What would you change about the films?

[Hes]

Please keep the amount of Caps you use to a minimum. It's considered shouting and rude on the internet. If you want to emphasize a word, use bolded text instead. Thanks.

[StarryVeil]

First, I have to say that I am a hardcore fan of the books and hate any sort of changes made to their story. It follows, therefore, that I am no big fan of the movies and have a lot of potential changes the they could have made. Here goes (in no certain order):

1) Ditch Dan as Harry. IMO, his acting was just deadpan and flat. Plus, he's way too short. And his hair from GoF onward just kept going from bad to worse (though, admittedly, that's not his fault.)

2) Either ditch Emma OR keep her, get her make-up back to the one from PS/SS and CoS, give the lines she stole from Ron and Harry back to them, and get her to stop. moving. her. eyebrows.

3) No changes here: Keep Rupert! He's a great actor, had Ron's character down and I'm just upset they didn't make use of the full depth that, IMO, Rupert could have brought to Ron. He was just sidelined and used 90% of the time as a bumbling comic relief character in the movies.

4) Alan Rickman's an awesome actor (I love Sense and Sensibility!), but he's just too old for Snape! I would still have supported letting him reprise the role if it hadn't meant aging all his contemporaries (i.e. Sirius, Lupin)

Originally Posted by Goddess_Clio

(My new obession is Adrian Brody as Snape but I do love Alan in the role)

It's because of the nose, isn't it?

5) Keep Chris Columbus for all seven movies and, even if that's not possible, at least keep Alfonso Cuaron and David Yates away from the series! The latter two's crushes on Emma and David's Harry-Hermione shipping ruined a lot of the movies, IMO.

6) Like Rickman, I think Gary Oldman is a great actor but I think he fell short in the role of Sirius. And it isn't even the fact that he's too old (because that was my only problem with Rickman; he otherwise had Snape spot on for the most part). In PoA, Gary lends a sort of extreme madness and also an extreme sentimentalism to Sirius that just... isn't like Sirius. And then in OoTP, he pulls a 180 (in the wrong direction) and seems too calm. Where's the frustration of being locked up? Where's that note of childishness and immaturity? He should've read the books before taking on the role, IMO.

7) Stop messing up the relationships with your own personal ships, moviemakers! As mentioned above, Yates's HH shipping lead to the infamous (and absolutely unnecessary, IMO) dance scene in DH. TPT was another shipping fiasco, IMO. They filmed it to look as though some sort of unspoken tension was there between Snape and Lily with the result that I've lost count of the number of times I've heard the following question from only-movie fans: "Is Snape Harry's actual dad?" Uh, no? The point of TPT (in the books, at least) was to convey exactly why that couldn't happen!

8) Get new scriptwriters. And, this time, possibly writers who've actually read and understood the real essence and characterizations of the books.

9) Understanding the importance of the past. The past plays an important role in HP. In the movies, however, all flashbacks and back stories (ie. SWM, TPT, Voldy's life story, the Marauder's back story) are glossed over and their connection to Harry's present isn't really pressed upon properly. The flashbacks felt very scrapbook-ish in nature, instead of being solid, deep scenes.

10) Spend less time on the stilted romance scenes in HBP and give that time to the actual point of the story: learning about Voldy's life.

11) Please, please, for heaven's sake, keep Michael Gambon as far away from the role of DD as possible (and, if possible, bring Richard Harris back to life ) Where's that air of serenity? Where's that twinkling of the eyes? Where's that calm understanding? Where's the silver/white beard? Where are the bright robes and wizard's hat?

There a lot more but, I'll keep it at this for the moment.

[TheScribbler]

Originally Posted by FurryDice

Mainly, characterisation. I love the characters as they are in the books, and the movie versions are unrecognisable as the book characters.
I like the casting, just not the scripting and characterisation for some of the characters.
In particular, the way the movies have mishandled the trio. The trio are a unit in the books. Harry is the hero, Ron and Hermione are both sidekicks. Movie-version, cliche-fest - Harry and Hermione are the hero and heroine, Ron is shunted into the background, dim-witted comic relief. Hermione actually has flaws in the books, and is much more likeable for not being perfect, and Harry doesn't like fame - "But I am the Chosen One"?? Really? I can't imagine Harry saying that.

I actually enjoyed that line, but mostly because of Dan's delivery. I felt like he was going for light sarcasm, which hinted at the clever and funny Book-Harry that's almost completely absent from the movies.

For DH2, I would definitely add the bit from the book where Harry gives Voldemort one more chance of redemption. It paints him in a more heroic light. And I would've emphasized the importance of Lily and Harry's sacrifices, and what happened because of that.

