David Yates F'ed Up Harry Potter

[Abbie Normal]

I am officially saying David Yates sucks ass as a director and blaming him for the ruining the last two Harry Potters. I believe the man to be a pussy. Be a man Yates and learn how to direct a fight scene and learn how to shoot a suspenseful scene. The man is so straightforward in his directing, he makes me sick.


This rant is in two parts. The first one is about Yates in regards to his directing the current Harry Potter and the second part are my complaints of the movie. I don't know if Yates is all to blame or if Kloves writing is.

Like Captain Teague Sparrow said, (sort of) "The book (code) is the law." I love Harry Potter for the book and I want at least the best scenes of the book in the movie. I am tired of the bullshit that someone says, "If they did everything in the book, the movie would be 10 hours long." That is bullshit. I understand this and at the very least keep the best scenes and the overall theme of the book in place.



Spoilers Do not read if you did not see the movie

Part 1

The best scene from the Half Blood Prince book is at the end when the several Death Eaters get into Hogwarts and then fight several students and members of the Order of the Phoenix on their way out of the castle to escape. This is not what happened in the movie. In the movie, the Death Eater just ran out of the castle. So they kill the most powerful wizard in the world and then they just run out of the castle. Does this make any sense? They could have at least tried to a kill a few mud bloods on the way out. After all, they hate anything other than pure blood wizards. I blame Yates. The man is a pussy, because he is not man enough to direct a real fight scene. In Order of the Phoenix, he fucked up the fight scenes at the end. It seems like Yates is going out of his way not to have a good fight scene.

The whole scene in the cave was supposed to be suspenseful. It was boring as fuck! Granted I was up since 5am and I saw this at 10:25 and ended at after 1am, but I fell asleep for about 30 seconds during this scene. I was bored. The music sucked and there was no mystery or suspense built. Watch Jaws Yates and learn from the master (Spielberg). Half of Harry Potter is suspenseful, because we don't know the wizard world and what might happen or what to expect. This is paramount as are the fight scenes. Step up your game in both areas for the last book, motherfucker.

Part 2
There are 3 things that really pissed me off and 1 minor thing. I can live with that fact that several minor things were left out for the sake of not making the movie 5 hours long, but not these 3 things below.


The movie is called The Half Blood Prince, how about we tell the audience why? This is just a lazy effort. Take a couple minutes and tell us the story. For those who did not read the book.

"I am the Half Blood Prince” is all that was said about the mystery of who this person would be. In the book, Hermione told the boys that she found a record in the library of a witch with a surname of PRINCE, great Potion Master, and she is a PUREBLOOD. And that PRINCE happens to be married to a muggle-born and that PRINCE is the mother of Severus Snape. That’s why he called himself the “Half Blood Prince”.


The movie never explained the history of the ring that you see, but never hear anything about it. Well, that burned the hand of Dumbledore and would have killed him if Snape did not do it first. This is important, because in the next book it is explained why Dumbledore was dying and Snape just finished him off faster with less pain and suffering. The ring was one of the Horcruxes owned by the descendant of Salazar Slytherin, Marvolo Gaunt. Dumbledore stabbed the ring to get rid of it. He used the sword owned by Godric Gryffindor. Tom Riddle is a direct descendant to the one of the creators of Hogwarts. Once again, lazy storytelling.


A large chunk of the book is supposed to be about the history of Tom Riddle (Lord Voldemort). There were several flashback scenes in the book that explain Tom Riddle better. In the movie, they used one two. Nothing about his family at all. At the very least, they should have used the first memory from the book about Tom's dad and you can see the ring there too. That would have been enough to make me happy in explaining the history and significance of the ring.

Fenrir Greyback was a totally useless character in the movie, other than look scary and menacing. In the book, he plays a bigger part, particularly in the fight scene that never happened in the end.

[Bourne101]

See Monotreme's thread for all points opposing what you are saying.

[QUENTIN]

David Yates is a pussy. If he were more of a man, he would have a more stylish visual sense. Scenes I wanted in the movie from the book weren't in the book because David Yates (or Steve Kloves) aren't man enough to craft fight scenes I like, being pussies.

I see.

[Reigh Kaufman]

Bring back Columbus!

You're lucky to have Yates. Seriously lucky.

[Abbie Normal]

See Monotreme's thread for all points opposing what you are saying.

You know what? You are right. I forgot, I only read half of his rant, because I did not see the movie yet. I will. Thanks.

[Abbie Normal]

David Yates is a pussy. If he were more of a man, he would have a more stylish visual sense. Scenes I wanted in the movie from the book weren't in the book because David Yates (or Steve Kloves) aren't man enough to craft fight scenes I like, being pussies.

I see.
I can't tell if you are kidding. We tend to agree on a lot of stuff, but I am not sure here.

Bring back Columbus!

You're lucky to have Yates. Seriously lucky.

I liked Alfonso Cuarón the best of all the HP directors.

[Jig Saw 123]

Like I said in the other thread. Yates did what he could do. True the film had flaws like every Harry Potter film has had and he didn't put in every key point that was within the book, but he did a great job. People asking for Alfonso Cuarón to return is somewhat shocking though I liked the Prisoner of Azkaban I thought Half-Blood was better given its action sequences, stylish appeal and character development. I thought Yates did a better job than Mike Newell did with the Goblet of Fire. I look forward to what Yates decides to do in the Deathly Hallows because I'm sure he intends to keep readers happy by staying closer to the book than previous incarnations.

