Well I heavily suspect that picture I showed you was photoshopped. It was Ralph Fiennes though, so it may not be as far from the truth as it could be. He is supposed to have red eyes at least!

Here are pictures of Stanislav Ianevski as Viktor Krum: http://gfx.filmweb.pl/p/166197/po.89061.jpg

And Clémence Poésy as Fleur Delacour: http://images.hollywood.com/images/large/l_2438871.jpg

(yes, the guy who plays Trigger in Only Fools and Horses is in this film, as Bartemius Crouch no less!)

I seriously doubt that Ginny is the last Horcrux. I'm sure stranger things have happened, but it doesn't make much sense. Whoever said that is saying it just because of the thing Harry and Ginny have in the sixth book. Sure there was that time when Voldemort kind of possessed Ginny in CoS, but he never actually killed anyone, and so part of his soul couldn't have gone into Ginny.

King of Numenor - This is the photoshopped pic of Voldemort: http://stephenwhitehead.com/pics/My_Voldemort.jpg

Since it says 'My_Voldemort.jpg', it means someone has created that themselves.
There isn't a picture of how Voldemort will actually look anywhere I don't think. Since seeing him will be the climax in the film, they won't want to ruin the surprise.
Nor is there a pic of Brendan Gleeson as Mad-Eye. It will be most interesting to see how they do his magical eye!

Oh wow! That's certainly a little on the disturbing side! :goofy_pur
Him teaching the Unforgivable curses should be an interesting scene. He'll certainly have everyone's attention :lol_blue:

Well rather than posting comments useless to the thread, why not try to spur on the conversation?

Okay, here's an original question: Who is your favourite character in the books (except Harry), and why?

If you're talking about Harry Potter, be it book or film, then it's not off-topic in this thread

I know what you mean about him not performing any actual magic. I think since this was the first film, they needed to establish what the characters were all about. Hermione is the smart one, the one who learns all the spells first, and so in the films, they showed her doing it with the Wingardium Leviosa spell. Harry performing spells, unless of great significance to the storyline, is not really moving the story along any, or showing a characteristic unique to him.
In the third film for example, when he produces the Patronus, that helps to develop his character, since he's the only student at that age, that can produce one. It ends up saving his own and Sirius' life (and Hermione's in the book), so it's important to the storyline, as well as character development.

First... let me bring the thread back to life. I know you all saw the 3rd movie. And setting aside that the acting is not 100%... (seriously though... these are kids... they haven't spent years in acting school or anything... they haven't even seen the world.)

What you see written is what first comes to mind... i haven't seen it in a while.

First. What kind of a director fades in and out of sceens. By that i mean... fading to black and then out again. For anyone that doesn't know how bad this is... please rent "Sasquotch Hunters". Fading out to black after every scene is not only repetitious, but it also looks bad. I would almost rate this a B Rated Horror film. Yes... it was that bad.

Secondly. You don't change things. You can't change MAJOR sections of the castle and hope that nobody will notice. ONE: The giant swinging penduleum at the main doors. Not only was that not there during the first two films... it was never there in the books. How much would that affect Harry chasing after Snape in the 6th book? Wow... Harry got sliced by the penduleum...movies over. TWO: The path to Hagrids. I didn't mind that as much... but they added so many things that you could tell everything had been changed. THREE: The womping willow... DOES NOT. I repeat... does not pick Hermonie up and spin her around in some cheezy CGI graphics. Not only does that contradict the book... but also the other movie. Its suppose to "womp" people... not spin them... gah!!

Speaking about that. Unecessary scenes in random locations that don't actually exist. That really long bridge that apparently connects two turrets of the castle... don't remember that.

We hardly saw Dumbledore. Mr. Black looked like some insane lunatic.... he wasn't. Maybe insane...not lunatic.

Hermonie's time travel thing was suppose to be some small device... but wasn't some huge clock thing? I mean really...

Stupid camera angles...

