Welcome, to all of those insane enough to walk this blog!

As you might have noticed, this here blog is one big archive of the ramblings of an insane author. So insane, in fact, that I wouldn't be surprised if you went mad just reading said blog...Good luck ;)


I lied. This is not, in fact, a "directory" as the title above might suggest...This is merely a warning of what you might find on this blog. I believe I have already warned you of the insane ramblings archived in this blog, but I must say, if you are not prepared for the tomfooleries that can be found here, you might just want to close this tab, shut your computer down, and walk away slowly in order to keep your OWN sanity in check. Fair warning >;)

Thursday, July 30, 2009

They killed Fleur!

Just a few days ago, I finally went and saw Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince in the theater. I have to say, I was sort of disappointed. They left so much of what was in the book out, and then added things that weren't in the book at all. It was quite confusing, to tell the truth. First, I would like to comment on how they left something so important as Fleur Delacour (AKA "Phlegm) and Bill's (one of Mr. and Mrs. Weasly's many son's) engagement. In the book, when Harry first gets to the Burrow, right before he goes to Hogwarts, (not when he visits for the holidays. And F.Y.I, the Burrow never gets burned down in the book! That's another example of the lies that the movie people are trying to feed us) he meets Fleur Delacour in the Burrow, and finds out that she and Bill are getting married. That was one of the many things I was looking forward to when the movie came out in the theater, because I found the awkwardness of Ron having the hots for her, and Ginny, Hermione and Molly (Mrs. Weasly) hating her guts and calling her Phlegm to be hilarious. But upon seeing the movie, I was sourly disappointed to see that they did not even mention her or Bill at all. Now I don't want to ruin it if you haven't read the book yet, (really, it's your fault if you haven't read it yet, because you've had plenty of time) but in the beginning of the Deathly Hallows, Bill and Fleur have their wedding. So I'm thinking, "how do they expect to throw the wedding into the seventh movie like that, with no wind-up in the story?" And also, in the Half Blood Prince movie, they left out Greyback (the werewolf) attacking Bill at the school when the Death Eaters showed up in the end. How could they leave something so pivotal to the story out?!? Plus, in the book, there was a lot more of Tonks and Lupin, and their own epic love story. But in the movie, they were in like, one scene, and it did not do justice to them at all. Okay, I think I should stop talking about this and move on, before I get too upset about it. Instead, I think I'll move on to the poor job of portraying Dumbledores genius. In the book, when he explains to Harry about the Horcruxes, (after Harry acquires the memory from Professor Slughorn) he tells him about his theory that Voldemort (I'm not afraid to say his name!) made seven Horcruxes, (or rather, six, since the seventh is the piece of soul that's left in his body) because seven is the most powerful number in the magical community, and that Harry had destroyed one already, (Tom Riddle's diary) and that he himself had destroyed one as well (Slytherin's ring, the one that Voldemort's grandfather, Marvolo, had stolen from him by Voldemort himself). Now, I don't want to get into this big history lesson about all the Horcruxes, because more likely than not, you have read the book yourself, and therefore know everything I'm telling you, so I'll just get to the point, which is: in the Half Blood Prince book, Dumbledore was almost sure that he was right about his theories, and was proven right when they got Slughorn's memory. In the movie, they made Dumbledore out to be a complete idiot, who had no idea what a Horcrux was before he saw the memory, and was shocked completely by the notion that Voldemort would have done something like that. And don't even get me started on how they killed Dumbledore in the movie.
Aww, too late...
So, in the book, Harry has to Apparate himself and Dumbledore out of the cave, (which was a big accomplishment, given the fact that Harry didn't even know how to Apparate very well to begin with, plus the fact that he had to take Dumbledore with him piggy-back Apparition, which was supposed to be very hard for a beginner!) and when they get past Madame Rosemerta in Hogsmead, (who they didn't mention being under the Imperius curse in the movie) they flew to a landing on the Astronomy Tower, where Dumbledore ultimately died. When they got there, Dumbledore used a stunning spell on Harry, who was still wearing his Invisibility Cloak, and Harry got stuck there, without the ability to move even the slightest muscle, and had to watch Dumbledore die right in front of him, without being able to stop it. In the movie, Dumbledore has Harry hide down below, and Draco comes in, and they talk, and when Snape comes in, he comes in behind Harry, and puts his finger up to his lip, as if to say, "shush", and Harry just stands there and lets him go up and kill Dumbledore! What?!? They made it out to look like Harry trusted Snape! Like that would ever happen! If Harry had Snape down there with him, he would have immobilized him or something, because he wouldn't have trusted Snape enough to let him up there with all the other Death Eaters, especially if Dumbledore were so weak! But whatever, it's not like I can change the movie or anything. And also, (this is the last thing I'll complain about, I swear!) they didn't even talk about the Apperition lessons, which would have been funny to see in the movie. And also, (this is the last time! Really!) they did not do justice to Harry and Ginny's kiss, at all. So all-in-all, I guess what I'm trying to say, is that the movie didn't quite add up to my expectations, although, I guess if you don't think about what was in the book, it was a good movie. Darker than the other five movies, but it was good.
Hope I didn't bore the heck out of you, Miss Eccentric.

1 comment:

  1. I couldn't agree more about the movie. It was excellent as movies go, but when compared with the book, it failed dismally. All of your points were very good. I read on a fansite that they added the attack on the Burrow because they thought that the movie needed to be darker and less of a love story/comedy. I think that instead they should have shown the great battle at Hogwarts, especially since the way they ended it seemed very anti-climactic. I understand the reasoning about leaving things out of the movie because of time restraints (can't make it three hours), but I wish they would be more thoughtful about what to take out and what to change.