Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows: Part 2 (Possible Spoilers)

[Shadow Ninja 2.0]

Why won't you read the books? The movies are mostly good, but I'm not kidding when I say the books destroy them in every conceivable way.

[Xanthul]

Why won't you read the books? The movies are mostly good, but I'm not kidding when I say the books destroy them in every conceivable way.

I read the first couple and never got hooked, plus having watched the movies it feels like kind of a drag. Everyone speaks wonders about them though, might have to reread them and see what the fuss is about.

[rumborak]

Why won't you read the books? The movies are mostly good, but I'm not kidding when I say the books destroy them in every conceivable way.

Absolutely this.

The HP movies have the same problem as LOTR, in that the books are so dense, with interwoven subplots and stuff, even though they cut out major things, the movies are still rushed.

[King Postwhore]

For the most part you can say that about all books made into movies for obvious reason.

[RuRoRul]

Why won't you read the books? The movies are mostly good, but I'm not kidding when I say the books destroy them in every conceivable way.

I read the first couple and never got hooked, plus having watched the movies it feels like kind of a drag. Everyone speaks wonders about them though, might have to reread them and see what the fuss is about.

If that's the case it could be worth just starting with Book 3 (or even book 4 if you want to jump in where it really ramps up). The first book especially is very much a children's story, the beginning reads more like a Roald Dahl children's book, by book 4 though it is a bit darker, more of a YA series (that's when the books start becoming tomes rather than really short). If you've seen the films then you know the world and the plot so I don't think you'll be missing too much by starting on a later book.

[Tom Bombadil]

First three books were ok, the rest were terrible. No idea why so many people like them. And the movies were even worse (First two movies weren't so bad).

[Orbert]

I don't have the free time to read for pleasure like I used to.  Between work, my family, work, music, work, and work, I have maybe a few hours a day for me, usually more like an hour.  I can watch some TV, play on the PC, or maybe read, but honestly, reading is at least third down the list.  So while I absolutely believe that the Harry Potter books are great, I just don't see myself ever reading them.

[MetalJunkie]

in the book, they circled each other as the sun was rising with the entire cast/wizarding community surrounding them, spelling it out for each other and revealing the whole story to the world at last- Snape's vindication, WHY the Elder wand didn't actually work for Voldemort, how by Harry presenting himself for death, thus cast the same charm over everyone that his mother's sacrifice cast on him. 

I've never read the books and likely never will.  Can you expand upon this?  I thought that the scene in the movie was interesting, but not the powerful, dramatic climax that it should have been.  To learn that there was more going on than movie viewers saw makes me want to know what it was all about.

I haven't read the books since release, so I don't remember the details like Neon does, but I do remember that Voldemort shot an Avada Kedavra at Harry, and Harry deflected with Expelliarmus, killing Voldemort. In front of everyone.

I was frustrated because I remember anticipating this scene so much in the theater, and then being so let down.

[RuRoRul]

in the book, they circled each other as the sun was rising with the entire cast/wizarding community surrounding them, spelling it out for each other and revealing the whole story to the world at last- Snape's vindication, WHY the Elder wand didn't actually work for Voldemort, how by Harry presenting himself for death, thus cast the same charm over everyone that his mother's sacrifice cast on him. 

I've never read the books and likely never will.  Can you expand upon this?  I thought that the scene in the movie was interesting, but not the powerful, dramatic climax that it should have been.  To learn that there was more going on than movie viewers saw makes me want to know what it was all about.

In the movie Harry and Voldemort have a more physical battle and fly all around the castle while Harry is saying some things to him, before ending up alone in front of the castle and shooting the final spells at each other. In the book Harry reveals himself in the middle of the Great Hall while everyone is fighting when he protects Molly Weasely from being killed by Voldemort (aftershe killed Bellatrix), and that pretty much stops the fighting as Voldemort doesn't understand how he is still alive and Harry tells people to stop fighting Voldemort. Then he basically taunts Voldemort by giving him "The Reason You Suck" speech and explaining that he is the master of the wand, and then they fire the final spells at each other with the same end result. There isn't really a physical duel between them, I don't know if they attack each other with any spells before that, and it's in the great hall where everyone can see it. Which is better is a matter of taste of course, but it's understandable that the film has a more visual and physical final confrontation while the book is more dialogue based.

