ground ball that would have won it all for the Boston Red Sox if he'd snagged it and stepped on first base mere inches to his left. How could that moment have had anywhere close to the same impact if you'd known ahead of time he was going to flub it? It simply couldn't. Man, when that ball bounded down the first base line, I was up out of my seat holding my breath, ready to pound my fist in the air ... then it squirted between Buckner's legs and I nearly passed out from the shock.

I LOVE those kinds of moments. :D

reenkam
07-17-2007, 09:39 PM
My mom always reads the last page/chapter first when she reads fiction. Drives me crazy.

My mom does the same thing. And she likes reading mysteries. I don't understand why, since she knows the ending the whole time, but :Shrug:

I don't know if she'll do it with HP7 or not...maybe I'll ask her.

Allynegirl
07-17-2007, 09:42 PM
I'll chime in about Book 7 - CAN'T WAIT UNTIL FRIDAY MIDNIGHT! :snoopy:

Now, about OoTP:

The acting was superb!
The occlumency lessons were chilling!
DA was fascinating!
The Weasley exit was wonderful!
The final battle was exquisite! (except the kids should have been beaten up a bit more)

The cinematography SUCKED! Turn the #$&#& lights on, people! The subject matter was dark enough; I didn't need dark "ambience" too. I spent half the movie squinting -- trying to make out what was going on on-screen. Other than black, white and shades of gray, the only other unmuted color I remember was PINK!

Scenes flashed too quickly. If I hadn't read the book, I would have been completely lost.

Final word: I'll buy the DVD when it comes out, if only to continue my collection and because the kids will want it.

sassandgroove
07-17-2007, 09:44 PM
That was probably on purpose to accentuate the PINK.

reenkam
07-17-2007, 09:46 PM
The cinematography SUCKED! Turn the #$&#& lights on, people! The subject matter was dark enough; I didn't need dark "ambience" too. I spent half the movie squinting -- trying to make out what was going on on-screen. Other than black, white and shades of gray, the only other unmuted color I remember was PINK!

Scenes flashed too quickly. If I hadn't read the book, I would have been completely lost.

Maybe it was your theater? I could see fine when I saw it. Then again, I had on contacts for the first time so I was amazed about just how much I could see, anyway. Usually movies are kind of a blur...

I agree about the flashing of the scenes, though I definitely think it was better than GoF.

maestrowork
07-17-2007, 09:53 PM
My mom does the same thing. And she likes reading mysteries. I don't understand why, since she knows the ending the whole time, but :Shrug:

I don't know if she'll do it with HP7 or not...maybe I'll ask her.

My mom loves mysteries, too. :D

Well... I knew who was going to die in OotP, but it didn't impede my enjoyment of it. However, I didn't feel the emotional punch when it happened, so I don't know if it was because I already knew he was going to die, or because it just wasn't emotional enough as written/filmed.

Southern_girl29
07-17-2007, 09:56 PM
My mom loves mysteries, too. :D

Well... I knew who was going to die in OotP, but it didn't impede my enjoyment of it. However, I didn't feel the emotional punch when it happened, so I don't know if it was because I already knew he was going to die, or because it just wasn't emotional enough as written/filmed.


I did feel an emotional punch, even though I knew it was going to happen. I guess I'm just weird that way, that knowing something is going to happen doesn't diminish the emotions for me. Even though I know it's going to happen, I don't know how, exactly. Seeing/reading the how is what makes something pop for me.

sassandgroove
07-17-2007, 10:28 PM
Ray, I didn't get the emotional punch in the movie either. It was sort of glossed over. "That's it?" I thought. The scene in the book was better, and left you wondering if he died or is just "somewhere else."

maestrowork
07-17-2007, 10:32 PM
Ray, I didn't get the emotional punch in the movie either. It was sort of glossed over. "That's it?" I thought. The scene in the book was better, and left you wondering if he died or is just "somewhere else."

I am glad I'm not the only one. I'm just as much a sucker for "death scenes" as anyone else, and some deaths in movies really did punch me in the guts. But not so in this case. It was like, um, okay...

dclary
07-17-2007, 10:33 PM
My mom loves mysteries, too. :D

Well... I knew who was going to die in OotP, but it didn't impede my enjoyment of it. However, I didn't feel the emotional punch when it happened, so I don't know if it was because I already knew he was going to die, or because it just wasn't emotional enough as written/filmed.

I didn't feel any emotional punch when I read it the first time. First of all, despite being Harry's only "family" (loose at best), I never considered him that central a character in Harry's life -- especially since they'd had such limited contact. And the death was so amazingly brief and anticlimactic, you had to stop, go back, and read it again, and go "Huh? That's stupid."

