PDA

View Full Version : Deathly Hallows Trailer



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 [39] 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58

KatieC
07-17-2011, 02:26 PM
I saw the movie yesterday afternoon and was somewhat shocked that the theatre was not full.

I did like this movie much better than the last, which was my least favourite, partially because most of the screen was so dark. This movie actually had blue skies and more light to see what was going on. Thank you to whoever does the lighting in movies.

Now the puzzles for me, probably out of order.

1. Why did Harry have to collect tears from Snape instead of the fuzzy, foggy stream that normally indicated memories? If the white stuff had come out, Harry would have already known where to use it, instead, poor Snape (can't believe I said that) had to tell him to use the pensieve.

2. I really missed the trio saving Draco Malfoy the second time - sometimes the movies do skip the funnier parts in the book - like Trelawney lobbing those crystal balls on peoples heads. And the nasty plant - and the house elves stabbing people in the legs.

3. I was a little shocked at the cavernous space under Gringotts. Somehow I always imagined tunnels, but yesterday I started wondering how London manages to stand up with enormous canyons right underneath. All those stone buildings do weigh a lot. Logic does sometimes intrude. :rollin:

4. I missed Professor Slughorn in emerald green pyjamas. :lol:

5. I think the time used for the falling Harry/Voldemort scene would have been better used by putting back the scene in the Headmasters office. Are we to supposed to think Harry keeps Draco's wand for the rest of his life?

6. I was glad they used the invisibility cloak for the scene at Gringotts - they have left it out of many scenes in the last two movies. Harry used the resurrection stone because he couldn't use his Patronis through the woods.

7. I did wonder why they showed a vent up from the tunnel into the room of requirement, with a deatheater just above, but since the Carows were cut out, Voldy wouldn't be notified from the Ravenclaw common room. I guess deatheaters can talk. :slinkaway

Cachoo
07-17-2011, 03:59 PM
I think you almost need to do something like Masterpiece Theater/BBC did with "Jewel in the Crown." I don't know the exact number but I think it was at least 25 episodes. Only that way could you possibly cover everything in the book and even then there would be conflicts about the way "we" see the characters and those that were hired for the production. My problem was always with the casting of Ginny. Ginny and Harry just had no spark in any production imo. She wasn't given much of a chance in this one. In interview after interview with Rowling with reporters who clearly had not read the books there were always questions about Hermoine and Harry. The reporters saw something of a spark there and if I have to be truthful I did too. I liked this final movie but the magic will always remain in the books for me.

Yehudi
07-17-2011, 07:04 PM
Frankly, except for one shot of the dementors in the skies surrounding Hogwarts, I did not find the 3D that great. I actually suspect I'll like the film better in 2D.


Agree here. Actually, the only 3D part that impressed me was the Happy Feet 2 trailer.

reckless
07-17-2011, 07:27 PM
I think you almost need to do something like Masterpiece Theater/BBC did with "Jewel in the Crown." I don't know the exact number but I think it was at least 25 episodes. Only that way could you possibly cover everything in the book and even then there would be conflicts about the way "we" see the characters and those that were hired for the production. My problem was always with the casting of Ginny. Ginny and Harry just had no spark in any production imo. She wasn't given much of a chance in this one. In interview after interview with Rowling with reporters who clearly had not read the books there were always questions about Hermoine and Harry. The reporters saw something of a spark there and if I have to be truthful I did too. I liked this final movie but the magic will always remain in the books for me.

I keep hoping that in 10 years or so, someone does a 6-hour or so miniseries per book. I know a movie can't include everything, but the movies really suffered greatly from leaving out: (1) the entire Marauders history; (2) Neville's history/growth; (3) Voldemort's history from Half-Blood Prince and the importance of tying horcuxes to the Hogwarts founders; and (4) the developments with the Weasley family (Percy's ambition over family loyalty, Bill's maiming, Fred's death). (Most of those aren't really spoilers.) I think the films really relied on viewers too heavily on knowing details from the book (like when Harry mentioned Lupin's son, who I don't think we mentioned until that point.

nerdycool
07-17-2011, 07:42 PM
If he had intended to make a horcrux out of it when he killed baby Harry, I don't think it would have worked on adult Harry- it was impregnanted with Basilisk venom which destroys horcruxes- can you make a horcrux out of something that destroys them?

I think he put it into the vault for safe keeping because, since he was very aware of the powerful magic and obviously knew quite a bit about horcruxes, he knew that a goblin-made sword which had killed a basilisk could destroy a horcrux. He was protecting (what he thought was) the sword as a means of protecting his horcruxes. But did he know that the sword imbued with basilisk venom? I don't know how he could have known, unless he was rummaging around in Harry's head. Instead, the reason the sword got put into the vault was because Dumbledore bequeathed it to Harry, and after Neville, Ginny and Luna tried to steal it for him, Snape passed it on to Bellatix to put in her vault for safe keeping. Of course, that was the replica, and the movie doesn't go into the how's and why's about the sword's removal to the vault... nor that there was a replica abound. Again, it's just one of those little details that we miss from the book.

Skittl1321
07-17-2011, 08:17 PM
The book doesn't really say why it was placed in the vault either- just that it was after they tried to steal it.

I still don't think there was anything in the book that made it sound like Voldemort wanted to make another Horcrux. He had made his 6, and split his soul into 7 already.


(And the reason I think Voldemort knew the sword had basilisk blood in it is because he knew that the diary had been destroyed and the basilisk defeated - probably from Lucius telling him. If all the students knew Harry got the sword out of the sorting hat and killed the basilisk, I'm sure that the story made its way back to V.)

