Micah: ...one point before we go on, because it was a focal point of what she was discussing. And that was that, really, Half-Blood Prince as a whole - its main plot took a back seat. She says: "It was back-burnered for teenage romance." And so everything from what and where the Horcruxes were, how they can be found and destroyed, what the identity of the Half-Blood Prince was, was all overshadowed by who was kissing who, and she felt really strongly. This is something that comes up a number of times throughout the course of her editorial, and I think she's right. I mean, I always said with Half-Blood Prince that they paid very little attention to Snape and really did nothing to develop his character, other than him shouting that he was the Half-Blood Prince at the end of the film, which we'll get to a little bit later, but what are your guys' thoughts on that? Do you agree with that statement, that it was a little bit too teeny-bopper?
Andrew: I thought that was a big statement, because that essentially throws out everything that's going on in the film. To say that the main point of the film was the teenage romance, I think that was kind of pushing it, though I think the fact of the matter is, that's what a lot of people want to see. They want to see that romance. I mean, look at the Harry Potter fandom and how excited people get when there's a new picture of Ron and Hermione sort of looking at each other a funny way. The image spreads like wildfire around Tumblr and Twitter. It just goes nuts. People love that kind of stuff. So, I think they have to fight a hard balance of catering to two groups of people. You have the people who really want to see some passion. You want to see a loyal...
Andrew: Yeah. You want to see a loyal adaptation from the book. But then on the other hand there's the general audience, which could be even a larger portion of the audience, that read the books for fun, doesn't really analyze them, just breezed through them, and likes to see that love stuff, because sex sells. So...
Andrew: ...I think that's something that they struggled with in Half-Blood Prince, and look, I mean, I don't think they would deny Lady Lupin's claim, because think of how they marketed the Half-Blood Prince film: sex, drugs, and rock and roll.
Eric: As - yeah.
Eric: Yeah, that was his three thing, three itemized answer. Was that David Heyman or David Yates who said that?
Micah: One of the two, yeah. I think it was probably David Heyman. It sounds like something David Heyman would say.
Eric: Yeah, one of the Davids. But, Micah, in answer to your question - and off the show a moment, the more we talk about what Lady Lupin was thinking, the less we actually have to talk about her editorial. I know this is an editorial discussion, but I think that Micah's question here is very relevant to everything Lady Lupin said - okay, back into the show. So Micah, in direct - what I feel about your direct question there, is that later on in her editorial, she also makes the comment that Dumbledore in Movie 6, for the first time she agreed with, and even liked, Michael Gambon as Dumbledore, and that's when I knew that Lady Lupin and I were going to one day be married because I feel the same way. So for her - and I said as much when we first started seeing the sixth film, so even though she does say - make this claim that the romance was completely fore-fronted and everything else back-burnered, like the coming of age of Voldemort, all of that that's important to the understanding of the series, she also feels that Dumbledore was the most - the best he's ever been, Michael Gambon as Dumbledore, and I feel the same way. So she does kind of - she doesn't contradict herself - but she feels as I do and I feel like I can possibly express that we see the film, and even though there was a lot of romance there were also important gains made in the Dumbledore department and for that reason, Movie 7 and Movie 8 are not completely - I haven't lost hope in them.
Micah: All right. So getting back to this list here, going down the points that Andrew started earlier:
"Book-Harry knows that Dumbledore believes Voldemort was unable to obtain an object of Gryffindor's. Perhaps a reminder of the sword hanging in Dumbledore's office would have been helpful as well, since it will come into play, a pretty large part, in 'Deathly Hallows.'"
And this points towards the mystery Horcrux being a Ravenclaw object. So, I think her point there is just again, sort of the lack of knowledge on Harry's part about what potentially the Horcruxes could be.
Micah: And I know, Eric, it's helpful that you have seen the film because you can also sort of comment on the Horcrux knowledge that Harry does have in this film or the lack thereof.
Eric: Right, yeah - I want to say read some more points and I'll eventually get to what I want to talk about later with this editorial, which is sort of how Movie 7 deals with things, but...
Eric: ...we'll talk about that later.
Micah: So, continuing down the list, and these are straight from the editorial: "Film Harry knows nothing what so ever about who and what Fenrir Greyback is, or why he is particularly threatening. He is introduced without an explanation in the film - " which is actually - we actually talked about this a couple of weeks ago...
Micah: "It's hard to believe the film makers missed the golden opportunity they themselves created for clarity near the beginning of the film, given the proximity of Greyback and Lupin, one of his victims during the attack on the Burrow."