[purplepinay808]

Originally Posted by TheScribbler

Harry doesn't like fame - "But I am the Chosen One"?? Really? I can't imagine Harry saying that.
I actually enjoyed that line, but mostly because of Dan's delivery. I felt like he was going for light sarcasm, which hinted at the clever and funny Book-Harry that's almost completely absent from the movies.

For DH2, I would definitely add the bit from the book where Harry gives Voldemort one more chance of redemption. It paints him in a more heroic light. And I would've emphasized the importance of Lily and Harry's sacrifices, and what happened because of that.

i too enjoyed that little line as well. i agree that harry doesn't like fame but i get the feeling that as he got older, he became more accepting of the fact that he had to be the hero. although i didn't like how Nevelle all of a sudden comes out of the shadows and kills LV. i don't remember that moment being in the book but i definitely thought harry should have taken the death stroke

[Martok]

Originally Posted by Goddess_Clio

1) Higher a better script writer. Steve Kloves probably did his best but the characterizations were way off, even for a book to screen adaptation. He ruined so many great charactes.

What do you think of Michael Goldenberg? In my opinion he did a great job condensing the doorstopper that was book 5 into a 2 hour movie. I guess they brought back Kloves because of his good relationship with Jo Rowling.

BTW, beware of the Rouge Angles Of Satin.

[coppertop1]

I would have changed the entrances to Beauxbatons and Durmstrang, it felt soo cliched. Beauxbatons and Durmstrang were both co-ed schools and in the movie it was like girly girls and macho men.

[Goddess_Clio]

Originally Posted by Martok

What do you think of Michael Goldenberg? In my opinion he did a great job condensing the doorstopper that was book 5 into a 2 hour movie. I guess they brought back Kloves because of his good relationship with Jo Rowling.

OOTP is a mixed bag. Along with having a couple of my favorite visuals (the Dept of Ministries battle, the Dumbeldore v. Voldemort battle and the visuals at the very beginning) I still think the script could have been refined more. OOTP was probably the hardest book to adapt simply because of its length and the fact that it had to be crammed into a two hour film. He did make a good choice in how he went about showing Umbridge's unreasonable application of Educational Decrees - in the book I think there were only three or four Educational Decrees but all the in-between action made those decrees very unjustified for the reader whereas in the film she was laying out twenty, thirty, forty Educational Decrees so the unjustness was visually apparent.

BTW, beware of the Rouge Angles Of Satin.

No one is immyoun frum the occassinol misspelling. (My other computer doesn't spell check on the fly like this one does so stuff slips past, in addition to occasionally not proof-reading. I do my best. )

[jbwarner86]

Overall, I like OotP as an adaptation, though it does have its stumbling blocks. It's mostly just nitpicky stuff that I don't like, such as the Order and Harry flying low over the river and around boats and stuff when they're supposed to be traveling undercover. Or how Fred and George make their riotous exit in the middle of everyone's O.W.L.s, when in the book they specifically stated that they didn't want their mayhem to disrupt anyone's studying. But out of all the post-Columbus films, I think it did the best job of including all the major important story points and still working as a coherent stand-alone film.

[coppertop1]

I thought OOTP was an improvement on the previous two movies, I didn't like POA all that much, WAY too much cut out at the end, tacky talking skulls, etc. GOF felt like a connect the dots.

Some of the stuff they cut from the fifth movie had to be cut since it wasn't in the fourth movie.

I'm flexible with movies, I'll forgive some changes, but when important scenes are omitted and scenes not even in the book are added in its place, I get so annoyed. I could have done without the fish analogy from Slughorn, why not have it like in the books where he shooes him out, it showed Slughorn's shame much better.

[SBNB]

Originally Posted by coppertop1

I would have changed the entrances to Beauxbatons and Durmstrang, it felt soo cliched. Beauxbatons and Durmstrang were both co-ed schools and in the movie it was like girly girls and macho men.

Yeah, I agree. I don't remember there being girls at Durmstrang, though, but I definitely remember that there were boys at Beauxbatons.

In POA, I wish they would've included Harry's time in Diagon Alley before he went to school, eating ice cream and admiring the Firebolt. And then in GOF, I think they should've included the part with Harry's situation at the Dursleys' house (Dudley's diet) and when the Weasleys pick up Harry from the Dursleys.

[jbwarner86]

Originally Posted by SBNB

In POA, I wish they would've included Harry's time in Diagon Alley before he went to school, eating ice cream and admiring the Firebolt.

