I think he pretty much said it in an interview about when he thought of the scene.
Well, i know how he thought of the scene. He wanted a separate battle between Harry and Voldemort. And i suppose they needed it, since they forgot to have THE battle. But, it's funny how they haven't shared the sentiments of you and others, in regards to this.
Lord Stafford.
I haven't heard this either, about Yates discussing the symbolism. Is it in some interview? I read that the original script was very much like the book, but then Yates just got this vision of Harry and Voldemort diving into the abyss, and he decided that's what he wanted. I see that as symbolizing Harry and Voldemort leaping into uncharted magical territory, not knowing what was going to happen (kind of like Harry shouting his best hope to the heavens, as the book describes when he yells, "Expelliarmus.") And yes, it gave Harry a chance to stand up to Voldemort and show that he's not afraid anymore. Their mind connection is over now that the piece of soul inside Harry is destroyed. Still, I maintain that it was all about trying to keep that final duel from being anticlimactic, and they were on their way to achieving that, but in completely cutting the dialogue I think they left the audience really confused at what happened when they cast those last spells...and then the aftermath was extremely underwhelming. All I've heard them say is that after all these years and all the build-up, they just needed to extend the battle to make it worth the wait. I agree they needed to add stuff and that what is there is good; it's just what they left out that bothered me.
Apparently, it is too much effort to have both. I know that i will be slaughtered for this, but Yates does this all the time... you'll notice in his films more than in the others, that characters such as Seamus, Dean, Padma and Parvati become sideshows, just cast aside to the background. That is an example, and there are many more. It is always either dialogue or action, not both. That's the one big thing i can't stand about him.
Apparently, it is too much effort to have both. I know that i will be slaughtered for this, but Yates does this all the time... you'll notice in his films more than in the others, that characters such as Seamus, Dean, Padma and Parvati become sideshows, just cast aside to the background. That is an example, and there are many more. It is always either dialogue or action, not both. That's the one big thing i can't stand about him.
Lord Stafford.
Yeah, it does get frustrating, so I understand where you're coming from. But I also understand they have to draw the line and cut somewhere. There's no way all the subplots with Harry's classmates, etc., can be in there. But they had plenty of time to add a little more dialogue between them in that final duel. I know I sound like a broken record, but they just had tons more to say to each other than what they did! And the aftermath was pathetic. I just can't understand that for the life of me.
Well, they had plenty of time over the course of the two films (as well as HBP) to properly explain the Horcruxes, and they never did. It had to happen, didn't it? I should have worried right from the get go, but i refused to. I was thinking 'This is great' because Mark Day said that both films would be at least 2 hours and 20 minutes. I got my hopes and expectations up, perhaps too high... but i should have known that it was too good to be true with Day involved.
Say, even if Part 2 had been the exact same length as Part 1, that would have given them an extra 20 minutes on what we now have with Part 2. Can anyone tell me that with 20 minutes, they wouldn't be able to clear this up?
I agree, Gina. This is my biggest disappointment with the film. I cannot understand the film makers decision to release that piece of awful to audiences. And then we see those images from the extended aftermath that was filmed and I just get angry.
I agree, Gina. This is my biggest disappointment with the film. I cannot understand the film makers decision to release that piece of awful to audiences. And then we see those images from the extended aftermath that was filmed and I just get angry.
I know, Cadmus. Poor Harry, all alone walking through the Great Hall after all he's done. =((
As I have said suggested before, I would have had a crowd behind Harry. If you know me, then you know that my reasoning is not that I want the films to be 100 % accurate to the books. I actually think that DH 1 would have been better had it been adapted more freely. However, this is a case where I see wasted thematic potential: The way I envision it, a crowd behind Harry supporting him contrasted against the lonely figure of Voldemort would convey how big the stakes are and how love in the end defeats evil. The scene didn't really convey that; the 9 or so people watching in the background does not make much of a difference. It seemed more like a personal victory for Harry in the film (which is fine), but I found it limited compared to the collective victory for the Hogwartians that the book communicated, minus the people behind Voldemort that I would have removed. Why can't we have both?
