When Harry and Hermione were dancing to the radio, does anyone know what song was playing on the radio?
Thanks
Oh Children by Nick Cave & The Bad Seeds
There’s a reason I own mostly small purses-- I can find things in them, and it’s less temptation to carry a lot of stuff.
Acid Lamp and I saw this on Friday, and enjoyed it. I love the dark visuals throughout the movie, including those bleak winter “happy tent time” scenes. Up until recently, I hadn’t read any of the book series, and I’m now in the middle of book four, so I’ve got some catching up to do. I am starting to get more of those “reader” bones that were not present for all the other movies, and I’m sure that, upon re-watching the movies after reading the series, I’ll catch more of them.
Some quick notes:
[ul]
[li]I didn’t initially get the horcrux-locket was drowning him to get away, but I did figure there was something in the magic pushing him away. My brain just didn’t connect that far until Ron appeared.[/li][li]I’m enjoying the later movies much more than the earlier ones-- I guess the drama and the higher exposure to the rest of the magical world (and their costuming) appeals to me.[/li][li]In case it isn’t obvious, I love to watch creatively and interestingly dressed people in a movie. Even if it’s crap otherwise, the costuming is a bonus when done well. It also pings a “dressing well and dressing strangely can go hand-in-hand” urge to reevaluate my wardrobe and dress much more formally than I do. (See Gangs of New York for the costuming, stay for the lack of anything else interesting. Okay, so Daniel Day-Lewis has some great facial hair in the movie. Same goes for A Series of Unfortunate Events and Jim Carey’s overdone acting-- just look at the costuming and the intricacies of tailoring and detail in there. Why didn’t I become a costumer?)[/li][li]I loved the Nick Cave dance scene-- somehow it seemed appropriate. He’s not mainstream in the States, and probably not in the UK either, so it fits the “wizards like odd things” bit while being ridiculous. [/li][li]The Three Brothers animated scene was really breathtaking as well-- I loved the animated woodcut/silhouette effect of the characters-- it made me think of all those old books of fairy tales JKR was referencing when she introduced the book to the story.[/li][li]Why a doe patronus for Harry? In the book, “Prongs” was a stag, and that’s what he saw in book 3 when all the Whomping Willow/Buckbeak/Sirius drama was going on. Can someone clarify as to whether he saw a stag or a doe in the movie version of PoA? I haven’t seen it in a while, and I just finished reading the book. [/li][/ul]
er…what?
When Harry used his patronus in the ministry, it was just the “umbrella of light” effect…the doe that lead him to the sword was
Snape’s
I did wonder at the ball-o-ghosts announcing the ministry’s fall, since in the book it was an otter.
To expand a little on what Unpronounceable posted, the doe Patronus was neither Harry’s nor his father’s. (If it had been then you’re right, it would have been a stag.) The doe Patronus was sent by someone else to guide them to the sword, although who that was won’t be revealed until the second movie. You may be confused because Ron said that when he saw the Patronus he thought it was Harry’s stag, but as Harry pointed out a stag would have had antlers. At this point in the story Harry/Ron/Hermione have never seen a doe Patronus before and don’t know who could have sent it.
They were very minor background characters. There was no point in JKR dropping the main storyline to go into every details of what may or may not happen to them in every eventuality.
They may never have their memories of Hermione restored, saving them the pain of losing a daughter since they weren’t required to fight ‘ultimate evil’. There’s no evidence that they’d be left wandering Australia under aliases either. Or that the morality of that particular choice was a prime consideration of an auther who killed off a kids parents and had another set of parents tortured into insanity. Old men and innocent bystanders are killed for the simple expedient of moving the plot along.
The fact that the families of the three protagonists used three different methods to protect their families was shorthand for the entire wzarding world doing what they felt was neccesary to protect their loved ones.
It’s a metaphor.
You seem to have a real issue with this one specific scene, way beyond the simplified morality of a kids series. Perhaps you could start your own thread on this. I only paid for a five minute argument, not the full half hour.
Just curious, ricksummon, what do you think Hermione *should *have done about her parents?
the doe was [spoiler]lily’s patronus as well as snapes. lily’s doe matched james’ stag, and snape’s doe matched lily’s. harry’s was a stag like his dad’s. when tonks fell for lupin her patronus changed to a wolf to follow her heart.
the ball-o-ghosts was to be kingley’s lynx. the otter belonged to hermione. later in the book arthur weasley’s weasel patronus speaks to the trio in the black’s house.[/spoiler]
thus far we know:
weasel = arthur weasley
doe= lily and snape
stag= james and harry
bunny rabbit=luna
jr terrier=ron
otter=hermione
lynx=kingsley
phoenix=albus
goat=aberforth
horse=ginny
wolf=tonks
Thanks guys-- I had gotten a wee bit confused with the doe patronus, and now it makes some more sense. I’m sure I’ll probably have more commentary and questions as I get through the rest of the books.
ah…lynx, right. Got that mixed up.
Thinking about it though, they cut the plotline that [spoiler]let Snape know where to put the sword - so I wonder if they’ll bother to explain that one.
And summoning patronuses would probably have worked better than all that pass-code nonsense.[/spoiler]
In the Weasley’s house, before the wedding, Harry is talking about going to look for the Horcruxes by himself. Hermione, who at this point (and until King’s Cross) has always understood the ‘Big Picture’ better than anyone else tells him the preparations she has made for the three of them to search and then says this:
From HP and the DH (hardcover, p.96), “‘I’ve also modified my parents’ memories so that they’re convinced they’re really called Wendell and Monica Wilkins, and that their life’s ambition is to move to Australia, which they have now done. That’s to make it more difficult for Voldemort to track them down and interrogate them about me — or you, because unfortunately, I’ve told them quite a bit about you.”