That's something I'd have liked to see too. What really bugged me about the way the movie handled this was how Harry's life didn't seem to be any better at the Leaky Cauldron than it was at Privet Drive. The ride on the Knight Bus is hectic and annoying, Tom the barman drags him around like a rag doll, the food is disgusting (apparently the pea soup is cannibalistic), he nearly gets chomped by his Monster Book of Monsters, etc. Even the building itself is gray and gloomy and uninviting, and he's got a crappy view from his room and there's an elevated train rumbling by.

I think it'd make much more sense to clarify the difference between life on Privet Drive and life in the wizarding world - once Harry settles in at the Leaky Cauldron, he should be surrounded by people who care about him and are willing to help him, in stark contrast to the indifferent and often times abusive Dursleys. That way, the "threat" of Sirius Black feels more genuine, as if there's some real danger within this world that's normally so inviting to Harry. The way Alfonso Cuaron shot it, Black's escape just feels like one more cruddy element to an already cruddy universe.

[coppertop1]

Originally Posted by SBNB

Yeah, I agree. I don't remember there being girls at Durmstrang, though, but I definitely remember that there were boys at Beauxbatons.

In POA, I wish they would've included Harry's time in Diagon Alley before he went to school, eating ice cream and admiring the Firebolt. And then in GOF, I think they should've included the part with Harry's situation at the Dursleys' house (Dudley's diet) and when the Weasleys pick up Harry from the Dursleys.

I believe in GOF, it said that a Durmstrang boy whispered to a girl next to him when he saw Harry.

I would have liked to have seen the Dursleys in the fourth movie, and the sixth movie. The scene with Dumbledore calling out the Dursleys was great, and would have been far better than flirting with the waitress.

Agree with the previous poster on POA, Cuaron dropped the ball in a big way.

[HarrysGal438]

Originally Posted by Sergio182

I would have added 'Peeves' the poltergeist! he was such a funny character! Sirius should have been more important, I reckon people that don't read the books didn't even get attached to him as much as we did. Snape should have also been in more scenes in the movies, he was so under rated throughout the whole series. The first film should have been longer. And I would put more Quidditch scenes, and if I could change all Half-Blood Prince I would, that was a terrible movie!

I totally agree. HBP was so upsetting. My sister hasn't read the books (very upset with her, haha) so she didn't understand why every five minutes I would say "that is so wrong!" or " this movie is horrible compared to the book!!" I would re-write that entire movie to be just like the book.

I would also add some character or expand more on them:
-Peeves, -Pidwidgeon (Pig), -Kreacher, and lots more that I can't think of right now!

There are lots of other things, but I just finished piles of homework so I am tired!

[Goddess_Clio]

Originally Posted by HarrysGal438

I would also add some character or expand more on them:
-Peeves, -Pidwidgeon (Pig), -Kreacher, and lots more that I can't think of right now!

I don't have a problem with some of the minor characters being cut like Pigwidgeon (fairly useless in the long run) or Peeves (whose would have added comedy and character to the castle but not much in terms of plot). There just isn't time in movies to include characters like this when the books you're adapting from are as long as GOF or OOTP. (Kreacher was a travesty, though, now that we know how important he was in terms of the plot)

On the other hand, the film makers wasted a lot of time on adding things to the movies that didn't need to be there for story-telling purposes or spent time (we're talking seconds but those seconds add up!) on things that they didn't need to spend time on - like the three seconds they spend panning over the kittens on Umbridge's office walls or spending time showing her preparing her tea... If that's what you're doing with the screen time give me Peeves any day.

[StarryVeil]

Originally Posted by Goddess_Clio

On the other hand, the film makers wasted a lot of time on adding things to the movies that didn't need to be there for story-telling purposes or spent time (we're talking seconds but those seconds add up!) on things that they didn't need to spend time on - like the three seconds they spend panning over the kittens on Umbridge's office walls or spending time showing her preparing her tea... If that's what you're doing with the screen time give me Peeves any day.

Exactly, that's what dislike about the films. Alright, you've got no time so you can't add the whole book into the film, but then why're you wasting precious time with unnecessary bits and pieces here and there? In addition to the small things you mentioned, they added whole scenes and characters that took up a lot of time and/or did not make sense according to the plot of the stories. Like, say, the HH dance scene in DH, Slughorn's Lily/goldfish story in HBP, the talking skull things in PoA, the nonsensical messages Ron was trying to send through Hermione to Harry before the first task in GoF culminating in Hermione's "I'm not an owl!" exclamation, the Muggle waitress bit in the beginning of HBP, the Nigel character, the burning of the Burrow, Snape going to Godric's Hollow (and how in the world did that whole scene right before Lily's death end up in Snape's memories?), the cliched entrance of the Beauxbatons and Durmstrang students in GoF, Harry zipping Ginny up in DH 1... IMO, they could have deleted all these and actually spent the time presenting solid scenes for SWM, Voldy's life memories, TPT, DD's funeral, the Marauder's backstory, the death of the Potters etc.