Never wearing their robes. The director wanted them to be more casual.Pssshhaa!

since I decided to stop my rant. I figure the best way was to end with the end of the movie.
What kind of director has Harry fly towards the screen and then blurr his face as he says that line to open up the map. That... just put the icing on the cake for me. I told my parents to never buy it. I may have to though.

This was my favourite book. Ruined thanks to that director. You may feel differently... but i'm sorry... he killed that image of Harry Potter FOREVER. Thank goodness my imagination is as strong as it is.

*breaths*

I'm done...

I agree with everything Throin said about the third film...shocking, I know.
Not being funny or anything, but most people in this country can't speak English properly, so how that director got the job, completely baffles me :loco:
It is his fault completely that film 3 was as different as it was. Thorin covered pretty much all of what was wrong with the film, so I'm sure no one is surprised Alfonso, or whatever his name is, is not back for GoF.

I agree that GoF will be the best yet. As long as they keep the film focused on the key events, there's no reason why it shouldn't be the best. The cast has been strengthened again significantly, and so the quality of the adult actors should help balance the suspect child acting. I'm looking forward to the Quidditch World Cup And the 3rd task will be interesting too. If anyone has seen trailers, the maze in which the 3rd task takes place is vast! Hopefully it's seeming enormity will mean that there is a lot of screentime there.

What do you mean by deluxe editions; what makes them deluxe? I only own HBP American version, and that's only because I wasn't prepared to wait for my English copy to be shipped over to read it.

The deluxe edition is the same as the adult addition right? Same book, but the cover is geared towards "adults" I personally prefer to "kids" edition.

No offense to the new director... but don't you think Ron and Harry could get a haircut? Harry's isn't that bad... but you should see Ron's hair. I mean... theres this one picture I saw... i could have sworn he was a girl. I am dead serious.

Oh, they started releasing "adult" versions of the books in England too. It's ridiculous I think. They put ultra-boring covers on, just so they don't embarress the adults :thumbsdow

I agree about the hair too. I mean sure, they're getting older, but most people still gets hair cuts when they get older. Ron's is far too long, plain and simple, and Harry's is getting there. Perhaps they're trying to be cool or something? It isn't working.

Speaking of getting older, I hope the main 3 kids stay on for all the films. By the time OotP comes out, the actors will between 2 and 4 years older than the age they're playing in the film. I don't think this will be much of a problem though, because you do start to look older in the mid-teen years.
I don't know whether Tom Felton (Draco) will return though. He'll be 18 this year! Could a 20 year old convincingly play a 15 year old? Maybe, but will a 20 year old want to play a 15 year old...?

The Flame of the West wrote: Speaking of getting older, I hope the main 3 kids stay on for all the films. By the time OotP comes out, the actors will between 2 and 4 years older than the age they're playing in the film. I don't think this will be much of a problem though, because you do start to look older in the mid-teen years.
I don't know whether Tom Felton (Draco) will return though. He'll be 18 this year! Could a 20 year old convincingly play a 15 year old? Maybe, but will a 20 year old want to play a 15 year old...?

Its possible for someone older to play someone younger, for example James Van Der Beek was 21 when he played 15 year old Dawson on Dawon's Creek, and Katie Holmes was was 20 playing a 15 year old on the same show, sometimes you have people in their 30s playing highschool people on tv shows and movies, so it is possible.

I haven't read any of the books, but have seen and liked all the movies. In general, the movies seem to keep getting better and better. I thought GoF was great! Very funny, exciting, and very disturbing when HP finally finds himself face to face with V.

I hope they keep the same cast for the rest of the movies because these kids are so good.

BladeCollector wrote:Its possible for someone older to play someone younger, for example James Van Der Beek was 21 when he played 15 year old Dawson on Dawon's Creek, and Katie Holmes was was 20 playing a 15 year old on the same show, sometimes you have people in their 30s playing highschool people on tv shows and movies, so it is possible.

I hear what you're saying. Take Smallville as another example. Tom Welling is 28 and married, and yet he plays Clark Kent just out of highschool! I was just wondering whether the actors will be up for it. Tom Felton in particular having seen GoF, since he isn't nearly as prominent as in the previous 3 films.

