Ad blocker interference detected!
Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers
Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.
Does anybody know why they destroyed the Burrow in the movie version of HBP? There is so much they left out they could have put in instead of adding things that wern't in the book. ~Drayche
I completely agree. What annoys me most is that David Yates said he cut most of the memories out of the film because they hold up the story, but apparently he had no qualms about holding up the story with completely useless, non-canon scenes that not only don't make sense but contradict the seventh book. Not to mention those god awful, cheesy, poorly acted, poorly directed romances. Jayden Matthews 08:42, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
I concur, to be honest David Yates seems to have tryed with all his might to make the sixth book into a funny romantic film, which is completeyly against the mood of the book. The sixth book is the preparation of the war to come for Harry, he must find out as much as he can about Voldemort, but they have completely focused on the stupid soppy romance stories. Hopefully he will not do the same for the next film
! - JACOBSMITH95
Your right. Not only that but he also sold out in regards to the charcters. The scene where they apparate to the Burrow, and Dumbledore drops Harry waist deep in a bog was just to get a quick cheap laugh out of the audience, and is completely contary to Dumbledore's charcter. Jayden Matthews 15:32, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
I think the bog incident was an act of emphasis. He was trying to make the point that he wasn't in Kansas anymore, that things were taking a more serious turn, getting more mysterious. He was trying to make that point in a more humorous way. I can forgive him his emphasis on the romances. Frankly, the movie could stand a bit of levity because it's getting increasingly heavy. Keep in mind, we don't have all the inherent cuteness of the story that was woven into especially the first two books. But I was pretty disappointed in a few things...I really wish they would have kept in the bit with the prime minister. I think it would have been more interesting and would have revealed more information, frankly. I read that part of the book with great relish, visualizing a Tony Blair look alike being confronted with Cornelius Fudge and was dying to see how they would treat that in the movie. We didn't really need to see that wiggling bridge, did we? Cornelius Fudge could have explained that and we could have seen the aftermath of the devastation. I am guessing that they are not bringing this in because it would require too much explaining in the later movies, how the muggle and wizarding worlds are colliding. But I just think it was poorly done. I also am really disappointed about how they are downplaying the whole thing with Bill and Fleur. These are really important plot points. I think they may try to hurriedly shoehorn it in later. On the whole, though, you have to admit that the Harry Potter movies do an excellent job of portraying the tone, spirit and for the most part, the plot of the Harry Potter series. And the casting is beyond reproach, in my opinion. The actors really take extraordinary care to bring these characters to life. Alan Rickman as Snape, for instance, the actor who plays Lucius Malfoy, and of course, the creepiest man in Hollywood, Ralph Fiennes as Voldemort...they truly inhabit these roles. I feel the way about these movies as I did about the Lord of the Rings series...yes, they left out some bits. But the experience of seeing it all brought to life so beautifully outweighs the minor disappointments.--Susang
Are we forgetting these are witches and wizards?! While it was a tragedy in so many way for The Burrow to get destroyed, would it not be possible for Molly annd Aurtur to repair it? I too am disappointed in so many ways that the film doesn't portray the book exactly also, but the films have never been exact with the films, have they? Yes I do feel the attack on the Burrow was a pointless scene and that Yates should have pulled more into why Snape is the Half-blood Prince instead. And I do feel that the Gaunts should have been introduced. However, I did love the film because we are getting deeper into Voldemort's past and we are being invited into the potential romances between Harry and Ginny and Ron and Hermione.Still Learning 13:25, 11 August 2009 (UTC)