[Neon]

in the book, they circled each other as the sun was rising with the entire cast/wizarding community surrounding them, spelling it out for each other and revealing the whole story to the world at last- Snape's vindication, WHY the Elder wand didn't actually work for Voldemort, how by Harry presenting himself for death, thus cast the same charm over everyone that his mother's sacrifice cast on him. 

I've never read the books and likely never will.  Can you expand upon this?  I thought that the scene in the movie was interesting, but not the powerful, dramatic climax that it should have been.  To learn that there was more going on than movie viewers saw makes me want to know what it was all about.

I haven't read the books since release, so I don't remember the details like Neon does, but I do remember that Voldemort shot an Avada Kedavra at Harry, and Harry deflected with Expelliarmus, killing Voldemort. In front of everyone.

I was frustrated because I remember anticipating this scene so much in the theater, and then being so let down.

So in the book...

The members of the Order of the Phoenix and Harry's old classmates show up in the room of requirement prior to the battle starting (not long after Harry, Ron, and Hermione enter through Arianna's painting).

Once the battle starts, pretty much everyone else who was ever a character in the book shows up to also defend Hogwarts...not many of them are mentioned by name but a few of them are (Neville's grandmother, Aberforth, etc). but it's mostly like..extended family members of Hogwarts students, shop keepers and residents of Hogsmeade, etc. 

After Harry presents himself to Voldemort to be killed, and Voldemort makes Hagrid carry Harry back to Hogwarts, EVERYONE who had participated in the battle was outside of the castle and sees what they perceive is a dead Harry Potter. 

This is where Neville gets his grand vindication with everyone- He runs up and stands up to Voldemort and gives everyone this awesome pep talk and at this point this is when the sorting hat presents Gryffindor's sword to him, and he lobs Nagini's head off IN FRONT OF EVERYONE.  After this is when Harry jumps up and shows that he's still alive.  There were also giants on the scene and they start going ape shit and out of fear of being crushed everyone gets ushered back inside and into the great hall.  Other individual fights break out (among them Molly Weasley finishing off Bellatrix).

After awhile all the death eaters have been killed or captured and finally it's just Voldemort left, and he and Harry are staring at each other and pacing, circling each other with everyone surrounding them- (as the sun is beginning to rise through the windows/enchanted ceiling in the great hall ).  Harry tells them all not to assist..."It's got to be this way...it's got to be me."  And then he proceeds to explain to Voldemort everything about Snape, and why the Elder wand never worked for him, and everything else. 

Finally it comes to a point and Voldemort casts "Avada Kadavra" and Harry casts "Expelliarmus" their spells collide in the middle of the circle, Voldemort is disarmed and the Elder wand flies into Harry's hand, and the killing curse that Voldemort cast backfired on him and hit him.  (Making it so that for everything Harry went through, he never had to go through with ever committing murder, despite the prophecy saying one of them would have to kill the other). 

Also just in case you were confused:
Dumbledore planned his death with Snape, and intended to die the last master of the Elder Wand so that it would never work properly for anyone ever again.  But Draco disarmed Dumbledore before Snape stepped in and killed Dumbledore, and the Elder wand recognized Draco as its new master but of course no one knew it.  Voldemort killed Snape thinking this would make him the new master of the Elder wand, but it was never Snape's. 
While Harry and Co. were in Malfoy Manor, Draco had collected everyone's wands, and ultimately Harry wrenched three different wands out of Draco's hands as they escaped, among them Draco's wand, which now also had changed allegiance to Harry. 

So when Harry and Voldemort were casting their final spells at each other, Harry was using the wand that had previously been Draco's, and in the book it was explained that the Elder wand "recognized" the wand with which it had been claimed previously (and also recognized that Harry was the master of it)- which is why, not only would it not kill its master when Voldemort cast the killing curse, but instantly flew to Harry when Harry summoned it.



TLDR:  The movie left out some crucial shit.

[Orbert]

Wow!  Thanks for all of that.  I guess they thought that it would be too hard to explain all of that cinematically, so they just went with something they thought looked good.  I suppose I didn't miss anything by not understanding what was going on with the wands, and everything else, but I'm glad that there was more to it than just "it's magic".