Well, I saw GoF opening night too. It was great. Easily the best yet, and as the books do, and as Olorin1 pointed out, it does follow the trend of being better than its predecessor. A great mixture of humour, action, sadness, and happiness.
I think it was too short, but only a bit. I think it would have been good to show some of the Quidditch World Cup. It's ridiculous to me for them to show the creative opening to the game, and then cut to them back in their tents after the game. I know it leads up to the more important scene of the Death Eaters showing up and the uttering of Mosmordre, but still, it would've only added a few minutes, but more entertainment. Also, what about the encounters in the Maze? I'm sorry, but the whole hedges moving around nonsense, and roots trying to ensnare the champions just doesn't cut it with me. We should've at least seen a Blast-Ended Skrewt, or the Sphinx. Whatever though, those are just a couple of minor issues.
Everything else was great. I thought Fiennes was great as Voldemort. He looked the part, had the silky voice you'd e xp ect, and the menacing presence. If anything hindered the performance, I'd say it was that it seemed a little rushed, like all of the film. The Goblet of Fire is a considerably larger novel than Prisoner of Azkaban, and yet they have to be roughly the same length as films. Even though some "unecessary" things were cut, the film should still have been closer to 3 hours than it was, just so as not to have the rushed feeling I thought it did.

Here's some info on the GoF DVD, from davisdvd.com:
Warner Home Video is set to release Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire on March 7th. Early details have the two-disc DVD including a commentary with director Mike Newell (a first for the Potter DVDs), deleted scenes, behind the scenes featurettes, set-top games and activities - including the Triwizard Tournament Challenge - and more. Incidentally, Warner Brothers has hinted that they'll revisit the previous three films in the future to include commentaries plus other goodies for the adult fans! Thanks to Tyler F. and Blockbuster Danny for the assists.

Overall, I think it was a good wrap up of the series.

My main complaints with the series as a whole is the simplistic writing of the earlier novels. I suppose it boiled down to being books of school age kids, for school age kids, so it didn't have the depth and vocabulary I would hope for. Case and point, the relationship between Harry and Sirius felt incredibly forced. Like the reader's would understand that Sirius was important, and thus when he died it was so...superficial. That may just be own problem though.

But her writing style has significantly improved since the first book. I'm glad I forced myself through the boring stuff to get to the end.

However, she still implements and annoying method. Rowling has been having a decade long affair with the deus ex machina in the Harry Potter novels.
SPOILER ALERTTTTTTT Just incase you folks didn't understand Flame's warning.

Like Aberforth -randomly- showing up and being involved. Dobby shows up at the Malfoy's??? Somehow Dean, and runaway crew show up and discuss the fake sword in the LeStrange vault -right- in front of Harry and his crew?

I think it's almost amusing that Harry essentially acknowledges that half of the things in his story were luck (In OotP) and that he's really not that great a wizard. While Harry is fairly skilled, this is certainly not a lie. Half of the things that happen in the HP series are just random occurances in order to solve plot issues. They're intricate and interesting enough, but it's a bit bothersome when things happen with very little rhyme or reason.

Fiendfyre can destroy horcruxes? There are spells that can destroy horcruxes?! So why did they have to travel all over creation for a year trying to find a sword or Basilisk venom???

Another bothersome thing about this book is the random killings. While I get J.K. was trying to get across the seriousness of the story and the darkness and such, some of the deaths just seemed to be there for shock value, and not really to push the story forward.

I guess, all in all, the book was what I e xp ected it to be. It was good, and right in line with the rest of the books. So it works.

After reading the story and after hearing some of your posts, I find myself agreeing with the fact that some of it seemed to be almost thrown together. I enjoyed it and I don't see anything wrong with how she wrote it... perhaps it could have been e xp anded upon in some of the earlier novels or lengthened in some detail. After all, compared to OotF, this one was fairly short. I think that Rowling wanted to move on. She has always seen the final chapter in her mind and it's probably been dying to come out for such a long time that the writing of the 7th and final novel became such a burden that it turned out more forced than usual. Who knows.

