Yeah, that's because they moved Sirius sending him the Firebolt until the end, after the gang knows he's not out to kill Harry. Kind of a moot point to put in that confrontation once you mangle the timeline so it doesn't fit.
@@aulvinduergard9952 Yep. Harry won the Quidditch cup against a Nimbus 2001 on a school broom. Which are said to be crappy brooms. Yep. Makes a lot of sense.
That's because the conflict between her and the other two couldn't happen because of other changes to the movie. In the book, the Firebolt was sent to Harry back before they knew Sirius wasn't trying to kill Harry, so Hermione went and reported the mysterious gift to a teacher and got it taken away from him, which is the reason she and Harry were fighting whereas the Firebolt gift in the movie happened after the rest of the movie's events. And her fight with Ron was a result of her cat Crookshanks repeatedly going after Scabbers because it recognized him as an animagus, which is something that I'm pretty sure didn't happen in the movie at all.
You guy's should have mentioned the significant difference of the Broomstick Harry received. In the movie, he received it at the very end of the movie and got to use it immediately and it was from Sirius. In the book, he received it at the beginning of the year from someone anonymous. Professor Mcgonagal took it from him to have it tested to make sure it was not cursed because she suspected it was from Sirius, and he didn't get it back till the last couple of quidditch matches. This among a few of things during the book, showed that Sirius was watching out for him.
Neville has significant roles in almost all the books. It isn't until the order of the pheonix that they actually have him tag along for once, even though he was heavily involved in most plots from book 1 and on. Granted they haven't gotten to the rest, but considering they hardly mentioned him in books 2 and 3, I don't think they are going to mention him much in the rest either.
What about how they lessen Ron as a character? I mean, they practically made him a coward compared to Harry and Hermione and, for whatever reason, they forgot it's Ron who grew up in the Wizarding world, not Hermione
They could have done that without lessening Ron as a character and, personally, I wouldn't describe Hermione as powerful. She's gifted for sure but she hasn't shown anything on the level of, say, Snape or Sirius
Kakyoin - MILF Hunter right? Hermione wasn't supposed to know what a mud blood was like she's a muggle born and this is her first year how is sue supposed to know that? like the spells alright she studied forever for that but she wouldn't know terms and things.
Yes, bigger than the one in the girl's bathroom. They skipped the fact the movie told us incorrectly that James was a Seeker. They also skipped over facts like Sirius giving Ron a new pet and Harry permission to go to Hogsmeade which is pretty important considering it was brought up in the movie, made no mention of Harry not supposed to cast magic outside of school, the Firebolt given at the end of the school year.
He was actually both, he was a great seeker and chaser and changed between the positions often, he mainly played as Seeker but was still chaser for awhile
I read ALL the books and watched ALL the movies and i forgot about Peeves. I cant wait to see the 8th movie this summer in London. Its a play UGH at least its a thing of harry potter.
"We need fire!" "Then get some fire!" "Yes... but we don't have any wood" "WOOD?? ARE YOU A WITCH OR NOT?!?" I mean like in the movie Hermione cast a solar light spell straightforward and Ron stayed like an idiot in that scene whereas in the book he actually helped
I have only watched the first two films in full. The books are so much better. No disrespect but the films felt a bit rushed...which is natural i guess when it comes to adapting a many paged book
I didn't really like the GOF movie. I could tell that if someone hadn't read the book half of it would have made no sense at all. I was watching it with my boyfriend and he hasn't read the books, so I had to explain the whole Barty Crouch thing over dinner. 😂
Remember the difference when Harry sneaked over to Hogsmeade under his invisibility cloak: Book Harry: I better be really careful not to bump into anyone or anything, no one must ever know I was here or even suspect anything amiss. Movie Harry: *OUTTA MY WAY FUCKERS, I'M INVISIBLE!*
You skipped the fact that in the 1st movie it cuts out my favorite part of the book, where Harry and Hermione encounter the riddle of potions in order for Harry alone to finally get to Quirrell.
The movies made one problematic change right from the start.... right from the beginning, starting with the Devil's Snare scene, they started taking away Ron's better and more heroic moments-- and giving them to Hermione. In the BOOK, it was HERMIONE who panicked, not Ron-- and Ron was the one who snapped her out of it. It got worse with each successive movie, with Ron being played as a bigger and bigger whiny, whimpering boob and lowbrow comic relief, and Hermione being literally handed the spotlight and just packed full of "grrrl power". Much of the fan hatedom for Ron is directly attributable to this deviation from the books... a cruel mistreatment of a character who was just as brave and loyal-- at least when the chips were really down-- as the others, and with less cause and for less reward.
omgg soo true and they hate romione because of ron's character, but it's just because they dont read the books + the films portrayed ron poorly, tbh ron is my favourite character and he is one of the most genuine and sweetest character
+Kemp Isabel Another reason is that Daniel Radcliffe and Emma Watson had such great chemistry (and they are such good actors) that it did wonders for the Harmione pairing. I wanted them to be together even before I saw the movies though.
I’m re reading after years and tbh Harry is much more likeable. He’s a proper teen, reacts first and after like “maybe I over reacted” Ron is much more useful and every character is just deeper, especially the marauders. It’s fun re reading as an adult lol
Hagrid: Look I have a Dragon. Trio: Yay! oh look its Malfoy! runs back to school. Mcgonagall: Ya'll got detention bitches! Go back to Hagrids hut! Hagrid: My Dragon is in Bulgaria now. Trio: How?! we just left!
Here Harry, this powder can poof you anywhere in the in the world into potentially lit or walled up fireplaces , it's veeeery important you pronounce your destination right. Harry: *Tasmanian Devil Impersonation* poof. I'm sure he's fine, yay book signing.
You also forgot to mention that the actual reason Crookshanks chases after Scabbers is because he knows that he's not a rat after hanging around with Sirius in his Animagus form
Movie version of Harry reading under his covers in bed by using lumos spell at the beggining of the 3rd movie should have had him expelled wright away, and not after blowing up his aunt.
tasos0140 You get expelled from Hogwarts when you use Magic in front of muggles.So Harry did it when no one was around so technically he is not expelled!
a lot of the deleted scenes were finished and put into recent re-releases, recently picked up the boxset and binged them noticing that the deleted scenes in films 1 and 2 were put in
You missed so much of the important details about the Marauders history in the Book that the movie seriously missed out on. Lupin in the movie basically just says I knew your parents and I'll look out for you, whereas in the book he told Harry a lot about his parents. There was also the fact that the Whomping Willow was planted SPECIFICALLY to allow Remus Lupin to attend Hogwarts and the Shrieking Shack became known as the Shrieking Shack because that was where Lupin would spend his transformations. Also didn't mention that the entire groups of the except Remus were self taught Animagi and not documented. Hell you could Literally make and Hour to Hour and a half long Harry Potter Special and put all this into it for TV.
You guys forgot to mention Peeves! The poltergeist was never even mentioned in the movies, which especially sucks when the Weasley twins leave Hogwarts in the 5th book after their AWESOME prank when they tell him to give Umbridge hell from them. But besides that Peeves was awesome, I personally loved him, and he should've been in the movies, would've made it 10x funnier too; I mean I guess the movies were leading more towards the drama and thrill of it rather than comedy enjoyment and whatnot, but Peeves still would've been great in the movies.
I think saw somewhere that in the first movie, a scene for Peeves was filmed, but then was cut out. If they left that one small part in, we could have had a great Peeves in the future
I feel like Harry and Sirius bounded to quickly in the third movie . He went from an evil killer to the last bit of family Harry had left in like one or two scenes.
Cathe strophal he wasn't a killer he was framed plus they got on quickly because they're family and it was Harry's only family but they cut Sirius off too quick I thing 😂😂
You've had the ability to edit your original comment for *_YEARS_* now. The fact that you don't know that, and instead reply to yourself with the correction rather than just correcting the original comment, makes you look even more stupid.
SeanTheOriginal i defenitly not think that it's stupid tho. I would rather confirm you that I better like good grades than any social media and it's flaws. Being smart at almost every subject you have and caring about your grades is way more important then knowing how to change your RUclips comment. I Don't like to confirm it, but you sound way more stupid than me with your rude comment.
Nah, just too dumb to make the connection that a Philsopher's Stone is connected to classical Western Alchemly, and it also apparently just didn't sound "magical" enough.
Philosopher's Stone by far has the most plotholes out of all the books. But the movie doesn't just keep many of those, it adds way more. And I wouldn't say that the movie stays true to the characters. It's only small now, but Ron's character being destroyed and Hermione being perfect is already starting in this movie with the devil's snare scene.