Andrew: Yeah. [sighs] I...
Micah: I agree with that.
Andrew: ...in the...
Andrew: They added that whole attack on the Burrow scene because, ooh, it was a pacer, it was a pacer!
Andrew: And now - yeah, that was a great way to get some more information about Fenrir, and if you think about one of the promotional posters for Part 1, it's that big shot of him, it's just Fenrir.
Eric: I mean, one of what ends up being one of the millions of promotional materials for this film, but it's true, and that's what I was suspecting it was about, the Greyback poster.
Andrew: Do you know why?
Eric: ...as Lady Lupin points out - what?
Andrew: They did - they made that poster because he's scary. They want to appeal to people, "Ooh, who's that? Who's that monster?"
Eric: Yeah. [sighs] Well, yeah, but two days after the movie comes out, who's going to be buying the Greyback Bus Shelter poster on EBay? Nobody, because he has no significance to anybody. Maybe there's one Greyback fan from the books, none from the movie, because they haven't introduced him. Like Lady Lupin says, he's a non-entity, and she points out that they created that Burrow scene with Lupin and Greyback at the same scene and they didn't do anything with it.
Eric: So, I think that's a very valid point.
Andrew: Next point: "Book Harry not only knows that Tonks is in love with Lupin, but he knows that Lupin is worried and reluctant to go forward with the relationship because of his condition and the prejudices against him."
Eric: Yeah, as far as Lupin's characterization, that's why this is important, but otherwise I don't think it's important at all. How Lupin feels about Tonks or how Tonks feels about Lupin. They both end up dead at the end of the film series, there's no reason for the...
Micah: It was never really developed much in the movies to begin with. Putting Half-Blood Prince aside, I mean, I think you started getting a feeling for, in Order of the Phoenix, when she was first introduced and they never really did anything more with her character.
Andrew: Next point: "Comparing film-Harry to book-Harry, film-Harry knows nothing, whatsoever, about the character of the new Minister, Scrimgeour." I...
Eric: She does go on in the article to say why that's significant, but it's not here in our notes.
Andrew: Well, I think - I was just going to say that I think, Eric you can correct me if I'm wrong, but I imagine we're going to get a lot of explanation when he comes and gives the items from Dumbeldore's will.
Eric: Well, explanation as far as, "Hello, I'm the new Minister"?
Andrew: Will we learn that he's kind of an oddball?
Andrew: I mean, will we - so we just learn that he's the new Minister, is that all?
Eric: Well no, I'm asking, is that what you think, he's going to sit down and explain who he is?
Andrew: Well, my theory is that to explain this, I would imagine a good opportunity to explain the character of the Minister more was to have him show up and sort of personify the descriptions of the book.
Eric: Yeah, the descriptions of the book are very clearly - personified - acted out, by the moments we have, which is another scene that's leaked, you can actually just find it online...
Andrew: Oh, is it? I haven't seen that.
Eric: ...between the Minister and Harry, so, where he reads Dumbeldore's will. That's the only scene with the Minister, other than the beginning of the film, which is also been leaked online, where he's addressing the Wizarding public. Bill Nighy is a great character - plays a great character in this movie. I think it does the book justice. But, what is it that Lady Lupin is saying is significant here as far as, Harry not knowing who the new Minister is? And, I think, isn't it that the Ministry and their stand on Voldemort is significant, because eventually the Ministry has to be infiltrated? But all of that, in my opinion, gets taken care of when they actually have to infiltrate the Ministry. So, I don't really know what else to say...
Andrew: Well then, speaking of the Ministry: "Film Harry has no idea that Dolores Umbridge is still employed by the Ministry, despite her terrible record at Hogwarts in Film and Book 5." I know, we all know that Umbridge does make a return in Part 1, but I wonder why she feels that this is a problem?
Eric: Well, isn't there in Book 6 - there was a line where Harry does a double take, and he says, "What, she's still with the ministry?" And that's in Book 6.
Micah: Yeah, that's at Dumbledore's funeral.
Eric: Oh, yeah. And that's from movie...
Micah: Because she's there.
Eric: Right, and that was omitted from - yeah, okay, I'm on board here. So that's significant.
Micah: I think some of the other points that are coming up, though, are a little bit more central to the plot. For example: "Film-Harry has never met Mundungus Fletcher, and incidentally, neither have viewers, and we have been told nothing of this character or history, nor the fact that he was stealing objects that someone like Aberforth bought from him. He and every plot point he touches, including the location of the locket and the two way mirror, are non-existent at this point."
