Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows - Part 2

I frickin loved that movie. It was so hard to see it end, but I'm glad that the movie was done so well. My only problem with it were the awkward pauses throughout the movie, sure they got a few laughs but I felt like they kind of took away from the movie and almost made it seem like a joke. Aside from that I absolutely loved it, it was so powerful! My favorite serious part was any scene with McGonagall, she is one of my favorite characters and she got to kick some major ass in this movie :icon_biggrin:
The funniest part of the movie by far was when Voldemort laughs, it was the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard and I laughed harder than I have in ages, it is now my ringtone :lmao:
 
Having decided to go and see this movie at midnight on Friday morning, you should already be painting a picture of big a fan I am of the series.

Taking you back to said Thursday night/Friday morning, I was lucky enough to be able to watch both part 1 and 2 in glorious 3D. The cinema I frequent were good enough to allow people to watch the first part for free, if they purchased a 3D ticket for the second part. Let's face it, I would have went to see the first part in 3D again regardless of the price. That being said, we are here to talk about the last Harry Potter movie and that's what I shall do.

For me, I thought that a lot of the facets of the movie were rushed and it annoyed me quite a bit. For instance, I thought that the Snape death was a little hurried and I would have very much have liked to have seen some more dialogue between Snape and Harry. As Harry noticed that Snape was being killed, he simply entered the room and had sympathy for him. This was the same guy that killed Harry's mentor only months before. I just thought more dialogue was needed but that's just personal preference.

Another thing that annoyed me about the movie was the “limbo” scene between Harry and Dumbledore. I know it was written into the book and there wasn't really much that could be done to avoid it but it just seemed so out of place. Not to mention the fact that it made no sense whatsoever. Personally, I think that it ruined the movie for me just a tad.

However, that was the extent of my hatred for the movie. I was completely in awe of what they did with the school scenes and found myself having chills as they protected Hogwarts. It wasn't the only scene that gave me shivers either and I think that it all added up to a brilliant experience. I have never been in a cinema showing where people have stood up and clapped as the credits roll before but that all finished at Harry Potter. Baring in mind that it was 3AM when the credits rolled, I think you have to say a lot about how much it gripped the audience.

I thought the characterisation was amazing and the acting was out of this Muggle world. Voldemort really seemed more menacing as his desperation grew and I thought that it added a new facet to the movie that I really enjoyed. Too many scenes grabbed my attention and the impact of 3D was not lost on me.

It was a ridiculously good movie and one that I would recommend to anyone. A fitting end to the series that has kept my attention since my childhood.
 
Having decided to go and see this movie at midnight on Friday morning, you should already be painting a picture of big a fan I am of the series.

Taking you back to said Thursday night/Friday morning, I was lucky enough to be able to watch both part 1 and 2 in glorious 3D. The cinema I frequent were good enough to allow people to watch the first part for free, if they purchased a 3D ticket for the second part. Let's face it, I would have went to see the first part in 3D again regardless of the price. That being said, we are here to talk about the last Harry Potter movie and that's what I shall do.

For me, I thought that a lot of the facets of the movie were rushed and it annoyed me quite a bit. For instance, I thought that the Snape death was a little hurried and I would have very much have liked to have seen some more dialogue between Snape and Harry. As Harry noticed that Snape was being killed, he simply entered the room and had sympathy for him. This was the same guy that killed Harry's mentor only months before. I just thought more dialogue was needed but that's just personal preference.

Another thing that annoyed me about the movie was the “limbo” scene between Harry and Dumbledore. I know it was written into the book and there wasn't really much that could be done to avoid it but it just seemed so out of place. Not to mention the fact that it made no sense whatsoever. Personally, I think that it ruined the movie for me just a tad.

However, that was the extent of my hatred for the movie. I was completely in awe of what they did with the school scenes and found myself having chills as they protected Hogwarts. It wasn't the only scene that gave me shivers either and I think that it all added up to a brilliant experience. I have never been in a cinema showing where people have stood up and clapped as the credits roll before but that all finished at Harry Potter. Baring in mind that it was 3AM when the credits rolled, I think you have to say a lot about how much it gripped the audience.

I thought the characterisation was amazing and the acting was out of this Muggle world. Voldemort really seemed more menacing as his desperation grew and I thought that it added a new facet to the movie that I really enjoyed. Too many scenes grabbed my attention and the impact of 3D was not lost on me.

It was a ridiculously good movie and one that I would recommend to anyone. A fitting end to the series that has kept my attention since my childhood.

Well Snape was dying and got brutally killed by a snake that's magical, probably is posinous and has strong ones. I don't think he was going to have a conversation with Harry, That was the point of the Pensieve. (to show why he killed Dumbledore also)

And Harry going to limbo was because he was a Horcrux and since Voldemort took out the horcrux by using the Killing Curse, he goes to Limbo.
 
Alright, saw the movie on Friday in Imax 3-D which was breathtaking in itself. Add in that the movie itself was absolutely astounding and it made the experience one of the most entertaining i've ever had. I felt that nearly everything in the movie was done to near perfection and that it held true to the book for the most part which you don't see very often. I have a few different subjects i'd like to give my opinion on.

When Snape was crying over Harry's mother's body

I've read countless times over the weekend how that was one of the most touching yet sad moments in movie history. While I agree it was incredibly emotional and felt the flashback was done to perfection, I couldn't help but chuckle at that part. I felt is was much to over-dramatic as he pretty much collapsed towards the wall. I'm sure after watching it again, i'll realize it was done just as perfectly as the rest of the flashback, but my first thought was it was a tad dramatic. Still, an emotional roller coaster the entire time Harry was looking into the memory, and it was a COMPLETE shock to me. I hadn't read the book before going to see it so I had no idea what was happening. To find out we had been mislead the entire series and that we were all weeping over the wrong character dying was fucking crazy. Easily the biggest plot turn i've ever seen in a movie.

