They had all the footage but they had a problem discerning the ghosts from the poltergeist. They didn't want him to have the same see-through of the ghosts and the tech they had couldn't do what they needed.
@@LadyKattrina84 I saw a vid that said that the children kept laughing at peeves instead of focusing that's why they didn't put it in...maybe it both or maybe I'm wrong
I didn’t read the books but my mom is a dire hard fan and she said the number one difference to her was that Ginny was more of a side character in the movies and the way Ginny was paired with Harry was done awkwardly and thrown together, while in the books she is a main character , has her own personality, and compliments together with Harry.
What you missed Book: “Did you put your name in the Goblet of Fire, Harry?” Dumbledore asked calmly Movie: “HARREH! DIDJA PUT YOUR NAME IN THE GUBLET UF FIYAH?!”
@Shruti I agree with @Abi A ... books always win. There's also the fact that certain things are created by the mind that could never be recreated to suit everyone's personal version.
Abi A Yeah I agree. But I feel like with the Harry Potter films they did pretty well trying to make the films exactly like the 📚 I have read or watched all of them that’s just what I’ve noticed so far.
The dance wasn't in the book, but I love it all the same. I was so hoping for the fight between Harry and Lupin after he left Tonks because she was pregnant.
Ideas for "Another Top 10 Shocking Differences...": - Book: The Burrow is unplottable because it's under the Fidelius Charm. Movie: The Burrow is attacked by Death Eaters and burnt down. - Book: Ginny is badass. Movie: Ginny sucks. - Book: Dumbledore is always calm and witty. Movie: Dumbledore sucks. - Book: There's like 10 important memories about Voldemort's past. Movie: There's 2 memories. - Book: The Quidditch World Cup is stretched over 3-4 chapters (including the camping and the Dark Mark business). Movie: The Quidditch World Cup is glossed over. - Book: The Crouch family is THE super intriguing secret of the 4th book and the way it all comes together in the end and how it all makes sense is absolutely fantastic. Movie: The Crouch family is mentioned like 2 times, adds nothing to the movie. - Book: Harry's parents are 21 when they died. Movie: Harry's parents are in their 40s. - Book: Dumbledore's family is full of tragic secrets. Movie: Dumbledore's family isn't mentioned at all. - Book: Marietta is the SNEAK who betrays the DA. Movie: Cho is the sneak. - Book: Rita Skeeter plays a more or less huge role in books 4, 5, and 7. Movie: Rita Skeeter gets like one scene. I could also pitch ideas for "Another Another Top 10..." ;)
Agree, especially about the Crouch family (they basically took away all the mystery from the plot), and Dumbledore and Ginny; Michael Gambon pretty much changed the entire character and Ginny and Harry's relationship on screen is awful! I'd add the rooms in the Department of Mysteries, and also the fact that the prophecy about Harry/Neville being able to vanquish Voldemort is really glossed over. It would have been good to add more of Trelawney's predictions in general, like the "first to rise will be the first to die" thing etc
That was amazing I knew all of that bug I wouldn't type it all out like you did I have the whole set so I read them all What I hated was that in the half blood Prince it was so cringy like when they are in the slug club and Ginny comes late then Harry stands up..that was awkward........and in the movies Harry didn't even go to a single meeting because well he didn't want to so he scheduled all the quiddich practic on the days of the meeting Also the reason why they all had to right there own names on the paper in the order of the phoenix because Hermione jinxed it so if you told an adult about the D.A. huge pimples will appear on your forehead spelling out SNEAK In the books Harry and rum found barty crouch in the forest acting all crazy so Harry went to look for help then barty crouch Jr I think petrified krum and killed his father In the order of the Phoenix Rita skeeter wrote what Harry said about when voldemort was reborn then they gave it to Luna for her to give it to her dad who published. In the goblet of fire Hermione figured out that Rita skeeter was an unregistered animagus (I think that's how you spell it)and trapped her in a little jar Also I always pronounced Hermione as hermoeni instead of her my o ni I am too tired to write more so that's all
I think the characterisation of characters such as Hermione was so different from the books (no hate to the performers, writers or directors). They became so perfect and lost what made them so human, which was their flaws (I still love Harry Potter anyway)
I agree... in the 1st movie they gave Hermione the hair but that was it after that. They never bothered to crazy it up again. Which would cause the shock when she came out for the ball with sleek beautiful hair. Plus she wasn't supposed to be all that pretty straight off the bat, but honestly even in the 1st movie. Emma was so pretty!
@@katieobrien97 Totally agree, I think it was important to represent a strong female character who was not typically beautiful, although I understand why they couldn't include some things, I would have liked to see some of Hermione's arrogance etc. included
Ginny's character is probably the most changed character in a movie adaptation of all time. But she and Hermione aren't the only ones: they changed most characters, made them a lot less flawed, a lot less three-dimensional. The only ones I think are spot-on are minor characters (such as Molly and Luna) plus Draco and McGonagall. Snape is well adapted character-wise, but he's way too old in the movies.
Exactly. They completely ignore the fact that Ron is the only one out of the trio who grew up in the wizarding world, and so knows a lot of stuff that the other two don't
I HATED that they left out Charlie and Teddy and St Mungos...I also hated how they glossed over Voldemorts tragic past because it explains just how he became so dark and hateful. It wasn't like Grindewald or Umbridge where the issues in their past was mostly their doing, Voldemort was cursed from conception, being the product of (essentially) rape (as a love potion is against the persons will)
BlueNoodle79 I never liked Cho for defending her and I didn’t think it was a really big deal for Harry and her to stop talking to each other for a while. I understand that she’s really really upset about the death of her boyfriend but the way she acted in the book felt ridiculous me.