[QUENTIN]

I can't tell if you are kidding. We tend to agree on a lot of stuff, but I am not sure here.


I was summarizing your argument as I see it, not agreeing with it. I haven't seen the Harry Potter movies nor read the books, so I'm in no position to say one way or the other.

I do however think it's odd and spurious to connect the fact that you thought different scenes from the book should wind up in the movie and a greater emphasis be placed on fight scenes or that his visual sense is not stylish enough for you to him being a pussy, and that if he were only a real man these perceived deficits in the movie would be fixed.

[adamjohnson]

As for the explanation of the ring, Dumbledore's hand, and why Snape did it - that's going to be in the next film(s). Im not even certain that stuff is actually in the 6th book, I remember alot of that stuff in the memory vial Snape gives to Harry.

as for Yates, the reason he has this job is because of his ability to make the fight scenes interesting. Thusly, the very best fight sequences have been the last 2 films, bar none. In the 5th book, Dumbledore and Voldy animatge golden satues of horses to do their fighting for them. Personally, I prefer the giant fire snake and the awesome glass scene. I mean, in the book that fight ended with the ring of water - Lame.

Here's a tip. What works on the page doesn't mean it will work on screen.

[ScaryFreak1827]

I strongly disagree with you, Abbie, for multiple reasons. In fact I think David Yates is the best thing that has happened to this series since Alfonso Cuaron stepped onboard.

One of the sequences from the book you mentioned, the "battle" at Hogwarts, was not much of a battle as Harry had his friends tell him most of what happened the next day. I don't understand this complaint especially with the LONG Hogwarts battle that will be in the final film.

Now your argument about the half-blood prince... well it wasn't that big a deal in the book either. The main focus was on Tom Riddle. The half-blood prince (which I don't believe the book should've been called as it wasn't the central plot) seemed more like side information and was just for Harry to realize that the potions book he treasured belonged to the person he comes to despise by the end of the story.

You also say Tom Riddle should've been expanded with more memories. They worked well in the book, were informative but ultimately they wouldn't have worked in the film. Not all of them anyway. The Gaunts were added fluff with the exception of the fact that Tom Riddle is a muggle (this can be easily said in a few words in the next film.) In fact the Horcruxes/extra info on Voldemort can be conveyed in either flashbacks or dialogue in either parts of the Deathly Hallows. The memories that were included were the most essential to this particular story.

[adamjohnson]

BTW, Rowling has to check off everything in the script. She added Kreacher scene in part 5 because he becomes important, and she omitted the "Dumbledore had a girlfriend" line in that same film, due to his 'mo-ness.

[LordSimen]

Considering he made the second best movie of the series, I'd have to disagree here.

[poopontheshoes7]

Strongly disagree. He's made the two best Potter films imo.

[Abbie Normal]

Please state if you are a reader of the books or not. Most readers of the book that I have seen on other site and friends does not like the movie as much for the same reasons. I think non readers do not have the same issues many readers do. I understand that many of you do not agree and that is fine. I still enjoyed the film, but would have more if my favorite scenes in the book were in the movie or done better.

To me, Yates sucks as a director of this series and I hope he will do a better job.

[adamjohnson]

Please state if you are a reader of the books or not. Most readers of the book that I have seen on other site and friends does not like the movie as much for the same reasons. I think non readers do not have the same issues many readers do. I understand that many of you do not agree and that is fine. I still enjoyed the film, but would have more if my favorite scenes in the book were in the movie or done better.

To me, Yates sucks as a director of this series and I hope he will do a better job.

Thats ignorant. Ive read the books and the last two movies were my faves of the bunch.

[poopontheshoes7]

Thats ignorant. Ive read the books and the last two movies were my faves of the bunch.

Same, I've read each book twice as a matter of fact.

Imo, the sixth book is the worst of the lot. It felt like a bloated prologue that belonged in the seventh book then its own actual story. It was boring and pointless besides the occasional flashback into Voldemorts past and the last 100 pages or so.

[Abbie Normal]

Thats ignorant. Ive read the books and the last two movies were my faves of the bunch.

You should watch how you say things to people. I did not say all people. I said many. What I said is a fact. The fact that you do not agree does not make what I said ignorant.

I am glad you enjoyed the movies so much. I did not.

[ScaryFreak1827]

I've read each book in the series five times (at least) and consider myself a huge fan of them. I still think Half-Blood Prince is the best of the films thus far with Order of the Phoenix a close second. I know plenty of people who've read the books and feel the same way.

[jolanar]

I've read and loved all the books but the last two movies were by far my least favorite. They were atrociously boring and slow. It's like he consciously went in there trying to make the longest movie possible with the least amount of action or suspense.

[Heisenberg]

I liked OOTP and loved HBP, but Yates cannot 'do' Death scenes or their aftermaths properly, and that's the only thing he fails on. Pretty big thing, but the only thing.

[LordSimen]

I actually thought the death scene in Half Blood Prince was better than any of 'em in the series thus far. Especially Goblet of Fire. That scene just pissed me off it was so bad.

[Smarmy Douche]

Matthew O'Callaghan f'ed up Curious George!!!