I never knew or even began to think that Harry was a horcrux.

Yet another huge twist that I wasn't expecting. I think that's what made this movie so enjoyable for myself was that I wasn't expecting any of these huge twists to happen. I was baffled for the entire movie.

How the fuck could they just play off Lupin, Tonks, and Fred's death?

The one huge crime I felt was committed during this movie. It's not like they were minor supporting character's. Each of them played a huge role in the books and films. One of these people was one of the most loved characters in the entire saga. They showed them briefly but gave no backstory to how it happened. That's the one gripe I have with the movie.

Outside of that one mishap, I felt the movie was done perfectly and was a fantastic end to one of my favorite film series' of all time.
 
Just got back theater. I must say I've been anticipating this movie for a long time coming. Ever since Voldemort was first resurrected in Goblet of Fire, I knew the final battle between Harry and Voldemort couldn't arrive soon enough. That being said, after things really started to turn up at the end of half blood prince, my anticipation grew ravenous. When Part one was release, I rushed to the theater to see the beginning of the end. It was a good movie in its own rights but all it was really doing was setting us up for the big finale and giving people a taste of whats to come.

That all being said, after watching the first part and realizing that part two was merely a half year away(though it felt like ages), I felt all the HP craze and admit I got caught in the mists of it. It didn't truly sink in until I was sitting in the theater watching it, this is the end of a series that an entire generation grew up with and followed.

On too the movie, it was simply fantastic, it was everything I expected would come out of the great finale. Lots of emotion and twists, and full of amazing action scenes. I was literally glued to the screen the entire time and never once thought out diverting my eyes. I have to say, while not reading any of the books, and restricting my knowledge of the original source material, I was expecting a lot of things.

I had a feeling Snape would die,ever since the beginning. I also had a strong feeling that Harry was a horcrux

The one thing that really caught me off guard was

the death of the Wesley brother, I'm not sure which one but yeah it was a heart wrenching moment

Overall I'm entirely satisfied with the movie and loved everything about it,could easily be the best of the series. My only vice with the movie is I though Voldemort's death was a little anti-climatic and just...happened and that was the end of it. But aside from that it was a very good film,makes me want to go back an re-watch the entire series now.
 
I am a HUGE Harry Potter fan and I saw this one at midnight. Honestly, I would have preferred they stopped the series after Deathly Hallows Part 1. Part 2 ruined the series for me. It was my favorite book and there were so many things I was looking forward to and I just felt let down.

I've never been a huge fan of the films because I've always felt that they missed the true essence of what Rowling was writing about, but I absolutely LOVED Part 1 and so therefore I assumed they would do just as good a job with Part 2.

I thought it felt rushed and awkward. There were so many weird awkward pauses where the entire theater was hysterically laughing at a scene that was supposed to be serious. That was the first thing that bothered me.

Fred's death
was another thing that really really pissed me off about this film. It was such a big, emotional moment in the book and they played it off as if it was nothing. They didn't even specify which of them it was in the film.

Lupin and Tonks deaths
is something that seemed to bother a lot of people but that actually was pretty accurate and I was okay with it.

I thought the whole scene of Snape's memories was done almost perfectly! I was soooo worried about that and the only thing that I disliked was
that they changed the reason Dumbledore had Snape kill him. In the books it was to save Draco's soul, in the film it was to get Snape back on Voldy's good side.
That moment lost a lot of meaning by changing that, but I guess I'm just being nit picky.

Overall, it was ok. It wasn't what I was expecting and I think it could have been a lot better, but it was alright. And this isn't just coming from a book lover, this is straight up I thought it was a poorly done film; especially from an editing stand point.
 
I seen this movie today. I thought i was good but not great. Having not read the books i can't compare. I enjoyed it and liked it, but i think many people have over-rated it a bit.
 
I am a HUGE Harry Potter fan and I saw this one at midnight. Honestly, I would have preferred they stopped the series after Deathly Hallows Part 1. Part 2 ruined the series for me. It was my favorite book and there were so many things I was looking forward to and I just felt let down.

I've never been a huge fan of the films because I've always felt that they missed the true essence of what Rowling was writing about, but I absolutely LOVED Part 1 and so therefore I assumed they would do just as good a job with Part 2.

I thought it felt rushed and awkward. There were so many weird awkward pauses where the entire theater was hysterically laughing at a scene that was supposed to be serious. That was the first thing that bothered me.

Fred's death
was another thing that really really pissed me off about this film. It was such a big, emotional moment in the book and they played it off as if it was nothing. They didn't even specify which of them it was in the film.

Lupin and Tonks deaths
is something that seemed to bother a lot of people but that actually was pretty accurate and I was okay with it.

I thought the whole scene of Snape's memories was done almost perfectly! I was soooo worried about that and the only thing that I disliked was
that they changed the reason Dumbledore had Snape kill him. In the books it was to save Draco's soul, in the film it was to get Snape back on Voldy's good side.
That moment lost a lot of meaning by changing that, but I guess I'm just being nit picky.

Overall, it was ok. It wasn't what I was expecting and I think it could have been a lot better, but it was alright. And this isn't just coming from a book lover, this is straight up I thought it was a poorly done film; especially from an editing stand point.

Well Harry was going to fight Voldy, in the Forest, They didn't really have time in the movie to worry about Fred's death especially when most of the viewers cant even tell them apart.