7:15 That scene does happen, but it's in the extended version. I hate that the quidditch match was cut. It was Harry and Gryffindor winning the cup, not just a simple game. A triumphant moment that Harry needed after all the darkness that was surrounding him in PoA
** On the prisoner of Azkaban they also miss the hole week when Harry's left wondering around Diagon Alley on his own! (and many more things that if included in the movies, it would've been too long) But I really do feel the movies started getting a little clumsy after Prisoner of Azkaban. The stories become too different from the books, and they become too hard to follow if you don't know anything about the series, or if you aren't paying full attention... I realise making the movies 100% in accordance to the books would make them too long, but tbh if I were Jo I'd be pissed with what they did to The Globet of Fire... (I feel like that one is one of the most different and hardest to follow ones)
Valentina Figurka that is a disgrace. I feel the trump voter feeling that I had when I was younger and they put out this SHIT. They killed the graveyard scene tho...
Valen Figurka Goblet of Fire was an enjoyable watch but yes, even I'm pissed about how much they cut out. Also, YES FLOREAN FORTESCUE'S WAS ONE OF MY FAVORITE SHOPS AND SCENES AND I'M SO PISSED THEY CUT THE WHOLE SEQUENCE OUT, EVEN THOUGH PoA IS MY FAVORITE MOVIE
Is it just me who had a problem with the start of movie 3? Wizards aren't supposed to do magic out of school as shown in films two and four and in the corresponding books. I know it makes a good opening but it bugs me that they had Harry use magic.
I agree with this as well as the Peeves thing, Neville had a massive part in almost ALL the books, and what you want to bet they won't even address him that much?
I actually liked both ( but I have to admit that it was one of the movies with one of the most cuts in it). None the less, the movie actually jumped a little more on the magic, and it has a couple of cool dramatic scenes. For me personally, it's The Half-Blood Prince. They really dropped the ball there when it came to plot details.
I've only watched a few of your videos, but there's one thing you do in the videos that I really like; you don't immediately just make it clear that you think the book is better, you give arguments on why it's okay that some things changed and even if you do like the book better you still give the movie a fair shot. I like that, not a lot of people do it.
He only uses Lumos in books when he's on the run. Which means it was after he blew up Aunt Marge. In other words the only time he gets out his wand and performs a spell is when he believes he's a fugitive anyways
in the third film they skipped Harry living in the leaky cauldron a couple of weeks before his friends arrived. I know it is not very important plot wise, but I really liked that chapter, when you read that part you can feel how liberated Harry felt after that stressful experience in Privet Drive.
Indeed, I remember that. I'd argue it was a small part of Harry's character development in becoming a proper wizard, instead of a beat down boy. This video is sadly in general making a piss poor job of catching all the details that differ between the movies and books. (Which is why anyone would like seeing it in the first place? Assuming they're not already as nerdy on the topic as us..)
Another fact. In the first film,where there were some trials the kids needed to pass to get to the philosopher's stone,there was 1 missing from the book,where Hermione shined. Instead of staying and helping Ron after he fell from a meter and a half in his back,in the film she goes with Harry in a room where there was a riddle to solve with potions. 1 of the made you go through the forward flames unharmed,the other made you go through the backward flames unharmed and the others did nothing. Hermione solved the puzzle for Harry and went back to check on Ron. I think it would've been more....well...fitting for Hermione than just saying "Do nothing" and saving Ron,Harry and herself from that snare thing....come to think of it...wasn't that Devil Snare thing something Neville did? I haven't read the first book in YEARS,so i have no idea
In the book Hermione uses fire she stored in the jar to burn the Devil Snare. There was no "do nothing" in the book. There were 2 trials missing from the book the other one was to get passed a troll. Not an internet troll though.
Tyler White Here's the thing...i remember some stuff and forget others. For example,i remember in the second book there was a whole anniversary for Nearly Headless Nick that was suprisingly refferenced in Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix game,i remember Neville giving the victory to the house of Griffindor due to his excellence in votanicology and the most interesting character on the Potterverse that never got a single appearance in the movies:Charlie Wesley. Now,why the fuck wasn't he like "HEY DEATH EATERS! HAVE FUN BURNING TO DEATH WITH MY DRAGON ARMY!!!"
You have to say though that the Chamber of Secrets was the film (never read the book I'm genuinely sorry) that had the deepest feeling of mystery, almost as if the movie was a "whodunnit?" story with magical elements thrown in and made a little bit appropriate for kids. The backstory retelling of the legends and tales that exist in Hogwarts made it feel like a manifestation of that urban legend that you always heard in school but never really saw for your own come to life and really contributed to that "feel" of that movie. For this reason, Chamber of Secrets might just be my favorite movie out of the whole series.
funny how they left out the differences i personally remember the most vividly. in book1, he goes through 5 challenges. the movie cut them to 3 or 4... i havent watched these movies in a long time. they left out the potion puzzle and the flames though.... entirely left out. another major difference is in the book he doesnt see only his parents in the mirror... he sees his extended family.
Where was Quidditch in the Order of the Phoenix? And all of the other two Quidditch matches every year? They were one of the best things in the series! Likewise, the character's friendships and romantic relationships were not as developed and this really annoyed me! Especially Harry and Ginny's friendship growing into a romantic relationship, which was very rushed. The Prisoner of Azkaban was definitely the best made film, though.
No in Prisoner they cut so much out for the run time. And at the begging Harry is literally practicing a spell which would have him expelled from school And in the book he's doing essays.
+Kelly Hack it is explained that underage wizards are allowed to perform minor spells at home as long as muggles don't see them, just so that they're able to practice a little bit during their time away from school.
I love how the books grow with their audience. Going back and reading the books as an adult, you can really see it clearly, but as a child I never noticed the tone changing - because *I* was changing with it. It's absolutely genius.
At the risk of sounding too nerdy, why do you (cinefix) skip all the subplots? Like their relations with the ghosts, and the elf's right movement that hermione starts, just to name a few.
Another difference from Prisoner of Azkaban is that in the book Harry receives a broomstick from Sirius, McGonagall takes it from Harry to check it for anything suspicious. In the movie he receives his gift in the end and the film ends
This is an interesting idea they should cover in the extended Potter-verse - can you BUY house-elves? It's implied that they're usually just inherited and passed down through rich wizard families, but where did these rich wizards get them from in the first place? And they can offer their services to new masters if set free, so are they just left to get on with it or does the Ministry of Magic police them in some way?
Yeah, No crap! Peeves is probably one of the most SIGNIFICANT differences considering how HUGE a part he played in the book, and even later on in the books he played a role as well.
In the book Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone, after the wizard chess battle, Harry and Hermonie move on to a Potions task. But the movie leaves that out completely.
Jim Bob Did you read 'Prisoner if Azkaban'. You'd find I'm right unless you mistook my auto-correct Snake but it was meant to be Snake. And next time try making some constructive critism.
slightly bugged that your version of Book Harry has brown, not green eyes! That to me was one of the major differences, since Harry having Lily's green eyes was an important point in the books.
Yeah, I remember hearing about that. I don't mind the change, it's for a good reason, but it's an important difference. They missed quite a few of them in this video, actually. Peeves, the Deathday Party, etc.
+Kmine Channle not yet complete Yeah, it's a little strange, because Rowling mentioned a couple times that Harry's eye color didn't necessarily matter, just the fact that it was the same as Lily's. But then in the movies, several actresses who played Lily didn't have blue eyes like Daniel Radcliffe. So... What's done is done, I guess.
Just because u can except that other people have a different title for the book doesn't mean you have to comment such stupid things. So u can leave now
Did you know that America and British English have diffrent phonetic sounds? So even though they share the same language. There are many differences in not only pronunciation of words but in the spelling of words. Most famously with "Color" and "Colour". So its nothing to rage about. Its like getting mad about Mexican Spanish and Brazilian Portuguese. Its completely unnecessary. You cant get mad about people having a slightly different set of phonemes then you.
Guys they're making a joke lmao; it's a reference to Hermione correcting Ron's pronunciation of "Wingardium Leviosa" in Philosopher/Sorceror's Stone x'D
Its certainly my favorite movie. Garry Oldman is literally Sirius Black. No matter how many movies I see him in, Im always like, "Sirius! I thought you were dead!" lol!
Snape's potion task in the Philosopher's Stone is one of the most underrated changes from the book. It's by far the most ingenious and devious trap that was guarding the stone. Something that Wizards and witches are rarely ever taught, basic math and problem solving
Honestly, we really need some movie slappers, like HUGE fangirl/boys who are hired on the set of a book to movie adaptions. So basically what they would do would be when someone says "hey, what if-" the movie slapper would go NO and slap the life out of them.
the problem is a lot of the changes they make don't add anything at all or in fact take away from what was being presented in the book. them cutting things for the movies is okay, them changing personalities and character achievements are not. fuck the movies.
Some of the great details are; 1. Harry's brother was never another side of the glass. 2. Longbottom was also involved with that three-headed dog things. 3. Challenge of the Malfoy for battle, but he never came back. 4. Taking Dragon to the top of towers to send it to Romania by Charlie's friends. 5. Finding out Nicolas Flamel. 6. Are you a witch or not? by Ron And many more.
Fun Fact: Harry and Ron's eye color are switched between the books and movies. Harry has green eyes while Ron has blue eyes. However, in real life Daniel Radcliff has blue eyes and Rupert Grint had green eyes.
