Yeah, it's pretty great!!! One of my other favorites is from TV Sins video on Peanuts' "The Great Pumpkin". Linus: "There are three things I've learned never to discuss with people, religion, politics, and The Great Pumpkin." Jeremy: "Strangely in 2019, these are somehow all the same topic."(3:08) I don't know why, but that one really got me. ☺
SOMEONE PLEASE LISTEN: yo but like Harry is the antagonist in the philosophers stone and flamel and I think his wife die as a result of his stupidity. If he had stayed in his room, quirrel would never have been able to get to the stone...
As a diehard fan of the books, this video makes me realize that the movies skipped so many crucial plot points. Like 80% of these sins are legitimate questions that someone who hasn't read the books might have while watching the movie and the movie does nothing to explain most of it or just blah blahs over it. How, according to the movie, does Harry learn about Hufflepuff's cup, for example? All of this makes me want a properly made remake of this series in the form of a TV show.
So many problems books turned to movies have could have been solved by turning the books into tv shows. Way too much needs to be cut to fit everything into a movie.
I literally just left the exact same comment only to scroll one down and find this lol the whole time I was dying inside like there's freaking muffliato for the anti eavesdropping spell.. There's so many things that were answered in the books but not the movie I had no idea until I watched this either
One sin you forgot is, when the letter says Harry did the patronus charm in from of a muggle, the letter is reading itself out loud while floating in the room with three muggles, including the same one from before.
Almost like it's an unfair charge that is later dropped because the ministry is trying to expel harry and normally using magic in front of your family who know about magic wouldn't be a problem.
They were already privy to the magical world when they had to take on the responsibility of raising Harry. It was in the letter tucked inside of his blanket. Dudley however was our of the loop about it, including Harry before Hagrid told him. So the enchanted letter wouldn’t have been new to them as muggles who were currently begrudgingly raising a wizard. Also by this time Harry is already three years into school, so they would be used to things like this by now, not comfortable with it, but used to it.
The reason that Lucius Malfoy tries to use killing curse against Harry in second movie was actually a legitimate mistake on Jason Isaacs' part. He legitimately forgot his line and just said the first spell that came to his mind, which just happened to Avada Kedavra.
@@trolletuva Obviously it didn't as it gave Lucius a darker side to the character. It has been confirmed by numerous people, including Isaacs and Daniel Redclife, that this was pure imrpovisation on Isaacs' part, just like the previous scene and Harry's famous line "Don't worry. I will" which was also improvised on the spot. Isaacs has claimed many times since that he was legitimately impressed with the young actor with how he handled this scene.
After all the unnecessary details they've put into the movies, they could've easily spare 5 seconds to explain that saying Voldemort's name out loud is actually used as a tracker.
They did in Deathly Hallows pt.1. It might have been a deleted scene. I watched the movies On Demand and apparently they were the extended versions so I saw a bunch of 'new' scenes. Probably should have left that one in there.
One thing that I find wrong about the movies is that Ron was downgraded to a cowardly, gluttonous and comedic sidekick, instead of the badass, loyal and witty friend that he is in the books.
@@Chris-ks4sw Could also be down to the fact that Emma Watson is better at acting than Rupert Grint and therefore the movies were rearranged. And Ron is really not that badass tbh. I think they portrayed the characters quite good in the movies. Only character that stands out is Umbridge and that is because Imelda Staunton nails that role to perfection.
@@mukke9728 Hermione got better but she was really awkward first few movies. They all got better. Harry had some great scenes in 5 and 6. Ron got a lot better too but by that point they had already ruined his character so they couldnt go back.
0:14 - The Sorcerer’s Stone 3:02 - The Chamber of Secrets 13:23 - The Prisoner of Azkaban 21:19 - The Goblet of Fire 33:16 - The Order of the Phoenix 48:52 - The Half Blood Prince 1:05:49 - The Deathly Hallows Part 1 1:24:35 - The Deathly Hallows Part 2
And you morons fail to realize how that punishment makes so much sense. If you punish someone by forcing them to do that very thing they think they like but with dangerous consequences, they're gonna stop enjoying that thing and thus never doing it again.
In the books it says that they placed a taboo on the word "Voldemort" that takes away all of the protective spells and immedietly reveals your place to them. That is why they do not say it. Altough they should've put that detail in the movie
I always wondered why ALL the spells and all the protective charms cold be overridden by Voldemort's Trace spell when ha finally had a little more power but was not at his peak. Does not compute
@@JulieFalen He was in control of the ministry of magic AND he was one of the most powerful wizards that century. In fact he was one of the 3 most powerful wizards of that century with Grindelwald and Dumbledore being the other two. Considering that Voldemort was significantly younger than Dumbledore I would assume that, if they were at same age, he might have been even more powerful than Dumbledore. So... actually not a big deal that he was capable of doing that.
Hey, remember when -Hermoine- Hermione corrected others for saying Wingardium Leviosa incorrectly? At 55:58, she herself says "Confundus", even though the incantation of the Confundus Charm is actually "confundo".
@@aumhren3480 Hermione is her name, which I did spell incorrectly, but I wasn't trying to say "heroine". If I actually wanted to type out heroine, then I would've also added "the" before it and H wouldn't have been capitalized. Stick to Slovene. With that being said, I recommend you stop watching these shitty-ass CinemaSins videos.
@@aumhren3480 My comment didn't go through, probably cause I said that you shouldn't watch videos by these guys. Anyway, I did spell Hermione incorrectly, so I fixed it. If I had wanted to say heroine though, I wouldn't have capitalized H and I would've put "the" before the word. But I didn't. Stick to Slovene.
I gotta say the book version of that dragon fight was way cooler. one, the entire fight happened in the stadium, and two it was meant to emphasize Harry's talent and reflexes as a quidditch player, but in the movie he is basically just running away the whole time.
@@RobCooper-Bachatador There are good video essays on how and why that happened, if you haven't seen them, but I agree - in tandem with kind of glossing over Hermione's flaws, they also just make Ron dumb. Because I'm, well, a huge nerd, and read various fanfiction, it was interesting to watch as you could tell which fanfic authors were basing their stuff off the books and which were basing it off the movies based solely on how they treated Ron in their fanfics.
@@stevencowan37 I've seen the one where the director script writer just said he was a fan of Hermione and JK was shocked. I get that he wanted to have a stronger heroine and i didn't mind movie Ron but I found the books balanced the flaws and benefits of three (four including Neville) protagonists better.
damn im still reading the first one bruh while i was buying the first one i saw one book and it was double the size i think its the one your talking abt
I love that one of the most consistent sins he points out is how everyone reverts back to calling Voldemort “You-Know-Who” in the last two movies. All this because the movies never bothered to explain that they turned the saying of his name into a tracking beacon.
It's funny because the one clue that it is a tracking beacon was Xenophilius Lovegood saying it, and it was more like a scare chord and a 'speed of plot' thing when the Death Eaters were suddenly already swooping in. I may be wrong, but I think the first time that the tracking beacon thing was definitely active was during Bill and Fleur's wedding, when it was announced that "The ministry has fallen. Scrimgeour is dead. They are coming." and it was revealed that the anti-disapparation shield was down. At that time, with the ministry under Voldemort's control, something like a country-wide tracking beacon for his spoken name, and a witch or wizard to get a fix on where it came from and to relay the information to the Death Eaters, is much more plausible. Once the trio escaped, it was then revealed for sure that the name was 'cursed' when it was quietly uttered in a cafe on the London Underground (a place where it would be very hard to find them conventionally because they're in Muggle territory and in a subterranean location to boot) and some disguised Death Eaters turned up a few minutes later. Later on, Hermione theorised that the name was now actually cursed because 'bad things kept happening' and was now actively avoiding its use, and it was Harry being overconfident, I think, that caused the trio to get captured and brought to Malfoy Manor.
By that logic, Hagrid was the one who endangered Harry from the beginning when he caved and told Harry about him, mentioning him by name in the Leaky Cauldron. Hagrid's a death eater!
@@jackl.1759 it wasn't used as a tracking beacon then. Only in the Deathly Hallows, once Voldemort was in power. Only his enemies dared to use his name, especially Harry, so they put a charm on using the name. That's how the Death Eaters were able to track Harry. And while they muse about this in the movie after Harry is no longer under-age, they never revisit this or explain this. So much stuff in the movies you wouldn't know unless you read the books.
A reason why Ron and Harry would never get into ravenclaw was that they decided to steal the flying car instead of waiting for Mr and Mrs Weasley to come back through the wall to get back to the car
It was Mad Eye Moody who said “This conversation is no longer private.” In Dumbledore’s office because he could see Harry through the door with his magic eye.
THANK YOU! I just spent waaay too much time looking for someone else who noticed that it was not Snape who noticed the meeting was no longer private so no need for the sin when Snape didn't notice eavesdropping going on at a later meeting.
My absolute favorite part in prisoner of Azkaban is when Harry says "he's free, we did it" and Dumbledore responds "did what?" And waves 😂😂 I don't know why I find that so funny
Dumbledore is always kinda giving the finger to everybody with his little trolls, it's so funny. I feel like he must be so tiring to deal with on a daily basis...
54:30 the reason that Hermione is having issue with making the potions is because Snape is no longer teaching the class. He used to write down ingredients and instructions on the chalkboard instead of telling everyone to use the book. Harry finds his book and its basically like Snape is still teaching.
that isn’t accurate actually, snape taught the traditional program and harry got ahead because he had his secret shortcuts and hacks that weren’t conventional or made official. snape wasn’t teaching what he wrote in the book, because students weren’t meant to know this kind of stuff, and they were following the conventional textbook anyway.
@@oui2375 No what the above guy said is correct cuz in the books it's always said Harry was looking at the ingredients from the board or something of that accord and as a teacher he will obviously write the correct or easiest method yk
@@thatonestarkidfan3918 Lots of my teachers don't teach directly from the textbook, especially when there are easier or more efficient methods of doing a problem available. That's precisely the point of that book too, that the common taught method isn't always the best. The best teachers teach kids to think outside the box/textbook, or teach the best way for each student.
Okay, and in the films they felt like changing the tension of that scene, and I think that's great. Kinda dumb when people want the book to be directly translated to a movie. It wouldn't even work at all anyway
@@JasonDrums24 It doesn't make any sense man. That's the literal only line Dumbledore is ever aggressive with Harry in the movies. It's so out of place and very odd.
@@Film-Is-Magic Well if you already read the books yeah, but cinema sins is taking it as its own universe separate from the books. Because the movies do a very, very shit job at explaining very basic and key plot points. Like the wand thing, its stated in the books that you don't need your wand, or even a wand at all, to perform spells. It just makes spells far stronger when you have a compatible wand. None of this is explained in the movies though. With that being said, you can still counter a good portion of what he says just by pure logic.
Also, in that magical clock the Weasleys have in their house we can see the word "Dentist", implying that Wizards know about the existence of said profession, but when Hermione has to explain what her parents do for a living in that small committee meeting with Slughorn, everybody seems surprised, as if they have never heard of that word before.
@@owaing it's very inconsistent. You would assume they solve a lot of these simple problems with magic, but there are a lot more they don't solve. Why are there people wearing glasses to begin with?
15:33 Fun fact: they actually had to start sewing the pockets of Tom Felton’s robes shut because he kept sneaking snacks on the set. That has nothing to do with the fact that Draco was eating a Granny Smith apple in this scene, it’s just a fun fact.
For convenience if this has not been done :) 0:14 - Sorcerer's Stone 3:04 - Chamber of Secrets 13:24 - Prisoner of Azkaban 21:19 - Goblet of Fire 33:16 - Order of the Phoenix 48:52 - The Half-Blood Prince 1:06:50 - The Deathly Hallows Pt. 1 1:24:35 - The Deathly Hallows Pt. 2
You know, I've always wondered why if you could easily gain ownership of the Elder wand just by disarming someone, that Voldemort didn't know of this at all and just decided to kill his best and (who he thought was) his most loyal death eater rather than just telling him "alright stand in front of me holding this elder wand, and i'll expelliarmus you"
In the books, it's explained. Historically no one's ever tried to get the wand just through defeating them without killing the previous owner. So until the draco defeating Dumbledore thing happened, no one could've known whether it's disarming or killing that transferred ownership
You can't just disarm someone--you have to disarm the owner while they're wielding it. If someone else wields it, it doesn't count, since you broke the wand's allegiance to them that it didn't have anyway.
@@coderzgaming7610 that's not true actually. Draco Malfoy never had the elder wand, but the ownership transferred to him anyway. So when Harry beat him in Malfoy manor, the ownership transferred to Harry even though neither one had ever had the wand yet
Actually, malfoy wasn't about to use the death curse outside Dumbledores office, the actor forgot the spell he was supposed to use and magically the only spell he remembered was ironically the death curse
Fun fact about that time where Lucius almost killed Harry but dobbie stopped him: They told the actor that played Lucius malfoy "just say a spell" and he couldn't remember any spells So he asked to camera operator and the camera operator could only remember that spell. Neither of them had any clue what the spell actually did.
My head cannon was that he was actually just going to kill Dobby, it’s played up as a heroic act of dobby saving harry but not realizing he actually just protected his own life.
@@Some_Guy6 Yeah, from memory Jason Isaacs had read the fourth book fairly recently and that was the spell that came to mind. I have no clue where the camera guy thing came from. Like, what? If he couldn't remember ANY spell, why would he turn to the camera guy and go "Hey mate, you know a spell?". Why not ask the director, for... yaknow... direction? Still though, it is kinda silly. If anything, he should have gone for his wand and that's when Dobby reacts. But no way is Lucius Malfoy stupid enough, even in a rage over losing a valuable slave, to think that AKing Harry bloody Potter in the middle of Hogwarts is going to end well.