They didn't change the reason. The whole reason of Snape killing Dumbledore was to stay on Voldy's good side and that was even the major reason, It wa salso because of Dumbledore's cursed ring that was going to kill him anyway, to save Draci;s soul, and to end the line of masters the Elder Wand had so it wouldn't fall into Voldy's hands because if the master dies a planned death as Snape and Dubmledore did the power is nullified.

They tried their best
 
They didn't change the reason. The whole reason of Snape killing Dumbledore was to stay on Voldy's good side and that was even the major reason, It wa salso because of Dumbledore's cursed ring that was going to kill him anyway, to save Draci;s soul, and to end the line of masters the Elder Wand had so it wouldn't fall into Voldy's hands because if the master dies a planned death as Snape and Dubmledore did the power is nullified.

They tried their best

That's not true. It was never about Snape staying on Voldy's good side. It was mainly saving Draco and a tiny bit about the Elder Wand. Nowhere in the book does it say anything about Snape getting back on Voldy's good side.
 
Well Harry was going to fight Voldy, in the Forest, They didn't really have time in the movie to worry about Fred's death especially when most of the viewers cant even tell them apart.

In the book though, it was long before the forest and Harry, Ron, and Hermione were all there when it happened. They easily could have fit that in if the editor had cut some of those useless pauses that made no sense.
 
In the book though, it was long before the forest and Harry, Ron, and Hermione were all there when it happened. They easily could have fit that in if the editor had cut some of those useless pauses that made no sense.

Useless pauses build suspense, and make it so it's not rushing the movie. Also when Fred died was only a few minutes if not seconds to when Harry fought Voldy in the forest. They tried to show emotion for Fred's death by having his family crying for him, What more do you want? Harry is more focused on defeating Voldy at this point then caring about people's deaths.

That's not true. It was never about Snape staying on Voldy's good side. It was mainly saving Draco and a tiny bit about the Elder Wand. Nowhere in the book does it say anything about Snape getting back on Voldy's good side.

Not exactly, Snape had to kill Dumbledore so that he could be seen as one of the Death Eaters especially when they doubted him, also he made an Unbreakable Vow with Draco's mom.

Also never in the movies did they say that Snape killing Draco had to do with him staying on Voldy's good side.
 
Useless pauses build suspense, and make it so it's not rushing the movie. Also when Fred died was only a few minutes if not seconds to when Harry fought Voldy in the forest. They tried to show emotion for Fred's death by having his family crying for him, What more do you want? Harry is more focused on defeating Voldy at this point then caring about people's deaths.

First off, useless pauses don't build suspense when it's a serious moment and the pause is so awkwardly long that the whole theater is hysterically laughing and no one is taking it seriously...

Second, Fred, Percy (who had been estranged from the Weasley family at this point), Ron, Hermione, and Harry were all fighting Death Eaters together in a corridor outside the room of requirement after saving Draco's life from the fire. The corridor explodes and Fred gets crushed to death.

"The world had ended, so why had the battle not ceased, the castle fallen silent in horror, and every combatant laid down their arms? Harry's mind was in free fall, spinning out of control, unable to grasp the impossibility, because Fred Weasley could not be dead, the evidence of all his sense must be lying...
Percy lay flat across Fred's body, shielding it from further harm, and when Harry shouted, "Percy, come on, we've got to move!" he shook his head.
"Percy!" Harry saw tear tracks streaking the grime coating Ron's face as he seized his elder brother's shoulders and pulled, but Percy would not budge." (Pg. 638).​

That is what I would have liked to have seen. (And btw Harry doesn't go into the forest until page 691).


Not exactly, Snape had to kill Dumbledore so that he could be seen as one of the Death Eaters especially when they doubted him, also he made an Unbreakable Vow with Draco's mom.

Also never in the movies did they say that Snape killing Draco had to do with him staying on Voldy's good side.

Snape was never going to kill Draco :p.

Dumbledore's exact words in the film were "We both know Lord Voldemort has ordered the Malfoy boy to murder me. But should he fail, I should presume the Dark Lord will turn to you. You must be the one to kill me Severus, it is the only way. Only then will the Dark Lord trust you completely."

http://www.solarmovie.eu/movie/playlink/id/380457/part/1/ (its at 77:42 in case you'd like to check :rolleyes:)

No mention of Draco at all except that he is the one who has been ordered to kill Dumbledore.

In the book, it went like this:

""I refer to the plan Lord Voldemort is revolving around me. His plan to have the poor Malfoy boy murder me."
..."The Dark Lord does not expect Draco to succeed. This is merely punishment for Lucius's recent failures. Slow torture for Draco's parents, while they watch him fail and pay the price."
"In short, the boy has a death sentence pronounced upon him as I surely have," said Dumbledore. "Now I should have thought the natural successor to the job, once Draco fails, is yourself?"
There was a short pause.
"That, I think, is the Dark Lord's plan."
"Offer him help and guidance, he ought to accept, he likes you--"
"--much less since his father has lost favor. Draco blames me, he thinks I have usurped Lucius' position."
"All the same, try...Ultimately, of course, there is only one thing to be done if we are to save him from Lord Voldemort's wrath."
Snape raised his eyebros and his tone was sardonic as he asked, "Are you intending on letting him kill you?"
"Certainly not. You must kill me."
...."If you don't mind dying," said Snape roughly, "why not let Draco do it?"
"That boy's soul is not yet damaged, said Dumbledore. "I would not have it ripped apart on my account."" (Pg. 683).​

That is 100% about saving Draco from Voldemort. By taking that out, it completely changes Dumbledore's character. Although, Michael Gambon, has done a pretty good job of ruining Dumbledore already so I guess that's not too big of deal.
 