Every time I see something Harry Potter online, I miss the suspense when I read the series and read it again. I've just finished reading the whole series a second time, and I might read the series for a third.
Well, when i grow up as еру books came out, i re-read all of them at least ten times + 3-4 times each previous book, while waiting for the next one. So at least 25 times for the first book. So, yeah.
I have watched the entire series of you guys, pretty well made, but I was wondering...what the heck ARE these black and white scenes with these creepy old guys?
I think in Goblet of Fire movie, Barty Crouch Jr's voice is explained away by him being able to do good impressions. He does the same for Hagrid and Karkaroff.
I'm British, and this is probably why, but i never remember Mr Dursley seeing the celebration of wizards in the book, looking at the book now i still cant find it. Is it because i have the hard back version?
I don’t have it in my softcover either. In fact I had no idea that chapter even existed!😱 I’ve only got the Philosopher’s Stone here in Australia, maybe if I had an American copy Sorcerer’s Stone would have it????
He never actually recognises them as "wizards" but sees people in strange clothes (robes) and one guy (the same guy who shakes Harry's hand in a supermarket) runs up and tells him in ambiguous language of Voldemort's demise (it's all in the first chapter) - I'm british with a paperback version and it's in mine D:
i thought you was not aloud to use magic out side of Hogwarts, yet in the first film ron tries to do a spell on the train and the third harry tries to do lumos in his bedroom, how does that work?
I think in the 5th book, when Harry goes to his hearing, it is explained that students are allowed to do low level spells as long as muggles don't see them.
Since the train is called the Hogwarts Express I think the train would "technically" be considered school grounds so doing magic on the train would be OK.
+Kareem Mukayed Because the only other person in the area was Mrs. Figg who was a Squib. Squibs being someone born to a wizarding family but no magical abilty themselves.
Harry Potter finally!😁 here's my other wish list Kick-ass 2 Stephen King's It A clock work orange Lord of the rings franchise War of the Worlds World war Z
8:45 I just figured Barty Crouch Jr could imitate Moody’s voice. If you’re looking for something to nitpick there, talk about Draco not wondering why his best friends voices are different.
Wait, I'm confused. In the Prisoner of Azkaban novel, there's this part where Harry's broom get's destroyed by the Whomping Willow and the Sirius Black sends him a Firebolt 360. Harry doesn't know who sent it, but Hermione's immediately suspicious and reports it to McGonagall who confiscates it for weeks to test it for hexes and jinxes and such. Then, Harry and Ron go a couple weeks ignoring Hermione for ratting Harry out when they'd pleaded with her not to. They do eventually make up when the broom is returned, and then Sirius mentions that he sent Harry that broom and Hermione's like "I knew it" and Ron and Harry acknowledge that she did the right thing. I mean, unless I hallucinated while I was reading or am mixing up fanon with canon or something, but either way I'm pretty sure that it's one of the things that really helped in defining the characters that didn't make it into the Film. Or at least not all of it did...
The Chamber of Secrets movie DOES include the bit where the Malfoys are getting rid of suspicious items at the shop before a potential raid. It's part of the extended version of the movie, but that's the one that's shown on TV all the time.
"They thought that a child would not want to read a book with the word "philosopher" in the title and, after some discussion, the American edition was published in September 1998 under the title Rowling suggested, Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone."
I think the difference between polyjuice in the second movie and others is that, 12 year olds made the potion that is really difficult to make and they didn't do the best job and quality is a little off.
Kareem Mukayed Honestly if you want to enjoy these movies you need to ingore most of them. There are just so many devices, spells or things that they use only once in the series that would've been so useful in later movies, yet are never mentioned again it's just mind boggling
Just before I was notified about this video. I was in a conversion about the differences between the British and American books. Mostly word usage stuff like cookie/biscuit or 'Sherbert Lemons'. I'm talking minutes here.
I was in a debate about the name change from "Philosopher's Stone" to "Sorcerer's Stone", so seeing the title and watching the video right after that was a little annoying.
Actually, because the 3rd movie leaves out the Mooney, Wormtail, Padfoot and Prongs details, and how the new Dumbledore seems careless, the 3rd movie is what so consider to be the worst movie in the franchise. Plus, to me, everything feels so rushed. Ironically, the 3rd book is my favorite Harry Potter book.
Azkaban is the best film of the franchise, but I agree that the Marauders' story needed to be explain. BUT, I find the absence of Voldemort's past in the Sixth Film worse than this, all about the Gaunt family and the f**ing Half-Blood Prince; come on, the movie was focused on that name and it was barely mentioned throughout it.
I guess I agree Lucas. I guess there are more hits than misses. In my opinion, though, the first one is the best, because it feels the most magical of them all, no matter how many times I watch it. I dunno, I pay more attention to smaller things like that. However, after your argument, I will reconsider the Prisoner of Azkaban. +Thegergaaf14 I agree.
There are lots of nice touches that make the film satisfying to watch. For example, the Whomping Willow is used as a device to show the passage of time in establishing shots that show the changing seasons; but its appearances also foreshadow the climax of the movie which involves the willow. The acting from the kids takes a significant jump up in this one particularly from Radcliffe who begins to embody the character rather than just read the lines - incidentally this film has Harry looking the closest to how I imagined him with his hair actually looking messy throughout the film. The film also laid out the visual style which the subsequent films would all adopt to some degree - the transitions through glass/mirrors pop up again several times after Azkaban. John Williams' score for the third is the best of his work on the franchise which helps a lot with the atmosphere and the music in Azkaban is excellent. They also redesigned Hogwarts and made the castle and its grounds feel older, larger and more crooked which I liked a lot since it lined up more with the image I'd formed of Hogwarts from the books. The film is paced very well and doesn't feature the slight sagging in the middle the first two have. When going through the films again Azkaban feels like it is more artistically made than the first two and deftly allows the transition to the more adult tone of later entries. Lastly, as much as I enjoyed Harris's benevolent and gentle Dumbledore, Gambon's version hints at the power and darkness of Dumbledore so seeing him for the first time is also refreshing when you go through the film series again. These are just some of the reasons I consider it to be the best film in the series as a piece if cinema, even though several things I loved from the book were left out like the identites of the Marauders.
Most critics consider it to be the second best film in the franchise, after the final one. Personally, it's my favourite. I even often skip the first two films because I can't bear the "childless" of them, even though they're great. I highly dislike Chamber. But POA has the perfect balance of seriousness and humour and it really flings the series forward from the "kids with sticks" to "kids in a tense era". The acting is amazing, both the kids and the adults and I love the plot as well. Even the additions or removals from the book to screen are perfect. They removed things that wouldn't work on screen (except the Marauders bit which should have been in) and added stuff that really helped. Plus, the directing and cinematography is amazing, which is to be expected from Alfonso Cuaron.
Would be wonderful if you could mention how Ron's character takes a major bashing in the films. He's very important in the books and is a strong character alongside Harry and Hermione but in the movies he is relegated to comedic relief and much of his importance is shifted to Hermione. Noticed you didn't mention this when talking about Prisoner of Azkaban, in which Ron is completely left out of the loop concerning the Time Turner and some great character-building lines are given to Hermione as well. Don't get me wrong, she's my favorite character in the movies, but I feel like to do a good comparison this needs to be acknowledged at least once! :) :)
I think that Ron is decent in the first few films. Definitely cut out and less well-rounded, but still decent. You really see it in the fourth film. There's nothing behind his jealousy of Harry or crush on Hermione He's just a jerk who eats a lot that they keep around because they feel sorry for him. I hope they address it in the next video, because it's one of my least favorite things about the movies, too. #ron'snotasidekick
Completely agree!! I loved Rupert Grint - he was the perfect Ron - and his acting in Half-Blood Prince was the best of the trio in that film (in my humble opinion), but even then the character is so much flatter than the dynamic one we got in the books. :(
Yes, exactly! IT's never a Rupert bashing. It's an issue with the adaption. He's less lovable, and he seems kind of useless. Harry and Hermione seemed to be totally fine without him on several occasions. Yes, the Shrieking Shack scene! Just an example of Hermione Stealing Everyone's Lines." Not that I hate the character or anything, Emma was great, but she's basically given everyone's character development.
It always bugged me how in the Sorcerers Stone how Professor Quarrel just came in to Hogwarts everyday without like ever taking off that thing that covered his head like once. What if it fell off and then like everyone would be like "Whoa man! You got Voldemort on the back of your head, bro. Better check that out."
Don't like that you left out that Hermione was key to getting Harry through the tests to keep the stone away from Voldemort. She solved the puzzle of the poison so Harry could continue. This made a girl essential to their success and it's a shame.
Also skipped over the fact that it was Hermione - not Ron - who panicked when attacked by the Devil's Snare and he had to remind her that she was a witch, and that it was Ron who explained what a Mudblood was. I find those significant in Ron's portrayal.
They didn't mention quite a few character changes- specifically Ron's- in this video. Such as in Prisoner, when Snape bashes Hermione for answering his question, which book Ron speaks out against, but movie Ron simply agrees with.