24:46 To be fair, the last tournament took place in 1792. I can't remember if the movie mentions it, but there was an incident involving a cockatrice, causing it to be shut down for over 200 years. This movie was the first time it was being brought back since then... NEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEERD!
@@deltableu - Is he really, though? Does he have an insanely large role in the books? Or is he just important because of how his existence affected Snape (avoiding book spoilers here)?
@@deltableu they just kept out the parts that if harry had died as a baby he would have been the "chosen one" but since harry didn't die, it's not relevant to the story. The peeves stuff is sad since his scenes were filmed for the first movie.
@@xxANTIFA That's like totally not true. Neville is a little bit significant only because he had the same "compatibility" with most of the Prophesy conditions as Harry... _apart from being chosen by Voldemort_ himself (imprecise quote: "and the Dark Lord will mark him as equal"). Even if that choice was a coin flip on the Voldie side, it still was a choice, and without that crucial detail Neville significance falls apart. If Harry had died that night then the Prophesy would've been fulfilled (imprecise quote: "one of them die at the hand of the other"), not magically transferred onto another child.
Couldnt you force someone to make a vow as a bypass to killing them? Like, "say the vow, say 'I won't breath for the rest of my life'" and then the person dies no matter what. Or does the vow have to be consensual?
@@thatguyintherain3168 Something like that almost happened to Ron in the books. The Weasley twins Fred and George almost put ron under the unbreakable vow, their father caught them and stop it before anything happen. He was pissed when he caught them. The unbreakable vow requires you to agree upon what is said so anything said cannot be forced it has to be consensual. But you could trick someone into an unbreakable vow like what almost happen to ron.
Why not call it the liars curse or the revenge curse. SInce the vow is clearly breakable and it being unbreakable isn't the point of it anyway. The person making the vow which was broken obviously lied to make the vow and you only want them to pay for breaking the vow.
@@TKFKU they don’t vow that they’re telling the truth, it’s a promise, a promise that you can’t break if you want to live, I think the unbreakable vow is a really good choice for a name
They honestly really should have included the lesson where they learn how to do unspoken incantations. It's very confusing for people who didn't read the books Also, in the books they explain that the ministry (which is taken over by Voldemort) tracks people who say the word Voldemort. That's why they're saying "You know who" and shit still
Even if we only talk about the books it's still a sin, because non-verbal spells are still very complicated to perform and even more in dangerous and stressful situations, that's why in the book the golden trio still had to say the spells out loud.
@@zorkan111 because "Voldemort" is one word, and hardly a common one only used by his most ardent adversaries, whereas "you", "know", and "who" are separate words commonly used by everyone who speaks English, and tracking magic isn't very good. After all, the Trace can't even detect when someone casts magic, it tracks all magic done around them meaning that in highly concentrated areas(Hogwarts, Diagon Alley, Quittage events), or even just the homes of adult witches and wizards, the Trace is just constantly pinging and they have to rely on the parents to enforce the no underage magic. It's why Harry was blamed for Dobby's hovering charm, as he was the only wizard for miles, but Hermione was never picked up for her trying out the simple spells on the Hogwarts Train in book 1.
It is truly astonishing how many of the sins in this video are resolved with either narrative or exposition in the books. Using spells without saying the incantation, for example. Either the third or fourth book (I don't recall which) had a scene where the students were learning this skill. Using other wizards wands, too, is addressed in the books. It is possible but not ideal.
They could have put that explanation about incantationless magic and using other wands into a scene in the movie but they didnt thats why people who dont read the books question it. They emphasize so much in the first movies the importance of chanting,(winguardium leviosa) then a couple of movies later they disregarded it and just begin to spam magic like they are playing paintball in the woods.
@@kenzacharyrodriguez2591 I'd love to have the series re-made as a TV show instead of movies. They could actually fit the classes into the run times. Also, some of the most amusing bits from the books were cut to make the movies feel more cinematic.
The book had a better reason for him saying it wrong. He just...says it wrong in the movie. In the book he inhaled floo powder as he was saying it. I wish we got to see it I the movie
I had hopes in the german dub, because he just says it really fast and sort of mumbles it there, but then I realized they translated Knockturn with...well..Nokturn ._. The diagonally thing doesn't even work, Diagon Alley is "Winkelgasse" and diagonally in German is just diagonal. I get why we don't like our dubs most of the time lmao
They could make a Harry Potter TV Series where each episode is a chapter of the books like The Lord of the Rings The Rings of Power, Game of Thrones and Game of Thrones House of the Dragon.
Such a great idea to sin an entire franchise. I'd like to see Everything Wrong With The Fast & Furious franchise (while I like the franchise as my guilty pleasures, it's fun to see them get sinned)
I love how half the sins are just things that weren't explained in the movie but were explained in the book.. 100 extra sins to all of the movies for keeping everything important from the books out of them
I'm happy you understand the entire point of those things being sins is because the movie should stand on its own. I'm sure you've read the other comments and know why.
@@Itsuomi-Io Yea hahaha I mean if you watch the movies without reading the books I 100% understand this but when you know it all it's hella triggering XD
Something I recently realized was none of the death eaters. Know a mass killing spell you could just send bees after them. They likely would not be able to cast enough spells in a timely manner before the bees were upon them
As someone who read the books several times, long before watching the movies, this made me realize just how many things wouldn't make sense for someone who only watched the movies. Like obviously as a book reader I understood everything that wasn't explained but all the people that didn't read the books, rip.
As someone who's only seen the movies and read the first half of the first book, I can say I managed to follow the movies okay, especially on repeat viewings. The only major plothole that got under my skin due to having not read the books was how Sirius knew about the Marauder's Map, but even that got sorted after a little reading on the Harry Potter Wiki. I wasn't so bothered by Lupin's concern over the map, though, because... well, he's a teacher, and teachers always confiscate stuff from students, whether it's actually dangerous stuff like pocketknives, or innocent stuff like Pokémon cards.
@@nnewt8445 Admittedly, the movies aren't perfect in terms of plot. The connection with the books was *extremely* strong, though, I very much recommend watching and reading together as a single piece of media, books first
Hi. Grew up only with the movies and am right now writing Harry Potter/Doctor Who and Harry Potter/Hellsing fics and have to read through the books to satisfy the book readers as well as the movie watchers.👍
right, like i would love to say nearly all of these are either explained in the books or are there for convenience, but I doubt anyone is going to read the books to find out.
What was the final straw for me was not even giving us the 20 seconds they could have and shown Harry using the Elder wand to repair his old one like he did in the books.
This legitimately pissed me off. They split the last book into 2 movies, wasted an hour of runtime in the first installment, then decided they didn't have time for a quick, informative, and narratively satisfying scene at the end of the second.
The Death Eaters found Harry, Ron and Hermione in the coffee shop because Voldemort put a trace on anyone who said his name out loud. Harry was known to use Voldemort's name.
I love how about half of these sins wouldn't be there if it was the books. Like how the reason that Dumbledore only hired Lockhart was to prove him guilty because Albus personally knew some of the people Gilderoy used memory charms on. Edit: I seem to have made a simple mistake and used a bad example for my point, so I'll try again with a far better one. When Ron and Harry were reading about the Basalisk the page says that roosters scare it, so why didn't they bring roosters? Because in the books it's stated by Hagrid that the roosters keep ending up mysteriously killed. Nearing the end when we find out what happened to Ginny, it's revealed that she was the one who was killing the roosters so that option wasn't available. And if you think "well, how could she and Tom have known that?", if a book from the school library knew then of course _Tom Riddle_ would know what _his_ giant snake is afraid of. It's also rooster blood that was used to write on the walls.
thats still stupid? like this man is literally around kids and constantly putting them in danger? and an entire year worth of education was lost for each year. there are better ways to prove him guilty given hes DUMBLEDORE than bring kids into it. but this is dumbledore we are talking about. he's never had an issue using kids
@@adisaster8734 well, the position of the teacher of DADA (Defense of Dark Arts) is cursed by Lord Voldemort since Profesor Albus Dumbledore rejecting his apply to become teacher of DADA in Hogwarts. No one could keep the job as teacher of DADA in Hogwarts more than one year since then. Look up to all series until the last book, teacher of DADA kept changing each year. Some are dead, some are missing, some lost their mind and end in asylum. The curse ended when Lord Voldemort died.
You missed a sin in the first film and it's another glaring plot hole - how does Harry's skin carry protection from Voldemort touching him, he can be strangled but the moment harry touches him back with his hands, THEN the protection kicks in! So it doesn't reside in all of his skin like his neck, just his hands?
This video feels like a timelapse of Cinemasins over the years. From the short and sweet nitpicks of the classics to the more detailed lighthearted jokes of the current. It's amazing so much has changed and yet they still remain true to being 'assholes'.
Yeah they're kinda getting a lot wrong on purpose here... There were so many times where I yelled at the narrator for getting something wrong that was shown pretty obviously earlier in the movie.
@@batmanbeyond5766 the entire part about portkeys is an example. This guy keeps harping on about the boot and how this boot must be the only portkey and how it leads to this random hill in the British countryside and the Cup being a portkey is weird because it’s not a boot etc etc. Or basically every time a problem is solved with magic, he goes “thats impossible & I dont understand it so its a sin” IT’S. FREAKING. MAGIC.
@@BootyCrusader Exactly, if the portkey aren't explained Jeremy goes "what well how does that work" and if they are explained he'll go "oh I'm sure this information won't be useful later in the movie *wink*" or "oh wow yes please explain more about this one object in this one scene" or some other "I hate exposition"
There's a lot of things wrong with these movies, but Hagrid's delivery of that "Harry?! No! What're you doin' here?!" Is fucking great. He is so sad that Harry is either willing to sacrifice himself, or betrayed by Hogwarts because he doesn't know what happened, and he just sounds like he wishes that asking why will save Harry.
Honestly, when the the dwarf professor surfing the group of his own students is to this day my favorite scene of the whole franchise.... That man was literally every single HP movie, as multiple different roles, and he was like screw it let whole bunch of teens moshpiting to magical rock music... why not, it might be fun.
@@sleekyissleepy YES! in deathly hallows!, and in that movie especially, there is no reason that the pacing couldn't tolerate an emotional scene like that
Reason I hate the movies sometimes, they never established that nonverbal spells are a thing in the books and are a sign of advanced magic, so if you didn't read, you don't get this. And did they ever mention that saying Voldemort's name now carries a Trace so if you say it, you're immediately zeroed in on by the baddies and taken away? You say the name, you've fucked yourself over. Granted, three against a bunch of snatchers do not look good when you don't have your own wand that you didn't take from someone else. I imagine apparating while running would be rather difficult to do, case in point, Yaxley got pulled along for the ride and ron got splinched.
Why didn’t they(the smart, intelligent adults)just say Voldemort’s name to pull a sting operation to identify and catch all the snatchers? Seems like a really big flaw to me.
@@dingle2987 Because by the time the snatchers and trace was around, Voldermort had the ministry under his control, so unless the so called smart witches and wizards, used the killing curse to get rid of the snatchers or imprisoned these snatchers in their own mansions, it was never going to amount to anything....
Lockhart wanted to add "Hogwarts's beloved DADA teacher" to his curricululm. Bumblemore needed someone, anyone, to teach DADA afTer decades of losing the current teacher every single year. Neither of those facts is explained in the movie. That's the sin: not the fact that Hogwarts hired an absolute incompetent for a teacher, but the lack of explanation. Admittedly, we the audience can presume that losing the Sabine god to the power of love put Bumblemore in a bit of a pickle... But the fact that every single DADA teacher hasn't lasted more than one year, including The Umbitch, because of a curse that De Mort placed on the position back when *he* wanted to teach DADA and Bumblemore laughed in his face and told him to get lost is never explained.
@@o0alessandro0o You seem very knowledgeable about this topic so I’ll take your word for it, CinemaSins just seemed to really despise the fact that Hogwarts would hire someone like Lockhart to teach
And we have to remember the job is cursed. Dumbledore knew Lockhart would be gone at the end of the year and something horrible would probably happen to him. Rowling said Dumbledore was friends with some of the people Lockhart obliviated.
@@Akuchan7 Would Dumbledore be that malicious? And if he was aware or suspected Lockhart, then why didn't he tell someone? Dumbledore was at least as famous as Lockhart, his word would have counted for something at least.
"Universities hire awful professors for their prestige and research all the time" you're talking out of your ass. literally. Just like the Disney screenwriters, and frankly the original author, you're parading your ignorance around as if it's a virtue.
Fun Fact: Emma Watson was always mouthing the lines of the other characters. And yes, the portkeys are put there by the ministry of magic beforehand and they use ordinary objects that don’t attract attention from muggles. And the portkey object actually travels with them and was then collected with the other used portkeys from the other locations. And I actually noticed a mistake in Goblet of Fire just now: the Indian twin sisters are not both in Gryffindor and therefore can’t sit at the same table or be in the same dorm room. Parvati is in Gryffindor, but Parma is in Ravenclaw. That Yule dance class wasn’t even in the book. The family of the champions are there, because they were invited to Hogwarts for the final task. For Harry Molly and Bill Weasley show up. In the fifth book with her dementors in the tunnel, he actually already makes a fully developed stag patronus.
You forgot to mention that they say You Know Who in the Deathly Hallows, because Voldemort had a tracking spell on his name so if anyone said it they would be tracked by the Snatchers
These are correct, but he's making fun of the movies and their lack of explaining things. No clue if they read the books or not, but they are just going off the information the books give, which at many moments is vague and exploitable.
Well sure but he's sinning the movie and not the book yeah? Also watch their "everything wrong with cinemasins" they say the books don't matter to them
If you have to go through outside material to make sense of what's happening in the movie, the movie had no legs to stand with and already failed on its own.