First off, useless pauses don't build suspense when it's a serious moment and the pause is so awkwardly long that the whole theater is hysterically laughing and no one is taking it seriously...

Second, Fred, Percy (who had been estranged from the Weasley family at this point), Ron, Hermione, and Harry were all fighting Death Eaters together in a corridor outside the room of requirement after saving Draco's life from the fire. The corridor explodes and Fred gets crushed to death.

"The world had ended, so why had the battle not ceased, the castle fallen silent in horror, and every combatant laid down their arms? Harry's mind was in free fall, spinning out of control, unable to grasp the impossibility, because Fred Weasley could not be dead, the evidence of all his sense must be lying...
Percy lay flat across Fred's body, shielding it from further harm, and when Harry shouted, "Percy, come on, we've got to move!" he shook his head.
"Percy!" Harry saw tear tracks streaking the grime coating Ron's face as he seized his elder brother's shoulders and pulled, but Percy would not budge." (Pg. 638).​

That is what I would have liked to have seen. (And btw Harry doesn't go into the forest until page 691).






Snape was never going to kill Draco :p.

Dumbledore's exact words in the film were "We both know Lord Voldemort has ordered the Malfoy boy to murder me. But should he fail, I should presume the Dark Lord will turn to you. You must be the one to kill me Severus, it is the only way. Only then will the Dark Lord trust you completely."

http://www.solarmovie.eu/movie/playlink/id/380457/part/1/ (its at 77:42 in case you'd like to check :rolleyes:)

No mention of Draco at all except that he is the one who has been ordered to kill Dumbledore.

In the book, it went like this:

""I refer to the plan Lord Voldemort is revolving around me. His plan to have the poor Malfoy boy murder me."
..."The Dark Lord does not expect Draco to succeed. This is merely punishment for Lucius's recent failures. Slow torture for Draco's parents, while they watch him fail and pay the price."
"In short, the boy has a death sentence pronounced upon him as I surely have," said Dumbledore. "Now I should have thought the natural successor to the job, once Draco fails, is yourself?"
There was a short pause.
"That, I think, is the Dark Lord's plan."
"Offer him help and guidance, he ought to accept, he likes you--"
"--much less since his father has lost favor. Draco blames me, he thinks I have usurped Lucius' position."
"All the same, try...Ultimately, of course, there is only one thing to be done if we are to save him from Lord Voldemort's wrath."
Snape raised his eyebros and his tone was sardonic as he asked, "Are you intending on letting him kill you?"
"Certainly not. You must kill me."
...."If you don't mind dying," said Snape roughly, "why not let Draco do it?"
"That boy's soul is not yet damaged, said Dumbledore. "I would not have it ripped apart on my account."" (Pg. 683).​

That is 100% about saving Draco from Voldemort. By taking that out, it completely changes Dumbledore's character. Although, Michael Gambon, has done a pretty good job of ruining Dumbledore already so I guess that's not too big of deal.

Yes but it had to do with the Elder Wand too. You have proven yourself correct but I do think J.K. Rowling had Snape kill Dumbledore also because it would get him good with the Dark Lord again, That was the only way Snape could prove himself. And don't forget the cursed ring

But in the movies once he walked in the infirmary, he went ouside to go meet Voldemort. And wasn't Fred killed by a Death Eater?

Whole theater laughing hysterically? When I went to see the movie there was no laughing, And yes pauses do build suspense because they make your heart pumped for what's next, Also pauses can sometimes be used to have a character take a break for speaking and think.

Also I don't see how having Snape get in good with the Dark Lord changes Dumbledore's character, that just shows Dumbledore cares about Snape's well being also. I don't see how Michael Gambon ruined Dumbledore's characters. It's very hard to judge the two actors that have played Dumbledore given their roles in the films were in 2 different parts of the 2nd Wizarding War.

Only reason people like the first actor is because that's the one we all grew up with, or most of us.
 
Yes but it had to do with the Elder Wand too. You have proven yourself correct but I do think J.K. Rowling had Snape kill Dumbledore also because it would get him good with the Dark Lord again, That was the only way Snape could prove himself. And don't forget the cursed ring

But in the movies once he walked in the infirmary, he went ouside to go meet Voldemort. And wasn't Fred killed by a Death Eater?

Obviously for the purposes of the story it had to do with the Elder Wand, but that was never mentioned as a reason in the book. Plus I never said it didn't have anything to do with the Elder Wand. Actually, I'm pretty sure I did say that it was partially about the Elder Wand as well...And the ring wasn't a reason for Snape to kill him, he would have asked Snape to do it regardless of that situation, it just made it easier for Snape from a moral stand point.

Fred was killed by the wall of the corridor exploding. It was left ambiguous as to who caused the wall to explode, but it came from outside and it very well could have been a Death Eater.

Whole theater laughing hysterically? When I went to see the movie there was no laughing, And yes pauses do build suspense because they make your heart pumped for what's next, Also pauses can sometimes be used to have a character take a break for speaking and think.

I'm not an idiot, in general, yes, pauses add to the suspense. Trust me, I know that, I'm a film major, but in this case they were too long and extremely awkward. Everyone I talked to who saw it at midnight said during most of the pauses everyone was laughing because they didn't feel right, they didn't fit, and they were way longer than they needed to be to create suspense.

Also I don't see how having Snape get in good with the Dark Lord changes Dumbledore's character, that just shows Dumbledore cares about Snape's well being also.