Eric: Do you guys remember a few MuggleCast's back, we did a who are we most stoked to see in the film, or what actor are we most proud of? And me having seen the film, I said Mundungus Fletcher; Andy, what's his name...
Eric: Well, that's how I feel. He was really good in the movie, and I don't think that - as much as I would have liked him to have been a character, because he's so enjoyable to watch, in the other films, I think it's okay, that they just pushed him in the end...
Micah: Yeah but, I think the point is that he has no idea that Mundungus was ransacking Grimmauld Place when they were cleaning it out in Movie 5, because they never cleaned it out in Movie 5.
Micah: I think the point is that he has no idea that Mundungus was ransacking Grimmauld Place when they were cleaning it out in Movie 5 because they never cleaned it out in Movie 5.
Micah: So her point is that, who is this random character that will be introduced about a locket that we never even knew about in the first place? It all ties into some of the other points that are here, like Harry having no idea that he owns Kreacher or Grimmauld Place...
Micah: Dumbledore never gave him of that information to him in Half-Blood Prince.
Eric: That is fairly significant.
Micah: These are a lot of plot points that are absent from the films preceding the one that is coming out on November the 19th.
Andrew: Yeah. I mean, again it is important to keep in mind, as we have also discussed on numerous occasions, it is impossible to take everything from the books and put them in the films. As Lady Lupin points out, too, they would have to be much longer. Next point: "Film-Harry does not know he has his mother's protection for Privet Drive and will until his 17th birthday. Even if this is stated in an earlier film, it certainly would have been benefited by a reminder somewhere in 'Half-Blood Prince'."
Eric: Yeah, everything from...
Eric: It also...go on.
Andrew: No, I was just going to say I agree it would have benefited, because not everyone sees these films - every film.
Eric: Yeah, and it downplays the character of Dumbledore, too. Knowing what Dumbledore had to do to protect Harry would have been important information. Both the characters of Dumbledore and Snape are extremely downplayed in the films. And Lady Lupin, that's one of her central points, especially Snape later on in the editorial.
Andrew: Next point: "As compared to book-Harry, film-Harry has very little information on the evolution of how Tom Riddle became Lord Voldemort, and the psyche of the Dark Lord, with which Harry will have to contend in 'Deathly Hallows'. Since Voldemort's psyche is largely responsible for his downfall and Harry's victory, that is an unfortunate omission."
Eric: Okay, I want to spend the most time talking about this. Not me, but you guys. I want to know what you think about this specific point.
Micah: I agree with the point on the whole. I do, I think a lot was omitted from Half-Blood Prince, a lot of flashback scenes in particular. And I think David Heyman and David Yates really tried to drive home the one at the orphanage, but I think the memories that Dumbledore was able to obtain about the Gaunts, and giving a look back into how Voldemort came to be who he was. And just the way his mind worked, his ability to charm people. You saw it a little bit with Slughorn but also with making Hufflepuff's cup with Hepzibah Smith into the Horcrux as well.
Micah: I think that was a major omission from the films, and again the question arises, how is he going to know of Hufflepuff's cup, and how is he going to know it is in Gringotts, in Bellatrix Lestrange's vault?
Andrew: [laughs] Yeah.
Micah: You know, all that stuff has been unfortunately left out prior to this, and I think she brings up a great point, because Harry is able to match Voldemort's wit when he calls him Tom at the end. There is just so much here that just...
Andrew: It breaks my heart.
Micah: Yeah, doesn't it? It's just so sad.
Micah: [laughs] But no, I mean, that's kind of my main point.
Andrew: I think there was a very large missed opportunity in Half-Blood Prince because we did get some backstories. And we could have heard more from Slughorn or Dumbledore, or just more from the backstories. Though I did love...
Eric: About Voldemort?
Andrew: Yeah, yeah! To get a better picture of how Tom Riddle became Voldemort. But I did love the Tom Riddle flashbacks in the film.
Eric: Yeah. Well, I mean, the film could've benefited from the Gaunts and Hepzibah Smith, and especially for the reasons that Lady Lupin says in this editorial regarding Riddle's ability to charm people. That's extremely important in Movie 7 - or Movie 8. But her point here about Voldemort's psyche - Harry not understanding Voldemort's psyche and how he came to rise to power affecting him, being an issue for the seventh or eighth film - I don't really feel that that is that big of a deal, not understanding Voldemort's personality.