Guess what, that lollipop in Prisoner of Azkaban that Harry "stole" from Neville, was quite possibly actually not stolen after all. Any time Harry has had to grab or hold anything, he's stuck his hand out of the cloak. You know what's far more likely? A sticky lollipop coming into contact with an invisible piece of fabric and sticking there, getting carried along for the ride.
He couldn't have taken it, I mean how would he eat it if it was visible? There must hacmve been a clooak between his face and the lollipop. To eat it he would have to have it undercloak invisible with all his stuff
54:10 What if the liquid luck potion was used before, but noone told us about it? Maybe Harry was stupidly lucky all of the time because Dumbledore was secretly pouring this potion into every Harry's meal in Hogwarts. That would make a lot more sense (this idea is actually pretty stupid, so it making more sense than the real plot tells us a lot about the realism of the films)
The thing about Felix Felicis is that it's almost certianly a placebo. This can be seen by the fact that just having a person think they drank it (Ron), a literal placebo, gives the person great confidence and they find they succeed in what they try. The description of the potion says that drinking too much can have disastrous results, similarly to how being overconfident leads to disastrous consequences, while a good amount of confidence usually leads to success. Further, Harry almost definitely didn't need to use it to extract the memory from Slughorn, Dumbledore knew that he could do it and trusted him to do so entirely, and the entire reason he succeeded was due to a change in attitude and approach after drinking liquid luck. He felt he knew what he was doing, ie he was confident, and that confidence put him into a situation where Slughorn was willing to give it up. If Harry had drank the potion and then just confronted Slughorn in the same way as before, it wouldn't work, but because he felt confident and in control, his roundabout method of following his gut instinct resulted in success, just like how Ron's confidence boost from thinking he drank it resulted in him following his gut instincts and thus performing well at quidditch.
Even though MacGonagall did more for Harry than Snape or Dumbledore, he still didn't name any of his children after her... that's a real sin. Also didn't show his first born son, Sirius James Potter
1:29:31 before this scene, the trio were stuffing their faces in food like they hadn't had any in weeks. Couldn't Hermione have packed a few snacks for the trip in her bag with INFINITE STORAGE!?
She actually did in a books. But the supplies ran out in a month or so. They had to smuggle food from nearby villages and farms, just to eat. At some point all 3 of them were starving.
0:14 Year 1: The Sorcerer’s Stone 3:04 Year 2: The Chamber of Secrets 13:24 Year 3: The Prisoner of Azkaban 21:19 Year 4: The Goblet of Fire 33:17 Year 5: The Order of the Phoenix 48:52 Year 6: The Half-Blood Prince 1:05:50 Year 7: The Deathly Hallows
1:04:55 "Honestly, leaving the assassination to Draco, who thought this was a good idea ?" No one, Voldemort is still pissed about Lucius for giving away one of his soul shards under the sole reason of "we're going to partake in some tomfoolery" to the Weasley Family. So as punishment, he basically sent Draco on a suicide mission, to kill the "best" wizard in the wizarding world and if he returns empty handed, he would die for it. And since his son didn't die that day, Voldemort still finds a way to make Lucius' life hell. From setting up base in his mansion and doing whatever he wants (breaking his wand in half and calling it trash, etc)
@@myweirdsecondchannelwithap9070 what would? Reading the books? 🤔 And I never said they had to add in ALL the information (the books are long obv, I understand necessary 'edits'), but certain crucial pieces were left out that leave ppl confused for apparently useless cinematic scenes that serve nothing to the story and were only there for show and 'action'. Not all movies need high amounts of action sequences to be good.
The biggest sin is when the movies didn't follow the end of the battle for Hogwarts. First, Harry and Voldemort have their battle in front of the whole of Hogwarts, not in an empty courtyard. And second, Harry's willingness to walk into Voldemort's camp and "die" did for everyone, what Harry's mother did for him that saved him from Voldemort. Which caused Voldemort's powers to become useless against the people Harry loved.
"Which caused Voldemort's powers to become useless against the people Harry loved." Wait, that's what happened ?! Like, I kinda bought the concept when it was about Harry and Lily, but in this context it looks like... cheating... Especially since Harry survived.
here's another one THE MALFOYS DID NOT RUN AWAY I'm sorry that just pisses me off turned the change of heart of the whole family into little piss mice. And the last part isn't exactly right it was how the wand decided to pick Harry IMHO
This cinemasin-video brought to my mind Ms Figg wasn't the only one who kept an eye on Harry in Order of the Phoenix (book). One member of the order kept watching him too in this case Mundungus who disappered before his shift was over.
The reason they call him "You know who" in Deathly hallows is because they know that saying "Voldemort" tracks your location, that is a spell that Voldemort set up in order to find anyone who was on the side of Harry. It was never explained in the movies but this is why you should read the books instead.
@@longarmsgiraffe0955 it was! Hermione stops Harry from saying his name and informs him there's a "trace" put on his name so that anyone who says it alerts the death eaters, etc. Exampled by when Luna's dad says the word his house is attacked immediately!
There’s a lot of stuff that the films miss from the books that’s actually really important. The main one in my head currently is in film 7 when they need Dobby’s help to apparate out of the Malfoy mansion. In the books, it’s explained that they’ve cast a spell to prevent apparating in and out of the house, but they don’t value house elves so Dobby can still do it. EDIT: Also that the Snatchers and Death Eaters have put a trace on the word Voldemort so they can find Order of the Phoenix members, seeing as they’re the only ones who are bold enough to use his name. That’s why they call him You Know Who in the films 7 and 8.
mine are two big ones one: THE MALFOYS DID NOT RUN FROM THE SCHOOL two: the Room of Requirements could not be broken into that easily was the point bonus three: Wizards can't fly that was a big todo about the FLYING Voldemort ghost
i call bullshit on the 'ppl are scared to say his name' thing. Why in the world would they be so scared? no one is/was even remotely terrified of saying 'hitler' or 'stalin' in the real world. also EVERYONE knows it, so who told them? why would people be scared to say it but not scared to write it? (if that's your explanation). And what would make dumbledores army suddenly not so scared? is being friends with harry a cure for being scared to say some arrangement of letters? Also the 'tracking words' thing is also bullcrap. Besides the BIG flaw stated above, if that is an actual spell, why not target something like 'horcrux' or 'Tom riddle' which only people that are actually somewhat important would know about? also what point did this even serve in the book in terms of plot, character or anything whatsoever? it seems so contrived yet unnecessary... (I've read them, but its been a while).
@@garlicicecream9087 In terms of magic and folklore, names have power. The setting for the series is a magical world where people believein magic, so they believe saying Voldemort name gives him some power. This is the same kind of taboo that make words for things people feared becoming unused and then being erased from history (the old english word for "bear", the animal, for example). Also in some cultures the "damnatio memoriae" is a form of punishment: completely erasing records about a person existence, what includes making their name being forgotten by prohibiting people from saying it.
There’s also the fact that in the films, the Room of Requirement isn’t properly explained. The books make it clear that the Room was also where the Mirror of Erised was in the first story but the films don’t pick up on that. Also, the room can change shape and purpose; one of the sins given is that the Room of Requirement looks different when it’s a place to hide stuff but that’s the exact point of it. In the books, Dumbledore says that he must have found it once when desperately looking for a bathroom as he found it then and never has since. Basically, the films are pretty dreadful the further into the series you go because they create so many plot holes and miss so many key details.
Something I have always wondered: After Harry's parents left him ALL that money, why did he never help Ron out to get a new wand? He just let his best friend suffer and struggle, when all he had to do was give him some cash to get a new one. I mean, he bought an entire trolley of candy and snacks at the beginning of the first movie, burn couldn't buy his friend a freaking wand???
The Weasleys were too prideful to accept money from him. Whenever he tried to help, the parents shut him down. One of the only times he got them to accept anything was when he gave the twins his Triwizard Tournament winnings, and that too after a lot of coaxing.
In the movie he buys the whole trolley but in the books I think he said like "I take one of everything". I might be mistaken. On a side note I felt bad for Weasleys when they saw Harrys vault. I don't remember which book it was.
Why didn’t anyone use repairo on it? Like Hermione did on Harry’s glasses. Also that spell was used outside of school before she was 17. Why didn’t she get expelled💀
One of my favorite sins quotes is still: "She's a little bunny, and you're a bear... and you're looking at these claws and these fangs and you're like, 'How do I kill the bunny?' "
The roosters were killed by Ginny as a precaution to avoid the roosters killing the basilisk. Still, with magic, a rooster should have been easy enough to replace.
Well the problem with that is that does it appear or is explained in the movie itself? Since by cutting that and pretending the books don’t exist it is essentially a plot hole. And the movies are adaptations of the book not the books.
Or they could go to any of the many many many many many farms on the planet they could reach in seconds via their teleportation magic and get one. But, plot convenience makes the world go round! Most movies wouldn't happen without it!
Dammit Cinemasins. I had stuff to do today and you go and drop a patreon notice that takes away a chunk of afternoon when I could have been doing Sunday busy-work (totally worth it though)
19:00 - 19:07 - I think the answer to that is that Hagrid moved from the one room forrest house, on one side of the castle, to the two room cliff house on the other side of the castle during the summer between "Chamber of secrets" and "Prisoner of Akzaban"
13:27 Actually, a wand is just a way to harness your magic power. You can make stuff like this happen when you become very emotional, but what happens is unpredictable. Like how he made the glass disappear for his cousin in the first movie.
AND you can use other instruments. Where wands are traditional, you can use potentially a staff or other device. The idea being that a combination of magical animal 'core' imbued with a wood from a tree is the best "conduit" between magic and casting. Non verbal spells were taught in Year 6 by Snape whilst he was Defence Against Dark Arts professor. It requires more focus and thought but provides more combat efficiencies (naturally)
@@projectstart5522 There was even a whole sub-plot in the books about certain races of magical creatures (goblins specifically if I remember rightly) that were rather miffed about humans decreeing that they couldn't use wands. Wands are well known to increase focus and power, even with creatures like elves and goblins that don't need them to create spells, and the implication is that wands are prohibited for magical creatures because they would pose a legitimate threat to the humans if they acquired a focus to their innate power. Maybe not world-breakingly so, but it was definitely something that was well known amongst wizards and their ilk, just not the people watching just the movies who didn't read the books.
One sin that really bugs me is when Harry practices the Lumos spell at the start of Prisoner of Azkaban (it’s not in the books). In practically every film your’e told students aren’t allowed to use magic outside of Hogwarts.
@@juleslovesreading this but unironically. Think about how celebrities get away with a bunch of petty crimes like parking on the side of the street in cities and speeding and the like. It's actually quite accurate that he can get away with breaking the rule
Well it’s explained that fudge waved all of them away because 1. Harry’s first use of magic was buried because it was accidental and Harry couldn’t control it. Then, thinking he was going to be expelled threw all caution or the winds and used magic anyways without knowing that he was fine. 2. Fudge was thinking that he was about to die and if he expelled him, Harry would likely run away again. (Chosen one argument) anyways
literally at the end of the first movie hagrid tells harry to give dudley a pair of pig ears if he annoys him back home. because his uncle and aunt don't know he's not allowed to use magic outside of hogwarts. so casting outside of hogwarts is obviously a grey area, as long as noone gets hurt or no muggles notice it you're good.
@@nearlydead7510 nope They can track used magic, that's why they thought dobbies magic was harries as they only know magic was used. The reason they shrugged it off later on was because they didnt wish for Harry to get killed.
If only they added a side story in which a young African American tries to spruce up until choir with slightly altered versions of popular songs. Maggie disapproves but eventually comes around.
Wands are unnecessary for magic, talented wizards and witches can perform magic without them. That was shown in the first movie. In the book, African wizards perform magic without wands, they used hand signs. The purpose of the wand is to amplify the magic power of the wizard. Wands are made with different types of wood and different cores, and they have their own ora, kinda like a soul. They link to the wizards. If you give a wand to the wrong wizard, you can have simple spells blow up in your face shown in the first movie. They don't give them out like candy and the wand picks the users. This is backed by Neville Longbottom. His wand was passed down to him, and it was given him problems stunting and plateauing his skills as a wizard. As soon as he got a wand suited for him, he performed well.
don't get me wrong. i get all of what you said. BUT...you telling me african wizards and witches can basically throw up ninjutsu, gang hand signs to use magic? sounds pretty cool, funny, but kinda impractical. like what if their opps just cut their hands off?
@@sportyjhf5Q It's true, I gotta find the book where it mentions it. It goes over all the other wizarding schools and governments. That's how they ended up explaining the African wizards. Not sure which book, but it is canon. O and if someone "sectumsempra" your hands off then you can just have a powerful wizard make your hands like Voldemort did to Wormtail in the Goblet of fire.
I think that children should be taught wandless magic from the beginning, while some adults could have wands to amplify their spells to suit their jobs or needs. Example being obliviators, they deal with mind magic which is extremely delicate, the wand can help concentrate the magic.
@@mcarrowtime7095 I’m just saying that teaching children that wands are absolutely necessary is utterly stupid, it’ll build limits that aren’t supposed to be built. I’m not trying to cause a fuss or anything really, just wanted to share my opinion 😅
Let's be honest, Rowling explained the overwhelming majority of those sins either herself or in the books. The biggest sin is not having more of the books in the films.
That's not a sin, it's called having a limited budget. You think people would watch 10 hour long Harry Potter movies? And before you go on whining about tv series, the industry for tv series wasn't as developed 20-25 years ago, the way it is now.
Nothing Rowling explained herself that wasn't in the books really counts. Especially since she clearly makes a lot of it up on the spot like one of the Lost writers and then just pretends it was planned all along.
The only thing that bugs me is that sometimes in certain scenes especially in the last 2 Ron just stands in the background like he just woke up or he doesn't know what's going on like a oblivious npc
Honestly the British conquering India is the greatest WTF moment in history. I still can't believe a few thousand British lorded over hundreds of millions of Indians at one point.