I never said that Snape getting on Voldy's good side ruined Dumbledore's character, I said Dumbledore's reasoning not being to save Draco's soul ruined Dumbledore character. Dumbledore is a kind, gentle, good-hearted man who puts his students, good or bad, before all else. Rowling never would have had Dumbledore put Snape before Draco. He is all about redemption and that gets completely taken away by cutting out that one simple line.

I don't see how Michael Gambon ruined Dumbledore's characters. It's very hard to judge the two actors that have played Dumbledore given their roles in the films were in 2 different parts of the 2nd Wizarding War.

Only reason people like the first actor is because that's the one we all grew up with, or most of us.

Richard Harris was only in two movies, nobody grew up with him as Dumbledore. People like him better because he played the part better. That being said, we only saw him in the first two films and therefore we never got further into his character. He very well could have screwed it up too.

Michael Gambon refuses to read the Harry Potter books. That's fine, he doesn't want to learn as much about his character as possible that's up to him. I can see how he would not want to ruin the story for himself or whatever, but if I were an actor in something as huge as Harry Potter, personally I'd want to get to know my character.

Like I said before, Dumbledore is a kind, good-hearted man. He rarely is rude or disrespectful and he puts the safety of the students of Hogwarts above all else. Michael Gambon does a decent job of depicting Dumbldore; however, he has lost the true essence of the character. That may not be his fault, that may be the way Steve Kloves/Michael Goldenberg (the screenwriters) wrote the part. In the films Dumbledore, is much less patient and understanding, he makes snide remarks, and in Goblet of Fire he choked Harry. Those are not things that Dumbledore would have done.

Also, Michael Gambon is incredibly rude to fans and in interviews and I dislike him as a person.
 
Obviously for the purposes of the story it had to do with the Elder Wand, but that was never mentioned as a reason in the book. Plus I never said it didn't have anything to do with the Elder Wand. Actually, I'm pretty sure I did say that it was partially about the Elder Wand as well...And the ring wasn't a reason for Snape to kill him, he would have asked Snape to do it regardless of that situation, it just made it easier for Snape from a moral stand point.

Fred was killed by the wall of the corridor exploding. It was left ambiguous as to who caused the wall to explode, but it came from outside and it very well could have been a Death Eater.

But in the book it also said that Dumbledore's hand was cursed by Marvolo Gaunt's ring, so him being killed would be a less painful death.


I'm not an idiot, in general, yes, pauses add to the suspense. Trust me, I know that, I'm a film major, but in this case they were too long and extremely awkward. Everyone I talked to who saw it at midnight said during most of the pauses everyone was laughing because they didn't feel right, they didn't fit, and they were way longer than they needed to be to create suspense.

Okay you got me there, but just because people laugh at pauses doesn't mean that they weren't necessary, just means people don't understand the purposes of it. Personally when I saw the movie I didn't really see any pauses

I never said that Snape getting on Voldy's good side ruined Dumbledore's character, I said Dumbledore's reasoning not being to save Draco's soul ruined Dumbledore character. Dumbledore is a kind, gentle, good-hearted man who puts his students, good or bad, before all else. Rowling never would have had Dumbledore put Snape before Draco. He is all about redemption and that gets completely taken away by cutting out that one simple line.

Richard Harris was only in two movies, nobody grew up with him as Dumbledore. People like him better because he played the part better. That being said, we only saw him in the first two films and therefore we never got further into his character. He very well could have screwed it up too.

Michael Gambon refuses to read the Harry Potter books. That's fine, he doesn't want to learn as much about his character as possible that's up to him. I can see how he would not want to ruin the story for himself or whatever, but if I were an actor in something as huge as Harry Potter, personally I'd want to get to know my character.

Like I said before, Dumbledore is a kind, good-hearted man. He rarely is rude or disrespectful and he puts the safety of the students of Hogwarts above all else. Michael Gambon does a decent job of depicting Dumbldore; however, he has lost the true essence of the character. That may not be his fault, that may be the way Steve Kloves/Michael Goldenberg (the screenwriters) wrote the part. In the films Dumbledore, is much less patient and understanding, he makes snide remarks, and in Goblet of Fire he choked Harry. Those are not things that Dumbledore would have done.

Also, Michael Gambon is incredibly rude to fans and in interviews and I dislike him as a person.

No Dumbledore didn't want Draco's soul to be completely bad. He said it in thr 6th movie and said it against in the 7th, so his character wasn't messed up.

Well now you're getting personal about Michael Gambon instead of his role in the movie.

Actually yes, Richard Harris was in the first 2 films, Yeah people did grow up with Dumbledore, especially the kids who are probably teens now, who are the main viewing audience. We grew up with him because he was the first Dumbledore he saw. I honestly don't see how he played him better, especially when he barely had a speaking role through most of the duration of the movie

Well can you blain Gambon for not wanting to read the books? He's adult, and an actor at that, Not everyone has the patience to read all the books. I know most of our parents wouldn't.

I don't remember him choking Harry in Goblet of Fire , though it may've been after the Maze. But you say those are thigns Dumbledore may not have done. Remember that over the years Dumbledore has gotten frustrated with the Wizarding War, for all we know he could've done those things. Not to mention sometimes they change certain things in the movies.

Dumbledore is not the perfect saint that many make him out to be, This was the same person who once carried Voldemort's dream of enslaving Muggles, and killed his own sister due to his own arrogance.
 
No Dumbledore didn't want Draco's soul to be completely bad. He said it in thr 6th movie and said it against in the 7th, so his character wasn't messed up.

Well now you're getting personal about Michael Gambon instead of his role in the movie.