Just Mary Also in Prisoner, when Sirius sounds like he wants to murder Harry, it's RON who says they'll have to kill them first in the book while in the movie it's Hermione who says it (just like how in the book it's Ron who explains the term "Mudblood" while it's Hermione in the movie).
They probably replaced that achievement by having Ron being the one to freak out during the Devil's Snare trial. I remember being pretty bummed at how they changed the trials overall. The fact that Hermione was the one to freak out in the devils snare added a lot to her character IMO and that she had a chance to show her talent in the potion room as well. It's been a while but I'm fairly sure she was knocked out or something there as well, that she had some sort of sacrifice to make. Those trials were a way to really show the extent of the characters, both their flaws and their strengths as well as their trust and loyalty towards each other.
at 7:10 there was a deleted scene on the DVD that showed that entire interaction between the shop keeper, Lucius, and Draco. Harry was peaking through a door crack but didn't see the book that Lucius was getting that he later dropped into Ginny's cauldron. It's too bad they cut it, but I guess they figured Lucius gets called out in the end of the movie so they didn't need to set it up at the beginning.
Sometimes when I think a lot about Harry Potter, I get hit by so much nostalgia that I have flashbacks to sitting in my room as a kid, reading this book and thinking it wasn't that cool... then I converted.
I just realized, in the entire movie of the prisoner of azkaban, they completely get rid of Hermione being ignored by Harry and Ron
CHBThalia
Well, they can’t fit all of it in
And all of the final exams
Yeah, that's because they moved Sirius sending him the Firebolt until the end, after the gang knows he's not out to kill Harry. Kind of a moot point to put in that confrontation once you mangle the timeline so it doesn't fit.
@@aulvinduergard9952
Yep. Harry won the Quidditch cup against a Nimbus 2001 on a school broom. Which are said to be crappy brooms. Yep. Makes a lot of sense.
That's because the conflict between her and the other two couldn't happen because of other changes to the movie. In the book, the Firebolt was sent to Harry back before they knew Sirius wasn't trying to kill Harry, so Hermione went and reported the mysterious gift to a teacher and got it taken away from him, which is the reason she and Harry were fighting whereas the Firebolt gift in the movie happened after the rest of the movie's events. And her fight with Ron was a result of her cat Crookshanks repeatedly going after Scabbers because it recognized him as an animagus, which is something that I'm pretty sure didn't happen in the movie at all.
You guy's should have mentioned the significant difference of the Broomstick Harry received. In the movie, he received it at the very end of the movie and got to use it immediately and it was from Sirius. In the book, he received it at the beginning of the year from someone anonymous. Professor Mcgonagal took it from him to have it tested to make sure it was not cursed because she suspected it was from Sirius, and he didn't get it back till the last couple of quidditch matches. This among a few of things during the book, showed that Sirius was watching out for him.
Not to mention the Peeves and Neville problem....
That's interesting. What's the Neville problem?
Neville has significant roles in almost all the books. It isn't until the order of the pheonix that they actually have him tag along for once, even though he was heavily involved in most plots from book 1 and on. Granted they haven't gotten to the rest, but considering they hardly mentioned him in books 2 and 3, I don't think they are going to mention him much in the rest either.
Joel Joedeman Ok, thanks!
In the books, this is also a mayor issue between hermonie, who let the proffessors know about the broomstick, making ron and harry mad at her.
What about how they lessen Ron as a character? I mean, they practically made him a coward compared to Harry and Hermione and, for whatever reason, they forgot it's Ron who grew up in the Wizarding world, not Hermione
But showing that Hermione is such a powerful witch is a way of proving that blood status doesn't matter.
They could have done that without lessening Ron as a character and, personally, I wouldn't describe Hermione as powerful. She's gifted for sure but she hasn't shown anything on the level of, say, Snape or Sirius
Kakyoin - MILF Hunter right? Hermione wasn't supposed to know what a mud blood was like she's a muggle born and this is her first year how is sue supposed to know that? like the spells alright she studied forever for that but she wouldn't know terms and things.
Is that a motherfucking JoJo ref... yaknow I'll just stop
Kakyoin - MILF Hunter so? If he was raised in the wizarding world doesnt mean hes brave
You missed Snape's potion / logic challenge protecting the Philospher's Stone in the book which was omitted from the movie.
I think there was a troll as well right?
Yes, bigger than the one in the girl's bathroom. They skipped the fact the movie told us incorrectly that James was a Seeker. They also skipped over facts like Sirius giving Ron a new pet and Harry permission to go to Hogsmeade which is pretty important considering it was brought up in the movie, made no mention of Harry not supposed to cast magic outside of school, the Firebolt given at the end of the school year.
+bakkahentai2600 wait James wasn't a seeker? What was he then?! And yeah I agree on all the rest
He was a Chaser.
He was actually both, he was a great seeker and chaser and changed between the positions often, he mainly played as Seeker but was still chaser for awhile
You forgot Peeves! The movies got rid of the poltergeist all together
I know I thought I was the only one who noticed!
Peeves has always been one of my favourites.
Yep - would have loved to see it. They did film Rik Mayall, but cut it :(
You're shitting me? :'(
I read ALL the books and watched ALL the movies and i forgot about Peeves. I cant wait to see the 8th movie this summer in London. Its a play UGH at least its a thing of harry potter.
"We need fire!"
"Then get some fire!"
"Yes... but we don't have any wood"
"WOOD?? ARE YOU A WITCH OR NOT?!?"
I mean like in the movie Hermione cast a solar light spell straightforward and Ron stayed like an idiot in that scene whereas in the book he actually helped
I have only watched the first two films in full. The books are so much better. No disrespect but the films felt a bit rushed...which is natural i guess when it comes to adapting a many paged book
That was one of the best lines.
I didn't really like the GOF movie. I could tell that if someone hadn't read the book half of it would have made no sense at all. I was watching it with my boyfriend and he hasn't read the books, so I had to explain the whole Barty Crouch thing over dinner. 😂
Marta Castillo
And In the last Book at " the battle of Hogwarts " Ron says something like that about ". IF WE HAD Pattenrond , " Hermione's Cat
Clément Mukundji crookshanks*
Remember the difference when Harry sneaked over to Hogsmeade under his invisibility cloak:
Book Harry: I better be really careful not to bump into anyone or anything, no one must ever know I was here or even suspect anything amiss.
Movie Harry: *OUTTA MY WAY FUCKERS, I'M INVISIBLE!*
So f**king true
LMFAO
You forgot nearly headless Nick's deathday party
There's where they introduce moaning Myrtle
Clint: please please please feel free to learn how to pronounce "Rowling." It rhymes with "bowling." Do your research.
Or did they just nearly forget it? Glad no one lost their heads over this. ;-)
You forgot that crookshanks was basically the hero and knew that scabbers was an anamagious
+adrasdea It wasn't really a spell. It was a joke given by George (or Fred), remember?
*Animagus
Cedric Diggory George gave it to him
klárka vranovská Thats has nothing to do with the comment lol
You skipped the fact that in the 1st movie it cuts out my favorite part of the book, where Harry and Hermione encounter the riddle of potions in order for Harry alone to finally get to Quirrell.
Easily one of the best scenes in the series.
I thought I was the only that noticed it. That's actually my favorite moment in the book
yeah through the video I was like I can't wit for that part
The Movie cut that part out. That really disturbed me cuz I thought that was pretty important
Funny coz in the videogame it appears and is such an intense moment lmao.
They really should have told the story about the marauders. Its a huge part!
kamileishon agreed
My wife and I yell about this all the time. They deserved so much more! - sorry for the 3 year delay hahaha
kamileishon as much as I love the poa film, that bugs me a lot
The movies made one problematic change right from the start.... right from the beginning, starting with the Devil's Snare scene, they started taking away Ron's better and more heroic moments-- and giving them to Hermione. In the BOOK, it was HERMIONE who panicked, not Ron-- and Ron was the one who snapped her out of it. It got worse with each successive movie, with Ron being played as a bigger and bigger whiny, whimpering boob and lowbrow comic relief, and Hermione being literally handed the spotlight and just packed full of "grrrl power". Much of the fan hatedom for Ron is directly attributable to this deviation from the books... a cruel mistreatment of a character who was just as brave and loyal-- at least when the chips were really down-- as the others, and with less cause and for less reward.
omgg soo true and they hate romione because of ron's character, but it's just because they dont read the books + the films portrayed ron poorly, tbh ron is my favourite character and he is one of the most genuine and sweetest character
+Kemp Isabel Another reason is that Daniel Radcliffe and Emma Watson had such great chemistry (and they are such good actors) that it did wonders for the Harmione pairing. I wanted them to be together even before I saw the movies though.
RHJunior truueee. Ron is a jerk in the movies but he isnt like that in the books. and he is more heroic in the books
RHJunior you got a problem with girl power?
He didn't say so, he just said how much movies Ron deviates from the literary counterpart.
I’m re reading after years and tbh Harry is much more likeable. He’s a proper teen, reacts first and after like “maybe I over reacted” Ron is much more useful and every character is just deeper, especially the marauders.