A lot of unexplained plot holes or just odd scenes in the movie are explained in the books. For example, in the 5th movie, Harry has to make his choice between sparing Bellatrix or taking revenge for Sirius. And in the books, he doesn't hesitate to take revenge. He immediately casts the spell that would cause the most pain, one that will let Bellatrix feel as much pain as he had. The Cruciatus curse (I'm 100% certain I spelt that wrong but whatever). He casts it multiple times actually. But you can't fit a lot of the exposition given in the books into the movies. A lot of it will be cut down due to time constraints. Another example is the families who came to visit during the Triwizard Tournament. The families of the champions were invited to come and see their children for a day, before the event started. Viktor's family came, Fleur's family came, Cedric's family came. The Weasley family came for Harry cause he didn't have any living relatives that were able to come see him. And the Buckbeak time travel shenanigans are also better explained. Instead of the trio stopping on top of the hill, they are underneath the invisibility cloak and are trying to get away as quickly as possible so they aren't spotted. Meanwhile, future Harry and Hermione are waiting in the treeline for the executioner and other people there to see Buckbeak so they can't blame Hagrid for letting him go, and then when the adults go back inside they quickly lure Buckbeak with some meat and run away with the hippogriff. A lot of things that make no sense in the movies rely on book knowledge to connect the dots. Another thing is that if you don't read the books, you will never know a lot of little details about the characters. Draco Malfoy is actually one of the smartest students in the school, just after Hermione. Hermione's front teeth were larger than average until a spell went haywire I think in their fourth year and Hermione let Madame Pomfrey continue to reshrink her teeth past their original length until they were at her desired size. Ron has a ghoul in the room above him which was used as a decoy for if death eaters were to come to their house (or it was a way to trick his family for a while so he could leave quickly I don't remember I haven't read Harry Potter in so long). Fleur was originally disliked by Molly Weasley, and she wanted her son Bill to marry Tonks instead. Neville could have also been the child of the prophecy, but Voldemort chose to go after the Potters on account of them being "stronger" in his eyes, and I think the fact that Harry was a Half-blood and Neville was a Pure-blood had something to do with it as well. Oh and another plot hole that is solved by reading the books is when the teachers all tell Lockhart to go into the Chamber of Secrets and defeat Slytherin's monster. They weren't telling him to go do it, they were just trying to get him away from their important meeting so they could actually come up with a plan to get Ginny Weasley back safe, or if it was too late bring back her body, and evacuate the students. Wow I didn't expect this comment to get so long-
Yea I mean in a way the movies just felt like a skim over of the books. Anyone who actually wants the full enjoyment of Harry Potter and actually wants to understand the story and the stuff that happens, they have to read the book. People who only watched the movies and refuse to read the books likely don’t care much about the full story and just want a movie to watch.
Honestly, the sins are the reason I enjoy these films because as someone who has read the books far too much, pointing out inconsistencies is entertaining.
@@definitelynotjustasquirrel8319 A lot of relevant plot is just straight up missing or reduced to nothing more than a sidenote and the characters have been aged up from 12 to 16 in the first movie. hopefully the upcoming Disney+ series of the books will be better.
33:35 to be fair, in the books Dudley is stated to have become a boxer for his school’s team and a lot of what WAS fat is now muscle. Boxers have pretty rigorous workout routines. Harry meanwhile is the lithe muscle of someone who runs a lot, so I can see the difference being made up by the fact that harry would be able to run linger than Dudley, he’s probably pacing himself
"It's still raining in my office." "Sir, have you tried checking the knowledge base?" "I pay people to do that for me." Maybe if you paid them better, it wouldn't still be raining in your office."
![[#2024MAMA] G-DRAGON - 무제(Untitled, 2014)+POWER+HOME SWEET HOME+뱅뱅뱅+FANTASTIC BABY | Mnet 241123 방송](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Ox29z5Nf1Uk/mqdefault.jpg)
“Neville reaches deep down to his British roots and conquers India” is hands-down one of the greatest sins ever dispensed by this channel.
Somebody tell me the timestamp, please?
@@miami9819 42:12
@@natpire3851 thanks :)
Yeah, it's pretty great!!! One of my other favorites is from TV Sins video on Peanuts' "The Great Pumpkin".
Linus: "There are three things I've learned never to discuss with people, religion, politics, and The Great Pumpkin."
Jeremy: "Strangely in 2019, these are somehow all the same topic."(3:08)
I don't know why, but that one really got me. ☺
SOMEONE PLEASE LISTEN: yo but like Harry is the antagonist in the philosophers stone and flamel and I think his wife die as a result of his stupidity. If he had stayed in his room, quirrel would never have been able to get to the stone...
As a diehard fan of the books, this video makes me realize that the movies skipped so many crucial plot points. Like 80% of these sins are legitimate questions that someone who hasn't read the books might have while watching the movie and the movie does nothing to explain most of it or just blah blahs over it. How, according to the movie, does Harry learn about Hufflepuff's cup, for example? All of this makes me want a properly made remake of this series in the form of a TV show.
So many problems books turned to movies have could have been solved by turning the books into tv shows. Way too much needs to be cut to fit everything into a movie.
I literally just left the exact same comment only to scroll one down and find this lol the whole time I was dying inside like there's freaking muffliato for the anti eavesdropping spell.. There's so many things that were answered in the books but not the movie I had no idea until I watched this either
Yes
You are 100% correct. However I would argue they are great movies. Not fully accurate to the books at all but solid movies
As much as I agree with you, you’ll have a hard time finding a new Harry without getting lunched by Daniel Radcliffe fans
One sin you forgot is, when the letter says Harry did the patronus charm in from of a muggle, the letter is reading itself out loud while floating in the room with three muggles, including the same one from before.
This is extremely true, I never even realized that
Almost like it's an unfair charge that is later dropped because the ministry is trying to expel harry and normally using magic in front of your family who know about magic wouldn't be a problem.
They were already privy to the magical world when they had to take on the responsibility of raising Harry. It was in the letter tucked inside of his blanket. Dudley however was our of the loop about it, including Harry before Hagrid told him. So the enchanted letter wouldn’t have been new to them as muggles who were currently begrudgingly raising a wizard. Also by this time Harry is already three years into school, so they would be used to things like this by now, not comfortable with it, but used to it.
i know!
No, that's just a new topic you wanted to raise, and for some reason you thought the best way to do it was the passive aggressive "you forgot" whine.
The reason that Lucius Malfoy tries to use killing curse against Harry in second movie was actually a legitimate mistake on Jason Isaacs' part. He legitimately forgot his line and just said the first spell that came to his mind, which just happened to Avada Kedavra.
Does fit the character though.
That makes the scene even better for me
Y'know what, fair enough
And retake of a scen doesn't happen?
@@trolletuva Obviously it didn't as it gave Lucius a darker side to the character. It has been confirmed by numerous people, including Isaacs and Daniel Redclife, that this was pure imrpovisation on Isaacs' part, just like the previous scene and Harry's famous line "Don't worry. I will" which was also improvised on the spot. Isaacs has claimed many times since that he was legitimately impressed with the young actor with how he handled this scene.
After all the unnecessary details they've put into the movies, they could've easily spare 5 seconds to explain that saying Voldemort's name out loud is actually used as a tracker.
They did in Deathly Hallows pt.1. It might have been a deleted scene. I watched the movies On Demand and apparently they were the extended versions so I saw a bunch of 'new' scenes. Probably should have left that one in there.
to track what?
@@KafshakTashtak Who said it.
@@KafshakTashtak to track anyone who says his name or rather dares say his name
First time am hearing this honestly didn't know
What I love about malfoy and the apples is that Tom Felton kept sneaking them on set to the point where they sewed all his pockets shut
I thought that was because of chocolate
@@rachael6855 Yeaah it was
/thathappened
No, that's because he kept sneaking chocolate and sweets onto the set and they melted and ruined the robes so eventually all pockets were sewn shut
Sooo many people for this, it's both impressive...
and disappointing.
r/woooosh
One thing that I find wrong about the movies is that Ron was downgraded to a cowardly, gluttonous and comedic sidekick, instead of the badass, loyal and witty friend that he is in the books.
It's cuz the writers favorite was Hermione. He was biased and gave her a lot of Harry and Ron's good moments
@@Chris-ks4sw Could also be down to the fact that Emma Watson is better at acting than Rupert Grint and therefore the movies were rearranged. And Ron is really not that badass tbh. I think they portrayed the characters quite good in the movies. Only character that stands out is Umbridge and that is because Imelda Staunton nails that role to perfection.
@@Chris-ks4sw Hermione I'd rge best out of the 3
Exactly! The movies did Ron so dirty! Ron was the brains of their group, Hermione was annoying and Harry was kind of a brat.
@@mukke9728 Hermione got better but she was really awkward first few movies. They all got better. Harry had some great scenes in 5 and 6. Ron got a lot better too but by that point they had already ruined his character so they couldnt go back.
0:14 - The Sorcerer’s Stone
3:02 - The Chamber of Secrets
13:23 - The Prisoner of Azkaban
21:19 - The Goblet of Fire
33:16 - The Order of the Phoenix
48:52 - The Half Blood Prince
1:05:49 - The Deathly Hallows Part 1
1:24:35 - The Deathly Hallows Part 2
The Philosophers Stone*
@@NyalBurns there's different titles in the US and UK
@@thatguyanderson I understand
The hero we all need. Thank you sir 🫡
“Neville reaches deep down to his British roots and conquers India” 42:12
"Their punishment for staying out late and hanging out with Hagrid is to hang out late with Hagrid" I still lose my shit at this
Never seesn any ogff the movires, but Im still laughing art this one!
Hagrid's punishment for unleashing spiders is to hang out with spiders?
@@MBison-im2qy oh my gosh, you're right
And you morons fail to realize how that punishment makes so much sense. If you punish someone by forcing them to do that very thing they think they like but with dangerous consequences, they're gonna stop enjoying that thing and thus never doing it again.
Very contrived reason to shoehorn in Harry seeing the unicorn blood drinking and meeting Firenze.
Imagine if they did this to the MCU. It would be measured in days.
I'm sure he would find the way to cram it all together
Just had to sin one movie then you‘ve sinned all of the movie‘s plots
No shit 23 movies to like 7
@@alenciaga21 lmao
@@alenciaga21 nice 👌
In the books it says that they placed a taboo on the word "Voldemort" that takes away all of the protective spells and immedietly reveals your place to them. That is why they do not say it. Altough they should've put that detail in the movie
I always wondered why ALL the spells and all the protective charms cold be overridden by Voldemort's Trace spell when ha finally had a little more power but was not at his peak. Does not compute
Ron kind of mentioned it after he got splinched
@@JulieFalen because they control the ministry of magic
@@JulieFalen He was in control of the ministry of magic AND he was one of the most powerful wizards that century. In fact he was one of the 3 most powerful wizards of that century with Grindelwald and Dumbledore being the other two. Considering that Voldemort was significantly younger than Dumbledore I would assume that, if they were at same age, he might have been even more powerful than Dumbledore. So... actually not a big deal that he was capable of doing that.
But that wasn't until the last book. Not saying his name began in book 1 and carried through.
Hey, remember when -Hermoine- Hermione corrected others for saying Wingardium Leviosa incorrectly? At 55:58, she herself says "Confundus", even though the incantation of the Confundus Charm is actually "confundo".
buddy, it is spelled 'heroine'. lol
@@aumhren3480 Hermione is her name, which I did spell incorrectly, but I wasn't trying to say "heroine". If I actually wanted to type out heroine, then I would've also added "the" before it and H wouldn't have been capitalized. Stick to Slovene.
With that being said, I recommend you stop watching these shitty-ass CinemaSins videos.
I thought its spelled Cocaine
@@aumhren3480 My comment didn't go through, probably cause I said that you shouldn't watch videos by these guys.
Anyway, I did spell Hermione incorrectly, so I fixed it. If I had wanted to say heroine though, I wouldn't have capitalized H and I would've put "the" before the word. But I didn't. Stick to Slovene.
What's funny is that there IS an anti-eavesdropping spell, which only makes that one sin even better since they don't use it. It's Muffliato
Ohh yeah I totally forgot about that haha
No, that one makes your ears buzz. One of Snape's spells. It makes you unable to hear anything, it wouldn't be practical.
They didnt learn that til Book 6.
omg I watch your genshin vidsssssss
it is Half-Blood prince's spell
I gotta say the book version of that dragon fight was way cooler. one, the entire fight happened in the stadium, and two it was meant to emphasize Harry's talent and reflexes as a quidditch player, but in the movie he is basically just running away the whole time.
The biggest book to movie sin is the dumbing down of Ron Weasley.
@@RobCooper-Bachatador There are good video essays on how and why that happened, if you haven't seen them, but I agree - in tandem with kind of glossing over Hermione's flaws, they also just make Ron dumb.
Because I'm, well, a huge nerd, and read various fanfiction, it was interesting to watch as you could tell which fanfic authors were basing their stuff off the books and which were basing it off the movies based solely on how they treated Ron in their fanfics.
@@stevencowan37 I've seen the one where the director script writer just said he was a fan of Hermione and JK was shocked.
I get that he wanted to have a stronger heroine and i didn't mind movie Ron but I found the books balanced the flaws and benefits of three (four including Neville) protagonists better.
damn im still reading the first one bruh while i was buying the first one i saw one book and it was double the size i think its the one your talking abt
@@watercat-veki yeah, the first one isn't as long as the others. You're in for a ride lol
I love that one of the most consistent sins he points out is how everyone reverts back to calling Voldemort “You-Know-Who” in the last two movies. All this because the movies never bothered to explain that they turned the saying of his name into a tracking beacon.