[rumborak]

Somebody earlier in this thread was surprised by my comment about the WWII allusions in the Deathly Hallows. Given how I'm listening to it on audiobook, I actually kept track of a few things now (I'm only halfway through it, there might be more later):

- The Deathly Hollows sign. Luna Lovegood's father wears it at Bill's wedding, and Viktor Krum is pissed about it because he views it as a sign of Grindelwald's followers, whereas Lovegood sees it as a benign sign for a "quest". Very reminiscent of how the Nazis used the Hindu swastika.
- The Ministry of Magic instates a "Halfblood registry", and requires all wizards to prove their pure blood. Essentially this.
- The new motto of the ministry, "Magic is Might" is quite similar to Kraft durch Freude and Arbeit macht frei and other slogans.
- Voldemort's Death Eaters infiltrate the government, just like Hitler's Schutzstaffel, which was initially his personal guards, and then became integral part of the Nazi government.
- Voldemort wants pure blood, but is himself a half-blood. Just like Hitler had Jewish blood in him.

[Anguyen92]

Why won't you read the books? The movies are mostly good, but I'm not kidding when I say the books destroy them in every conceivable way.

I read the first couple and never got hooked, plus having watched the movies it feels like kind of a drag. Everyone speaks wonders about them though, might have to reread them and see what the fuss is about.

For me, when I watched the 3rd movie, I was a bit let down by the ending compared to the book.  I mean there was that usually end of the year speech that Dumbledore had with Harry in the book that I did not see in the movie and that kinda bummed me out a bit.

[RuRoRul]

Why won't you read the books? The movies are mostly good, but I'm not kidding when I say the books destroy them in every conceivable way.

I read the first couple and never got hooked, plus having watched the movies it feels like kind of a drag. Everyone speaks wonders about them though, might have to reread them and see what the fuss is about.

For me, when I watched the 3rd movie, I was a bit let down by the ending compared to the book.  I mean there was that usually end of the year speech that Dumbledore had with Harry in the book that I did not see in the movie and that kinda bummed me out a bit.

They completely botched which would otherwise probably be the best film in the series with the ending of the Prisoner Of Azkaban, by not taking the time to explain all the details that make it such a cool story. Namely these are:
1. The Marauder's Map originally belonged to James, Sirius, Lupin and Peter Pettigrew.
2. Sirius, James and Peter became animagi so they could stay with Lupin when he turned into a werewolf. (And it was being able to turn into a dog that allowed Sirius to resisdt the Dementors and eventually escape Azkaban - could have been worth mentioning in the film...)
3. Harry's dad's animal form was a stag (prongs), which is why his Patronus is a stag.

I mean, these things are kind of just background information and I can understand films cutting down heavily on exposition... But these particular facts about the Marauders Map and the Stag are just so meaningful and make the story so much better that it is baffling to me that they didn't include them. And its not like they didn't have ample opportunity for Lupin or Dumbeledore to mention them at the end, it would not take long and would fit perfectly (and I'm sure they made time for Lupin to reminisce about Harry's mother for a while in the film, which is really irrelevant compared to the stuff about James).

[Zantera]

My opinions on the book/movies is pretty much reversed when it comes to Harry Potter and the LOTR trilogy. With Harry Potter, the books are superior by miles, and with LOTR the movies are superior by miles.

[Xanthul]

My opinions on the book/movies is pretty much reversed when it comes to Harry Potter and the LOTR trilogy. With Harry Potter, the books are superior by miles, and with LOTR the movies are superior by miles.

Did you watch the LOTR movies before you read the books?

[Zantera]

My opinions on the book/movies is pretty much reversed when it comes to Harry Potter and the LOTR trilogy. With Harry Potter, the books are superior by miles, and with LOTR the movies are superior by miles.

Did you watch the LOTR movies before you read the books?

I tried reading the first book before the first movie came out, but I couldn't get further than maybe 30 pages before I had to give up. It was just such a messy writing style IMO. After seeing, and falling in love with the movies, I tried reading the books again a few times over the years, but never got further into them than maybe 50-60 pages or so. I admire the crap out of Tolkien for the world he has created, his imagination and just the story itself, but the way it is presented was just too messy for me. I think part of the problem is that he is very detailed and describes parts of his world so great, but that results in very long trail-offs where you leave the story to get something explained for a page or two. With a movie, you absorb a lot of that information with your eyes, so it's harder to describe it in a book.

