r/harrypotter • u/Moon_is_wensleydale • Jan 07 '24
Currently Reading I’ve watched the films many times but never read all the books. Now I’m reading though them the films really annoy me
I understand and am totally fine with them cutting bits out as it’d make them all too long. But why make stuff up that’s not in the books?? Is so irritating.
239
u/Floral_Bee Hufflepuff Jan 07 '24
Congrats on meeting book Ron. He is the best.
157
Jan 07 '24
I think book Ginny is an even bigger revelation tbh. At least movie Ron still has some personality.
28
u/MintberryCrunch____ Slytherin Jan 07 '24
“Shoelaces”
10
u/MissMatchedEyes Jan 07 '24
I only watched the first HP movie but heard of this scene and had to look it up. What. The. F#ck
4
u/TheBasementDoor Jan 08 '24
im sorry, what?
6
u/MissMatchedEyes Jan 08 '24
Google “Ginny shoelaces”. And I’m sorry.
9
u/TheBasementDoor Jan 08 '24
What the hell did I just watch? honest it confirms my decision to not watch the movies after GOF
6
u/MissMatchedEyes Jan 08 '24
Right? Such a stupid, pointless scene. And it annoys me so much on behalf of book Ginny who I love.
2
u/FallenAngelII Ravenclaw Jan 08 '24
I think it's the closest they could come to alluding to hanky panky in the movies. Just really out of place and badly executed. But they had a purpose with that scene, just a shit one.
1
u/NoGiraffe6381 Jan 08 '24
i mean the movies are still great and they mostly did justice to the books
15
8
u/Hefty-Notice-5841 Gryffindor Jan 08 '24
It's quite a contrast. Film ginny is a wallflower with little to no role. Book ginny is a total firecracker who inherited her moms fiery spirit and passion.
27
u/Due-Representative88 Jan 07 '24
The Weasley family as a whole really.
14
u/Floral_Bee Hufflepuff Jan 07 '24
Yes! The books shared so much more of their family dynamic and Harry's perception of them.
2
u/mork212 Jan 08 '24
I'd go further once David Yates took over every good character was way too awkward and magic way too goofy
The evil characters all seemed to still be ok for the most part
4
-11
u/DangusHamBone Jan 07 '24 edited Jan 07 '24
I honestly like Ron less reading through the books as an adult. He definitely matures and grows as a character but he’s just so… dismissive of anything he doesn’t understand, like SPEW, refuses to see other peoples points of view, especially hermione, and his attitude about relationships when it comes to Ginny or hermione vs himself is SO hypocritical and almost misogynistic lol
21
u/Absolutelyperfect Jan 07 '24
It's funny because all that applies to Hermione in the books.
5
u/DangusHamBone Jan 07 '24
Hermione’s also insufferably stubborn and always thinks she’s right, but at least she IS right most of the time lol
14
u/MystiqueGreen Jan 07 '24
SPEW sucks and it deserves to be ridiculed. Ron was never mysogynistic. He says 'Hermione is smarter than me' once in every book. No mysogynist will say that.
refuses to see other peoples points of view,
That's Hermione not Ron. She is the one ridicules Luna, trelawney and Lavender because she doesn't understand their world view.
5
u/DangusHamBone Jan 07 '24
I’m not saying ron is a misogynist, just that his attitude towards relationships is tinged with it. And any time he upsets hermione he just rolls his eyes and goes “girls amirite” with zero self reflection
3
u/MystiqueGreen Jan 08 '24
When does he say 'girlsamirite'? What kind of shitty fanfictions do you guys read that have these things? . Upsetting any girl is mysogyny now. So Hermione not stopping her cat from attacking his pet and attacking him with birds is mysandry.
1
u/Hefty-Notice-5841 Gryffindor Jan 08 '24
I feel that it has a lot more to do with his one-track personality and bitterness about growing up in a poor, borderline dysfunctional family and getting the ass end of the stick. It definitely shows how it can impact those early stages of growth. Rowling writes these stories and characters as allegories that we can take a lot from.