Micah: Yeah, I think you're right. Ultimately, though, it's just - there's so much in that one point about how the producers left out the flashbacks because it really - it takes away from the fact that Movie 6 should have been about Voldemort and how he came to be. And instead it was about teenage romance.
Micah: Which is what her point was early on. And that all takes a backseat to the story of teenage romance. So that's the unfortunate side of how they ended up producing Movie 6. And there's other major plots, too, that were left out from Movie 6, like Snape as well.
Eric: Do you feel like Book 6 ever reached a conclusion as far as how Voldemort became a dictator? Because Dumbledore makes some really broad quotes - there are some really broad quotations like, "Voldemort created his enemies just as dictators everywhere do," and he seems exclamatory about it. But I don't feel like it was ever answered whether Voldemort is Voldemort because he was born that way or Voldemort was Voldemort because he was made that way. I think the case is made for him being born that way, but it just seems like - come Book 7, I feel like Voldemort's psyche is extremely inconsistent with the buildup from the first six books. He's shown very careless and he's shown forgetful and he makes many, many mistakes in Book 7 that I don't think anybody as terrifying as the Voldemort that Jo has written up in Book 6 would have made. And it's so - it's interesting because I feel that there's inconsistency there. And Lady Lupin feels that it's important somehow that the psyche of Voldemort is important to know. I don't feel like the book ever reaches a conclusion why Tom Riddle became Voldemort, and, therefore, I don't necessarily feel that it's too upsetting that they left it out of the film.
Micah: Well, I just think there are major plot points that are missing from Half-Blood Prince that needed to be there, especially from a Horcrux standpoint.
Eric: Okay. So go on.
Micah: I think we agree on that.
Micah: So this kind of touches a bit on the last point that we were discussing - that "film-Harry doesn't know how and where Voldemort obtained objects of significance to make into Horcruxes, or anything about Tom Riddle's ability to charm others into giving him what he wanted. This will handicap Harry's sleuthing ability when encountering the Grey Lady, whom film-Harry also never heard of. That may be less of an issue since book-Harry didn't pay any attention to the Ravenclaw ghost either. However, it would be nice if viewers at least understood that each Hogwarts house has a ghost. Have we ever even seen the Bloody Baron?"
Eric: [laughs] That's a good point, because she pulls out all the stops. I mean we don't even know - movie viewers won't even know that each house has a ghost. I don't know that it's significant but I think she has a sound point here, especially about Harry's sleuthing ability when trying to find the Horcruxes. So what do you guys think?
Andrew: Well wasn't there a brief mention - this isn't an excuse, but wasn't there a very brief mention of the Bloody Baron in Sorcerer's Stone? Like, [in high voice] "Oh it's the Bloody Baron!"
Eric: Well that was when he was sweeping over the students. It was during the welcoming feast.
Andrew: Right, yeah.
Eric: He was sweeping down and kind of...
Micah: Well Eric, wasn't it you that saw a prop from him at one of the exhibitions...
Eric: Yeah. It's his costume. They have it at Harry Potter: The Exhibition, and it's probably my favorite prop from the exhibition. Maybe because of how little it's shown in the film, but just the attention to detail. It's basically the best example of the HP exhibition when it was in Chicago that shows the detail that goes into the films, which gets traded off against how much screen time any of those props are actually getting. So yeah, the only thing I remember about the Bloody Baron or the Grey Lady is the brief bit during the welcoming feast.
Micah: Yeah, it just ties into our earlier point though, about Harry not being knowledgable about the fact that Voldemort would have wanted to take and make Horcruxes from each of the founders.
Eric: Yeah. I think maybe that's what she was getting to too, that one of the revelations of Book 6 is that Tom felt as strongly about Hogwarts as Harry does. And it's for that reason that he seeks out the magical objects to create Horcruxes out of it. It's for that reason. I think that about his psyche is extremely important.
Micah: Yeah and kind of following that point, film-Harry doesn't know that his potions book is hidden under a beat up old tiara.
Micah: And the recollection of the tiara is an important moment for book-Harry in Deathly Hallows and will eventually lead to him going to the Room of Requirement. So that ties into whole Diadem Horcrux. So...
Micah: It's kind of like nitpicking now a little bit here, but I think it speaks to the larger hole in the plot that has been created here.