[ericdraven]

Please state if you are a reader of the books or not. Most readers of the book that I have seen on other site and friends does not like the movie as much for the same reasons. I think non readers do not have the same issues many readers do. I understand that many of you do not agree and that is fine. I still enjoyed the film, but would have more if my favorite scenes in the book were in the movie or done better.

To me, Yates sucks as a director of this series and I hope he will do a better job.


Oh yeah. lets start a petiton to have directors put all of our favorite scenes in movies. if they did that, the movies will feel overbloated.

[zombievictim]

Yeah, Yates is an absolutely terrible blockbuster director. Can't get emotion or anything even close to epic. Which makes me very scared for the seventh and eighth movies.

[Pentangeli]

For me, the worst director of the series is Mike Newell. The screenplay of Goblet of Fire was well structured, and although the dialogue wasn't great, the screenplay overall was pretty good. And yet the film felt lifeless, more so than other HP films. And the blame for that must lie with the director. Which isn't to say its my least favourite film, as I do prefer it to the first two.

Although the childish nature of the first two HP films might be cited by many dissauders of Columbus, I believe the films should reflect the perception of Harry, so the earlier films needed to be lighter to reflect the innocence of Harry at that time. There's an energy in these first films, which Goblet of Fire doesn't have.

Is David Yates the worst director of the HP series? Did David Yates ruin the last two films? No, and No. The problems with the last two were down to the writing, and not for all this leaving stuff out business, but for being poorly structured. David Yates isn't to blame for that. There's more energy and life in the last two films than any of the others, with the exception of Prisoner of Azkaban.

On the subject of screenwriting and omitting parts out, aside from reasons of time constraint, the films are obviously made primarily for the fans of the book, and will assume the majority of the audience already knows the details.

[Pentangeli]

Yeah, Yates is an absolutely terrible blockbuster director. Can't get emotion or anything even close to epic

So the end of Order of the Phoenix, with Harry battling Voldemort who had just possessed him, and Harry is having flashbacks to his good and bad past, had no emotional impact on you?

[Abbie Normal]

So the end of Order of the Phoenix, with Harry battling Voldemort who had just possessed him, and Harry is having flashbacks to his good and bad past, had no emotional impact on you?

Not nearly the same emotion I had when Harry was looking into the mirror and saw his parents in the first one or when he again saw his parents who help save him against Voldemort in the Goblet movie.

It is not really fair to bring up one point where there was some emotion. Talk about the lack of emotion is the dozen or so other scenes. The sun does shine on a dog's ass once in a while.

[zombievictim]

So the end of Order of the Phoenix, with Harry battling Voldemort who had just possessed him, and Harry is having flashbacks to his good and bad past, had no emotional impact on you?

God no. That was terribly done. The ending of 4 was done much better.

[poopontheshoes7]

Yeah, Yates is an absolutely terrible blockbuster director. Can't get emotion or anything even close to epic. Which makes me very scared for the seventh and eighth movies.

Can't disagree more. Imo, OOTP and HBP are the most genuinely emotional of the series. Everyone's relationship in the HBP felt the most genuine and natural. Partly do to the script, the progression of the actors and Yates.

[zombievictim]

Whatever I guess. I feel the exact opposite. This is one of those movies where talking to people online and talking to people in life are two COMPLETELY different experiences. I've yet to meet anyone that's liked this movie in real life. On here, everyone seems to. Very odd.

[LordSimen]

Can't disagree more. Imo, OOTP and HBP are the most genuinely emotional of the series. Everyone's relationship in the HBP felt the most genuine and natural. Partly do to the script, the progression of the actors and Yates.

I'm gonna have to agree. My only problem with OOTP honestly is it's pacing was off. I felt they should have cut out more than they did.

[Jig Saw 123]

Whatever I guess. I feel the exact opposite. This is one of those movies where talking to people online and talking to people in life are two COMPLETELY different experiences. I've yet to meet anyone that's liked this movie in real life. On here, everyone seems to. Very odd.

Maybe your surrounded by too many people like yourself. :rolleyes:

[zombievictim]

Maybe your surrounded by too many people like yourself. :rolleyes:

So you're giving me attitude why? I live in a town where people's favorite movie can range from Meet The Spartans to The Godfather. At the midnight showing of this film, there were plenty of people dressed up in full costume. Then when the movie ended, most of the theater booed. This is just another case like Juno where I don't understand why people liked the movie.

[Abbie Normal]

So you're giving me attitude why? I live in a town where people's favorite movie can range from Meet The Spartans to The Godfather. At the midnight showing of this film, there were plenty of people dressed up in full costume. Then when the movie ended, most of the theater booed. This is just another case like Juno where I don't understand why people liked the movie.

I thought Juno sucked.

I find it very funny how people who liked this movie are debating the fact that most hard core Potter fans do not like the movies for all the cutting they have done.

[adamjohnson]

Ok heres the deal.

We had the same exact issues with LOTR. People were pissy about Bombadil and they were pissy about Arwen and everything else. Ultimately, LOTR is one of the best adaptations of modern literature into a film. No one can dispute that.

The fact remains that things MUST CHANGE from book to screen. Not just for length but for tone and structure.

Fact is Abbie, nothing in your rant is either important to me or something I believe will NOT be in the next film(s). The ring, Dumbledore's plan- that will all come out. You'll get your fight scene as well.