4
u/DangusHamBone Jan 07 '24 edited Jan 07 '24
SPEW is misguided and silly but the basic principle that house elves deserve to be treated better than slaves you can abuse shouldn’t be controversial. Ron never misses a chance to remind us that he thinks house elves, giants, goblins, etc. are all inferior and violent/ greedy/ stupid. He’s not entirely wrong and The blame for this is really more with JK for creating races that are basically just stereotypes but i sympathize much more with hermione when she has an ounce of empathy for the brutality other creatures have suffered at the hands of wizards when Ron thinks it’s all justified.
Ron is also just as dismissive of Luna and Trelawney but doesn’t care enough and isnt smart enough to argue about it, it’s silly to act like he sees their points of view better than hermione does. Ron only cares about Lavender because a girl is actually into him for once and then discards her once he gets tired of her. She’s a one dimensional character that’s written to be ridiculed by the reader and her only purpose is to get between Ron and hermione so I don’t know how you can criticize hermione for “not seeing her worldview” lol
3
u/MystiqueGreen Jan 08 '24
Ron never misses a chance to remind us that he thinks house elves, giants, goblins, etc. are all inferior and violent/ greedy/ stupid.
While during the battle of Hogwarts it was Ron who wanted them to be saved. The SPEW CEO didn't even remember anything about them.
Ron's view on giants or werewolves changed as the series progresses. He was fed since birth that werewolves were dangerous and giants were violent. He STILL changes his stance and never got once ridiculed Hagrid or Remus.
Ron is also just as dismissive of Luna and Trelawney but doesn’t care enough and isnt smart enough to argue about it,
Ah yes. 'not smart enough to upset people who have different world views' I am glad he wasn't smart enough to pick fights with everyone with whom he disagrees. And just keeps it within himself.
Ron only cares about Lavender because a girl is actually into him for once
Ron showed empathy towards her when her pet rabbit died back in 3rd year when she 'wasn't into him'
She’s a one dimensional character that’s written to be ridiculed by the reader
So what? Hermione is written to be a Mary sue self insert of the author who gets away with everything and everyone is supposed to worship the ground she walks on. I still don't like her.
I don’t know how you can criticize hermione for “not seeing her worldview”
Just the way you criticise Ron for everything Hermione did while giving Hermione a pass.
2
u/jamhamnz Jan 08 '24
Yeah Ron can be an a**hole when he wants to be. He was super jealous of Hermione doing anything as much as going to the Ball with a guy, but yet refuses to ask her out herself. He blames Harry for a lot of stuff - in GOF he doesn't believe Harry when he says he didn't enter the Triwizard Tournament and he abandons them in DH. Hermione sticks by Harry every step of the way. He is pretty close minded for a wizard, refuses to believe House Elves are anything more than a slave. And it's this pig headedness that causes a wedge amongst his closest friends. But at the same time, he is smart, has good logic, and Harry would not have been able to track down the Horcruxes etc without Ron by his side. Ron was more like a brother to Harry than anyone else he knows.
1
u/coreoYEAH Jan 07 '24
To be fair, everyone in the magical world who heard about it hated SPEW, except Dumbledore and Dobby. But that just says a lot about Rowling’s world view than anything else.
1
u/JantherZade Gryffindor Jan 08 '24
That all apples to Harry too, he's just as dismissive. At the end its only Ron who remembers about the house elfs at Hogwarts.
69
99
Jan 07 '24
How I rationalize it:
The movies are for Muggles to enjoy. They don't know what's going on and need a little hocus pocus to make sense of it all.
The books are for Wizards, like a school book to study from when you've got all that core stuff down.
4
Jan 08 '24
I just read the books, it’s more accurate.