The movie captured perfectly how lame and unusual that death was in the book, IMO.

sunna
07-17-2007, 10:51 PM
Turn the #$&#& lights on, people! The subject matter was dark enough; I didn't need dark "ambience" too. I spent half the movie squinting -- trying to make out what was going on on-screen.

Same here. I dunno if it was just the theater or what, but I had to put on my glasses pretty much when the fog-cloaked WB logo appeared. I felt doubly like an old lady, surrounded by all those popcorn snarfing kiddies.



Ray, I didn't get the emotional punch in the movie either. It was sort of glossed over. "That's it?" I thought. The scene in the book was better, and left you wondering if he died or is just "somewhere else."


I agree. It was one of the few letdowns for me. But I thought they made up for it a few minutes later. The fight between Dumbledore and Voldemort was KICK A$S. Even my husband, who only went with me so he could argue with me later when I yapped about it for the next 3 days, loved that scene.

maestrowork
07-17-2007, 11:24 PM
You already know I enjoyed it... but I do agree that parts of it do seem to become somewhat formulaic: introduce some good guys/bad guys; talk about good vs. evil some more, and talk about mom and pop some more; introduce some strange creatures or giants or what not so you can ride them or use them to help you later on; learn a new spell or trick and it will save you later; Snape snarls; the Dark Lord doesn't show up until the very end... it comes to a point when you can begin to predict what will happen -- you can make a list and check it twice. Almost.

sassandgroove
07-17-2007, 11:53 PM
Well yes to an extent. Don't forget to add, "A new Dark Arts Teacher" to the list. But it isn't just the events but how they unfold.

maestrowork
07-18-2007, 12:35 AM
Well yes to an extent. Don't forget to add, "A new Dark Arts Teacher" to the list. But it isn't just the events but how they unfold.

LOL, how could I forget the new Dark Arts teachers -- they should just get rid of that post since all the bad guys seem to gravitate toward that position. LOL. But yes, the unfolding is interesting. I'm just curious about all the "marks" that Rowling seems to have to hit every time. ;)

ChunkyC
07-18-2007, 12:41 AM
The Dark Arts teacher one is so obvious, I'm sure she's going to come up with a whopper of an explanation for it in the last book.


I hope. :D

PS -- I don't want to know a single word of the content before I read it, but I admit I am curious about how long it is, considering all the plotlines that need tying up.

Jersey Chick
07-18-2007, 12:50 AM
Unless, of course, she doesn't tie them up. In the end of Agatha Christie's last Hercule Poirot book, you aren't supposed to know if Poirot is dead or not. And we may never know, since Christie is also dead...

imagine the fracas if there are loose ends.... there'll probably be riots and pillaging and burning... it will be ugly.

ChunkyC
07-18-2007, 12:55 AM
Ah yes, and great television it shall be!

sassandgroove
07-18-2007, 12:57 AM
The Dark Arts teacher one is so obvious, I'm sure she's going to come up with a whopper of an explanation for it in the last book.


I hope. :D

It is explained. In book 6 I believe. I won't say the explanation b/c I don't want to spoil anything. Get to readin'!

---egads if you don't know this by the 5th movie - but there be spoilers about them Dark Arts teahers below---





Oh and not all the Dark Arts teachers are evil. Gilderoy Lockhart was just a fake. Lupin was cool but not accepted by everyone. Moody was cool, but his doppleganger wasn't.

dclary
07-18-2007, 01:00 AM
The Dark Arts teacher one is so obvious, I'm sure she's going to come up with a whopper of an explanation for it in the last book.


I hope. :D

PS -- I don't want to know a single word of the content before I read it, but I admit I am curious about how long it is, considering all the plotlines that need tying up.

92,032 pages.

Single spaced.

ChunkyC
07-18-2007, 01:03 AM
It is explained. In book 6 I believe.
I have read book 6, I don't remember that specifically ... it has been a while.


92,032 pages.

Single spaced.
Dang. Good thing I opted for the free shipping. ;)

dclary
07-18-2007, 01:14 AM
Oh and not all the Dark Arts teachers are evil. Gilderoy Lockhart was just a fake. Lupin was cool but not accepted by everyone. Moody was cool, but his doppleganger wasn't.

Exactly. First year dark arts teacher: shill for voldy.
Second year dark arts teacher: phony
Third year dark arts teacher: cool, but had a bad facial hair problem
Fourth year dark arts teacher: cool, except he was locked in a cellar for the whole book
Fifth year dark arts teacher: moron (and Harry himself)
Sixth year dark arts teacher: I don't remember who it was in book 6, as I only glanced through it.