As for Dobby showing up, it was the 2 way mirror that Sirius had given Harry. Aberforth had it did he not? And when harry reached around in his bad, he saw the eye of Dumbledore... but it was his brother and it was he who sent Dobby to rescue Harry. That is how I understood it.

Dean was out of school because he was Muggle-born (I believe..?) and was thus on the run before the Snatchers found him. They just happened to meet up in the same place. I'm not so much questioning those characters or why they were on the run, that was entirely plausible. It just bothers me that where a 5x8 tent (on the outside anyways) was camped was exactly where that group came.

Please don't misunderstand me, I understand fully why Aberforth and Dobby were involved, I just felt that it was kind of random. As I said, the deus ex machina's again. But they weren't that disappointing, because I essentially e xp ected them from Rowling.

The Deathly Hallows were...interesting but kind of pointless when you think about it. They didn't -really- conquer death or anything, and the fact that Voldemort didn't even know of their existance just makes him look weak. I felt Voldemort didn't come across as evil in this book as he has in the past. He was almost evenly matched with Harry, as Harry was nailin' horcruxes and the Deathly Hallows left and right while Voldemort trailed behind. I think if Voldemort had been aware of the Deathly Hallows legend it would've been a bit more intimidating.

My point on the deaths is essentially the same throughout the series. The deaths of almost every character are done more for shock value than for actually progressing the story:

Cedric was entirely for shock value. I don't think his death was important enough on its own. I think a bit more character development of the fellow, or perhaps if he had been killed in an effort to protect Harry or something. It just made Cedric appear weak against -Wormtail-. Wormtail, who is essentially the lowest Death Eater.

Sirius was killed to piss off Harry. That's about it. He didn't really live up to his potential, as I felt the character could've done so much more for the story. Again, if it had been done to save Harry. Perhaps a diving in front of a spell or some such thing. Cliche, but a bit more important. Especially the event itself. Falling into some mystery shroud? Seems unnecesarily 'comic-book' death-like. Where she could've brought him back if she didn't like how it came out. It was disappointing.

Dumbledore for the face value at the sixth book was a bit pointless. Dumbledore who beat the hell out of Voldemort the book before, couldn't manage against a handful of Death Eaters, Snape even despite going through the Horcrux events. Granted, in this book we learned that it was a bit deeper, it still felt a bit...anti-climactic at first.

Lupin and Tonk's death just disturbed me because it was these main characters (and essentially Harry's very last link to his parents) were killed off without even their moment, which I felt Lupin at least earned. Harry just sees their bodies. What kind of justice does that do to either characters? I also felt the after effects were entirely wasted, as Ted Lupin is now an orphan in a similar manner as Harry. But there was almost no mention of that.

Which, the uneventful death, brings me to my main gripe with the deaths in the series. They're done so quickly, and so blandly that it's hard to take much away from it. I think people were shocked and sympathetically upset by them simply due to human nature, not to the actual literature. It was the fact that we could imagine close friends or relatives being killed in front of our eyes. But if you take the context away, it's so bland and quick that there's little to know emotion to the deaths themselves, which makes me feel like the characters don't get their justice. Go back and read the scene where Sirius dies. Or even Dumbledore. It takes maybe a paragraph to describe what happens, and then it's done. And it feels like Harry barely notices. He acknowledges their death, but not in as strong a way as you'd e xp ect. It's like the reader is responsible for filling in the emotional blanks. They just come across as anti-climactic and dull.

While I agree that Rowling wanted to just move on, I'm not so sure. I've heard in at least one interview that an 8th book in the Harry Potter 'verse wasn't out of the question. The book didn't feel rushed, but it probably was. I don't think it felt any different than other books in the series. If anything, HBP felt much more rushed than this one.

I think the Deathly Hallows were necessary for Harry to survive death and ultimately to come back to the world of the living. As Ddore e xp lained to him, he had the choice to come back because he had mastered death, having all three of the Hallows... without these items, it was impossible for Harry to survive. Otherwise there wouldn't have been a real reason to have given the book that had all of those children's stories.