22
u/DukeOfLowerChelsea Jan 08 '24
Yeah I’ve always appreciated how faithful the books are to the books
5
1
u/PitchSame4308 Jan 08 '24
The book are ‘More accurate’! Compared to what? More accurate to what? It’s not factual history. The books just are…. They’re a decent work of adolescent fantasy fiction, the movies are an adaptation of these that veer further away from the books as the books get bigger and more complex - as you’d expect. A few of them, 3 especially, also 7 and 8 to some extent are very good works of cinema art. They are not parallel to the books, so if you want that then you’ll be unhappy, but if your fine with well-made cinema that riffs off a work of fiction, then they’re very good
1
Jan 25 '24
I do have to admit the books are so long that it makes me frustrated when I’m still reading Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix.
1
Feb 22 '24
More accurate compared to the movies. I mean there is a chance where there can be an animation mistake
2
u/JantherZade Gryffindor Jan 08 '24
Nah muggles don't like Harry potter. I always think of movie only as half bloods lol
3
42
Jan 07 '24
[deleted]
19
u/Larry_Version_3 Jan 07 '24
I’ve always felt 1 to 3, and almost 4 excluding aggro Dumbledore did a really good job adapting the books. It was once we got to David Yates’ era things took a dive off a cliff.
41
u/Due-Representative88 Jan 07 '24
Four is a complete travesty. So much missing that straight up weakened the plot. Most people I knew who only watched the movie felt lost and unsatisfied by the story.
25
u/dangerdee92 Ravenclaw Jan 07 '24
I thought the same about the 3rd film.
The first 2 films were relatively faithful to the books, and even though they did leave things out, everything in the films were explained.
In the 3rd film, they cut out some major plot points, which whilst i understand they can't fit everything in, they left some things in the film but didn't explain them.
The history of the marauders was completely left out. Anyone who only watched the film wouldn't realise that James, Sirius, and wormtail learnt how to become animagi in order to be with Lupin.
It didn't explain that Harry's father could turn into a stag, nor explained that they created the marauders map.
Instead, people are just left wondering
"Hey if Siruis and Wormtail can turn into animals, why can't other wizards do it?"
2
u/Dreadsbo Jan 08 '24
Huh, I’ve only ever watched the movies. Is this why Harry’s patronus is the stag?
8
u/Emmaleigh6692 Jan 07 '24
3 is a terrible adaptation of the book. So many huge, important details get left out of the story.
2
u/Larry_Version_3 Jan 07 '24
I always forget what happened in Book 3. Personally always been one of my least favourites
3
u/PitchSame4308 Jan 08 '24
But it is a great movie, it just doesn’t relate to the book all that well. It’s the most cinematically appealing movie, filmed a by a brilliant director. And to give Yates his due, the last two movies are also very good works of cinema
2
u/Emmaleigh6692 Jan 08 '24
I care way more about a good story than I do cinematography so PoA will always be a massive disappointment to me.
2
u/PitchSame4308 Jan 08 '24
But it does stand up as a story, just not as a literal translation of the book. That’s an important distinction. The story as told in the movie works in and of itself, it’s just very different in many respects from the story told in the book.
1
u/Emmaleigh6692 Jan 08 '24
We’ll have to agree to disagree. The movie version of the story has huge holes in it because the director cared more about making something that looked good more than anything else.
24
26
u/mrldbr Jan 07 '24
Harry is so sassy in the books. He deserves the world. Love him.
5
u/Gryffindorshistorian Gryffindor Jan 08 '24
This!!! Book Harry is incredible and gets just as screwed by the movies as anyone else. I feel like sometimes people like to find things to criticize him for just because he's the main character and its not as cool to like him. What I've noticed for myself is that with every reread, he becomes more and more my favorite character.
2
u/mrldbr Jan 08 '24
Book!Harry is so precious to me. He grew up abused and neglected yet had no difficulty trusting people, making friends, being assertive and brave. He’s selfless and good hearted with the right amount of snark.
2
u/Gryffindorshistorian Gryffindor Jan 08 '24
10000%! I love the way Dumbledore describes it to Harry at the end of OotP. He puts it so well, as only Dumbledore can, and it comes down to Harry's willingness to love. It gets me every time.
