Harry Potter and the deathly hallows

You are reading too much into it: Harry’s first son was named James, after his father. His younger son was the one named after Snape (and Dumbledore).

And by the way, I think naming your kids after your parents is a little creepy.

I couldn’t disagree more strongly. Sure, Harry ends up sneaking around and being outside when he’s not supposed to, but only because he’s trying to investigate what’s going on, or to stop something really horrible from happening. He never asks for special treatment, never plays off of his fame, and never shows off. If anything, he is desperately trying not to stand out, and a theme from the very first book is that he just wants to be a normal kid. And I suppose you could say he gets away with some things, but given that his parents were murdered, his godfather was wrongly accused of murder, he is the target of multiple malevolent Big Bad things (including Voldemort himself), not to mention all the people who end up dying around him before he has to sacrifice himself to save them…well, I wouldn’t say he “gets away” with very much.

Ugh. Yes. Voldemort thinking he had control over magic was a big motivation for his character, and essentially the reason behind his undoing. But as the movies put it, Harry basically won because he Voldemort’s wand was acting up. They definitely could have spent more time on that, or at least mentioned it.

Probably not so creepy if he’s never met his father and is doing it sort of as a memorial.

James Potter is still a dick, though.

Yeah and why isn’t it one of those evil spells?

You obviously don’t understand how magic works. That spell where there’s a green flash and the person dies instantly? That’s a forbidden spell that no one must ever use. But the spell that makes someone dry up, shrink, and then explode in a million pieces…well, that’s just fine. I don’t know why you would punish someone for that.

My audience cheered, in fact.

Molly just used a weaponized version of her home-made beef jerky spell.

^^ lol

So yep I got to see this last evening, and I felt it kept a lot of the awkwardness of 7.1 intact, and just added a couple of cool fight scenes. Which is what it is, I won’t say I liked nor hated the overall feel that it presented, it was a good movie to me at the end of the day.

Why the hell is it whenever SNAPE is on screen they give him like 10 words to say, he seems super under used for the caliber of talent cast to representing him.

I guess its time to read the books now.

The boxed paperback set Amazon is selling for $42 should arrive today.

I think the idea is that the ministry is forgiving unforgivable curses for the time being. Remember Harry cruciating the Carrow brother? So yeah, Molly cast the killing curse, but are we charging Seal Team Six with murder now?

They should do an 18 part BBC miniseries about the prosecution of surviving deatheaters for their war crimes. The first few episodes will also discuss the controversial amnesty granted to those who used unforgivable curses while fighting against Voldemort.

I had watch harry potter latest movie with my friends.The story of this movie is mystery based and i like to watch this genre of movies a lot.

Happens in Jewish families all the time, if the parents died before their grandkids were born. Maybe Harry’s actually Jewish.

I wish the books and the movies did a better job of portraying exactly this. After reading them multiple times, sure, I can look back and see the complex relationship, but I just didn’t have it conveyed to me in a natural way. Sloppy writing? I don’t know. I tend to think most of the characterization is shoddy. And I think the movies did a poor job of portraying the deaths because the books did the same. I remember reading the seventh and feeling like Rowling just decided to kill people to remind herself it’s oh so serious now. Like Fred/George - wasn’t it just: big explosion -> he’s dead -> cut to new scene.

For what it’s worth, in Part 2 I finally enjoyed Radcliffe’s acting as Harry. Up until now it seemed like he was just the same, monotone, emo teen.

And did Harry seriously kill Voldemort with Expelliarmus? I just remember seeing the wand fly out of Fienne’s hand, then he poofed.

SPOILARZ

The Elder wand’s owner was Harry after he disarmed Draco (who had disarmed Dumbledore), so when Voldemort tried to use it against Harry with the killing spell it reversed itself, and vaporized Voldemort instead. ( I think they added the vaporize part, as the killing curse never did that before in any of the movies.)

Voldemort didn’t know Draco disarmed Dumbledore, he thought Snape killed Dumbledore and that he was the wants master, which is why he killed Snape.

The reason it didn’t reverse the spell in the forest , is it killed the part of Voldemort that was in Harry, not harming Harry in any way.

In the end Snape really got the shitty end of the wand (heh) from start to finish.

I think I wrote that out correctly. :|

Harry didn’t resist in the forest. He didn’t defend himself with a spell. He closed his eyes and accepted death.

I don’t think of the Elder Wand as having an automatic backfire feature when used against its true master. It’s just that Voldemort could not wield it effectively. This, compounded by his attempt to duel with the Elder Wand’s true master (who is also using a loyal wand), and the power he was attempting to channel into the spell, resulted in the killing curse rebounded on him, not unlike when he tried to kill Harry as a baby, destroying his body a second time and, with no Horcruxes left, killing him utterly. At least, I like to think the film deviated from how the book pointedly left a body behind as a reminder that Voldemort was, in the end, just a man, in order to create a greater symmetry and not just as an excuse for a flashy 3D effect and PG-13 rating.

Harry Potter and Deathly Hallows is amazing movie and I was glad to watch this flick.

REPORTED

ni shil: It’s in the name! :)

Wait, so Snape isn’t Harry’s real dad? I’m so confused. What’s the deal with Snape and Harry’s Mom having matching spirit animals and Harry naming his kid after Snape? Then he totally ignores him in the forest.

I enjoyed it. I never read anything past book one and I’ve liked the later movies much more than the first 3, while these last two have been my wife’s least favorite (she’s read each book two or three times).

That was fantastic.

This has been explained multiple times.

  1. Snape was in love with Harry’s mom
  2. Harry names his firstborn after his dad and his secondborn after Snape/Dumbledore. Which I think is kind of selfish, does Ginny not have someone she wants to name a kid after?