Eric: Yeah. Here's where I'll say that the movie split may benefit a lot of these issues quite a lot. Because in the book - in Book 7, sorry - Harry gets to Hogwarts pretty late in the game. Really, he's gone from Hogwarts for most of the book up until the final battle. And it's when he gets to Hogwarts that he not only discovers the Diadem - I mean that's really the first time we hear about the Diadem is once he's at Hogwarts, five eighths of the way into the book. And that's also where he finds the - that's also where a lot of the exposition about the remaining Horcruxes is discovered. Harry not only finds out about the Diadem while he's at Hogwarts for the very first time, he also finds out about Fiendfyre destroying it. It happens so sudden in rapid succession in the book even. So that, splitting the film, they'll be able to dwell on that a lot more. I feel like it'll be a lot less forced or rushed as it is in the book, since they have a whole second movie to devote largely to Harry being at Hogwarts. I feel like the book didn't get to do that because it had to show them in the woods with all that other - with the important Dumbledore plot that was running. So because Movie 1 can focus on a large part of that, Movie 8 can focus a lot more on the actual Horcrux quest.
Micah: Now, just another couple of quick points here. "Film-Harry doesn't know why Tom Riddle was orphaned." That kind of ties into the backstory that we were talking about that was left out of Half-Blood Prince - a lot of look-backs at the Gaunts, and Harry getting a better understanding of the fact that he is actually very similar...
Eric: To Tom Riddle.
Micah: To Tom Riddle. And I do think that's an important recollection. Because there is that moment with Dumbledore where he realizes that Tom Riddle chose to go down one path, whereas Harry chose to go down another - sort of those two diverging paths. I think it is important that Harry has that recollection or that recognition of the difference between the two of them.
Eric: I agree. That is sort of the one definitive where, I feel like Harry should know more about Voldemort, and Voldemort should be a more fleshed-out character. But in the films, he really just has to be a villain, and only has to function as a villain. Fortunately they've got a good actor playing him in the films, but unless they are going to do something with that actor, he may as well not be there in that sense, if you get what I'm saying. They really should do more with Voldemort's character, and because he's a villain - somebody's got to want him to make the Most Compelling Villains list that comes out. But if not, then he just looks really cool. In the end Harry defeats him with Expelliarmus, so really, what...
Andrew: What does this all matter anyway?
Eric: What was Jo ever saying about Voldemort? If he can be defeated with Expelliarmus, which isn't even a defensive spell!
Andrew: Another point - well, we're going to get e-mails about that, I mean, obviously the Horcruxes were gone, so he couldn't have just killed him with Expelliarmus with the Horcruxes still intact. But anyway, another point: "Film-Harry has no connection to or knowledge of Bill Weasley and hasn't seen or spoken to Fleur since the end of Year Four. And yet, in 'Deathly Hallows', their wedding is the jump-off point of the trio's hunt for Horcruxes, and their home plays a major role as a sanctuary."
Andrew: ...and yet, in Deathly Hallows, their wedding is the jump-off point of the trio's hunt for Horcruxes, and their home plays a major role as a sanctuary." I disagree that this is too big of a deal because, you know, one of the Weasley members, could just be like, "Okay hey, our plan is to go to Bill's because nobody knows...
Andrew: ...them," including the viewers, so...
Andrew: ...or you, so. I mean, that would actually make more sense that Harry doesn't know Bill, to go there because nobody would really...
Andrew: ...expect him to go there. So...
Eric: Yeah their reduced role in the film is, I think, appropriate because Harry doesn't speak to Fleur since Movie 4 anyway until she shows up at The Burrow in Book 7. You know essentially they're re-introduced, both characters are re-introduced in Book 7, and so it's very easy for that to translate to Movie 7, even though we haven't seen Bill before. He looks just like...
Micah: Well, I will say this though, it goes back to a lot of the points that were brought up earlier, for example Fenrir Greyback and the fact that he attacks Bill Weasley, and that's the whole reason Fleur really ends up falling for him and they end up getting married in Movie 7, or Book 7. And you know they think - another thing is they completely leave out the fact that Fenrir Greyback is a werewolf. I mean for all you know he's just an ugly looking villain...
Micah: ...and you know that's the only thing I would say with respect to that.
Eric: Well I'm going to play devil's advocate here, you know - wouldn't - okay, things like knowing about Bill Weasley, obviously, you know we see him in Chamber of Secrets, the book, and you know he sits down at dinner and he's really cool, Harry gets the impression that he's a really cool guy, and things like that are what make the book special, so would you really want a film to have introduced Bill Weasley way back in Movie 4 or do you want to be able to read the books and have this whole sense of a greater world, and a whole sense of a family, that the films really would have had to strain themselves to include? Because if a film is about...
