This may not be appropriate, but I thought this place doesn't have to just be a Wiki! Would anyone else like to speculate or suggest what actors we'd like to see in the roles of the new characters? There's Umbridge and Tonks, but also what about Firenze, will he appear the same as he did in Philosopher's Stone? - Vostok 00:17, 31 Dec 2005 (UTC)


Wait, I don't see the actor who's going to be playing Dumbledore?

BTW, does anyone else think that, upon reading the 5th and 6th books, the role of Dumbledore was almost written for the first actor to play him?

Yes, I know he passed away, but; when thinking about the things he says and does in the 1st and 2nd films (seeing how he moves and listening to his speech patterns) and then reading The Order of the Phoenix and The Half-Blood Prince, can you simply see his character uttering those lines and acting that role?

After watching the 4th movie, I can't readily envision the "Second Dumbledore" actor (though he is doing a fine job) as that character.

So the question remains, who's going to play him in movie #5? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Stevegoryan (talkcontribs).

Richard Griffiths has remained Dumbledore for Order of the Phoenix. {{SUBST:User:C3PO the Dragon Slayer/sig}} 14:14, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Richard Griffiths has never played Dumbledore. In films 1-2 he was played by Richard Harris, in 3-5 and presumably 6-7 he was portrayed by Michæl Gambon. 16:01, 5 August 2007 (UTC)


This article is currently little more than a list. I haven't seen the movie yet, but one would think that the significant differences between the book and the movie would make for some interesting material. For example, in the book, Sirius was propelled through the veil due to a stunning spell, but I heard that in the movie, he was killed with the Killing Curse and fell through the veil. Also worth mentioning would be the fact that JK advised the filmmakers not to leave out Kreacher, which they had been planning to do, since it would make the seventh movie difficult to put together (something that may also be noteworthy in the Deathly Hallows article). If nobody else steps up and starts adding important bits, I'll do so after I've seen the movie. - UglinessMan 06:16, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

I saw the movie, and tryed to take a mentel note of things that were left out. I'd try to list them, But I'm sure the good folks at wikipedia have done a much better job then me. Tesfan 17:06, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Possible Corrections

There appears to be something missing from the Differences section. There is no mention in the movie about Ron and Hermione being named Prefects. --Bob 01:02, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Also, the Mistakes section is incorrect. The radio reports the temperature to be in the mid-90's Fahrenheit, so that explains the mid-90's reference. --Bob 01:05, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Location of hogsmeade station and the forbidden forest

Someone has written that "Hogsmeade Station is at the edge of Hogsmeade in the novels, yet it is in/close to the Forbidden Forest in the film, with no village in sight.", this is not true. According to JK's hand-drawn map (, Hogsmeade station is located south-east of Hogwarts, by the lake, and the village is located north of Hogwarts.

Also, the forbidden forest in the films (at least PA and later) is located NORTH of Hogwarts, across the wooden bridge, not south-east. In the PA film they also used this bridge to get to Hogsmeade, which would fit with the novels because the bridge goes north. In the SS film we could see that the Hogsmeade station is by the lake since they used boats to get to Hogwarts (exactly like in the books).

So, the forest we see in this movie is just some other forest. There is nothing in the movie that says it would be the FORBIDDEN forest. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs).

Error in the film!

In the film, when Harry was forced to give prophecy to Lucius Malfoy, Neville suddenly shouted out Don't give it to her. Why Neville said the word her that is suppose to be word him? 01:34, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

You are right. --Lupin & Kingsley 03:11, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Really, I think Neville said Don't give it to 'em, Harry! Gryff23 03:17, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Harry's duel with Lucius

The scene appears to have Harry casting spells non-verbally, but harry could be casting a spell that doesn't have a incantation (as harry is described in the sixth book to have difficulty casting spells non-verbally, let alone to be able to in the 5th film). Hermoine in the books was seen to cast a spell non verbally to dry out her clothes as well as set snapes cloak on fire, (this was in the first book) Harry cast the same spell Lucius and Sirius where casting (no projectile but a red splash when its blocked) the spell in question is probably a spell that only requires a wand movement. The Unbeholden 19:06, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

The fact that Harry is unable to perform non-verball spells in the book is the reason for this statememnt, because the whole point is to highlight discrepencies between the film and the book versions. We can't assume the spell he uses has no incantation, because as far as I'm aware there are no known spells in Harry Potter that only require a wand movement. The statement stays in. Jayce Carver Slytherin banner Talk 20:45, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
Not true, Apparition/Disapparition has no incantation, it was taught in a class room with no incantation. Which is proof of incantationless spells. The Unbeholden 16:20, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Yes apparition used merely wand and mind. the person had to think of the 3Ds. Besides, the book does not mention Harry casting non-verbal spells in the Battle of the Department of Mysteries. ShirleyALuna Lovegood(The Quibbler) 08:10, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

When a sentence makes no sense, you take it out

The Omissions section contained this little gem that gave me a chuckle. It's from the paragraph about the injuries sustained by the students during the final battle: Ron is injured by brains.

