Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows (Harry Potter, #7) Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows discussion

The Movies and the Books

Comments Showing 1-15 of 15 (15 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

Dash What I don't get is why Harry is made up so different in the movies then in the books. Seriously! He's really witty and smart in the books and in the movies he's really dumb. At first I thought it was the acting by D.R. but he didn't write the screenplay! For example, in the prisoner of askaban his challenges to malfoy are all really dumb. What do you think?

mishti Yeah I agree. It makes me so furiously mad when someone claims to be a diehard Harry Potter fan and then, when I ask them which book was their favorite, they say, "Oh... I never read the books-- too long. *stupid giggles* I loovvee the movies though."

The movies always disappoint me. Where are the characters I know and love?

message 3: by Kat (new) - rated it 5 stars

Kat Helgeson I think a big element of this is that in the books you get inside Harry's head. You know him a lot more intimately. Radcliffe is a strong actor, but there's only so much you can do with your face to convey Harry's extensive inner monologue. There is a really good example of it in the fourth movie, right after he asks out Cho Chang and she says no. He is lying by the fire, hugging his golden egg, with a priceless look on his face.

The movies are never going to be the same as the books. I try to enjoy them as what they are - an adaptation of a story I love into a different art form. I think they do a pretty good job.

But Mishti - I TOTALLY agree with you about HP "fans" who have never read the books. Who are THEY kidding?

message 4: by [deleted user] (new)

Books are better thaan movies, whoever disagrees with me on this shouldnt be on goodreads they should be on flixster or something. Harry potter books are the best and are better than the movies.

Annalisa It's Hermione that gets me. Particularly in Prisoner of Azkaban, she could not be more dumb, especially the part where she howls like a werewolf to detract Lupin and then says "yeah I didn't think about that." I know in the book she was stressed out with her extra classes and not as sharp and I suppose they were trying to relate that, but it just makes her look stupid.

Karina Books will always be better than the movies, and I know we cant
expect them to be up to 100% accurate, but I agree with Annalisa that in the third movie it showed her none smartness.

I also agree with Mishti, how can they be fans when all they watch is the movie which isn't even close to the book. Those people are literature deprived.

Anyway, can you believe that the 7th movie is going to be in two parts! I know that there's alot of info to get inot the movie, so I'm kinda glad its going to be in two parts, but thats like a whole year been the release of part one to part 2.

Tami I love the books and like the movies. I believe the reason is, while reading the books, you form your own idea on the characters, setting, etc. While watching the movies you see how someone else interprets it.

Also, there is a lot missing from the movies! Anyone wonder about the absence of the house elves in the Goblet of Fire movie?

I will admit though, that even though the movies are so different than the books, they are much more enjoyable than some of the other movies out there. I am also glad that those who are too busy (lazy) to read the books, have some type of exposure to Harry Potter and his world.

message 8: by Khadija (new)

Khadija the books r waaaaaaaaaaaaay better than the movies!! each movie disappoints me but i try to enjoy them. what's good about every book is that u get to explore and evaluate the character and c what he/she is thinking, while in the movies, u can't hear what everyone's thinking... plus, in the movies, they can't add every sigle detial in the book to it, because it would turn out really really loooong and boring. but it's the details in the book that makes me love it even more. and i really experience a sense of loss when they don't show the parts that i like in the movie, or just do it wrong. i was really pissed when in movie 5 they just filmed a very very small part of snape's memory. and james appeared to be such an ass in it. at least in the book he was an arrogant idiot, but i loved him!!! while in the movie, he just seemed like a bully +it wasn't really clear what was going on....
+ did anyone notice that in movie 3, towards the end, they do NOT reveal the identity of the 4 maruaders, and they don't explain everything...it was such a pity :(

Dusty For my taste, the movie is successful when it gives the same overall feel of the book. I doubt anybody would expect them to accomplish more than this.

That being my criteria, I did find the 5th movie to be satisfying. Of course they added where they didn't need to, left out a bunch of fun pieces, and lost much of the humor which gave the book such balance. But I walked away with that mixture of loss, accomplishment, and Harry's growing and dreaded sense of purpose - same as the book.

The other movies did not hit the mark, though #3 wasn't as far off as the others.

Pandy The movies will never come close to being as good as the books. I liked the first two movies for keeping most of what was in the books, but I know those are most poeples' least favorite. I love how a couple charcters were done in the movie even if it was not exactly like the book(Snape for instance). The way Harry and Hermione are portrayed certainly annoys me sometimes. Has anyone seen the international trailer for the Half-Blood Prince? The scene at the end in the library is so out of character for Harry. The biggest thing about the movies I don't like is Gambon's portrayal of Dumbledore. It is all wrong. Richard Harris did a much better job in the first two moveis. I'm hoping Gambon will do a better job in the sixth film. A few test screen viewers said he did, but then again, others did not think so.

江平 12

Ayunda Yeah I agree. I think books are always better than the movies. But still, I like the movies, even sometimes it doesn't fit with the book.

message 13: by Jenn (new) - rated it 5 stars

Jenn i agree with u pandy, harris did a much better job portraying albus.


message 14: by Jenn (new) - rated it 5 stars

Jenn 江平 wrote: "12"



message 15: by Annalisa (last edited Feb 28, 2009 04:35PM) (new) - rated it 5 stars

Annalisa Pandy wrote: "The movies will never come close to being as good as the books. I liked the first two movies for keeping most of what was in the books, but I know those are most poeples' least favorite. I love how..."

I was watching these the other day with my daughter and at the moment when Dumbledore shoves Harry asking him if he puts his name in the Goblet of Fire I realized why maybe someone could get the impression that Dumbledore is cold (maybe I should argue this on the Snape thread, but the discussion has moved on elsewhere). Gambon gets the intelligence but without the veil of contented ignorance that gives him that kind elderly characteristic, which is his greatest defining characteristic. Dumbledore just isn't Dumbledore without a cheery disposition, just like Hermione isn't Hermione without her brains, Ron his humor, and Harry his bravery.

back to top