Micah: No, that's a fair pointÖ
Micah: It's a fair point, but I mean, part of the reason why it wasn't included previously was because they cut out the whole fight scene at the end of Half-Blood Prince.
Eric: It's very true.
Micah: So, you know we spend a lot of time here talking about Voldemort and the Horcruxes but you know Lady Lupin also touches on Snape, and she mentions that, "Film-Harry does not know that it was Snape who betrayed the Prophecy to Voldemort. The lack of that knowledge is unfortunate in that the realization escalates book-Harry's hatred of Snape and ultimately becomes a vehicle for his acceptance of his former enemy-teacher." You know and...
Andrew: Yeah, I mean, I think one of the most upsetting moments for me in Half-Blood Prince was at the end, where there's just that quick moment where Snape admits that he is the Half-Blood Prince, Harry doesn't call him a coward. I mean that was something that a lot of fans were looking forward to, and that basically just wraps everything up about this point in a bow. That there is no - Harry and Snape...
Andrew: Yeah, and it's gonna be a shame when Snape dies in Part 2, and I hope we feel the emotion that we should.
Eric: Yeah, they practically have to cast Lily for the first time, just to show that Snape had been in love with her the whole time. I mean I'm glad that they kept the same actress from Movie 1 to portray Lily in all of the photographs they've shown of her since, but it almost seems ridiculous and that it's likely to be cut, even though it's very important at this point because Snape, alone has suffered such reduced screen time, compared with how prominent he is in the books.
Eric: I mean, the Half-Blood Prince is Snape, and we don't even - I don't even - that's - easily, easily, easy to miss by watching the sixth film.
Micah: Yeah, and you know she brings up some points about the Harry/Snape relationship and the fact that it was really obliterated in the sixth film. The train is one example. Obviously Luna finds him in the movie, where it's Tonks in the book. And Tonks is the one that brings him up to Snape in the start of the term. There's no Defense Against the Dark Arts lessons, where obviously Snape has taken over that post. You know, so something that Harry had come to really enjoy learning about is now taught by the person he loathes the most. And there was no detentions post-Sectumsempra, as she says, after Harry curses Draco and he's sentenced to detention with Snape. So it just goes to show you, that where they had the opportunity to really develop this hatred between the two and then have it come full circle, in Part 2, they missed the boat on that. And they made it seem more like Snape was just doing what was being asked of him by Dumbledore, which really isn't supposed to be revealed until the final film.
Eric: That's true. And then, so the other thing she does run through really quick is the - what I think is a very important point - several instances in which all of the films, of the Harry Potter series have failed to show Harry as an emerging leader. She mentions Quidditch tryouts, which we did see some of in the film. The cave scene...
Andrew: But as she points out - but as Lady Lupin points out in her article - at the beginning of the lesson, it takes Ginny to quiet down the group of people. Harry can't even do it.
Andrew: Which is, which is,,,
Eric: Maybe they're, yeah, maybe they're sensible, the filmmakers. They know that Harry...
Micah: Well that was her point, though. That was her point...
Micah: That is should have been Harry, and not Ginny. You know, making Ginny do it made Harry look weak.
Andrew: Yeah, he's about to get the entire school fighting for him two films later, and he can't even quiet down a little Quidditch team? It seems, it seems like a stretch.
Micah: Yeah. The cave, they showed more of - I think, what was her point that they're going into the cave - or no, in the beginning of the movie, actually it's in the book, too, where they Apparate. Harry says that he feels safe because he's with Dumbledore. And then in the cave, it's Dumbledore who says that he feels safe because he's with Harry. And they've - really the way that they did the cave scene, where it just kind of ended with them up in that middle island and not showing Harry taking Dumbledore out, she felt was a mistake on their part.
Eric: It's a short change because in the beginning when Harry goes with Dumbledore to see Slughorn, Harry makes the comment, "I'm okay because I'm with you," and it plays off each other, which I never realized until I read this article, like that that was a setup and payoff. I loved that.
Andrew: Okay. And a couple other points related to that. Harry and Ginny, the kiss, Harry kind of - he's not the one making the move there...
Andrew: ...it's Ginny. And also, not being immobilized atop the tower. The whole point in the book was Dumbledore immobilizes Harry because Harry really wants to intervene. But instead, Dumbledore just says, "Oh, go downstairs. Hide." And...
Eric: And Harry is immobilized by fear.
Andrew: ...Harry runs. He scampers, like a little rat.
Eric: Yeah. [laughs] Like a little rat. That's a little harsh.