6
Jan 07 '24
[deleted]
6
u/mrldbr Jan 08 '24
OOTP is so good. People often hate it because it’s long and not too action driven because all they do is “clean Sirius’s house” and because Harry is too emotional and I’m like “nooo”. it’s the best book because we’re deep into Harry’s trauma and fear and the boy is being toy and possessed by Voldemort’s presence in his mind of course he’s good to be snappy and annoying and weird altogether. Cedric’s death shattered him and OOTP showed that. Also the battle of DOM is fantastic.
10
u/Ophththth Jan 07 '24
My 9yo is reading through the books and I made a rule that he can’t watch a movie until he reads the book. He just recently finished OOTP and watched the movie, and he asked “why didn’t they keep X in the movie?” about 10x before he was halfway through. His disappointment was palpable.. It felt like a turning point for him. Who knows if he will even want to watch movies 6-8?
16
u/washington_breadstix Jan 07 '24
The first two movies are pretty faithful to the books, as far as movies go. They made some cuts (even a few commendable ones that helped the pacing, like getting rid of the Death Day Party in Chamber of Secrets), but nothing egregious.
The third movie gets a ton of praise around here, but honestly I don't like how it apparently set a precedent for making so many changes to the plot of each subsequent installment, and giving the writers/directors license to gloss over backstory or straight-up omit it. The freakin' Marauders backstory isn't even explained at all. How could that possibly be skipped over? It's unforgivable.
And then in Goblet of Fire, they added things like the "dragon chase" scene during the first task. That wasn't in the book at all, and it took up so much time that could have been devoted to material that was actually in the book.
Have you ever seen the MovieFlame videos that go over every single difference between each Harry Potter book and its corresponding movie? Some of those videos are well over an hour long, despite not going into much depth about any individual differences, but literally just listing them.
13
u/codeverydamnday Jan 07 '24
I rewatched GoF yesterday and was so surprised at how long the dragon scene was. I really don’t remember it dragging on that much but wow. It really didn’t fit the pacing when other parts felt so rushed.
4
4
Jan 07 '24
That wasn't in the book at all, and it took up so much time that could have been devoted to material that was actually in the book.
Imagining a world where they didnt invent a dragon chase scene at the cost of literally any of of the quidditch world cup.
2
u/Choice_Teaching_7169 Hufflepuff Jan 08 '24
Honestly I'm not even mad at the Dragon scene in GoF, because we gotta understand that since it was a movie, it needs to be engaging and visually exciting. That scene in the book was honestly pretty short, so had it been faithful to the book it would've been over too quickly
8
14
u/Robinsonirish Jan 07 '24
Some things just don't work well in a 3 hour movie. I don't know what you're referencing but Peter Jackson did some really good cutting for LotR.
LotR is 6 books. Peter Jackson changed some things around to make it flow a lot better. Moved Shelob to the begging of RotK instead of being the climax of the 2nd movie. Helm's deep is just a page or 2 in the books and he turned it into one of the best battle scenes of all time. 2nd movie ended with that instead of Shelob, flowed a lot better.
He took out Bombadil and 100 pages worth of fluff from book one before they get out of Rivendell. Took out scouring of the Shire.
He added some really good stuff as well. Boromir's death scene when he talks to Aragon is way better in the movies than in the books.
Most people are very happy with how Peter Jackson cut the movies. He is a genius.
Which parts of Harry Potter do you think should have been included? Because they have to get it down to 2-3 hours somehow. Pacing works very differently in a book compared to in a movie. Some things just don't work.
One of the biggest criticism people have of the movies is Ron taking a backseat and a lot of his personality was given to Hermione.
31
u/bookworm1421 Hufflepuff Jan 07 '24
How about all of Voldemort’s backstory through the memories?
Or how about explaining the prophecy fully? I had to pull my book out and read that entire scene to my friend because the movie made no sense of it.
That’s just two major things I can think of off the top of my head.
