Sennadar Forums

Please lets not post any spoilers here to ruin it for the maybe 2-3 people who didn't read the book..

I thought the ending of the book was much better than what they did in the movie, The Movie ending lacked a lot of the emotions that the book provoked with the conversation between Harry and Vold before the "final" battle...

What are your thoughts, did you like the book ending or the movie ending more?

Didn't read it. I flipped to the last chapter and was disgusted enough to not read the rest of it.

So since I didn't read it or watch it I need to know if there was some sort of Harry I am your Father moment? And if not why not?

J-Man5

J-Man5 wrote:So since I didn't read it or watch it I need to know if there was some sort of Harry I am your Father moment? And if not why not?

J-Man5

No not really, for the most part the endings are similar, but the movie simplifies a lot of stuff, doesn't do some things that the book did, with Longbottom (sp?) and a conversation between Vold and Harry before the ending, the movie just lacks the spark that the book did with the ending and was kinda anti-climatic, and they changed other things with the ending too.

I just thought the Ending of the book was much better than the movie, and Honestly they could have fit it in, wouldn't have added much if any time to it...

***silly joke ahead***

I heard that this movie was great for fans who hadn't read the books, but I'm hearing conflicting things: is it true in the end, snape bites off harry's finger and falls into the volcano with the elder wand? cause that would be epic.

Sancria wrote:***silly joke ahead***

I heard that this movie was great for fans who hadn't read the books, but I'm hearing conflicting things: is it true in the end, snape bites off harry's finger and falls into the volcano with the elder wand? cause that would be epic.

You forgot to somehow include Star Wars in there.

I just got back from it, and I enjoyed it immensely.

Thankfully they had a 2D showing. My eyes don't gel well with 3D movies, which is why I don't go to many movies anymore, I just wait for them to come out on DVD. ><

Fel wrote:I just got back from it, and I enjoyed it immensely.

Thankfully they had a 2D showing. My eyes don't gel well with 3D movies, which is why I don't go to many movies anymore, I just wait for them to come out on DVD. ><

didn't mean to imply it wasn't good, just that the ending of the book was much much better than the blah ending of the movie.

Movies are seldome as good as the book they originate from. In the case of Harry Potter, only the first two followed the books to any real extent. The rest should have been split into multiple movies. They destroyed so much of the plot by shortening the rest of them, that they had to simplify this one to something very different then the original. The same would happen if they ever turned a great story like any of Fels into a movie. They simply wouldn't be able to carry it off well. I just don't think a screen writer is as good a story teller as a book writer. And then you have to colaborate with Directors and others to take away all the originality from the story plot.

lapland wrote:Movies are seldome as good as the book they originate from. In the case of Harry Potter, only the first two followed the books to any real extent. The rest should have been split into multiple movies. They destroyed so much of the plot by shortening the rest of them, that they had to simplify this one to something very different then the original. The same would happen if they ever turned a great story like any of Fels into a movie. They simply wouldn't be able to carry it off well. I just don't think a screen writer is as good a story teller as a book writer. And then you have to colaborate with Directors and others to take away all the originality from the story plot.

Ya, I do understand that, but Honestly the book ending to make it into the movie ending would have at most added 5 minutes if that, I mean what was the point of him trying to turn into smoke while Harry was holding on, etc that wasn't in the book at all, so why not cut that crap, and just stick to the book ending which was much more emotional IMO..

lapland wrote:Movies are seldome as good as the book they originate from. In the case of Harry Potter, only the first two followed the books to any real extent. The rest should have been split into multiple movies. They destroyed so much of the plot by shortening the rest of them, that they had to simplify this one to something very different then the original. The same would happen if they ever turned a great story like any of Fels into a movie. They simply wouldn't be able to carry it off well. I just don't think a screen writer is as good a story teller as a book writer. And then you have to colaborate with Directors and others to take away all the originality from the story plot.

Case in point Lord of the Rings .Wasn't bad by any means , wasn't really what Tolkien wrote either. nuff said.