Ronnie Posted July 18, 2011 Posted July 18, 2011 Apparently disarming Draco with a regular wand is enough, he doesn't have to be holding the Elder Wand. It was explained in the books apparently (not read them) but wasn't in the film.
Oxigen_Waste Posted July 18, 2011 Posted July 18, 2011 Well, in any case, I think anyone can agree the ending is one giant cop out. She could have ended the story in so many great ways... but no, she went with the obvious and formulaic ending that nobody's going to remember in 50 years. How jolly.
chairdriver Posted July 18, 2011 Posted July 18, 2011 Saw this. Thought it was good. Minerva, you're the absolute best. You're great at fighting. You can turn into a cat. I don't get why you wouldn't read the books? The main highlight of the franchise is the humour, which doesn't translate well into film at all. The films are objectively worse than the books.
Mokong Posted July 18, 2011 Posted July 18, 2011 (edited) Apparently disarming Draco with a regular wand is enough, he doesn't have to be holding the Elder Wand. It was explained in the books apparently (not read them) but wasn't in the film. Haha reminded me of this, skip to 3.56 (actually some other good quotes in there... kids are funny ) Also pointed out in the video, the 5th book was actually longer than the 7th... yet they managed to condense the 5th into one film. Obviously splitting the 7th into two films was to milk the franchise but makes me wonder if a single 7th film might have worked better... maybe at 2.5 to 3hours long if they really did need the extra time EDIT: Lost deleted a post but I saw it in my email and as an admin I am a God on this forum and thus can resurect posts from the dead So to reply to him... buy me the books and I'll consider it Edited July 18, 2011 by Mokong
Nintendohnut Posted July 18, 2011 Posted July 18, 2011 I watched this on friday. I saw it in 3d which was ok. 2D would do the film the same justice i feel. I never read the books so the film was a surprise. I thought that the story line was pretty weak and predictable. There were many places she could have thrown in the OMG i never saw that coming moment but she is not a great author so it probably goes to show. Film was a solid 7/10 not a transformers or an X-men first class. but i would say 2nd or 3rd best film so far this year. Just a small point - how do you know she's not a great author if you haven't read the books? This is what annoys me about HP - it's almost become 'cool' to dislike it and say 'it's not well written' etc now, especially by people who haven't read it. Read it, then you can comment on the way it is written/how good JKR is. As it stands someone who has read it saying 'the book is amazing' has a lot more basis for their opinion than someone who hasn't saying 'the book is shit'. Also: People need to read the books. The whole thing makes sense in the books, and also does in the film but it's a complex story to explain in the time they had. There is a lot 'going on' in the background of the overall story arc, and they all contribute to the main part of the plot. Every question that has been asked in this thread is answered in the books.
mcj metroid Posted July 18, 2011 Posted July 18, 2011 Well, in any case, I think anyone can agree the ending is one giant cop out.She could have ended the story in so many great ways... but no, she went with the obvious and formulaic ending that nobody's going to remember in 50 years. How jolly. I personally felt she wrote the final book "knowing" full well it would be made into a hollywood movie. So it has a very generic ending... such a s shame.
Jon Posted July 18, 2011 Posted July 18, 2011 Just a small point - how do you know she's not a great author if you haven't read the books? This is what annoys me about HP - it's almost become 'cool' to dislike it and say 'it's not well written' etc now, especially by people who haven't read it. Read it, then you can comment on the way it is written/how good JKR is. As it stands someone who has read it saying 'the book is amazing' has a lot more basis for their opinion than someone who hasn't saying 'the book is shit'. Also: People need to read the books. The whole thing makes sense in the books, and also does in the film but it's a complex story to explain in the time they had. There is a lot 'going on' in the background of the overall story arc, and they all contribute to the main part of the plot. Every question that has been asked in this thread is answered in the books. That's what happens nowadays, anything that becomes mainstream or gets the success it deserves instantly becomes uncool and always leads to people banging on about selling out.
ReZourceman Posted July 18, 2011 Posted July 18, 2011 Yeah I agree with Mokong in that Harry and Ginny over the course of the movies had a fucking atrociously small amount of time on screen together. Like...whut. I love Ginny. All we got in this was a damn shit kiss. Pffft. Anyway yeah.