Sad that they didn't add in the tonks/remus romance plot, bill/fleur romance plot, and teddy lupin scenes with victoire weasley. Latter is small, but it goes to show some goodness came in Teddy's life
I've never had any issue with the scene with Harry and Hermione dancing and there being a moment between them. They were both upset, lonely and devastated with Ron gone and no other contact with their friends and family. The moment that happened was just that, a moment when life was so hard and all you feel is hurt and you just want to forget just for a bit. Them pulling away from each other was realising that them letting anything happening between them in their state of mind wouldn't have been the wisest of choices. Because it could have screwed up their friendship for good and caused them both guilt.
1. Harry's eye's 2. Bill, Charlie and purcy (i purposely misspelled his named) is not in Goblet of Fire 3. Young Lily's are brown in the movie 4. Greyback gets more to say and do in the book than the movie 5. Book: Barty Crouch Jr, Bellatrix, Rodolphus and Rabastan have a trial at the same time, Movie: Barty Crouch Jr is exposed by an ex-deatheater 6. Arthur scolds the twins in Goblet of Fire 7. Molly Rants more in the books than the movie 8. Ginny and Harry kiss in a crowded Gryffindor common room 9. Percy is way more talkative and annoying in the books than in the movies 10. (My favorite) Hermione punches Malfoy in the nose instead of a slap across the face 11. Arthur and Malfoy Sr get in a physical fight 12. Barty Crouch Jr appears at the beginning of the Goblet of Fire movie but not the book 13. The book describes the Riddles' deaths
I don't have much of a problem with Harry's eyes being blue instead of green because of the circumstances with the contacts bUT! I wish they made Lily's actress' eyes blue, too! Her younger self having brown eyes is just especially wrong. Harry could definitely still have his mother's eyes if him & her were both switched to blue.
The Barty Crouch Jr plot was part of the mystery of GoF, but the films blow it by revealing him at the start. For half the book, Harry believes that Barty Jr is his own father. I don't think the film mentioned that Barty Jr was one of the death eaters who tortured Neville's parents. I also disliked the fact that the lessons on Voldemort's past were nearly all omitted from the film, seeing how they help set up the horcrux plot for Book 7.
Books: Neville: "I'll join you when Hell freezes over!" *Breaks out of Body Bind Curse and cuts off Nagini's head. * Movies: Neville: *Tells a sad speech about friendship and gets knocked out * *Facepalm * There goes one of the coolest scenes in the book
Two more suggestion for the changes in book and movie- 1.Book:Bertha Jorkins is tortured by Voldemort. Movie:Bertha Jorkins is not shown.(Goblet of Fire) 2.Book:Ron and Hermione are the prefects for their 5th year. Movie:No prefects for all houses.(Order of Phoenix)
Ya if there was any book that should’ve been a 2 part movie it was order. Instead of a steady build up to Harry getting tricked into going to the department and the slow tension building of getting through the circular spinning room to reach the hall of prophecies and the exciting escape through the different rooms, Ron’s fight with the brains, hermione being hit by an unidentified curse and the group being saved just in the knick of time by the order only to lose Sirius through the arch. Follow that up with an epic battle between voldy and dumbledore involving the statues from the fountain with dumbledore taking on voldy while protecting Harry. Instead we get a glorified gun chase scene through a small part of the ministry (just pointing wands without any spells or effects) everything past the third movie is just lazy blockbuster screenwriting. Yes it’s still very good, but they could have been great, they could’ve been magical.
I'm annoyed that they cut out dumbledore's history and harry's loss of faith in him. How much better would Deathly Hallows part 1 have been if the strained relationship of the friends was compounded by Harry's questioning of Dumbledore? But at the very least, Fantastic Beasts will probably address it
It's just soooo out of character for Dumbledore to become angry, ESPECIALLY at a student. He pretty much only shows anger to death eaters or people who threaten the kids. Just goes to show that Michael Gambon did not understand the character at all.
@@abcdefg2174 he understood the character but he has to go off what the directors say. I don't understand why people keep blaming him when the creators makes the decisions and JK had say and didn't get it changed.
@@royaltyhall87 Honestly, I blame both. If I remember correctly Micheal Gambon admitted to not even reading the books. The fact that absolutely nobody stopped to say "uhh, maybe it should be done differently" bothers me so much. Richard Harris did a decent job though
i kinda am dissapointed from the death of voldermort in the movie(he is just a man not a god to die and disperse in a cloud of conffeti).in the books there are climatic moments that end with the battle of voldermort and harry explaining why the elder wand doesn not do well in his hand and why any of his spells dont affect anyone anymore.ok yes if this was in the movie maybe it would be boring to watch every single moment before the duel BUT it would be awesome nonetheless.
What about the whole Hagrid and Lupin Back stories? I love those along side Voldemort's past. Those made me fall in love with the books. Now, it's hard for me to watch the movies lol they are still amazing. But they missed so much.
To me, one of the most significant plot changes was in The Order of the Phoenix on how Harry broke up with Cho. In the books, they argued because Cho's friend Marietta sold out the DA. In the movies, it was because Cho sold out the DA, although under the influence of Veritaserum ( also note that Snape never gave Umbridge real Veritaserum in the books) This change kinda made both Harry and Snape lose a few points on their personality chart
Harry's parents were 21 years old when Voldemort killed them (Book 7). They are 30ish years old (films). No offense to Alan Rickman, but Snape was in his late 30s in the books.
In the book to the goblet of fire, Harry gave his winnings from the triwizard tournament to Fred and George, saying he didn't need it or want it, and he wanted to help them both start up their joke shop.