[Goddess_Clio]

Originally Posted by StarryVeil

Exactly, that's what dislike about the films. Alright, you've got no time so you can't add the whole book into the film, but then why're you wasting precious time with unnecessary bits and pieces here and there? In addition to the small things you mentioned, they added whole scenes and characters that took up a lot of time and/or did not make sense according to the plot of the stories. Like, say, the HH dance scene in DH, Slughorn's Lily/goldfish story in HBP, the talking skull things in PoA, the nonsensical messages Ron was trying to send through Hermione to Harry before the first task in GoF culminating in Hermione's "I'm not an owl!" exclamation, the Muggle waitress bit in the beginning of HBP, the Nigel character, the burning of the Burrow, Snape going to Godric's Hollow (and how in the world did that whole scene right before Lily's death end up in Snape's memories?), the cliched entrance of the Beauxbatons and Durmstrang students in GoF, Harry zipping Ginny up in DH 1... IMO, they could have deleted all these and actually spent the time presenting solid scenes for SWM, Voldy's life memories, TPT, DD's funeral, the Marauder's backstory, the death of the Potters etc.

Some of these things I find annoying but at the same time I understand that there are times when books cannot be translated scene for scene into a movie.

the HH dance scene in DH

Gag me. Aside from hating this scene in general I don't feel like making so shippy was at all necessary. To me it made Harry a huge jerk for appearing to hit on his best friend's girl and there was definitely a better way to show their despair and their desire for some kind of happiness.

Slughorn's Lily/goldfish story in HBP

This made Lily look like a suck up to me.

the talking skull things in PoA

Not even going there because I thought the shrunken heads were cute and clever. (I hadn't read the books when I saw POA, POA was what got me to read the books)

the nonsensical messages Ron was trying to send through Hermione to Harry before the first task in GoF culminating in Hermione's "I'm not an owl!" exclamation

I thought this was a weird choice since Hermione submits to passing the messages along in the first place and then blows up about having to deliver them - also not the best acting moment. When all is said and done though, this moment doesn't grate on me as much as some others.

the Muggle waitress bit in the beginning of HBP

Thought this was just plain stupid. There were better ways to begin that movie - and I really missed Dumbledore interacting with the Dursley's! That's like one of my favorite parts about HBP!

the Nigel character

This is probably the single most confusing thing about the film makers' choices to me: Why did they have to invent the character of Nigel in the first place when there was a built-in character that they could have simply recast: Collin Creevey! We hadn't seen him since COS so recasting him wouldn't have been that big a deal; he was a relatively minor character to begin with and OOTP takes place three years later so he would have grown up and looked different anyway and it would have made fans happier (IMO) to see Collin, a canon character, brought back since he does make little cameo appearances in the later books.

It's things like this that make me think the film makers didn't use their resources wisely.

the burning of the Burrow

Another bad choice, IMO. If they wanted to change the pacing of the films (which I have heard was the whole reason for adding this scene in) then find a better way to do it; this scene was terrible.

Snape going to Godric's Hollow (and how in the world did that whole scene right before Lily's death end up in Snape's memories?)

Meh, no opinion on this, really.

the cliched entrance of the Beauxbatons and Durmstrang students in GoF

I thought this was kind of okay, but I agree that I don't like how these schools were shown as girl-only or boy-only.

Harry zipping Ginny up in DH 1

I'll allow some license to the film makers in showing Harry and Ginny's developing relationship, my problem with their scenes in the movies has more to do with the total lack of chemistry between the actors and how awkward every single "romantic" moment between them became. And they weren't awkward in a charming, puppy love kind of way, they were awkward in cringing, look away from the screen kind of ways.

[StarryVeil]

Originally Posted by Goddess_Clio

This is probably the single most confusing thing about the film makers' choices to me: Why did they have to invent the character of Nigel in the first place when there was a built-in character that they could have simply recast: Collin Creevey! We hadn't seen him since COS so recasting him wouldn't have been that big a deal; he was a relatively minor character to begin with and OOTP takes place three years later so he would have grown up and looked different anyway and it would have made fans happier (IMO) to see Collin, a canon character, brought back since he does make little cameo appearances in the later books.

Yes, Colin would have fit Nigel's role perfectly. Plus, yes, I would have been happy to see him again (I found him adorably annoying in CoS ).

