Really? I actually think otherwise... I was surprised that Cho Chang was the one who reveals Dumbledore's Army to Umbridge
I completely agree. I really didn't like the book because there was too much filler (Creature & Dobby for instance). The movie really excelled because they dropped all that needless crap and got down to the meat & potatoes of the story. And the end battle in IMAX 3D was freaking amazing.I thought it was the best of all the movies...it flowed faster and more smoothly than the other ones. Probably because it was clearly adapted and not dragged rote from the book. If you think about it, a story needs to be developed to the medium it is in. Look at the many, many, incarnations of "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy". It is different as a radio play than it is as a BBC adaptation than it is as a book than it is as a full length movie adaptation. Yet the underlying story is the same. I think if more adaptations followed that concept they would be much better quality.
I really hope that bloody locket isn't a Horcrux because it's way too obvious (what's less is that Harry would be one himself). I really doubt Rowling would have let them cut out such an important part. For instance, the only reason Kreature is in the movie is because of what happens in Book 6. Although, it would be really annoying if they changed the story line like they did in LoTR with the gifts.No, they're alive in the movie - the difference is that rather than Harry finding out about it in the fourth (?) movie, they decided to put it off. Which meant Harry needed to be the only to know for a little while. In this, the rest of the gang was supposed to findout while at St. Mungo's. But, instead, Neville just told Harry. Maybe they'll find a way for the rest of the gang to know in the next movie. It's little things like that that worry me about the 7th movie. Something that might have taken a few seconds of movie time get cut out, but their neccesity to the story means it has to be added later. For example - suppose Book 7 reveals that RAB really is R. Black and the locket seen in passing in Book 5 is the horcrux. By passing that up in this, movie, they will have to take time to introduce it in a later movie. Thus forcing more cuts.
I don't mind condensing a book for a movie, and I often appreciate it. But, when cutting, if something seems important or may come back to being important, even making it a background item that at least establishes the fact in some way makes later points easier to swallow. The Neville thing was important to establish his relationship with Lestrange. If Dumbledore had mentioned it in passing after the trip in the pensive in Movie 4, it would have made the Neville scene shorter, less awkward and less out of place in this one.
The comment about the Veritas serum was enough to establish this for me without there having to be an additional scene.There was somethings about this movie that bothered me:
- Harry et al didn't patch things up with Cho at the end
No different from the book really. Umbrage is threatening Hogwarts and in many ways is the more immediate baddie, especially given that she's supposed to work for the good guys (the Ministry).- Too much Umbridge. Not enough Voldemort
Was it even mentioned that he was in the Prophecy too? This could mean that it's all a bit of a Red Herring in the books as I think that that Rowling is heavily involved with the film adaptations and if this was going to be essential towards the plotting of book 7 she would have said something - we'll know in less than a week.- Neville's role/fate downplayed
Not really, she didn't even mention her dad's mag the Quibbler, she's just shown reading it upside down when she's first introduced.- Luna too looney for me
Again, not dissimilar to the book. To be honest I find him one of the more dull characters. I have to admit that I thought that the CGI on Grawp was weak and that he was too big.- Not enough Hagrid
A little but better than the usual 10 minutes of exposition from Dumbledore.- Ending/Resolution too quick