Andrew: [laughs] Like a little mouse - well I didn't mean rat like a - I don't know, a little bunny. There, is that better?
Andrew: So to wrap up this discussion, we have a couple Tweets. We asked you guys what you thought of the adaptation, especially in regards to Lady Lupin's article. RajahReid wrote:
"I agree that W.B. left out critical info for Harry in 'Half-Blood Prince.' I bet they'll use Hermione or the will to get Harry the info."
Of course Hermione always knows everything.
Andrew: AlabamaMike2814 wrote:
"I complete agree with that article. Those who only watch the movies will have to take several leaps of faith to keep up."
That's a little unfair, though. We don't - until we actually see the film, we don't know for sure. I imagine it's not going to be a complete mess. [laughs]
Andrew: Despite everything we've discussed in the past 45 minutes.
Eric: My hope is that...
Eric: Go ahead.
Micah: Plot holes abound, but don't worry, the movie will be fine.
[Eric and Micah laugh]
Andrew: peculiarways writes:
"I don't think they've given the prophecy, specifically its origins, any justice, and how it was Snape who informed Voldemort."
Eric: Snape informing Voldemort, personally in the book, it felt like that wasn't always meant to be, you know, it was kind of a last minute extra reason to hate Snape. But what does she mean the prophecy wasn't given any - or peculiarways - what do they mean that the prophecy wasn't given any justice? Because also regarding Book 7, I don't think the prophecy specifically even matters by the end of it all.
Andrew: No, it doesn't, but there wasn't - I agree, there wasn't too much of an explanation with the prophecy.
Micah: Yeah, I agree with that. I think that - was it ever revealed too that it was Trelawney that made the prophecy in the movies? I'm not sure that they ever figured out in the initials.
Eric: The original?
Micah: On the prophecy.
Eric: No because Harry doesn't have that. Yeah, he doesn't have that follow-up meeting with Dumbledore. Dumbledore just comes to his bedroom and talks about curtains instead.
Eric: No, I think you're right in that aspect.
Andrew: kb1073 wrote:
"I love the article and I agree 100%. I think that fans that haven't read the books are going to be a little lost."
But again, that's you know, to be determined. And finally, GabrielaMaria94 writes:
"If they do remake the series, maybe they'll make sure not to leave out scenes..."
"...where Harry finds something out."
Micah: Well, that's a...
Andrew: Don't get your hopes up.
Micah: That's a great way to end the discussion.
Andrew: It is. And now let's get into some Muggle-mail before we wrap up the show today.
Eric: This ones' from Laura from Manchester. She says:
"Sorry if this has been sent more than once, I've been having internet problems..."
Oh, I guess I was supposed to read over that.
"I was just listening to your new show when you discussed why the Beauxbaton students sat at the Ravenclaw table - an idea came to mind straight away. Yes, it balances out so that there's a champion at each table, but there are also comparisons between Fleur and Rowena Ravenclaw. Fleur is obviously good looking, considering the attention she gets from the boys - especially from Ron. Rowena is described as fair, which again indicates attractiveness. A lot of other Ravenclaws are also seen as good looking - Cho Chang, Roger Davies, Padma Patil - so possibly this is a trait for members of the house. And I think that Xenophilius Lovegood's bust of Rowena is described as beautiful, but austere looking ('Deathly Hallows' page 327 of the U.K. edition). This severe look could link to Fleur's Veela blood in her, especially when they are angry and become harpy-like. Harpies also have bird features, another link. Just a thought, love the show. Laura."
Hm, Interesting - and there are plenty of connections between Durmstrang and there dart arts - especially with Grindelwald. So, I feel like that and Slytherin, you know, so I feel like that's important.
Andrew: Next e-mail comes from Shwee, 18 of Utah:
"Hey, in 'Goblet of Fire,' Harry is forced to compete in the Triwizard Tournament because it is a binding magical contract. I think that if he had refused to compete, it would have been like breaking an Unbreakable Vow, and he would have died. What do you think?"
This is of course in response to last episode's Chapter-By-Chapter, where we were wondering...
Andrew: ...why he was forced.
Eric: Yeah, we talked about this. Where it was like, we weren't sure to what point Harry actually agreed to this magical - like a magical contract, especially an Unbreakable Vow, you've gotta shake hands on it, for crying out loud. And Harry had nothing to do with his name being submitted into the Goblet, so...
Micah: Right, so...
Eric: He shouldn't have been able...
Eric: ...you know, been bound to compete.