Jon Posted July 18, 2011 Posted July 18, 2011 Yeah I agree with Mokong in that Harry and Ginny over the course of the movies had a fucking atrociously small amount of time on screen together. Like...whut. I love Ginny. All we got in this was a damn shit kiss. Pffft. Anyway yeah. When Ginny screams at the end when she thinks that Harry is dead, I wondered to myself that she's only been in about 3 scenes with him over the entire movie run, can't be that attached surely. The annoying thing is that what little scenes they did have together, they worked well (in my opnion). The bit from the Room of Requirement in Half Blood Prince comes to mind.
Beast Posted July 18, 2011 Author Posted July 18, 2011 Come back from seeing this in 3D, it was epic! Absolutely adored the living shit out of every minute. Also, the 3D in the movie was great, which surprised me a little. I was thinking it could be another SAW 3D thing where the 3D was dire but it was the total opposite. The special effects were amazing, the acting is the best in this movie, the story was brilliant and I think I'm the only one who loved the ending as well. I did cry in a couple of scenes though and some of my favourite scenes that were in the book were fantastic to watch. 3. The protection spell being cast over Hogwarts and Voldemort and the Death Eaters trying to break through it 2. "NOT MY DAUGHTER, YOU BITCH!" and Minerva fighting Snape, just epic moments! 1. Harry looking in the pensieve at Snape's memories. I cried at that when I saw Snape cradling a dead Lily in his arms. Overall, the best of the lot and definitely one of the best movies of the year. The Battle of Hogwarts was mesmerising to watch. 9/10 Also, I will admit to crying when the credits were rolling, haha.
Dannyboy-the-Dane Posted July 18, 2011 Posted July 18, 2011 What bothered me the most was indeed that it was never explained why Harry survived and Voldemort's soul was destroyed. In the book it was explained by Dumbledore while they were in the King's Cross limbo, but he admitted not even he fully knew what happened. Basically, the protection from Lily's sacrifice, which kept Voldemort from even touching Harry before, was bypassed when Voldemort was revived using Harry's blood, in which the protection ran. However, this meant that when Harry willingly sacrificed himself for his friends, the protection, now also in Voldemort's blood, tethered Harry's life to his, meaning Harry was destroyed/killed as a Horcrux, but could still choose to hang on to life via the tether to Voldemort. After this it seemed like they were on equal footing, meaning either one could defeat the other, but Harry had the trumph card that he was the master of the Elder Wand, meaning Voldemort couldn't defeat him with it in a duel.
Beast Posted July 18, 2011 Author Posted July 18, 2011 What bothered me the most was indeed that it was never explained why Harry survived and Voldemort's soul was destroyed. In the book it was explained by Dumbledore while they were in the King's Cross limbo, but he admitted not even he fully knew what happened. Basically, the protection from Lily's sacrifice, which kept Voldemort from even touching Harry before, was bypassed when Voldemort was revived using Harry's blood, in which the protection ran. However, this meant that when Harry willingly sacrificed himself for his friends, the protection, now also in Voldemort's blood, tethered Harry's life to his, meaning Harry was destroyed/killed as a Horcrux, but could still choose to hang on to life via the tether to Voldemort. After this it seemed like they were on equal footing, meaning either one could defeat the other, but Harry had the trumph card that he was the master of the Elder Wand, meaning Voldemort couldn't defeat him with it in a duel. I was a bit bothered by that too and the fact that the fight of the century wasn't longer than it was but I must absolutely applaud Alan Rickman's performance as Snape. Really got to me. I've told my mates I've watched it and they're asking me questions because they don't get a lot of stuff so I'm having fun in answering them, haha. I cried when the credits were up because I grew up with the books and the movies and it was like an end to a big part of my life. It truly is an amazing series and I can definitely see parents of the future reading this to their little ones and so on and so forth. I'll be one of them when I have children!