The book has already become a blur to me because I read it so quickly. I have a feeling I might have to go back and re-read some bits here and there to completely understand the story.

I suppose I -kind- of buy that hey needed all three items to survive death. However, he didn't really have the Elder Wand in his possesion at that point, he had merely mastered it. So while I understand it, I'm not sure I like it all that much...kind of a technicality.

And I'm the same way, Thorin. A lot of the book kind of blended together and I forgot some of the minor details.

No, I get where Flame's coming from. In the last book, even Malfoy wasn't impressive (to be fair, he still isn't) and thus his drones are pretty much unimpressive. While I do approve of them showing that the Carrow's were teaching dark magic that was entirely too powerful for them, it does seem a bit odd that he could conjure something -that- powerful. The lack of control makes up for it a bit, but it results in the main problem I keep referring back to.

It's anti-climactic.

They rush into Hogwarts to find this Horcrux, only to have it destroyed by a lowly and barely conscious Slytherin.

It makes plenty of sense, but it makes the book a bit weak. Another Deus ex machina. After spending 2 books to find and destroy the locket. Took about half the book to get the cup. It took a chapter or two to find and destroy the diadem. And they didn't even do it. It just felt like a very weak point of the story.

Thats one of the reasons why I felt that it was rushed. Surely Dumbledore would have been able to find that room in Hogwarts and discover the Diadem and with the Order, he probably could have managed to break into the bank to get the Teacup.

Well, furthermore, Voldemort -had- to have known that Harry knew of the Room of Requirement. That's where he held meetings of DA. And that's where Malfoy was hatching his schemes. So Malfoy, Snape, or some other Slytherin -had- to have mentioned that at some point.

Again, deus ex machina. Rowling needed a hiding place in Hogwarts that Harry could figure out.

However, I -am- tempted to go and reread the entire series to see if Rowling mentioned things like that in such a way that it was clear she had a solid plan all along. Not just "I need something that belonged to Ravenclaw, let's look back and see what random item Harry's moved in Hogwarts!!!"

To be honest with all of the folks here, I've never read the physical books. I've read e-books (don't ask...) so I don't actually own copies of them. I'm really tempted to go and pick up a box set. But at the same time, I want to wait for the 7th to come out in paperback so I can get them all in one shot for cheaper (For anyone interested, Amazon frequently has the first 6 in paperback for $30).

If you are thinking of going back and re-reading anything... try starting with the Half Blood Prince for the Diadem. That is when we were introduced to the storage hall in the room of requirement. The chapter will be the one where Harry trys the curse on Malfoy and Snape asks Harry to get his potions book. I wonder if Rowling described anything in there when Harry was trying to find a place to hide it.

I figured that's when it was.

Problem being, I don't doubt that it was mentioned. But I -am- thinking that it may have been random, and when she needed a horcrux, she went back and picked one of the items in the room. OR if it's written as though the diadem is a bit more important than it seemed at first (i.e. Sirius' bike in the first book, pointless mentioning but important later).

Thanks for the excerpt, Flame.

I suppose the could imply that Rowling knew all along that this would become a Horcrux in the final book. Though it still kind of bothers me that Voldemort would put such an important item in a room that half the school knew about, and not even consider having Snape move it.

Did anyone else feel that Voldemort wasn't all that ominous in this book? Like he was kind of a push-over in this book? A danger because of his followers, not Voldemort himself.

I don't think Voldemort had enough of a handicap to justify his laid-back approach in the series. I mean...take a look at other fantasy/sci fi-type series where you have someone who is exceptionally powerful/dangerous. Darth Vader doesn't send underlings to do an important job. He goes himself and tears the place up. Sauron (at least when he had a body) went into battle and -destroyed- everyone. The list goes on where the ominous enemy doesn't just sit back and do nothing. Also, it should be noted their going in and blasting methods don't lead to their demise (not directly, anyways).

So why did Voldemort not shape up to be the villain we e xp ected. Voldemort is entirely absent from two books in the series. The Prisoner of Azkaban and the Half-blood Prince. Now, in PoA, he's still "dead" and, to be fair, the book was about Sirius. So I think it can be forgiven. Also, in the HBP, that story is Snape's. So I think that can also be forgiven. A cameo of sorts would've been a bit more satisfying, but it's understandable.