I'll just say that artists very rarely actually speak out on such because they want people to discover it for themselves. Take Silent Hill 2, a videogame, for example. It has been out for more than a decade, but fans are still turning up very well hidden symbolism and meaning in just about everything, and it's not speculative; the things that have been figured out and pointed out in that game are widely regarded as intentional. Artists don't like to, therefore, come out and explain everything because they like for people to discuss it. If Yates came out and explained everything about the symbolism, I feel that he would be kind of interfering with the discussion. When you tell a story you're telling it for the audience and many writers, directors, designers, etc. rarely ever say "yes, that's what this means, and that's what that means" because they know that it would be straight from the horse's mouth and wouldn't leave much up to actually discover in the material proper.
I realize that the more negative folk when it comes to Part 2 are more inclined to see it as fanboy gibberish, but I just strongly believe that our analysis of this sequence is accurate. We don't mean to force this on people, we're just here to provide insight and our own personal opinions about the direction that the film took in certain regards. Of course everything should be read as opinion; there's no way to actually prove any of this, but that doesn't mean there's no merit to it either. I didn't go looking for the symbolism; when I first saw the film I didn't even think about it, but after some time with it and looking at it, it definitely seems intentional. In my opinion.
As for Harry having a crowd, I'm indifferent toward that. While reading the books I always envisioned Harry having to finally confront Voldemort solo, without adults interfering and this and that. I know having a crowd is different, but I don't think that taking that away really... took anything away from it. I personally like standalone hero vs. villain confrontations-- the entire story built up to it and I thought that both the film and book version of it were great. I still felt as though all the points were hit, and most of the qualities of the book confrontation were preserved in one way or another. I don't mind change as long as the logic is sound, and as long as the better things about it are personally touched upon. I don't really think him having a crowd would have added to anything. There is a crowd sequence too, it may have not been during the actual fight, but everyone got to see Harry seemingly come back from the dead and attacking an entire group of Death Eaters as well as taunting Voldemort. And then there at the end, while the final cut didn't exactly show it, the way the geography of the castle ruins suggests to me that they did see Harry kill Voldemort. There ARE onlookers in the courtyard and the Great Hall is more or less ravaged so much that everyone even in the castle could still see it happen.
But that's kind of my point, again, I don't really think crowd or no crowd has much influence on the impact of the sequence. The Harry and Voldemort struggle IS a very personal one so I didn't really need people cheering him on like they're at some kind of basketball game pep rally.
As I have said before, I would have had a crowd behind Harry. If you know me, then you know that my reasoning is not that I want the films to be 100 % accurate to the books. I actually think that DH 1 would have been better had it been adapted more freely. However, this is a case where I see wasted thematic potential: The way I envision it, a crowd behind Harry supporting him contrasted against the lonely figure of Voldemort would convey how big the stakes are and how love in the end defeats evil. The scene didn't really convey that; the 9 or so people watching who are barely seen in the background does did not make much of a difference. It seemed like more of a personal victory for Harry (which is fine), but I found it limited compared to the collective victory for the Hogwartians that the book provided, minus the people behind Voldemort. Why can't we have both?
There are witnesses. I just think that if the book had been written to where there are no witnesses, and if the film version had the big crowd or whatever, people would be crying foul that they changed it from it being a personal battle to some lame scene with everyone watching. That's why I chalk this up as purist complaint; it's nice how it is in the book, but I do feel that on film it would have been somewhat repetitive. You already have the Snape confrontation in the Great Hall with everyone in attendance, and then you had the scene in the courtyard with Neville's speech and Harry revealing himself to be alive. IT IS victorious regardless.
well there WAS a crowd hiding in the background so Im ok.