The song playing in the tent was hardly soothing. If you listen to the lyrics, it’s a really dreary, morbid, hopeless song, which I feel kind of reflects how they’re both feeling. I don’t think they included that dance scene as a way to cheer up, but rather to try to distract themselves from the despair of missing their best friend. This was actually one of the additions I liked because even before the song was over, they both looked so miserable while they were still dancing together.
Shifat Ara no it was one of voldemort follower that was undercover in alastor moody’s body that gave neville the gilleweed and he deliverd it to Harry potter
In the book it’s the age line that stops Fred and George submitting their names in the goblet of fire, before they can even attempt to get their names in. In the film they get past the line, enter their names and then it’s the goblet that expels them, not the age line as in the book, insinuating that it’s the goblet that knows if a student is underage, not the line. If it’s the goblet expelling them as it shows in the film, how did would Harry’s name have got in, even if he asked another student to put it in?
Soooooo glad you included the difference where Harry breaks the elder wand vs. fixing his wand and giving it back to Dumbledore. This drove me crazy and was probably the most frustrating difference for me.
Barty Crouch Jr is shown as being possibly Innocent when accused in his trial in the books. He also is shown as a innocent boy-ish watch the Quidditch-cup in the company of his house-elf. The movie made him a slithering-obvious-villain instead. Bugs me everytime. The final fight between Voldie and Harry bugs me more but it is almost a Tie. Even before Voldy dies, Harry grabbing on would never have worked in the books. He would be hurt before he even got that close. Or something depending what the Master-issue would allow.
Charlie weasley was in the movie, eventhough for one scene and his face was not clearly visible. In HP&GOF, when hagrid took harry to see the dragons, the one taking care of them was Charlie (to make certain hagrid calls him by his name.)
6:41 huh. I only just realized how insulting that line from Ron actually is. I mean, sure, he never really was close to them (though in the book they do kinda reconcile with each other, so leave on good terms), but Harry DOES have the Dursleys. They're his aunt, uncle and cousin respectively... so Harry actually does understand how Ron feels. I'm certain while it's not forefront in his mind during thst time, Harry hopes not to hear any of the Dursley's names on the radio. And to anyone who says "it's a wizarding radio, they wouldn't mention Muggles getting attacked", it is mentioned throughout the books whenever Muggles are attacked and I'm certain Muggle relatives of the famous Harry Potter would definitely get mentioned if something happened to them
I mean, ya'll gotta remember there is only so much they can put in the movie. Otherwise, you get the "Harry Potter extended addition" like with The Lord of the Rings. These people where kids when they started, they had school and lives and such. Making them film far too much would have been torture. Plus, they may have filmed stuff that ruined the pace of the movie and so left it out.
You forgot about Andromeda Tonks (nee Black; Andromeda Black) the sister of Bellatrix Lestrange & Narcissa Malfoy, who Harry mistaken as Bellatrix for her resemblance of Bellatrix in Deathly Hallows once he was taken into hiding after Mad Eye Moody's plan (well, it was actually Snape's plan under Dumbledore's suggestion) on using 7 Harry Potter as bait on Voldemort & Death Eaters. Andromeda's look was slightly subttle than Bella. That would be interesting to see in the film though
4:53 um... I haven't read The Deathly Hallows for a few years, but I'm pretty sure Harry put the Elder Wand in the Chamber of Secrets, for the reason you specified, but also because you need to be able to speak Parsaltongue to get in the Chamber, so even if someone figured out how to get in, by the time they did, Harry would be long dead, so they couldn't win the wand from him because you can't track down someone who is already dead
Things which I miss in the movies, or are in the movie but never happend in the books End of the Goblet of fire, where the Weasleys find out the truth about Sirius Minerva McGonnagall getting shot by five stunning spells, and survives it. (to taking dragond down it takes seven spells) Like almost everything about Voldemort's history Harry's denial of Sirius death and breaking like everything in Dumbledore's office Harry giving the twins the win from Triwizard tournament Explanation of everything from the Crouch family All the pranks which Fred and George did during the Order of the Phoenix Percy Weasley and how he worked on the Ministry of magic (also the last person, who made Fred laugh) Burrow is never burned down in the books (I would also write how they changed Ginny's or Ron's character, but people are writing it already)
I know that Canada has the proper titles. I wasn't aware Watch MOJO is Canadian. This particular host pronounced Edinburgh like (ed-in-burg) in a different video. That led me to believe they were American.
Very strong points where I very much agree with as a huge Potter fan! Though I missed one thing and that was Ginny Weasley. The way they had treated the character in the film was terrible. In the books she is my favorite female character but in the films not even close. In the books she was actually really cool. I don't blame the actress for this who did a fine job and did what she had to do as an actress. But it were the filmmakers who were responsible, especially the writers for the films. I also very much agree on Tom Riddle's memories, you just miss so much of his story that helps developing and understanding and fleshing out the character. The films made him seem like a bullied teenage boy , who just was evil without reason. But there is so much history behind his character. The reason why I love Tom Riddle was not shown in the films. Also I think they never relly showed how powerful Lord Voldemort actually is. He could do much more than films show.
I also hate that the movie had Harry read Snape's mind after using protego against him instead of seeing memories in the pensive. If Snape can keep Voldemort out of his head, he can keep Harry out without trying. Also I would have loved to see Hermione reveal that Rita Skeeter is an animagus. Skeeter caused a lot of tension that was quite entertaining in the books, though I understand there wasn't time for that I the movie.