But you bring up a great point, Flame. Another cop out. HOW, HOW, HOW can you e xp lain with any sort of logic that when a piece of your soul is killed you don't feel a thing? I mean, granted this is fantasy, there's no math or logic to it, I just think it's a real hole that should've been dealt with. Could've easily done it by having Harry/Dumbledore collecting the horcruxes without destroying them. Then they destroy them all at the end. The wya it worked was simply a way for the crew to destroy the horcruxes one at a time without Voldemort being any the wiser (and thus, no real threat).

Voldemort just comes off as a pansy. Too scared to face Harry lest some prophecy come true. He just was never that impressive. He was dangerous simply because he had a following, not because of his actual power. I think the only point where he was actually intimidating to the readers was when he first came back.

And I agree. LeStrange and Greyback were more dangerous than Voldemort.

Overall, I'd rate Voldemort pretty low on the Evil Villain scale.

Yeah, I was talking to a friend tonight about that and we both agreed that he should have and could have been a much tougher villain than he was. I considered the fact that the series was meant for children and as such, she simply kept him from getting too out of hand. But even so, after what she has put some of the characters through, I find it hard to believe that Voldemort did not get a chance to spill some more blood.

As for the Horcruxes, because he essentially split the parts of his soul into pieces, you lose feeling in them. I thought that was how they worked... although it was never really e xp lained very well until the end. Its like slicing off a finger... you lose feeling in that finger. Part of his soul is taken and put into the Horcrux and once it is seperated, you lose feeling. ???

Of course something like a soul is much more complicated especially in a fantasy world and I could also imagine that the soul would be connected to you in some way.

In the end, it was ultimately up to Rowling to decide how the magic of her world was going to work and I really don't have a big problem with that particular portion of the story.

I suppose I'm thinking of it too logically.

Also, if I had created something so powerful that was, essentially, my life line, I think I would try to know what happens to those items. It just kind of bothered me that Voldemort had no idea what was going on until the last few hours of the story. Made him look like a fool. And it's his intelligence that makes him so dangerous.

In watching LOTR today, something occured to me, that may seem kind of obvious at first glance, but is really in depth when thought about.

Rowling took a -great- deal from LOTR. Probably more than she intended, and more than the average person realizes. With the end of the final book, it's a bit more reasonable to compare the two stories. However, seeing that LOTR came half a century before HP, it's fair to say that LOTR has the rights to story concepts.

Horcruxes. So you can put part of your soul into an object or creature in order to preserve your life. Which is essentially what Sauron did with the Ring. Also, in both stories, the "horcruxes" cause those near them to be weighed down mentally. The destruction of "horcruxes" in both stories require a specific item or power to do the job.

Now that seemed kind of obvious to me. But then I thought about it more. How about the fact that Sauron was a huge power in the "before-the-novel" time but was defeated by a puzzling and seemingly simple event. Much the same that Voldemort was a huge power "before-the-novel" and was defeated by a puzzling and seemingly simple event. And through most of the story (in both LOTR and HP) the main villain doesn't have their own body. They work through others.

Then to the protagonist. The main character. The Hero. An orphan who, by all rights, shouldn't be as powerful as they are. But through luck, they were given situational power. Frodo was related to Bilbo who found the ring, and Harry was the one Voldemort chose to feel the prophecy spoke of (as opposed to Neville). Following their "war" they both carry a significant scar (Harry's scar, Frodo's missing finger).

Then you have the powerful mentor to the Hero who dies, but not quite. (Dumbledore, Gandalf)

You have the Hero who has a very strong bond to their surrogate fathers (Bilbo, Sirius).

The more I think about it, the more it occurs to me that Harry Potter really got a leg up from LOTR. While I'm not in any way insinuating that Rowling deliberately used similar ideas, it is kind of strange that it connects in so many ways, especially considering that people would inevitably compare the two.

Anyone else have an opinion on the matter?