It's funny because the one clue that it is a tracking beacon was Xenophilius Lovegood saying it, and it was more like a scare chord and a 'speed of plot' thing when the Death Eaters were suddenly already swooping in. I may be wrong, but I think the first time that the tracking beacon thing was definitely active was during Bill and Fleur's wedding, when it was announced that "The ministry has fallen. Scrimgeour is dead. They are coming." and it was revealed that the anti-disapparation shield was down. At that time, with the ministry under Voldemort's control, something like a country-wide tracking beacon for his spoken name, and a witch or wizard to get a fix on where it came from and to relay the information to the Death Eaters, is much more plausible. Once the trio escaped, it was then revealed for sure that the name was 'cursed' when it was quietly uttered in a cafe on the London Underground (a place where it would be very hard to find them conventionally because they're in Muggle territory and in a subterranean location to boot) and some disguised Death Eaters turned up a few minutes later. Later on, Hermione theorised that the name was now actually cursed because 'bad things kept happening' and was now actively avoiding its use, and it was Harry being overconfident, I think, that caused the trio to get captured and brought to Malfoy Manor.
I forgot about that!
By that logic, Hagrid was the one who endangered Harry from the beginning when he caved and told Harry about him, mentioning him by name in the Leaky Cauldron. Hagrid's a death eater!
@@jackl.1759 it wasn't used as a tracking beacon then. Only in the Deathly Hallows, once Voldemort was in power. Only his enemies dared to use his name, especially Harry, so they put a charm on using the name. That's how the Death Eaters were able to track Harry. And while they muse about this in the movie after Harry is no longer under-age, they never revisit this or explain this. So much stuff in the movies you wouldn't know unless you read the books.
TECHNICALLY the name of Voldemort was jinxed. Not cursed.
Yes I'm fun at parties, why do you ask
A reason why Ron and Harry would never get into ravenclaw was that they decided to steal the flying car instead of waiting for Mr and Mrs Weasley to come back through the wall to get back to the car
It was Mad Eye Moody who said “This conversation is no longer private.” In Dumbledore’s office because he could see Harry through the door with his magic eye.
Yeah, did the dude not notice that his eye was rolled back, looking backwards through the back of his head?
In the book series, madeye is always looking around for threats; so would it be unusual for a guy to do the thing that the guy usually does?
That's not the only mistake. This was a really lazy video.
@@amadeushorror129 1 hour 40 minutes long you want 10 hour?
THANK YOU! I just spent waaay too much time looking for someone else who noticed that it was not Snape who noticed the meeting was no longer private so no need for the sin when Snape didn't notice eavesdropping going on at a later meeting.
My absolute favorite part in prisoner of Azkaban is when Harry says "he's free, we did it" and Dumbledore responds "did what?" And waves 😂😂 I don't know why I find that so funny
Dumbledore is always kinda giving the finger to everybody with his little trolls, it's so funny.
I feel like he must be so tiring to deal with on a daily basis...
@@Libellulaire someone so powerful would either be a dick or eccentric af. I'll take the latter
Dumbledore understands the concept of 'Plausible deniability'! *one sin removed*
54:30 the reason that Hermione is having issue with making the potions is because Snape is no longer teaching the class. He used to write down ingredients and instructions on the chalkboard instead of telling everyone to use the book. Harry finds his book and its basically like Snape is still teaching.
that isn’t accurate actually, snape taught the traditional program and harry got ahead because he had his secret shortcuts and hacks that weren’t conventional or made official. snape wasn’t teaching what he wrote in the book, because students weren’t meant to know this kind of stuff, and they were following the conventional textbook anyway.
@@oui2375 I feel like Snape should've been teaching *his* version of the text-book: He's a god damned teacher, after all.
@@oui2375 No what the above guy said is correct cuz in the books it's always said Harry was looking at the ingredients from the board or something of that accord and as a teacher he will obviously write the correct or easiest method yk
@@MrHel-hf3nk at least in real life, teachers can get sanctioned for not teaching curriculum, but this is the harry potter universe so i guess
@@thatonestarkidfan3918 Lots of my teachers don't teach directly from the textbook, especially when there are easier or more efficient methods of doing a problem available. That's precisely the point of that book too, that the common taught method isn't always the best. The best teachers teach kids to think outside the box/textbook, or teach the best way for each student.
The song the choir sings is based on Shakespeare, it's from the 3 witches speech in Macbeth!
In the Book it Said: “did you put your name in the goblet of fire Harry?” Dumbledore asked, calmly
Okay, and in the films they felt like changing the tension of that scene, and I think that's great. Kinda dumb when people want the book to be directly translated to a movie. It wouldn't even work at all anyway
@@JasonDrums24 It doesn't make any sense man. That's the literal only line Dumbledore is ever aggressive with Harry in the movies. It's so out of place and very odd.
Why is this too low?
HARRY HARRY DIDYOUPUTYOURNAMEINTHEGOBLETOFFIRE
Why are you saying that as if 99% of people on the planet haven't had it shoved down their throat already?
This ish is like a movie on itself. Soon we're gonna need "Everything wrong with Everything wrong with the entire Harry Potter franchise"
I'm pretty sure Th3Birdman ist working on that right now
Yeah that’s already a series, there’s a guy called Th3Birdman who does everything wrong with cinemasins’ everything wrong with _____
@@hexenshadow5642 wow really? Where .. that is funny
I only watched the first 10 minutes but you could counter like 70% of the things he's saying.
@@Film-Is-Magic Well if you already read the books yeah, but cinema sins is taking it as its own universe separate from the books. Because the movies do a very, very shit job at explaining very basic and key plot points. Like the wand thing, its stated in the books that you don't need your wand, or even a wand at all, to perform spells. It just makes spells far stronger when you have a compatible wand. None of this is explained in the movies though. With that being said, you can still counter a good portion of what he says just by pure logic.
Also, in that magical clock the Weasleys have in their house we can see the word "Dentist", implying that Wizards know about the existence of said profession, but when Hermione has to explain what her parents do for a living in that small committee meeting with Slughorn, everybody seems surprised, as if they have never heard of that word before.
might just be the weasleys considering arthur is obsessed with muggles
@@ashignat813 He sends all of them to the dentist, then? Seems a bit too far. Still, how do people in the magical world not have fucked up teeth?
@@vinnicinhus44 They have magic to fix glasses and broken bones, why not teeth?
@@owaing it's very inconsistent. You would assume they solve a lot of these simple problems with magic, but there are a lot more they don't solve.
Why are there people wearing glasses to begin with?
@@vinnicinhus44 STOP! You're asking questions that shouldn't be asked.
15:33 Fun fact: they actually had to start sewing the pockets of Tom Felton’s robes shut because he kept sneaking snacks on the set.
That has nothing to do with the fact that Draco was eating a Granny Smith apple in this scene, it’s just a fun fact.
Damn I never realised how much the movie left unexplained. I just took those facts as granted having read those books.
As someone who only read half the books, I just thought "oh well, it's magic, they don't have to explain shit".
@@birdsong1126 as someone who never read the books, i never even noticed any of them
Because thats not the point of watching/reading a story you are just supposed to enjoy it
@@scaregameing9022 this is it, the comment above all else. I love this mentality
@@zpetrie88
Yes it's the perfect mentality to promote mediocrity
For convenience if this has not been done :)
0:14 - Sorcerer's Stone
3:04 - Chamber of Secrets
13:24 - Prisoner of Azkaban
21:19 - Goblet of Fire
33:16 - Order of the Phoenix
48:52 - The Half-Blood Prince
1:06:50 - The Deathly Hallows Pt. 1
1:24:35 - The Deathly Hallows Pt. 2
Thank you. You're a bro!
Thanks :)
*philosophers stone looooooool
@@CreativeCache101 Boohoo tears are free
@@Filiolus eh?
You know, I've always wondered why if you could easily gain ownership of the Elder wand just by disarming someone, that Voldemort didn't know of this at all and just decided to kill his best and (who he thought was) his most loyal death eater rather than just telling him "alright stand in front of me holding this elder wand, and i'll expelliarmus you"
In the books, it's explained. Historically no one's ever tried to get the wand just through defeating them without killing the previous owner. So until the draco defeating Dumbledore thing happened, no one could've known whether it's disarming or killing that transferred ownership
Also killing is kind of his go-to response to every problem.
have you
You can't just disarm someone--you have to disarm the owner while they're wielding it. If someone else wields it, it doesn't count, since you broke the wand's allegiance to them that it didn't have anyway.
@@coderzgaming7610 that's not true actually. Draco Malfoy never had the elder wand, but the ownership transferred to him anyway. So when Harry beat him in Malfoy manor, the ownership transferred to Harry even though neither one had ever had the wand yet
Actually, malfoy wasn't about to use the death curse outside Dumbledores office, the actor forgot the spell he was supposed to use and magically the only spell he remembered was ironically the death curse
And so they just left it in? Almost like they don’t have editing 😂
Fun fact about that time where Lucius almost killed Harry but dobbie stopped him: They told the actor that played Lucius malfoy "just say a spell" and he couldn't remember any spells So he asked to camera operator and the camera operator could only remember that spell. Neither of them had any clue what the spell actually did.
My head cannon was that he was actually just going to kill Dobby, it’s played up as a heroic act of dobby saving harry but not realizing he actually just protected his own life.
No, the actor himself came up with it because he could not remember one. Idk where you get the whole camera man thing from...
@@Some_Guy6 Yeah, from memory Jason Isaacs had read the fourth book fairly recently and that was the spell that came to mind. I have no clue where the camera guy thing came from. Like, what? If he couldn't remember ANY spell, why would he turn to the camera guy and go "Hey mate, you know a spell?". Why not ask the director, for... yaknow... direction?
Still though, it is kinda silly. If anything, he should have gone for his wand and that's when Dobby reacts. But no way is Lucius Malfoy stupid enough, even in a rage over losing a valuable slave, to think that AKing Harry bloody Potter in the middle of Hogwarts is going to end well.
That’s crazy how’d you know that?!
@@Sosamoneybags Interview, if i remember correctly.
"I can hear them."
"Dog Whistles?"
"The horcruxes."
"Ohhh." This got a laugh out of me XD
Yeah, I laughed or chuckled at Jeremy's remarks more than usual with this one. 🙂
@@BennyLlama39 yeah, i mean I'm a fan of harry potter but Jeremy got me laughing with this video 😁
@@BennyLlama39 there's something about his vocal delivery in these earlier videos that nails the chilled but sarcastic nature of this stuff lmao
24:46 To be fair, the last tournament took place in 1792. I can't remember if the movie mentions it, but there was an incident involving a cockatrice, causing it to be shut down for over 200 years. This movie was the first time it was being brought back since then...
NEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEERD!
NERD smh
And the Tournament takes place after every 4 years
And considering how tournament goes, no lesson was learned
@@slavchansidorov32 hence they permanently shutdown the tournament again after this one.
@@RobCooper-Bachatador safety protocols is not the strongest Hogwarts point XD
i love cinemasins' videos but the amount of "hermione isnt old enough to be hot yet" comments made me so genuinely uncomfortable
Couldnt agree more, this one feels really off
Biggest sin of all: Never showing us our favorite Poltergeist, Peeves.
No they didn't show us how Fred die!!!
Actually. the biggest sin is how forgotten Neville Longbottom is in the franchise. He's just as important as Harry.
@@deltableu - Is he really, though? Does he have an insanely large role in the books? Or is he just important because of how his existence affected Snape (avoiding book spoilers here)?
@@deltableu they just kept out the parts that if harry had died as a baby he would have been the "chosen one" but since harry didn't die, it's not relevant to the story. The peeves stuff is sad since his scenes were filmed for the first movie.
@@xxANTIFA That's like totally not true.
Neville is a little bit significant only because he had the same "compatibility" with most of the Prophesy conditions as Harry... _apart from being chosen by Voldemort_ himself (imprecise quote: "and the Dark Lord will mark him as equal"). Even if that choice was a coin flip on the Voldie side, it still was a choice, and without that crucial detail Neville significance falls apart.
If Harry had died that night then the Prophesy would've been fulfilled (imprecise quote: "one of them die at the hand of the other"), not magically transferred onto another child.
The unbreakable vow: The reason it's unbreakable is that if you break it you die. Not because it makes you literally not be able to break it.
Couldnt you force someone to make a vow as a bypass to killing them? Like, "say the vow, say 'I won't breath for the rest of my life'" and then the person dies no matter what. Or does the vow have to be consensual?
@@thatguyintherain3168 Something like that almost happened to Ron in the books. The Weasley twins Fred and George almost put ron under the unbreakable vow, their father caught them and stop it before anything happen. He was pissed when he caught them. The unbreakable vow requires you to agree upon what is said so anything said cannot be forced it has to be consensual. But you could trick someone into an unbreakable vow like what almost happen to ron.
Why not call it the liars curse or the revenge curse. SInce the vow is clearly breakable and it being unbreakable isn't the point of it anyway. The person making the vow which was broken obviously lied to make the vow and you only want them to pay for breaking the vow.
@@TKFKU they don’t vow that they’re telling the truth, it’s a promise, a promise that you can’t break if you want to live, I think the unbreakable vow is a really good choice for a name
never trust a suicidal person with an unbreakable vow
They honestly really should have included the lesson where they learn how to do unspoken incantations.
It's very confusing for people who didn't read the books
Also, in the books they explain that the ministry (which is taken over by Voldemort) tracks people who say the word Voldemort.
That's why they're saying "You know who" and shit still
Even if we only talk about the books it's still a sin, because non-verbal spells are still very complicated to perform and even more in dangerous and stressful situations, that's why in the book the golden trio still had to say the spells out loud.
Then why doesn't the ministry track people who say "you know who"?