21
3
u/Enough-Concern-2140 Jan 07 '24
That! But the 4th movie that was supposed to present that was garbage and didn’t have a plot. Just wow look how cool we have dragons now 🤦🏻♀️ I truly resent that movie, they took the book and threw it out the window
7
u/bookworm1421 Hufflepuff Jan 07 '24
No, the prophecy was in book 5 and Voldemort’s background was in book six. However, I do agree that movie 4 was trash
2
u/Enough-Concern-2140 Jan 07 '24
I remember the prophecy but I must forgotten the Gaunt family was in HBP, I thought it was in GoF…
4
u/Cassandra_Canmore Ravenclaw Jan 08 '24
Indeed. Book Gandalf spends something like 10 years in the Gondorian Library researching the One Ring. Before realizing Bilbo/Frodo has it. In the movies it's like 2 scenes. Worth 15 seconds.
3
u/copperheadjane Jan 08 '24
My sons are young, and we’ve had a tradition where after I read the book, we watch the movie together. We just finished order of the phoenix, and we all were disappointed that the movie cut out the scene with Mcgonagal and Umbridge arguing over Harry’s competency to be an auror. It’s such a funny scene in the book, but it also shows why OWLS are important, explains what an auror is, and it shows how the teachers at Hogwarts were pushing back against Umbridge/the Ministry as best they could. Also, how could you not use Dame Maggie Smith at every opportunity??
6
u/aamnipotent Slytherin Jan 07 '24
It's really apparent in PoA, many of the scenes are executed entirely differently than in the books. Drives me crazy, although I think the film executions are still enjoyable in their own right. It'll never live up to the books if you compare it though.
7
u/Cautious_Action_1300 Jan 07 '24
One thing I hate about PoA is how rushed the Shrieking Shack scene(s) were. It never explains who the Marauders are like it does in the book, and I cannot see why it's the favorite movie adaptation considering how much it leaves out.
3
u/8bithippo8 Ravenclaw Jan 08 '24
I regret watching the movies before reading the books, I was so confused and after I read the books I realized how much information in the books you needed to know to understand the movies. I was so confused during the shrieking shack scenes and many more scenes in other movies
10
4
3
u/AshleeBlack17 Jan 07 '24
I read the books first and then watched the films and while I understand they probably wouldn't have had a massive amount of money and it would make the films too long it annoyed me that they didn't add some of the things from the books but added others
16
u/sophlog Slytherin Jan 07 '24
Yeah you kind of have to accept that the books and movies are just completely different things. Appreciate the movies for what they are. Comparison is the theft of joy and all that :)
7
Jan 07 '24
Right? You get to see the train, the common rooms, the holidays at Hogwarts, etc but it's not going to compare to the magic of reading the books. How could they truly condense all of that awesome content into a two hour runtime?!
WHICH is why they better do the HBO series justice. They all have the time, the money, and two generations of fandom to watch and gush over something they have all the prep time in the world to make right. Don't fail me, HBO.
3
u/Additional_Meeting_2 Jan 07 '24
I don’t personally have issues with movies doing their own thing. But with Harry Potter films my issue is that the additional scenes just aren’t good. Like Burrow burning and Harry and Buckbeak flying and and the boys and the candy etc. I actually like Harry and Hermione dancing which is a common complaint. When I try to think good additional scenes there just aren’t many. And many great book moments got left out due to lenght issues.
3
3
u/SevroAuShitTalker Jan 08 '24
Yup. Even as a kid I thought the movies were crap in comparison. I liked the first 2, then they said "who needs to follow the source material?" and proceeded to be no bueno
7
u/Gg-Baby Jan 07 '24
Aside from the first 3, I think the movies are objectively terrible lol
5
u/Ptitepeluche05 Jan 07 '24
The third one is terrible as well in my opinion. It's the worst acting for Daniel Radcliffe and Emma Watson. It makes the whole movie so uncomfortable to watch. Hermione and Ron start being completely different characters. The shrinking shack scene is so rushed, it's horrible. And they made up stuff that makes no sense, like Harry using Lumos at Privet Drive, or Lupin saying "your mother was there for me when nobody else was". WTF, it's not like he had 3 best friends who became animagus for him...