But in the book Harry uses protego and gets into Snape's mind, too. He just sees different memories, then later sees him getting bullied in the pensieve. So his mind can indeed be broken into
Actually he doesn't. Malfoy interrupts their lesson, Snape leaves, and Harry sees the memories in the pensive on the way out and ends up watching them. Snape returns and furiously pulls him out, canceling all future occlumency lessons. Book 5, Chapter 28: Snape's Worst Memory.
Hmmm. Yeah, you're right. I forgot about Harry seeing Snape's dad bully his mom and such... That's kinda dumb. Maybe Harry caught him off guard? Cuz seriously, not dissing on Harry, but at that point in time he's not stronger than Voldemort.
Not including the quidditch World Cup and nothing about Krum were huge blunders by the movies. Krum is nothing in the movies. Hell he barely talks for crying out loud!!!!!!!!
I read the harr potter book and watched the movie. As time passed by, all i can remember is the flashing of the movie scene. I guess picture more retained in the memory than words
Just for me, destroying the elder wand in the movie made more sense instead of keeping it in Dumbledore's tomb. What if someone knew how to get its allegiance and disarm Harry Potter? I don't know. 😂
they took pettigrew's fatness way too seriously it was described that scabbers was losing weight because pettigrew knew sirius was getting closer and when remus and sirius use revealio on hime he looks like he lost a lot of weight
the goblt of fire hair styles shouldn't have existed because the harry potter books take place in the 1990s and in 2005 every boy had that hair style including me , you weren't cool if you didn't have that hair style
Does anyone know where i can watch Harry Potter? I've checked Netflix, Hulu, Prime Video, and a whole bunch of other platforms and cant find it. Do i have to buy it?
I wonder why nobody made Daniel Radcliffe put on green contact lenses or anything that would give him green eyes? He would’ve looked exactly like Harry Potter pitch perfect 👌😆 😍 I don’t have a problem with his blue eyes it makes him even more good looking, I was just wondering.
![ว้าว!ลุงบีมแบกทองมารับขวัญหลานกันยกบ้าน [cc] แดนแพทตี้ SS2 | EP.49 |](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Osihq1OAs-4/mqdefault.jpg)
I am still very bitter that they never included Peeves....
Would have loved to see Rik mayall (R.I.P) perforemance as peeves in the movies
And winky!
They had all the footage but they had a problem discerning the ghosts from the poltergeist. They didn't want him to have the same see-through of the ghosts and the tech they had couldn't do what they needed.
You could almost say you’re peeved he wasn’t included 😜
@@LadyKattrina84 I saw a vid that said that the children kept laughing at peeves instead of focusing that's why they didn't put it in...maybe it both or maybe I'm wrong
I didn’t read the books but my mom is a dire hard fan and she said the number one difference to her was that Ginny was more of a side character in the movies and the way Ginny was paired with Harry was done awkwardly and thrown together, while in the books she is a main character , has her own personality, and compliments together with Harry.
Yeah, this video hardly touches upon all the major changes. There's room for many sequel videos, lol.
Your mother was absolutely correct!
Keisha Milton I actually read all the books now ❤️ they’re a lot more much different
What you missed
Book: “Did you put your name in the Goblet of Fire, Harry?” Dumbledore asked calmly
Movie: “HARREH! DIDJA PUT YOUR NAME IN THE GUBLET UF FIYAH?!”
LALZ
Hahahaha yesss 🤣
They did mention it after number 1 😂😂
*Calmness Intensifies*
So basically, books win.
Books always win...i don't think it's possible to capture every aspect of the books in movies. Disappointing
@Shruti I agree with @Abi A ... books always win. There's also the fact that certain things are created by the mind that could never be recreated to suit everyone's personal version.
Abi A Yeah I agree. But I feel like with the Harry Potter films they did pretty well trying to make the films exactly like the 📚 I have read or watched all of them that’s just what I’ve noticed so far.
Katie Obrien Exactly, but a 2D cartoon would be good too, books are still better though.
always.
I would of loved to seen Ant Petunia getting that howler from Dumbledore that would off been funny too see
The books are a thousand times better which the movies did the whole book
Everything about Ginny's character in the movies
The dance wasn't in the book, but I love it all the same.
I was so hoping for the fight between Harry and Lupin after he left Tonks because she was pregnant.
Ideas for "Another Top 10 Shocking Differences...":
- Book: The Burrow is unplottable because it's under the Fidelius Charm. Movie: The Burrow is attacked by Death Eaters and burnt down.
- Book: Ginny is badass. Movie: Ginny sucks.
- Book: Dumbledore is always calm and witty. Movie: Dumbledore sucks.
- Book: There's like 10 important memories about Voldemort's past. Movie: There's 2 memories.
- Book: The Quidditch World Cup is stretched over 3-4 chapters (including the camping and the Dark Mark business). Movie: The Quidditch World Cup is glossed over.
- Book: The Crouch family is THE super intriguing secret of the 4th book and the way it all comes together in the end and how it all makes sense is absolutely fantastic. Movie: The Crouch family is mentioned like 2 times, adds nothing to the movie.
- Book: Harry's parents are 21 when they died. Movie: Harry's parents are in their 40s.
- Book: Dumbledore's family is full of tragic secrets. Movie: Dumbledore's family isn't mentioned at all.
- Book: Marietta is the SNEAK who betrays the DA. Movie: Cho is the sneak.
- Book: Rita Skeeter plays a more or less huge role in books 4, 5, and 7. Movie: Rita Skeeter gets like one scene.