It’s fun re reading as an adult lol
Hagrid: Look I have a Dragon.
Trio: Yay! oh look its Malfoy!
runs back to school.
Mcgonagall: Ya'll got detention bitches! Go back to Hagrids hut!
Hagrid: My Dragon is in Bulgaria now.
Trio: How?! we just left!
Here Harry, this powder can poof you anywhere in the in the world into potentially lit or walled up fireplaces , it's veeeery important you pronounce your destination right.
Harry: *Tasmanian Devil Impersonation* poof.
I'm sure he's fine, yay book signing.
Haha, maybe the detention took place on another night
BobvanKay Detention wasnt on the same day though -_-
BobvanKay magic
You also forgot to mention that the actual reason Crookshanks chases after Scabbers is because he knows that he's not a rat after hanging around with Sirius in his Animagus form
Sorry, but Shanks is after Scabbers before Sirius enters into the picture. He's after Peter in the pet shop's first scene.
@@indy_go_blue6048 may not be bc of Sirius but it's implied that Shanks is a really intelligent cat who sensed something awry w Scabbers
indy_go_blue60 crookshanks could tell due to him being a half kneazle
you didn't mention how Arthur decked Lucius that one time in the bookstore
for a comparison they sure did miss a lot of stuff, but that happens when you don't read the book but just skim it.
I really liked that part
Movie version of Harry reading under his covers in bed by using lumos spell at the beggining of the 3rd movie should have had him expelled wright away, and not after blowing up his aunt.
And yet, it was assigned as summer homework to him by one of the Hogwarts teachers...I presume. Correctly.
tasos0140 You get expelled from Hogwarts when you use Magic in front of muggles.So Harry did it when no one was around so technically he is not expelled!
Perhaps you are right. If the spell is not a serious one, and is not used in front of muggles, there is no punishment.
no, the books are clear in that minors can't use any spells outside school, period.
Eric VanDerBoom no, he was using the Lumos Maximus to see the book; it was not his homework.
The moment when Lucius Malfoy try to sell dark magic objects can be seen in one of the deleted scenes of the movie.
a lot of the deleted scenes were finished and put into recent re-releases, recently picked up the boxset and binged them noticing that the deleted scenes in films 1 and 2 were put in
^ Yeah, the first two movies have extended cuts.
You missed so much of the important details about the Marauders history in the Book that the movie seriously missed out on. Lupin in the movie basically just says I knew your parents and I'll look out for you, whereas in the book he told Harry a lot about his parents. There was also the fact that the Whomping Willow was planted SPECIFICALLY to allow Remus Lupin to attend Hogwarts and the Shrieking Shack became known as the Shrieking Shack because that was where Lupin would spend his transformations. Also didn't mention that the entire groups of the except Remus were self taught Animagi and not documented. Hell you could Literally make and Hour to Hour and a half long Harry Potter Special and put all this into it for TV.
DeathsPit00 hi
That's why it didn't really need to be in the movie
buggs00 exactly what I was thinking
You guys forgot to mention Peeves! The poltergeist was never even mentioned in the movies, which especially sucks when the Weasley twins leave Hogwarts in the 5th book after their AWESOME prank when they tell him to give Umbridge hell from them. But besides that Peeves was awesome, I personally loved him, and he should've been in the movies, would've made it 10x funnier too; I mean I guess the movies were leading more towards the drama and thrill of it rather than comedy enjoyment and whatnot, but Peeves still would've been great in the movies.
I think saw somewhere that in the first movie, a scene for Peeves was filmed, but then was cut out. If they left that one small part in, we could have had a great Peeves in the future
+Marcelo Zuniga Agreed.
You know what's even worse? Peeves was apparently played by the late great Rik Mayall.
Geez, I totally forgot about Peeves. Great catch, 21! Then there's the exclusion from the movie of Nearly Headless Nick's deathday party.
+Thom Florio
I WAS RAGING WHEN I REALISED THAT!!
I feel like Harry and Sirius bounded to quickly in the third movie .
He went from an evil killer to the last bit of family Harry had left in like one or two scenes.
Because he wasn't an evil killer to begin with.
Cathe strophal he wasn't a killer he was framed plus they got on quickly because they're family and it was Harry's only family but they cut Sirius off too quick I thing 😂😂
I feel like that helps to emphasize just how desperate Harry is for a Family that loves him.
What i missen what peeves, spew, Winky and the potion choices with hermoine and Harry on their way to quirrel
Mis is*
You've had the ability to edit your original comment for *_YEARS_* now. The fact that you don't know that, and instead reply to yourself with the correction rather than just correcting the original comment, makes you look even more stupid.
+SeanTheOriginal if she is on a mobile no, it's not possible to edit the comment.
SeanTheOriginal i defenitly not think that it's stupid tho. I would rather confirm you that I better like good grades than any social media and it's flaws. Being smart at almost every subject you have and caring about your grades is way more important then knowing how to change your RUclips comment. I Don't like to confirm it, but you sound way more stupid than me with your rude comment.
Haley Black yes I am on a mobile device. Although I don't like to use it that much. Thank you.
Fun fact: here in England, it's "philosopher's stone," not "sorcerer's stone."
I was always confused by that back in the day to the point where I thought there were two books.
In Colombia too...
It doesnt make a difference tho, why do people keep bitching about it...
Nah, just too dumb to make the connection that a Philsopher's Stone is connected to classical Western Alchemly, and it also apparently just didn't sound "magical" enough.
yeah I never knew there was an another name for the first book in the States, so at fist I thought they made a mistake lol
Philosopher's Stone by far has the most plotholes out of all the books. But the movie doesn't just keep many of those, it adds way more. And I wouldn't say that the movie stays true to the characters. It's only small now, but Ron's character being destroyed and Hermione being perfect is already starting in this movie with the devil's snare scene.
7:15 That scene does happen, but it's in the extended version.
I hate that the quidditch match was cut. It was Harry and Gryffindor winning the cup, not just a simple game. A triumphant moment that Harry needed after all the darkness that was surrounding him in PoA
** On the prisoner of Azkaban they also miss the hole week when Harry's left wondering around Diagon Alley on his own! (and many more things that if included in the movies, it would've been too long) But I really do feel the movies started getting a little clumsy after Prisoner of Azkaban. The stories become too different from the books, and they become too hard to follow if you don't know anything about the series, or if you aren't paying full attention... I realise making the movies 100% in accordance to the books would make them too long, but tbh if I were Jo I'd be pissed with what they did to The Globet of Fire... (I feel like that one is one of the most different and hardest to follow ones)
Valentina Figurka that is a disgrace. I feel the trump voter feeling that I had when I was younger and they put out this SHIT. They killed the graveyard scene tho...
Valen Figurka Goblet of Fire was an enjoyable watch but yes, even I'm pissed about how much they cut out. Also, YES FLOREAN FORTESCUE'S WAS ONE OF MY FAVORITE SHOPS AND SCENES AND I'M SO PISSED THEY CUT THE WHOLE SEQUENCE OUT, EVEN THOUGH PoA IS MY FAVORITE MOVIE
Is it just me who had a problem with the start of movie 3? Wizards aren't supposed to do magic out of school as shown in films two and four and in the corresponding books. I know it makes a good opening but it bugs me that they had Harry use magic.
It wasn't just you. I picked up on that right away
Abigail Sowrey yeah, but harry always does magic at home, and nothing happens, because he's harry
Kevin Espinoza
Uhhh that's not true.
Kevin Espinoza not true at all wtf?
The page he was reading in that scene had instructions on how to use lumos maxima on it. I’m fairly certain it was intended to be homework.
WHAT HAPPENED TO THE GHOST PARTY?!?! THAT WAS MY FAVORITE PART OF THE BOOKS!!!
Could you do one on the Lord of the Rings or Percy Jackson?
welp might as well throw in Game of Thrones/ASOIAF
that would be a LONG video
Well, they can split it up into 2 or 3 parts like what they're doing with the Harry Potter series
Percy Jackson would be great considering what absolute garbage the movie is in comparison to the book
In the case of the Percy Jackson adaptation, you'd have to call it "What's Similar?"
You missed harry meeting fudge when he gets off the night bus
the 3rd one was cinematically the best one of all. such a well directed movie
in my opinion it was the 2nd one asvthe best
+marco magistro i liked the 2nd one too
goblet of fire was the best
That's because it had an awsome director.
Acually, PoA is harry potters least successful movie, but however made more money than twilights most successful movie.
Neville was also more important in the first book.. and he had better reasons to stand up to them near the end of the first book than the movie
I agree with this as well as the Peeves thing, Neville had a massive part in almost ALL the books, and what you want to bet they won't even address him that much?
I wish they had added Snape's potion riddle from the first book. That could have added more drama.
My favorite book was Order of the Phoenix, which was, unfunnily enough, my least favorite movie.
I wholeheartedly agree about it being the worst movie!
My favourite book was The Half Blood Prince which was also the worst movie for me.