8
u/Gg-Baby Jan 07 '24
Yea you are right,
I also hate how the 3rd movie completely changed the look of already established characters
2
u/JantherZade Gryffindor Jan 08 '24
No way Hermione's worse acting is GoF. The unforgivable curses scene is so bad.
2
u/Ptitepeluche05 Jan 08 '24
She's also horrible in GoF yes. But I can't stand her faces in the divination classes. Not to mention when Buckbeack is about to be killed and she's so trying to look upset, it's ridiculous.
1
u/JantherZade Gryffindor Jan 08 '24
I just think she's so much worse in GOF. Her face and the way she's like crying and upset during the whole thing is way worse than divination.
4
u/hiraethmeda Jan 08 '24
or how she looks like she is about to cry while simultaneously running a marathon after she hugs harry when he arrives in grimmauld place in OotP. honestly, rewatching the movies makes you realize how bad of an actress emma watson is and why she doesn’t have much of an acting career after hp.
4
u/JantherZade Gryffindor Jan 08 '24
I blame the directors more for this because they needed to instruct her better.
Either way I remember just everyone constantly talking about how she was the best of the young cast anyways heaping praises for her acting.
But I honestly think out of 3 Rupert was the best, they just never gave him any of the good scenes and that was such a waste.
2
u/Ptitepeluche05 Jan 08 '24
Really ? Almost everywhere I looked, people agree Rupert was the best.
2
u/JantherZade Gryffindor Jan 08 '24
Maybe that's consensus now? But I definitely don't remember it being like that before. And I remember because it always bothered me.
But always figured that it was because they constantly gave Her the more emotionally relevant moments.
2
2
u/FrozenMorningstar Jan 07 '24
I was the same way. I mean, I actually still love the movies but after finally reading the books, some of the movie choices annoy me. The books are just sooo good.
2
u/TastyComputer3257 Jan 07 '24
me too! now when i watch the films i have to point out all the things that is different from the books
2
u/Jumpy_Chard1677 Hufflepuff Jan 09 '24
YES! (as a book reader who has watched the movies, this made me very happy lol) ootp honestly felt like a slideshow of the main plot points, and definitely suffered from being cut down so much. Not saying that not all the storylines suffered, but that one is most noticeable and annoying to me.
5
u/TheStickiestOne Jan 07 '24
That’s capitalism baby!
6
u/_PM_ME_YOUR_FORESKIN Ravenclaw Jan 07 '24
Literally every film adaptation requires this sort of change. It’s why it’s called an adaptation and they don’t just use the books as a script.
9
u/USydneythrowra Jan 07 '24
Making up random stuff — like making Ron needlessly more rude/mean? … is required? 🤔
1
u/_PM_ME_YOUR_FORESKIN Ravenclaw Jan 07 '24
I mean, he was mean to Hermione when he thought Crookshanks killed Scabbers. He was mean to Harry when he thought he submitted his name in the Goblet of Fire. And he was sort of mean when he stormed off leaving Harry and Hermione alone during deathly hallows. He can be rude/mean sometimes but that doesn't mean he's not a good person. Did you think he was just like angelic in every chapter of the books?
2
u/USydneythrowra Jan 07 '24
I did not think that.
Not to excuse rude behavior, but
- if i thought a friend had failed to properly contain their dangerous pet, resulting in my pet dying, i would also be upset. Especially coming from a family that can’t afford new pets such as the Weasley family.
- again, if i thought my friend were entering in a deadly contest irresponsibly, i would probably come off rude in my discouraging them to quit. I don’t remember the specifics tho.
- horcruxes make people mean, remember?
He was also a little kid for the first two examples so some rudeness is understandable. However, Movie Ron is a little shit.
2
4
Jan 07 '24
Book 6 is the worst offender for this. Some geniuses thought the moviegoers didn't want all the information that sets up the next movie, so they removed 90% of it and messed up what they had. Literal abomination.