Other than that, there's not much to your rant.

The 6th book is the most boring book of the series and the worst in terms of structure.

How do you have a book that doesnt even include your villain? Voldemort has risen and killed people, and he doesn't even show up. How is there an arc to this story where there is NO antagonist?

Not only that but most of that book is either Harry learning Voldemort's memories (repetitive) or Harry snogging, or learning to apparate, or another God damn Quiddich match. "Life continues at Hogwarts..." is a bunch of bullshit and shows Rowling's misstep here as a writer.

Book 6 is a bridge book between 5 and 7. It's a prologue. Nothing more. Considering that, we should all be very lucky at the movie we DID get

[Bourne101]

Ok heres the deal.

We had the same exact issues with LOTR. People were pissy about Bombadil and they were pissy about Arwen and everything else. Ultimately, LOTR is one of the best adaptations of modern literature into a film. No one can dispute that.

The fact remains that things MUST CHANGE from book to screen. Not just for length but for tone and structure.

Fact is Abbie, nothing in your rant is either important to me or something I believe will NOT be in the next film(s). The ring, Dumbledore's plan- that will all come out. You'll get your fight scene as well.

Other than that, there's not much to your rant.

The 6th book is the most boring book of the series and the worst in terms of structure.

How do you have a book that doesnt even include your villain? Voldemort has risen and killed people, and he doesn't even show up. How is there an arc to this story where there is NO antagonist?

Not only that but most of that book is either Harry learning Voldemort's memories (repetitive) or Harry snogging, or learning to apparate, or another God damn Quiddich match. "Life continues at Hogwarts..." is a bunch of bullshit and shows Rowling's misstep here as a writer.

Book 6 is a bridge book between 5 and 7. It's a prologue. Nothing more. Considering that, we should all be very lucky at the movie we DID get

This.

[ScaryFreak1827]

Ok heres the deal.

We had the same exact issues with LOTR. People were pissy about Bombadil and they were pissy about Arwen and everything else. Ultimately, LOTR is one of the best adaptations of modern literature into a film. No one can dispute that.

The fact remains that things MUST CHANGE from book to screen. Not just for length but for tone and structure.

Fact is Abbie, nothing in your rant is either important to me or something I believe will NOT be in the next film(s). The ring, Dumbledore's plan- that will all come out. You'll get your fight scene as well.

Other than that, there's not much to your rant.

The 6th book is the most boring book of the series and the worst in terms of structure.

How do you have a book that doesnt even include your villain? Voldemort has risen and killed people, and he doesn't even show up. How is there an arc to this story where there is NO antagonist?

Not only that but most of that book is either Harry learning Voldemort's memories (repetitive) or Harry snogging, or learning to apparate, or another God damn Quiddich match. "Life continues at Hogwarts..." is a bunch of bullshit and shows Rowling's misstep here as a writer.

Book 6 is a bridge book between 5 and 7. It's a prologue. Nothing more. Considering that, we should all be very lucky at the movie we DID get

Amen.

[Abbie Normal]

Ok heres the deal.

We had the same exact issues with LOTR. People were pissy about Bombadil and they were pissy about Arwen and everything else. Ultimately, LOTR is one of the best adaptations of modern literature into a film. No one can dispute that.

The fact remains that things MUST CHANGE from book to screen. Not just for length but for tone and structure.

Fact is Abbie, nothing in your rant is either important to me or something I believe will NOT be in the next film(s). The ring, Dumbledore's plan- that will all come out. You'll get your fight scene as well.

Other than that, there's not much to your rant.

The 6th book is the most boring book of the series and the worst in terms of structure.

How do you have a book that doesnt even include your villain? Voldemort has risen and killed people, and he doesn't even show up. How is there an arc to this story where there is NO antagonist?

Not only that but most of that book is either Harry learning Voldemort's memories (repetitive) or Harry snogging, or learning to apparate, or another God damn Quiddich match. "Life continues at Hogwarts..." is a bunch of bullshit and shows Rowling's misstep here as a writer.

Book 6 is a bridge book between 5 and 7. It's a prologue. Nothing more. Considering that, we should all be very lucky at the movie we DID get

I was not around of the LOTR debates. I have the books, but have not read them yet.

Things must change from book to movie, but not major plot developing points and details.


We are not talking about the next two films yet here. I want a fight in every movie, because that is what is in the book. It is not MY fight scene. It is what should have happened. I don't want what is in this book (movie) to have to spill over to the next movie. They have a hard enough time giving us a movie that covers what is in each book as it is already. Why would they now try to backtrack in the next movie to explain stuff that should be in this movie?

I liked the 6th book. It is far from the worst. Malfoy is the villain in this movie. As are the Death Eaters. Or is it just because Voldemort is not in it there is no villain to you? One thing the movie did a good job was showing the mental stresses Malfoy goes through to complete his task. Something that was not shown in the movie, but in the book is how Harry is obsessed with catching Malfoy planning something. This was barely addressed in the movie, but I do not have a problem with it. There is your villain. From beginning to end, Malfoy was set up to be the main villain in this book. The whole book boils down to Malfoy planning, but not able to go through with killing Dumbledore and Snape keeping his vow to help Malfoy. Then those two and the Death Eaters are supposed to take to killing everyone in sight and escaping out of the castle. But because they did not show this in the movie, you think the book sucks. How sad.

The details of the book that you seem to hate is what makes the Harry Potter books so great. Life goes on for everyone else. Time also goes by as the story moves along the whole class term. It wasn't until the end of the 5th one did the general public know that Voldemort was back. This is the year of planning and the plan was to kill Dumbledore. He was the only man between Voldemort taking over. Or did you forget that Dumbledore beat Voldemort at the end of 5? Dumbledore had been doing what he has been doing for years, which was finding a way to end Voldemort once and for all. Without finding the details of Voldemorts earlier life, there would have been no way to kill him. But this is all prologue and unimportant stuff to you. :rolleyes:

I don't care if you don't agree with me, but it is just plain ignorant to ignore the opinions of thousands of HP readers who feel exactly as I do and think our problems with the movie are baseless or weak. Search the internet and see for yourself thousands of comments just like mine.

http://sheirene.wordpress.com/2009/07/20/hp/

[Abbie Normal]

This.

This movie was so badly explained that the few blind men can't see who the villain is in this movie.

Amen.

Amen and praise Jesus that one day people will see that Yates did such a shitty job portraying Malfoy to be the real villain in this movie.

[Abbie Normal]

This.

This movie was so badly directed or written that no one who did not read the book knows where the name the Half Blood Prince came from.

Amen.

Amen and praise Jesus that one day people will see that Yates did such a shitty job portraying Malfoy to be the real villain in this movie.

[LordSimen]

Ok heres the deal.

We had the same exact issues with LOTR. People were pissy about Bombadil and they were pissy about Arwen and everything else. Ultimately, LOTR is one of the best adaptations of modern literature into a film. No one can dispute that.

The fact remains that things MUST CHANGE from book to screen. Not just for length but for tone and structure.

Fact is Abbie, nothing in your rant is either important to me or something I believe will NOT be in the next film(s). The ring, Dumbledore's plan- that will all come out. You'll get your fight scene as well.

Other than that, there's not much to your rant.

The 6th book is the most boring book of the series and the worst in terms of structure.

How do you have a book that doesnt even include your villain? Voldemort has risen and killed people, and he doesn't even show up. How is there an arc to this story where there is NO antagonist?

Not only that but most of that book is either Harry learning Voldemort's memories (repetitive) or Harry snogging, or learning to apparate, or another God damn Quiddich match. "Life continues at Hogwarts..." is a bunch of bullshit and shows Rowling's misstep here as a writer.

Book 6 is a bridge book between 5 and 7. It's a prologue. Nothing more. Considering that, we should all be very lucky at the movie we DID get

http://i573.photobucket.com/albums/ss175/progressinacan/SlowClap.gif

[Abbie Normal]

http://i573.photobucket.com/albums/ss175/progressinacan/SlowClap.gif

When you were banned.

http://www.mypostergallery.com/store/bmz_cache/5/55e58f50fad1ed32e5753945f7a69558.image.254x200.jpg

Now that you are back.

[Jig Saw 123]

Ok heres the deal.

We had the same exact issues with LOTR. People were pissy about Bombadil and they were pissy about Arwen and everything else. Ultimately, LOTR is one of the best adaptations of modern literature into a film. No one can dispute that.

The fact remains that things MUST CHANGE from book to screen. Not just for length but for tone and structure.

Fact is Abbie, nothing in your rant is either important to me or something I believe will NOT be in the next film(s). The ring, Dumbledore's plan- that will all come out. You'll get your fight scene as well.

Other than that, there's not much to your rant.

The 6th book is the most boring book of the series and the worst in terms of structure.

How do you have a book that doesnt even include your villain? Voldemort has risen and killed people, and he doesn't even show up. How is there an arc to this story where there is NO antagonist?

Not only that but most of that book is either Harry learning Voldemort's memories (repetitive) or Harry snogging, or learning to apparate, or another God damn Quiddich match. "Life continues at Hogwarts..." is a bunch of bullshit and shows Rowling's misstep here as a writer.

Book 6 is a bridge book between 5 and 7. It's a prologue. Nothing more. Considering that, we should all be very lucky at the movie we DID get

Completely agree.

[Bourne101]

This movie was so badly explained that the few blind men can't see who the villain is in this movie.

Amen and praise Jesus that one day people will see that Yates did such a shitty job portraying Malfoy to be the real villain in this movie.

This movie was so badly directed or written that no one who did not read the book knows where the name the Half Blood Prince came from.

I think the "This" and "Amen" spoke very well for themselves thanks. :)

[adamjohnson]

This movie was so badly explained that the few blind men can't see who the villain is in this movie.



Amen and praise Jesus that one day people will see that Yates did such a shitty job portraying Malfoy to be the real villain in this movie.

THAT villain is not THE villain.

[Abbie Normal]

I think the "This" and "Amen" spoke very well for themselves thanks. :)

Now up to millions of HP fans compelled me to properly complete your sentences as they do not agree with Mister Johnson.

Monotreme's gal pal agrees with me and I don't know about you, but it always pays off to agree with the ladies. ;)

Are you telling me that the title of the book "The Half Blood Prince" and how that was explained in the movie did it for you?

[Abbie Normal]

THAT villain is not THE villain.

So I guess the second booked sucked as well for you, because adult Voldemort is not in that one either. Only the teenage, pre snake version is present.

And just so you know Michael Bay is planning on explaining more of the plot for TF2 in TF3. :rolleyes:

[adamjohnson]

So I guess the second booked sucked as well for you, because adult Voldemort is not in that one either. Only the teenage, pre snake version is present.

And just so you know Michael Bay is planning on explaining more of the plot for TF2 in TF3. :rolleyes:

Now you're just being petty.

[adamjohnson]

The Half Blood Prince" and how that was explained in the movie did it for you?

We're all saying that the book should have never been called the half blood prince because that moniker is a small subplot in book 6, which in itself is a small subplot in the greater "Harry vs Voldemort" storyline.

[Abbie Normal]

Now you're just being petty.

No, I used your point against you and rather than address the point you deflected.

[jolanar]

If they have time for 45 minutes of Lavander making Ron ron swooning sounds, then they should of have time for a little more action. Especially near the end where I was desperate for it at that point. There was no reason they should have spent so much time on the relationships and so little on the more interesting stuff.

[Abbie Normal]

We're all saying that the book should have never been called the half blood prince because that moniker is a small subplot in book 6, which in itself is a small subplot in the greater "Harry vs Voldemort" storyline.

But what you want is not what is reality. In reality, the book is called The Half Blood Prince and to me and millions of other readers we love and understand the meanings.

Did you even read the books? Snape is a huge figure that looms large in the whole series and history of the wizard world during those 40 odd years. Snape is not a subplot at all. Book six begins to show us how big Snape really is. Much of the point of book 5 for Snape's part is to set the stage to show who he really is. Snape has been a huge character throughout the whole series of books with major implications to Harry life. Are you forgetting it was Snape who saved Harry's life in book 1? It started in that book how Snape was not nearly as bad as he was portrayed on the surface. Holy cow man, how can you either not see this or completely ignore it? You think this is all just Harry vs Voldemort? This is why the books are so awesome! We have a story chock full of history and subplots that really matter. It was the movies that diminished the importance of the character. This is what we have been bitching about for years now.

[Bourne101]

Now up to millions of HP fans compelled me to properly complete your sentences as they do not agree with Mister Johnson.

Millions of HP fans also don't understand the difference between novel and film. Two completely different mediums. Not saying that is the case for you or every HP fan, but it is indeed the case for many. For an adapted work to be able to work on a cinematic level, often much needs to be cut from the novel, sometimes large bits of storyline, and even precious brief descriptions of battles. J.K. Rowling approves the scripts herself, and I'm pretty sure if there was something important that was going to work on a cinematic level that wasn't in the script, she would let them know. J.K is the fuckin' boss and I'd take her opinion over any HP fan any day. :D

Even though you haven't read the LOTR books, it is a great comparison. The films leave out a lot from the novels (stuff I TRULY loved from the novels), and some scenes in one novel are in another entry in the film series (like the spider scene). But in the end, it's not about what worked in the novel, it is what works on film. It's all about working smoothly and properly on a cinematic level. I think we all know how the LOTR series turned out. I remember after the second one was released, people were freaking out important stuff missing, but once ROTK was released a lot of the important details and emphasis on certain plot points were included. And even beloved stuff that was left out, people came to realize and appreciate why it was left out. I see similar things happening for HP. But regardless, if every little detail from a Potter or LOTR film was included in the film, they would be complete messes.

[Abbie Normal]

J.K is the fuckin' boss and I'd take her opinion over any HP fan any day. :D

But regardless, if every little detail from a Potter or LOTR film was included in the film, they would be complete messes.

JK gets a lot of money and there is no way she is not going to back the movies that are put out whether she likes them or not. Yes, I am saying she is influenced by the money, the HP fans are not.

I never said details. I said main plot points and scenes. One must be true to the book from which it comes from and I feel this is not happening and will not happen. Your point is taken though. I am interested on your thoughts about Snape. Adam equates him to a secondary character with no real point.

[adamjohnson]

JK gets a lot of money and there is no way she is not going to back the movies that are put out whether she likes them or not. Yes, I am saying she is influenced by the money, the HP fans are not.

I never said details. I said main plot points and scenes. One must be true to the book from which it comes from and I feel this is not happening and will not happen. Your point is taken though. I am interested on your thoughts about Snape. Adam equates him to a secondary character with no real point.

No I do not.

But the plotline of why he is calling himself the half blood prince is completely irrelevant, as I've said, in the Harry v Voldemort throughline.

[Abbie Normal]

No I do not.

But the plotline of why he is calling himself the half blood prince is completely irrelevant, as I've said, in the Harry v Voldemort throughline.

Why don't you address the longer post I directed at you on this subject? I have my doubts you read the books. Snape and why he is the half blood prince is not irrelevant? This book sets the stage to show how large a character Snape really has been to Harry.

Harry frigging names one of his kids Albus Severus. You have no clue at all. To me everything you say on this subject is meaningless. You do not know what you are speaking about.

[adamjohnson]

Why don't you address the longer post I directed at you on this subject? I have my doubts you read the books. Snape and why he is the half blood prince is not irrelevant? This book sets the stage to show how large a character Snape really has been to Harry.

Harry frigging names one of his kids Albus Severus. You have no clue at all. To me everything you say on this subject is meaningless. You do not know what you are speaking about.