@@zorkan111 because there were only a select few who used the name Voldemort , with most being his enemies, whereas everyone used You Know Who
@@zorkan111 because "Voldemort" is one word, and hardly a common one only used by his most ardent adversaries, whereas "you", "know", and "who" are separate words commonly used by everyone who speaks English, and tracking magic isn't very good. After all, the Trace can't even detect when someone casts magic, it tracks all magic done around them meaning that in highly concentrated areas(Hogwarts, Diagon Alley, Quittage events), or even just the homes of adult witches and wizards, the Trace is just constantly pinging and they have to rely on the parents to enforce the no underage magic. It's why Harry was blamed for Dobby's hovering charm, as he was the only wizard for miles, but Hermione was never picked up for her trying out the simple spells on the Hogwarts Train in book 1.
0:33 so creepy
It is truly astonishing how many of the sins in this video are resolved with either narrative or exposition in the books. Using spells without saying the incantation, for example. Either the third or fourth book (I don't recall which) had a scene where the students were learning this skill. Using other wizards wands, too, is addressed in the books. It is possible but not ideal.
6th book😭
@@arshiamotazedian9334 It's been a WHILE since I read the books.
also, the iconic 'no need to call me sir, professor' line is from that scene, if i recall correctly
They could have put that explanation about incantationless magic and using other wands into a scene in the movie but they didnt thats why people who dont read the books question it. They emphasize so much in the first movies the importance of chanting,(winguardium leviosa) then a couple of movies later they disregarded it and just begin to spam magic like they are playing paintball in the woods.
@@kenzacharyrodriguez2591 I'd love to have the series re-made as a TV show instead of movies. They could actually fit the classes into the run times. Also, some of the most amusing bits from the books were cut to make the movies feel more cinematic.
Also, sure, Harry says “Diagon Alley” weird, but he doesn’t say it so weird that it sounds like “Knockturn Alley”
I think it went to the first flue it could find in a diagonal direction
The book had a better reason for him saying it wrong. He just...says it wrong in the movie. In the book he inhaled floo powder as he was saying it. I wish we got to see it I the movie
@@rydianblack7594 ah true, I remember that now. He sort of sneezed as he spoke, and that could feasibly sound like “knockturn”
Like “cough-gon alley”
I think the idea in the movie is that he says diagonally, as in Knockturn alley is diagonally to Diagon Ally
I had hopes in the german dub, because he just says it really fast and sort of mumbles it there, but then I realized they translated Knockturn with...well..Nokturn ._.
The diagonally thing doesn't even work, Diagon Alley is "Winkelgasse" and diagonally in German is just diagonal. I get why we don't like our dubs most of the time lmao
I can’t believe I actually spent almost 2 hours watching this…
The worst part is that I don’t even regret it
lol same
Please stop me before I finish
I regret watching 5 minutes of it
i popped this on not realizing the length and ended up taking a 2 hr shower
@@TomasM30 here's the guy with no sense of sarcasm
25:29 1 Sin Sin: This is a sin since it’s not called the Tri-Wizard tournament because it’s mean to be 3 wizards, it’s meant to be 3 challenges.
I think it's supposed to be both
This taught me how important the book is to understanding this movie. And shows how much important stuff was cut out.
They could make a Harry Potter TV Series where each episode is a chapter of the books like The Lord of the Rings The Rings of Power, Game of Thrones and Game of Thrones House of the Dragon.
@@Bartman1989-i2z Funny you should say they they just announced a Harry Potter show in the works
@Orion-V Right? I'm so conflicted
It's genuinely stupid how much the movies cut out
he literally reacted to a deleted scene
Such a great idea to sin an entire franchise. I'd like to see Everything Wrong With The Fast & Furious franchise (while I like the franchise as my guilty pleasures, it's fun to see them get sinned)
Well I guess I have 5 hours to waste :D
How many times would the sin counter break down?
Quick question, have I missed it or have they not sinned F9 yet? I haven’t seen it
@@joshsmith8715 They haven't sinned F9 yet.
I’d recommend the Cosmomaut Variety Hour’s review of this series! He’s really good at pointing out all the dumb flaws 😂
I love how half the sins are just things that weren't explained in the movie but were explained in the book.. 100 extra sins to all of the movies for keeping everything important from the books out of them
I'm happy you understand the entire point of those things being sins is because the movie should stand on its own. I'm sure you've read the other comments and know why.
Luckily HBO is making a tv show version of Harry Potter that will follow the books word for word.
bro I actually got mad at some of these sins XD. I recently read all the books again and know everything fresh in my mind and it triggered me so much
LOL Yeah, you counted half huh?
@@Itsuomi-Io Yea hahaha I mean if you watch the movies without reading the books I 100% understand this but when you know it all it's hella triggering XD
Something I recently realized was none of the death eaters. Know a mass killing spell you could just send bees after them. They likely would not be able to cast enough spells in a timely manner before the bees were upon them
Incendio?
It doesn‘t matter that I watched every single Everything Wrong With Harry Potter multiple times, I‘m so gonna watch the whole video
Hahah for real though. I’m always wanting as much of these videos as possible!
Yeah and now he just put them all together into one long video lol
I could only stand it through the 5:21 mark. Time to wash the shit off me.
this is my fifth time watching the whole video today😁
@@arvmoney11 h-how 😭 I wish I had your time
As someone who read the books several times, long before watching the movies, this made me realize just how many things wouldn't make sense for someone who only watched the movies. Like obviously as a book reader I understood everything that wasn't explained but all the people that didn't read the books, rip.
I sometimes think of the movies as illustrations for the books, rather than two separate things.
As someone who's only seen the movies and read the first half of the first book, I can say I managed to follow the movies okay, especially on repeat viewings. The only major plothole that got under my skin due to having not read the books was how Sirius knew about the Marauder's Map, but even that got sorted after a little reading on the Harry Potter Wiki.
I wasn't so bothered by Lupin's concern over the map, though, because... well, he's a teacher, and teachers always confiscate stuff from students, whether it's actually dangerous stuff like pocketknives, or innocent stuff like Pokémon cards.
@@nnewt8445 Admittedly, the movies aren't perfect in terms of plot. The connection with the books was *extremely* strong, though, I very much recommend watching and reading together as a single piece of media, books first
Hi. Grew up only with the movies and am right now writing Harry Potter/Doctor Who and Harry Potter/Hellsing fics and have to read through the books to satisfy the book readers as well as the movie watchers.👍
right, like i would love to say nearly all of these are either explained in the books or are there for convenience, but I doubt anyone is going to read the books to find out.
What was the final straw for me was not even giving us the 20 seconds they could have and shown Harry using the Elder wand to repair his old one like he did in the books.
This legitimately pissed me off. They split the last book into 2 movies, wasted an hour of runtime in the first installment, then decided they didn't have time for a quick, informative, and narratively satisfying scene at the end of the second.
That should’ve literally doubled ALL sins assigned. (Including ones they might’ve forgiven between.)
And why did they have to be on the bridge.. why not in the headmasters office like in the book. Why did he have to break it. Dummbbbb
"Hermione isnt old enough to be hot yet" atleast 16 terabytes.
Glad I wasn't hallucinating him saying that 😂
thank god sum1 in this comment section brought that up
1:25:00 - "priosner"
fucking creepy
"Harry, did you put your name in the Goblet of Fire?" Dumbledore asked calmly.
HARRY! *Did you put your name in the Goblet of Fire!? Did you!?* -aggressively shakes Harry.
I was searching for this
I was disappointed it wasn't in the video
@@alan-hz1to Well, this is Cinemasins, not BookSeriesAndCinemaSins
"HURRYDJAPUCHANEMUNNOBLETOFIRE"
The Death Eaters found Harry, Ron and Hermione in the coffee shop because Voldemort put a trace on anyone who said his name out loud. Harry was known to use Voldemort's name.
Yeah there are lot of things in the books are missing.
I’ve read that book 5 times I thought it came into place after Xmas lol
@@delphi_lasagna After the weeding.
@@naviscript2655 oh lmao
I love how about half of these sins wouldn't be there if it was the books.
Like how the reason that Dumbledore only hired Lockhart was to prove him guilty because Albus personally knew some of the people Gilderoy used memory charms on.
Edit:
I seem to have made a simple mistake and used a bad example for my point, so I'll try again with a far better one.
When Ron and Harry were reading about the Basalisk the page says that roosters scare it, so why didn't they bring roosters? Because in the books it's stated by Hagrid that the roosters keep ending up mysteriously killed. Nearing the end when we find out what happened to Ginny, it's revealed that she was the one who was killing the roosters so that option wasn't available. And if you think "well, how could she and Tom have known that?", if a book from the school library knew then of course _Tom Riddle_ would know what _his_ giant snake is afraid of. It's also rooster blood that was used to write on the walls.
Exactly! Gilderoy is a POS and is the exact reason Dumbledore hired him, to prove where vanity is bigger problem than extreme danger...
thats still stupid? like this man is literally around kids and constantly putting them in danger? and an entire year worth of education was lost for each year. there are better ways to prove him guilty given hes DUMBLEDORE than bring kids into it. but this is dumbledore we are talking about. he's never had an issue using kids
No it was becausr there wasn't any other choice since some peeps believed it was cursed
@@adisaster8734 well, the position of the teacher of DADA (Defense of Dark Arts) is cursed by Lord Voldemort since Profesor Albus Dumbledore rejecting his apply to become teacher of DADA in Hogwarts. No one could keep the job as teacher of DADA in Hogwarts more than one year since then. Look up to all series until the last book, teacher of DADA kept changing each year. Some are dead, some are missing, some lost their mind and end in asylum. The curse ended when Lord Voldemort died.
@@adisaster8734 thats like half our government bud lmao
You missed a sin in the first film and it's another glaring plot hole - how does Harry's skin carry protection from Voldemort touching him, he can be strangled but the moment harry touches him back with his hands, THEN the protection kicks in! So it doesn't reside in all of his skin like his neck, just his hands?
This video feels like a timelapse of Cinemasins over the years. From the short and sweet nitpicks of the classics to the more detailed lighthearted jokes of the current. It's amazing so much has changed and yet they still remain true to being 'assholes'.
>detailed
>lighthearted
>jokes
Can't tell if sarcastic or insane.
Yeah they're kinda getting a lot wrong on purpose here... There were so many times where I yelled at the narrator for getting something wrong that was shown pretty obviously earlier in the movie.
@@BootyCrusader lwhen you say mistakes, do you also mean including the delete sceens from chamber of secrets
@@batmanbeyond5766 the entire part about portkeys is an example. This guy keeps harping on about the boot and how this boot must be the only portkey and how it leads to this random hill in the British countryside and the Cup being a portkey is weird because it’s not a boot etc etc. Or basically every time a problem is solved with magic, he goes “thats impossible & I dont understand it so its a sin” IT’S. FREAKING. MAGIC.
@@BootyCrusader Exactly, if the portkey aren't explained Jeremy goes "what well how does that work" and if they are explained he'll go "oh I'm sure this information won't be useful later in the movie *wink*" or "oh wow yes please explain more about this one object in this one scene" or some other "I hate exposition"
Ah, back when Jeremy would speed run through the sins. 47 sins in less than 3 minutes for the first one.
Cinemasins any% speedrun world record?
He obviously hates the first one and wants to get it done as fast as possible. Or he loves it (wouldn’t know)
@@PloverTechOfficial they used to make the videos a lot shorter so he talked faster to get more sins in.
I’m sure that was back before TH-cam decided short videos didn’t deserve monetization.
@@dingle2987 Oh, the irony
There's a lot of things wrong with these movies, but Hagrid's delivery of that "Harry?! No! What're you doin' here?!" Is fucking great. He is so sad that Harry is either willing to sacrifice himself, or betrayed by Hogwarts because he doesn't know what happened, and he just sounds like he wishes that asking why will save Harry.
I still burst into tears when he says that
I'm sorry but i can't help myself: NEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEERD!
That line, no mater how many times I watch it, will always crush my soul and have me bawling like a newborn.
Why will save Harry indeed.
@@GettoGero lmfao
Honestly, when the the dwarf professor surfing the group of his own students is to this day my favorite scene of the whole franchise.... That man was literally every single HP movie, as multiple different roles, and he was like screw it let whole bunch of teens moshpiting to magical rock music... why not, it might be fun.
A sin you missed, they cut out the part where Aunt Petunia tells what dementors are and the Dursleys actually understand Harry's world for once.
Another sin, they cut out the part where Harry reads an letter his mom wrote, it was such an beatiful scene in the book.
@@sleekyissleepy YES! in deathly hallows!, and in that movie especially, there is no reason that the pacing couldn't tolerate an emotional scene like that
@@nreed200 exactly-
@TaikaJamppa the letter i meant
@@TaikaJamppa Do you mean "An letter" is grammatically incorrect, instead of "AN letter is wrong"?
Reason I hate the movies sometimes, they never established that nonverbal spells are a thing in the books and are a sign of advanced magic, so if you didn't read, you don't get this. And did they ever mention that saying Voldemort's name now carries a Trace so if you say it, you're immediately zeroed in on by the baddies and taken away? You say the name, you've fucked yourself over.
Granted, three against a bunch of snatchers do not look good when you don't have your own wand that you didn't take from someone else. I imagine apparating while running would be rather difficult to do, case in point, Yaxley got pulled along for the ride and ron got splinched.
They made such a big deal in yen books about it I was disappointed when they didn’t even mention it at all
Why didn’t they(the smart, intelligent adults)just say Voldemort’s name to pull a sting operation to identify and catch all the snatchers? Seems like a really big flaw to me.
@@dingle2987 One of many
@@dingle2987 Because by the time the snatchers and trace was around, Voldermort had the ministry under his control, so unless the so called smart witches and wizards, used the killing curse to get rid of the snatchers or imprisoned these snatchers in their own mansions, it was never going to amount to anything....
@@Heyjessicahh Right???