I could also pitch ideas for "Another Another Top 10..." ;)
Agree, especially about the Crouch family (they basically took away all the mystery from the plot), and Dumbledore and Ginny; Michael Gambon pretty much changed the entire character and Ginny and Harry's relationship on screen is awful!
I'd add the rooms in the Department of Mysteries, and also the fact that the prophecy about Harry/Neville being able to vanquish Voldemort is really glossed over. It would have been good to add more of Trelawney's predictions in general, like the "first to rise will be the first to die" thing etc
I’m extremely surprised that the fire at the Burrow wasn’t mentioned. That for me was the most egregious omission in the entire series!
That was amazing I knew all of that bug I wouldn't type it all out like you did
I have the whole set so I read them all
What I hated was that in the half blood Prince it was so cringy like when they are in the slug club and Ginny comes late then Harry stands up..that was awkward........and in the movies Harry didn't even go to a single meeting because well he didn't want to so he scheduled all the quiddich practic on the days of the meeting
Also the reason why they all had to right there own names on the paper in the order of the phoenix because Hermione jinxed it so if you told an adult about the D.A. huge pimples will appear on your forehead spelling out SNEAK
In the books Harry and rum found barty crouch in the forest acting all crazy so Harry went to look for help then barty crouch Jr I think petrified krum and killed his father
In the order of the Phoenix Rita skeeter wrote what Harry said about when voldemort was reborn then they gave it to Luna for her to give it to her dad who published.
In the goblet of fire Hermione figured out that Rita skeeter was an unregistered animagus (I think that's how you spell it)and trapped her in a little jar
Also I always pronounced Hermione as hermoeni instead of her my o ni
I am too tired to write more so that's all
Yeah and hermione puts on jinx spell on the paper so whoever betray them will get a pimple that said "sneak" on their faces..
I think the characterisation of characters such as Hermione was so different from the books (no hate to the performers, writers or directors). They became so perfect and lost what made them so human, which was their flaws (I still love Harry Potter anyway)
I agree... in the 1st movie they gave Hermione the hair but that was it after that. They never bothered to crazy it up again. Which would cause the shock when she came out for the ball with sleek beautiful hair. Plus she wasn't supposed to be all that pretty straight off the bat, but honestly even in the 1st movie. Emma was so pretty!
@@katieobrien97 Totally agree, I think it was important to represent a strong female character who was not typically beautiful, although I understand why they couldn't include some things, I would have liked to see some of Hermione's arrogance etc. included
Agreed! They also wrote Ron so differently as well and reduced him to a comedic relief :/
Ginny's character is probably the most changed character in a movie adaptation of all time. But she and Hermione aren't the only ones: they changed most characters, made them a lot less flawed, a lot less three-dimensional. The only ones I think are spot-on are minor characters (such as Molly and Luna) plus Draco and McGonagall. Snape is well adapted character-wise, but he's way too old in the movies.
Exactly. They completely ignore the fact that Ron is the only one out of the trio who grew up in the wizarding world, and so knows a lot of stuff that the other two don't
I HATED that they left out Charlie and Teddy and St Mungos...I also hated how they glossed over Voldemorts tragic past because it explains just how he became so dark and hateful. It wasn't like Grindewald or Umbridge where the issues in their past was mostly their doing, Voldemort was cursed from conception, being the product of (essentially) rape (as a love potion is against the persons will)
I've always been a fan of Hermione's revenge on Marietta Edgecombe and the 'SNEAK' pustules on her face
Yeah, and how it affected Harry and Cho's relationship.
BlueNoodle79 I never liked Cho for defending her and I didn’t think it was a really big deal for Harry and her to stop talking to each other for a while. I understand that she’s really really upset about the death of her boyfriend but the way she acted in the book felt ridiculous me.
Sad that they didn't add in the tonks/remus romance plot, bill/fleur romance plot, and teddy lupin scenes with victoire weasley. Latter is small, but it goes to show some goodness came in Teddy's life
I've never had any issue with the scene with Harry and Hermione dancing and there being a moment between them.
They were both upset, lonely and devastated with Ron gone and no other contact with their friends and family.
The moment that happened was just that, a moment when life was so hard and all you feel is hurt and you just want to forget just for a bit.
Them pulling away from each other was realising that them letting anything happening between them in their state of mind wouldn't have been the wisest of choices. Because it could have screwed up their friendship for good and caused them both guilt.
I hope one day in the future that BBC makes an expensive, elaborate TV series remake to include all these details.
Every character is played by an obese black transgender, before the series gets cancelled for infringing sharia law
AUM: Oh, don't be so negative :o)
@@aum9809 Thanks for giving me a good giggle.
1. Harry's eye's
2. Bill, Charlie and purcy (i purposely misspelled his named) is not in Goblet of Fire
3. Young Lily's are brown in the movie
4. Greyback gets more to say and do in the book than the movie
5. Book: Barty Crouch Jr, Bellatrix, Rodolphus and Rabastan have a trial at the same time, Movie: Barty Crouch Jr is exposed by an ex-deatheater
6. Arthur scolds the twins in Goblet of Fire
7. Molly Rants more in the books than the movie
8. Ginny and Harry kiss in a crowded Gryffindor common room
9. Percy is way more talkative and annoying in the books than in the movies
10. (My favorite) Hermione punches Malfoy in the nose instead of a slap across the face
11. Arthur and Malfoy Sr get in a physical fight
12. Barty Crouch Jr appears at the beginning of the Goblet of Fire movie but not the book
13. The book describes the Riddles' deaths
Astell Dark Shadow Harry’s eyes couldn’t be green, because Daniel was allergic to contacts
I know BUT Voldemort's eyes are blue they should be red
I don't have much of a problem with Harry's eyes being blue instead of green because of the circumstances with the contacts bUT! I wish they made Lily's actress' eyes blue, too! Her younger self having brown eyes is just especially wrong. Harry could definitely still have his mother's eyes if him & her were both switched to blue.