Actually yes, Richard Harris was in the first 2 films, Yeah people did grow up with Dumbledore, especially the kids who are probably teens now, who are the main viewing audience. We grew up with him because he was the first Dumbledore he saw. I honestly don't see how he played him better, especially when he barely had a speaking role through most of the duration of the movie

Well can you blain Gambon for not wanting to read the books? He's adult, and an actor at that, Not everyone has the patience to read all the books. I know most of our parents wouldn't.

I don't remember him choking Harry in Goblet of Fire , though it may've been after the Maze. But you say those are thigns Dumbledore may not have done. Remember that over the years Dumbledore has gotten frustrated with the Wizarding War, for all we know he could've done those things. Not to mention sometimes they change certain things in the movies.

Dumbledore is not the perfect saint that many make him out to be, This was the same person who once carried Voldemort's dream of enslaving Muggles, and killed his own sister due to his own arrogance.

He said it in the 6th book and in the 7th book, but never in any of the movies.

Harry Potter and the Sorcer's/Philosopher's Stone came out on November 14, 2001, Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets came out on November 15, 2002. Correct me if I'm wrong, but that's 1 year. NO ONE grew up with Richard Harris. I was in 4th grade in 2001 and 5th grade in 2002. That's not growing up...I grew up with Michael Gambon.

Do you actually read what I write or do you just skim it? Because this is now the 3rd time you are saying something that I said. I said "We only saw him in the first two films and therefore we never got further into his character. He very well could have screwed it up too." You said, "I honestly don't see how he played him better, especially when he barely had a speaking role through most of the duration of the movie." I'm not denying that, I agree that he did not have a huge part in those movies and therefore we will never know.

Again, I didn't blame Gambon for not wanting to read the books. I said I get it. However, he has stated that he specifically does not read them because he wants to interpret Dumbledore the way he is written in the script not the way that JKR writes him, as well as he does not want to spoil the movies by knowing what's ahead. And I guess I get that, not wanting to spoil it and all, but I also think as an actor you would want to know your character as well as possible. You would want to know every detail about your character so that you can feel what they feel and bring that emotion to the screen. Also, both my parents and most of my friend's parents have read Harry Potter, just sayin...

When Harry's name is pulled out of the Goblet of Fire and Harry is waiting with the other Triwizard Champions in the room off to the side of the Great Hall, Dumbledore and a few others, including Barty Crouch and Rita Sketter storm in the room. Dumbledore runs to Harry, puts his hand around Harry's throat, pushes him up against a wall, shakes him, and yells, "DID YOU PUT YOUR NAME IN THE GOBLET OF FIRE?!" Dumbledore would never do something like that.

It's at 1:36 if you want to see:
[YOUTUBE]93Vfj77npd4&feature=related[/YOUTUBE]

The point is that he didn't do those things and he never would have done those things, because it's not in his character's nature. He would never treat the students of Hogwarts the way he does in some of these films, especially GoF and HBP. And obviously they change things for the movies, that's what we're talking about :banghead:.

I never said he was a saint, but 1. we're not talking about his past, we're talking about his behavior whilst Headmaster at Hogwarts and 2. No matter whether he was perfect or not, he still always put the students ahead of everything else. He didn't kill his sister!!! A spell ricocheted that could have been his, Grindewald's, or Aberforth's. You can't make assumptions like that.
 
He said it in the 6th book and in the 7th book, but never in any of the movies.
No he said it in the Pensieve and even talked to Draco in a caring tone when Draco was pointing a wand at him.

Harry Potter and the Sorcer's/Philosopher's Stone came out on November 14, 2001, Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets came out on November 15, 2002. Correct me if I'm wrong, but that's 1 year. NO ONE grew up with Richard Harris. I was in 4th grade in 2001 and 5th grade in 2002. That's not growing up...I grew up with Michael Gambon.

Yes that means you grew up with Richard Harris given he was the first Dumbledore you knew when you were a child. Most of Harry Potter's vieweing audience are teens and when Harry Potter started in what say 2001 and 2002, the oldest we could've been was 4 or 5. Who did we see on the screen? Richard Harris

Do you actually read what I write or do you just skim it? Because this is now the 3rd time you are saying something that I said. I said "We only saw him in the first two films and therefore we never got further into his character. He very well could have screwed it up too." You said, "I honestly don't see how he played him better, especially when he barely had a speaking role through most of the duration of the movie." I'm not denying that, I agree that he did not have a huge part in those movies and therefore we will never know.

Again, I didn't blame Gambon for not wanting to read the books. I said I get it. However, he has stated that he specifically does not read them because he wants to interpret Dumbledore the way he is written in the script not the way that JKR writes him, as well as he does not want to spoil the movies by knowing what's ahead. And I guess I get that, not wanting to spoil it and all, but I also think as an actor you would want to know your character as well as possible. You would want to know every detail about your character so that you can feel what they feel and bring that emotion to the screen. Also, both my parents and most of my friend's parents have read Harry Potter, just sayin...
Well that's his way of acting, Maybe he's not trying to be a ripoff of Dumbledore, to make viewers unhappy.

When Harry's name is pulled out of the Goblet of Fire and Harry is waiting with the other Triwizard Champions in the room off to the side of the Great Hall, Dumbledore and a few others, including Barty Crouch and Rita Sketter storm in the room. Dumbledore runs to Harry, puts his hand around Harry's throat, pushes him up against a wall, shakes him, and yells, "DID YOU PUT YOUR NAME IN THE GOBLET OF FIRE?!" Dumbledore would never do something like that.