Also I think it's a matter of scale. Had this occurred in the Great Hall I don't think it would have been as epic. That's something that I did kind of dislike about the book. I didn't feel that the Great Hall was a very good, strong setting for this climax. The Snape scene proves it; if you look at that in the film, it's just not very... big. I definitely prefer how they took it outside rather than what is basically a cafeteria.
But I wouldve loved if they flew threw the great hall.
Sure, and the thing about film is, especially being a big fan of something, you're always going to have little nitpicks and problems. It just comes with the territory of adoring something. You guys that have problems with it? I'm not against you. I don't even think you're ridiculous for your complaints. I have nitpicks too-- but the Harry and Voldemort confrontation direction is not one of them and I felt that it was definitely superior to the book version in a multitude of ways. We lost some cool things about it, but in my opinion, gained a whole lot more.
Yeah, but no one can really notice the crowd hiding. And Darth, I don't want a crowd simply because that's how it was in the book. I want a crowd there to actually see what happened with their own eyes and to be able to give accounts of what happened, rather than just take Harry's word for what happened. It just gives extra satisfaction to me for people to actually see Harry stand up to Voldemort. I guess it's sort of like the difference between a bully being defeated by the little kid whose lunch money he's trying to steal. Would the bully choose to have that happen in front of a crowd or in private where no one sees him humiliated? And Pumpkinjuice makes an excellent arguments about the optics of it, with Harry having all the support and Voldemort being alone, the reverse of how it was in the graveyard in GoF.
well there WAS a crowd hiding in the background so Im ok.
Also I think it's a matter of scale. Had this occurred in the Great Hall I don't think it would have been as epic. That's something that I did kind of dislike about the book. I didn't feel that the Great Hall was a very good, strong setting for this climax. The Snape scene proves it; if you look at that in the film, it's just not very... big. I definitely prefer how they took it outside rather than what is basically a cafeteria.
Yeah, I was a little upset about that, but I got over it. The Great Hall worked fine in the book, but the Courtyard worked great for the movie. If only Voldemort would have had his hood up, it would have looked so incredibly close to the American cover of the book!
But I wouldve loved if they flew threw the great hall.
Sure, and the thing about film is, especially being a big fan of something, you're always going to have little nitpicks and problems. It just comes with the territory of adoring something. You guys that have problems with it? I'm not against you. I don't even think you're ridiculous for your complaints. I have nitpicks too-- but the Harry and Voldemort confrontation direction is not one of them and I felt that it was definitely superior to the book version in a multitude of ways. We lost some cool things about it, but in my opinion, gained a whole lot more.
There are witnesses. I just think that if the book had been written to where there are no witnesses, and if the film version had the big crowd or whatever, people would be crying foul that they changed it from it being a personal battle to some lame scene with everyone watching. That's why I chalk this up as purist complaint; it's nice how it is in the book, but I do feel that on film it would have been somewhat repetitive. You already have the Snape confrontation in the Great Hall with everyone in attendance, and then you had the scene in the courtyard with Neville's speech and Harry revealing himself to be alive. IT IS victorious regardless.
To be honest, he and Minerva battling wasn't up to scratch. And to be even more honest... it would have been better in the way of the book.
The Great Hall lost some of it's power, some of it's magical nature. It didn't have what it had in previous films, and i'm not sure what. It just didn't feel like The Great Hall.
Yeah, but no one can really notice the crowd hiding. And Darth, I don't want a crowd simply because that's how it was in the book. I want a crowd there to actually see what happened with their own eyes and to be able to give accounts of what happened, rather than just take Harry's word for what happened. It just gives extra satisfaction to me for people to actually see Harry stand up to Voldemort. I guess it's sort of like the difference between a bully being defeated by the little kid whose lunch money he's trying to steal. Would the bully choose to have that happen in front of a crowd or in private where no one sees him humiliated? And Pumpkinjuice makes an excellent arguments about the optics of it, with Harry having all the support and Voldemort being alone, the reverse of how it was in the graveyard in GoF.
Right and I still didn't feel that it really took away from anything. There were still scenes with big crowds, with both Neville standing up to Voldemort and Harry's spectacular reveal. And like I said, at the end, I think everyone did see what happened. It wasn't focused on, but you did get that pan-up shot as Voldemort's ashes withered away, and you see Neville in the Great Hall entrance with the sword and the Great Hall right behind him. So no, it didn't focus on it, but again considering the geography of the space, I do think everyone saw what happened.
Yeah, but no one can really notice the crowd hiding. And Darth, I don't want a crowd simply because that's how it was in the book. I want a crowd there to actually see what happened with their own eyes and to be able to give accounts of what happened, rather than just take Harry's word for what happened. It just gives extra satisfaction to me for people to actually see Harry stand up to Voldemort. I guess it's sort of like the difference between a bully being defeated by the little kid whose lunch money he's trying to steal. Would the bully choose to have that happen in front of a crowd or in private where no one sees him humiliated? And Pumpkinjuice makes an excellent arguments about the optics of it, with Harry having all the support and Voldemort being alone, the reverse of how it was in the graveyard in GoF.
Right and I still didn't feel that it really took away from anything. There were still scenes with big crowds, with both Neville standing up to Voldemort and Harry's spectacular reveal. And like I said, at the end, I think everyone did see what happened. It wasn't focused on, but you did get that pan-up shot as Voldemort's ashes withered away, and you see Neville in the Great Hall entrance with the sword and the Great Hall right behind him. So no, it didn't focus on it, but again considering the geography of the space, I do think everyone saw what happened.
And yet no one seemed to care, to appreciate all that Harry had just done for them. :-?
well there WAS a crowd hiding in the background so Im ok.
Also I think it's a matter of scale. Had this occurred in the Great Hall I don't think it would have been as epic. That's something that I did kind of dislike about the book. I didn't feel that the Great Hall was a very good, strong setting for this climax. The Snape scene proves it; if you look at that in the film, it's just not very... big. I definitely prefer how they took it outside rather than what is basically a cafeteria.
I envisioned it to be in ruins with no roof left. But I do agree that it was a good decision to move it outside because the place is too confined cinematically.
And yet no one seemed to care, to appreciate all that Harry had just done for them. :-?
That's debatable, just because it didn't show it doesn't mean they didn't care. However, your point is completely fair-- it wasn't shown on film so I cannot defend it, but the argument here is that there's no crowd and I'm simply suggesting that everyone did see what happened.
well there WAS a crowd hiding in the background so Im ok.
Also I think it's a matter of scale. Had this occurred in the Great Hall I don't think it would have been as epic. That's something that I did kind of dislike about the book. I didn't feel that the Great Hall was a very good, strong setting for this climax. The Snape scene proves it; if you look at that in the film, it's just not very... big. I definitely prefer how they took it outside rather than what is basically a cafeteria.
I envisioned it to be in ruins with no roofs. But I do agree that it was a good decision to move it outside because it's too confined. The extra space between them was needed.
Remember what we heard? The Great Hall would be in ruins. I don't remember that, and yes, darth... it certainly lost alot of it's feel.
I envisioned it to be in ruins with no roofs. But I do agree that it was a good decision to move it outside because it's too confined. The extra space between them was needed.
Right, I think so as well. I do think, like you said, that a more damaged Great Hall with no roof might have worked, but now we're dealing with "might haves" and "what if" scenarios.
And yet no one seemed to care, to appreciate all that Harry had just done for them. :-?
That's debatable, just because it didn't show it doesn't mean they didn't care. However, your point is completely fair-- it wasn't shown on film so I cannot defend it, but the argument here is that there's no crowd and I'm simply suggesting that everyone did see what happened.
I don't see how, but they did know what happened. Otherwise, it would be Voldemort walking through.
I envisioned it to be in ruins with no roofs. But I do agree that it was a good decision to move it outside because it's too confined. The extra space between them was needed.