Satellitegirl
07-17-2011, 08:25 PM
I saw it today, in 2d. LOVED IT. Only about 20 people in the theater(I went to the 12:30 show). Really really well done. I teared up about 5 or 6 times. Snape was just *grabs heart*. Love Alan Rickman so. Mrs Weasley and Professor McGonnagall were awesome :)

So sad it's over, but I'll be rereading the books occasionally...and of course the films will be shown on TV a lot, for a long time to come(and I own them).

rfisher
07-17-2011, 09:25 PM
I had a big long post and lost it. I'll just say thank goodness for Alan Rickman, otherwise I'd be pissed about spending $20. I won't bother watching it again. I'll buy the DVD just to have, but I far prefer the books. Rupert Grint and Emma Watson's acting skills were dreck and I can't say Radcliffe was that much better.

Gil-Galad
07-18-2011, 12:25 AM
I had a big long post and lost it. I'll just say thank goodness for Alan Rickman, otherwise I'd be pissed about spending $20. I won't bother watching it again. I'll buy the DVD just to have, but I far prefer the books. Rupert Grint and Emma Watson's acting skills were dreck and I can't say Radcliffe was that much better.
:rofl: Don't be shy, tell us what you think!


I keep hoping that in 10 years or so, someone does a 6-hour or so miniseries per book. I know a movie can't include everything, but the movies really suffered greatly from leaving out: (1) the entire Marauders history; (2) Neville's history/growth; (3) Voldemort's history from Half-Blood Prince and the importance of tying horcuxes to the Hogwarts founders; and (4) the developments with the Weasley family (Percy's ambition over family loyalty, Bill's maiming, Fred's death).
But I think there is a big reason why those stories aren't included (I would also add Dumbledore's backstory). How do you add so many backstories and explanations to a movie? Obviously, I am a huge fan of the books and also enjoy the movies. But I thought during my first reading of Deathly Hallows back in the day: how many explantations and backstories is JKR trying to include here? And the plot-devices she used to include those stories were sometimes sketchy at best. Ghost-Angel-Dumbledore-version, Pensieve-memories, newspaper articles, excerpts from books, Aberforth telling his/Dumbledore's story, Ghost-Angel-Dumbledore telling his story, the Deathly-Hallows fairy tale, the snippets Harry got from looking into Voldy's mind, Harry explaining everything at length to Voldy right during the battle...

And to put all this into a movie would have murdered the movie. Same goes for the Marauders, the story was very well done in the third book, but I think that lengthy story told by Lupin would not have worked in the movie. There is only so much you can include, especially if you want a blockbuster and not the magical movie-version of Waiting for Godot.

Skittl1321
07-18-2011, 12:44 AM
Didn't they leave out Snape calling Lily a mudblood in the flashback scene to James picking on him? IIRC, they made it look like it was his worst memory because he was mistreated so badly, rather than it being his worst memory because it was the moment where he and Lily were no longer best friends.

If they did indeed leave it out, as I remember it, I imagine it greatly hurt his motivations in Deathly Hallows, and completely changes the characterization of Snape for the movies. I guess they can't really know what was important (in reading the book, I don't think anyone saw what the scene was really about until the end of the books), but since JKR advises, you'd think she would have told them to make sure to have that in.

rfisher
07-18-2011, 01:11 AM
Problems with the movie: where the hell was Harry's scar? Luna and Jenny are at Hogwarts before Harry and crew even arrive. :rolleyes: Bella wearing a muggle dress, Goblins wearing button down stripe shirts with French cuffs. Bella and Voldy blowing up (I mean really--I get that was to milk the 3D crowd, but come on!) The whole point of the death scene in the book was to show Voldy was just a man without the horcruxes. Harry jumping off the castle wall with Voldy. :rolleyes: Very poor casting for Narcissa. She looked like a skunk rather than a platnum blonde. Special effects were boring. Molly and Bella's fight was stupid. No taunting about Fred, Jenny wasn't nearly killed. They just threw it in so she could say bitch.

Good: Alan Rickman. Except his makeup looked horrible. The resurrection stone scene. Very well done. You almost, almost felt Harry's fear. Neville's scene which they screwed around with. The book did it better. Maggie Smith setting the statues to guard the castle. And Filch trying to sweep up the rubble. It was the only time I smiled.

Missed: Percy's redemption, Kreacher leading the house elves, Grawp battling the giant, the dementor scene when Luna was so serene.

IceAlisa
07-18-2011, 01:19 AM
You mean Ginny? I was wondering who Jenny was.

rfisher
07-18-2011, 01:31 AM
You mean Ginny? I was wondering who Jenny was.

:lol: Yes. :duh: And Bill looked pretty good to have been ravaged by a wearwolf. And Harry breaks the Elder Wand and throws it off the bridge rather than putting it back in Dumbledore's crytp. WITHOUT fixing his wand!

Satellitegirl
07-18-2011, 01:56 AM
Yeah I'd say that was about the only thing I didn't like, was Harry tossing the wand off the bridge. Also, if you're this picky about books, rfisher, I'm guessing you're giving up on True Blood? :lol:

rfisher
07-18-2011, 02:57 AM
Yeah I'd say that was about the only thing I didn't like, was Harry tossing the wand off the bridge. Also, if you're this picky about books, rfisher, I'm guessing you're giving up on True Blood? :lol:

Argghhhhh.....:scream: