Go to albert.com/cinematherapy to download the Albert app. For a limited time when you open a checking account and connect a qualifying direct deposit, you'll get $150. Thanks to Albert for sponsoring this video.
Hi boys! As a teen i used to love snape, then i grew up and started to see him in... a more truthful light i guess. (also, i started to read the books after the 4th movie). As a character is interesting, as a real person i would punch him in the face if i had him in front of me. So, good idea speaking about him, i hope for you there won't be too much fuss between snape lovers and snape haters in the comments XD
About the James bullying scene: the spell James uses on Snape is a spell Snape himself had created AND had been using to bully 1st year muggle born students. James was giving Snape a taste of his own medicine but the scene is framed only from the self-sympathetic eyes of Snape himself.
@@AtomcsiKK I think that should’ve been left in! When I was a kid I missed the point that he was specifically bullying Harry, I thought if Harry just told him he was taking notes and not doodling he’d go easier on him.
@@eileensnow6153 Harry just came from living with the Dursleys, had he come from a normal home, I'm sure he would have said something to the effect of "Sorry sir, I thought I was meant to be taking notes". If he had done that without saying it sarcastically it would have put Snape on the back foot without him being able to insult him further since the boy had openly apologized for paying attention. Something you couldn't really say for Draco even when he's clearly his favorite student, he's not anywhere near the best student in potions. But because Harry is in flight mode he just takes the abuse. Side note, Snape loves potions but the potion books are so badly written that Harry only becomes a top student after finding Snapes version with notes. That means that the man is so petty that he knows his students will fail or make less quality potions from the books that are used to teach, just so that he can then smugly say to kids ages 11-17 that their work is not as good as his. As an excuse to berate them for it. Dumbledore most certainly was a powerful clever wizard, but not great when it comes to job interviews or check up on student progress or complaints.
@@dcworld4349 that’s true, I didn’t think about the whole aspect of coming from an abusive home. But yeah I remember reading HBP and going, “this man is so petty that he’ll keep his potion-making secrets away from the children he is ACTIVELY TEACHING?” He’s just a tyrant, I’m glad he never taught DADA like he wanted to. Harry wouldn’t have made it past the fourth book
I was so mad that they removed most of Snapes nasty moments (like calling Neville an idiot and taking a point from HARRY because he apparently knew that Neville was doing it wrong and what LED to Snape being Nevilles boggart) because movie Snape didn’t seem to actually NEED to be redeemed. I mean, he didn’t even provide the PROPHECY nor did he call Lily a mudblood. Movie Lily apparently just ditched him as soon as she got sorted. Making her seem extremely shallow
It’s Alan Rickman’s voice, pauses and all. It was commanding, even when he was very quiet. He played villains very, very well. And his very presence instantly made his character the most interesting. RIP Alan Rickman
@@driftingdruid he played cheating asshole husband well too in Love Actually. It's this thing he does in a lot of films where he plays inherently negative characters but makes you care about them and look beyond the surface.
Yeah, I was also about to write that. I heard the theory that he despised Neville because he could have been the one in place of Harry (and in that alternative Lily would have lived). Don't know how much of it is true, but either way, the way he treated him was quite nasty :c
I think he sees himself in neville and has such an intense self hatred that he takes in out on a child. It’s very likely he sees the “weakness” that bullies preyed on him for within Neville and leaps onto it as an outward manifestation of the longing to pull those experiences and traits out of himself- to purge.
@@RespectedProfessional Agreed. After years of bullying, one's mind can go from "this shouldn't have happened to me" to "this is how the world works," which can lead someone who has been abused to be an abuser. I got bullied for this and had to change, so now I must bully others about the same flaw.
He bullies everyone in general, as far as the books tell us. He favors Slytherins and picks on everyone else. Yes he picks on some specific students harder, and I can absolutely understand the theory that he picks on Neville harder because Neville reminds him of himself when he was a kid; what I'm saying is that, though Harry and Neville may be personal, he bullies everyone.
I’d get called out like that all the time. Unlike Harry, every time someone accused me I’d just hold up my notebook and say “no, I’m paying total attention. Look at this infographic I made of everything you just said.” They didn’t usually like that either but there wasn’t much they could say. Coulda just held up the notebook.
I teach college, and I have had this (almost) happen to me. I saw someone that I thought was on their phone during my lecture, and I moved through the classroom towards them only to realize that they were taking notes. Unlike Snape, I did actually check before running my mouth.
I imagine what would have happened if he had taken down everything, word for word, and then being chided for writing gibberish, or doodling, because he used Gregg's shorthand.
2 года назад+15
To be fair their are good and bad moments to take notes, besides he wasn't actually taking notes
Never write when the teacher is in the middle of an introduction. I have had teachers who will call you out for it because the introduction is the most important thing, mainly because they want you to know what is going on before anything because with most of my teachers when you don't pay attention to the introduction you get completely lost afterwards, it's like introducing fruit and that talking about astronomy.
I've said it before and I'll die on this hill: Snape is an INTERESTING character because he makes us think about "what if a person who is objectively cruel and miserable, was directly responsible for saving not only your life, but countless others by defeating a greater evil?" Some characters aren't meant to be admirable, but are there to make you think.
Like a person of the uniform, soldier, firefighter, etc - maybe not the most moral or civilized people but when the world is crashing down and hell has broken loose - they’re running towards it, not away.
Pretty much...Snape is actually a despicable character. To put it clearly: He is the books equivalent of a Nazi, and the reason why he stopped being one is not because he realised what a sh... thing being a Nazi is, but because one of the victims of his actions is a woman he is obsessed with. He never really redeems himself for anything he did during the first war, because he never feels guilty about any of it, it is all about Lily only.
Rest in peace, Alan Rickman. Even though Snape was a character we loved to hate, Alan played him so splendidly, and with so much heart and soul, that we couldn't help but empathise with him, after all this time.
I didnt hate him...I loved him, he was one of my favorite characters in the movie he is a hero in my eyes...yeah he was hardh attimes and sometimes a bully but in the end of teh day he was a good person...but in the books he was a complex villain
I've said this elsewhere on RUclips: Movie Snape has a redemption arc. Book Snape has an explanation arc. They are not the same. Alan Rickman was a master.
@KatelynRushe Director David Yates: "With the space that Alan puts between words, you can feel an entire auditorium hanging on that pause, and they absolutely adore it." (7/2/2022)
Dylan is in Trouble pointed this out in his series review. During the Great Hall confrontation in DH Part 2, he emphasized the silence in the "anyone who has knowledge" part. It cracks me up. He jokes that Rickman didn't have enough screen time, so he warned that he would need multiple rolls of film for one line.
Rickman's delivery is in line with the whole "Villains don't run" idea. Villains are in charge and in control. Running or rushing is a sign that something else has power. As long as Snape is talking, he is in power. The longer he makes others wait to hear what he has to say, the more he exerts power over them.
@@Pandalka Now see, this whole thing is fascinating. I thought some people were just awkward as public speakers. I mean, I guess its probably a column A/B thing, but still. The idea of someone doing stuff on purpose is kind of interesting.
@Matt Morehouse he's rushing in, but he's still in control because he is setting the INTENSE tone oh his the class and is already instilling fear in the students. It's like when a hurricane blows in, you don't exactly know what's gonna happen but you know it's not gonna be pretty 😂
The scene where Snape calls out Hermione for speaking out of turn also shows how differently Ron is portrayed in the films compared to the books. In the books he defends her, rather than agreeing with Snape, and it saddens me that they reduced his character to comic relief in the films.
and how they treated poor Ginny. 😭😭😭 they only used her for Harry's love interest in the movies, but in the books she's such a baddie and so much more involved.
Agreed! They reduced movie Ron quite a lot, turned him into a comic relief in some moments. Whereas in the books, he does act like an ass sometimes, but there are A LOT of moments when he stands up for his friends, and in movies those actions were reassigned to either Harry or Hermione, leaving Ron just standing in the back.
@@moldyvoldy1231 I'll be honest, I can't remember her doing a single thing before book like... 5 or 6, where the romance angle starts up. She's almost entirely background until then, dating boys her brothers don't approve of and reportedly having a nasty bat bogey hex, but thazzit.
Yup that's the moment the characters got screwed. As of that point Ron is worthless, Ginny is invisible and Hermione is a Mary Sue (later she steals Ron's "you'll have to kill us too" line)
The tragedy of Snape and Harry is that Harry came to Hogwart’s absolutely starving for love. If Snape had befriended Harry, Snape would have gotten to spend time being loved by the last bit of Lily she left in the world. Harry would have absolutely been a loyal and attentive friend. Instead he got to hated, because of his own pettiness.
I think one of the reasons Snape continues to despise Harry, aside from the whole James thing, is because of how alike child Snape and child Harry are. Snape, just like Harry, came to Hogwarts from an abusive household, shabbily dressed in ill-fitting clothes, and didn't really know what healthy relationships looked like. On paper, Harry should not have fit in at school, but people actually like Harry. Snape assumes it's because he is famous, but it's actually because he's earned people's affection and goodwill by being a decent human being. Snape has never been able to do that. He doesn't realize it, but he is jealous of Harry.
@@EstherHulst-Artist Except he did. He hated that Harry was being kept alive only to die when the time was right. He could have also swayed Harry’s perception of James. Like if Snape had showed Harry kindness he could have been loved by what was left of Lily, and gotten the ultimate revenge on James by turn his son against him. Instead he was petty and small he got neither love nor revenge.
I love the duality yet mutual understanding between Jonathan's "He was a terrible teacher, but credit where credit is due, he committed to lessons that benefitted the survival of his students, namely Harry," and Alan's "Doesn't change that he still negatively impacted many of his students, including Harry!"
To bad in the books. After Harry saw his worst memory He attacked Harry. Shaking him, throwing him to the floor, and throwing a large jar at his head shattering it on the wall as Harrys back was turned to him. And FULLY STOPED those life saving lessons
The thing is that Snape is teaching a dangerous subject at a dangerous place. Yeah he is harsh but barring some acts of sabotage no one ever gets hurt during his classes, adn what we've see from Hogwarts is that that's not a given. Hagrid even says it, "It's alwyas been risky sending your kids to Hogwarts". Also rememebr the wizarding world is stuck in the 19th centuery socially.
@@ShatoraDragondore On the other hand it only happened when Haryr seriosuly and intentionally invaded his privacy. In the books he was pleased when Harry did the protego thing.
To rephrase what you said, how people with many terrible traits can still end up doing good/great things. ..It makes me wonder how many of the people we praise for their contributions to society were/are actually terrible people. ...Probably a lot.
@@Commenter339 Yea a lot of people are really flawed. J. K.'s characters all feel so real because they are all flawed. Plenty of them screw up majorly.
What I always struggle with is that Snape never valued Harry as an individual, as his own person. He protects him for Lilly´s sake and he despises him for James´ sake, but none of his behaviour has anything to do with who Harry is. it´s all about his parents.
THIS! This is one of my biggest points about Snape that most people miss. He can't secretly care about Harry, he barely knows Harry. All he sees is James and Lily when he looks at him so everything between them is really about those two.
Which is another (I'd say planned) level of tragedy of the character (or characters). Can you imagine the world where Snape met and got to know Harry Potter, not simply "the child of James and Lily"?
Snape does shoot himself in the foot in the first scene, because Harry could have been his best student. The one year where Harry actually cared about potions and used Snape's instructions, he was better at potions than Hermoine. Harry was also at a stage of his life where he needed/wanted a father figure, especially in this strange new world of wizardry. If Snape put his bitterness aside, Harry could have ended up like a son to him.
Honestly JK Rowling is the one who shot herself in the foot, because that would have been a fantastic redemption story for Snape. I always connected with his character because of his troubled upbringing, but making him this petty simp who could never get over lily and his hatred for James made it hard to root for him at all. If he could have just looked at harry and seen the part of him that was lily, and then chose to nurture and care for him in her place regardless of his blood ties to james, that could have been his true redemption. Not just protecting Harry because of some obligation born from guilt, but truly coming to care for him and protecting him for that reason. That would have justified the ending where harry named one of his children after severus IMO.
She also shot herself in the by having Harry find out all the drama after Snape dies. Harry should have been shown sooner and we could have had Snape and Harry genuinely find equal footing with each other@@starlette7820
To be fair to Hermione, Harry was only better than her because he was using Snape’s instructions AND she wasn’t. If they’d both been using his instructions, she still would’ve been better but he also still would’ve been fantastic. Aside from that minor point, you said it perfectly
I don’t think there’s any ground to call Snape a simp - she asked him to leave the Dark Arts and he wouldn’t do it. If he was a Death Eater while he still knew her, you don’t get to call him that. To be clear, Snape is (tied with Hermione and Newt) my favorite Harry Potter character of all time, but I feel like a lot of people forget that Lily’s death changed him DRASTICALLY. For me, he was a villain up until passing along the Prophecy to the Dark Lord, but the moment he finds out she’ll die and turns to Dumbledore that’s where he becomes a hero. And while I don’t think he’s a Saint, I will stand behind him 100% being a hero. Also for the record, I do think that Lily could have saved him from the Dark Arts if she had just given it a little bit more effort, but as soon as she started considering James I think Snape was lost (until her death)
You laughed at the moment where Ron said, "she's right you know," but that is one of my least favorite parts because in the book, Ron defends Hermione asking Snape why he would ask something he didn't want to know and ends up getting detention for it. I hated this change in the movie.
Snape seems to flip between bullying Harry, Neville, and Hermione. Harry is one end of the spectrum as Snape created a narrative where he believes Harry is a potential narcissistic, overinflated bully (to reflect the father) and Neville is on a completely opposing end of the spectrum. The film and book show him as meek, awkward, stammering, and subjected to bullying. I think snape sees himself in Neville and despises that “weakness” and propensity for victimhood/trauma that he shares with Neville. I took it as a show of self hatred in which he projects his despised attributes onto Neville and brings attention to his “weakness” or lack of power.
@@19Rena96 actually, there isn't any particular mention of bullying anyone other than these three. Taking house points yes but not bullying. Still doesn't make it right, but all the pointed instances of bullying are these three. I find his meanness to Hermione to be the worst of it honestly. For the other two, we can say he had issues. Harry reminded him of his parents, specially James. Neville was a reminder that if Voldemort had gone after his parents, Lily would be alive. I don't think even the most deep-seated issues excuse his behaviour towards Hermione though.
Also something interesting I learned a while back reflecting on the books, but all of the questions Severus asks Harry in their first potions lesson are -not- first year student questions. Harry didn't learn about bezoars properly until several years later, and the Draught of Living Death is taught in Sixth year, wile the Wolfsbane potion, the main use for asphodel/monkshood/aconite in the series is also another NEWT level potion. Snape knew Harry would never be able to answer those questions, and the only reason Hermione knew is that she was so studious that she had literally read several years ahead of the material.
I am not much familiar with the Harry Potter books and Movies but this is kinda what I thought about the questions he asks Harry on his 1st potions class in the movies- "How the hell I he supposed to know that, this is literally his 1st class!" I guess I wasn't the only one to think so.
It’s not even “keeping him around”. Snape never wanted to be a teacher, he never wanted to be back at Hogwarts. Dumbledore placed him there the moment he got his hooks into him. The only reason Snape wanted the Defense Against the Dark Arts position every year was because he knew it was cursed. Dumbledore not only forced him to be there, he condoned his actions every step of the way by keeping him in that position and doing nothing to prevent or punish his actions.
My school allowed racist bullies to beat me bloodily, were aware that my parents were physically and psychologically abusive and willingly ignored any cry for help or were too lazy to properly do their job. So no, it's not just "old-time" schools.
Or the way he was grooming Harry from day one to die? Or letting children fight his battles. All the other things that made me hate Dumbledore as an adult.
@@natashaw.7315 although now that I think about it. Why did Dumbledore even have him teach in the first place? Why not have him on in a research role? Cause obviously he’s miserable teaching
@@madee024 a lot is also because the movies cut out a lot of horrible moments. Like in 4th year when Hermione gets hit with the tooth growing spell and Snapes just like “I don’t see a difference” and legit sends Hermione running in tears
You mentioned that Alan Rickman's pauses "shouldn't work" when, actually, I'd say those kinds of pauses always work in performances (or even public speaking). 'Cause when you take a pause at the right place, the listener instinctively leans forward. You're creating a kind of suspense and gravitas to what you're going to say next. Basically, silence in the right place can command attention. The trick is just choosing the right moments and Alan Rickman was a master at doing just that.
Agreed, I'd even go so far as to say that if you can't master the timely silences then you're not a good actor!! The speedy pacing of current film/tv is the most forgiving style for bad acting, which is why there is so much crap made these days!
Yes, and no. If a person with no authority or gravitas pauses, even at the right moment, then you just think, "This fool can't remember what he was about to say." You MUST have the authority or the gravitas, or both (Alan Rickman seemed to always have both), or it won't work. Example: William Shatner was often mocked for his pauses. He did not have enough gravitas.
Exactly! More than that Snape NEVER wanted to be a teacher in the first place! He doesn't like this job, isn't qualified to teach, and is in serious need of therapy, but Dulbledore still keeps him around young kids for some reasons! I am a big Snape fan but wtf Albus
Oh, there is so much more to being a teacher. I've been lucky enough to have a couple of amazing teachers in my life. They've changed my world. But it's also through them that I know I'm not cut out to do that job. Snape should have gone to the countryside and written a new textbook on potion-making.
@@malyaboi8780 Snape wanted to be a teacher, he just wanted the DADA job, but Dumbledore refused to let him have it because that post is cursed by Voldemort when Dumbledore refused Tom Riddle the post way back when.
This is so true! I had a math teach my freshmen year of high school who was very smart, he had just graduated with a math degree with like a 4.2 gpa, but he was TERRIBLE at teaching. He would under explain because he thought everybody could keep up, and then be confused when only a handful of us could, and then he would try to fix it by over explaining until everybody was lost. Poor guy got bullied by freshmen lol
I want to point out regarding Snape's opening scene - although this applies to the film only, not the book - when Snape calls out Harry for thinking he's better than everyone because he's not paying attention, the thing Harry's scribbling down is Snape's own words: He's doing what the majority of teachers wants their students to do, make notes. This is something you guys touch on, but I want to expand on this a bit. The implication of this is that Harry had an interest in potions when he entered - this is the first and only time we see Harry willingly start making notes in a class - but that Snape killed that interest by virtue of being an unpleasant teacher, needlessly embarrassing him in front of the class and then proceeding to bully him for the rest of his student life. This is something that's exemplified in half blood prince: When Harry has a good teacher - ironically, still Snape in the form of his instructions in Harry's borrowed potions book - Harry flourishes in potions, and even proves that he had been listening in that very first potions lesson with Snape when he uses a bezoar to save Ron's life.
I really wanted to learn German, but I had a hard time understanding it. Nonetheless, I paid attention and did my best. My teacher singled me out after a while because I understood it less than others and completely killed my enthousiasm for learning German for the next 4 years. Those kind of teachers can fuck themselves.
Wonderfully put. I had noticed Harry was scribbling down what Snape was saying, but I doubt it was so in the books. I will check. Harry was always too eager not to stay still for too long and concentrate for too long, too act now, think later to excel at school, although a bright kid. So it wasn't just Snape being a bad teacher, which he was, of course, that made Harry a mediocre student most of the time. It was himself. But considering this scene, it was very well put. Oh, and these kids actually made a polly juice potion in second grade by themselves, so they weren't that bad at potions after all, yeah.
Expanding further on that, the reason Hermione did so poorly in Slughorn’s class as opposed to when Snape was teaching is because Snape never used the book. He always put the instructions on the blackboard which most likely contained his alterations.
Snape is the antithesis of the line from Wreck It Ralph, "Just because you're a Badguy, doesn't mean you're a bag guy". Just because he was on the side of the good guys and did very heroic things, doesn't excuse the fact he was a bad person
He's a good person when he asks Dumbledore to save Lily and from that point on he's basically undercover as a bad person because he HAS to do that to fool his fellow Death Eaters and, eventually, Voldemort
@@AlexBrantZawadzki ONLY Lily, in the books. "Please let my competition and an innocent baby die, but save the girl I want." Selfishness, not kindness or goodness
@@AlexBrantZawadzki No he isn't. He didn't ask Dumbledore to save Lily and Voldemort to spare her for her sake, he did it for his sake. He is possessed by his resentments and his jealousies, if he could have made Lily his even if it would have made Lily miserable, he would have done so. The reason he can go undercover with the Death Eaters and even fool Voldemort himself is that he fits right in. The only act he has to put on is hide that he wants revenge on Voldemort for killing Lily, and he can do that by simply hiding it under how much he hates and despises everyone on Dumbledore's side.
The reason that style of delivery works for Alan Rickman is down to his command of the scenes he is in. Everything has absolute intent, and is deliberate. When you are fully truthful in your performance, and fully embody your character in the moment, you can draw your audience into your performance and command their attention.
Yeah, it's not that intentions are irrelevant, but it's mostly an internal thing of "are we the baddies" sorta stuff. It just has no influence on how you should react when things go sideways. You meant well? Ah well, pity. Just roll your sleeves anyway, cause you're still going to work your ass off fixing things.
THIS. Literally almost no one actually means to cause harm. Most people are trying to do what they think is the right thing. That doesn't actually mean that no one got hurt. If you hurt someone, your intentions do not matter as much as the fact that someone got hurt. And I'm tired of people trying to justify it that way.
10:50 in the books ron says something like "why'd he ask if he didn't want an answer" rather than "he's got a point though" and like urgh- such character assassination in the movies of him.
@Alex Thornton I think that's just the script writer or the director showing bias against Ron. Another example would be Ron standing on a broken legs, telling Sirius that he would have to kill him to get to Harry. In the movie Hermione got this line while Ron was cowering in the corner. What's there to be streamlined? They just switched the line from Ron to Hermione. Character assassination is absolutely right.
The scriptwriter is on record as saying his favourite character was Hermione, girl power, etc. It’s a bit tragic that the scriptwriter felt the need to make Ron look like a dunce in order to elevate Hermione. He could have kept Ron’s character intact while emphasising Hermione’s already obvious strengths. So many people I know have watched the movies without reading the books and assumed Ron is just there for the laughs. Kind of sad really.
@Alex Thornton I really don't think so, I think had he said what he did in the books, he would have had just further emphasised Snape's cruelty, I think it would even have been better for him not to say anything than that. There are so many of Ron's strengths and triumphs given to Hermione that it turns his complex and witty, if a little rash and jealous character into a one dimensional dunce designed only for entertainment. Another great example is in the devil's snare scene where Ron, Hermione and Harry all play equally important roles in surviving, while in the movies Ron is saved by Hermione and plays it off as luck. Again in the seventh book / lest film where they visit xenophilius and Hermione is the one who tells Harry about the tales of Beedle the Bard instead of Ron, when in the books, Hermione is just as clueless to the kids fairy tales as Harry, Ron's character is the group's link to the wizarding world and wizarding culture, as well as, aside from a couple of notible examples, always by Harry's side and is just as much important for Harry and Hermione to stay friends as Harry is for Hermione and Ron to saty freinds and Hermione is for Harry and Ron to stay friends. In the books they all support each other, with each of them being a corner of a pyramid, where if you take one away the other two fall, whereas the books make it so that Harry and Hermione are besties and Ron is mostly just there for the laughs but dosnet actually contribute anything to the friendship
This is my issue with the movies in general, I don't care about changing or skipping things or events but changing the personality of the characters makes me don't want to see the movies.
What I love is Harry’s answer to asphodel and wormwood. He doesn’t remember his mother, and he has no bitterness in her death, just grief. “I don’t know sir.”
Y’all should definitely do one on the Lion the witch and the wardrobe, the family dynamics of the children and the typification with Aslan and the witch, ugh… so good
I mean, the entire Narnia series is just fantasy retellings of various Biblical stories and events, and since Aslan is Narnian Jesus, and the Witch is basically Satan, of course they're going to be typified.
@@LevonBlueoak for sure. Though the way they portrayed them is different. Aslan isn't just some soft Jesus, he is also ferocious. And the witch is beautiful and actually tempting. Yea it's a typification, but it's a worthy one to discuss, because of how it affects the kids. I totally agree though.
I had binge read all the books knowing that Snape was a "good guy" in the end and I had expected to see some misunderstood goodness but as I read I'm like This bullying is so vile and absolutely unnecessary! He is actually a bad person but on the good side but doesnt miss opportunities to be awful
I think having an episode on Dumbledore! "Raising him like a pig for slaughter". A former bigot who sees the lights. Taking control of trauma vs. Over control. SO MUCH TO UNPACK
@@egekazkayas8968 Well bigot maybe not but close friend of one and murderer. Well he'd probably be convicted of second degree or manslaughter but still. And like they say book Dumbledore let Snape do all his child abuse and let it go on, and he kind of did raise Harry for slaughter. He couldn't be sure he would survive and Harry didn't really have choice. He couldn't just have decided to have a different career than fighting Voldy.
That is a think I taked about with my mom this week (not about Harry Potter or this scene) but how a lot of teachers don't understand some people has different ways or learning. If we use this scene, for exemple, someone can learn more looking at the professor and pay attention to what is said, cause can't pay attention and write at the same time. While others actually learn better by taking notes while the professor speaks. He is not looking at the professor, but is fully paying attention. But of course, Snape is being a full intentional asshole here. Doesn't matter if Harry took notes or not. Maybe if was any other student, he wouldn't care.
In my AU where Harry is a Slytherin and friends with Malfoy, Malfoy actually points out Harry is paying attention as he has written everything down verbatim. Another Slytherin friend, a fellow half blood says "A muggle method sure but an effective one."
Yeah let's not forget that Neville's boggart was LITERALLY SNAPE. I can appreciate a nuanced/layered character, but Snape was in a position of power and actively chose to bully children. And that's just the tip of the iceberg.
Yes, also, the only reason he switched to Dumbledore's side was because of Lily. If Neville's mother was the one killed he wouldn't have double crossed Voldemort
@@nicokrasnow1851 YES! He would have willingly stayed a Death Eater his whole life if it was Neville's mother. Just this is enough to make him a villain, you don't accidently fall into an extremist/racist organisation because your crush doesn't tolerate you being intolerent against people like her.
@@alex0589 it's not "being afraid", like the boggart is supposed to be the thing that you fear THE MOST, the thing that torments you, Neville was more scared of his teacher than the person who tortured his parents to the point of literal insanity; like think about how fucking scared of snape he would have had to be.
@@liltatih I believe he's talking to the Onion Knight, who also experienced that particular philosophy of Stannis. Season 2, I think. He snuck into his castle while it was under siege and smuggled in food. Stannis knighted him for it... and also chopped off some fingers because he was still a pirate and smuggler.
I think the slow speech is a power play. He takes up more of the time the way some people spread out to physically take up more space as a way to display "dominance".
"Intentions count for something but Intentions dont matter nearly as much as results" -Cinema Therapy This is up there as an AMAZING quotes THANK YOU GUYS!
I wish someone could tell this to all the people who did nothing about my abuse, but then said later that the were "sorry" that I was abused. *Their words mean nothing.*
I vehemently disagree that the *results* make someone a bad person though. By that logic, every selfish, greedy choice that had unexpected positive results makes the chooser a good person, and vice versa, which I doubt anyone would agree on. It is the actual choice made (or lack thereof), that dictates the morality of the individual. Context is everything and causality is amoral. Only the decisions themselves have morality.
@@dustmystic291 intent does matter, however results play a part as well. The best way I've found to explain this I learned in a Discrete Math course, of all places. Intent is necessary, but not sufficient. Results are necessary, but not sufficient. Intent and results together are necessary and sufficient. Good intent is necessary, otherwise the person just really sucks at hurting people - and with enough practice, they're going to get better at it. Good results are necessary because no matter what was intended, hurting someone is hurting someone.
@@MorgenPeschke I guess the issue I take is more with the word "results". Results aren't always within our sole control. Our choices however, are and they are our chance to influence the result as much as we can. If my actions cause hurt despite my intentions or expectations, I am not suddenly evil, I made a mistake. A misjudgment is not a sin. What makes me a bad or good person is the additional choice afterwards - Do I fix it? Do I learn? The result is amoral. The choice is moral. For example, Snape chooses to bully kids, and that is what makes him a bad person. If Harry had become stronger and more resilient as a direct result, that is a credit to Harry not to Snape. Snape is still a bad person, even if that bad choice had a unexpected good outcome.
When Jono was asking Alan's thoughts about book to movie adaptations, I thought they were going to tackle the fact that the scene they had just played painted both characters in a totally different light. In the movie, Harry just defended himself (you know, the thing he was there to learn), while in the books, Snape had set those memories aside in the Pensive specifically so this WOULDN'T happen, but he got called away and Harry snooped and saw Snape's memories. So Snape's reaction of getting angry and putting an end to Harry's lessons makes a lot more sense (even if it's a lot less restrained).
Yeah, in the book Snape’s guard is down when Harry manages to invade his mind and he praises him for an effective move, the memories he sees are not important to Snape. The memory Harry sees in the Pensieve however is Snape’s worst memory, not mainly because James bullied him but because that’s when his friendship with Lily ended. It’s also clear that he has hidden other memories that it would be downright dangerous for Voldy to see if he invaded Harry’s mind, like when Snape agrees to protect Harry. He shares them all willingly with Harry at the end, even his worst memory and the aftermath of it.
Also in the movies, the bullying is very one sided where in the book it's a little more complicated of a situation. James was definitely a bully, but Snape could give just as well as he got, to the point of potentially causing lethal harm, and by 5th year had pretty much joined a hate group. He was a literal death eater. People like to gloss over these intricacies because James is too dead to get his perspective on it.
@@marystombaugh2282 are you serious? it was always one-sided, snape couldn't defend himself against 4 thugs and creating hexes to BE SAFE is just a distress signal, it's the typical example of how shootings happen or why kids join gangs
He's not a villain; he's an antihero. He's an emotionally abusive jerk, but he's not a villain. And I ugly cried the first time I read his death scene.
I would say the book version of Snape is more of Anti-Villain than hero. He’s does a lot of heroic deeds in the story but he’s still has the presence of an antagonistic evil character even towards the very end of the series. Movie Snape however feels more like an Anti-Hero.
@@Jackal_El_Lobo34 in the books he hardly tolerates people. Even Dumbledore. He would have betrayed Dumbledore happily if it were not for Harry. This is why Harry never gets why Snape is even around them, he hates everyone so its easy for him to betray everyone. He would make so many snide remarks, it was hilarious. He was hero in shadows, but such a pain in ass to be around.
@dflaming1371 i think it was purposefully done. Everyone doubted him so much except Voldy , which I found hilarious. Was it because he was too stupid or bcuz he was just too egotistical that he thought no one could betray him? Everyone doubting him (both sides) made him both the perfect double agent but also the obvious one. I still dont understand why Harry would name his child Severus. Honoring him as head master or writing an article on him should have been enough.
@@anushrees4981 For me, I can buy Voldemort’s character being blind to Snape’s betrayal due to Narcissism in both the book and film version. Now as to why Harry named his son after Snape in the book, I’m just as confused. I mean yes. He did things that were good in the longterm but when you start to analyze his motivation as to why he did it, you realize that his end goal really was just to stick it Voldemort for killing Lilly and that he never really had affection for Harry (Something he made clear to Dumbledore when he asked if he grew to care for him). So yeah. Don’t really get why Harry in the book chose to honor him that way.
Personally what I liked about Snape is he's both. Yes what he did for Harry in honor of his mother was brave and heroic ....But he still was going to kill a 13 year old boys toad if he failed to make a potion correctly and alienated Lily by calling her a slur
I honestly think is important to make a difference between teen snape and adult snape. Because being cruel to neville and the other kids as an adult was a conscious decision, and as much as is explainable, is still horrible. Calling lily that slur in fith year was a result of the ongoing brainwashing and manipulation that the "future death eater club" was already doing to him, and he regretted it the moment he said it, because tbh i don't think he ever believed in blood supremacy, he was just a lonely ,humiliated and angry kid that was very easy for the death eater to manipulate with a few " we respect you, we value you" and shits like that.
@@nessyness5447 I think he did truly believe in it, in as much as any teen that falls in with bad company can. You believe in it to be a part of the group, and to feel like you are part of something greater. It's also important to remember that he grew up in a home that was clearly not the best environment - it's been speculated that his muggle father may even have been abusive. What I'm getting at, is that if he'd gotten some kind of support sooner - maybe through a healthy rolemodel - teen snape could have chosen a very different path, and probably mended his bond with Lily.
Don't forget he betrayed Harry to Lord Moldyface when Harry was just a babe. He told his Dark Lord about a prophecy and all he wanted was that Tom spare Lily's life. Dumbledore called him despicable for this and he was right. 0:44 I don't care that he mourned over Lily's corpse not when he was inadvertently responsible for her death. He bullies Harry because of his dead father yet tells Dumbledore he protected Harry because of his dead mother. This walking douchenozzle was just obsessed with death, wasn't he? No wonder he joined Riddle's aptly named gang of thugs.
I'd love to see one of these on Draco Malfoy eventually, going over book vs. movie differences, as well. they changed stuff in the movies, and i feel it actually removed a level of sympathy one could have had for him otherwise, the biggest example i can think of being how ... his concern when confronting dumbledore was that he'd kill his family, but in movies, it was "he'll kill me"
Yes. To quote the author: the one forgiving thing about the Malfoys is the love they have for each other, and Narcissa's love for Draco is part of what saves Harry, it is all tied together. (Unlike Bellatrix who would happily and with pride sacrifice any of the children she does not have for Voldemort.)
but he also was, like, WAY more of an as*hole in the books? Tom Felton is like 80% of why girls love Draco. Book Draco is so much ruder. I agree Malfoys love for eachother is beautiful, but that doesn't make a villain better, bad people can still care for their loved ones. I believe the problem with Draco is just the way he was raised, with enough work and therapy he would have been a decent guy. and it actually happened - adult Harry and Draco are on good terms, Draco changed.
10:57, in the book, Ron, who basically thought the same thing, actually doesn’t respond by saying it but by calling out Snape for punishing Hermione for answering a question he asked
@@dyutibasu4541 I actually don’t agree with that statement. I agree that they did this individual Ron scene wrong. I don’t think that the movies by and large were unfair to Ron
When he barges into a room to take charge of the scene, he's like Batman. Both are dark, brooding, authoritative, and scary as hell. In the books, he's described as an overgrown bat.
Snape is not a good person, but such an amazing and complex character. You can feel the pain he is in, even if it doesn't excuse his behavior. He will always be my favorite.
I love his character he is a tragic man who suffered deeply the pain of losing the only woman he ever loved the pain of bullying and protecting Harry potter on Dumbledore's orders. Severus Snape is not a monster but a tragic victim. I'm a woman and i love him not matter what. all his flaws.
Villain therapy for sure: he still fell to the extremism of Voldy and didn’t just bully the one kid, it was multiple. He was Neville’s greatest fear. BUT I really like the character and his story, and can sympathize for sure. But it still doesn’t excuse anything he did, plenty of people also experience that and can still be truly good people
Two characters I love in the book are Snape and Dumbledore. Simply because they're so divisive and twisted. Snape is a bully and a hero. Dumbledore is a great man who left a child with abusive guardians and used his school as a microcosm of the war. They were both drawn in by Fascist ideologies and people because of their loneliness, lack of companionship and complicated family situations. While Dumbledore moves towards doing good for the greater masses as the ultimate Gryffindor, Snape only turns to the path of goodness for the sake of one person like the consummate Slytherin. The similarities and differences make for a very interesting study.
If it wasn't Lily (not even the Potters because at first he doesn't care if James and Harry die) but the Longbottoms that the prophecy was about, he wouldn't have changed sides and he'd still be a Death Eater. He's a villain for sure.
10:51 I'm actually sad that they rid Ron half of his character, he stood up for Hermione in the books. Yeah, he usually calls her an *insufferable know-it-all* in different terms all the time, but when others try to humiliate her, he's not letting that go. Plus when they were stuck in the shrieking shack and Harry was 'threatened' Ron said they'd have to go through him first and he has a BROKEN LEG, uncomfortable with the pain and a potential middle aged man for a pet...
Could we get a Lit Therapy for Ron? Psychology of Hero for book Ron, dealing with his insecurities, supporting his friends, growing out of his nastier tendencies.
The *"he's got a point, you know"* line really should never have made it into the script, let alone the final cut. Especially when Emma Watson portrayed Hermione on the verge of tears in that scene, true to the book. A simple *"You asked a question and she gave you the answer." / "SILENCE, WEASLEY!"* would have taken just as much time and demonstrated Ron's loyalty, particularly as Buckbeak's appeal had to be cut. I actually disagree with a lot of fans on the Ron-standing-on-a-broken-leg moment. Ron's not able to jump in front of Harry, and having Hermione do this quickly keeps the pace and intensity of the scene up before Harry considers killing Sirius. Before Harry and Hermione reach the Shack, though, they could have heard Ron beg them to run, leave him, and save themselves. That would have shown Ron's selflessness (he always thinks Harry and Hermione are more important than him) without having him stand up.
i love the vibe of "nobody calls them an insufferable know-it-all but me". in a friendly way, of course, obviously that sort of thing can spiral out of control in the wrong hands
With Snape, I'm in the "He bullies children, he a villian" camp, but I love how Alan Rickman portrayed him. He did a phenomenal job. I think there's a difference between being a villian and being evil. Snape is a villian, but he's not completely evil. He does do a lot of good things, and has some redeemable qualities. I also think that one reason why fans argue over whether or not he's a villian is because he's not as bad or as obvious of a villian as Voldemort, Bellatrix or Umbridge.
Book-Snape and Movie-Snape is also a big difference, but it's just all in the small things. In the books Snape is clearly biased and crass, where you pull the line of bullying is personal, but he's nasty towards Harry, Neville and Hermoine, he even has a go at Crabbe and Goyle at some point if I recall correctly. He actively tries to out Lupin as well, which could ruin his life, just to get back at him. There's a big difference between Sirius and Snape not hiding their hate towards each other, but he's never put Sirius' life (or quality there off) in danger. Again if I recall correctly, only the books mentioned Snape making sure everyone knew once he was outed, where-as movies it's just something Hermoine figured out and then all events made Lupin decide it was best to resign. Snape's further involvement was ignored. Having to leave out all these small details, whilst keeping the redemption as strong as ever, makes movie-Snape much more redeemable. On top of that movies humanise characters much more, we see 'one of us' whom we wish to relate to, understand, and see all the bodylanguage, facial expressions, rather than just this mean guy that looks like a bat.
@@esmee6308 I think someone needs to revisit the books. "There's a big difference between Sirius and Snape not hiding their hate towards each other, but he's never put Sirius' life (or quality there off) in danger." Sirius "pranked" Snape into leading him to the shrieking shack to get killed by Lupin (sure you can argue that he was a teenager and thought it would only scare him but we can assume that there was a high possiblity of him getting attacked by Lupin). So Sirius has put Snape's life in danger before. I don't think he's a villain, I think he's what people call "Anti-hero". He's horrible, annoying, etc but he has redeeming qualities, even if few, to make you "like" him (very careful with the word like haha). Regardless you always gotta take Movie adaptations with a grain of salt. Like many have said there're big differences with book Snape & movie Snape. Same happens with Hermione/Ron. I think that, when talking about characters, we should always go back to the "source" (in this case the books). While the books have a lot of plot holes and is not the "greatest" writing there's still much more flexibility and appreciation of character's development/growth, and a bigger understanding of them.
@@GuildElites Maybe you should read a post properly before putting down an statement that was never said and then argueing how it's wrong. Aside from me referring to Snape in the whole post, how can you read "he's never put *Sirius' life* in danger" as Sirius never put Snape's life in danger... His name is literally in there, like either you read Sirius never put Sirius' life in danger or Snape never put Sirius' life in danger. Also context? The whole post and video is about Snape... Sirius' actions hardly matter to whether Snape is a villain or not since Snape, well, not to be a broken record, didn't put Sirius' life in danger. (With the sidenote: After Pettigrew's secret came out and not everyone thought Sirius was a serial killer trying to murder Harry.)
@@esmee6308 Well English is not my first language (if you wanna make fun of me because of it go ahead) and as you pointed out I read that as Snape never being put in danger by Sirius. While I do stand corrected (cause I misread something) I will add to your concept of "Why do Sirius's actions matter?" you also replied yourself with "Also context?", it would matter (if you would've wrote what I misread) because it gives context and argumentation to Snape's behaviour later on, it doesn't exonerate him tho. And just in case, I don't like Snape (that's why I was careful with the concept of liking) but I don't hate him either and like I said I think he's more of a "anti-hero" than "villain". P.S: I would assume we're also leaving aside his (Snape) interaction in the shrieking shack when he had Sirius at wand point and, although everyone in that room was trying to explain to him Sirius wasn't guilty of the charges, he wanted to take him to the dementors to have him kissed. Also the scene in Grimmauld place's kitchen when they were both pointing wands at each other.
@@GuildElites English is my second language as well, I feel your pain. Your English is really good though, your first line irked me a bit but I shoulda just accepted it as a misread. And you are right that Snape acted spiteful in the end of the third book, dismissing a whole room and wanting to give Sirius up to the dementors. They're also a good example of 'everyone's the hero in their own story' except in this case, it's Harry's. Snape is immediately described negatively, greasy hair, bat-like, mean to Harry and soon a downright bully. (And suspected main-villain.) Sirius, on the other hand, gets described positively, despite having a bit of a nasty streak. And not just in childhood, like how he hit Snape's head a few times whilst transporting him back to the castle or how he treats Kreacher. Which is ironic since movies tend to take such bias away (we see actions, and put our own feelings to it, not Harry's) but movies also had to cut quite a few bits fit a book in under 2 hours. Which somehow to me makes Snape more of an anti-hero, where-as in the books I'm still kinda... damn son, not a villain but oof, what a bunch of life choices.
"Why do these pauses work with Alan Rickman?" At this point I recommend reading up on theatre practitioner Harold Pinter, and his use of the "pregnant pause" in his works. It's not waiting, it's isolating the listener, and seizing control of the conversation.
I always thought it was normal for line delivery and a common device in public speaking, I think. I guess maybe a lot of movies now don't do it (it depends on the character/situation)?
@@brxzbze it depends. Some of it comes from the actors background. More British actors come through theater, which has not emphasis on presence. Many more American actors come through TV and commercials, which tend to be less about presence, and more about pace. Modern movie dialogue is SO much faster than it used to be.
Eh, I would say that joining terorist organisation set on muder and torture of specific group of people (which you leave only because your school crush was target, not because you realized that this is wrong), and then spending years bullying childern in a position of authority IS classified as vilian.
@@veronikamajerova4564 Still doesn’t make sense why Neville would fear him more than the uncle who threw him out the window as a toddler. Maybe Boggarts don’t really mean THAT kind of greatest fear. After all, Harry was wounded way way more by Voldemort, and his Boggart is a Dementor.
I agree with Alan on this one. He is a villain and I will die on this hill. He bullies more than just Harry. Neville is terrified of him. He asks for an answer to a question and when Hermione answers it he berates her. Even before Harry starts he is told Snape favors the slytherins. As far as his Lilly obsession goes it is a full obsession and he just couldn’t take it that she didn’t see him in that way. Im not saying James wasn’t a bully in the beginning but he grew out of it. Snape held a grudge for a second generation.
He is not a villain; he is not a savior. He is a Bully. And also a Hero. He's complicated. There are things about him which absolutely do deserve to be condemned. He has traits which are legitimately admirable. Both parts of Snape are real, and neither side cancels the other one out. - His fixation on Lily is disappointing as a character-reveal, but I can believe there was some genuine love in it (as well as, yes, a whole huge mountain of unhealthy obsession).
@@StoryMing I can agree with most of that. I feel like he was a complicated character. I also feel like he was a bully. I know he did some heroic things but I don’t feel like they make up for his bad qualities.
@@occheermommy No, they do not make up for it. Just as neither do the horrible things he did cancel out his heroism. He is a bully- and yes, he should absolutely be held fully accountable for that, irrespective of his other actions. -But that does not solely define him. It is only half the story; either side of which is true, but incomplete without the other half. He is not a good guy who simply made a few bad decisions, or a bad guy who also happened to do some good things. He doesn’t fit in simple boxes of good or evil (although many of his actions do). He is morally gray- In my opinion- and deserving of both praise AND censure. Snape never shows that he even recognizes, much less regrets, the wrongfulness of his treatment of his students (and others), which would be the bare minimum required before we could even begin to discuss or debate about “letting him off”. Moreover, he committed himself to Dumbledore’s cause out of a sense of duty to atone for a terrible mistake, and an implacable enmity towards the one who murdered the woman he loved; NOT out of any real concern for the safety of his fellow Wizards and Witches, or Muggle neighbors. He is not someone I would ever remotely wish to have as a friend, a teacher, or a romantic partner. Nonetheless, he put his own life on the line, and ultimately sacrificed himself, in order to do the right thing.
I clicked so fast!! Snape has always inspired a dialectic discussion. His affection for Lily has never been black and white and I've wavered between seeing it as an unhealthy obsession vs tragic love. while I'd been interested in Benedict Cumberbatch as Snape.. Alan Rickman brought such nuance to the character I was allover that🥰😍.
I would say it had a bit of both. He loved lily ( either truly romantically or actually platonic) , and she was the first person who cared about him and his only real friend so that affected him. And when he lost lily as a friend and knew it was his fault, and worse, when she died and he knew he had a part on it, he just was never able to get over it. And that's when it became truly unhealthy, he was not able to deal with the loss properly and stayed stuck on the past. Which actually, is basically the same that happened to sirius with james, he didn't process the loss properly and stayed stuck on the past. Is just that sirius had a lot less guilt and self hate to deal with.
@@nessyness5447 I concur with your points 👏👏👏. The movie Snape was well crafted to reflect grey areas of humanity from trauma at home to learning to love and sacrifice.
Mooning over people from afar is so over-rated and carries a kind of silliness with it. It doesn't work. It didn't work for Cyrano de Bergerac, it didn't work for Dr. Horrible and it didn't work for Snape. It may seem so very romantic but it's classic avoidance coupled with a sense of martyrdom.
@@QueenBoadicea You can accept that what someone does is wrong or stupid and still have sympathy for them, just as you can identify with someone's suffering without supporting how they dealt with it.
Hey, fun fact about Jaws the book: the author didn't know a thing about sharks (shocker) and did no research whatsoever. But years down the line, particularly after the movie accidentally created a hatred for sharks (I think), he became a shark conservationist
Legendary move, he accidentally caused the demonization of animals that don’t understand what it means to “harm” or “do it on purpose” sharks can’t see very well and the only reason why they attack swimmers is because they feel and see a turtle or a seal instead of a human being. They also don’t like the taste of human meat.
@@thomaswolfe7845 Someone will probably at some point write a book or make a movie about some really evil dolphins. But I think they'll always be liked. They are very similar to us, we also have the intelligence and capacity for evil that dolphins do unlike sharks that have the inner life of a TV remote. And towards humans generally they behave well, they're monsters towards "lesser life forms" another "human trait". I think how similar they are to us is an excellent study in general traits of high intelligence and may offer clues towards exobiology. Though much more closely related to us the capacity for evil exists in all intelligent animals with self awareness with Bonobos being an interesting anomaly considering how evil chimps can be (edit now that I think about it elephants too). Not just towards eachother but also "lesser life forms". They basically have parties where they torture monkey's to death while making the chimp equivalent sound to laughter and joy. Perhaps Bonobos show the answer to controlling evil. By keeping primal urges satisfied at all times. Basically the primate equivalent of sex, drugs and rock.
I think it's says a lot about a person if you are their worsr fear. Not Bellatrix Lestrange was Neville's worst fear but a teacher he saw EVERY DAY. Neville is very brave!
Literally everything likeable about Snape came from Rickman, 100%. And I know why, it's because Rowling told him about his love for Lily from the beginning, and it was an INCREDIBLE interpretation. The one thing that was better than the books. Because Alan Rickman was an acting genius. Same goes for McGonnagal and Maggie Smith, but I like the book McGonnagal too.
IIRC Rickman actualy fought some of the "meaner" things the writers/directors wanted him to do as Snape. Because he knew what Rowlling had planned in advance.
I think Snape stands out as a character for me because I feel a great deal of sympathy not for the man he was, *but for the man he could have been* . He had the potential to grow past the years of abuse and bullying that came not just from his home life, but from his classmates as well. The talent he possessed for potions and spellcraft was incredible and could have done so much for so many if he had shared it. But then he turned inward, and cut himself off from perhaps the one truly supportive person in his life, and it all fell apart from there. We see in the books that he regretted what he did and said to Lily, but when he finally apologized, it was too little, too late. From there, his ambition shifted to bitterness and spite. He had already been hanging with a bad crowd, but he no longer has anyone to try to pull him up. I imagine that at this point, if he still had feelings for Lily, it would have been more on the side of obsession; a desire to have the thing he can no longer obtain. And then she dies. She's gone. Snape cast in his lot with Voldemort, and he killed Lilly. It was at this point that Snape could have had a true redemption arc, leaving the years of bitterness behind and fighting for something that he cared for. But he only turned part-way around, and instead of fighting Voldemort because it was right and using his feelings for Lily as motivation to keep going, he held onto that bitterness, continuing to use that as his drive. He was petty, and spiteful, and just generally awful not just to Harry, but to Nevil, too (perhaps because if Nevil had been singled out as "the Chosen One", Lily would have been safe). The "good" he does by keeping Harry alive and safe from Voldemort is outweighed, even in the end when he gives his life. There is no redemption to be had, no "complicated hero arc". There is only Snape, the man who bullied and abused his students in an effort to reconcile his own feelings of loss and hatred, and the path he chose not to take. This is what makes him a tragic character, I feel. All the chances he had to be a better man but turned away. He dies a villain, a title he chose for himself through his actions.
Actually, no, Lily cut him off because of one word. She was not the "one truly supportive person in his life" just a friendship born of desperation and convenience... we all have those, we all outgrow them. Unfortunately, the people he outgrew them for were Voldemort and Dumbledore, both manipulative asshats who feigned care to gain supporters then let them rot.
1) he turned before lily died he tried to save her 2) his bullying can be explained by mantaining the cover 3) yes he was bitter but who wouldnt be 4) he did redeemed himself at the end. if harry can admit it so can we
Agreed. And honestly, maintained the cover? He terrorized three houses and favored one immensely. It wasn't just two students, it was students throughout the years. He lifted an ideal instead of grew better and led his house better. He's a bitter and spiteful villain.
@@vladimiramatejova1796 HArry can admit whatever he wants, that doesn't means it's true. Snape helped what was basically Magic genocide and he can't turn back to give life to everyone who suffered thanks to his own part, a part he would have kept playing had Lily not been affected. Harry CAN consider Snape as redeemed, but he doesn't speaks for everyone else involved which is part of why people even criticize him naming his kids after him.
What got me was all the Snilly shippers adopting the doe as the symbol of their ship… But the only reason we have to associate Lilly with a doe is that JAMES is a stag animagus.
Lily's patronus was a doe, iirc, which makes James' animagus form (and patronus, again iirc) complementary. This is what pushes a lot of people toward Snape's infatuation being an obsession rather than love. James and Lily being complementary to each other is symbolic of a more healthy dynamic.
@@Masterswordobjection nope we never see lily’s patronus. Only Severus’s. We’re just all meant to conclude it represents Lilly because Lilly is with James and he’s a stag. The symbolism is ENTIRELY dependent on Lilly belonging with James.
When Alan Rickman died I was at college and quite a few people were crying, myself included. He was an integral part of our childhoods and an amazing actor
The absolute, only just barely restrained anger in Umbridge’s face when Snape says he can’t help her, not won’t but can’t, is just priceless. We all know or know of a person who is used to getting their way by hook or by crook, and when they fail, they’re not nice people to be around. To see someone like that be denied their wishes never gets old.
Just a general note because of the wand sounds comment: It’s interesting how Prisoner of Azkaban isn’t the darkest point of the Harry Potter story, but in the films it is the most gothic, which is fun and probably why I like it - the wand sound effects in that film add to that I feel. It just makes everything a little more spooky and magical, and now that I’ve noticed it’s only in that film I won’t be able to unhear it lol
I love the third movie for this dark mysterious atmosphere. It's always been my favorite one of the Harry Potter movies. And I love how they did the time travel
I honestly felt that while the atmosphere of Prisoner of Azkaban was great, and it nailed a lot of the scenes brilliantly, that it was lacking. There was a whole lot of stuff left on the cutting room floor that involved important story beats from the book, that made the film feel like a far less coherent telling. Particularly in regard to the Marauders' identities and how they don't really give enough information on them to actually put forward a reasoning as to why Harry jumps to assume that it's his father involved when the Patronus initially comes. And I...have a hard time taking the wand sound effects seriously. Particularly in the scene with Snape teaching the DADA class, it takes me out of the intensity of the moment, because to me, it sounds like the type of sound effects I associate with fairies. Like, add a layer of jingling bells over that, and it would absolutely be the sound used for the fairy in the movie _Legend._
I love these guy’s dynamic! They’re very obviously good friends, they can laugh about each other’s flaws without putting each other down. And when they correct each other, they aren’t making each other feel bad when they do so! There are so many other things but those stick out to me. Honestly, just found your channel, and I love it so much!
I remember before the books were even done, Walden Books were passing out "Trust Snape" and "Don't Trust Snape" stickers. I ended up getting them both even though I decided to trust Snape. Mind you, this was before we found out what Snape was really doing and his reason for it (Lily). I always liked Snape (didn't always like what he said and did) but he was such a complex, interesting character and he stood out to me. I like the broken, flawed characters the best and I think in many ways, they're more relatable. Alan Rickman did such an amazing job portraying Snape that I'm still stunned, several years later. Also, I loved Sirius Black in the books (and movies), too. The interactions of the adult Snape and Black with one another always killed me.
One very telling thing from the scene you pointed out at the beginning (Snape cradling Lily's body) is that Harry is screaming in the background and Snape is completely ignoring him. It's a dynamic that will continue.
Rickman’s speaking cadence was perfect for every occasion: intimidation, sarcasm, exasperation, or frustration. “By Grapthor’s Hammer…wh-what a savings.” 😂
For me, it all comes down to Neville's Boggart. I will grant that JKR likely didn't have Neville's complete backstory fleshed out when she wrote that particular scene in PoA, but even in the first book there are hints that Neville's home life isn't sunshine and roses. for instance, Neville recounts "jokingly" his uncle attempting to KILL him several times, attempts he only survived via accidental magic, because clearly the uncle would rather see Neville dead than a squib - and given that there WERE multiple attempts his Grandmother clearly didn't care to intervene. later in the series we learn that Neville was almost the Boy Who Lived, and his parents were tortured into permanent insanity because of it.... and with all that trauma in his background, SNAPE is Neville's greatest fear? and when you consider the depths of Snape's obsession with Lily... the reason he torments Neville becomes painfully clear: he's lashing out at an already traumatized child because in Snape's mind, Alice Longbottom should have taken Lily's place - i.e. should have died instead of Lily. even if Neville being the prophacy Child results in Lily being tortured into insanity - that's still a better outcome in Snape's mind, especially when it likely means Snape can get a job at St Mungo's and have her all to himself, free from the Real Lily's disgust at his choices, free from her marriage to James, and free from any notion that she ever had a son.
I mean i agree with you that he resents neville because lily would have been alive if voldemort had chosen to go after him that night, but everything else you said was pure conjecture. He has never shown himself to be so completely obsessed that he would do something like that. That's absolutely insane. Like I dont agree with his actions at all, and am critical of jk rowling's choices with his character, but the picture you paint is of a cartoon villain with sinister schemes twirling his little cartoon mustache, when he absolutely was not that, even with all the flaws in her writing of him.
I think you make a good point about why he resents Neville, and I’ve never thought about that before, but I think you’re wrong about the Boggart. Neville’s greatest fear is NOT Severus Snape. Neville’s greatest fear is being known as a failure. Somewhat similar to Hermione, actually. It’s not being enough, and having everyone know that he’s not enough. Snape represents this by constantly telling him that he’s not enough. It’s quite telling that, while they’re already in a conversation about fear, it’s quite easy for him to picture his grandmother. You may just say this is because he knows her really well, but let me ask you this. Does it really seem likely that if you put a 13 year old’s GREATEST fear in front of them, they’ll really be able to think of something else? No, they’ll be petrified! Neville’s ability to think of his Grandmother tells us both that she scares him too, and that Snape isn’t actually his greatest fear. See his Grandmother also tells him quite often that he’s not enough I really hate it when people cite this as the example that Snape is a villain. Sure, you can argue that he’s a villain, and I’ll disagree and even prove you wrong, but you cannot cite this as your crowning, indisputable evidence.
@@samstromberg5593 I've never seen Snape as "just a villain". He'd have stayed with Voldy and not have cared about Lily at all if he was. But, he is a double agent which makes him very scary. Your analysis is lovely.
People think he was Neville's boggart because he bullied him. It's nit true. He was his Boggart because he represented Neville's fear of not being good enough. His parents were excellent at potions, but he was failing it. His grandmother always told him she wished he was more like his parents. Snape being his boggart represents, he's not. At least not that time
@@Nezumi99 This is actually more reasonable where Neville is concerned, especially when dressing the boggart in his grandmother's "best" makes fun of both of them ... thus alleviating both worries for a moment and maybe beginning to let Neville accept that he didn't have to be his parents, he just had to be Neville. Thank you for your thoughts on this.
11:41, that’s more or less acknowledged in the books. Since in Book 5, Harry actually does well in his Potions OWL due to not having Snape breathing down his neck.
@@miditrax that was book 6. Book 5 they make sure to know that while Harry isn’t the best at potions he’s not nearly as terrible as Snape makes him out to be.
To be honest, everyone had a Snape as teacher in school and always wondering, how is that allowed. So I'm not surprised about that. And I think for the Dumbledore it was more important to have a loyal ally, than a good teacher.
The magical community is really small in Britain in the HP universe, that's something I am far more familiar with as I live in a country where there aren't a lot of teachers and there aren't a lot of people that wanna be teachers so most of our teachers in schools at the moment are kinda just bottom of the barrel with the occasional gem. I know of a lot of teachers in my previous schools that would get physical with students, I remember one incident in which a boy got hit in the head with a glass bottle for something rather by my 7th-grade science teacher, his parents came to the school (i wasn't there at the time) to confront him and the students in 7th-grade, that's a little over 250 to 300 kids, backed him up because we don't have enough teachers to be able to replace him so we needed him to stay.
Also, Dumbledore struggled to find teachers and he had to hang onto the teachers he did have. I mean, the whole reason Lockhart was hired is because no one else wanted the job at the time, so it makes sense that Dumbledore keeps Snape around.
I'm beginning to believe that Dumbledore might qualify for a villain therapy slot. He has grand plans to save the world but doesn't have much of a problem using people and destroying their lives to get it done.
There's a plot hole in book one that I'm sure was just an accident but it solidified him as a liar from the first time I read it and I couldn't get over it from there
Yeah I liked Dumbledore like book 1 and then didn't like him after that. Him just being "okay" with kids getting exposed to a ton of dangerous stuff and not really equipping them with a lot good skills. He's not a super strong school administrator. He like makes everyone else do everything and just sits back and does really nothing.
@@HouseMDaddict It could be pointed out however, that the general school curciculum at the time was what the students needed. Perhaps the only branch of the ministry that wasn't overly covered in their general education was if they wanted to go into the military branch of the ministry (name of which I can't remember how to spell). Everything else was enough for the general education they would need going into their everyday lives. I imagine Charms, and Herbology honestly should have been the main focus, given what we know of the wizarding world and the life that awaited them after school.
@@sylviachen7686 okay strap in this sounds kinda crazy. After Harry gets the stone and is in the hospital wing, dumbledore tells him that he was on his way back from the ministry when he got the owl from Ron and Hermione explaining the situation. Later when Ron and Hermione are talking to Harry, they say they were on their way up to the owlery (i can't remember how to spell that) to send the letter when they ran into Dumbledore who said something to the extent of "Harry's gone after the stone, hasn't he".
They did Ron so dirty in the films! Ron stuck up for Hermione in that scene about her being a know-it-all. He told Snape “don’t ask questions if you don’t want them answered!” He might tease her and talk crap but he didn’t allow anyone else to do it. He was the greatest bravest of the trio to me. Justice for Ron’s character!
On the topic of what makes a good teacher: I've had teachers in the past like Alan suggested and honestly it sucked for me, because if you have further questions they don't know how to answer or they dismiss you, I don't think learning should ever be stunted.
I had a history teacher in grade 9 (14/15 year olds) teaching History who had zero knowledge outside the packet handed to her. I was aaking about the battle of Britain and Spitfires in relation to engineering aircraft and battlefield strategy etc and she didn't know what a Spitfire was. It was an incredibly frustrating year to say the least.
@@classicambo9781 I've had similar, a science teacher who taught music, a P.E teacher doing math. I've since come to blame the school system and not the teachers, because they were told to fill a class that wasn't in their field of study so they were learning along with the students.
my uni professors are like this, there's basically no requirements to be a uni tutor except that you're an expert in the field, so some of my tutors are just terrible and teach like we should know the content already. makes for a miserable time
I feel it healthier to remember that humans are complex beings. Just because a villain does something admirable does not make him less of a villain. A Hero will fail and take actions that are cruel and self serving. That does not negate the good they did. We should admire actions not people.
1:00, it’s not just one kid though. He fed the potion Neville made to Neville’s toad Trevor claiming that if Neville brewed the potion well Trevor would be unscathed but if, as Snape himself says was likely, Neville’s potion were a dud, Trevor would die. And Snape responded to Trevor surviving by assuming that Hermione had helped him and deducted points from Gryffindor as punishment. Snape responded to Goyle putting an engorgement charm on Hermione’s already oversized teeth (that she was insecure about) causing to grow uncontrollably by taking a look at her and saying “I see no difference”. And Snape mocked Neville for incompetence to Lupin in front of Neville and Lupin’s class. And according to Percy Weasley, Snape constantly favoured the Slytherins already.
That spokes both to his bullying and his cruelty. Trevor is a toad. What kind of sick person would want to kill a toad, in front of Neville, just for the trill that torturing an animal and a child at the same time. Freaking despicable.
I actually really like the pauses that Alan Rickman added to Snape. It makes you hang on his every word, especially since students would be rude to interrupt him, and it makes his taunts even more biting.
Snape most likely saw James in Harry first but decided to give him a "test" to see if he was more like his mother. His mother was good at Potions. He unfairly decided Harry was definitely James when he didn't know the answers.
That's just so ugly and wrong not to mention racist is it just me? I guess he forgot that everyone learns at a different pace also I'm surprised Harry's mental health is as good as it is considering all the crap that snape put him through abuse is never justifiable in any situation I have both read the book and seen the movies he just comes off as creepy and unsettling in both instances this is another example of how so much can change a person mentally to a point where they don't even realize what they're doing is affecting other people it's a crappy situation for anyone to be in I've always said that when it comes to abuse or bullying etc it all starts with one person in this case James bullying him to the point where he became bitter cynical and resentful toward everyone it all starts with one person and it can take forever to break the cycle in my opinion this is another sad example of this all it takes is one person and then a chain of ugly events starts off from there and a lot of people are suffering as a result from it
@@cuteizombi6946 I agree with most of this. Just to add that Sirius plays a huge part in the bullying. And you'll notice that Snape was even worse when Voldemort came back. He seems to react to most negative situations by lashing out at others... Almost like an injured animal at this point. Not sure how his treatment of Harry is racist though?
@@dyutibasu4541 his assumption that just because he didn't know anything about potions he must be a lot like James also choosing to treat someone like absolute crap just because of who they're related to I wasn't sure of the right word? How twisted and insecurity you have to be to go that route? I'm pretty sure his treatment would have been the same just because he has so much bitterness about Lily's passing regardless of who he happened to resemble or be related to if he was associated with Lily in any way I think it's treatment would have been the same
@@cuteizombi6946 I get that. And it's bullying but it's not racism. Racism is hatred against someone for their membership of a particular racial or ethnic group, typically one that is a minority or marginalized, not just who their father was. Like, for instance, if he was against Harry for having an Indian parent or if he had issues with him being a half-blood. His hatred towards Harry, while deplorable, is a cycle of abuse started by James, as you mentioned. But that's not racism.
Ah here it is! Over time, I realized he isn’t as “redeemable” as we all thought, but I consider him smack in the middle of anti villain/anti hero territory. He’s complicated, like any human. He did the right thing, but for the wrong reasons. Like Harry, he grew up being unloved, but also in a broken home, and was bullied immensely during his student days, so it’s no wonder he fell in with the death eaters. His hurt from being terribly bullied stuck with him to such an extreme that he couldn’t see Harry with any kind of rational clarity. He assumed he’d be just like James, and that was made worse but how much he looks like him, and somehow felt the need to bully other students that he has no reason to do whatsoever. He did the right thing by Lily but that’s it. He didn’t do it for the greater cause of bringing down evil, but for the individualistic reason of the love of one person. I can always applaud doing the right thing, but I still prefer doing right for the pure sake of that it’s RIGHT. But give me complex characters any day over over simplicity :)
For the last time, SNAPE WASN´T SOME POOR BULLIED KID! Everybody described is as rivalry, like Harry and Draco had. He literally invented spells like Sectusempra, which could kill - and who do you think he used it on? Also, about the Levicorpus, it was also one of Snapes creations. How do you think the Marauders learned it? Most probably by Snape using it against them. Plus, he was racist prick even before they started Hogwarts, when he almost hurt Petunia, and when Lily was concerned, he brushed it aside, saying "it´s just a muggle".
@@veronikamajerova4564 Was it a rivalry? Yes. Did Snape ever do to James what James did to him? No, he didn't. James was the one calling him names and using his own spells against him. That's bullying. Also, did you ever consider that Snape invented those spells BECAUSE he was bullied? We really don't know why or when he invented them, but that's my take anyway. Again, James and Sirius had it in for Snape from the moment they met on the train because 'Slytherin' and that was it. No other reason. They made their own assumptions about Snape, just as Snape did about muggles. And if you read my comment again, I said he came from a broken home where was basically unwanted. Nobody becomes a bully without having BEEN bullied first. It's a cycle of abuse in its own way. I'm not excusing anything Snape did that we all find repugnant. Not in the least. I'm saying he's one of the most morally gray characters ever written in fiction. Thinking in black v white with him is useless.
@@solongandgoodnight1820 levitated and stripped, by a gang. As someone who went through bullying including a slight sexual element yeah had I the chance I would have made a curse to cut them up. And the is no evidence he used the spell.
I'm so glad y'all brought up the fact that they softened him way the hell up for the movies. I'm still seeing a lot of Snape sympathy in these comments, though. So let me remind you guys that Neville once botched a potion (I think it was a de-aging something or other) and Snape's approach to correcting him was to tell Neville that he had until the end of the class period to fix before he force fed it to the boy's pet, knowing full well that it was likely nothing but poison at this point (he even said as much), and then he did. The toad only survived because Hermione spent the rest of class whispering instructions into Neville's ear. Snape was PISSED! That's the kind of person we're looking at here. How is he sympathetic? "Always" justifies nothing. We are our actions, not our intent.
I'm going out on a limb and say it could have been used to show that one mistake in potion making could cost someone their life. But we both know that was just a dick move.
@@catandrobbyflores He can show that without killing a child's pet. A home economics teacher doesn't threaten to chop your cat's arm to teach you knife safety.
I remember Professor McGonagall telling Umbridge off for the way she punished Harry (obviously, she made him scar his hand) and that the school has guidelines for punishing students. Despite the threat, I highly doubt he would have killed Neville's frog. While not much better, it was probably more a scare tactic.
Jonathan. Alan. I think the pair of you, with your respective professions, are such an iconic duo. Artistry (specifically filmmaking within this context) has the potential to affect people at such a deep and intimate level. As an aspiring writer, I take a lot of mental notes while watching these to help me solidify certain aspects of my own characters with their psychology. These videos have helped me in many ways and I just want to thank you for what you do. Your passion for your disciplines inspire me to both be a better, more mindful person as well as a better writer, creating characters that are more than just narrative devices. I love this channel and hope you two have years of content to commentate on because I simply can't get enough.
I'm in the "He bullies children." camp. Imagine your worst bully- and then imagine the teacher that not only allows the bullying to continue, but also *joins in.* That sounds like hell for an insecure 12 year old.
I'm somehow simultaneously in the "he's an adult man bullying children" camp and the "if literally anyone other than Lily had ever shown him kindness, he could've been a great man" camp. He's an asshole, but his life makes me sad. So much wasted potential.
Same! I love Allen Rickman, he did an amazing job. Now Snape, I will never forgive. He is right below Umbridge for me. I know that's harsh, but he was so mean to poor Neville that he became his greatest fear. Yes Voldy was bad no one argues that. People will go to war to defend Snape. Also James was a jerk as well.
@Booper Dooper She also probably wanted him be really nasty so he'd be the clear main suspect in the first book for the young readers. Nuance is often much more limited when the book is aimed at kids.
First and foremost: Alan Rickman is a treasure. Forever missed, never forgotten. "Always" Is he a bully? Yes, because of past trauma. Is he a villain or a hero? Neither. He's human; broken yet determined, flawed yet disciplined. Gruff and deeply sentimental. Both heroic and villainous by times.
Snape is one of my favorite characters ever, because of his complexity. He does heroic things, risking his life continually in the name of someone he loved. Except, he’s not on the good side because it’s right. Hes a reluctant hero. But also deeply flawed too. His taught prejudices separated himself from Lily as a kid and put him on the bad path. It’s not excusable tho. He had trauma dealing with the Marauders, but that doesn’t excuse him for later behavior too. And we can’t forget what snape did to them too. Even in the book, I like the part in the deathly hallows where the pensieve shows snape’s memories through the years and you see him advocate for Harry to Dumbledore
I love his character. Unlike other characters, he is very complex and interesting. I wouldn't label him as a good or a bad person, he's exactly in the middle. Most people will either LOVE him or HATE him.
Just the fact people still have this argument about whether Snape deserved redemption, was he a hero or a villain? The continued discourse just proves what a complicated character he was. I will die on the same hill as Allen regarding the whole he bullies children thing, but still.
@@MiaTyrnfae What do you mean? I thought that he wasn’t okay with the plan to sacrifice Harry, since he seemed pretty shocked that Harry was “being raised like a pig for slaughter” as he said. And I honestly don’t understand how grieving the death of someone you loved & wanting them to not die is “pining after your childhood crush”..?
@@renatoramos8834 He’s not a good person, but how is he a “heinous criminal”? You’re totally missing the point, he’s intended to be a morally grey character, neither a hero or a villain
20:32, based on the “lately only those I could not save” speech he gives to Dumbledore, I would say that at some level he does care about saving the world
@@gpettigrewgmailcom no he says he saved everyone he could. the quoted sentense is his reply to "how many ppl you have seen dying?" i like how they portrayed the death of Charity in DH film. you can see in snape's face how he is suffering while he is watching her die infront of those deatheaters. especially when she is begging him. he knows he cannot interfere to keep his cover. they would die both if he did but he still shows pain in his face.
@@gpettigrewgmailcom No he does not we see him attacking a fellow deah eater to save George from being killed, we see him running into danger often enough. And we never see him being anti muggle kids.
To whoever made the captions: you make my day! The captions themselves are extremely helpful for me as a person with a hearing impairment, and there are the little things added in too (Fanboy 3000). Thank you!!!
The comment on teachers around 12:00 is something I love! I am an education major just 1 year away from graduation and it is hard! These kids want to learn and it is hard to teach some of them because you need to know where everyone is and then how they learn, so you can then teach them the content. Snape (as much as I love the character in general) is a terrible teacher. In fact, most of them are. They teach from the perspective of just lecture and do a few practice runs and it will be fine, that's not how learning happens. You need to know your students and teach to each student, not just lecturing the same way to everyone all the time.
Late to the party. 'all of them are' THIS! Hogwarts is the worst school. I would not send my kid there. Let us count the staff: Trelawney who is not only an acknowledged alcoholic but who frightens kids by predicting their deaths and is, as a teacher, a complete fraud - plus seems to drug them with incense. Hagrid has absolutely no sense of what is age appropriate or dangerous to someone who is not his size and strength and is nearly illiterate; he has trouble writing a small note, uses big block letters and shows difficulty in even doing so on the island in the first book. McGonagal is competent in her area but irresponsible. Sending 11-year-olds into the Forbidden Forrest? has outsourced her conscience about abuse and child safety to Dumbledore because despite knowing what kind of people the Dursleys are after observation does not lift one finger to help. Binns might know his stuff as well but neither bothers to remember the names of his pupils, nor what year he is teaching. They could spell a book to voice its content and it would be an improvement. Flittwick is competent in what he teaches but does not seem to do anything about bullying (Luna); Sprout does not know where to order Mandrakes as if the ones in her greenhouse are the only ones in all of Europe. Snape is a bully. Now, granted, Potions seems to be a subject where keeping discipline is essential to prevent explosions, but he allows Slytherins to sabotage the Gryffindors and then blames the victims. Muggle studies seems to be outdated and the teacher as competent as the official government-certified specialist in all things Muggle, Mr. Weasley, who can't spell electricity. DADA? What does it say about the quality of the teachers when Snape and Quirrelmort seemed to have been the best of the worst? Lupin, while presented as good is an irresponsible, weak and cowardly asshole when you look deeper. Not only does he FORGET to take his medicine and endangers everyone in the school, but his Boggart lesson also made me want to strangle him because it was horrible on all counts: exposing fears and triggers (and in front of all year mates) is NOT a good idea - neither is dealing like that with Neville's worst fear. Snape will never retaliate, nope, never. /sarcasm off. But it's worth it to tweak Snape's nose, sure, instead of helping the boy or trying to stop Snape from abusing Neville. Don't get me started about his behavior when it comes to Harry. He is such an emotional coward that he never thought to send even one measly letter to Harry in 10 years? All other teachers are non-entities. Which begs the question, doesn't it? What kind of school is the headmaster running here? If I was a parent of a Muggleborn I would take my kid and try to get away from the insanity.S
@@chemina8541 Trelawny is actually the descendant of a very real prophet/seer who was cursed to never be believed, and that curse was passed down through her children who had her power. So...yeah.
@@chemina8541 I disagree with your take on MANY of the teachers but as a whole Hogwarts could seriously use some work yeah Trelawney is the only one I'll actually try to prove you wrong on though, the other's I'm just content saying I think you're wrong (not all of them, just most) But I would highly recommend a video by Super Carlin Brothers - Tralawney is always right Totally worth a watch, it made her less of an annoyance and more just really funny
@@samstromberg5593 ^^ I don't mind a different opinion. I guess it's in this case about sympathy and what you focus on. I don't say that nearly all of these teachers aren't knowledgeable about their subject and that includes Trelawney, I say that they give pedagogy a bad name. Let's take Trelawney and Hagrid as examples. Trelawney is an accomplished seer and a rarity but like with her ancestor Cassandra it is destroying her that nobody takes her seriously and that she can't remember her own prophesies can't help. She does seem to be skilled in the theory of Divination as well because from what we are shown it is spot on - but she is pants at teaching children because she undermines herself and makes them doubt everything about her up to the real information she teaches them. Now, imagine her as a member of, say, the Department of Mysteries as a valued member, praised by her colleagues. You don't need a prophetess as the Divination teacher, someone who can explain and demonstrate would suffice. Hagrid: I love Hagrid because there isn't someone who is more warm-hearted and sincere in the HP universe but he should be on an endangered magical species resort, not in a school. His flobberworm lessons are just as useless as the others - for the average pupil that is not Harry Potter. He can subdue every beast, no doubt but he shows, repeatedly, that he misjudges when a situation will turn harmful for students, he shows no awareness of what is dangerous to his pupils AT ALL.
@@chemina8541 Oh no I'm totally with you on Hagrid AND Trelawny - I love him to death but he seriously does not belong at Hogwarts and she's funny but also probably shouldn't be teaching Divination Though I also found it interesting that Rowling opened up the question but never really answered it of whether or not Divination even CAN be taught - McGonagall doesn't believe in it and so neither do I I believe that there are real seers with real prophesies and I think Trelawny is one of them but i don't think someone who doesn't have "the Sight" or whatever can't really be taught it and so I don't think Hogwarts should have a Divination department at all, and definitely not until 6th or 7th year and it shouldn't be required One thing I do think worth noting is that wizard children are different from "human" children and should be treated differently. Like I'm assuming you wouldn't trash on turtle parents for just leaving their children on the beach and abandoning them because it's just okay for them. Wizard children need to be pushed further than most because "with great power comes great responsibility" and they need to be taught to be better than most children. So I think sending them into the Forbidden Forest (with supervision, but forbidding it without) is totally reasonable for them. Because they're capable of defending themselves in a way that we just aren't. So I think a lot of the things you're riffing on them for are excusable, but I also think you have some good points about the Hogwarts teachers not being great
It's difficult to sympathise with Snape if you've had a teacher like that. I had a high school teacher so much like him (obviously not as extreme) whose words were often demeaning and who liked to go on about how badly all the students were failing in his class. I think he was very knowledgeable about the subject he taught but was definitely not a great teacher (hence why all his students weren't doing well). He was even a bully outside the class so much that other students were afraid of him. Snape reminds me so much of him and I think I'm still mentally scarred by that teacher so I really, really dislike Snape as a character even in the films. Kudos to Alan Rickman for portraying him so well!
On bad teachers stories, My CWP teacher once threw a tantrum in class because about 25 of the 30ish students in class were failing. At the time, it pissed me off, because it was 1st period so everyone was tired, it was our Senior year so we were all burnt out, and she spent 80% of every school day monitoring the honor students and helping no one else. I stopped raising my hand because I knew she was never going to answer any questions I had, and I was going to get shit all done with one hand hanging in the air for 30 minutes. In retrospect, it was hilarious because she basically admitted she was a shit teacher. Especially because I failed that class, then finished the online schooling in _one month._ I wish I had the clarity and bravery to tell her off at the time. What a tool.
After snape refused to help hermione when her teeth were growing (he literally said “I see no difference”) he’s forever a villain in my eyes. Not to mention his endless bullying of Neville.
Yes! This is what I came here to say too. I’ll never forgive him for such cruelty. That sort of comment from a teacher when I was 14 would have broken me.
I think Rickman being engaging despite speaking slowly is in part because he's stage-trained. He knows how to imbue not just every word, but every pause as well with tension and excitement, which is so interesting because he almost speaks in a monotone in addition to the slow speed. On stage though, that's often all you have to capture the audience: your voice and your movements. No camera that can be moved. No editing to highlight the important parts. Still, there are a lot of stage actors who went on to do film, and none managed the gravitas like Rickman. He was really one of the most brilliant actors out there.
Snape seems to hate being a teacher. At all times he acts as if he feels it's beneath him. That resentment CONSTANTLY filters down onto his students in general, and a few students that have traits he dislikes in particular. As for the character of his love for Lily...it's both tragic AND obsessive.
@@mikemorro140 Ooh, good point. He might have been awful and bitter partially because he was teaching a subject he didn't want to teach. Maybe he knew deep down he had the curse of knowledge in Potions and couldn't teach it without being really annoyed with most of the students the whole time, whereas Defense against the Dark Arts was something he had to work at, and was likely very passionate about because Voldemort killed Lily.
Personally, I don't think Snape ever had aspirations to be a teacher. He was sent to Hogwarts by Voldemort as a spy and became a double agent. I think he wanted the DADA position simply because the dark arts interested him most. Why put in the effort to be a good teacher if you don't want to even be a teacher to begin with?
It's not obsessive it's Tragic! lily was the only friend he ever had he though Hogwarts was going to his safe haven, but it become a hellhole of pain and suffering.
"Some of you don't even want to pay attention " Yet Harry was taking notes, he *would* have been such a good student if Snape had given him a chance Snape should never have been a teacher in a school, but he *might* have been better if he just wrote text books
There’s attention towards the teacher as they speak and there’s the attention most teachers actually want; taking notes because that confirms they’re paying attention
And then he asks this child raised by _muggles_ questions he can't POSSIBLY know to embarrass him (okay, Hermione’s a counterargument but the point still stands). This isn't just about being mean. This character isn't supposed to be “the Dursleys but at school.” This wasn't handled properly.
YES!!! THIS!!! I’m not British so I never could be sure but I alway kinda suspected that for a centuries-old British boarding school, teachers who act the way Snape does - BOOK Snape - was considered extremely normal, even as recent as the 90s, which is when the books take place.
Hell even now there are bad teachers who bully kids and actively show favoritism but get away with it because they suck up to the right people and/or kids are terrified to report it
Oh 100% teachers could be very cruel at boarding school, children were always crying over things they said and they haven't even got the excuse of some weird grudge.
Go to albert.com/cinematherapy to download the Albert app. For a limited time when you open a checking account and connect a qualifying direct deposit, you'll get $150. Thanks to Albert for sponsoring this video.
Hi boys! As a teen i used to love snape, then i grew up and started to see him in... a more truthful light i guess. (also, i started to read the books after the 4th movie). As a character is interesting, as a real person i would punch him in the face if i had him in front of me. So, good idea speaking about him, i hope for you there won't be too much fuss between snape lovers and snape haters in the comments XD
hello guys! could u please do an episode on Sucker Punch? Is it maladaptive daydreaming?
I hope you do the movie adaptation of Chicago someday.
About the James bullying scene: the spell James uses on Snape is a spell Snape himself had created AND had been using to bully 1st year muggle born students. James was giving Snape a taste of his own medicine but the scene is framed only from the self-sympathetic eyes of Snape himself.
What do you think about doing an episode on the shining?
Snape: *Gets mad at Harry for not paying attention*
Harry: *Is literally taking notes on his opening speech*
And in the extended scene, after telling the answers to all his own questions, he asks the class why no one is taking notes.
@@AtomcsiKK I think that should’ve been left in! When I was a kid I missed the point that he was specifically bullying Harry, I thought if Harry just told him he was taking notes and not doodling he’d go easier on him.
@@eileensnow6153 Harry just came from living with the Dursleys, had he come from a normal home, I'm sure he would have said something to the effect of "Sorry sir, I thought I was meant to be taking notes". If he had done that without saying it sarcastically it would have put Snape on the back foot without him being able to insult him further since the boy had openly apologized for paying attention. Something you couldn't really say for Draco even when he's clearly his favorite student, he's not anywhere near the best student in potions. But because Harry is in flight mode he just takes the abuse.
Side note, Snape loves potions but the potion books are so badly written that Harry only becomes a top student after finding Snapes version with notes. That means that the man is so petty that he knows his students will fail or make less quality potions from the books that are used to teach, just so that he can then smugly say to kids ages 11-17 that their work is not as good as his. As an excuse to berate them for it. Dumbledore most certainly was a powerful clever wizard, but not great when it comes to job interviews or check up on student progress or complaints.
@@dcworld4349 that’s true, I didn’t think about the whole aspect of coming from an abusive home. But yeah I remember reading HBP and going, “this man is so petty that he’ll keep his potion-making secrets away from the children he is ACTIVELY TEACHING?” He’s just a tyrant, I’m glad he never taught DADA like he wanted to. Harry wouldn’t have made it past the fourth book
I was so mad that they removed most of Snapes nasty moments (like calling Neville an idiot and taking a point from HARRY because he apparently knew that Neville was doing it wrong and what LED to Snape being Nevilles boggart) because movie Snape didn’t seem to actually NEED to be redeemed. I mean, he didn’t even provide the PROPHECY nor did he call Lily a mudblood. Movie Lily apparently just ditched him as soon as she got sorted. Making her seem extremely shallow
It’s Alan Rickman’s voice, pauses and all. It was commanding, even when he was very quiet. He played villains very, very well. And his very presence instantly made his character the most interesting. RIP Alan Rickman
Any time he was on screen he had constant energy. We're not bored watching him because there's always something spinning.
The pauses were everything. "You just... ... ... ... know?"
@@AWSVids "Some of you have come to Hogwarts in possession of abilities so formidable that you feel confident enough...to NOT...PAY...ATTENTION."
he played lovers very well too, Sense and Sensibility (1995)
@@driftingdruid he played cheating asshole husband well too in Love Actually. It's this thing he does in a lot of films where he plays inherently negative characters but makes you care about them and look beyond the surface.
It's not just the one kid. He bullies Neville to the point that he is literally Neville's greatest fear.
Lmao I was in the middle of typing this and saw your comment. Also Hermione
Yeah, I was also about to write that. I heard the theory that he despised Neville because he could have been the one in place of Harry (and in that alternative Lily would have lived). Don't know how much of it is true, but either way, the way he treated him was quite nasty :c
I think he sees himself in neville and has such an intense self hatred that he takes in out on a child. It’s very likely he sees the “weakness” that bullies preyed on him for within Neville and leaps onto it as an outward manifestation of the longing to pull those experiences and traits out of himself- to purge.
@@RespectedProfessional Agreed. After years of bullying, one's mind can go from "this shouldn't have happened to me" to "this is how the world works," which can lead someone who has been abused to be an abuser. I got bullied for this and had to change, so now I must bully others about the same flaw.
He bullies everyone in general, as far as the books tell us. He favors Slytherins and picks on everyone else. Yes he picks on some specific students harder, and I can absolutely understand the theory that he picks on Neville harder because Neville reminds him of himself when he was a kid; what I'm saying is that, though Harry and Neville may be personal, he bullies everyone.
snape: "not paying attention."
harry: literally writing notes showing he's paying attention.
I’d get called out like that all the time. Unlike Harry, every time someone accused me I’d just hold up my notebook and say “no, I’m paying total attention. Look at this infographic I made of everything you just said.”
They didn’t usually like that either but there wasn’t much they could say. Coulda just held up the notebook.
Snape: I'm going to teach you things
Harry: "teach me things" ok got it.
I teach college, and I have had this (almost) happen to me. I saw someone that I thought was on their phone during my lecture, and I moved through the classroom towards them only to realize that they were taking notes. Unlike Snape, I did actually check before running my mouth.
THATS WHAT I'VE BEEN SAYING
I found that weird because Snape is a skilled Legilimens. He just wanted to call Harry out.
First day of school: Harry gets in trouble for taking notes
Harry: never takes notes again
Harry: "well damn I guess that's not how we do things here"
I imagine what would have happened if he had taken down everything, word for word, and then being chided for writing gibberish, or doodling, because he used Gregg's shorthand.
To be fair their are good and bad moments to take notes, besides he wasn't actually taking notes
Never write when the teacher is in the middle of an introduction. I have had teachers who will call you out for it because the introduction is the most important thing, mainly because they want you to know what is going on before anything because with most of my teachers when you don't pay attention to the introduction you get completely lost afterwards, it's like introducing fruit and that talking about astronomy.
@ to be fair, he’s 11 at his first day of wizard school after being a muggle his whole life. Kid is probably nervous AF
I've said it before and I'll die on this hill: Snape is an INTERESTING character because he makes us think about "what if a person who is objectively cruel and miserable, was directly responsible for saving not only your life, but countless others by defeating a greater evil?" Some characters aren't meant to be admirable, but are there to make you think.
Yeah, and that's the point of how he is written. Too many people think the latter fact changes something about the character's morals.
Like a person of the uniform, soldier, firefighter, etc - maybe not the most moral or civilized people but when the world is crashing down and hell has broken loose - they’re running towards it, not away.
This.
Hmm what he did in the end is very characteristic of hufflepuff i guess 🤔
Pretty much...Snape is actually a despicable character. To put it clearly: He is the books equivalent of a Nazi, and the reason why he stopped being one is not because he realised what a sh... thing being a Nazi is, but because one of the victims of his actions is a woman he is obsessed with. He never really redeems himself for anything he did during the first war, because he never feels guilty about any of it, it is all about Lily only.
Rest in peace, Alan Rickman. Even though Snape was a character we loved to hate, Alan played him so splendidly, and with so much heart and soul, that we couldn't help but empathise with him, after all this time.
Always
I love Alan Rickman, I have a crush on him, he was an excellent actor, Rest In Peace.
Even if he played him in a very different way to how he was portrayed in the books
Always 🦌
I didnt hate him...I loved him, he was one of my favorite characters in the movie he is a hero in my eyes...yeah he was hardh attimes and sometimes a bully but in the end of teh day he was a good person...but in the books he was a complex villain
I've said this elsewhere on RUclips: Movie Snape has a redemption arc. Book Snape has an explanation arc. They are not the same. Alan Rickman was a master.
“Snape is nothing if he’s not impatient.”
Which makes…the way…he…talks…even…more…interesting.
Why did that remind me of Flash from zootopia?🤣
yes... I... agree...
@KatelynRushe Director David Yates: "With the space that Alan puts between words, you can feel an entire auditorium hanging on that pause, and they absolutely adore it." (7/2/2022)
Dylan is in Trouble pointed this out in his series review. During the Great Hall confrontation in DH Part 2, he emphasized the silence in the "anyone who has knowledge" part. It cracks me up. He jokes that Rickman didn't have enough screen time, so he warned that he would need multiple rolls of film for one line.
It's like every time he speaks he's telling you "This is what you imbeciles subject me to on the regular."
Rickman's delivery is in line with the whole "Villains don't run" idea. Villains are in charge and in control. Running or rushing is a sign that something else has power. As long as Snape is talking, he is in power. The longer he makes others wait to hear what he has to say, the more he exerts power over them.
preachers and priests use this technique even when saying random things
@@Pandalka Now see, this whole thing is fascinating. I thought some people were just awkward as public speakers. I mean, I guess its probably a column A/B thing, but still. The idea of someone doing stuff on purpose is kind of interesting.
What about whenever Snape rushes into class? Certainly seems like he wants to get on with it quickly.
@Matt Morehouse he's rushing in, but he's still in control because he is setting the INTENSE tone oh his the class and is already instilling fear in the students. It's like when a hurricane blows in, you don't exactly know what's gonna happen but you know it's not gonna be pretty 😂
@@gg_kworth52 Then either Snape isn't a villain, or running is allowed to make others keep pace with you.
The scene where Snape calls out Hermione for speaking out of turn also shows how differently Ron is portrayed in the films compared to the books. In the books he defends her, rather than agreeing with Snape, and it saddens me that they reduced his character to comic relief in the films.
and how they treated poor Ginny. 😭😭😭 they only used her for Harry's love interest in the movies, but in the books she's such a baddie and so much more involved.
Agreed! They reduced movie Ron quite a lot, turned him into a comic relief in some moments. Whereas in the books, he does act like an ass sometimes, but there are A LOT of moments when he stands up for his friends, and in movies those actions were reassigned to either Harry or Hermione, leaving Ron just standing in the back.
I think he's perfect as a comic relief like that
@@moldyvoldy1231 I'll be honest, I can't remember her doing a single thing before book like... 5 or 6, where the romance angle starts up. She's almost entirely background until then, dating boys her brothers don't approve of and reportedly having a nasty bat bogey hex, but thazzit.
Yup that's the moment the characters got screwed. As of that point Ron is worthless, Ginny is invisible and Hermione is a Mary Sue (later she steals Ron's "you'll have to kill us too" line)
The tragedy of Snape and Harry is that Harry came to Hogwart’s absolutely starving for love. If Snape had befriended Harry, Snape would have gotten to spend time being loved by the last bit of Lily she left in the world. Harry would have absolutely been a loyal and attentive friend. Instead he got to hated, because of his own pettiness.
I think one of the reasons Snape continues to despise Harry, aside from the whole James thing, is because of how alike child Snape and child Harry are. Snape, just like Harry, came to Hogwarts from an abusive household, shabbily dressed in ill-fitting clothes, and didn't really know what healthy relationships looked like. On paper, Harry should not have fit in at school, but people actually like Harry. Snape assumes it's because he is famous, but it's actually because he's earned people's affection and goodwill by being a decent human being. Snape has never been able to do that. He doesn't realize it, but he is jealous of Harry.
that's such a heartbreaking comment because you're absolutely right
You're so right!
If not for Lily Snape would not have changed. He would not care about baby Harry being killed.
@@EstherHulst-Artist Except he did. He hated that Harry was being kept alive only to die when the time was right. He could have also swayed Harry’s perception of James. Like if Snape had showed Harry kindness he could have been loved by what was left of Lily, and gotten the ultimate revenge on James by turn his son against him. Instead he was petty and small he got neither love nor revenge.
I love the duality yet mutual understanding between Jonathan's "He was a terrible teacher, but credit where credit is due, he committed to lessons that benefitted the survival of his students, namely Harry," and Alan's "Doesn't change that he still negatively impacted many of his students, including Harry!"
And both reasons are valid, it’s always nice to see people with differing views understand & respect each other’s opinions
yeah totally, and snape, while he is still not quite a good person, is a fascinating character because of the two very different sides to him.
To bad in the books. After Harry saw his worst memory He attacked Harry. Shaking him, throwing him to the floor, and throwing a large jar at his head shattering it on the wall as Harrys back was turned to him. And FULLY STOPED those life saving lessons
The thing is that Snape is teaching a dangerous subject at a dangerous place. Yeah he is harsh but barring some acts of sabotage no one ever gets hurt during his classes, adn what we've see from Hogwarts is that that's not a given. Hagrid even says it, "It's alwyas been risky sending your kids to Hogwarts".
Also rememebr the wizarding world is stuck in the 19th centuery socially.
@@ShatoraDragondore On the other hand it only happened when Haryr seriosuly and intentionally invaded his privacy. In the books he was pleased when Harry did the protego thing.
Snape is a perfect example of how people can be more than one thing and have both terrible and admirable traits.
snape never had one admirable trait, except feeling guily and therefore saving harry for his own motives.
Aren’t characters vaguely similar to Snape generally known as ‘antiheroes’ or ‘antivillains’ still depending on which side of it they aid?
To rephrase what you said, how people with many terrible traits can still end up doing good/great things. ..It makes me wonder how many of the people we praise for their contributions to society were/are actually terrible people. ...Probably a lot.
@@alecLogan Yeah! Good point! I guess Snape is kind of an antivillain. A villain in his own sense, but against the "greater evil".
@@Commenter339 Yea a lot of people are really flawed. J. K.'s characters all feel so real because they are all flawed. Plenty of them screw up majorly.
What I always struggle with is that Snape never valued Harry as an individual, as his own person. He protects him for Lilly´s sake and he despises him for James´ sake, but none of his behaviour has anything to do with who Harry is. it´s all about his parents.
THIS! This is one of my biggest points about Snape that most people miss. He can't secretly care about Harry, he barely knows Harry. All he sees is James and Lily when he looks at him so everything between them is really about those two.
Which is another (I'd say planned) level of tragedy of the character (or characters). Can you imagine the world where Snape met and got to know Harry Potter, not simply "the child of James and Lily"?
@@honest9158 Fanfic has provided. There are numerous stories in which it's Snape who raises Harry, or at least mentors him.
@@Shan_Dalamani Good bless the fanfic!
He comes from a family that’s obsessed with bloodlines
Snape does shoot himself in the foot in the first scene, because Harry could have been his best student. The one year where Harry actually cared about potions and used Snape's instructions, he was better at potions than Hermoine. Harry was also at a stage of his life where he needed/wanted a father figure, especially in this strange new world of wizardry. If Snape put his bitterness aside, Harry could have ended up like a son to him.
Honestly JK Rowling is the one who shot herself in the foot, because that would have been a fantastic redemption story for Snape. I always connected with his character because of his troubled upbringing, but making him this petty simp who could never get over lily and his hatred for James made it hard to root for him at all. If he could have just looked at harry and seen the part of him that was lily, and then chose to nurture and care for him in her place regardless of his blood ties to james, that could have been his true redemption. Not just protecting Harry because of some obligation born from guilt, but truly coming to care for him and protecting him for that reason. That would have justified the ending where harry named one of his children after severus IMO.
She also shot herself in the by having Harry find out all the drama after Snape dies. Harry should have been shown sooner and we could have had Snape and Harry genuinely find equal footing with each other@@starlette7820
To be fair to Hermione, Harry was only better than her because he was using Snape’s instructions AND she wasn’t. If they’d both been using his instructions, she still would’ve been better but he also still would’ve been fantastic. Aside from that minor point, you said it perfectly
I don’t think there’s any ground to call Snape a simp - she asked him to leave the Dark Arts and he wouldn’t do it. If he was a Death Eater while he still knew her, you don’t get to call him that. To be clear, Snape is (tied with Hermione and Newt) my favorite Harry Potter character of all time, but I feel like a lot of people forget that Lily’s death changed him DRASTICALLY. For me, he was a villain up until passing along the Prophecy to the Dark Lord, but the moment he finds out she’ll die and turns to Dumbledore that’s where he becomes a hero. And while I don’t think he’s a Saint, I will stand behind him 100% being a hero.
Also for the record, I do think that Lily could have saved him from the Dark Arts if she had just given it a little bit more effort, but as soon as she started considering James I think Snape was lost (until her death)
@@Ojas97 I've read that comment yeah
I agree with it
None of that disproves anything I said
"There's no one like Rickman on earth." - terribly accurate.
So true. Although that clip of Benedict Cumberbatch in Sherlock that was dropped in sure sounded heavily Snape-ish!
@@neuralmute idk I'm pretty sure this is just a reference to him being dead since 2016
In my mind I was like "Not even Rickman now" because I'm a terrible and morbid person.
@@jennastewart7290 I'm pretty sure everyone thought that .
"The Scene they added out of nowhere to the movie
where Snape holds Lilys Corpse: Pretty cringey."
-Biggest HP-RUclips-Channel.
You laughed at the moment where Ron said, "she's right you know," but that is one of my least favorite parts because in the book, Ron defends Hermione asking Snape why he would ask something he didn't want to know and ends up getting detention for it. I hated this change in the movie.
Amen.
They did my man Ron so dirty in the movies.
they did Ron so dirty in the movies
I hate all the changes they did to Ron for the movies, he's turned into the bumbling sidekick and all of his good moments are given to Hermionie.
Yeah. That’s why Ron and hermoine ship doesn’t make much sense in the movies. Feels so forced when Ron keeps putting her down
Snape seems to flip between bullying Harry, Neville, and Hermione. Harry is one end of the spectrum as Snape created a narrative where he believes Harry is a potential narcissistic, overinflated bully (to reflect the father) and Neville is on a completely opposing end of the spectrum. The film and book show him as meek, awkward, stammering, and subjected to bullying. I think snape sees himself in Neville and despises that “weakness” and propensity for victimhood/trauma that he shares with Neville. I took it as a show of self hatred in which he projects his despised attributes onto Neville and brings attention to his “weakness” or lack of power.
In the movies. In the books he bullies everyone, except slytherin students.
@@19Rena96 actually, there isn't any particular mention of bullying anyone other than these three. Taking house points yes but not bullying. Still doesn't make it right, but all the pointed instances of bullying are these three. I find his meanness to Hermione to be the worst of it honestly. For the other two, we can say he had issues. Harry reminded him of his parents, specially James. Neville was a reminder that if Voldemort had gone after his parents, Lily would be alive. I don't think even the most deep-seated issues excuse his behaviour towards Hermione though.
Wow that's a really great theory. I think the same
this ^^
Interesting that both Harry & Neville are ongoing foils for one another...
Also something interesting I learned a while back reflecting on the books, but all of the questions Severus asks Harry in their first potions lesson are -not- first year student questions. Harry didn't learn about bezoars properly until several years later, and the Draught of Living Death is taught in Sixth year, wile the Wolfsbane potion, the main use for asphodel/monkshood/aconite in the series is also another NEWT level potion. Snape knew Harry would never be able to answer those questions, and the only reason Hermione knew is that she was so studious that she had literally read several years ahead of the material.
I am not much familiar with the Harry Potter books and Movies but this is kinda what I thought about the questions he asks Harry on his 1st potions class in the movies- "How the hell I he supposed to know that, this is literally his 1st class!"
I guess I wasn't the only one to think so.
“Why is Dumbledore keeping this obvious child abuser around.”
You mean Albus “I send children to fight a war” Dumbledore?
Albus "dark lord bait in a school full of children" Dumbledore?
Albus "I'll omit crucial details to the most important person in my plan even though it gets him into grave danger" Dumbledore?
It’s not even “keeping him around”. Snape never wanted to be a teacher, he never wanted to be back at Hogwarts. Dumbledore placed him there the moment he got his hooks into him. The only reason Snape wanted the Defense Against the Dark Arts position every year was because he knew it was cursed. Dumbledore not only forced him to be there, he condoned his actions every step of the way by keeping him in that position and doing nothing to prevent or punish his actions.
Actually that is Albus Percival Wulfric Brian 'i choked in lemon drop' Dumbledore
He’s a double agent, very useful to dumbledore. Of course snape is being kept around.
“Why is Dumbledore keeping this obvious child abuser around?” - Have you seen the way old-time schools used to treat children?
Modern schools can also be worse, I speak from experience.
My school allowed racist bullies to beat me bloodily, were aware that my parents were physically and psychologically abusive and willingly ignored any cry for help or were too lazy to properly do their job. So no, it's not just "old-time" schools.
@@artlover5060 This is why I wanna be homeschooled
Or the way he was grooming Harry from day one to die? Or letting children fight his battles. All the other things that made me hate Dumbledore as an adult.
@@onlyicanbullymyself Ironically, I might've been dead if I was homeschooled.
Snape in the books vs movies is completely different. He’s so much more redeemable in the movies than the books
I was literally about to come in and say this! He is irredeemable in the books, but movie Snape is not near as bad
@@natashaw.7315 although now that I think about it. Why did Dumbledore even have him teach in the first place? Why not have him on in a research role? Cause obviously he’s miserable teaching
Alan Rickman gave him so much redeemable quality in the movie. Book Snape is just a lost cause.
@L. Wilhelm It might have been voldermort that wanted snape to have the teaching position. 🤔
@@madee024 a lot is also because the movies cut out a lot of horrible moments. Like in 4th year when Hermione gets hit with the tooth growing spell and Snapes just like “I don’t see a difference” and legit sends Hermione running in tears
"If you've read the books you're like no he's an asshole" 😂 truest statement ever
Bery true. I couldn’t stand him until the end except for that one scene in book 4 when he shows Fudge his dark mark.
You mentioned that Alan Rickman's pauses "shouldn't work" when, actually, I'd say those kinds of pauses always work in performances (or even public speaking). 'Cause when you take a pause at the right place, the listener instinctively leans forward. You're creating a kind of suspense and gravitas to what you're going to say next. Basically, silence in the right place can command attention. The trick is just choosing the right moments and Alan Rickman was a master at doing just that.
Agreed, I'd even go so far as to say that if you can't master the timely silences then you're not a good actor!!
The speedy pacing of current film/tv is the most forgiving style for bad acting, which is why there is so much crap made these days!
It creates a certain amount of antici-
-pation
@@lizzieanne2214 I kind of can't stand overly quick, overly witty (or "witty") dialogue. Feels really unnatural.
@@carpelibrarium8522 I just flashed on Tim Curry in The Rocky Horror Picture Show.:)
Yes, and no. If a person with no authority or gravitas pauses, even at the right moment, then you just think, "This fool can't remember what he was about to say."
You MUST have the authority or the gravitas, or both (Alan Rickman seemed to always have both), or it won't work.
Example: William Shatner was often mocked for his pauses. He did not have enough gravitas.
As a teacher, I am deeply appreciative of you guys recognizing that being knowledgeable on a topic doesn't qualify someone to be a teacher ♥️
Exactly! More than that Snape NEVER wanted to be a teacher in the first place! He doesn't like this job, isn't qualified to teach, and is in serious need of therapy, but Dulbledore still keeps him around young kids for some reasons! I am a big Snape fan but wtf Albus
Oh, there is so much more to being a teacher. I've been lucky enough to have a couple of amazing teachers in my life. They've changed my world. But it's also through them that I know I'm not cut out to do that job.
Snape should have gone to the countryside and written a new textbook on potion-making.
@@malyaboi8780 Snape wanted to be a teacher, he just wanted the DADA job, but Dumbledore refused to let him have it because that post is cursed by Voldemort when Dumbledore refused Tom Riddle the post way back when.
@@malyaboi8780 the point was to keep him close to Dombledore to have him help take care of Harry and find a way to kill Voldemort
This is so true! I had a math teach my freshmen year of high school who was very smart, he had just graduated with a math degree with like a 4.2 gpa, but he was TERRIBLE at teaching. He would under explain because he thought everybody could keep up, and then be confused when only a handful of us could, and then he would try to fix it by over explaining until everybody was lost. Poor guy got bullied by freshmen lol
I want to point out regarding Snape's opening scene - although this applies to the film only, not the book - when Snape calls out Harry for thinking he's better than everyone because he's not paying attention, the thing Harry's scribbling down is Snape's own words: He's doing what the majority of teachers wants their students to do, make notes. This is something you guys touch on, but I want to expand on this a bit.
The implication of this is that Harry had an interest in potions when he entered - this is the first and only time we see Harry willingly start making notes in a class - but that Snape killed that interest by virtue of being an unpleasant teacher, needlessly embarrassing him in front of the class and then proceeding to bully him for the rest of his student life.
This is something that's exemplified in half blood prince: When Harry has a good teacher - ironically, still Snape in the form of his instructions in Harry's borrowed potions book - Harry flourishes in potions, and even proves that he had been listening in that very first potions lesson with Snape when he uses a bezoar to save Ron's life.
I really wanted to learn German, but I had a hard time understanding it. Nonetheless, I paid attention and did my best.
My teacher singled me out after a while because I understood it less than others and completely killed my enthousiasm for learning German for the next 4 years.
Those kind of teachers can fuck themselves.
Wonderfully put. I had noticed Harry was scribbling down what Snape was saying, but I doubt it was so in the books. I will check. Harry was always too eager not to stay still for too long and concentrate for too long, too act now, think later to excel at school, although a bright kid. So it wasn't just Snape being a bad teacher, which he was, of course, that made Harry a mediocre student most of the time. It was himself. But considering this scene, it was very well put. Oh, and these kids actually made a polly juice potion in second grade by themselves, so they weren't that bad at potions after all, yeah.
Bezoar stone was in the book, and Harry loved the book because of the power it gave him, not because of his love for potions.
Expanding further on that, the reason Hermione did so poorly in Slughorn’s class as opposed to when Snape was teaching is because Snape never used the book. He always put the instructions on the blackboard which most likely contained his alterations.
@@Boundwithflame23 nice!
Snape is the antithesis of the line from Wreck It Ralph, "Just because you're a Badguy, doesn't mean you're a bag guy". Just because he was on the side of the good guys and did very heroic things, doesn't excuse the fact he was a bad person
He's a good person when he asks Dumbledore to save Lily and from that point on he's basically undercover as a bad person because he HAS to do that to fool his fellow Death Eaters and, eventually, Voldemort
@@AlexBrantZawadzki ONLY Lily, in the books. "Please let my competition and an innocent baby die, but save the girl I want." Selfishness, not kindness or goodness
@@AlexBrantZawadzki No he isn't. He didn't ask Dumbledore to save Lily and Voldemort to spare her for her sake, he did it for his sake. He is possessed by his resentments and his jealousies, if he could have made Lily his even if it would have made Lily miserable, he would have done so. The reason he can go undercover with the Death Eaters and even fool Voldemort himself is that he fits right in. The only act he has to put on is hide that he wants revenge on Voldemort for killing Lily, and he can do that by simply hiding it under how much he hates and despises everyone on Dumbledore's side.
@@alexsherry1238 There is no excuse for how Snape treats Neville. Snape never even asks Harry what he knows about his parents.
The reason that style of delivery works for Alan Rickman is down to his command of the scenes he is in. Everything has absolute intent, and is deliberate. When you are fully truthful in your performance, and fully embody your character in the moment, you can draw your audience into your performance and command their attention.
Even the way he handles the robes is very intentional. I don't think they could have made a better choice of actor to play Snape.
"There is a chasm between intentions and results." That's good! I often have a hard time trying to explain that concept to people.
Yeah, it's not that intentions are irrelevant, but it's mostly an internal thing of "are we the baddies" sorta stuff. It just has no influence on how you should react when things go sideways. You meant well? Ah well, pity. Just roll your sleeves anyway, cause you're still going to work your ass off fixing things.
I always liked the quote, "the road to hell is paved with good intentions." What one intends means nothing compared to what one actually does.
THIS. Literally almost no one actually means to cause harm. Most people are trying to do what they think is the right thing. That doesn't actually mean that no one got hurt.
If you hurt someone, your intentions do not matter as much as the fact that someone got hurt. And I'm tired of people trying to justify it that way.
honestly life is all about balance, and the same goes with intention and results.
Who you are is what you do.
10:50 in the books ron says something like "why'd he ask if he didn't want an answer" rather than "he's got a point though" and like urgh- such character assassination in the movies of him.
@Alex Thornton I think that's just the script writer or the director showing bias against Ron.
Another example would be Ron standing on a broken legs, telling Sirius that he would have to kill him to get to Harry. In the movie Hermione got this line while Ron was cowering in the corner. What's there to be streamlined? They just switched the line from Ron to Hermione.
Character assassination is absolutely right.
They gave a lot of the triumphant moments of Ron's to Hermione too
The scriptwriter is on record as saying his favourite character was Hermione, girl power, etc. It’s a bit tragic that the scriptwriter felt the need to make Ron look like a dunce in order to elevate Hermione. He could have kept Ron’s character intact while emphasising Hermione’s already obvious strengths. So many people I know have watched the movies without reading the books and assumed Ron is just there for the laughs. Kind of sad really.
@Alex Thornton I really don't think so, I think had he said what he did in the books, he would have had just further emphasised Snape's cruelty, I think it would even have been better for him not to say anything than that. There are so many of Ron's strengths and triumphs given to Hermione that it turns his complex and witty, if a little rash and jealous character into a one dimensional dunce designed only for entertainment. Another great example is in the devil's snare scene where Ron, Hermione and Harry all play equally important roles in surviving, while in the movies Ron is saved by Hermione and plays it off as luck. Again in the seventh book / lest film where they visit xenophilius and Hermione is the one who tells Harry about the tales of Beedle the Bard instead of Ron, when in the books, Hermione is just as clueless to the kids fairy tales as Harry, Ron's character is the group's link to the wizarding world and wizarding culture, as well as, aside from a couple of notible examples, always by Harry's side and is just as much important for Harry and Hermione to stay friends as Harry is for Hermione and Ron to saty freinds and Hermione is for Harry and Ron to stay friends. In the books they all support each other, with each of them being a corner of a pyramid, where if you take one away the other two fall, whereas the books make it so that Harry and Hermione are besties and Ron is mostly just there for the laughs but dosnet actually contribute anything to the friendship
This is my issue with the movies in general, I don't care about changing or skipping things or events but changing the personality of the characters makes me don't want to see the movies.
What I love is Harry’s answer to asphodel and wormwood. He doesn’t remember his mother, and he has no bitterness in her death, just grief. “I don’t know sir.”
I'm so indescribably pleased that Dumbledore asking calmly made it into the edit, even as a brief side-note
Y’all should definitely do one on the Lion the witch and the wardrobe, the family dynamics of the children and the typification with Aslan and the witch, ugh… so good
omg yes
YAS
Yes!
I mean, the entire Narnia series is just fantasy retellings of various Biblical stories and events, and since Aslan is Narnian Jesus, and the Witch is basically Satan, of course they're going to be typified.
@@LevonBlueoak for sure. Though the way they portrayed them is different. Aslan isn't just some soft Jesus, he is also ferocious. And the witch is beautiful and actually tempting. Yea it's a typification, but it's a worthy one to discuss, because of how it affects the kids. I totally agree though.
I had binge read all the books knowing that Snape was a "good guy" in the end and I had expected to see some misunderstood goodness but as I read I'm like This bullying is so vile and absolutely unnecessary! He is actually a bad person but on the good side but doesnt miss opportunities to be awful
When he said he saw no difference when Hermione’s was distraught over her teeth getting enlarged I got so upset 😭😭
True. Same experience. He's an anti-hero.( Kind of like Loki.) He's a not-nice person who does the right thing in the end.
I think having an episode on Dumbledore! "Raising him like a pig for slaughter". A former bigot who sees the lights. Taking control of trauma vs. Over control. SO MUCH TO UNPACK
Former bigot ?
@@egekazkayas8968 Well bigot maybe not but close friend of one and murderer. Well he'd probably be convicted of second degree or manslaughter but still. And like they say book Dumbledore let Snape do all his child abuse and let it go on, and he kind of did raise Harry for slaughter. He couldn't be sure he would survive and Harry didn't really have choice. He couldn't just have decided to have a different career than fighting Voldy.
Crazy realization: he accuses Harry of not paying attention while Harry's writing down everything he's saying WORD FOR WORD!
I got so angry when I first saw this.
That is a think I taked about with my mom this week (not about Harry Potter or this scene) but how a lot of teachers don't understand some people has different ways or learning. If we use this scene, for exemple, someone can learn more looking at the professor and pay attention to what is said, cause can't pay attention and write at the same time. While others actually learn better by taking notes while the professor speaks. He is not looking at the professor, but is fully paying attention.
But of course, Snape is being a full intentional asshole here. Doesn't matter if Harry took notes or not. Maybe if was any other student, he wouldn't care.
In my AU where Harry is a Slytherin and friends with Malfoy, Malfoy actually points out Harry is paying attention as he has written everything down verbatim. Another Slytherin friend, a fellow half blood says "A muggle method sure but an effective one."
@@hollyputvin917 whats it called
I got in trouble that way in school often.
Yeah let's not forget that Neville's boggart was LITERALLY SNAPE. I can appreciate a nuanced/layered character, but Snape was in a position of power and actively chose to bully children. And that's just the tip of the iceberg.
Yes, also, the only reason he switched to Dumbledore's side was because of Lily. If Neville's mother was the one killed he wouldn't have double crossed Voldemort
@@nicokrasnow1851 YES! He would have willingly stayed a Death Eater his whole life if it was Neville's mother. Just this is enough to make him a villain, you don't accidently fall into an extremist/racist organisation because your crush doesn't tolerate you being intolerent against people like her.
Being afraid of older teachers doesnt make them villains automatically
@@alex0589 it's not "being afraid", like the boggart is supposed to be the thing that you fear THE MOST, the thing that torments you, Neville was more scared of his teacher than the person who tortured his parents to the point of literal insanity; like think about how fucking scared of snape he would have had to be.
@@alex0589 go read the books. Don't be willingly obtuse
“A good act does not wash out the bad, nor a bad act the good." - Stannis Baratheon
Hmm I don’t remember that quote… is that how he justified murdering his daughter
Stannis would be a good character study, he’s a very grey character with positives and negatives to his character.
@@BENR8108 Book Stannis, at least
@@liltatih I believe he's talking to the Onion Knight, who also experienced that particular philosophy of Stannis. Season 2, I think. He snuck into his castle while it was under siege and smuggled in food. Stannis knighted him for it... and also chopped off some fingers because he was still a pirate and smuggler.
Why be good?
I think the slow speech is a power play. He takes up more of the time the way some people spread out to physically take up more space as a way to display "dominance".
"Intentions count for something but Intentions dont matter nearly as much as results" -Cinema Therapy This is up there as an AMAZING quotes THANK YOU GUYS!
I wish someone could tell this to all the people who did nothing about my abuse, but then said later that the were "sorry" that I was abused. *Their words mean nothing.*
The Greater Good
I vehemently disagree that the *results* make someone a bad person though. By that logic, every selfish, greedy choice that had unexpected positive results makes the chooser a good person, and vice versa, which I doubt anyone would agree on.
It is the actual choice made (or lack thereof), that dictates the morality of the individual. Context is everything and causality is amoral. Only the decisions themselves have morality.
@@dustmystic291 intent does matter, however results play a part as well. The best way I've found to explain this I learned in a Discrete Math course, of all places.
Intent is necessary, but not sufficient. Results are necessary, but not sufficient.
Intent and results together are necessary and sufficient.
Good intent is necessary, otherwise the person just really sucks at hurting people - and with enough practice, they're going to get better at it.
Good results are necessary because no matter what was intended, hurting someone is hurting someone.
@@MorgenPeschke I guess the issue I take is more with the word "results". Results aren't always within our sole control. Our choices however, are and they are our chance to influence the result as much as we can.
If my actions cause hurt despite my intentions or expectations, I am not suddenly evil, I made a mistake. A misjudgment is not a sin.
What makes me a bad or good person is the additional choice afterwards - Do I fix it? Do I learn? The result is amoral. The choice is moral.
For example, Snape chooses to bully kids, and that is what makes him a bad person. If Harry had become stronger and more resilient as a direct result, that is a credit to Harry not to Snape. Snape is still a bad person, even if that bad choice had a unexpected good outcome.
When Jono was asking Alan's thoughts about book to movie adaptations, I thought they were going to tackle the fact that the scene they had just played painted both characters in a totally different light. In the movie, Harry just defended himself (you know, the thing he was there to learn), while in the books, Snape had set those memories aside in the Pensive specifically so this WOULDN'T happen, but he got called away and Harry snooped and saw Snape's memories. So Snape's reaction of getting angry and putting an end to Harry's lessons makes a lot more sense (even if it's a lot less restrained).
Snape: Control your emotion. Also Snape: Trows a jar at a student...
Yeah, in the book Snape’s guard is down when Harry manages to invade his mind and he praises him for an effective move, the memories he sees are not important to Snape. The memory Harry sees in the Pensieve however is Snape’s worst memory, not mainly because James bullied him but because that’s when his friendship with Lily ended. It’s also clear that he has hidden other memories that it would be downright dangerous for Voldy to see if he invaded Harry’s mind, like when Snape agrees to protect Harry. He shares them all willingly with Harry at the end, even his worst memory and the aftermath of it.
Also in the movies, the bullying is very one sided where in the book it's a little more complicated of a situation. James was definitely a bully, but Snape could give just as well as he got, to the point of potentially causing lethal harm, and by 5th year had pretty much joined a hate group. He was a literal death eater. People like to gloss over these intricacies because James is too dead to get his perspective on it.
@@bazilda after digging into their worst memories, you forgot that, by the way if someone did that to me I'd slap them
@@marystombaugh2282 are you serious? it was always one-sided, snape couldn't defend himself against 4 thugs and creating hexes to BE SAFE is just a distress signal, it's the typical example of how shootings happen or why kids join gangs
Allen: "I'm going cry a lot"
Everyone Watching: "That's literally every episode lol"
Hey! I resemble that remark.
@@CinemaTherapyShow sorry but gotta tease cause in the same boat
I mean there's something great about a man in touch with his emotions.
@@bjtibbs6436 This is true
@@CinemaTherapyShow Alan channelling James Acaster "Never before have I been so offended by something I 100% agree with!"
He's not a villain; he's an antihero. He's an emotionally abusive jerk, but he's not a villain. And I ugly cried the first time I read his death scene.
I would say the book version of Snape is more of Anti-Villain than hero. He’s does a lot of heroic deeds in the story but he’s still has the presence of an antagonistic evil character even towards the very end of the series.
Movie Snape however feels more like an Anti-Hero.
@@Jackal_El_Lobo34 in the books he hardly tolerates people. Even Dumbledore. He would have betrayed Dumbledore happily if it were not for Harry. This is why Harry never gets why Snape is even around them, he hates everyone so its easy for him to betray everyone. He would make so many snide remarks, it was hilarious. He was hero in shadows, but such a pain in ass to be around.
@@anushrees4981 yeah I didn't buy book snapes involvement in good at all. It felt more like shock factor. Rickman saved that character
@dflaming1371 i think it was purposefully done. Everyone doubted him so much except Voldy , which I found hilarious. Was it because he was too stupid or bcuz he was just too egotistical that he thought no one could betray him? Everyone doubting him (both sides) made him both the perfect double agent but also the obvious one. I still dont understand why Harry would name his child Severus. Honoring him as head master or writing an article on him should have been enough.
@@anushrees4981 For me, I can buy Voldemort’s character being blind to Snape’s betrayal due to Narcissism in both the book and film version.
Now as to why Harry named his son after Snape in the book, I’m just as confused.
I mean yes. He did things that were good in the longterm but when you start to analyze his motivation as to why he did it, you realize that his end goal really was just to stick it Voldemort for killing Lilly and that he never really had affection for Harry (Something he made clear to Dumbledore when he asked if he grew to care for him).
So yeah. Don’t really get why Harry in the book chose to honor him that way.
Personally what I liked about Snape is he's both. Yes what he did for Harry in honor of his mother was brave and heroic
....But he still was going to kill a 13 year old boys toad if he failed to make a potion correctly and alienated Lily by calling her a slur
this!!! shitty people can do good things XD
Don’t forget cruelly insulting Hermione, driving her to tears.
I honestly think is important to make a difference between teen snape and adult snape. Because being cruel to neville and the other kids as an adult was a conscious decision, and as much as is explainable, is still horrible. Calling lily that slur in fith year was a result of the ongoing brainwashing and manipulation that the "future death eater club" was already doing to him, and he regretted it the moment he said it, because tbh i don't think he ever believed in blood supremacy, he was just a lonely ,humiliated and angry kid that was very easy for the death eater to manipulate with a few " we respect you, we value you" and shits like that.
@@nessyness5447 I think he did truly believe in it, in as much as any teen that falls in with bad company can. You believe in it to be a part of the group, and to feel like you are part of something greater.
It's also important to remember that he grew up in a home that was clearly not the best environment - it's been speculated that his muggle father may even have been abusive.
What I'm getting at, is that if he'd gotten some kind of support sooner - maybe through a healthy rolemodel - teen snape could have chosen a very different path, and probably mended his bond with Lily.
Don't forget he betrayed Harry to Lord Moldyface when Harry was just a babe. He told his Dark Lord about a prophecy and all he wanted was that Tom spare Lily's life. Dumbledore called him despicable for this and he was right. 0:44 I don't care that he mourned over Lily's corpse not when he was inadvertently responsible for her death. He bullies Harry because of his dead father yet tells Dumbledore he protected Harry because of his dead mother. This walking douchenozzle was just obsessed with death, wasn't he? No wonder he joined Riddle's aptly named gang of thugs.
I'd love to see one of these on Draco Malfoy eventually, going over book vs. movie differences, as well. they changed stuff in the movies, and i feel it actually removed a level of sympathy one could have had for him otherwise, the biggest example i can think of being how ... his concern when confronting dumbledore was that he'd kill his family, but in movies, it was "he'll kill me"
Yes. To quote the author: the one forgiving thing about the Malfoys is the love they have for each other, and Narcissa's love for Draco is part of what saves Harry, it is all tied together.
(Unlike Bellatrix who would happily and with pride sacrifice any of the children she does not have for Voldemort.)
but he also was, like, WAY more of an as*hole in the books? Tom Felton is like 80% of why girls love Draco. Book Draco is so much ruder.
I agree Malfoys love for eachother is beautiful, but that doesn't make a villain better, bad people can still care for their loved ones.
I believe the problem with Draco is just the way he was raised, with enough work and therapy he would have been a decent guy. and it actually happened - adult Harry and Draco are on good terms, Draco changed.
I love Tom Felton! He nailed that role! ❤
10:57, in the book, Ron, who basically thought the same thing, actually doesn’t respond by saying it but by calling out Snape for punishing Hermione for answering a question he asked
Yeah. They did Ron dirty in the movies.
Yeah, that's why I'm torn out that they rid him of that protective nature over his friends
@@dyutibasu4541 His character needs justice!
@@blessyie643 specially the "you have no family" line. I was like WTF?!?! 😶
@@dyutibasu4541 I actually don’t agree with that statement. I agree that they did this individual Ron scene wrong. I don’t think that the movies by and large were unfair to Ron
When he barges into a room to take charge of the scene, he's like Batman. Both are dark, brooding, authoritative, and scary as hell. In the books, he's described as an overgrown bat.
Snape is not a good person, but such an amazing and complex character. You can feel the pain he is in, even if it doesn't excuse his behavior. He will always be my favorite.
Same. I don’t need a character to be morally upright to empathize with & love them. He’s just too Compelling. I can’t help it.
I love his character he is a tragic man who suffered deeply the pain of losing the only woman he ever loved the pain of bullying and protecting Harry potter on Dumbledore's orders. Severus Snape is not a monster but a tragic victim. I'm a woman and i love him not matter what. all his flaws.
Villain therapy for sure: he still fell to the extremism of Voldy and didn’t just bully the one kid, it was multiple. He was Neville’s greatest fear. BUT I really like the character and his story, and can sympathize for sure. But it still doesn’t excuse anything he did, plenty of people also experience that and can still be truly good people
Two characters I love in the book are Snape and Dumbledore. Simply because they're so divisive and twisted. Snape is a bully and a hero. Dumbledore is a great man who left a child with abusive guardians and used his school as a microcosm of the war. They were both drawn in by Fascist ideologies and people because of their loneliness, lack of companionship and complicated family situations. While Dumbledore moves towards doing good for the greater masses as the ultimate Gryffindor, Snape only turns to the path of goodness for the sake of one person like the consummate Slytherin. The similarities and differences make for a very interesting study.
Anti-Villain. Snape is an Anti-Villain. Voldemort is the Villain.
@TansaMakes took the words right out of my mouth, i like him as a character but _absolutely despise_ him as a person
What can I say... I believe he was damaged enough into becoming a villain but not enough to get stripped of his heroism.
If it wasn't Lily (not even the Potters because at first he doesn't care if James and Harry die) but the Longbottoms that the prophecy was about, he wouldn't have changed sides and he'd still be a Death Eater. He's a villain for sure.
10:51 I'm actually sad that they rid Ron half of his character, he stood up for Hermione in the books. Yeah, he usually calls her an *insufferable know-it-all* in different terms all the time, but when others try to humiliate her, he's not letting that go.
Plus when they were stuck in the shrieking shack and Harry was 'threatened' Ron said they'd have to go through him first and he has a BROKEN LEG, uncomfortable with the pain and a potential middle aged man for a pet...
Could we get a Lit Therapy for Ron? Psychology of Hero for book Ron, dealing with his insecurities, supporting his friends, growing out of his nastier tendencies.
The *"he's got a point, you know"* line really should never have made it into the script, let alone the final cut. Especially when Emma Watson portrayed Hermione on the verge of tears in that scene, true to the book. A simple *"You asked a question and she gave you the answer." / "SILENCE, WEASLEY!"* would have taken just as much time and demonstrated Ron's loyalty, particularly as Buckbeak's appeal had to be cut.
I actually disagree with a lot of fans on the Ron-standing-on-a-broken-leg moment. Ron's not able to jump in front of Harry, and having Hermione do this quickly keeps the pace and intensity of the scene up before Harry considers killing Sirius. Before Harry and Hermione reach the Shack, though, they could have heard Ron beg them to run, leave him, and save themselves. That would have shown Ron's selflessness (he always thinks Harry and Hermione are more important than him) without having him stand up.
i love the vibe of "nobody calls them an insufferable know-it-all but me". in a friendly way, of course, obviously that sort of thing can spiral out of control in the wrong hands
19:09 Notice how everyone, including Malfoy, was shocked at Umbridge slapping Harry
With Snape, I'm in the "He bullies children, he a villian" camp, but I love how Alan Rickman portrayed him. He did a phenomenal job.
I think there's a difference between being a villian and being evil. Snape is a villian, but he's not completely evil. He does do a lot of good things, and has some redeemable qualities. I also think that one reason why fans argue over whether or not he's a villian is because he's not as bad or as obvious of a villian as Voldemort, Bellatrix or Umbridge.
Book-Snape and Movie-Snape is also a big difference, but it's just all in the small things. In the books Snape is clearly biased and crass, where you pull the line of bullying is personal, but he's nasty towards Harry, Neville and Hermoine, he even has a go at Crabbe and Goyle at some point if I recall correctly. He actively tries to out Lupin as well, which could ruin his life, just to get back at him. There's a big difference between Sirius and Snape not hiding their hate towards each other, but he's never put Sirius' life (or quality there off) in danger. Again if I recall correctly, only the books mentioned Snape making sure everyone knew once he was outed, where-as movies it's just something Hermoine figured out and then all events made Lupin decide it was best to resign. Snape's further involvement was ignored.
Having to leave out all these small details, whilst keeping the redemption as strong as ever, makes movie-Snape much more redeemable. On top of that movies humanise characters much more, we see 'one of us' whom we wish to relate to, understand, and see all the bodylanguage, facial expressions, rather than just this mean guy that looks like a bat.
@@esmee6308 I think someone needs to revisit the books.
"There's a big difference between Sirius and Snape not hiding their hate towards each other, but he's never put Sirius' life (or quality there off) in danger."
Sirius "pranked" Snape into leading him to the shrieking shack to get killed by Lupin (sure you can argue that he was a teenager and thought it would only scare him but we can assume that there was a high possiblity of him getting attacked by Lupin). So Sirius has put Snape's life in danger before.
I don't think he's a villain, I think he's what people call "Anti-hero". He's horrible, annoying, etc but he has redeeming qualities, even if few, to make you "like" him (very careful with the word like haha).
Regardless you always gotta take Movie adaptations with a grain of salt. Like many have said there're big differences with book Snape & movie Snape. Same happens with Hermione/Ron.
I think that, when talking about characters, we should always go back to the "source" (in this case the books). While the books have a lot of plot holes and is not the "greatest" writing there's still much more flexibility and appreciation of character's development/growth, and a bigger understanding of them.
@@GuildElites Maybe you should read a post properly before putting down an statement that was never said and then argueing how it's wrong. Aside from me referring to Snape in the whole post, how can you read "he's never put *Sirius' life* in danger" as Sirius never put Snape's life in danger... His name is literally in there, like either you read Sirius never put Sirius' life in danger or Snape never put Sirius' life in danger.
Also context? The whole post and video is about Snape... Sirius' actions hardly matter to whether Snape is a villain or not since Snape, well, not to be a broken record, didn't put Sirius' life in danger. (With the sidenote: After Pettigrew's secret came out and not everyone thought Sirius was a serial killer trying to murder Harry.)
@@esmee6308 Well English is not my first language (if you wanna make fun of me because of it go ahead) and as you pointed out I read that as Snape never being put in danger by Sirius.
While I do stand corrected (cause I misread something) I will add to your concept of "Why do Sirius's actions matter?" you also replied yourself with "Also context?", it would matter (if you would've wrote what I misread) because it gives context and argumentation to Snape's behaviour later on, it doesn't exonerate him tho.
And just in case, I don't like Snape (that's why I was careful with the concept of liking) but I don't hate him either and like I said I think he's more of a "anti-hero" than "villain".
P.S: I would assume we're also leaving aside his (Snape) interaction in the shrieking shack when he had Sirius at wand point and, although everyone in that room was trying to explain to him Sirius wasn't guilty of the charges, he wanted to take him to the dementors to have him kissed. Also the scene in Grimmauld place's kitchen when they were both pointing wands at each other.
@@GuildElites English is my second language as well, I feel your pain. Your English is really good though, your first line irked me a bit but I shoulda just accepted it as a misread.
And you are right that Snape acted spiteful in the end of the third book, dismissing a whole room and wanting to give Sirius up to the dementors.
They're also a good example of 'everyone's the hero in their own story' except in this case, it's Harry's. Snape is immediately described negatively, greasy hair, bat-like, mean to Harry and soon a downright bully. (And suspected main-villain.) Sirius, on the other hand, gets described positively, despite having a bit of a nasty streak. And not just in childhood, like how he hit Snape's head a few times whilst transporting him back to the castle or how he treats Kreacher.
Which is ironic since movies tend to take such bias away (we see actions, and put our own feelings to it, not Harry's) but movies also had to cut quite a few bits fit a book in under 2 hours. Which somehow to me makes Snape more of an anti-hero, where-as in the books I'm still kinda... damn son, not a villain but oof, what a bunch of life choices.
"Why do these pauses work with Alan Rickman?"
At this point I recommend reading up on theatre practitioner Harold Pinter, and his use of the "pregnant pause" in his works. It's not waiting, it's isolating the listener, and seizing control of the conversation.
I always thought it was normal for line delivery and a common device in public speaking, I think. I guess maybe a lot of movies now don't do it (it depends on the character/situation)?
@@brxzbze it depends. Some of it comes from the actors background. More British actors come through theater, which has not emphasis on presence. Many more American actors come through TV and commercials, which tend to be less about presence, and more about pace. Modern movie dialogue is SO much faster than it used to be.
@@Ludiotic Fair enough. I get the feeling stage actors might focus on it more, but then it might all be up to directorial decisions anyway.
dramatic....
....
...PAUSE!!!!!!!
I respect Alan so much for “dying” on the Snape-is-a-villain-because-he-bullies-children hill
Eh, I would say that joining terorist organisation set on muder and torture of specific group of people (which you leave only because your school crush was target, not because you realized that this is wrong), and then spending years bullying childern in a position of authority IS classified as vilian.
@@veronikamajerova4564 Still doesn’t make sense why Neville would fear him more than the uncle who threw him out the window as a toddler.
Maybe Boggarts don’t really mean THAT kind of greatest fear. After all, Harry was wounded way way more by Voldemort, and his Boggart is a Dementor.
@@davidw.2791 or maybe Snape really was just that cruel to him, tormenting him for years and all
@@davidw.2791 We don't know if that uncle is still alive. Or he may not live nearby anymore.
@@jettqk1 Does that really matter for the Boggart to do their thing?
I agree with Alan on this one. He is a villain and I will die on this hill. He bullies more than just Harry. Neville is terrified of him. He asks for an answer to a question and when Hermione answers it he berates her. Even before Harry starts he is told Snape favors the slytherins.
As far as his Lilly obsession goes it is a full obsession and he just couldn’t take it that she didn’t see him in that way. Im not saying James wasn’t a bully in the beginning but he grew out of it. Snape held a grudge for a second generation.
Snape held a grudge to the grave.
He is not a villain; he is not a savior.
He is a Bully. And also a Hero. He's complicated.
There are things about him which absolutely do deserve to be condemned. He has traits which are legitimately admirable. Both parts of Snape are real, and neither side cancels the other one out.
- His fixation on Lily is disappointing as a character-reveal, but I can believe there was some genuine love in it (as well as, yes, a whole huge mountain of unhealthy obsession).
@@StoryMing I can agree with most of that. I feel like he was a complicated character. I also feel like he was a bully. I know he did some heroic things but I don’t feel like they make up for his bad qualities.
@@occheermommy
No, they do not make up for it.
Just as neither do the horrible things he did cancel out his heroism.
He is a bully- and yes, he should absolutely be held fully accountable for that, irrespective of his other actions. -But that does not solely define him. It is only half the story; either side of which is true, but incomplete without the other half.
He is not a good guy who simply made a few bad decisions, or a bad guy who also happened to do some good things. He doesn’t fit in simple boxes of good or evil (although many of his actions do). He is morally gray- In my opinion- and deserving of both praise AND censure.
Snape never shows that he even recognizes, much less regrets, the wrongfulness of his treatment of his students (and others), which would be the bare minimum required before we could even begin to discuss or debate about “letting him off”. Moreover, he committed himself to Dumbledore’s cause out of a sense of duty to atone for a terrible mistake, and an implacable enmity towards the one who murdered the woman he loved; NOT out of any real concern for the safety of his fellow Wizards and Witches, or Muggle neighbors. He is not someone I would ever remotely wish to have as a friend, a teacher, or a romantic partner. Nonetheless, he put his own life on the line, and ultimately sacrificed himself, in order to do the right thing.
He could have seen Harry as Lily’s child, not James’ son
you have no idea how much i love alan rn for pointing out that snape is still a big bad bully
I clicked so fast!! Snape has always inspired a dialectic discussion.
His affection for Lily has never been black and white and I've wavered between seeing it as an unhealthy obsession vs tragic love.
while I'd been interested in Benedict Cumberbatch as Snape.. Alan Rickman brought such nuance to the character I was allover that🥰😍.
I would say it had a bit of both. He loved lily ( either truly romantically or actually platonic) , and she was the first person who cared about him and his only real friend so that affected him. And when he lost lily as a friend and knew it was his fault, and worse, when she died and he knew he had a part on it, he just was never able to get over it. And that's when it became truly unhealthy, he was not able to deal with the loss properly and stayed stuck on the past. Which actually, is basically the same that happened to sirius with james, he didn't process the loss properly and stayed stuck on the past. Is just that sirius had a lot less guilt and self hate to deal with.
@@nessyness5447 I concur with your points 👏👏👏.
The movie Snape was well crafted to reflect grey areas of humanity from trauma at home to learning to love and sacrifice.
Mooning over people from afar is so over-rated and carries a kind of silliness with it. It doesn't work. It didn't work for Cyrano de Bergerac, it didn't work for Dr. Horrible and it didn't work for Snape. It may seem so very romantic but it's classic avoidance coupled with a sense of martyrdom.
@@QueenBoadicea You can accept that what someone does is wrong or stupid and still have sympathy for them, just as you can identify with someone's suffering without supporting how they dealt with it.
Why would he join an organization that is against muggles or muggle-born, when the person he supposedly likes is one of them? Doesn't make sense.
Hey, fun fact about Jaws the book: the author didn't know a thing about sharks (shocker) and did no research whatsoever.
But years down the line, particularly after the movie accidentally created a hatred for sharks (I think), he became a shark conservationist
He did so much work after the movie. He did everything to undo what the book caused.
Legendary move, he accidentally caused the demonization of animals that don’t understand what it means to “harm” or “do it on purpose” sharks can’t see very well and the only reason why they attack swimmers is because they feel and see a turtle or a seal instead of a human being. They also don’t like the taste of human meat.
Bro saw the mistakes of his past and rectified them and turned into an absolute Chad. Biggest respects.
He was also almost sterilized by a dolphin so part of it may have been that he realized he demonized the wrong water critter
@@thomaswolfe7845 Someone will probably at some point write a book or make a movie about some really evil dolphins. But I think they'll always be liked. They are very similar to us, we also have the intelligence and capacity for evil that dolphins do unlike sharks that have the inner life of a TV remote. And towards humans generally they behave well, they're monsters towards "lesser life forms" another "human trait".
I think how similar they are to us is an excellent study in general traits of high intelligence and may offer clues towards exobiology. Though much more closely related to us the capacity for evil exists in all intelligent animals with self awareness with Bonobos being an interesting anomaly considering how evil chimps can be (edit now that I think about it elephants too). Not just towards eachother but also "lesser life forms". They basically have parties where they torture monkey's to death while making the chimp equivalent sound to laughter and joy. Perhaps Bonobos show the answer to controlling evil. By keeping primal urges satisfied at all times. Basically the primate equivalent of sex, drugs and rock.
I think it's says a lot about a person if you are their worsr fear. Not Bellatrix Lestrange was Neville's worst fear but a teacher he saw EVERY DAY. Neville is very brave!
He didn't know how Bellatrix looked like at that time
Literally everything likeable about Snape came from Rickman, 100%. And I know why, it's because Rowling told him about his love for Lily from the beginning, and it was an INCREDIBLE interpretation. The one thing that was better than the books. Because Alan Rickman was an acting genius. Same goes for McGonnagal and Maggie Smith, but I like the book McGonnagal too.
IIRC Rickman actualy fought some of the "meaner" things the writers/directors wanted him to do as Snape. Because he knew what Rowlling had planned in advance.
I think Snape stands out as a character for me because I feel a great deal of sympathy not for the man he was, *but for the man he could have been* . He had the potential to grow past the years of abuse and bullying that came not just from his home life, but from his classmates as well. The talent he possessed for potions and spellcraft was incredible and could have done so much for so many if he had shared it. But then he turned inward, and cut himself off from perhaps the one truly supportive person in his life, and it all fell apart from there. We see in the books that he regretted what he did and said to Lily, but when he finally apologized, it was too little, too late. From there, his ambition shifted to bitterness and spite. He had already been hanging with a bad crowd, but he no longer has anyone to try to pull him up. I imagine that at this point, if he still had feelings for Lily, it would have been more on the side of obsession; a desire to have the thing he can no longer obtain.
And then she dies. She's gone. Snape cast in his lot with Voldemort, and he killed Lilly. It was at this point that Snape could have had a true redemption arc, leaving the years of bitterness behind and fighting for something that he cared for. But he only turned part-way around, and instead of fighting Voldemort because it was right and using his feelings for Lily as motivation to keep going, he held onto that bitterness, continuing to use that as his drive. He was petty, and spiteful, and just generally awful not just to Harry, but to Nevil, too (perhaps because if Nevil had been singled out as "the Chosen One", Lily would have been safe). The "good" he does by keeping Harry alive and safe from Voldemort is outweighed, even in the end when he gives his life. There is no redemption to be had, no "complicated hero arc". There is only Snape, the man who bullied and abused his students in an effort to reconcile his own feelings of loss and hatred, and the path he chose not to take. This is what makes him a tragic character, I feel. All the chances he had to be a better man but turned away. He dies a villain, a title he chose for himself through his actions.
Actually, no, Lily cut him off because of one word. She was not the "one truly supportive person in his life" just a friendship born of desperation and convenience... we all have those, we all outgrow them. Unfortunately, the people he outgrew them for were Voldemort and Dumbledore, both manipulative asshats who feigned care to gain supporters then let them rot.
1) he turned before lily died he tried to save her 2) his bullying can be explained by mantaining the cover 3) yes he was bitter but who wouldnt be 4) he did redeemed himself at the end. if harry can admit it so can we
Agreed. And honestly, maintained the cover? He terrorized three houses and favored one immensely. It wasn't just two students, it was students throughout the years. He lifted an ideal instead of grew better and led his house better. He's a bitter and spiteful villain.
@@vladimiramatejova1796 HArry can admit whatever he wants, that doesn't means it's true. Snape helped what was basically Magic genocide and he can't turn back to give life to everyone who suffered thanks to his own part, a part he would have kept playing had Lily not been affected. Harry CAN consider Snape as redeemed, but he doesn't speaks for everyone else involved which is part of why people even criticize him naming his kids after him.
@@vladimiramatejova1796 Harry also named his son after Snape, and not Hagrid. So who's the real villain here.
Snape's pronunciation always appears like he points out how stupid the things were his opponent just said and giving him time to regret saying it
His pronunciation is a very pointy finger poking you hard with every word. Alan Rickman was an amazing actor.
@Cheesus - I think that you are correct in that. Excellent!
What got me was all the Snilly shippers adopting the doe as the symbol of their ship…
But the only reason we have to associate Lilly with a doe is that JAMES is a stag animagus.
And their logic of "They have the same Patronus so that means he loves her" when it actually proves how obsessed Snape is with Lily.
Lily's patronus was a doe, iirc, which makes James' animagus form (and patronus, again iirc) complementary. This is what pushes a lot of people toward Snape's infatuation being an obsession rather than love. James and Lily being complementary to each other is symbolic of a more healthy dynamic.
@@Masterswordobjection nope we never see lily’s patronus. Only Severus’s. We’re just all meant to conclude it represents Lilly because Lilly is with James and he’s a stag.
The symbolism is ENTIRELY dependent on Lilly belonging with James.
@@Xehanort10 it’s not even the same patronus” though. There is no canon evidence that Lilly ever cast a patronus. We don’t know what hers would be.
@@carolynv8979 Canon facts never stop obsessed shippers.
When Alan Rickman died I was at college and quite a few people were crying, myself included. He was an integral part of our childhoods and an amazing actor
to this day I can't think about him without a glimpse of sadness caused by his death, I too remember crying *a lot* when I learned about his death
The absolute, only just barely restrained anger in Umbridge’s face when Snape says he can’t help her, not won’t but can’t, is just priceless. We all know or know of a person who is used to getting their way by hook or by crook, and when they fail, they’re not nice people to be around. To see someone like that be denied their wishes never gets old.
Just a general note because of the wand sounds comment:
It’s interesting how Prisoner of Azkaban isn’t the darkest point of the Harry Potter story, but in the films it is the most gothic, which is fun and probably why I like it - the wand sound effects in that film add to that I feel. It just makes everything a little more spooky and magical, and now that I’ve noticed it’s only in that film I won’t be able to unhear it lol
I love the third movie for this dark mysterious atmosphere. It's always been my favorite one of the Harry Potter movies. And I love how they did the time travel
There are a lot more horror elements in Prisoner than most of the others. (Apart from goblet… that one was overtly horrific)
Yes! Prisoners of Azkaban was my favorite book and movie, idk it just had such a different vibe to it I LOVED.
@@luiiiandmovieee yes the third one was pretty good but it wasn't my favorite. The time travel was good
I honestly felt that while the atmosphere of Prisoner of Azkaban was great, and it nailed a lot of the scenes brilliantly, that it was lacking. There was a whole lot of stuff left on the cutting room floor that involved important story beats from the book, that made the film feel like a far less coherent telling. Particularly in regard to the Marauders' identities and how they don't really give enough information on them to actually put forward a reasoning as to why Harry jumps to assume that it's his father involved when the Patronus initially comes.
And I...have a hard time taking the wand sound effects seriously. Particularly in the scene with Snape teaching the DADA class, it takes me out of the intensity of the moment, because to me, it sounds like the type of sound effects I associate with fairies. Like, add a layer of jingling bells over that, and it would absolutely be the sound used for the fairy in the movie _Legend._
I love these guy’s dynamic! They’re very obviously good friends, they can laugh about each other’s flaws without putting each other down. And when they correct each other, they aren’t making each other feel bad when they do so! There are so many other things but those stick out to me. Honestly, just found your channel, and I love it so much!
I remember before the books were even done, Walden Books were passing out "Trust Snape" and "Don't Trust Snape" stickers. I ended up getting them both even though I decided to trust Snape. Mind you, this was before we found out what Snape was really doing and his reason for it (Lily). I always liked Snape (didn't always like what he said and did) but he was such a complex, interesting character and he stood out to me. I like the broken, flawed characters the best and I think in many ways, they're more relatable.
Alan Rickman did such an amazing job portraying Snape that I'm still stunned, several years later. Also, I loved Sirius Black in the books (and movies), too. The interactions of the adult Snape and Black with one another always killed me.
One very telling thing from the scene you pointed out at the beginning (Snape cradling Lily's body) is that Harry is screaming in the background and Snape is completely ignoring him. It's a dynamic that will continue.
Rickman’s speaking cadence was perfect for every occasion: intimidation, sarcasm, exasperation, or frustration. “By Grapthor’s Hammer…wh-what a savings.” 😂
See, what sold that, was getting the payoff after. The heartfelt version he gives later in the film is legitimately a gut Punch.
Agreed. "Not minors! Miners!" A simple line, but his delivery made it as hilarious as it could be.
I loved him in that role. So meta.
For me, it all comes down to Neville's Boggart. I will grant that JKR likely didn't have Neville's complete backstory fleshed out when she wrote that particular scene in PoA, but even in the first book there are hints that Neville's home life isn't sunshine and roses. for instance, Neville recounts "jokingly" his uncle attempting to KILL him several times, attempts he only survived via accidental magic, because clearly the uncle would rather see Neville dead than a squib - and given that there WERE multiple attempts his Grandmother clearly didn't care to intervene. later in the series we learn that Neville was almost the Boy Who Lived, and his parents were tortured into permanent insanity because of it.... and with all that trauma in his background, SNAPE is Neville's greatest fear?
and when you consider the depths of Snape's obsession with Lily... the reason he torments Neville becomes painfully clear: he's lashing out at an already traumatized child because in Snape's mind, Alice Longbottom should have taken Lily's place - i.e. should have died instead of Lily. even if Neville being the prophacy Child results in Lily being tortured into insanity - that's still a better outcome in Snape's mind, especially when it likely means Snape can get a job at St Mungo's and have her all to himself, free from the Real Lily's disgust at his choices, free from her marriage to James, and free from any notion that she ever had a son.
I mean i agree with you that he resents neville because lily would have been alive if voldemort had chosen to go after him that night, but everything else you said was pure conjecture. He has never shown himself to be so completely obsessed that he would do something like that. That's absolutely insane. Like I dont agree with his actions at all, and am critical of jk rowling's choices with his character, but the picture you paint is of a cartoon villain with sinister schemes twirling his little cartoon mustache, when he absolutely was not that, even with all the flaws in her writing of him.
I think you make a good point about why he resents Neville, and I’ve never thought about that before, but I think you’re wrong about the Boggart.
Neville’s greatest fear is NOT Severus Snape. Neville’s greatest fear is being known as a failure. Somewhat similar to Hermione, actually. It’s not being enough, and having everyone know that he’s not enough. Snape represents this by constantly telling him that he’s not enough. It’s quite telling that, while they’re already in a conversation about fear, it’s quite easy for him to picture his grandmother. You may just say this is because he knows her really well, but let me ask you this. Does it really seem likely that if you put a 13 year old’s GREATEST fear in front of them, they’ll really be able to think of something else? No, they’ll be petrified! Neville’s ability to think of his Grandmother tells us both that she scares him too, and that Snape isn’t actually his greatest fear. See his Grandmother also tells him quite often that he’s not enough
I really hate it when people cite this as the example that Snape is a villain. Sure, you can argue that he’s a villain, and I’ll disagree and even prove you wrong, but you cannot cite this as your crowning, indisputable evidence.
@@samstromberg5593 I've never seen Snape as "just a villain". He'd have stayed with Voldy and not have cared about Lily at all if he was. But, he is a double agent which makes him very scary. Your analysis is lovely.
People think he was Neville's boggart because he bullied him. It's nit true. He was his Boggart because he represented Neville's fear of not being good enough. His parents were excellent at potions, but he was failing it. His grandmother always told him she wished he was more like his parents. Snape being his boggart represents, he's not. At least not that time
@@Nezumi99 This is actually more reasonable where Neville is concerned, especially when dressing the boggart in his grandmother's "best" makes fun of both of them ... thus alleviating both worries for a moment and maybe beginning to let Neville accept that he didn't have to be his parents, he just had to be Neville. Thank you for your thoughts on this.
11:41, that’s more or less acknowledged in the books. Since in Book 5, Harry actually does well in his Potions OWL due to not having Snape breathing down his neck.
And Draco was good at potions too, without Snape's favoritism.
But he had Snape's annotated textbook to help him
@@miditrax that was book 6. Book 5 they make sure to know that while Harry isn’t the best at potions he’s not nearly as terrible as Snape makes him out to be.
@@miditrax Harry had earned an E in his Potions OWL before the annotated textbook.
To be honest, everyone had a Snape as teacher in school and always wondering, how is that allowed. So I'm not surprised about that. And I think for the Dumbledore it was more important to have a loyal ally, than a good teacher.
The magical community is really small in Britain in the HP universe, that's something I am far more familiar with as I live in a country where there aren't a lot of teachers and there aren't a lot of people that wanna be teachers so most of our teachers in schools at the moment are kinda just bottom of the barrel with the occasional gem. I know of a lot of teachers in my previous schools that would get physical with students, I remember one incident in which a boy got hit in the head with a glass bottle for something rather by my 7th-grade science teacher, his parents came to the school (i wasn't there at the time) to confront him and the students in 7th-grade, that's a little over 250 to 300 kids, backed him up because we don't have enough teachers to be able to replace him so we needed him to stay.
Also, Dumbledore struggled to find teachers and he had to hang onto the teachers he did have. I mean, the whole reason Lockhart was hired is because no one else wanted the job at the time, so it makes sense that Dumbledore keeps Snape around.
I'm beginning to believe that Dumbledore might qualify for a villain therapy slot. He has grand plans to save the world but doesn't have much of a problem using people and destroying their lives to get it done.
There's a plot hole in book one that I'm sure was just an accident but it solidified him as a liar from the first time I read it and I couldn't get over it from there
Care to elaborate? I'm curious
Yeah I liked Dumbledore like book 1 and then didn't like him after that. Him just being "okay" with kids getting exposed to a ton of dangerous stuff and not really equipping them with a lot good skills. He's not a super strong school administrator. He like makes everyone else do everything and just sits back and does really nothing.
@@HouseMDaddict It could be pointed out however, that the general school curciculum at the time was what the students needed. Perhaps the only branch of the ministry that wasn't overly covered in their general education was if they wanted to go into the military branch of the ministry (name of which I can't remember how to spell). Everything else was enough for the general education they would need going into their everyday lives. I imagine Charms, and Herbology honestly should have been the main focus, given what we know of the wizarding world and the life that awaited them after school.
@@sylviachen7686 okay strap in this sounds kinda crazy. After Harry gets the stone and is in the hospital wing, dumbledore tells him that he was on his way back from the ministry when he got the owl from Ron and Hermione explaining the situation. Later when Ron and Hermione are talking to Harry, they say they were on their way up to the owlery (i can't remember how to spell that) to send the letter when they ran into Dumbledore who said something to the extent of "Harry's gone after the stone, hasn't he".
They did Ron so dirty in the films! Ron stuck up for Hermione in that scene about her being a know-it-all. He told Snape “don’t ask questions if you don’t want them answered!” He might tease her and talk crap but he didn’t allow anyone else to do it. He was the greatest bravest of the trio to me.
Justice for Ron’s character!
On the topic of what makes a good teacher: I've had teachers in the past like Alan suggested and honestly it sucked for me, because if you have further questions they don't know how to answer or they dismiss you, I don't think learning should ever be stunted.