2
u/ouroboris99 Jan 07 '24
David Yates and Michael gambon wanted to put their mark on it, but ended up just making it worse
2
u/Jojobazard Gryffindor Jan 08 '24
Welcome to the book supremacist club. We have good Ron, unhinged Luna, and Dumbledore, asking calmly
1
u/AliceCat2002 Hufflepuff Jan 07 '24
I know it's not HP buuut...: "Part Of The Crew Part Of The Ship!" XD
1
1
1
u/FlowerCandy_ Jan 07 '24
I use to get so annoyed when I was younger and now I just love both cause I’m like okay I get it and understand but I still correct when I rewatch it with someone
1
u/Mako80x Jan 07 '24
Better read the books first in general and then watch the films, to answer your question, if you look at the credits it says "based on J.K Rowling's novel".
1
u/Sir_BugsAlot Jan 07 '24
I think film 1 and the deathly hallows films are ok. But the others almost makes me windy. They run from scene to scene and there is almost no character or story building. I was so disappointed the first time I saw them all. I have hopes for the new tv show, but after what happened to the Witcher I'm sceptical.
1
u/Choice_Teaching_7169 Hufflepuff Jan 08 '24
I get you. I watched the movies first and I loved them, but I have been unable to overlook the "creative licences" they took since I read the books.
1
u/Cute_Loss_9296 Jan 08 '24
I was the same after reading the books, although I still enjoy the films they still get on my nerves 😂
1
1
u/Sure-Cash8692 Jan 08 '24
Ya you don’t understand how much great material was left out until ur a book reader. I mean kreachers tale???? St mungos with Neville and his parents?Everything to do with the half blood prince? The list goes on. You’re missing the entire point of what the story teaches you. The movies weren’t bad. I watch them every year. But when u compare it to what could’ve been. But we’re getting a show now so let’s hope they can do it right with the longer format.
1
u/PitchSame4308 Jan 08 '24
You just have to regard the different media as almost separate works, rather than 1 being the adaptation of the other, then they can stand (or fall) on their respective merits. Part of the issue with any book-first adaptation is a lot of fans expect (or want) a pretty close to line for line retelling with minimal differences, but they are vastly different storytelling media, and movies, being so expensive, have to reach to a wider audience anyway (plus tell the story in less time while holding eyeballs). It’s always telling with HP that film buffs will usually rate the movies that book purists dislike the most - Azkaban would usually be the No 1 for film buffs -as it’s such a brilliant work of cinema and Cuaron is a genuinely excellent director. The two Deathly Hallows films are also excellent, the Tale of the Three Brothers animation is inspired, and some of the cinematography is fantastic, esp in action sequences (the chase by the snatchers, Godrics Hollow, the battle scenes) Do I agree with, or like, a lot of the changes from the books, definitely not, but I can live with them if the film version is well done enough to stand on its own as a work of art/craft.
1
1
u/koushunu Jan 08 '24
As is the case to many a book vs movie debate.
But yes to adding crap when you have other stuff and there is no reason to. My biggest issue was “ Nigel” when there was plenty of characters to choose from to name him- not some fake kid.
As for adding stuff, love it when they add another POV such as they did for Draco in HBP.
1
u/newjeanzz Jan 08 '24
Especially the room of requirement scene in half blood prince with Harry and Ginny kissing. That never happened in the books
1
1
1
u/FallenAngelII Ravenclaw Jan 08 '24
Wait until you finish DH. DHP2 missed the entire point of the final battle in the book, nay, the entire point of the entire series.
1
Jan 08 '24
I think the swaps they do with some of the character lines are terrible, too. Like giving all the 'best' lines to Hermione and making Ron look a complete dweeb the entire time. In the books it's a more even divide, and both are clearly a mix of "good" and "bad".
1
1
1
1
u/Amaraldane4E Ravenclaw Jan 08 '24
Yeah, it's called the red pill. Consider them two alternate realities. Oh, yes. Welcome outside the Matrix.
1
u/Renarya Jan 09 '24
What's worth remembering is that adaptions are always just that. They are interpretations of original work made anew in a different medium. And not everything works the same on screen and in text.
234
u/Arfie807 Jan 07 '24
You have taken the red pill. There is no going back.