The Barty Crouch Jr plot was part of the mystery of GoF, but the films blow it by revealing him at the start. For half the book, Harry believes that Barty Jr is his own father. I don't think the film mentioned that Barty Jr was one of the death eaters who tortured Neville's parents.
I also disliked the fact that the lessons on Voldemort's past were nearly all omitted from the film, seeing how they help set up the horcrux plot for Book 7.
Astell Dark Shadow
movie: potion that the locket was in was purple
Book: the potion was green
Books:
Neville: "I'll join you when Hell freezes over!" *Breaks out of Body Bind Curse and cuts off Nagini's head. *
Movies:
Neville: *Tells a sad speech about friendship and gets knocked out *
*Facepalm * There goes one of the coolest scenes in the book
What about the Burrow being set on fire? That was such a wrong thing to throw in the movie.
The elder wand thing still bothers me to this day. As well as not having winky leading an army of house elves into the battle of hogwarts.
Two more suggestion for the changes in book and movie-
1.Book:Bertha Jorkins is tortured by Voldemort.
Movie:Bertha Jorkins is not shown.(Goblet of Fire)
2.Book:Ron and Hermione are the prefects for their 5th year.
Movie:No prefects for all houses.(Order of Phoenix)
Dumbledore in the book: calmly
Dumbledore in the movie: HARREH! DIDJA PUT YOUR NAME IN THE GUBLET OF FIYAH
Unbelievable, they didn’t mention Umbridge being the one who sent the Dementors after Harry and that we were left to think Voldemort did.
There is also the department of mysteries in book 5 which is portrayed very poorly in the movie.
Ya if there was any book that should’ve been a 2 part movie it was order. Instead of a steady build up to Harry getting tricked into going to the department and the slow tension building of getting through the circular spinning room to reach the hall of prophecies and the exciting escape through the different rooms, Ron’s fight with the brains, hermione being hit by an unidentified curse and the group being saved just in the knick of time by the order only to lose Sirius through the arch. Follow that up with an epic battle between voldy and dumbledore involving the statues from the fountain with dumbledore taking on voldy while protecting Harry. Instead we get a glorified gun chase scene through a small part of the ministry (just pointing wands without any spells or effects) everything past the third movie is just lazy blockbuster screenwriting. Yes it’s still very good, but they could have been great, they could’ve been magical.
I'm annoyed that they cut out dumbledore's history and harry's loss of faith in him. How much better would Deathly Hallows part 1 have been if the strained relationship of the friends was compounded by Harry's questioning of Dumbledore?
But at the very least, Fantastic Beasts will probably address it
12:49 did you put your name in the goblet of fire is funny
especially since in the book dumbledore asks harry in a calm matter
(2nd actor) movie dumbledore is all spaztic and angry about it lol
It's just soooo out of character for Dumbledore to become angry, ESPECIALLY at a student. He pretty much only shows anger to death eaters or people who threaten the kids. Just goes to show that Michael Gambon did not understand the character at all.
@@abcdefg2174 he understood the character but he has to go off what the directors say. I don't understand why people keep blaming him when the creators makes the decisions and JK had say and didn't get it changed.
@@royaltyhall87 Honestly, I blame both. If I remember correctly Micheal Gambon admitted to not even reading the books. The fact that absolutely nobody stopped to say "uhh, maybe it should be done differently" bothers me so much. Richard Harris did a decent job though
i kinda am dissapointed from the death of voldermort in the movie(he is just a man not a god to die and disperse in a cloud of conffeti).in the books there are climatic moments that end with the battle of voldermort and harry explaining why the elder wand doesn not do well in his hand and why any of his spells dont affect anyone anymore.ok yes if this was in the movie maybe it would be boring to watch every single moment before the duel BUT it would be awesome nonetheless.
I can accept Voldemort’s weird death, because he has a split soul. But why does Bellatrix die in a weird way too?
What about the whole Hagrid and Lupin Back stories? I love those along side Voldemort's past. Those made me fall in love with the books. Now, it's hard for me to watch the movies lol they are still amazing. But they missed so much.
How could you ommit Dumbledore's very calm "DID YA POOT YER NAMMME IN DA GOBLETTT OF FIYAAA!!!!!???"
One of my least favorite changes is honestly Harry breaking the elder wand!!!!
To me, one of the most significant plot changes was in The Order of the Phoenix on how Harry broke up with Cho. In the books, they argued because Cho's friend Marietta sold out the DA. In the movies, it was because Cho sold out the DA, although under the influence of Veritaserum ( also note that Snape never gave Umbridge real Veritaserum in the books) This change kinda made both Harry and Snape lose a few points on their personality chart
But he must have given it to Umbridge at some point because Cho wouldn't have ratted out the DA without it.
Harry's parents were 21 years old when Voldemort killed them (Book 7). They are 30ish years old (films). No offense to Alan Rickman, but Snape was in his late 30s in the books.
I think they made it clear in the movies that they did miss Ron, and I loved the addition of the dancing together.
In the book to the goblet of fire, Harry gave his winnings from the triwizard tournament to Fred and George, saying he didn't need it or want it, and he wanted to help them both start up their joke shop.
The song playing in the tent was hardly soothing. If you listen to the lyrics, it’s a really dreary, morbid, hopeless song, which I feel kind of reflects how they’re both feeling. I don’t think they included that dance scene as a way to cheer up, but rather to try to distract themselves from the despair of missing their best friend. This was actually one of the additions I liked because even before the song was over, they both looked so miserable while they were still dancing together.