My favorite is Prisoner of Azkaban, which is the worst movie for me as well.
I actually liked both ( but I have to admit that it was one of the movies with one of the most cuts in it). None the less, the movie actually jumped a little more on the magic, and it has a couple of cool dramatic scenes. For me personally, it's The Half-Blood Prince. They really dropped the ball there when it came to plot details.
I felt the order of the Phoenix was the most boring in both the book and movie
what always bugged me was the age of lily and james they look so old even doe they are supoosed to be 21!!!
They're supposed to be 21 when Harry is born orrr?
Yes, it was one of my least favorite casting choices in the franchise! It might be my least favorite, actually.
You must hate drive-thrus.
Even 'doe' I really hope that was intentional
They were always meant to look older than 21. The stress of war and raising a child up until their deaths was meant to age them in looks.
I've only watched a few of your videos, but there's one thing you do in the videos that I really like; you don't immediately just make it clear that you think the book is better, you give arguments on why it's okay that some things changed and even if you do like the book better you still give the movie a fair shot. I like that, not a lot of people do it.
do passion of the chirst next.
on god
That would actually be pretty interesting!
Mel Gibson wants to do a sequel.
Wouldn't that just be Risen though?
+Atomic Particle
We know, it's called The Passion of the Christ 2: Crucify This.
I've read all the Potter books and watched the movies but it's still interesting to watch a video comparing them.
dude same
you r not alone my friend!
Same, I waaay prefer the books though.
It always bugged me that harry could use Lumos in his room at the start of the third one. What ever happened to 'no magic outside of school'?
in the books he uses Lumos too. It's only not allowed in front of muggles.
He only uses Lumos in books when he's on the run. Which means it was after he blew up Aunt Marge. In other words the only time he gets out his wand and performs a spell is when he believes he's a fugitive anyways
in the third film they skipped Harry living in the leaky cauldron a couple of weeks before his friends arrived. I know it is not very important plot wise, but I really liked that chapter, when you read that part you can feel how liberated Harry felt after that stressful experience in Privet Drive.
Indeed, I remember that. I'd argue it was a small part of Harry's character development in becoming a proper wizard, instead of a beat down boy.
This video is sadly in general making a piss poor job of catching all the details that differ between the movies and books. (Which is why anyone would like seeing it in the first place? Assuming they're not already as nerdy on the topic as us..)
Another fact. In the first film,where there were some trials the kids needed to pass to get to the philosopher's stone,there was 1 missing from the book,where Hermione shined. Instead of staying and helping Ron after he fell from a meter and a half in his back,in the film she goes with Harry in a room where there was a riddle to solve with potions. 1 of the made you go through the forward flames unharmed,the other made you go through the backward flames unharmed and the others did nothing. Hermione solved the puzzle for Harry and went back to check on Ron. I think it would've been more....well...fitting for Hermione than just saying "Do nothing" and saving Ron,Harry and herself from that snare thing....come to think of it...wasn't that Devil Snare thing something Neville did? I haven't read the first book in YEARS,so i have no idea
In the book Hermione uses fire she stored in the jar to burn the Devil Snare. There was no "do nothing" in the book. There were 2 trials missing from the book the other one was to get passed a troll. Not an internet troll though.
Tyler White Oh right,i forgot about that....Again:haven't read the book in over 5 years
Cursedwind I haven't read the book in over 12 years, yet I remember.
Tyler White Here's the thing...i remember some stuff and forget others. For example,i remember in the second book there was a whole anniversary for Nearly Headless Nick that was suprisingly refferenced in Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix game,i remember Neville giving the victory to the house of Griffindor due to his excellence in votanicology and the most interesting character on the Potterverse that never got a single appearance in the movies:Charlie Wesley. Now,why the fuck wasn't he like "HEY DEATH EATERS! HAVE FUN BURNING TO DEATH WITH MY DRAGON ARMY!!!"
It wasn't fire in a jar, she cast a spell, that set fire to the devil snare if I remember correctly
You have to say though that the Chamber of Secrets was the film (never read the book I'm genuinely sorry) that had the deepest feeling of mystery, almost as if the movie was a "whodunnit?" story with magical elements thrown in and made a little bit appropriate for kids. The backstory retelling of the legends and tales that exist in Hogwarts made it feel like a manifestation of that urban legend that you always heard in school but never really saw for your own come to life and really contributed to that "feel" of that movie. For this reason, Chamber of Secrets might just be my favorite movie out of the whole series.
1helioss1 it is probably the best standing alone movie if you have no knowledge of the hp series, you can still enjoy this movie
funny how they left out the differences i personally remember the most vividly. in book1, he goes through 5 challenges. the movie cut them to 3 or 4... i havent watched these movies in a long time. they left out the potion puzzle and the flames though.... entirely left out. another major difference is in the book he doesnt see only his parents in the mirror... he sees his extended family.
Where was Quidditch in the Order of the Phoenix? And all of the other two Quidditch matches every year? They were one of the best things in the series!
Likewise, the character's friendships and romantic relationships were not as developed and this really annoyed me! Especially Harry and Ginny's friendship growing into a romantic relationship, which was very rushed.
The Prisoner of Azkaban was definitely the best made film, though.
They'll talk about the rest of those in the future videos I'm sure.
+Kareem Mukayed Hopefully, yes.
No in Prisoner they cut so much out for the run time. And at the begging Harry is literally practicing a spell which would have him expelled from school And in the book he's doing essays.
+Kelly Hack it is explained that underage wizards are allowed to perform minor spells at home as long as muggles don't see them, just so that they're able to practice a little bit during their time away from school.
Kareem Mukayed oh okay
I love how the books grow with their audience. Going back and reading the books as an adult, you can really see it clearly, but as a child I never noticed the tone changing - because *I* was changing with it. It's absolutely genius.
What about peeves?!? I was soooo angry that peeves didn't make it into the films
so was I, I loved him! 😣😭
he was there
+Ben Shepard when?
+Sun Angel in the first movie he made a cameo but all he did was fly through the walls
You could say that you were peeved about him not showing up
More Walking dead seasons please
Agreed
Yep
Yeah!!! And then later make one about game of thrones
i agree
Uhhh... The channel is cinefix not cineshit
There’s a pattern emerging regarding adaptation-focused RUclips; Americans don’t mind the mountain of stuff left out of the movies while Brits hate it
Did you not see the next eppy where one of the cohosts is depressed the Neville Bubblegum wrapper scene is left out of OOTP??
At the risk of sounding too nerdy, why do you (cinefix) skip all the subplots? Like their relations with the ghosts, and the elf's right movement that hermione starts, just to name a few.
The S.P.E.W. subplot doesn't start until Goblet of Fire.
Characters like Peeves and the subplot with the ghost party are all left out.
+Walter Kovacs, oh yeah that's right. I guess it has been a while sins I read the books.
I was so mad when they took out Harry winning the quidditch finals in prisoner of Azkaban
Another difference from Prisoner of Azkaban is that in the book Harry receives a broomstick from Sirius, McGonagall takes it from Harry to check it for anything suspicious. In the movie he receives his gift in the end and the film ends
How much does Dobby cost? I want to buy him.
I looked it up online.
Apparently, Dobby is free!
I'm going to buy him.
This is an interesting idea they should cover in the extended Potter-verse - can you BUY house-elves? It's implied that they're usually just inherited and passed down through rich wizard families, but where did these rich wizards get them from in the first place? And they can offer their services to new masters if set free, so are they just left to get on with it or does the Ministry of Magic police them in some way?
The best joke I have seen in this comment section
Aaaaaand, then he’d be enslaved again!
Sam Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope NOPE!
SuperSongbird21 r/whoooosh
You forgot the part where Harry meets Draco at the robe shop.
I wish that in philosopher's stone all of the obstacles were in in, including the potion riddle and Quirrel's troll.
Peeves?
You didn't even adress him?
Yeah, No crap! Peeves is probably one of the most SIGNIFICANT differences considering how HUGE a part he played in the book, and even later on in the books he played a role as well.
+Joel Joedeman this was meant to be read ironically, right?
What do you mean, may I ask? (referring to Kelly)
+PᴀsᴛᴇʟDᴀᴡɴ They didn't even mention Peeves.
I know, I was responding to kelly r
You completely forgot hermoines potions task during the the sorcerer's stone! That's a seriously important part cut by the movie
In the book Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone, after the wizard chess battle, Harry and Hermonie move on to a Potions task. But the movie leaves that out completely.
Aunt Marge Really Got What She Had Coming,You go Harry
How about when Harry, Ron and Hermione use Expelliarmus against Snake in the book while only Harry did in the film.
Joe Duffy wrong
idiot
Jim Bob Did you read 'Prisoner if Azkaban'. You'd find I'm right unless you mistook my auto-correct Snake but it was meant to be Snake. And next time try making some constructive critism.
'snake' lmao
Kept you waiting, huh?