It's at 1:36 if you want to see:
[YOUTUBE]93Vfj77npd4&feature=related[/YOUTUBE]

The point is that he didn't do those things and he never would have done those things, because it's not in his character's nature. He would never treat the students of Hogwarts the way he does in some of these films, especially GoF and HBP. And obviously they change things for the movies, that's what we're talking about :banghead:.

1st of all, there was a specific rule about not putting your name in the Goblet and if you tried magic you would get in trouble so really it's not unlike Dumbledore's nature.

I never said he was a saint, but 1. we're not talking about his past, we're talking about his behavior whilst Headmaster at Hogwarts and 2. No matter whether he was perfect or not, he still always put the students ahead of everything else. He didn't kill his sister!!! A spell ricocheted that could have been his, Grindewald's, or Aberforth's. You can't make assumptions like that.

No it was his spellthat richocheed, and Dumbledore knows this, that's why he was the one that mostly felt guilty over his sister's death not Aberforth. And what's to say he didn't take some of the traits he had when he was older. Dumbledore had no problem having Harry die if it killed Voldemort, nor did he give Harry much clues on the Horcruxes.
 
No he said it in the Pensieve and even talked to Draco in a caring tone when Draco was pointing a wand at him.

Again, he never says it in the pensieve in the film (only in the book, I've already proved this point) and talking to Draco in a caring tone and straight up saying that he wants to save Draco are two completely different things.

Yes that means you grew up with Richard Harris given he was the first Dumbledore you knew when you were a child. Most of Harry Potter's vieweing audience are teens and when Harry Potter started in what say 2001 and 2002, the oldest we could've been was 4 or 5. Who did we see on the screen? Richard Harris

Do you not understand the concept of growing up? By the way you're explaining it, people shouldn't even remember Richard Harris. Everyone has grown up with Michael Gambon as Dumbledore. No matter what age you were when you saw the first film, you only knew Richard Harris as Dumbledore for one year. One year is not growing up, 9 years (The length of Michael Gambon's reign) is growing up.


Well that's his way of acting, Maybe he's not trying to be a ripoff of Dumbledore, to make viewers unhappy.

And AGAIN, I already said that I get where he's coming from and this isn't that big of a deal.

1st of all, there was a specific rule about not putting your name in the Goblet and if you tried magic you would get in trouble so really it's not unlike Dumbledore's nature.

Let's look to the book again:

The door behind them opened again, and a large group of people came in: Professor Dumbledore, followed closely by Mr. Crouch, Professor Karkaroff, Madame Maxim, Professor McGonagall, and Professor Snape. Harry heard the buzzing of hundreds of students on the other side of the wal before Professor McGonagall closed the door.

"Madame Maxime!" said Fleur at once, striding over to her headmistress. "Zey are saying zat zis little boy is to compete also!"

Somewhere under Harry's numb disbelief he felt a ripple of anger. Little boy?

Madame Maxime had drawn herself up to her full, and considerable, height. The top of her handsome head brushed the candle-filled chandelier, and her gigantic black-satin bosom swelled.

"What is ze meaning of zis, Dumbly-dorr?" she said imperiously.

"I'd rather like to know that myself, Dumbledore," said Professor Karkaroff. He was a steely smile, and his blue eyes were like chips of ice. "Two Hogwarts champions? I don't remember anyone telling me the host school is allowed two champions--or have I not read the rules carefully enough?"

He gave a short and nasty laugh.

..."We were under the impression that youur Age Line would keep out younger contestants, Dumbledore," said Karkaroff, his steely smile still in place, though his eyes were colder than ever. "Otherwise, we would, of course, have brought along a wider selection of candidates from our own schools."

"It's no one's fault but Potter's, Karkaroff," said Snape softly. His black eyes were alight with Malice. "DOn't go blaming Dumbledore for Potter's determination to break the rules. He has been crossing lines ever since he arrived here--"

"Thank you, Severus," said Dumbledore firmly, and Snape went quiet, though his eyes still glinted malevolently through his curtain of greasy black hair.

Professor Dumbledore was now looking down at Harry, who looked right back at him, trying to discern the expression of the eyes behind the half-moon spectacles.

"Did you put your name into the Goblet of Fire, Harry?" he asked calmly.

"No," said Harry. He was very aware of everybody watching him closely.

"Did you ask an older student to put it in the Goblet of Fire for you?"

"No," said Harry vehemently.

"Ah but of course 'e is lying!" cried Madame Maxime.

..."Dumbledore, you know perfectly well you did not make a mistake!" said Professor McGonagall angrily. "Really what nonsense! Harry could not have crossed that line himself, and as Professor Dumbledore believes that he did not persuade an older student to do it for him, I'm sure that should be good enough for everybody else!"

Sorry for that quote being so long, I just wanted to make sure I got the whole thing. Dumbledore never would have reacted as he did in the movie, because Dumbledore knew from the start Harry is not the kind of person who would have put his name in the cup. Dumbledore suspected foul play from the beginning and that is why in the book he is calm and reserved. He knows something greater is happening here and due to the fact that Karkaroff is a death eater, I suspect that Dumbledore's initial thought was that Karkaroff put Harry's name in the cup.

No it was his spell that richocheed, and Dumbledore knows this, that's why he was the one that mostly felt guilty over his sister's death not Aberforth. And what's to say he didn't take some of the traits he had when he was older. Dumbledore had no problem having Harry die if it killed Voldemort, nor did he give Harry much clues on the Horcruxes.