Thought this was just plain stupid. There were better ways to begin that movie - and I really missed Dumbledore interacting with the Dursley's! That's like one of my favorite parts about HBP!

And the way DD commented about how pretty the waitress was to Harry is just.... I cringed every single time DD commented on Harry's growth from a boy into a man in that movie ("You need a shave, my friend"...eeek + look who's talking )
As for the deletion of the Dursley scene...I agree. This is the last interaction between DD and the Dursleys. It sort of brings the circle that started the night he left Harry on their doorstep to a nice finish. As of DH, I also love imagining what's going on in Petunia's head during that scene, that being the first time she meets this man who has been affecting her life from a distance since the time she was 13-ish.

Meh, no opinion on this, really.

What really got me about Lily's last words and her death scene being in Snape's memories was the complete disregard for basic logic by the moviemakers. How can something end up in your memories if you were not even present at that place?? It's just plain illogical and an insult to the audience's intelligence, IMO.

I'll allow some license to the film makers in showing Harry and Ginny's developing relationship, my problem with their scenes in the movies has more to do with the total lack of chemistry between the actors and how awkward every single "romantic" moment between them became. And they weren't awkward in a charming, puppy love kind of way, they were awkward in cringing, look away from the screen kind of ways.

Don't even get me started on the lack of chemistry between Dan and Bonnie. I totally get what you mean about the "can't bear to look at the screen it's so cringeworthy" thing. I couldn't look at the screen for most of HBP because of this. Plus, in such a crowded house as the Burrow, who comes all the way down to the kitchen with their dress unzipped?

[coppertop1]

Originally Posted by StarryVeil

Exactly, that's what dislike about the films. Alright, you've got no time so you can't add the whole book into the film, but then why're you wasting precious time with unnecessary bits and pieces here and there? In addition to the small things you mentioned, they added whole scenes and characters that took up a lot of time and/or did not make sense according to the plot of the stories. Like, say, the HH dance scene in DH, Slughorn's Lily/goldfish story in HBP, the talking skull things in PoA, the nonsensical messages Ron was trying to send through Hermione to Harry before the first task in GoF culminating in Hermione's "I'm not an owl!" exclamation, the Muggle waitress bit in the beginning of HBP, the Nigel character, the burning of the Burrow, Snape going to Godric's Hollow (and how in the world did that whole scene right before Lily's death end up in Snape's memories?), the cliched entrance of the Beauxbatons and Durmstrang students in GoF, Harry zipping Ginny up in DH 1... IMO, they could have deleted all these and actually spent the time presenting solid scenes for SWM, Voldy's life memories, TPT, DD's funeral, the Marauder's backstory, the death of the Potters etc.

Exactly, like characters like Bem or Nigel, or putting things like the burning of the burrow, the goldfish story, etc, really detract from the story. And takes away time for important scenes. As a result some movies have felt like they lost their depth. GOF and HBP, in particular. GOF seemed like connect the dots, and HBP had way too much emphasis on the teen romances than the real stove like the memories. I would have kept Harry and Ginny's first kiss as it was in the book, it was spontaneous, and it worked. In the movie, it felt so lacklustre.

I also hate how some characters lose their depth. Ginny doesn't have any of the fire that she has in the books. Fleur did not come across at all as being the strong, capable woman she turned out to be. I hated NEville's line about serving panache's at the slug club. He was coming into his own by that time, what an insult

[susimuggle]

I've always wanted to say this, but not sure if many people feel the same. Richard Harris was amazing. He was exactly how I imagined Dumbledore. I would have replaced Michael Gambon (who is otherwise a brilliant actor) with somebody different. Dumbledore is pretty laid back and relaxed. Michael Gambon portrayed him in such a hyper and flustery way and he speaks way too fast and too loudly. I actually think Alan Rickman could have made a brilliant Dumbledore, cos he has this quiet calm aura about him, (and the perfect nose), even though he might have been a wee bit too young.

[StarryVeil]

Originally Posted by susimuggle

I've always wanted to say this, but not sure if many people feel the same. Richard Harris was amazing. He was exactly how I imagined Dumbledore. I would have replaced Michael Gambon (who is otherwise a brilliant actor) with somebody different. Dumbledore is pretty laid back and relaxed. Michael Gambon portrayed him in such a hyper and flustery way and he speaks way too fast and too loudly.

I think a lot of people share that opinion. I know I do. Richard Harris did Dumbledore exactly the way I pictured him to be while reading the books. Michael Gambon gave him a personality transplant. Not to mention hair, beard, and wardrobe transplant.