Same to you, bucko, since you cannot seem to read what it is I write.

Harrys mudblood potions professor and particularly the stupid name he gives himself as an angsty teen has nothing to do with how he's going to kill Voldemort. And while that isnt what the entirety of the books are about, that IS what the movies are about.

Exactly in the same way that if it didnt deal with Frodo destroying the ring, Fran and Peter cut it out.

BTW, the hands-over-the-ears approach to litigation is extremely childish.

[adamjohnson]

So I guess the second booked sucked as well for you, because adult Voldemort is not in that one either. Only the teenage, pre snake version is present.

And just so you know Michael Bay is planning on explaining more of the plot for TF2 in TF3. :rolleyes:

And yes, they did suck. The second book and the second film are the worst in each of their respective mediums - by far.

But your point is moot, since MY point was that Voldemort had risen by book 6, yet his current presence is not felt at all in that novel. Which is inherently different than book 2.

[Abbie Normal]

Thats ignorant.


BTW, the hands-over-the-ears approach to litigation is extremely childish.


So is calling someone ignorant when talking about matters of opinion. I have no wish to debate this subject with you any longer as you have shown you can not answer questions directed at you and it is my opinion that you have not really read the books and therefore have no idea what you are talking about. I might be wrong, but that is how you are coming off to me. I agree to disagree. Good day sir.

[Abbie Normal]

And while that isnt what the entirety of the books are about, that IS what the movies are about.

I will address this one point. No, the movies are not about Harry vs Voldemort. The Harry Potter movies have more to do with relationships, friendships, family and ethics than it does about a story or man vs man. It has also been said in two of the trailers.

[Natty]

Same to you, bucko, since you cannot seem to read what it is I write.

This tends to happen in online arguements, its very frustrating.


Nevertheless:

I disagree that David Yates has messed up Harry Potter and I actually think that Order of the Phoenix is the best of the series so far. I have read all the books and seen all the films and fans are going to have to accept that the films aren't being made for them so they can't whine that all their favourite parts didn't make it in, the films are being made to give those stories a wider audience...and to make money from the existing fans.

The best scene from the Half Blood Prince book is at the end when the several Death Eaters get into Hogwarts and then fight several students and members of the Order of the Phoenix on their way out of the castle to escape. This is not what happened in the movie.

As Monotreme explained the reason why they didn't include the battle at the end is probably because there is going to be one in Deathly Hallows and they want to avoid being repetitive. The ending was still good in my opinion.

The whole scene in the cave was supposed to be suspenseful. It was boring as fuck!

Again, I disagree as the audience I was with certainly found it to be scary and suspenseful.

The movie is called The Half Blood Prince, how about we tell the audience why? This is just a lazy effort. Take a couple minutes and tell us the story.

I agree with this and it is part of the reason why I don't think the movie is the best of the series like others seem to, the title is never really developed on in the way that it could/should have been, so when Snape reveals himself at the end it's kind of like..."oh, OK" and is not suprising at all, a big anticlimax.

The movie never explained the history of the ring that you see, but never hear anything about it.

I didn't really mind about this because they simply showed that Dumbledore got rid of it, the audience thinks "oh, 1 down 6 to go, on with the story". The history of ring didn't really need to be explained like the title.

Fuck Fenrir Greyback...he is a scary monster, that's all the audience need.

I believe the man to be a pussy. Be a man Yates and learn how to direct a fight scene and learn how to shoot a suspenseful scene.

Bloody hell Abbie the rest of your arguement is actually legitimate but this is just a stupid thing to say. David Yates directed the best action scene of the series in the showdown with Voldemort in Order of the Phoenix at the end. Saying that he is 'unmanly' for not including another action scene at the end of this film is just plain incorrect and obviously sexist for assuming that only men can direct action scenes...ever heard of Kathryn Bigelow?

[Danger^Cart]

It would seem having read the books is a big factor in the enjoyment of these films, which I have not. Having said that, I've thoroughly enjoyed the last two films, and I thought the duel between Voldemort and Dumbledore at the end of Pheonix was beautifully directed. Easily a highlight of the entire series.

[Natty]

I'm having a discussion on this topic with Abbie through the PMs but my message is too long for a PM, I am posting it here for him to read:


MAJOR SPOILERS FOR HARRY POTTER NOVEL SERIES


1. You are very critical of me...

Well actually I did say that I agree with you on a couple of things and let's not forget that you have been critical too and not just of me, telling one of the moderates that your life is 'far better' than hers.

what do you think of Snape character based on the info we learn about him in the last book?

He is one of my favourites, I was pleased that he actually turned out to be a good guy because despite his darkness he always struck me as one throughout the series, so I was major shocked when he killed Dumbledore and very pleased to find out that it was all part of a plot.

You spoke of the movies trying to appeal to a wider audience. Where is this wider audience...

I don't think this is true, films have a much larger audience than books. For example, I am the only member of my family that has read the books, yet all of my family have seen the films. Out of the six people I went on vacation with only two had read the books, yet all have seen the films. It's true that most of the people who see the films are fans of the book, but not all of them are. The figures are not going up but that doesn't mean the people who watch them haven't read the books.

I don't know how you can say the cave scene was scary and suspenseful.