I had a history teacher in grade 9 (14/15 year olds) teaching History who had zero knowledge outside the packet handed to her. I was aaking about the battle of Britain and Spitfires in relation to engineering aircraft and battlefield strategy etc and she didn't know what a Spitfire was. It was an incredibly frustrating year to say the least.
@@classicambo9781 I've had similar, a science teacher who taught music, a P.E teacher doing math. I've since come to blame the school system and not the teachers, because they were told to fill a class that wasn't in their field of study so they were learning along with the students.
my uni professors are like this, there's basically no requirements to be a uni tutor except that you're an expert in the field, so some of my tutors are just terrible and teach like we should know the content already. makes for a miserable time
I feel it healthier to remember that humans are complex beings. Just because a villain does something admirable does not make him less of a villain. A Hero will fail and take actions that are cruel and self serving. That does not negate the good they did. We should admire actions not people.
1:00, it’s not just one kid though. He fed the potion Neville made to Neville’s toad Trevor claiming that if Neville brewed the potion well Trevor would be unscathed but if, as Snape himself says was likely, Neville’s potion were a dud, Trevor would die. And Snape responded to Trevor surviving by assuming that Hermione had helped him and deducted points from Gryffindor as punishment. Snape responded to Goyle putting an engorgement charm on Hermione’s already oversized teeth (that she was insecure about) causing to grow uncontrollably by taking a look at her and saying “I see no difference”. And Snape mocked Neville for incompetence to Lupin in front of Neville and Lupin’s class. And according to Percy Weasley, Snape constantly favoured the Slytherins already.
Yep, lots of crimes.
That spokes both to his bullying and his cruelty. Trevor is a toad. What kind of sick person would want to kill a toad, in front of Neville, just for the trill that torturing an animal and a child at the same time. Freaking despicable.
I actually really like the pauses that Alan Rickman added to Snape. It makes you hang on his every word, especially since students would be rude to interrupt him, and it makes his taunts even more biting.
Snape most likely saw James in Harry first but decided to give him a "test" to see if he was more like his mother. His mother was good at Potions. He unfairly decided Harry was definitely James when he didn't know the answers.
That's just so ugly and wrong not to mention racist is it just me? I guess he forgot that everyone learns at a different pace also I'm surprised Harry's mental health is as good as it is considering all the crap that snape put him through abuse is never justifiable in any situation I have both read the book and seen the movies he just comes off as creepy and unsettling in both instances this is another example of how so much can change a person mentally to a point where they don't even realize what they're doing is affecting other people it's a crappy situation for anyone to be in I've always said that when it comes to abuse or bullying etc it all starts with one person in this case James bullying him to the point where he became bitter cynical and resentful toward everyone it all starts with one person and it can take forever to break the cycle in my opinion this is another sad example of this all it takes is one person and then a chain of ugly events starts off from there and a lot of people are suffering as a result from it
@@cuteizombi6946 I agree with most of this. Just to add that Sirius plays a huge part in the bullying. And you'll notice that Snape was even worse when Voldemort came back. He seems to react to most negative situations by lashing out at others... Almost like an injured animal at this point. Not sure how his treatment of Harry is racist though?
@@dyutibasu4541 his assumption that just because he didn't know anything about potions he must be a lot like James also choosing to treat someone like absolute crap just because of who they're related to I wasn't sure of the right word? How twisted and insecurity you have to be to go that route? I'm pretty sure his treatment would have been the same just because he has so much bitterness about Lily's passing regardless of who he happened to resemble or be related to if he was associated with Lily in any way I think it's treatment would have been the same
@@dyutibasu4541 I meant insecure not insecurity
@@cuteizombi6946 I get that. And it's bullying but it's not racism. Racism is hatred against someone for their membership of a particular racial or ethnic group, typically one that is a minority or marginalized, not just who their father was. Like, for instance, if he was against Harry for having an Indian parent or if he had issues with him being a half-blood. His hatred towards Harry, while deplorable, is a cycle of abuse started by James, as you mentioned. But that's not racism.
Ah here it is!
Over time, I realized he isn’t as “redeemable” as we all thought, but I consider him smack in the middle of anti villain/anti hero territory. He’s complicated, like any human. He did the right thing, but for the wrong reasons. Like Harry, he grew up being unloved, but also in a broken home, and was bullied immensely during his student days, so it’s no wonder he fell in with the death eaters. His hurt from being terribly bullied stuck with him to such an extreme that he couldn’t see Harry with any kind of rational clarity. He assumed he’d be just like James, and that was made worse but how much he looks like him, and somehow felt the need to bully other students that he has no reason to do whatsoever.
He did the right thing by Lily but that’s it. He didn’t do it for the greater cause of bringing down evil, but for the individualistic reason of the love of one person. I can always applaud doing the right thing, but I still prefer doing right for the pure sake of that it’s RIGHT.
But give me complex characters any day over over simplicity :)
Beautifully described
This right here
For the last time, SNAPE WASN´T SOME POOR BULLIED KID! Everybody described is as rivalry, like Harry and Draco had. He literally invented spells like Sectusempra, which could kill - and who do you think he used it on? Also, about the Levicorpus, it was also one of Snapes creations. How do you think the Marauders learned it? Most probably by Snape using it against them.
Plus, he was racist prick even before they started Hogwarts, when he almost hurt Petunia, and when Lily was concerned, he brushed it aside, saying "it´s just a muggle".
@@veronikamajerova4564 Was it a rivalry? Yes. Did Snape ever do to James what James did to him? No, he didn't. James was the one calling him names and using his own spells against him. That's bullying.
Also, did you ever consider that Snape invented those spells BECAUSE he was bullied? We really don't know why or when he invented them, but that's my take anyway. Again, James and Sirius had it in for Snape from the moment they met on the train because 'Slytherin' and that was it. No other reason. They made their own assumptions about Snape, just as Snape did about muggles.
And if you read my comment again, I said he came from a broken home where was basically unwanted. Nobody becomes a bully without having BEEN bullied first. It's a cycle of abuse in its own way. I'm not excusing anything Snape did that we all find repugnant. Not in the least. I'm saying he's one of the most morally gray characters ever written in fiction. Thinking in black v white with him is useless.
@@solongandgoodnight1820 levitated and stripped, by a gang. As someone who went through bullying including a slight sexual element yeah had I the chance I would have made a curse to cut them up. And the is no evidence he used the spell.
I'm so glad y'all brought up the fact that they softened him way the hell up for the movies. I'm still seeing a lot of Snape sympathy in these comments, though. So let me remind you guys that Neville once botched a potion (I think it was a de-aging something or other) and Snape's approach to correcting him was to tell Neville that he had until the end of the class period to fix before he force fed it to the boy's pet, knowing full well that it was likely nothing but poison at this point (he even said as much), and then he did. The toad only survived because Hermione spent the rest of class whispering instructions into Neville's ear. Snape was PISSED! That's the kind of person we're looking at here. How is he sympathetic? "Always" justifies nothing.
We are our actions, not our intent.
I'm going out on a limb and say it could have been used to show that one mistake in potion making could cost someone their life. But we both know that was just a dick move.
The only Always I think should count for something is Lily's, in response to Harry's 'Stay close to me' (DH2)
@@catandrobbyflores He can show that without killing a child's pet. A home economics teacher doesn't threaten to chop your cat's arm to teach you knife safety.
Louder for the ppl in the back 👏👏👏
I remember Professor McGonagall telling Umbridge off for the way she punished Harry (obviously, she made him scar his hand) and that the school has guidelines for punishing students. Despite the threat, I highly doubt he would have killed Neville's frog. While not much better, it was probably more a scare tactic.
Jonathan. Alan. I think the pair of you, with your respective professions, are such an iconic duo. Artistry (specifically filmmaking within this context) has the potential to affect people at such a deep and intimate level. As an aspiring writer, I take a lot of mental notes while watching these to help me solidify certain aspects of my own characters with their psychology. These videos have helped me in many ways and I just want to thank you for what you do. Your passion for your disciplines inspire me to both be a better, more mindful person as well as a better writer, creating characters that are more than just narrative devices. I love this channel and hope you two have years of content to commentate on because I simply can't get enough.
I'm in the "He bullies children." camp. Imagine your worst bully- and then imagine the teacher that not only allows the bullying to continue, but also *joins in.*
That sounds like hell for an insecure 12 year old.
I'm somehow simultaneously in the "he's an adult man bullying children" camp and the "if literally anyone other than Lily had ever shown him kindness, he could've been a great man" camp. He's an asshole, but his life makes me sad. So much wasted potential.
Yes, but there are also way too many 7th grade teachers who do that, in part because they're not quite the right age for the job.
Same! I love Allen Rickman, he did an amazing job. Now Snape, I will never forgive. He is right below Umbridge for me. I know that's harsh, but he was so mean to poor Neville that he became his greatest fear.
Yes Voldy was bad no one argues that. People will go to war to defend Snape.
Also James was a jerk as well.
And because you live in a boarding school you have no escape from either
@Booper Dooper She also probably wanted him be really nasty so he'd be the clear main suspect in the first book for the young readers. Nuance is often much more limited when the book is aimed at kids.
First and foremost: Alan Rickman is a treasure. Forever missed, never forgotten. "Always"
Is he a bully? Yes, because of past trauma. Is he a villain or a hero? Neither. He's human; broken yet determined, flawed yet disciplined. Gruff and deeply sentimental. Both heroic and villainous by times.
this is it
I couldn't agree more
He's an anti-hero
Snape is one of my favorite characters ever, because of his complexity. He does heroic things, risking his life continually in the name of someone he loved. Except, he’s not on the good side because it’s right. Hes a reluctant hero. But also deeply flawed too. His taught prejudices separated himself from Lily as a kid and put him on the bad path. It’s not excusable tho. He had trauma dealing with the Marauders, but that doesn’t excuse him for later behavior too. And we can’t forget what snape did to them too. Even in the book, I like the part in the deathly hallows where the pensieve shows snape’s memories through the years and you see him advocate for Harry to Dumbledore
Big agree 👌
I love his character. Unlike other characters, he is very complex and interesting. I wouldn't label him as a good or a bad person, he's exactly in the middle. Most people will either LOVE him or HATE him.
Just the fact people still have this argument about whether Snape deserved redemption, was he a hero or a villain? The continued discourse just proves what a complicated character he was.
I will die on the same hill as Allen regarding the whole he bullies children thing, but still.
Neither. More like an anti-hero?
to me, he feels kinda morally grey
There's no argument. He's a heinous criminal.
@@MiaTyrnfae What do you mean? I thought that he wasn’t okay with the plan to sacrifice Harry, since he seemed pretty shocked that Harry was “being raised like a pig for slaughter” as he said. And I honestly don’t understand how grieving the death of someone you loved & wanting them to not die is “pining after your childhood crush”..?
@@renatoramos8834 He’s not a good person, but how is he a “heinous criminal”? You’re totally missing the point, he’s intended to be a morally grey character, neither a hero or a villain
20:32, based on the “lately only those I could not save” speech he gives to Dumbledore, I would say that at some level he does care about saving the world
He means Lily. The only things Snape hates more than innocent muggle children are James Potter and Voldemort.
@@gpettigrewgmailcom no he says he saved everyone he could. the quoted sentense is his reply to "how many ppl you have seen dying?" i like how they portrayed the death of Charity in DH film. you can see in snape's face how he is suffering while he is watching her die infront of those deatheaters. especially when she is begging him. he knows he cannot interfere to keep his cover. they would die both if he did but he still shows pain in his face.
@@gpettigrewgmailcom No he does not we see him attacking a fellow deah eater to save George from being killed, we see him running into danger often enough. And we never see him being anti muggle kids.
Also Dumbledore thinks he's changed "You know sometimes I think we sort too soon"
To whoever made the captions: you make my day! The captions themselves are extremely helpful for me as a person with a hearing impairment, and there are the little things added in too (Fanboy 3000). Thank you!!!
I. had to go tell my sister about Sherbict Holmebatch. I LOVE the captions! I don't even NEED them, but for this channel, I will ALWAYS have them on!
@@AuntLoopy123 always :)
The comment on teachers around 12:00 is something I love! I am an education major just 1 year away from graduation and it is hard! These kids want to learn and it is hard to teach some of them because you need to know where everyone is and then how they learn, so you can then teach them the content. Snape (as much as I love the character in general) is a terrible teacher. In fact, most of them are. They teach from the perspective of just lecture and do a few practice runs and it will be fine, that's not how learning happens. You need to know your students and teach to each student, not just lecturing the same way to everyone all the time.
Late to the party. 'all of them are' THIS! Hogwarts is the worst school. I would not send my kid there. Let us count the staff: Trelawney who is not only an acknowledged alcoholic but who frightens kids by predicting their deaths and is, as a teacher, a complete fraud - plus seems to drug them with incense. Hagrid has absolutely no sense of what is age appropriate or dangerous to someone who is not his size and strength and is nearly illiterate; he has trouble writing a small note, uses big block letters and shows difficulty in even doing so on the island in the first book. McGonagal is competent in her area but irresponsible. Sending 11-year-olds into the Forbidden Forrest? has outsourced her conscience about abuse and child safety to Dumbledore because despite knowing what kind of people the Dursleys are after observation does not lift one finger to help. Binns might know his stuff as well but neither bothers to remember the names of his pupils, nor what year he is teaching. They could spell a book to voice its content and it would be an improvement. Flittwick is competent in what he teaches but does not seem to do anything about bullying (Luna); Sprout does not know where to order Mandrakes as if the ones in her greenhouse are the only ones in all of Europe. Snape is a bully. Now, granted, Potions seems to be a subject where keeping discipline is essential to prevent explosions, but he allows Slytherins to sabotage the Gryffindors and then blames the victims. Muggle studies seems to be outdated and the teacher as competent as the official government-certified specialist in all things Muggle, Mr. Weasley, who can't spell electricity. DADA? What does it say about the quality of the teachers when Snape and Quirrelmort seemed to have been the best of the worst? Lupin, while presented as good is an irresponsible, weak and cowardly asshole when you look deeper. Not only does he FORGET to take his medicine and endangers everyone in the school, but his Boggart lesson also made me want to strangle him because it was horrible on all counts: exposing fears and triggers (and in front of all year mates) is NOT a good idea - neither is dealing like that with Neville's worst fear. Snape will never retaliate, nope, never. /sarcasm off. But it's worth it to tweak Snape's nose, sure, instead of helping the boy or trying to stop Snape from abusing Neville. Don't get me started about his behavior when it comes to Harry. He is such an emotional coward that he never thought to send even one measly letter to Harry in 10 years? All other teachers are non-entities. Which begs the question, doesn't it? What kind of school is the headmaster running here? If I was a parent of a Muggleborn I would take my kid and try to get away from the insanity.S
@@chemina8541 Trelawny is actually the descendant of a very real prophet/seer who was cursed to never be believed, and that curse was passed down through her children who had her power. So...yeah.
@@chemina8541 I disagree with your take on MANY of the teachers but as a whole Hogwarts could seriously use some work yeah
Trelawney is the only one I'll actually try to prove you wrong on though, the other's I'm just content saying I think you're wrong (not all of them, just most)
But I would highly recommend a video by Super Carlin Brothers - Tralawney is always right
Totally worth a watch, it made her less of an annoyance and more just really funny
@@samstromberg5593 ^^ I don't mind a different opinion. I guess it's in this case about sympathy and what you focus on. I don't say that nearly all of these teachers aren't knowledgeable about their subject and that includes Trelawney, I say that they give pedagogy a bad name. Let's take Trelawney and Hagrid as examples. Trelawney is an accomplished seer and a rarity but like with her ancestor Cassandra it is destroying her that nobody takes her seriously and that she can't remember her own prophesies can't help. She does seem to be skilled in the theory of Divination as well because from what we are shown it is spot on - but she is pants at teaching children because she undermines herself and makes them doubt everything about her up to the real information she teaches them. Now, imagine her as a member of, say, the Department of Mysteries as a valued member, praised by her colleagues. You don't need a prophetess as the Divination teacher, someone who can explain and demonstrate would suffice. Hagrid: I love Hagrid because there isn't someone who is more warm-hearted and sincere in the HP universe but he should be on an endangered magical species resort, not in a school. His flobberworm lessons are just as useless as the others - for the average pupil that is not Harry Potter. He can subdue every beast, no doubt but he shows, repeatedly, that he misjudges when a situation will turn harmful for students, he shows no awareness of what is dangerous to his pupils AT ALL.
@@chemina8541 Oh no I'm totally with you on Hagrid AND Trelawny - I love him to death but he seriously does not belong at Hogwarts and she's funny but also probably shouldn't be teaching Divination
Though I also found it interesting that Rowling opened up the question but never really answered it of whether or not Divination even CAN be taught - McGonagall doesn't believe in it and so neither do I
I believe that there are real seers with real prophesies and I think Trelawny is one of them but i don't think someone who doesn't have "the Sight" or whatever can't really be taught it and so I don't think Hogwarts should have a Divination department at all, and definitely not until 6th or 7th year and it shouldn't be required
One thing I do think worth noting is that wizard children are different from "human" children and should be treated differently. Like I'm assuming you wouldn't trash on turtle parents for just leaving their children on the beach and abandoning them because it's just okay for them. Wizard children need to be pushed further than most because "with great power comes great responsibility" and they need to be taught to be better than most children. So I think sending them into the Forbidden Forest (with supervision, but forbidding it without) is totally reasonable for them. Because they're capable of defending themselves in a way that we just aren't. So I think a lot of the things you're riffing on them for are excusable, but I also think you have some good points about the Hogwarts teachers not being great
Also, all the things Snape brought up in his introductory class Harry uses to save people's lives in later books.
It's difficult to sympathise with Snape if you've had a teacher like that. I had a high school teacher so much like him (obviously not as extreme) whose words were often demeaning and who liked to go on about how badly all the students were failing in his class. I think he was very knowledgeable about the subject he taught but was definitely not a great teacher (hence why all his students weren't doing well). He was even a bully outside the class so much that other students were afraid of him. Snape reminds me so much of him and I think I'm still mentally scarred by that teacher so I really, really dislike Snape as a character even in the films. Kudos to Alan Rickman for portraying him so well!
It's easy to sympathize with Snape when you are bullied by assholes who treat you like shit and girls still run to them.
On bad teachers stories,
My CWP teacher once threw a tantrum in class because about 25 of the 30ish students in class were failing. At the time, it pissed me off, because it was 1st period so everyone was tired, it was our Senior year so we were all burnt out, and she spent 80% of every school day monitoring the honor students and helping no one else. I stopped raising my hand because I knew she was never going to answer any questions I had, and I was going to get shit all done with one hand hanging in the air for 30 minutes.
In retrospect, it was hilarious because she basically admitted she was a shit teacher. Especially because I failed that class, then finished the online schooling in _one month._
I wish I had the clarity and bravery to tell her off at the time. What a tool.
@@Dan55888 hope you manage to avoid joining a club to murder people because of how they were born
I didn't realize that, but yeah, I guess that's why I love Severus and sympathize with him far more.
@@harvestmoon_autumnsky You like him because he's a bully?
After snape refused to help hermione when her teeth were growing (he literally said “I see no difference”) he’s forever a villain in my eyes. Not to mention his endless bullying of Neville.
Yes! This is what I came here to say too. I’ll never forgive him for such cruelty. That sort of comment from a teacher when I was 14 would have broken me.
I think Rickman being engaging despite speaking slowly is in part because he's stage-trained. He knows how to imbue not just every word, but every pause as well with tension and excitement, which is so interesting because he almost speaks in a monotone in addition to the slow speed. On stage though, that's often all you have to capture the audience: your voice and your movements. No camera that can be moved. No editing to highlight the important parts. Still, there are a lot of stage actors who went on to do film, and none managed the gravitas like Rickman. He was really one of the most brilliant actors out there.
Snape seems to hate being a teacher. At all times he acts as if he feels it's beneath him. That resentment CONSTANTLY filters down onto his students in general, and a few students that have traits he dislikes in particular.
As for the character of his love for Lily...it's both tragic AND obsessive.
I think Snape did want to be a teacher he just wanted it for Defense Against the Dark Arts not potions
@@mikemorro140
Ooh, good point. He might have been awful and bitter partially because he was teaching a subject he didn't want to teach. Maybe he knew deep down he had the curse of knowledge in Potions and couldn't teach it without being really annoyed with most of the students the whole time, whereas Defense against the Dark Arts was something he had to work at, and was likely very passionate about because Voldemort killed Lily.
Personally, I don't think Snape ever had aspirations to be a teacher. He was sent to Hogwarts by Voldemort as a spy and became a double agent. I think he wanted the DADA position simply because the dark arts interested him most. Why put in the effort to be a good teacher if you don't want to even be a teacher to begin with?
It's not obsessive it's Tragic! lily was the only friend he ever had he though Hogwarts was going to his safe haven, but it become a hellhole of pain and suffering.
@@antisocial_dogmom
I'm pretty sure he only became a teacher after he betrayed Voldemort
"Some of you don't even want to pay attention "
Yet Harry was taking notes, he *would* have been such a good student if Snape had given him a chance
Snape should never have been a teacher in a school, but he *might* have been better if he just wrote text books
There’s attention towards the teacher as they speak and there’s the attention most teachers actually want; taking notes because that confirms they’re paying attention
And then he asks this child raised by _muggles_ questions he can't POSSIBLY know to embarrass him (okay, Hermione’s a counterargument but the point still stands). This isn't just about being mean. This character isn't supposed to be “the Dursleys but at school.” This wasn't handled properly.
Hogwarts was still a British school in the 90’s, Snape would absolutely have gotten away with verbal and emotional abuse.
Just like dursleys
YES!!! THIS!!! I’m not British so I never could be sure but I alway kinda suspected that for a centuries-old British boarding school, teachers who act the way Snape does - BOOK Snape - was considered extremely normal, even as recent as the 90s, which is when the books take place.
Hell even now there are bad teachers who bully kids and actively show favoritism but get away with it because they suck up to the right people and/or kids are terrified to report it
Oh 100% teachers could be very cruel at boarding school, children were always crying over things they said and they haven't even got the excuse of some weird grudge.
Thank you