Did Dobby give Harry the gilleweed in goblet of fire ?
Y
E
S
Shifat Ara no it was one of voldemort follower that was undercover in alastor moody’s body that gave neville the gilleweed and he deliverd it to Harry potter
@@magnusorisson1806 this is the movie version. In the books Dobby is the one who helps Harry
"Harry did you put your name in the goblet of fire", he asked CALMLY
Hope to have a new movie series with EVERYTHING IN THE NOVEL.
In the book it’s the age line that stops Fred and George submitting their names in the goblet of fire, before they can even attempt to get their names in. In the film they get past the line, enter their names and then it’s the goblet that expels them, not the age line as in the book, insinuating that it’s the goblet that knows if a student is underage, not the line. If it’s the goblet expelling them as it shows in the film, how did would Harry’s name have got in, even if he asked another student to put it in?
“HARRYDIDJAPUTYURNAMEINDAGOBLETOFFIYAH?!” Dumbledore asked calmly.
Soooooo glad you included the difference where Harry breaks the elder wand vs. fixing his wand and giving it back to Dumbledore. This drove me crazy and was probably the most frustrating difference for me.
Barty Crouch Jr is shown as being possibly Innocent when accused in his trial in the books. He also is shown as a innocent boy-ish watch the Quidditch-cup in the company of his house-elf.
The movie made him a slithering-obvious-villain instead. Bugs me everytime. The final fight between Voldie and Harry bugs me more but it is almost a Tie.
Even before Voldy dies, Harry grabbing on would never have worked in the books. He would be hurt before he even got that close. Or something depending what the Master-issue would allow.
Charlie weasley was in the movie, eventhough for one scene and his face was not clearly visible. In HP&GOF, when hagrid took harry to see the dragons, the one taking care of them was Charlie (to make certain hagrid calls him by his name.)
6:41 huh. I only just realized how insulting that line from Ron actually is.
I mean, sure, he never really was close to them (though in the book they do kinda reconcile with each other, so leave on good terms), but Harry DOES have the Dursleys. They're his aunt, uncle and cousin respectively... so Harry actually does understand how Ron feels.
I'm certain while it's not forefront in his mind during thst time, Harry hopes not to hear any of the Dursley's names on the radio.
And to anyone who says "it's a wizarding radio, they wouldn't mention Muggles getting attacked", it is mentioned throughout the books whenever Muggles are attacked and I'm certain Muggle relatives of the famous Harry Potter would definitely get mentioned if something happened to them
I mean, ya'll gotta remember there is only so much they can put in the movie. Otherwise, you get the "Harry Potter extended addition" like with The Lord of the Rings. These people where kids when they started, they had school and lives and such. Making them film far too much would have been torture. Plus, they may have filmed stuff that ruined the pace of the movie and so left it out.
Kitty Vixen Agreed, I’m grateful and happy with what I got from the ALL the Harry Potter movies
You forgot about Andromeda Tonks (nee Black; Andromeda Black) the sister of Bellatrix Lestrange & Narcissa Malfoy, who Harry mistaken as Bellatrix for her resemblance of Bellatrix in Deathly Hallows once he was taken into hiding after Mad Eye Moody's plan (well, it was actually Snape's plan under Dumbledore's suggestion) on using 7 Harry Potter as bait on Voldemort & Death Eaters. Andromeda's look was slightly subttle than Bella. That would be interesting to see in the film though
4:53 um... I haven't read The Deathly Hallows for a few years, but I'm pretty sure Harry put the Elder Wand in the Chamber of Secrets, for the reason you specified, but also because you need to be able to speak Parsaltongue to get in the Chamber, so even if someone figured out how to get in, by the time they did, Harry would be long dead, so they couldn't win the wand from him because you can't track down someone who is already dead
Nah, Harry just said: I'm putting it back where it came from
I liked how there were extra details in the book
Things which I miss in the movies, or are in the movie but never happend in the books
End of the Goblet of fire, where the Weasleys find out the truth about Sirius
Minerva McGonnagall getting shot by five stunning spells, and survives it. (to taking dragond down it takes seven spells)
Like almost everything about Voldemort's history
Harry's denial of Sirius death and breaking like everything in Dumbledore's office
Harry giving the twins the win from Triwizard tournament
Explanation of everything from the Crouch family
All the pranks which Fred and George did during the Order of the Phoenix
Percy Weasley and how he worked on the Ministry of magic (also the last person, who made Fred laugh)
Burrow is never burned down in the books
(I would also write how they changed Ginny's or Ron's character, but people are writing it already)
Professor Snape tries to protect the trio from Remus Lupin as a werewolf (film only).
Praise the Wizarding Heavens you used the proper titles for Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone!
Watch Mojo is Canadian. Canada had the proper title.
I know that Canada has the proper titles. I wasn't aware Watch MOJO is Canadian. This particular host pronounced Edinburgh like (ed-in-burg) in a different video. That led me to believe they were American.
Very strong points where I very much agree with as a huge Potter fan! Though I missed one thing and that was Ginny Weasley. The way they had treated the character in the film was terrible. In the books she is my favorite female character but in the films not even close. In the books she was actually really cool. I don't blame the actress for this who did a fine job and did what she had to do as an actress. But it were the filmmakers who were responsible, especially the writers for the films. I also very much agree on Tom Riddle's memories, you just miss so much of his story that helps developing and understanding and fleshing out the character. The films made him seem like a bullied teenage boy , who just was evil without reason. But there is so much history behind his character. The reason why I love Tom Riddle was not shown in the films. Also I think they never relly showed how powerful Lord Voldemort actually is. He could do much more than films show.