-Snake
Lol, if u read later in the book, Lupin stepped in because he thought the boggart was going to turn into Voldemort.
slightly bugged that your version of Book Harry has brown, not green eyes! That to me was one of the major differences, since Harry having Lily's green eyes was an important point in the books.
Daniel had problems with lenses so they couldn't use them to make his eyes green
Yeah, I remember hearing about that. I don't mind the change, it's for a good reason, but it's an important difference. They missed quite a few of them in this video, actually. Peeves, the Deathday Party, etc.
+John Smith they should have made Lily's eyes blue instead of brown though
+Kmine Channle not yet complete Yeah, it's a little strange, because Rowling mentioned a couple times that Harry's eye color didn't necessarily matter, just the fact that it was the same as Lily's. But then in the movies, several actresses who played Lily didn't have blue eyes like Daniel Radcliffe. So... What's done is done, I guess.
I wonder: is it really that difficult to change eyecolor via CGI?
*Philosophers Chamber of Azkaban
Just because u can except that other people have a different title for the book doesn't mean you have to comment such stupid things. So u can leave now
+Lilly Keegan philosophers stone
+Lilly Keegan Philosophers stone
+Kmine Channle not yet complete wow sorry hunty I didn't know u were a ten year old. My bad
Lilly Keegan "hunty"
2:48 It's pronounced Rowling. Row-ling. Rhymes with bowling.
Brian Larsen how about Jeff? I like Jeff better. :D
mi name is jeff
See +Brain, Jeff knows.
THANK YOU! Everyone keep saying pronouncing row-ling and I'm like no you pronounce it rolling!
Rowl ing
No, no, no, STOP! You're going to take someone's eye out! It's "J.K. ROlling!" Not "J.K. ROWling!" Honestly!
I see what you did there, Granger!
Did you know that America and British English have diffrent phonetic sounds? So even though they share the same language. There are many differences in not only pronunciation of words but in the spelling of words. Most famously with "Color" and "Colour". So its nothing to rage about. Its like getting mad about Mexican Spanish and Brazilian Portuguese. Its completely unnecessary. You cant get mad about people having a slightly different set of phonemes then you.
Guys they're making a joke lmao; it's a reference to Hermione correcting Ron's pronunciation of "Wingardium Leviosa" in Philosopher/Sorceror's Stone x'D
+LegendsP Or Aluminum and Aluminium
Books! And Cleverness! But there are more important things -- friendship and bravery.
prisoner of azkaban is the movie that made me a potter head.
It's my favorite
Same! Can't really place why, but it balances seriousness and comedy in a really good way.
Its certainly my favorite movie. Garry Oldman is literally Sirius Black. No matter how many movies I see him in, Im always like, "Sirius! I thought you were dead!" lol!
My least favorite are prisoner of askaban and and order of the Phoenix
+Bradley Anderson but I did like the dementors
Snape's potion task in the Philosopher's Stone is one of the most underrated changes from the book. It's by far the most ingenious and devious trap that was guarding the stone. Something that Wizards and witches are rarely ever taught, basic math and problem solving
anyone notice they didn't mention snapes effort in defending the stone with the potions?
yea but it's a little complex and I think it'd have looked a bit weird in a movie. easy enough to cut
Honestly, we really need some movie slappers, like HUGE fangirl/boys who are hired on the set of a book to movie adaptions. So basically what they would do would be when someone says "hey, what if-" the movie slapper would go NO and slap the life out of them.
Momo Zhou I second that :D
This^^^ PLEASE! Happy to keep calling it a Deluminator though instead of a put-outer. LMAO!
That would be terrible if you've read any fanfiction.
the problem is a lot of the changes they make don't add anything at all or in fact take away from what was being presented in the book. them cutting things for the movies is okay, them changing personalities and character achievements are not. fuck the movies.
Hand that person a wet fish :O
Some of the great details are;
1. Harry's brother was never another side of the glass.
2. Longbottom was also involved with that three-headed dog things.
3. Challenge of the Malfoy for battle, but he never came back.
4. Taking Dragon to the top of towers to send it to Romania by Charlie's friends.
5. Finding out Nicolas Flamel.
6. Are you a witch or not? by Ron
And many more.
Harry's BROTHER? You mean cousin.
Fun Fact: Harry and Ron's eye color are switched between the books and movies. Harry has green eyes while Ron has blue eyes. However, in real life Daniel Radcliff has blue eyes and Rupert Grint had green eyes.
cool
I'm gonna be the nit-picker here. You forgot to mention Snape's logic puzzle.
Ivan Ward Yeah
this scene would have been so awesome!!!
Could you make a what’s the difference between the Narnia books and movies?
Every time I see something Harry Potter online, I miss the suspense when I read the series and read it again. I've just finished reading the whole series a second time, and I might read the series for a third.
Go for it dude, it's always a magical experience.
I'm re-reading the whole thing for the 4th or 5th time now.
Well, when i grow up as еру books came out, i re-read all of them at least ten times + 3-4 times each previous book, while waiting for the next one. So at least 25 times for the first book.
So, yeah.
The first book is uncountable for me.
I finished reading Harry Potter but then it felt as if it was saying "don't go away read me all again" and so I do straight form the beginning again
I have watched the entire series of you guys, pretty well made, but I was wondering...what the heck ARE these black and white scenes with these creepy old guys?
I think in Goblet of Fire movie, Barty Crouch Jr's voice is explained away by him being able to do good impressions. He does the same for Hagrid and Karkaroff.
I'm British, and this is probably why, but i never remember Mr Dursley seeing the celebration of wizards in the book, looking at the book now i still cant find it. Is it because i have the hard back version?
Titan Rex First Chapter, it’s on my hard Book British version
I don’t have it in my softcover either. In fact I had no idea that chapter even existed!😱
I’ve only got the Philosopher’s Stone here in Australia, maybe if I had an American copy Sorcerer’s Stone would have it????
He never actually recognises them as "wizards" but sees people in strange clothes (robes) and one guy (the same guy who shakes Harry's hand in a supermarket) runs up and tells him in ambiguous language of Voldemort's demise (it's all in the first chapter) - I'm british with a paperback version and it's in mine D:
Please do The Jungle Book and Ender's Game
Also the Giver that film was a disgrace to the novel
They already did the jungle book I think
We don't talk about the Ender's Game movie.
What I Thought the Ender's Game Movie was good
+Rman Nayr The book is so much better. The movie is utter shit.
You forgot the fight between Mr. Weasley and Malfoy that happened in the book. Would've loved to see that.
i thought you was not aloud to use magic out side of Hogwarts, yet in the first film ron tries to do a spell on the train and the third harry tries to do lumos in his bedroom, how does that work?
I think in the 5th book, when Harry goes to his hearing, it is explained that students are allowed to do low level spells as long as muggles don't see them.
I think they're allowed to use magic on the train too.
Since the train is called the Hogwarts Express I think the train would "technically" be considered school grounds so doing magic on the train would be OK.
+Cyanakrli then how did they know that it was Harry specifically who conjured the patronus in front of Dudley?
+Kareem Mukayed Because the only other person in the area was Mrs. Figg who was a Squib. Squibs being someone born to a wizarding family but no magical abilty themselves.
Harry Potter finally!😁 here's my other wish list
Kick-ass 2
Stephen King's It
A clock work orange
Lord of the rings franchise
War of the Worlds
World war Z
I'd like to see them do Starship Troopers.
all of them plus American Psycho
Great suggestions!! Fun story, just the other day we were pretty sure we saw Malcolm McDowell walking his dog.
+Cameron Austin yes!! American Psycho would be awesome
World War Z: everything
8:45 I just figured Barty Crouch Jr could imitate Moody’s voice. If you’re looking for something to nitpick there, talk about Draco not wondering why his best friends voices are different.
You forgot that Peeves the poltergeist isn't in the movies at all.
Wait, I'm confused.
In the Prisoner of Azkaban novel, there's this part where Harry's broom get's destroyed by the Whomping Willow and the Sirius Black sends him a Firebolt 360. Harry doesn't know who sent it, but Hermione's immediately suspicious and reports it to McGonagall who confiscates it for weeks to test it for hexes and jinxes and such. Then, Harry and Ron go a couple weeks ignoring Hermione for ratting Harry out when they'd pleaded with her not to. They do eventually make up when the broom is returned, and then Sirius mentions that he sent Harry that broom and Hermione's like "I knew it" and Ron and Harry acknowledge that she did the right thing.
I mean, unless I hallucinated while I was reading or am mixing up fanon with canon or something, but either way I'm pretty sure that it's one of the things that really helped in defining the characters that didn't make it into the Film.
Or at least not all of it did...
Myorrin Times Yeah. You're not going crazy. I haven't read a single article of Fanon, so I'm 99% sure you're correct.
Myorrin Times You're correct about the incident, but I don't think cutting it out really harmed the characters.
The Chamber of Secrets movie DOES include the bit where the Malfoys are getting rid of suspicious items at the shop before a potential raid. It's part of the extended version of the movie, but that's the one that's shown on TV all the time.