Right, I think so as well. I do think, like you said, that a more damaged Great Hall with no roof might have worked, but now we're dealing with "might haves" and "what if" scenarios.
Yes, unfortunately that is a recurring scenario. But it is warranted.
I But that's kind of my point, again, I don't really think crowd or no crowd has much influence on the impact of the sequence. The Harry and Voldemort struggle IS a very personal one so I didn't really need people cheering him on like they're at some kind of basketball game pep rally.
It would mean the difference in the world, at least if I had directed it. And there would be no stupid cheering like you suggest, but they would naturally celebrate the boy who saved them from hell afterwards.
I know that this isn't "enough" for some of you, but you can see Neville watching from the GH entrance, Ron and Hermione should be there somewhere after the Nagini attack, and the entrance is clearly wide open so that everyone inside probably saw it go down. It's enough for me but if it isn't enough for you, that's just a personal quip you're going to have to deal with.
But yes, clearly, to me, the space is wide open so I think everyone witnessed it. I DO think that there should have been a shot in the Great Hall of people seeing it after it happens or right before the curse rebounds, but like I said, I have my own nitpicks. It's a nitpick though, not a complaint. I would have liked to see that, but it doesn't ruin the moment for me personally.
Hopefully when the Blu-ray comes out, more details can be spotted. It happens. I was upset that they didn't have Bathilda's snapping neck but when I noticed it visibly in the mirror reflection, I not only shat a brick, but I actually appreciated how tasteful it was.
There are witnesses. I just think that if the book had been written to where there are no witnesses, and if the film version had the big crowd or whatever, people would be crying foul that they changed it from it being a personal battle to some lame scene with everyone watching. That's why I chalk this up as purist complaint; it's nice how it is in the book, but I do feel that on film it would have been somewhat repetitive. You already have the Snape confrontation in the Great Hall with everyone in attendance, and then you had the scene in the courtyard with Neville's speech and Harry revealing himself to be alive. IT IS victorious regardless.
You want to know the difference between a purist and a critical fan? The purist wants all the details from the book packed into the film, whereas the critical fan wants its story, themes and ideas to be visualized.
Okay, so I missed quite a bit, loll. Here's my two cents on it overall:
Saying that there needs to be witnesses or it's just taking Harry's word is a petty argument; there are people behind there. Now, if you want talk about a large crowd being apart of it, then you have something to debate. I think the crowd isn't necessary, it's a heat of the moment sort of moment. Voldemort and Harry aren't going to wait for a crowd to walk out and circle them while they get up and circle each other. Voldemort wants to kill Harry right there, why the fuck should he wait?
Now, please take this seriously and don't say: 'how can I pretend the book doesn't exist?' because it's a question I really want to see how you're going to answer. Take the book out. Take it out completely. Pretend there never was any circling, Harry never explained everything to Voldemort, there was no massive crowd, and that Harry and Voldemort did fight each other longer and ended up in the courtyard and not the great hall. The book never existed: it's only the film. Not comparing anything to the book, what's wrong with it?
Now, please take this seriously and don't say: 'how can I pretend the book doesn't exist?' because it's a question I really want to see how you're going to answer. Take the book out. Take it out completely. Pretend there never was any circling, Harry never explained everything to Voldemort, there was no massive crowd, and that Harry and Voldemort did fight each other longer and ended up in the courtyard and not the great hall. The book never existed: it's only the film. Not comparing anything to the book, what's wrong with it?
No reactions, which made it a big anticlimax. That's what wrong with it.
Now, please take this seriously and don't say: 'how can I pretend the book doesn't exist?' because it's a question I really want to see how you're going to answer. Take the book out. Take it out completely. Pretend there never was any circling, Harry never explained everything to Voldemort, there was no massive crowd, and that Harry and Voldemort did fight each other longer and ended up in the courtyard and not the great hall. The book never existed: it's only the film. Not comparing anything to the book, what's wrong with it?
No reactions, which made it a big anticlimax. That's what wrong with it.