[Tom Bombadil]

I tried reading the first book before the first movie came out, but I couldn't get further than maybe 30 pages before I had to give up. It was just such a messy writing style IMO. After seeing, and falling in love with the movies, I tried reading the books again a few times over the years, but never got further into them than maybe 50-60 pages or so. I admire the crap out of Tolkien for the world he has created, his imagination and just the story itself, but the way it is presented was just too messy for me. I think part of the problem is that he is very detailed and describes parts of his world so great, but that results in very long trail-offs where you leave the story to get something explained for a page or two. With a movie, you absorb a lot of that information with your eyes, so it's harder to describe it in a book.

I can respect this opinion. I personally disagree, but Tolkien's writing style is certainly not for everyone. I'd still encourage you to try to read the whole thing. I'll admit that the beginning of the first book, albeit very important, is rather slow, but it really picks up after that.

[rumborak]

Oh god, I had totally forgotten about the penis length allusion in The Dearly Hallows

Hermione: "Harry, there are always wizards who claim to have a bigger and better wand. But it's how you use it!"

[hefdaddy42]

I tried reading the first book before the first movie came out, but I couldn't get further than maybe 30 pages before I had to give up. It was just such a messy writing style IMO. After seeing, and falling in love with the movies, I tried reading the books again a few times over the years, but never got further into them than maybe 50-60 pages or so. I admire the crap out of Tolkien for the world he has created, his imagination and just the story itself, but the way it is presented was just too messy for me. I think part of the problem is that he is very detailed and describes parts of his world so great, but that results in very long trail-offs where you leave the story to get something explained for a page or two. With a movie, you absorb a lot of that information with your eyes, so it's harder to describe it in a book.

I had the problem the first couple of times I attempted reading LOTR.  Trust me, if you can make it past, say, the first 100 pages, you're golden.  It gets better.

[Neon]

Why won't you read the books? The movies are mostly good, but I'm not kidding when I say the books destroy them in every conceivable way.

I read the first couple and never got hooked, plus having watched the movies it feels like kind of a drag. Everyone speaks wonders about them though, might have to reread them and see what the fuss is about.

For me, when I watched the 3rd movie, I was a bit let down by the ending compared to the book.  I mean there was that usually end of the year speech that Dumbledore had with Harry in the book that I did not see in the movie and that kinda bummed me out a bit.

They completely botched which would otherwise probably be the best film in the series with the ending of the Prisoner Of Azkaban, by not taking the time to explain all the details that make it such a cool story. Namely these are:
1. The Marauder's Map originally belonged to James, Sirius, Lupin and Peter Pettigrew.
2. Sirius, James and Peter became animagi so they could stay with Lupin when he turned into a werewolf. (And it was being able to turn into a dog that allowed Sirius to resisdt the Dementors and eventually escape Azkaban - could have been worth mentioning in the film...)
3. Harry's dad's animal form was a stag (prongs), which is why his Patronus is a stag.

I mean, these things are kind of just background information and I can understand films cutting down heavily on exposition... But these particular facts about the Marauders Map and the Stag are just so meaningful and make the story so much better that it is baffling to me that they didn't include them. And its not like they didn't have ample opportunity for Lupin or Dumbeledore to mention them at the end, it would not take long and would fit perfectly (and I'm sure they made time for Lupin to reminisce about Harry's mother for a while in the film, which is really irrelevant compared to the stuff about James).

I completely agree here.  PoA is my favorite book in the series besides Deathly Hallows, for all of the reasons that you mention.  It would have taken then 30 seconds to have Lupin come out with all of those details at the end of the movie, which to me are CRUCIAL details.  They allowed time for Lupin to tell Harry that he knew Lily, but never bothered to have him mention that he was one of James' best friends, or why they all became animagi, and why their forms once animagi were significant. They alluded to the Lupin knowing that it was a map, and how it worked, but if you didn't read the book you wouldn't pick up on why that was important.