Harry Potter 6 -- Only spoilers.

[The Backlash Cometh]

Everything was phenomenal, but the ending. That part needed to follow the book.

What do you think?

[Hell Hath No Fury]

1. How did they switch the ending???

Yeegads, why can't they can't they just leave shit alone. :(

[Jo March]

2. They cut quite a bit from book 6

We just got back from seeing it. It was a fantastic movie. I wish that I had seen it before reading the book. Alas, I kept being jerked back to reality by all of the, "hey, that wasn't in the book" moments.

It still rocked.

I cried at the end even though I knew what was coming.

[The Backlash Cometh]

4. I didn't have the time to cry.

It just wrapped up too quickly. I was expecting a much louder exit for Snapes. While I was still waiting, it was over.

[XemaSab]

3. The whole thing was definitely lavishly done

and DAMN... Tom Felton was so perfect as Draco. In the previous films, he's been a good Draco, but in this one, he's a GREAT Draco. He really captured the mixture of arrogance and despair. Draco is such an awful person, but you can't help feeling bad for him.

Some of the scenes were really well done, such as the orphanage scene, the necklace, Ron's poisoning, and the death of Aragog (they got Odo in!). Even though they changed the budding romance between Ron and Hermione, I thought they made the evolution of events seem right and natural. I also thought that they did a good job of streamlining Draco's task, and the Vanishing Cabinet plotline worked well within the film.

Things that I would have tweaked just a little include the Sectumsempra scene, where Snape fails to demand the book (but maybe in the context of the film that would have given too much away). I also thought that the death of Dumbledore and fight between Harry and Snape seemed rushed, and Snape's revelation that he's the Prince seems tacked-on. Additionally, I thought the Unbreakable Vow could have had a little more time. In the book, Snape leisurely explains himself to Narcissa, but maybe given Rickman's performance, it would have been TOO leisurely. :D

I thought the connections between Harry and Ginny and Harry and Dumbledore could have had a little more emotion. Somehow I just wasn't understanding why Harry and Ginny got together here. And one of the best scenes in the book is when Harry tells Dumbledore "Scrimgeour accused me of "Being Dumbledore's man through and through...' and I told him I was...."

Tonks had one scene, and a little tidbit that's in the book that was missed here is that her Patronus had changed, which seems like it would be important for DH. Did Neville have any lines at all?

The scene at the Burrow I didn't get at all. Why did they add that? :shrug:

Finally, I thought half of the point of the book was for Harry to see who Voldemort IS, and the two memories we were shown somehow missed part of that. I've read some discussion of which scenes were omitted, and I think the scene with Merope, the scene with Hepzibah, and the scene where Voldemort asks Dumbledore for a job, were the three that stood out. And I'm interested in how they're going to play the fact that there was virtually NO discussion of what items would be Horcruxes. At the end of the book, Harry pretty much knows what he's looking for, but all he knows he needs to find at the end of the film is the locket.

In summary, I think knowing how the series ends has heightened my fault-finding with the film. I also wonder if people who have only seen the movies are following what's going on. :shrug:

[The Backlash Cometh]

5. Nice synopsis.

As for Snapes' exit, I was waiting for the moment at the end, where he criticized Harry for broadcasting his spells because he was easily deflecting them. When I read it in the book, it felt as if Snapes was trying to give Harry one last important lesson before he departs. It may be a failure of understanding on my part, but I never fully got the impression that Snapes had completely turned traitor. And if he did, at what point did he do it? Was it before he made the unbreakable bond?