Hmm, not much more either of us can do. I feel it's not anti-climatic and you do, lolll. Can't really say much to change the way someone feels
Comments
Lord Stafford.
Say, even if Part 2 had been the exact same length as Part 1, that would have given them an extra 20 minutes on what we now have with Part 2. Can anyone tell me that with 20 minutes, they wouldn't be able to clear this up?
Lord Stafford.
Lord Stafford.
=((
Lord Stafford.
I agree with Gina; the film was very good, but the climax and aftermath was disappointing.
;;)
I realize that the more negative folk when it comes to Part 2 are more inclined to see it as fanboy gibberish, but I just strongly believe that our analysis of this sequence is accurate. We don't mean to force this on people, we're just here to provide insight and our own personal opinions about the direction that the film took in certain regards. Of course everything should be read as opinion; there's no way to actually prove any of this, but that doesn't mean there's no merit to it either. I didn't go looking for the symbolism; when I first saw the film I didn't even think about it, but after some time with it and looking at it, it definitely seems intentional. In my opinion.
As for Harry having a crowd, I'm indifferent toward that. While reading the books I always envisioned Harry having to finally confront Voldemort solo, without adults interfering and this and that. I know having a crowd is different, but I don't think that taking that away really... took anything away from it. I personally like standalone hero vs. villain confrontations-- the entire story built up to it and I thought that both the film and book version of it were great. I still felt as though all the points were hit, and most of the qualities of the book confrontation were preserved in one way or another. I don't mind change as long as the logic is sound, and as long as the better things about it are personally touched upon. I don't really think him having a crowd would have added to anything. There is a crowd sequence too, it may have not been during the actual fight, but everyone got to see Harry seemingly come back from the dead and attacking an entire group of Death Eaters as well as taunting Voldemort. And then there at the end, while the final cut didn't exactly show it, the way the geography of the castle ruins suggests to me that they did see Harry kill Voldemort. There ARE onlookers in the courtyard and the Great Hall is more or less ravaged so much that everyone even in the castle could still see it happen.
But that's kind of my point, again, I don't really think crowd or no crowd has much influence on the impact of the sequence. The Harry and Voldemort struggle IS a very personal one so I didn't really need people cheering him on like they're at some kind of basketball game pep rally.
Totally agree about needing those witnesses! :-bd
The Voldy/Harry fight was 10x better.
Lord Stafford.
Lord Stafford.
Lord Stafford.
Lord Stafford.
Lord Stafford.
Lord Stafford.
I know that this isn't "enough" for some of you, but you can see Neville watching from the GH entrance, Ron and Hermione should be there somewhere after the Nagini attack, and the entrance is clearly wide open so that everyone inside probably saw it go down. It's enough for me but if it isn't enough for you, that's just a personal quip you're going to have to deal with.
But yes, clearly, to me, the space is wide open so I think everyone witnessed it. I DO think that there should have been a shot in the Great Hall of people seeing it after it happens or right before the curse rebounds, but like I said, I have my own nitpicks. It's a nitpick though, not a complaint. I would have liked to see that, but it doesn't ruin the moment for me personally.
Saying that there needs to be witnesses or it's just taking Harry's word is a petty argument; there are people behind there. Now, if you want talk about a large crowd being apart of it, then you have something to debate. I think the crowd isn't necessary, it's a heat of the moment sort of moment. Voldemort and Harry aren't going to wait for a crowd to walk out and circle them while they get up and circle each other. Voldemort wants to kill Harry right there, why the fuck should he wait?
Now, please take this seriously and don't say: 'how can I pretend the book doesn't exist?' because it's a question I really want to see how you're going to answer. Take the book out. Take it out completely. Pretend there never was any circling, Harry never explained everything to Voldemort, there was no massive crowd, and that Harry and Voldemort did fight each other longer and ended up in the courtyard and not the great hall. The book never existed: it's only the film. Not comparing anything to the book, what's wrong with it?