It's called the philosophers stone here in Australia
ayy
"They thought that a child would not want to read a book with the word "philosopher" in the title and, after some discussion, the American edition was published in September 1998 under the title Rowling suggested, Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone."
Australians all let us rejoice
In scotland to
in everywhere other than America that's what it's called
I think the difference between polyjuice in the second movie and others is that, 12 year olds made the potion that is really difficult to make and they didn't do the best job and quality is a little off.
But in the seventh movie Moody is the one who made the potion to give them to turn into Harry and all their voices remain the same.
+Kareem Mukayed the only instance of poky juice potion changing voice in movies is when Barty Crouch junior uses it
+marcino457 yeah it's just the inconsistency that bothers me. Not a really big deal tho :p
Kareem Mukayed Honestly if you want to enjoy these movies you need to ingore most of them. There are just so many devices, spells or things that they use only once in the series that would've been so useful in later movies, yet are never mentioned again it's just mind boggling
Maybe Barty is just good at impressions....
The scene with the artifacts from the Malfoys is in the extended cut of the movie.
Just before I was notified about this video. I was in a conversion about the differences between the British and American books. Mostly word usage stuff like cookie/biscuit or 'Sherbert Lemons'. I'm talking minutes here.
Lemon drops! xD
+NeverlandHunter You get it.
I was in a debate about the name change from "Philosopher's Stone" to "Sorcerer's Stone", so seeing the title and watching the video right after that was a little annoying.
I think you misspelled “Philosopher’s” there buddy
A special edition of the COS has the scene with Draco and his father at Borgin and Burks
Actually, because the 3rd movie leaves out the Mooney, Wormtail, Padfoot and Prongs details, and how the new Dumbledore seems careless, the 3rd movie is what so consider to be the worst movie in the franchise. Plus, to me, everything feels so rushed. Ironically, the 3rd book is my favorite Harry Potter book.
Really? I'm not saying you're wrong, but what do you see in it that I don't? Just curious.
Azkaban is the best film of the franchise, but I agree that the Marauders' story needed to be explain. BUT, I find the absence of Voldemort's past in the Sixth Film worse than this, all about the Gaunt family and the f**ing Half-Blood Prince; come on, the movie was focused on that name and it was barely mentioned throughout it.
I guess I agree Lucas. I guess there are more hits than misses. In my opinion, though, the first one is the best, because it feels the most magical of them all, no matter how many times I watch it. I dunno, I pay more attention to smaller things like that. However, after your argument, I will reconsider the Prisoner of Azkaban.
+Thegergaaf14 I agree.
There are lots of nice touches that make the film satisfying to watch. For example, the Whomping Willow is used as a device to show the passage of time in establishing shots that show the changing seasons; but its appearances also foreshadow the climax of the movie which involves the willow. The acting from the kids takes a significant jump up in this one particularly from Radcliffe who begins to embody the character rather than just read the lines - incidentally this film has Harry looking the closest to how I imagined him with his hair actually looking messy throughout the film. The film also laid out the visual style which the subsequent films would all adopt to some degree - the transitions through glass/mirrors pop up again several times after Azkaban. John Williams' score for the third is the best of his work on the franchise which helps a lot with the atmosphere and the music in Azkaban is excellent. They also redesigned Hogwarts and made the castle and its grounds feel older, larger and more crooked which I liked a lot since it lined up more with the image I'd formed of Hogwarts from the books. The film is paced very well and doesn't feature the slight sagging in the middle the first two have. When going through the films again Azkaban feels like it is more artistically made than the first two and deftly allows the transition to the more adult tone of later entries. Lastly, as much as I enjoyed Harris's benevolent and gentle Dumbledore, Gambon's version hints at the power and darkness of Dumbledore so seeing him for the first time is also refreshing when you go through the film series again. These are just some of the reasons I consider it to be the best film in the series as a piece if cinema, even though several things I loved from the book were left out like the identites of the Marauders.
Most critics consider it to be the second best film in the franchise, after the final one. Personally, it's my favourite. I even often skip the first two films because I can't bear the "childless" of them, even though they're great. I highly dislike Chamber. But POA has the perfect balance of seriousness and humour and it really flings the series forward from the "kids with sticks" to "kids in a tense era". The acting is amazing, both the kids and the adults and I love the plot as well. Even the additions or removals from the book to screen are perfect. They removed things that wouldn't work on screen (except the Marauders bit which should have been in) and added stuff that really helped. Plus, the directing and cinematography is amazing, which is to be expected from Alfonso Cuaron.
Would be wonderful if you could mention how Ron's character takes a major bashing in the films. He's very important in the books and is a strong character alongside Harry and Hermione but in the movies he is relegated to comedic relief and much of his importance is shifted to Hermione. Noticed you didn't mention this when talking about Prisoner of Azkaban, in which Ron is completely left out of the loop concerning the Time Turner and some great character-building lines are given to Hermione as well. Don't get me wrong, she's my favorite character in the movies, but I feel like to do a good comparison this needs to be acknowledged at least once! :) :)
I think that Ron is decent in the first few films. Definitely cut out and less well-rounded, but still decent. You really see it in the fourth film. There's nothing behind his jealousy of Harry or crush on Hermione He's just a jerk who eats a lot that they keep around because they feel sorry for him. I hope they address it in the next video, because it's one of my least favorite things about the movies, too.
#ron'snotasidekick
Completely agree!! I loved Rupert Grint - he was the perfect Ron - and his acting in Half-Blood Prince was the best of the trio in that film (in my humble opinion), but even then the character is so much flatter than the dynamic one we got in the books. :(
Yes, exactly! IT's never a Rupert bashing. It's an issue with the adaption. He's less lovable, and he seems kind of useless. Harry and Hermione seemed to be totally fine without him on several occasions.
Yes, the Shrieking Shack scene! Just an example of Hermione Stealing Everyone's Lines." Not that I hate the character or anything, Emma was great, but she's basically given everyone's character development.
Y'all didn't even mention the biggest omission from the first movie - the fire, potions and riddles room near the end.
It always bugged me how in the Sorcerers Stone how Professor Quarrel just came in to Hogwarts everyday without like ever taking off that thing that covered his head like once. What if it fell off and then like everyone would be like "Whoa man! You got Voldemort on the back of your head, bro. Better check that out."
its HP world so the answe ris obvoius....magic:D
Don't like that you left out that Hermione was key to getting Harry through the tests to keep the stone away from Voldemort. She solved the puzzle of the poison so Harry could continue. This made a girl essential to their success and it's a shame.
Also skipped over the fact that it was Hermione - not Ron - who panicked when attacked by the Devil's Snare and he had to remind her that she was a witch, and that it was Ron who explained what a Mudblood was. I find those significant in Ron's portrayal.
They didn't mention quite a few character changes- specifically Ron's- in this video. Such as in Prisoner, when Snape bashes Hermione for answering his question, which book Ron speaks out against, but movie Ron simply agrees with.
Just Mary Also in Prisoner, when Sirius sounds like he wants to murder Harry, it's RON who says they'll have to kill them first in the book while in the movie it's Hermione who says it (just like how in the book it's Ron who explains the term "Mudblood" while it's Hermione in the movie).
They probably replaced that achievement by having Ron being the one to freak out during the Devil's Snare trial. I remember being pretty bummed at how they changed the trials overall.
The fact that Hermione was the one to freak out in the devils snare added a lot to her character IMO and that she had a chance to show her talent in the potion room as well. It's been a while but I'm fairly sure she was knocked out or something there as well, that she had some sort of sacrifice to make. Those trials were a way to really show the extent of the characters, both their flaws and their strengths as well as their trust and loyalty towards each other.
Dr foto She wasn't knocked out, there was only enough for Harry to drink so she had to turn back.
at 7:10 there was a deleted scene on the DVD that showed that entire interaction between the shop keeper, Lucius, and Draco. Harry was peaking through a door crack but didn't see the book that Lucius was getting that he later dropped into Ginny's cauldron. It's too bad they cut it, but I guess they figured Lucius gets called out in the end of the movie so they didn't need to set it up at the beginning.
7:15 Deleted scene on the DVD! DELETED SCENE IN THE DVD SPECIAL FEATURES!!!
Repeat after me: ROWLING, like BOWLING, not like HOWLING.
Thank you, finally someone understands.
The creator of the GIF says it's JIF
and it leviOHsa not levioSAR
It's LeviOOOOOOOOOOOOOOsa,
Not LeviosAAAAAAAAAAAAAR.
actually jk pronounces it ROwling
Sometimes when I think a lot about Harry Potter, I get hit by so much nostalgia that I have flashbacks to sitting in my room as a kid, reading this book and thinking it wasn't that cool... then I converted.
Part 2- Harry Potter and the order of fire
Part 3- Harry Potter and the deadly prince
Part 2- Harry Potter and the Goblet order of firePart 3- Harry Potter and the Half-blood Hallows
Slayer Kracor Wouldn't that be Goblet of the Phoenix?
Yh haha I wasn't really thinking when I wrote it, haha
Harry Potter and the goblet of the Phoenix
Harry Potter and the half blood hallows