“Assuming I survive our hunt for the Horcruxes, I’ll find Mum and Dad and lift the enchantment. If I don’t ---- well, I think I’ve cast a good enough charm to keep them safe and happy. Wendell and Monica Wilkins don’t know that they’ve got a daughter, you see.”
Hermione’s eyes were swimming with tears again. '"
This wasn’t an evil decision. This was an incredibly difficult decision. Hermione knew, from having grown up a muggle and then entering the world of magic, that Voldemort could not only destroy the magical world, but also the muggle world.
He could become what every evil dictator since time immemorial has strived for: One who controls everyone and everything to the point of even being able to read your thoughts and control your emotions.
She knew that to help Harry win this fight, she had to remove her parents from the scene, not because she was evil, but because she loved her parents so much that she would do anything to save them from not only the fight, but from what very well might happen if the fight were lost.
This wasn’t an evil decision. This was an incredibly mature adult decision.
MrDibble,
Thanks very much for that. Though it provides an atmosphere for that scene, it isn’t in the soundtrack album so I wasn’t sure how I would be able to identify it.
Cheers,
Velomont
If the fight were lost, then the world would be doomed. Every Muggle would either be dead or a slave. Monica and Wendell Wilkins would suffer just as much as the rest. Mr. and Mrs. Granger would not, because they’d be dead already, their minds snuffed out of existence by their daughter. Bless her heart, she means well. 
She should have told them what was going on and asked the Order to hide them — just as Harry did for the Dursleys. The fact that he did that proves that it was not an utterly impossible task. Yes, Hermione’s parents love her and the Dursleys detest Harry. That’s why it’s utterly incomprehensible to me that anyone, much less everyone, believes that a technique used as a punishment for serial killers on Babylon 5 is the right, proper, and good thing to do to the people you love the most.
Well, maybe…but by putting them in Australia, she’s putting them in a place that’s likely one of the last that will be conquered, if it ever is. Like sending your parents to the U.S. from Germany during WWII. They might well die of old age before it comes to that.
They never would have allowed it if she tried this. Never would any decent parent (which the Grangers certainly seem to be) knowingly allow their child to go off to fight a horribly dangerous battle while they go safely into hiding.
This whole hijack is about your preference for the moral code of a TV show? There’s no magic in Babylon 5.
Just because you saw that before you saw Harry Potter doesn’t make it the gold standard of morality.
What makes their writers better judges than JKR?
Those serial killers you’re so concerned about can never feel remorse or atone for their crimes. The families of their victims will always know that those killers are free. I consider that far more evil than the protection Hermione is giving her parents.
Hermione, from the quoted passage earlier, seems to care more for her parents safety, than for the moral pronouncements of a fictional space station. She’s fictional too. Different stories, different rules.
And please stop saying that everyone thinks it’s Right and Proper and Good.
We’ve said countless times - it’s not right or proper or good, it’s the best in the circumstances. Not everything is black and white, even if it’s printed that way.
Were the Dursleys under the Order’s protection indefinitely, or just while they were transferring Harry to the Burrow? I don’t remember all their furniture being missing from the sitting room in the book as seen in the movie.
Sorry to interrupt this thread, but I’ve not yet seen this film, but I have read the book. At which point do they end the film?
My family and I plan to see this over the Christmas holidays, but were curious as to where it ended, and if that means that the final film would just be one long magic fight scene.
Other than blatant profiteering, I can’t see why they would split the final book into two parts, Order of the Phoenix, for example, was a much longer book and still only had enough real material for one film. It seems that unless there is a lot of fleshing out of material and quite a lot of “aftermath” in the final film there should not be enough to fill 5-6 hours of screen time
They ended the film with Voldemort getting the Weirding Wand from Dumbledore’s grave.
Not being a Harry Potter fan/follower, I’ll offer my near-useless observations to the delight of all…
I liked how gloomy the movie was. I didn’t really follow it all that well (I kept nodding off, which had nothing to do with the film), but nobody looked as if they were having a good time.
Harry and Hermione need to hook up. Her and that redhead guy? Blech.
Speaking of Emma Watson, she’s one of those actresses who would look so much better with an additional 20 pounds. Seriously chicky, you’re too thin. And are breasts outlawed by the Powers that Be? I swear it was like all the young women were bound in corsets or had their breasts taped down (“There’s no jiggling in the Potterverse!”) or something.
As a personal note, as the father of a nine year-old who brought her Hedwig stuffed animal to the movie, Sophie was strangely non-reactive when Hedwig was killed - and, imho, the movie didn’t place enough emphasis on the loss of Hedwig who was, IIRC, the first thing you saw at the very beginning of HP1 (she was flying to Harry’s home with the note in her beak, right?) It was odd in that Hedwig wasn’t even mourned, but Harry did take the time to lay the blame on the ambush on her. (“How did they find you?”, “It was Hedwig - she follows me everywhere.”)
I hope I’m wrong about the above - like I said I dozed a couple of times - but it seemed a lame send-off to Harry’s animal companion.
A gentle reminder, everybody: please be careful about spoilers. It’s better to be too cautious than to spoil something for someone else. I’ve added spoiler tags to two posts, but since I’m not a big fan I don’t know what all the key plot points are.