One word....calmly. Should have been #1
Still don't like how the department of mysteries battle was changed for the films
Fun fact. They actually filmed Voldemort's book version death
I love both the movies and books in different ways! Of course, the books were still the best, though.
The Death day Party was my favorite part of the Gameboy Color game!
Seems like the HP hype is back
The HP hype never left
I also hate that the movie had Harry read Snape's mind after using protego against him instead of seeing memories in the pensive. If Snape can keep Voldemort out of his head, he can keep Harry out without trying. Also I would have loved to see Hermione reveal that Rita Skeeter is an animagus. Skeeter caused a lot of tension that was quite entertaining in the books, though I understand there wasn't time for that I the movie.
But in the book Harry uses protego and gets into Snape's mind, too. He just sees different memories, then later sees him getting bullied in the pensieve. So his mind can indeed be broken into
Actually he doesn't. Malfoy interrupts their lesson, Snape leaves, and Harry sees the memories in the pensive on the way out and ends up watching them. Snape returns and furiously pulls him out, canceling all future occlumency lessons. Book 5, Chapter 28: Snape's Worst Memory.
Hmmm. Yeah, you're right. I forgot about Harry seeing Snape's dad bully his mom and such... That's kinda dumb. Maybe Harry caught him off guard? Cuz seriously, not dissing on Harry, but at that point in time he's not stronger than Voldemort.
@@mareezollinger3184 pretty sure both happen actually
@@ginganinjav5220 They do. I referenced both in the comments. :)
Not including the quidditch World Cup and nothing about Krum were huge blunders by the movies. Krum is nothing in the movies. Hell he barely talks for crying out loud!!!!!!!!
I read the harr potter book and watched the movie. As time passed by, all i can remember is the flashing of the movie scene. I guess picture more retained in the memory than words
I like the dancing scene in Deathly Hollows part 1
Dont tell me you forgot about skiving snack boxes, and the ten ton tounge lozenge at the beginning of book 4
A top ten list could be made of the differences between the book and movie for the final battle of Hogwarts alone.
The eyes alway used to tick me off, it was such a big deal in the books but I guess the film's budget couldn't spring for green eye contacts
They tried but Daniel Radcliffe had an allergic reaction to the green eye contacts
Still Daniel Radcliffe has blue eyes and Harry has his mother's eyes , luckily the actress who played Lily Potter also had blue eyes.
Just for me, destroying the elder wand in the movie made more sense instead of keeping it in Dumbledore's tomb. What if someone knew how to get its allegiance and disarm Harry Potter? I don't know. 😂
they took pettigrew's fatness way too seriously it was described that scabbers was losing weight because pettigrew knew sirius was getting closer and when remus and sirius use revealio on hime he looks like he lost a lot of weight
Dobby best character
Finally a good video with th original voice thanks watch mojo
Voldemort doesn't know his mom drugged his dad. So he hates tom riddle thinking he abandoned them because of her magic.
I would love to go to a maze like that for real.
I'm obsessed with these movies😂😂
the goblt of fire hair styles shouldn't have existed because the harry potter books take place in the 1990s and in 2005 every boy had that hair style including me , you weren't cool if you didn't have that hair style
Wasn't this already done video?
YES IT CALLED BEST OF
Yh on the main WM channel. Same name as well. Shameless reupload of a video a year old now
I was always shipping Harmony and Harry, but the that kiss scene happened. Saw all movies to the end, never went back to rewatch
This was awesome! :D So many cool facts :D Very nice :)
I enjoyed the 1st 2 films out of nostalgia, everything else felt rushed.
You said animagi wrong
HARRY, DID YOU PUT YOUR NAME ON THE GOBLET OF FIRE ?
Very very great list I like it a lot and a lot of fun too
Does anyone know where i can watch Harry Potter? I've checked Netflix, Hulu, Prime Video, and a whole bunch of other platforms and cant find it. Do i have to buy it?
wishing Severus Snape called Lily a mudblood in order of the Phoenix and deathly hallows movies
Goblet of Fire was the worst translation to screen. All of the others were pretty good adaptations.
'Calmly'...
I love Harry Potter
This is re-uploaded from the main watchmojo channel. The original vodeo was uploaded a year ago.
#1: HARRY DIDYA PUT UR NAME INDA GOBLETA FYAH?!?!?!?!?! Dumbledore asked calmly.
Blame Goblet of Fire on Mike Newell.
This is explained by MovieFlame’s Video: Why Goblet Of Fire is The Worst
Watch it, it’s really an eye opener
Very cool video :) ( as usual 😉😄)
Maroders map oh god
i dont remember the sphinx part in book 4
Why don't you try to make "Top 10 Shocking Differences Between the Percy Jackson Movies & Books"? It could be almost everything 😂
peeves not being in the movies didn't really bother me
Didnt know quite a few :)
They must play HQ
I need to re-read these books.
Didn't they already upload this video?
also Harry doesn't break the elder wand in the movie
For someone new to the Harry Potter world is their a American school of Witchcraft and Wizardry?
Yes Ilvermony but it is never mentioned in the 7 Harry Potter books/movies
I wonder why nobody made Daniel Radcliffe put on green contact lenses or anything that would give him green eyes? He would’ve looked exactly like Harry Potter pitch perfect 👌😆 😍 I don’t have a problem with his blue eyes it makes him even more good looking, I was just wondering.
They tried, but the lenses irritated his eyes so much
Ginganinja V Ok than, that’s understandable.