I disagree with the sins regarding Lockhart. Universities hire awful professors for their prestige and research all the time
Lockhart wanted to add "Hogwarts's beloved DADA teacher" to his curricululm. Bumblemore needed someone, anyone, to teach DADA afTer decades of losing the current teacher every single year. Neither of those facts is explained in the movie.
That's the sin: not the fact that Hogwarts hired an absolute incompetent for a teacher, but the lack of explanation.
Admittedly, we the audience can presume that losing the Sabine god to the power of love put Bumblemore in a bit of a pickle... But the fact that every single DADA teacher hasn't lasted more than one year, including The Umbitch, because of a curse that De Mort placed on the position back when *he* wanted to teach DADA and Bumblemore laughed in his face and told him to get lost is never explained.
@@o0alessandro0o You seem very knowledgeable about this topic so I’ll take your word for it, CinemaSins just seemed to really despise the fact that Hogwarts would hire someone like Lockhart to teach
And we have to remember the job is cursed. Dumbledore knew Lockhart would be gone at the end of the year and something horrible would probably happen to him. Rowling said Dumbledore was friends with some of the people Lockhart obliviated.
@@Akuchan7 Would Dumbledore be that malicious? And if he was aware or suspected Lockhart, then why didn't he tell someone? Dumbledore was at least as famous as Lockhart, his word would have counted for something at least.
"Universities hire awful professors for their prestige and research all the time"
you're talking out of your ass. literally. Just like the Disney screenwriters, and frankly the original author, you're parading your ignorance around as if it's a virtue.
There’s an uncomfortable amount of sexual references to Hermione in these.
fr and nobody is pointing it out??? except Th3Birdman on his channel
Fun Fact: Emma Watson was always mouthing the lines of the other characters.
And yes, the portkeys are put there by the ministry of magic beforehand and they use ordinary objects that don’t attract attention from muggles.
And the portkey object actually travels with them and was then collected with the other used portkeys from the other locations.
And I actually noticed a mistake in Goblet of Fire just now: the Indian twin sisters are not both in Gryffindor and therefore can’t sit at the same table or be in the same dorm room. Parvati is in Gryffindor, but Parma is in Ravenclaw.
That Yule dance class wasn’t even in the book.
The family of the champions are there, because they were invited to Hogwarts for the final task. For Harry Molly and Bill Weasley show up.
In the fifth book with her dementors in the tunnel, he actually already makes a fully developed stag patronus.
NEEEERDDD
You forgot to mention that they say You Know Who in the Deathly Hallows, because Voldemort had a tracking spell on his name so if anyone said it they would be tracked by the Snatchers
mhm yes
Parvati Patil was in Gryffindor and her twin was actually in Ravenclaw
These are correct, but he's making fun of the movies and their lack of explaining things. No clue if they read the books or not, but they are just going off the information the books give, which at many moments is vague and exploitable.
With so much things mentioned i'm like:
"Well in the book this is explained"
"In the book this does make sense"
Well sure but he's sinning the movie and not the book yeah? Also watch their "everything wrong with cinemasins" they say the books don't matter to them
@@439sparky1 so I know that? That doesn't mean I can say that it does make sense in the books.
Shows even more how much the movies are lacking
@@AoiOkami I wonder if we will ever get a re make series of the films
If you have to go through outside material to make sense of what's happening in the movie, the movie had no legs to stand with and already failed on its own.
@@everythingisawesome2903 Right, because the Harry Potter movies were such a massive failure.
Guess what, that lollipop in Prisoner of Azkaban that Harry "stole" from Neville, was quite possibly actually not stolen after all. Any time Harry has had to grab or hold anything, he's stuck his hand out of the cloak. You know what's far more likely? A sticky lollipop coming into contact with an invisible piece of fabric and sticking there, getting carried along for the ride.
I mean, it's still kinda stealing, in a way
@@thatguyintherain3168 No it's not. If that was what happened, Harry didn't take it.
@@thatguyintherain3168 Pretty much
He couldn't have taken it, I mean how would he eat it if it was visible? There must hacmve been a clooak between his face and the lollipop. To eat it he would have to have it undercloak invisible with all his stuff
@@PittsburghSportsFan43 The sticky bandits will have something to say about that
54:10 What if the liquid luck potion was used before, but noone told us about it? Maybe Harry was stupidly lucky all of the time because Dumbledore was secretly pouring this potion into every Harry's meal in Hogwarts. That would make a lot more sense (this idea is actually pretty stupid, so it making more sense than the real plot tells us a lot about the realism of the films)
The thing about Felix Felicis is that it's almost certianly a placebo. This can be seen by the fact that just having a person think they drank it (Ron), a literal placebo, gives the person great confidence and they find they succeed in what they try. The description of the potion says that drinking too much can have disastrous results, similarly to how being overconfident leads to disastrous consequences, while a good amount of confidence usually leads to success.
Further, Harry almost definitely didn't need to use it to extract the memory from Slughorn, Dumbledore knew that he could do it and trusted him to do so entirely, and the entire reason he succeeded was due to a change in attitude and approach after drinking liquid luck. He felt he knew what he was doing, ie he was confident, and that confidence put him into a situation where Slughorn was willing to give it up. If Harry had drank the potion and then just confronted Slughorn in the same way as before, it wouldn't work, but because he felt confident and in control, his roundabout method of following his gut instinct resulted in success, just like how Ron's confidence boost from thinking he drank it resulted in him following his gut instincts and thus performing well at quidditch.
@@bobbobert9379 Well, Hermione literally cheated at the practice for Ron too........
@@Some_Guy_6 That was before Harry tricked Ron into thinking he had drank it.
"You sinning this again, mate?" - Dumbledore asked calmly.
Lol
netflix version: Dumbledore beats up cinemasin guy with a random chair in the nearby politically correct food and drinks selling establishment :)
I totally thought we were going to get a redo because Birdman is doing the EWWCS Harry Potters right now. Bummer.
after the audio books of the series, you know how much important details are missed, like why Harry lived there and so on.
@@TheRatsintheWalls OP clearly cannot even comprehend the idea of _reading_ a book instead of listening to it.
@@conflictbrooks Read a book? *Spits* What do you take me for? Some peasant?
Yeah but it's still a trash story that doesn't make sense and the movie is a reflection of that.
@@vegeta6167 …….then why watch the video??
@@jalenwilliams9 wait what? I'm agreeing with the video. He just dunked on Harry Potter so hard.
Even though MacGonagall did more for Harry than Snape or Dumbledore, he still didn't name any of his children after her... that's a real sin.
Also didn't show his first born son, Sirius James Potter
If he had a daughter, Minerva would be a lovely name for her :,)
@@hannahshark8080 he does have a daughter. He just didn't name her after Minerva.
@@hannahshark8080 her name is Lily Luna Potter
They do show his firstborn son. Watch closer.
the names of Harry Potter's kids read as though Ginny had no say at all
1:29:31 before this scene, the trio were stuffing their faces in food like they hadn't had any in weeks. Couldn't Hermione have packed a few snacks for the trip in her bag with INFINITE STORAGE!?
She actually did in a books. But the supplies ran out in a month or so. They had to smuggle food from nearby villages and farms, just to eat. At some point all 3 of them were starving.
0:14 Year 1: The Sorcerer’s Stone
3:04 Year 2: The Chamber of Secrets
13:24 Year 3: The Prisoner of Azkaban
21:19 Year 4: The Goblet of Fire
33:17 Year 5: The Order of the Phoenix
48:52 Year 6: The Half-Blood Prince
1:05:50 Year 7: The Deathly Hallows
Thanks
Certified chad
Scrolled and scrolled hoping I'd find this list!!!!
1:04:55
"Honestly, leaving the assassination to Draco, who thought this was a good idea ?"
No one, Voldemort is still pissed about Lucius for giving away one of his soul shards under the sole reason of "we're going to partake in some tomfoolery" to the Weasley Family. So as punishment, he basically sent Draco on a suicide mission, to kill the "best" wizard in the wizarding world and if he returns empty handed, he would die for it.
And since his son didn't die that day, Voldemort still finds a way to make Lucius' life hell. From setting up base in his mansion and doing whatever he wants (breaking his wand in half and calling it trash, etc)
ooooooooooh. i understand that now. thanks!!
and the whole mess up at the ministry
Information that is only gained by reading the books. The movies do an incredibly piss poor job at helping anyone understand anything.
@@odduckOasis that would take away from the action in the movies and prolong them even longer than they already are
@@myweirdsecondchannelwithap9070 what would? Reading the books? 🤔
And I never said they had to add in ALL the information (the books are long obv, I understand necessary 'edits'), but certain crucial pieces were left out that leave ppl confused for apparently useless cinematic scenes that serve nothing to the story and were only there for show and 'action'. Not all movies need high amounts of action sequences to be good.
The biggest sin is when the movies didn't follow the end of the battle for Hogwarts. First, Harry and Voldemort have their battle in front of the whole of Hogwarts, not in an empty courtyard. And second, Harry's willingness to walk into Voldemort's camp and "die" did for everyone, what Harry's mother did for him that saved him from Voldemort. Which caused Voldemort's powers to become useless against the people Harry loved.
Thank you. I hated when they changed one of the most epic moments in the series. 🤬😡🤬😡🤬🤬
"Which caused Voldemort's powers to become useless against the people Harry loved."
Wait, that's what happened ?! Like, I kinda bought the concept when it was about Harry and Lily, but in this context it looks like... cheating... Especially since Harry survived.
here's another one THE MALFOYS DID NOT RUN AWAY I'm sorry that just pisses me off turned the change of heart of the whole family into little piss mice. And the last part isn't exactly right it was how the wand decided to pick Harry IMHO
It's literally, like, rule #1 of this channel that the books do not matter and the movies are judged solely on their own merits/flaws.
Wait really!?! I don't remember either of those!?
This cinemasin-video brought to my mind Ms Figg wasn't the only one who kept an eye on Harry in Order of the Phoenix (book). One member of the order kept watching him too in this case Mundungus who disappered before his shift was over.
The reason they call him "You know who" in Deathly hallows is because they know that saying "Voldemort" tracks your location, that is a spell that Voldemort set up in order to find anyone who was on the side of Harry. It was never explained in the movies but this is why you should read the books instead.
So Voldemort can cast a spell that tracks anyone saying his name? Yet Harry can't fix his eyesight? Man, HP is weif
I swear it was mentioned in the movies too but I guess not?
@@longarmsgiraffe0955 it was! Hermione stops Harry from saying his name and informs him there's a "trace" put on his name so that anyone who says it alerts the death eaters, etc. Exampled by when Luna's dad says the word his house is attacked immediately!
@@WhiteOutify it’s tabbu I think they said
Wouldn't it perhaps be more efficient tracking anyone who said the name "Harry Potter", as that would primarily be used by people near Harry?
There’s a lot of stuff that the films miss from the books that’s actually really important. The main one in my head currently is in film 7 when they need Dobby’s help to apparate out of the Malfoy mansion. In the books, it’s explained that they’ve cast a spell to prevent apparating in and out of the house, but they don’t value house elves so Dobby can still do it.
EDIT: Also that the Snatchers and Death Eaters have put a trace on the word Voldemort so they can find Order of the Phoenix members, seeing as they’re the only ones who are bold enough to use his name. That’s why they call him You Know Who in the films 7 and 8.
mine are two big ones
one: THE MALFOYS DID NOT RUN FROM THE SCHOOL
two: the Room of Requirements could not be broken into that easily was the point
bonus three: Wizards can't fly that was a big todo about the FLYING Voldemort ghost
i call bullshit on the 'ppl are scared to say his name' thing. Why in the world would they be so scared? no one is/was even remotely terrified of saying 'hitler' or 'stalin' in the real world. also EVERYONE knows it, so who told them? why would people be scared to say it but not scared to write it? (if that's your explanation). And what would make dumbledores army suddenly not so scared? is being friends with harry a cure for being scared to say some arrangement of letters?
Also the 'tracking words' thing is also bullcrap. Besides the BIG flaw stated above, if that is an actual spell, why not target something like 'horcrux' or 'Tom riddle' which only people that are actually somewhat important would know about? also what point did this even serve in the book in terms of plot, character or anything whatsoever? it seems so contrived yet unnecessary... (I've read them, but its been a while).
@@garlicicecream9087 In terms of magic and folklore, names have power. The setting for the series is a magical world where people believein magic, so they believe saying Voldemort name gives him some power. This is the same kind of taboo that make words for things people feared becoming unused and then being erased from history (the old english word for "bear", the animal, for example). Also in some cultures the "damnatio memoriae" is a form of punishment: completely erasing records about a person existence, what includes making their name being forgotten by prohibiting people from saying it.
There’s also the fact that in the films, the Room of Requirement isn’t properly explained. The books make it clear that the Room was also where the Mirror of Erised was in the first story but the films don’t pick up on that. Also, the room can change shape and purpose; one of the sins given is that the Room of Requirement looks different when it’s a place to hide stuff but that’s the exact point of it. In the books, Dumbledore says that he must have found it once when desperately looking for a bathroom as he found it then and never has since. Basically, the films are pretty dreadful the further into the series you go because they create so many plot holes and miss so many key details.
@@garlicicecream9087 Voldemort didn’t tell anyone about his Horcruxes so the Snatchers wouldn’t have known to trace that word.
Something I have always wondered: After Harry's parents left him ALL that money, why did he never help Ron out to get a new wand? He just let his best friend suffer and struggle, when all he had to do was give him some cash to get a new one. I mean, he bought an entire trolley of candy and snacks at the beginning of the first movie, burn couldn't buy his friend a freaking wand???
The Weasleys never accepted money for some reason
The Weasleys were too prideful to accept money from him. Whenever he tried to help, the parents shut him down. One of the only times he got them to accept anything was when he gave the twins his Triwizard Tournament winnings, and that too after a lot of coaxing.