So she's actually done a great job of making the people and reasons for the new people in this post unique and interesting, each providing their own challenges and flavor to the stories, some proving more important than others.

dclary
07-18-2007, 01:14 AM
Dang. Good thing I opted for the free shipping. ;)

The entire state of Vermont was clear-cut to print the sucker. Local maple farmers expressed an interest in going into ethanol-corn production anyway.

Sage
07-18-2007, 01:51 AM
I loved the DADA teacher in book 6. We didn't get to see that class enough in that book, IMO.

And, yes, the bad luck in that position is definitely explained in book 6 (at least Dumbledore's theory for it).

And Chunky, I'm giving you a rep point for giving a spoiler alert for a twenty-year-old sport event, cuz that was just so cute.

badducky
07-18-2007, 02:01 AM
I just have to add this: I was at a MOvie Tavern with family watching this movie, and after one bottle of chardonnay before we got to the theatre plus some jack daniels and some margaritas, I had no idea what was going on at all. Not at all.

All these characters where jumping around and most of them were new to me and I was too drunk to try and keep track of them all.

Seriously, I was completely confused and disoriented for the entire movie.

Then, when the wizard battle started at the end, it was just a bunch of blurry smoke effects and water and it was all moving so fast that following what was happening was frankly impossible.

I don't think I could've gotten through it without the booze. At least everytime some new character popped up out of nowhere as if I was supposed to know who they were I was too drunk to care.

Duncan J Macdonald
07-18-2007, 02:19 AM
PS -- I don't want to know a single word of the content before I read it, but I admit I am curious about how long it is, considering all the plotlines that need tying up.
Heh, heh.


"Hogwarts".



784 pages, standard hardcover.






Got ya.

ChunkyC
07-18-2007, 02:27 AM
Heh, heh.


"Hogwarts".






Got ya.
Argh, ye scurvy dog! ;)

Christine N.
07-18-2007, 02:53 AM
LOL, how could I forget the new Dark Arts teachers -- they should just get rid of that post since all the bad guys seem to gravitate toward that position. LOL. But yes, the unfolding is interesting. I'm just curious about all the "marks" that Rowling seems to have to hit every time. ;)


The Dark Arts teacher one is so obvious, I'm sure she's going to come up with a whopper of an explanation for it in the last book.


I hope. :D

PS -- I don't want to know a single word of the content before I read it, but I admit I am curious about how long it is, considering all the plotlines that need tying up.

Uh, yes, it's explained in detail in HBP, to rather amusing effect.

maestrowork
07-18-2007, 03:55 AM
That's the great thing about writing a series... you can explain every illogical things in the later books, appearing to have had it all figured out instead of "oops, I didn't think it through." :)

Christine N.
07-18-2007, 05:15 AM
Actually it makes perfect sense, since the reason for the teachers leaving that particular post occured before the series started. She did a pretty good job of making all the pieces go together.

I can tell you the reason if you really want to know, Ray...

Writer2011
07-18-2007, 10:03 AM
I wanted to apologize for the not so kind comments I made a few nights ago regarding the latest Harry Potter film... Having said that, let's move on shall we :)

rkbentley
07-18-2007, 04:50 PM
Saw it yesterday at the $5 tuesdays at the movie theater with my co-writer.

A disclaimer, I saw the movies first then after Goblet came out, I went out, bought all the books and read them.

Having said that: What a train wreck. Wow. Just wow. Too short. Too much stuff cut. Not enough Tonks and a lame ending. My co-writer won't be seeing HBP in the theater.

Here's hoping HBP is better.

sassandgroove
07-18-2007, 06:22 PM
That's the great thing about writing a series... you can explain every illogical things in the later books, appearing to have had it all figured out instead of "oops, I didn't think it through." :)
Assuming she hadn't thought it through. SOme things work so well I rather think she did plan ahead. Though perhaps not all.

reenkam
07-19-2007, 10:15 AM
Since she knew it'd be 7 books I bet she had a pretty good plan from the beginning. I mean, it'd be one thing if she just wrote blindly to an ending, but to know how many books? She had to know comflict for each and have connected them. And she has be writting it for 17 years while it has only been in publishing for 10, I think. that's seven years of napkins, or whatever she used.


That's a lot of napkins...

Sophia
07-19-2007, 01:36 PM
I saw it last night and liked it a lot. The films have improved with the series, I think. The first two films were hugely disappointing; the third was okay and the fourth and fifth were pretty exciting action films. It was a little slow for the first half, but the fight at the end was amazing. I loved the shadowy forms of the adult wizards. Tonks annoyed me in the book but I thought she was great in the film. It's a pity that so much had to be left out, but it's understandable. I went with my husband who hasn't read the book, and he could follow along easily enough and enjoyed it, too. Overall, entertaining!