Ghost Ghost

My Button Collection

thegardenparty: el-linzo: Umm, one point here. It was actually quite heavily explained as to why Voldemort couldn’t use his own wand to kill Harry. It was explained in the first film (the scene in Ollivanders) and again in the Deathly Hallows (by Voldemort himself) that both Harry’s wand and Voldemorts wand were created using feathers from the same Phoenix bird. Ergo, they couldn’t be used to kill each other. Ahhhhhhhhhh. But my point about the Deathly Hallows still stands; the only thing that seemed to be important was the Elder wand. He gets the resurrection stone and throws it on the ground after a wee chat with his Ma and Da. The cloak helped them no more than how it always helps them. It should have been Harry Potter and the Elder Wand if anything, although that does not sound as cool. Anyway, wasn’t Harry using Draco’s wand at the end? So the whole Elder wand plot point moot? Someone please correct me on that. With pleasure dear fellow, but please try to keep up. The Elder Wand was not working for Voldemort as Voldemort was not the true master, it therefore only worked as a normal wand - which could equate to even less power than when Voldemort would use his own wand. Also, having the resurrection stone, cloak and being the master of the elder wand made Harry the master of death, hence why he didn’t die when his horcrux did. You don’t need to read the books to understand the films, but if you did read the books you would get all the character developement your heart desired and you wuold see that the films stick rigidly to the books as far as they can. The way I see it, the books definately beat the films, but I no longer really believe that there is anything fundamentally wrong with the films (despite Daniel Radcliffe). The whole story took 10 years to tell, how on earth do you suppose to fit that into 8 films? Also, books allow for you to personally develop the characters. You stop reading a chapter to go to sleep and you dream about that characters life, what happened before, what happened after. In anticipation for the next installment you re-read the last books, picking up on the subleties of the language Rowling used to describe certain situations and slightly change how you originally percieved it. The films give you a version of events, but it’s not exactly as I have personally experienced it. It’s fantasy, it doesn’t have to answer to logic, but there is an explanation for everything that happens, whether or not it makes sense.

thegardenparty:

el-linzo:

Umm, one point here. It was actually quite heavily explained as to why Voldemort couldn’t use his own wand to kill Harry. It was explained in the first film (the scene in Ollivanders) and again in the Deathly Hallows (by Voldemort himself) that both Harry’s wand and Voldemorts wand were created using feathers from the same Phoenix bird. Ergo, they couldn’t be used to kill each other.

Ahhhhhhhhhh.

But my point about the Deathly Hallows still stands; the only thing that seemed to be important was the Elder wand. He gets the resurrection stone and throws it on the ground after a wee chat with his Ma and Da. The cloak helped them no more than how it always helps them. It should have been Harry Potter and the Elder Wand if anything, although that does not sound as cool.

Anyway, wasn’t Harry using Draco’s wand at the end? So the whole Elder wand plot point moot? Someone please correct me on that.

With pleasure dear fellow, but please try to keep up. The Elder Wand was not working for Voldemort as Voldemort was not the true master, it therefore only worked as a normal wand - which could equate to even less power than when Voldemort would use his own wand. Also, having the resurrection stone, cloak and being the master of the elder wand made Harry the master of death, hence why he didn’t die when his horcrux did.

You don’t need to read the books to understand the films, but if you did read the books you would get all the character developement your heart desired and you wuold see that the films stick rigidly to the books as far as they can.

The way I see it, the books definately beat the films, but I no longer really believe that there is anything fundamentally wrong with the films (despite Daniel Radcliffe). The whole story took 10 years to tell, how on earth do you suppose to fit that into 8 films? Also, books allow for you to personally develop the characters. You stop reading a chapter to go to sleep and you dream about that characters life, what happened before, what happened after. In anticipation for the next installment you re-read the last books, picking up on the subleties of the language Rowling used to describe certain situations and slightly change how you originally percieved it. The films give you a version of events, but it’s not exactly as I have personally experienced it.

It’s fantasy, it doesn’t have to answer to logic, but there is an explanation for everything that happens, whether or not it makes sense.

Button Theme