You point out to me where it ever says that it was Dumbledore's spell and I'll give you that one, but I just finished reading the 7th book and I don't recall it ever saying anything about that. They leave it at no one knows, but Dumbledore blames himself. Aberforth blamed Dumbledore for everything and therefore never felt guilty over Arianna's death because he automatically blamed Albus. He even says that in the book, he also says that they never knew who's spell it was, but that Albus blamed himself nonetheless.


My apologies to those who wanted to discuss Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 here. I did not intend for us take over this thread with a debate about Dumbledore. :blush:
 
Again, he never says it in the pensieve in the film (only in the book, I've already proved this point) and talking to Draco in a caring tone and straight up saying that he wants to save Draco are two completely different things.



Do you not understand the concept of growing up? By the way you're explaining it, people shouldn't even remember Richard Harris. Everyone has grown up with Michael Gambon as Dumbledore. No matter what age you were when you saw the first film, you only knew Richard Harris as Dumbledore for one year. One year is not growing up, 9 years (The length of Michael Gambon's reign) is growing up.




And AGAIN, I already said that I get where he's coming from and this isn't that big of a deal.



Let's look to the book again:

The door behind them opened again, and a large group of people came in: Professor Dumbledore, followed closely by Mr. Crouch, Professor Karkaroff, Madame Maxim, Professor McGonagall, and Professor Snape. Harry heard the buzzing of hundreds of students on the other side of the wal before Professor McGonagall closed the door.

"Madame Maxime!" said Fleur at once, striding over to her headmistress. "Zey are saying zat zis little boy is to compete also!"

Somewhere under Harry's numb disbelief he felt a ripple of anger. Little boy?

Madame Maxime had drawn herself up to her full, and considerable, height. The top of her handsome head brushed the candle-filled chandelier, and her gigantic black-satin bosom swelled.

"What is ze meaning of zis, Dumbly-dorr?" she said imperiously.

"I'd rather like to know that myself, Dumbledore," said Professor Karkaroff. He was a steely smile, and his blue eyes were like chips of ice. "Two Hogwarts champions? I don't remember anyone telling me the host school is allowed two champions--or have I not read the rules carefully enough?"

He gave a short and nasty laugh.

..."We were under the impression that youur Age Line would keep out younger contestants, Dumbledore," said Karkaroff, his steely smile still in place, though his eyes were colder than ever. "Otherwise, we would, of course, have brought along a wider selection of candidates from our own schools."

"It's no one's fault but Potter's, Karkaroff," said Snape softly. His black eyes were alight with Malice. "DOn't go blaming Dumbledore for Potter's determination to break the rules. He has been crossing lines ever since he arrived here--"

"Thank you, Severus," said Dumbledore firmly, and Snape went quiet, though his eyes still glinted malevolently through his curtain of greasy black hair.

Professor Dumbledore was now looking down at Harry, who looked right back at him, trying to discern the expression of the eyes behind the half-moon spectacles.

"Did you put your name into the Goblet of Fire, Harry?" he asked calmly.

"No," said Harry. He was very aware of everybody watching him closely.

"Did you ask an older student to put it in the Goblet of Fire for you?"

"No," said Harry vehemently.

"Ah but of course 'e is lying!" cried Madame Maxime.

..."Dumbledore, you know perfectly well you did not make a mistake!" said Professor McGonagall angrily. "Really what nonsense! Harry could not have crossed that line himself, and as Professor Dumbledore believes that he did not persuade an older student to do it for him, I'm sure that should be good enough for everybody else!"

Sorry for that quote being so long, I just wanted to make sure I got the whole thing. Dumbledore never would have reacted as he did in the movie, because Dumbledore knew from the start Harry is not the kind of person who would have put his name in the cup. Dumbledore suspected foul play from the beginning and that is why in the book he is calm and reserved. He knows something greater is happening here and due to the fact that Karkaroff is a death eater, I suspect that Dumbledore's initial thought was that Karkaroff put Harry's name in the cup.



You point out to me where it ever says that it was Dumbledore's spell and I'll give you that one, but I just finished reading the 7th book and I don't recall it ever saying anything about that. They leave it at no one knows, but Dumbledore blames himself. Aberforth blamed Dumbledore for everything and therefore never felt guilty over Arianna's death because he automatically blamed Albus. He even says that in the book, he also says that they never knew who's spell it was, but that Albus blamed himself nonetheless.


My apologies to those who wanted to discuss Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 here. I did not intend for us take over this thread with a debate about Dumbledore. :blush:

Yes he said it in the Pensieve in the flim that he meant to save Draco and if he talked to Draco in a caring tone he must've meant well for Draco. Draco had the wand pointed at him and was ready to kill him and Dumbledore told Draco to put the wand down. That implies that he didn't want Draco to kill him even though at this point he wanted to die, and whether Snape or Draco killed him wouldn't matter. (Though the Elder Wand's power would've lived on if Draco killed him)

I don't see how I'm explaining it wrong. Even though we've seen Michael Gambon for most films, we remember Richard Harris the most because that was the first Dumbledore we saw when we first got into Harry Potter. Even though we didn't go through the years with him, that was still the first one we saw when were all kids, even toddlers in some cases. Thats what I meant by "grew up"

And again even though Dumbledore would'v enever choked Harry in the book, It depends on your definition of choke, In the movie Dumbledore may've not choked Harry to hurt him or even really choked him, he probably just shook him by the neck because he was in a rush to get the answer.

But...you've proven a good argument about what Dumbledore would've did so I give you the win here.

But when Dumbledore fought Aberforth at that time he was Anti-Muggles, so his intentions were wrong at the time, so indirectly it was his fault.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
174,851
Messages
3,300,884
Members
21,726
Latest member
chrisxenforo
Back
Top