The Peeps Posted July 19, 2011 Posted July 19, 2011 (edited) Happy endings/main character surviving = hollywood cop-out... I'm starting to completely disagree with this (not that it was a particularly happy ending in the book - not seen the film yet). "Oh the story ended and I was pleased that the main character survived against the odds. THIS IS POORLY WRITTEN" Sometimes the main character wins. Would you prefer every film to end with everyone losing? Then when that becomes the main thing, you'll call that a cop-out too I bet. I've heard that the final battle between Harry and Voldemort happens away from everyone else. They're just on their own and Harry kills him rather than it happening in front of everyone and in the Great Hall. Can anyone actually justify why this was done? As I've said, I haven't seen the film but I can't imagine having them fight alone makes more of an impact than the way it is in the book. Edited July 19, 2011 by The Peeps
Oxigen_Waste Posted July 19, 2011 Posted July 19, 2011 Happy endings/main character surviving = hollywood cop-out... I'm starting to completely disagree with this (not that it was a particularly happy ending in the book - not seen the film yet). "Oh the story ended and I was pleased that the main character survived against the odds. THIS IS POORLY WRITTEN" Sometimes the main character wins. Would you prefer every film to end with everyone losing? Then when that becomes the main thing, you'll call that a cop-out too I bet. The main "problem" people have with that ending and calling it a cop out is because there were 10 better ways to finish it considering how she spun the threads up to the very end. And then, instead of pulling of a memorable finale, she chose to go with the easiest way out... obviously out of fear that fans wouldn't like it. It basically rendered the entire story into something completely average, as opposed to something grand. Every single thing that was good about it colapsed under the weight of how poorly she wraped things up.
Nintendohnut Posted July 19, 2011 Posted July 19, 2011 The main "problem" people have with that ending and calling it a cop out is because there were 10 better ways to finish it considering how she spun the threads up to the very end. And then, instead of pulling of a memorable finale, she chose to go with the easiest way out... obviously out of fear that fans wouldn't like it. It basically rendered the entire story into something completely average, as opposed to something grand. Every single thing that was good about it colapsed under the weight of how poorly she wraped things up. I massively disagree with this statement. You can say 'the whole story spanning seven 300 page books is ruined by the last three chapters... You'd just be massively wrong
Beast Posted July 19, 2011 Author Posted July 19, 2011 I massively disagree with this statement. You can say 'the whole story spanning seven 300 page books is ruined by the last three chapters... You'd just be massively wrong
The Peeps Posted July 19, 2011 Posted July 19, 2011 The main "problem" people have with that ending and calling it a cop out is because there were 10 better ways to finish it considering how she spun the threads up to the very end. And then, instead of pulling of a memorable finale, she chose to go with the easiest way out... obviously out of fear that fans wouldn't like it. It basically rendered the entire story into something completely average, as opposed to something grand. Every single thing that was good about it colapsed under the weight of how poorly she wraped things up. I wish you'd write things in a way that actually show you're just putting your own opinion forward because it really makes you come across badly. How can you say 'obviously out of fear', you don't know why she did it. Maybe she thought that was the best way to do it? Maybe that's how she wanted to do it from the start. Wasn't it widely known that she had the ending pretty much figured out from the start? Harry already had his 'death' and he came back with his second chance. Dying after that would've been stupid and pointless.
Beast Posted July 19, 2011 Author Posted July 19, 2011 I wish you'd write things in a way that actually show you're just putting your own opinion forward because it really makes you come across badly. How can you say 'obviously out of fear', you don't know why she did it. Maybe she thought that was the best way to do it? Maybe that's how she wanted to do it from the start. Wasn't it widely known that she had the ending pretty much figured out from the start? Harry already had his 'death' and he came back with his second chance. Dying after that would've been stupid and pointless. Basically, The Peeps has posted what I think. Especially about the second part.
