Harry Potter and The Half Blood Prince

Am I right in thinking they are from the wedding and the immediate aftermath? If so do you think they're going to disguise Harry? Actually is the wedding even going to be shown? Argh so many questions and I haven't even seen HBP yet.
 
PICK IT UP! you are wasting valuabe reading time :)

Yeh tbh I'm still sulking that they didn't think of me for that role. I have no idea what it involves...but I'm sure I would have aced it lol :D

Ok...here's a question for you guys. If you were able to be in the HP films, which character would you like to be? And it doesn't matter about hair colour, age, nationality etc

hmmm....I wouldn't mind being any of the gals really. Maybe Ginny cos she kicks ass! :D
 
No they don't - if they were to stand on their own merits then lets not call them the same as the books.

Lets have Harry Potter and the Random Warner Bros scenes Part 1 etc etc.

It is RIDICULOUS to say the films don't need to adhere to the books.

The films COULD be good, but sadly they aren't, because WB and JKR with the dollar signs rolling round in their eyeballs set the films for the dumbed down audience who are too lazy to read the books.

There's a reason why the books have done so well. Why not just use the books and film what happens in the books, instead of making stuff up and leaving most of the books out.
 
I don't know about the best film, I mean, It looks EXCELLENT. But I read on the internet they hadn't cast Fleur or Bill Weasley. In the last book they stay at the Burrow and have to Dissaparate on the wedding day. Plus Ginny and Ron call her Phelm (sp?).
So If theres no Bill and Fleur, their's no wedding. :(
 
Bill and Fleur are both in the next movie, Bill has definately been cast and i think the girl who played Fleur in GOF is returning, there are pictures of the trio after the wedding on Tottenham Court Road and i believe that they are filming the actual wedding scenes this week according to mugglenet. So i don't think they will put Dumbledores funeral in DH as i don't think its actually needed.
Not sure why they needed Greyback in HBP maybe they have him attack someone at the wedding or during the seven potters scene in DH and HBP was a way of introducing him so he would be recogniseable in the next movie.
 
Maybe he'll get Bill during the wedding? The trio can apparate just as he's getting attacked, resulting in panicky-Ron for a bit until they get the Patronus, perhaps.
 
Just read the transcript - thanx for that by the way. I think i'd read it before but had forgotten it.
Quick question - how come DD can use homeum revelio spell and know that you are there under the cloak, i thought the cloak was truly invincible - renders the wearer completely and utterly invisible - no spells puncture it and accio cloak - didn't work on it when a DE used it. Again - how can animals see it - i know JK said that they can sense heat but if truly renders you invisible then surely heat doesn't escape the cloak either.
 
But none of the "magic" was carried over from the way Columbus envisioned it.. I adored everything about how Hogwarts and the cast were portrayed in the first two films (the first especially). The Great Hall, the corridors, the common room.. then they started doing stupid things like having choirs and wearing their own clothes.. it just wasn't the same.

Columbus' films had a certain magical feel to them, and yes.. although I have to accept the books get darker and cannot be edited just to be a PG (which I'd protest against) I just felt the continuity was awful, but I guess that was just down to the problem that one director wouldn't commit to seven films, even if the majority of the cast have done.

And as for GoF and OotP, they just seemed to cut out all the necessary parts and add in just those that would look good on screen. Very, very poor adaptations in my opinion.
 
Back
Top