I got the image of someone chucking a load of brains at poor Ron! If someone would care to translate this and put it back, that would be great. 23skidoo 06:49, September 14, 2009 (UTC)

I think Ron summoned the brains to himself and they attacked him -Smonocco 15:35, September 14, 2009 (UTC)


I've seen the Movie and i notice that in the battle of Department of Mystery,They use the Levicorpus Charm,but this charm is not revealed after Harry discovers it on Book 6,I belive that is a HUGE error.

The word "error" seems to imply it was an accident rather than an intentional change. In fact, most of the "mistakes" are actually just changes. You could argue they were changes for the worse (and indeed I was annoyed by the Levicorpus one), but the movies clearly have certain differences in continuity than the books and never attempt to follow precisely the same rules. Furthermore, I'm not sure the sections in each movie article about the errors caused by the movies being set in the 1990s are really necessary--what reason is there to believe that the movies are even supposed to be set in the 1990s? The books clearly are, but the movies appear to be set sometime in the 2000s.
The book starts in summer 1995, but there are several things in the film which indicate a much later date: when Harry is carrying Dudley home, in the background of one shot can clearly be seen a car with a February 2005 numberpate; when Harry flies up the Thames, he first passes the finished Canary Wharf development (I'm not sure that even 1 Canada Square was finished in 1995; certainly the other skyscrapers weren't) and then the London Eye (not erected until late 1999); in one Gryffindor Common Room scene, a 2005 song is playing. I reckon that these are because the movie is an adaptation of the book, not a slavish copy. -- RobertATfm (talk) 22:58, November 2, 2012 (UTC)


when they are going to the Ministry of Magic on Thestrals , how could ron , Hermione and Ginny ride the therstals while they cant even see them? isnt that a mistake? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs).

Luna, who could see the thestrals, helped them mount the beasts. --Hcoknhoj 05:39, January 20, 2010 (UTC)


In the plot section, it refers to Dudley as being "nearly dead" as he was being brought back home, but that doesn't seem the most accurate way to describe his state at the time. The dementor tried to kiss him, which would have may have left him soulless but definitely not dead. --BachLynn23 13:57, July 29, 2010 (UTC)


Hi, I found the following actors:

Lorraine Malby as Witch/Extra , source:

John-Eric Johnson as S.A / Commuter @ train station / others , source:

Alexander Bonner, source:

Tim Wynne-Jones in Piccadilly crowd scene, source: Harry granger 18:33, August 17, 2010 (UTC)

Bumping ! Harry granger 18:45, August 23, 2010 (UTC)

Possible cast

The french Wikipedia names another possible cast:

Jena Willhemson née le 18 juin 1989, est une actrice britannique, vivant à Londres. Elle est essentiellement connue pour avoir interpréter le rôle de Rose Zeller dans Harry Potter et l'Ordre du phénix

Which is translated to:

Jena Willhemson born June 18, 1989, is an actress living in London. It is primarily known for playing the role of Rose Zeller Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix

Is this a true cast??

Possible Mistake at the End?

I was watching the duel between Dumbledore and Voldemort on YouTube, and after they do, Voldemort possesses Harry. While possessing him, there are several visions of Voldemort pretty much just moving his wand around in front of his face. Well, in the first four shots of him, he has his V-neck robe that he wore in GoF. And then in the final two shots of him, he has on his regular robes that he wore during the duel and then in the seventh and eighth films. I'm just wondering, why did he change his robes?? AlastorMoody 06:50, July 29, 2011 (UTC)

I am entirely aware how late I am to this particular congress, but it appears to be the appropriate forum in which to vent on the subject of a personal hobgoblin. Whilst feeling that a fine job was done with this film as a whole, every morsel of potential pleasure in it was drained by Michael Gambon's utterance (as I refuse to entertain the notion that Albus Dumbeldore would be capable of such a comment) at the 24:10 mark of the phrase and title "Dark Lord", which betrays everything the character ever stood for. That may well be an utterly excessive set of statements in itself, but it was how I felt, and upon reviewing, how I largely still feel - that whoever adapted this screenplay in Mr. Kloves' absence failed to grasp something so germane to the depiction of APWBD, and therefore cannot have genuinely comprehended other vital aspects of this world.

Error {?} in the "Differences from the book" section

"In the book, Prof. Umbridge and Filch are seen using spells to try and stop the firecrackers".(emphasis mine)

Filch is a Squib; how can he use spells? — RobertATfm (talk) 22:41, November 2, 2012 (UTC)