Oxigen_Waste Posted July 19, 2011 Posted July 19, 2011 I massively disagree with this statement. You can say 'the whole story spanning seven 300 page books is ruined by the last three chapters... You'd just be massively wrong That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying the whole story spanning seven 1000 page books is a ruin in itself. To be honest, the whole story itself is a very mediocre affair, (but very addictive, I must say). I've read the whole thing twice and the first 5 books 3 times... and excluding 2 or 3 moments of particular genius, I have to admit that while enjoyable, the books are pretty much nothing special. And the reason the finale exacerbated this is because all the good doubts it raised over the last 6 books, every single moment in which you thought to yourself "maybe this bitch knows what she's doing after all" like when she hinted at the probability of the prophecy refering to Snape after all, she squashed dead in the last book. I'll put it like this: The reason I and apparently many people across the globe were hugely enjoying it before that final novel is because it really did seem like she was hiding a great story behind an average one, only to remove the cape in the end and wow everyone... but it turned out that wasn't the case. She was writing a straightforward story with a straightforward ending who's only redeeming quality was Severus Snape. She didn't provoke readers, she didn't surprise them, she just indulged them and gave them something easy to chew on. Something that wouldn't cause waves. So, yes, the fact that it ended in a bad way pretty much rendered it sort of irrelevant, literarily speaking. It will go down in history like And Then There Were None. A very popular book who sold an outrageous amount of copies, but which isn't an extraordinary achievement in any way, and something that just played into audiences' hands. They're not "bad" books, no, just terribly average books. I wish you'd write things in a way that actually show you're just putting your own opinion forward because it really makes you come across badly. How can you say 'obviously out of fear', you don't know why she did it. Maybe she thought that was the best way to do it? Maybe that's how she wanted to do it from the start. Wasn't it widely known that she had the ending pretty much figured out from the start? Harry already had his 'death' and he came back with his second chance. Dying after that would've been stupid and pointless. Simple minded fool (joking). You think I'm upset because he didn't die? Hell no. I'm upset because everything else "sucked" too! Read above post. _____________________________ What I think you boys should do is go and read some literary greats before you choose to decide for yourself what good writing is. Rowling is no Joyce!
darksnowman Posted July 19, 2011 Posted July 19, 2011 She was writing a straightforward story with a straightforward ending who's only redeeming quality was Severus Snape. Completely disagree! Luna Lovegood was the only redeeming quality of the books!
The Peeps Posted July 19, 2011 Posted July 19, 2011 So you're working with the assumption that because we enjoyed it, we must've not read anything else? The story could easily have ended with Harry dying and many people thought it would go that way. Surely that is good writing? You apparently spent the whole of the time thinking the ending would be one thing, only for it to be the other. There's your twist. Your challenge with these books is to see if you can enjoy it for what it is and not what it's not.
Oxigen_Waste Posted July 19, 2011 Posted July 19, 2011 So you're working with the assumption that because we enjoyed it, we must've not read anything else? The story could easily have ended with Harry dying and many people thought it would go that way. Surely that is good writing? You apparently spent the whole of the time thinking the ending would be one thing, only for it to be the other. There's your twist. Your challenge with these books is to see if you can enjoy it for what it is and not what it's not. No, I enjoyed it too. But you think it's good. I don't. And if you think this is good, you're clearly lacking in literary standards, peeps! You're fixated on Harry dying... I never said I wanted him to die, far from it. I wanted him to be irrelevant, just a bait for the reader! No... I spent the whole of the time praying she wouldn't do something as obvious as she did. And she did it in the end. There's my twist. I shouldn't enjoy them for the average piece of storytelling they are, I should criticize them for the missed opportunity they are. If I want good children/teen fantasy literature I know where to go. And Harry Potter isn't it. Compared to His Dark Materials, HP is just lame.
The Peeps Posted July 19, 2011 Posted July 19, 2011 No, I enjoyed it too. But you think it's good. I don't. And if you think this is good, you're clearly lacking in literary standards, peeps! You're fixated on Harry dying... I never said I wanted him to die, far from it. I wanted him to be irrelevant, just a bait for the reader! No... I spent the whole of the time praying she wouldn't do something as obvious as she did. And she did it in the end. There's my twist. I shouldn't enjoy them for the average piece of storytelling they are, I should criticize them for the missed opportunity they are. If I want good children/teen fantasy literature I know where to go. And Harry Potter isn't it. Compared to His Dark Materials, HP is just lame. You're lacking in literary standards His Dark Materials is better, I agree. I think you're expecting too much of HP though, they're primarily children's books written with children in mind as the main audience. I suppose it's understandable to want more from them though because the world she created is so much better than the story she told.
Nintendohnut Posted July 19, 2011 Posted July 19, 2011 .....What I think you boys should do is go and read some literary greats before you choose to decide for yourself what good writing is. Rowling is no Joyce! I cannot describe how much I cracked up at this statement. I have a degree in English Literature.
Recommended Posts