Yes, no surprise that you'd have more tolerance for the changes.
Legolas Send a noteboard - 31/07/2011 11:22:41 AM
I'm not massively impressed with the movie - i would have to see it again to pinpoint exactly why, but i'm not sure I see your point about "pointless" changes to the action scenes. Some are made to look more spectacular, but most were justified by the medium or storytelling needs E.g.:
What with your being professionally active in the sector, and all.
- Rowling was able to tell the story of the last duel as she did because she wrote from harry's pov, and isolated him and Voldemort that way, made it about them by focussing Harry's thoughts on him. On screen, they really had to get rid of the crowd and have them alone.
Doesn't mean they had to do the absurd flying around and falling off towers together, though.
- The shrieking shack (a lot of complaints about that): they got rid of it because they needed a location at which Harry could easily witness Snape's death while the audience could see Harry at the same time (and not in close-up reaction shots from under the cloak, tne scene was too long and they needed us to see
That one didn't bother me, except for the part where somehow Snape's tears contained his memories. Not sure where that came from.
- The fiendfyre had to go. The kids had already found an alternative to the sword, and using the fire required not only to explain Hermione knew of that and there's no doubt he horçrux is gone, but also that it's uncontrollable and can't be risked. Exposition that would have broken the rhythm for little purpose (the sort of things a bad director like Columbus used to do early on) otherwise they created a plot hole (why didn't Hermione use fienfyre againt Nagini?).
Except that the fiendfyre didn't go at all, they even dragged out the running away from it, compared to the book. But I have no problem with them using the basilisk tooth again.
- Nagini and Neville. That one is very simple. They couldn't just drop Ron and Hermione again in the climax of the movie (it already happened during the forest scenes, they needed to bring them back in the action), and they needed to delay the death of Nagini so it happened right before Harry killed Voldemort, which worked better on screen than having Nagini die before the duel began (as of course in the book it's more about Harry's thoughts than a proper duel).
I don't see why they needed to delay the death of Nagini at all. It seemed a lot more exciting the way they did it in the book, without all that pointless running to and fro in the castle.
- Molly and Bella. Well.. There was no more to it than that, really. I think a lot of people are disappointed they didn't inflate that scene, but THAT would have been pointless. Neither the movie Molly nor Bellatrix deserved more, unlike the book Molly, a far more important character.
It was lame in the movie, but then it was lame in the book, so I guess they were faithful enough there.
- Lupin and Tonks. Again, not a change, and there's a very good reason why they did not show this fight or the death of the twin on screen, the very same as Rowling's: she killed those characters, and did it off-screen, so their death came as a shock to Harry when he learns, bringing real personal meaning when Voldermort says Harry is sending his friends to die in his place. The audience needed to learn at the same time as Harry. The movie showed more of the fighting, but it couldn't show that, especially not when we can't follow what goes on in Harry's head. I thought those moments rather well-done, hardly "blink and you'll miss it" as i had expected from comments. Both the mourning scene with the Weasleys and the couple's shot were pretty powerful visually and emotionally.
Lupin and Tonks, okay. But Fred? I don't see why he couldn't get an on-screen death.
- The chamber of secrets was a good way to give Ron-Hermione some screen time, and to give them a moment alone (the movie audience really wanted their big pay-off kiss).
No objections here.
- The Ravenclaw scenes had their purpose in the book but none to the movie. The confrontation with Snape was really good as they did it. Not that it's better than the book, but for the movie it was. Again, the movie Snape and Harry could use the face to face moment the book characters didn't need.
The movie had to take into account that they'd butchered Snape in most of the previous movies, so they could hardly stick by the book too closely here, true... the tears thing is still bizarre, though, and breaks continuity even with the earlier movies.
That said, i'm not too sure why I also found the movie a bit underwhelming... I was annoyed by the editing, but I doubt it's just that.
I can think of loads of reasons, but I hardly know which ones are the ones you're thinking of.
I read a review in Time that made me really wonder if the reviewer had seen the same movie as me - a glowing review of the movie, and as if that wasn't bad enough, a comment about how the first part of Deathly Hallows had been a weak point in an otherwise good series of movies. The author freely admitted he'd never read the books, but even so you'd think he'd have some semblance of a clue.
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part Two
- 13/07/2011 11:17:42 PM
2874 Views
I'm really, really looking forward to seeing this 
- 14/07/2011 01:43:17 AM
941 Views
- 14/07/2011 01:43:17 AM
941 Views
Thinking about the film I found only two things to complain about *major spoiler*
- 15/07/2011 03:17:29 PM
1023 Views
Re: Thinking about the film I found only two things to complain about *major spoiler*
- 15/07/2011 04:35:07 PM
980 Views
Really??
- 15/07/2011 05:26:25 PM
963 Views
No. Dom needs to re-read me thinks. *NM*
- 15/07/2011 08:15:11 PM
541 Views
Re: No. Dom needs to re-read me thinks.
- 15/07/2011 08:32:44 PM
992 Views
Re: Thinking about the film I found only two things to complain about *major spoiler*
- 15/07/2011 08:19:47 PM
984 Views
I did not like the last 40 minutes or so of the film. I expected so much more from ... *SPOILERS*
- 16/07/2011 02:49:50 AM
1013 Views
I didn't really like it at first so I went to see it again today and walked out very satisfied. *NM*
- 16/07/2011 09:37:22 AM
531 Views
It's a great movie but...
- 16/07/2011 04:31:21 PM
1064 Views
Re: It's a great movie but...
- 16/07/2011 05:24:43 PM
1138 Views
That change had to be made, just like Frodo/Gollum/Mount Doom.....
- 16/07/2011 05:51:39 PM
1073 Views
You know, I kind of like that better than what happened in the book.
- 16/07/2011 10:27:47 PM
963 Views
*NM*
Very much enjoyed
- 19/07/2011 01:00:22 AM
1219 Views
I certainly think you're in the majority, re: 7.1 being easily the best movie in the series. *NM*
- 20/07/2011 11:35:13 PM
531 Views
Predictably disappointing, sad to say.
- 20/07/2011 11:31:38 PM
942 Views
Re: Predictably disappointing, sad to say.
- 31/07/2011 03:58:19 AM
888 Views
Yes, no surprise that you'd have more tolerance for the changes.
- 31/07/2011 11:22:41 AM
899 Views
Never read any of the books, but
- 30/07/2011 09:35:03 PM
1029 Views
The books are more coherent, more humourous, and more complex, to sum it up.
- 30/07/2011 11:00:29 PM
952 Views
- 30/07/2011 11:00:29 PM
952 Views
What? Goblet of Fire was my favorite by far until Deathly Hallows 1 came out. *NM*
- 01/08/2011 07:05:00 PM
533 Views
Feel like taking a survey about Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part Two.
- 03/08/2011 09:01:45 AM
1088 Views