I said the audience not myself. I found the scene much more suspenseful in the book but when I went to see it the people in the audience were gasping and screaming all over the place, so you see it was still effective, even if it wasn't to you (or me).

There is nothing wrong with 2 fights scenes at Hogwarts, so I call Yates a pussy.

My point still stands, just because a director doesn't want to put in a fight scene doesn't make him a pussy, otherwise Michael Bay and Zack Snyder would be the world's toughest guys...but they aren't.

[Tagia_Romero]

I have my own thoughts in regards to how I felt about the film, but now wouldn't be the right place to share them, but I will say this;

Was anybody else a little bothered by Dumbledore asking for Harry to take his arm? ;)

[Pentangeli]

I have my own thoughts in regards to how I felt about the film, but now wouldn't be the right place to share them, but I will say this;

Was anybody else a little bothered by Dumbledore asking for Harry to take his arm? ;)

There was quite a lot of homosexual subtext, I thought. Another example was Broadbent's character "collecting" Harry, and having a few awkward moments after dinner.

Tom Riddle's scenes gave me the impression he was the victim of sexual abuse, though for no more reason than he was institutionalized and incredibly depressed, which implied abuse, and that the older Riddle seemed gay.

I've often thought the HP universe mirrors Harry's inner turmoil. His teenage angst is paralleled by the films gradually getting darker. Voldemort, by name, suggests death, which, the death of Harry's parents, would be Harry's main source of anger, his inner nemesis. With that in mind, I interpreted Half Blood Prince as Harry having to fight his sexual confusion, and forced to tackle his fears of being gay before he's happily together with Ginny (and Ron with Hermione) at the film's end.

[Jig Saw 123]

I have my own thoughts in regards to how I felt about the film, but now wouldn't be the right place to share them, but I will say this;

Was anybody else a little bothered by Dumbledore asking for Harry to take his arm? ;)

I noticed a lot of homosexual subtext especially when Dumbledore and Harry visit Slughorn's house and Dumbledore ask if he can take his knitting magazine. Also when Dumbledore would constantly hold Harry close to him when no one was in present danger nor was Harry grieving.

[Abbie Normal]

I have my own thoughts in regards to how I felt about the film, but now wouldn't be the right place to share them, but I will say this;


There was quite a lot of homosexual subtext, I thought. Another example was Broadbent's character "collecting" Harry, and having a few awkward moments after dinner..

I noticed a lot of homosexual subtext especially when Dumbledore and Harry visit Slughorn's house and Dumbledore ask if he can take his knitting magazine. Also when Dumbledore would constantly hold Harry close to him when no one was in present danger nor was Harry grieving.

If JK did not out Dumbledore would any of you still feel this way?

I am not going to agree, but it is funny.

[Jig Saw 123]

If JK did not out Dumbledore would any of you still feel this way?

I am not going to agree, but it is funny.

I think that's what probably inspired Yates when developing the Dumbledore character this time around. If J.K. didn't state it I would probably question Dumbledore as being a pedophile.

[FireCaptain4]

I think Harry Potter fans can come off as ungrateful sometimes. Seriously, you bastards are lucky. You guys don't know heartbreak until you witness one of your favorite novels turned into something like that Watchers adaptation. Now that's heartbreak.

[Monotreme]

I'm too lazy and tired to write out some big preachy post (which I already did - check out my rant on this same subject but showing the exact OPPOSITE arguement, AGAINST opinions like this one) so I think I'll just sum up my opinion in these simple, straightforward points:

1. Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince was the best film of the series so far.

2. It is inevitable that many backstories and sub-plots from novels will be lost during the transition to film.

3. In this specific case, little details like the full backstory of Tom Riddle/Voldemort as well as insight into Snape's past are all interesting in a 600-page NOVEL, which leaves room for exploring these things, but in a 2+ hour MOVIE, a single, linear plot must be achieved.

4. The film succeeds in trimming these sub-plots and keeping the film focused on one thing while not losing the atmosphere and nature of the book.

5. That said, Yates and Kloves did have a stroke of genius by increasing the importance and emotional weight of Malfoy, a character that had been completely underused and underwritten in all the previous films and in ALL of Rowling's novels, including the sixth, which depicted but didn't EMPHASIZE his own emotional struggle, which is really parallel to Harry's which is what makes it so compelling in the film.

6. Keeping the Hogwarts battle in at the end would have completely destroyed the emotional continuity of Dumbledore's death immediately followed by his mourning. Had that sequence been interrupted by a big action set piece, it would have completely destroyed any emotional impact the death would have had on audiences. Again, it works in a book which you can put down and continue reading days later, but not in a movie which needs to keep emotional clarity and continuity for it to work.

7. The direction and especially cinematography were top-notch in this film, by far the best of the series so far, and I can't wait to see what Yates, better at drama and evoking good performances from his actors than ANY other Potter director so far, will do with films 7+8.

8. Finally, agreeing with gal pals is alright by me, but it's not recommended when they're FULL OF SHIT. :)

Thank you, and good day!

[Pentangeli]

If JK did not out Dumbledore would any of you still feel this way?

Yes. Even though JK had outed Dumbledore, I thought of him (prior to Half-Blood Prince) as non-sexual. In Half-Blood Prince, Dumbledore seemed gay, and I would have have thought as much irrespective of JK outing him.