I haven't reread the books for an eternity, but I have a vague feeling Hermione tried to help, but Ron refused. So yeah, the same logic.
- Adûnâi
In the movie he buys the whole trolley but in the books I think he said like "I take one of everything". I might be mistaken. On a side note I felt bad for Weasleys when they saw Harrys vault. I don't remember which book it was.
Why didn’t anyone use repairo on it? Like Hermione did on Harry’s glasses. Also that spell was used outside of school before she was 17. Why didn’t she get expelled💀
Fun fact: They used glasses without the glass so that they wouldn't reflect while filming.
One of my favorite sins quotes is still:
"She's a little bunny, and you're a bear... and you're looking at these claws and these fangs and you're like, 'How do I kill the bunny?' "
The roosters were killed by Ginny as a precaution to avoid the roosters killing the basilisk. Still, with magic, a rooster should have been easy enough to replace.
It's not like you can find a rooster in half the houses of the countryside in every country
Well the problem with that is that does it appear or is explained in the movie itself? Since by cutting that and pretending the books don’t exist it is essentially a plot hole. And the movies are adaptations of the book not the books.
Or they could go to any of the many many many many many farms on the planet they could reach in seconds via their teleportation magic and get one. But, plot convenience makes the world go round!
Most movies wouldn't happen without it!
They could have but they were all turned into cups in transfiguration class.
Accio rooster!
Dammit Cinemasins. I had stuff to do today and you go and drop a patreon notice that takes away a chunk of afternoon when I could have been doing Sunday busy-work (totally worth it though)
Ikr
The f**k? 31 mins ago?
@@LazyCCP fr like??
@@dynobomb3673 probably patreon
how did you post this 31 minutes ago? This video just got uploaded a few seconds ago.
19:00 - 19:07 - I think the answer to that is that Hagrid moved from the one room forrest house, on one side of the castle, to the two room cliff house on the other side of the castle during the summer between "Chamber of secrets" and "Prisoner of Akzaban"
13:27 Actually, a wand is just a way to harness your magic power. You can make stuff like this happen when you become very emotional, but what happens is unpredictable. Like how he made the glass disappear for his cousin in the first movie.
AND you can use other instruments. Where wands are traditional, you can use potentially a staff or other device. The idea being that a combination of magical animal 'core' imbued with a wood from a tree is the best "conduit" between magic and casting. Non verbal spells were taught in Year 6 by Snape whilst he was Defence Against Dark Arts professor. It requires more focus and thought but provides more combat efficiencies (naturally)
Only very powerfull wizards can truly do magic (verbal, or especially non verbal) without a wand.
@@someguy7629 Well yeah, but even then, the spell itself will still be less stable than if you used a wand, hence why they created them.
@@projectstart5522 There was even a whole sub-plot in the books about certain races of magical creatures (goblins specifically if I remember rightly) that were rather miffed about humans decreeing that they couldn't use wands. Wands are well known to increase focus and power, even with creatures like elves and goblins that don't need them to create spells, and the implication is that wands are prohibited for magical creatures because they would pose a legitimate threat to the humans if they acquired a focus to their innate power. Maybe not world-breakingly so, but it was definitely something that was well known amongst wizards and their ilk, just not the people watching just the movies who didn't read the books.
@@bdizzle7072 Interesting.
One sin that really bugs me is when Harry practices the Lumos spell at the start of Prisoner of Azkaban (it’s not in the books). In practically every film your’e told students aren’t allowed to use magic outside of Hogwarts.
shhhhhh, hes the chosen one! all else is excused
@@juleslovesreading this but unironically. Think about how celebrities get away with a bunch of petty crimes like parking on the side of the street in cities and speeding and the like. It's actually quite accurate that he can get away with breaking the rule
Well it’s explained that fudge waved all of them away because 1. Harry’s first use of magic was buried because it was accidental and Harry couldn’t control it. Then, thinking he was going to be expelled threw all caution or the winds and used magic anyways without knowing that he was fine. 2. Fudge was thinking that he was about to die and if he expelled him, Harry would likely run away again. (Chosen one argument) anyways
literally at the end of the first movie hagrid tells harry to give dudley a pair of pig ears if he annoys him back home. because his uncle and aunt don't know he's not allowed to use magic outside of hogwarts. so casting outside of hogwarts is obviously a grey area, as long as noone gets hurt or no muggles notice it you're good.
@@nearlydead7510 nope
They can track used magic, that's why they thought dobbies magic was harries as they only know magic was used.
The reason they shrugged it off later on was because they didnt wish for Harry to get killed.
Aw come on, you should totally have taken off a sin for Maggie Smith saying "I've always wanted to use that spell!" She's adorable.
Interesting note even though she was proud of the movies she and Snape thought their parts were under utilized
Or when she calls Filch a "blithering idiot". That was gold.
@@Geno2733 that was amazing omg
Just for her in general really
If only they added a side story in which a young African American tries to spruce up until choir with slightly altered versions of popular songs. Maggie disapproves but eventually comes around.
I really wish you'd stop with the "hermione is not old enough to be hit yet" sin its just fucking creepy
Wands are unnecessary for magic, talented wizards and witches can perform magic without them. That was shown in the first movie. In the book, African wizards perform magic without wands, they used hand signs. The purpose of the wand is to amplify the magic power of the wizard. Wands are made with different types of wood and different cores, and they have their own ora, kinda like a soul. They link to the wizards. If you give a wand to the wrong wizard, you can have simple spells blow up in your face shown in the first movie. They don't give them out like candy and the wand picks the users. This is backed by Neville Longbottom. His wand was passed down to him, and it was given him problems stunting and plateauing his skills as a wizard. As soon as he got a wand suited for him, he performed well.
don't get me wrong. i get all of what you said. BUT...you telling me african wizards and witches can basically throw up ninjutsu, gang hand signs to use magic? sounds pretty cool, funny, but kinda impractical. like what if their opps just cut their hands off?
@@sportyjhf5Q It's true, I gotta find the book where it mentions it. It goes over all the other wizarding schools and governments. That's how they ended up explaining the African wizards. Not sure which book, but it is canon. O and if someone "sectumsempra" your hands off then you can just have a powerful wizard make your hands like Voldemort did to Wormtail in the Goblet of fire.
I think that children should be taught wandless magic from the beginning, while some adults could have wands to amplify their spells to suit their jobs or needs. Example being obliviators, they deal with mind magic which is extremely delicate, the wand can help concentrate the magic.
@@zahraaameer7145 are you really trying to have a practical discussion about how to teach magic?
@@mcarrowtime7095 I’m just saying that teaching children that wands are absolutely necessary is utterly stupid, it’ll build limits that aren’t supposed to be built. I’m not trying to cause a fuss or anything really, just wanted to share my opinion 😅
He really did it. What a madman!
Just connected all the previous ones together
I read this as “madam” and I thought it was funnier than it should be
Did what? They just added the videos together that theyd already made years ago.
9:32 In the books, Ginny admits that while controlled she strangled the roosters that Hagrid kept.
oh fuck! youre right! i TOTALLY forgor, even tho i dont remember if it said the rooster thing on the book but... yeah
They didn't state that in the movie?
@@optimisticwatermelon Nope, movies never bother to explain this
There are lots of things that aren't explained in the movies
The movies never explain anything. They just leave it to the books to say every detail, which is a big problem.
Let's be honest, Rowling explained the overwhelming majority of those sins either herself or in the books. The biggest sin is not having more of the books in the films.
That's not a sin, it's called having a limited budget. You think people would watch 10 hour long Harry Potter movies?
And before you go on whining about tv series, the industry for tv series wasn't as developed 20-25 years ago, the way it is now.
Nothing Rowling explained herself that wasn't in the books really counts. Especially since she clearly makes a lot of it up on the spot like one of the Lost writers and then just pretends it was planned all along.
@@kieranhair37Maybe she's a gardener, like GRRM 👩🌾
If you need the book to understand the movie, it isn't a good movie.
@@brianoneil9662 Would you be willing to have a 5 hour film per book?!
“Something once considered hard to figure out is handed to them on a Harry Platter so that they can advance the Harry Plotter.”
I died 😂😂😂
The only thing that bugs me is that sometimes in certain scenes especially in the last 2 Ron just stands in the background like he just woke up or he doesn't know what's going on like a oblivious npc
He doesn't, the director gave all of his lines and actions to Hermione.
@@adde9506 that sucks cause he's kinda cool :(
That sounds quite relatable, to be honest 😀
@@adde9506 nah, that was the screenwriters idea
"Neville reaches deep down to his British roots and conquers India" killed me bruh
*Time to conquer all of India~*
Or-
*Most of India~*
Honestly the British conquering India is the greatest WTF moment in history. I still can't believe a few thousand British lorded over hundreds of millions of Indians at one point.
SOMEONE PLEASE LISTEN: if Harry had just stayed in his room quirrel wouldn't have been able get the stone and flame would still be alive
@@bucknasty6288 agree 100%. Nobody ever talks about this.
@@scholaroftheworldalternatehist The fact that a tiny island nation became the biggest Empire in history still confuses me
14:53 the first actor who played dumbledore passed away after the 2nd movie and got replaced how is that a sin?
Because he was the best and only Dumbledore.
A lot of unexplained plot holes or just odd scenes in the movie are explained in the books. For example, in the 5th movie, Harry has to make his choice between sparing Bellatrix or taking revenge for Sirius. And in the books, he doesn't hesitate to take revenge. He immediately casts the spell that would cause the most pain, one that will let Bellatrix feel as much pain as he had. The Cruciatus curse (I'm 100% certain I spelt that wrong but whatever). He casts it multiple times actually. But you can't fit a lot of the exposition given in the books into the movies. A lot of it will be cut down due to time constraints. Another example is the families who came to visit during the Triwizard Tournament. The families of the champions were invited to come and see their children for a day, before the event started. Viktor's family came, Fleur's family came, Cedric's family came. The Weasley family came for Harry cause he didn't have any living relatives that were able to come see him. And the Buckbeak time travel shenanigans are also better explained. Instead of the trio stopping on top of the hill, they are underneath the invisibility cloak and are trying to get away as quickly as possible so they aren't spotted. Meanwhile, future Harry and Hermione are waiting in the treeline for the executioner and other people there to see Buckbeak so they can't blame Hagrid for letting him go, and then when the adults go back inside they quickly lure Buckbeak with some meat and run away with the hippogriff. A lot of things that make no sense in the movies rely on book knowledge to connect the dots. Another thing is that if you don't read the books, you will never know a lot of little details about the characters. Draco Malfoy is actually one of the smartest students in the school, just after Hermione. Hermione's front teeth were larger than average until a spell went haywire I think in their fourth year and Hermione let Madame Pomfrey continue to reshrink her teeth past their original length until they were at her desired size. Ron has a ghoul in the room above him which was used as a decoy for if death eaters were to come to their house (or it was a way to trick his family for a while so he could leave quickly I don't remember I haven't read Harry Potter in so long). Fleur was originally disliked by Molly Weasley, and she wanted her son Bill to marry Tonks instead. Neville could have also been the child of the prophecy, but Voldemort chose to go after the Potters on account of them being "stronger" in his eyes, and I think the fact that Harry was a Half-blood and Neville was a Pure-blood had something to do with it as well. Oh and another plot hole that is solved by reading the books is when the teachers all tell Lockhart to go into the Chamber of Secrets and defeat Slytherin's monster. They weren't telling him to go do it, they were just trying to get him away from their important meeting so they could actually come up with a plan to get Ginny Weasley back safe, or if it was too late bring back her body, and evacuate the students.
Wow I didn't expect this comment to get so long-
You spelled Cruciatus right
Also I remember some of these
Also the fact that they explain the fact that you can silently say spells and that’s why sometimes they just don’t say anything
The movie shouldn't need knowledge of the books to be understood. It should be a self-contained story.
Yea I mean in a way the movies just felt like a skim over of the books. Anyone who actually wants the full enjoyment of Harry Potter and actually wants to understand the story and the stuff that happens, they have to read the book. People who only watched the movies and refuse to read the books likely don’t care much about the full story and just want a movie to watch.
you should start writing your college essay
Honestly, the sins are the reason I enjoy these films because as someone who has read the books far too much, pointing out inconsistencies is entertaining.
I 100% agree. The movies are utterly garbage in comparison to the incredible franchise that is the harry potter books.
@@definitelynotjustasquirrel8319 Have you read/watched the percy jackson series/movies? they are way worse.
@@Hackedsound i havent seen the movies but i quite liked the books
@@definitelynotjustasquirrel8319 A lot of relevant plot is just straight up missing or reduced to nothing more than a sidenote and the characters have been aged up from 12 to 16 in the first movie. hopefully the upcoming Disney+ series of the books will be better.
@@Hackedsound wow that’s horrible. Hopeful for the Disney+ one though.
33:35 to be fair, in the books Dudley is stated to have become a boxer for his school’s team and a lot of what WAS fat is now muscle. Boxers have pretty rigorous workout routines. Harry meanwhile is the lithe muscle of someone who runs a lot, so I can see the difference being made up by the fact that harry would be able to run linger than Dudley, he’s probably pacing himself
The “Hermione isn’t old enough to be hot yet” sin is always creepy :/
100%
The wizard who says “this conversation is no longer private” wasnt Snape, it was Mad Eye
"where am I supposed to go, you didn't give me a letter?!?!" I laughed way harder than I should have at that one
Same! I laughed for like 5 minutes! 1:32
"to the owlry!" my girlfriend exclaimed
"It's still raining in my office."
"Sir, have you tried checking the knowledge base?"
"I pay people to do that for me."
Maybe if you paid them better, it wouldn't still be raining in your office."
That almost sounds straight from the book :)
The reason they didn't attack Lupin in werewolf form was because they didn't want to hurt him.
And spells mostly dont work on them (werewolfs)