Harry smurfing Potter and the end of my childhood part 2

[Peegee]

@Miriel - re harrinny:

I have to re-watch their previous scenes together, but (SPOILER) there was a short kiss sometime during the battle of hogwarts (?) where they kissed briefly and Harry ran away - that didn't look right - a little fumbled, but the mood didn't call for a fumbled kiss. I wonder too if they just lacked chemistry.

Just came back from watching and thought the movie had much better pacing than the first half - mostly by cutting out a lot of scenes. Yet it didn't feel rushed. I never once got bored and the flow of the movie was just superb. Plus I never did understand the importance of (SPOILER)snape getting killed. By the middle of the movie I was so confused because I knew that killing him to get control of the elder wand was futile, but didn't know why until I thought back to the first movie.

(SPOILER)Harry just snapping in half an artifact weapon was hilarious to me

[TrollHunter]

I have to get caught up before I go see it. I know I've seen them all but I can't for the life of me remember the story D:

From everyone I've heard (including this thread) It's apparently fantastic, of that I'm not surprised. I must see it~!

[Pheesh]

I'm glad they were able to make the last two movies not suck (and to a lesser extent I suppose the Goblet of Fire didn't suck). I think they did a really good job capturing the tone of the last book and the whole thing never stopped feeling like an epic final chapter. Overall a great way to finish off a series.

The scene when (SPOILER)Voldemort killed Snape was incredibly intense, and I'm just really glad they didn't shy away from making the movie a very dark experience. It wasn't perfect, but the chances of them making the movie live up to how I have had it pictured in my head the last 4 years were so minimal, so I'm not too fussed. Overall it was a really good experience, but Harry Potter ended 4 years ago, not this week.

[Shaibana]

ow ya, 1 thing i forgot to say:
the one - point that bothered me is that i didnt (re)watch part 1 before seeing part 2.
i kinda fellt like being thrown in the dept. becaus the movie simply continieus on where it ended...

And since its been quite a while since i saw part 1 i got a little confused xD

[Rantz]

I agree with everything Miriel and Happy Noodle Boy said.

I found myself not missing Dumbledore's backstory so much in the movie. It's great in the books, but I feel like it's no calamity that it was left out. However, I really didn't like that they left out (SPOILER)Fred's death scene. In the book it was already a lot to take in at the same time that both Remus and Tonks had died. Now it feels like they lumped Fred in with them and it kind of diminishes the impact of each individual death.

McGonagall was just terrific. Alan Rickman did an amazing job and his story is very compelling, but I was honestly more affected by McGonagall's ardour and resolve. It's even better than it is in the book.

[Depression Moon]

I'm not sure about seeing this. Goblet of Fire and Order of the Phoenix pissed me the hell off.

[Peegee]

i have a question

(SPOILER)from what i gathered, the reason voldermort couldn't kill harry (like, ever) is because a part of his soul is in him (harry). ignoring why voldermort can't commit suicide (unless you can explain that), he then gets in his head that the two wands are made from the same core. so he takes lucius' wand and that fails (beginning of HP7). he then tortures people to find out why, and where to get the elder wand (dumbledore).

the problem is, even though snape killed dumbledore, malfoy disarms dumbledore (iirc), after which harry disarms malfoy, thus making the elder wand his (harry's).

my question is: has anybody ever disarmed another person in the series? wouldn't that make those people's wands ineffective against the disarmer? and is this the case universally?

[Breine]

The film was really good fan service. It also portrayed the action very well. It was good, as a movie, but it wasn't that enjoyable because my favorite parts of the book were the things they never even mentioned (Grindlewald, Dumbledore's past, the pensive scenes, etc).

I agree.

I've always thought the books were much better than the movies, and I've never really thought the movies were that great (except for Deathly Hallows part 1, which I actually enjoyed a lot). I can see why people think they are great, but in my mind people who only see the films and don't read the books miss out on a whole lot.

But yeah, the movie was good, but not anything special. I'm sure if I hadn't read the book I'd think otherwise.

[Shaibana]

i have a question

(SPOILER)from what i gathered, the reason voldermort couldn't kill harry (like, ever) is because a part of his soul is in him (harry). ignoring why voldermort can't commit suicide (unless you can explain that), he then gets in his head that the two wands are made from the same core. so he takes lucius' wand and that fails (beginning of HP7). he then tortures people to find out why, and where to get the elder wand (dumbledore).

the problem is, even though snape killed dumbledore, malfoy disarms dumbledore (iirc), after which harry disarms malfoy, thus making the elder wand his (harry's).

my question is: has anybody ever disarmed another person in the series? wouldn't that make those people's wands ineffective against the disarmer? and is this the case universally?

Looking at all the HP's id say it only counts for the Elder Wand

[Araciel]

I'm still waiting til I don't have to wait in a line of at least twenty people to get in and see it, but I'm sure it will be good. Also, who here as opted to see it 2D and who 3D?! Should I do a poll!? hrmmmgarble

[Shaibana]

3d always ads a little extra

if u can than go on a regular work-day :o
there were like 40 ppl at highest in the cinema (here) than...
but i guess by now all the schools at wherever you are have vacation?

[Rantz]

I watched it in 3D. Neat but didn't add very much really.

[Araciel]

3d always ads a little extra

if u can than go on a regular work-day :o
there were like 40 ppl at highest in the cinema (here) than...
but i guess by now all the schools at wherever you are have vacation?

I have wednesday/thursday off so probably take in a day show then.. live in a small city so the one theater is the only one worth goin to.

[Miriel]

i have a question

(SPOILER)from what i gathered, the reason voldermort couldn't kill harry (like, ever) is because a part of his soul is in him (harry). ignoring why voldermort can't commit suicide (unless you can explain that), he then gets in his head that the two wands are made from the same core. so he takes lucius' wand and that fails (beginning of HP7). he then tortures people to find out why, and where to get the elder wand (dumbledore).

the problem is, even though snape killed dumbledore, malfoy disarms dumbledore (iirc), after which harry disarms malfoy, thus making the elder wand his (harry's).

my question is: has anybody ever disarmed another person in the series? wouldn't that make those people's wands ineffective against the disarmer? and is this the case universally?

Voldy couldn't kill Harry in the beginning because of the protection that his mother's sacrifice gave to Harry. Once Voldy took some of Harry's blood to help in his resurrection, that protection no longer existed. So that was the first obstacle. Then, when Voldy tried to kill Harry in Goblet of Fire, he did it without knowing that their wands shared a core. That was the 2nd obstacle. And the third obstacle, Voldemort never knew about, even at the very end. If Voldemort had successfully tried to kill Harry after (SPOILER)killing the horcrux in Harry he would have been successful since all obstacles would have been eliminated at that point.

For your question, Rowling said that the ownership and allegiance of wands shift when there's an act of conquering involved. It has less to do with disarming and more to do with defeating. Snape (SPOILER)never defeated Dumbledore because they were on the same side, following the same plan. It was Malfoy who betrayed and then disarmed Dumbledore, leading to his death. Harry didn't even use magic to get Malfoy's wand, but just physically wrestled and took it from him. That must have been something of a defeat for Malfoy because his wand shifted loyalties to Harry. So disarming someone while practicing dueling at Hogwarts wouldn't really turn a wand's allegiance. And wands are tricky anyway with the whole "the wand chooses the wizard" thing. Bellatrix had her wand taken from her but the wand's loyalty didn't shift.

[Depression Moon]

Miriel's got it on point. I was going to answer it, but it's been such a long time since I've read any of the books, but all that brought most of everything I knew back and I'm sure that she's right.