Micah: I mean, if he physically didn't put his name in, or write his name down, then you would think that it wouldn't magically bind him to have to compete.
Eric: And therefore not kill him.
Micah: Unless Mad-Eye/Barty Crouch took a piece of his report or something where "Harry Potter" was written at the top and...
Micah: ...submitted it into the Goblet.
Eric: Yeah, that would be a little - that would be yeah - I get that.
Andrew: No, but. No, but still, there should have been a special piece of paper to put in the Goblet too. I think future competitions will be more secure.
Micah: Absolutely. Wasn't it that Mad-Eye/Barty Crouch Jr. was able to trick the Goblet because he entered Harry under a fourth school?
Andrew: Yes I think you're right. Yeah.
Eric: What fourth school?
Andrew: But like - why - but, yeah. But we sort of talked about this. Why doesn't the Goblet only know there's three? Doesn't - shouldn't the Goblet know what the three schools are?
Eric: And especially since they're making decisions about...
Micah: It's a PC, not a Mac.
Eric: [laughs] Especially if they're making decisions about a champion's character based off their name. You know, we heard from the Goblet of Fire last week and he talked, he told us about you know viewing Facebook profiles, going by the eyes.
Micah: Oh yeah.
Eric: I don't know. I think it's very...
Micah: It's only Goblet of Fire 1.0. It needs to be upgraded.
Andrew: Micah, can you read the next e-mail please?
Micah: The next e-mail comes from Madeline, 13 of Virginia. And she says:
"Hi MuggleCasters. I was listening to Episode 212 where you played audio clips of the 'Deathly Hallows' soundtrack and as I listened I noticed the score sounded quite weak to be frank. I realize this is a new composer of course he produces different songs than John Williams and Nicholas Hooper. However, the score didn't come across as if it was from a 'Harry Potter' movie. More like a one-off film, not the first part of the final movie highly important loved series. 'Dobby's Death' didn't even make me cry. Just somewhat of a disappointment. In Hooper's and Williams' scores, they had so many instruments playing at once in an organized chaos sort of way where it was hard to detect every single instrument. Whereas the new score sounded quite dull and not supported. I understand that there is a lot of pressure put on new makers of anything 'Harry Potter' because us fans are very picky and hardly ever fully pleased. Although I would have liked to see - or rather hear - Nicholas Hooper back for the last film. Thanks for reading my lengthy..."
Eric: This is so harsh.
"...complaint, and thank you for giving me a new podcast to listen to every two weeks."
Well thanks for being a new listener. Now Eric, proceed to...
Eric: This is...
Eric: This is so harsh. This is ridiculously harsh. I can't even - I can't even begin...
Eric: Okay. Okay.
Micah: We have to see it in context. Is that what you were going to say basically?
Eric: Well not - no...
Micah: You have to see it in...
Eric: No no no. That's not what...
Micah: ...with the film.
Eric: Okay. Yes. And I made the point that last, you know, in the earlier films when John Williams did compose, the music had to be, what I called it last week, "its own character." Because the acting - it was not being supported by the acting. Movie 7 or 8 there is such strong acting coming from the trio that you actually almost don't want to here this loud, brassy, extreme music playing during these scenes because what's going on is far more interesting than the music, but I don't...
Eric: ...know how she could make the claim that this sounds like it's not the music of an important and highly-loved series. I don't even get that. That's horrible. What kind of music doesn't sound like it's from a highly loved series? I thought that there were plenty of instruments. I thought that the thirty second clips, which again she said she listened to the score - it's only thirty second clips. Dobby's death didn't make you cry? That's because of a ninety second clip you only heard thirty seconds, and you haven't seen Dobby's death on screen. So I don't know.
Andrew: And this concludes Eric's spiel.
Eric: Okay. I was concluding it!
Micah: Stop ripping on a thirteen year old. Okay?
Eric: I disagree.
Micah: Before we get letters.
Eric: I just...
Andrew: Yeah. Don't forget we need votes for the Podcast Awards! So that's it for e-mails. Before we wrap up the show we want to give you guys a couple reminders about everything going on in the MuggleCast/MuggleNet/Harry Potter world. First of all, a quick little fanart plug. We have a great section on MuggleNet, the MuggleNet fanart area, where every week there's a new piece of art being featured created by a Harry Potter fan, and we wanted to feature a cool piece of fan art - two actually. I just remembered a great one. First of all, visit MuggleCast.com, and there you'll see a pumpkin carved of the trio: Harry, Ron, and Hermione. It's really well done. It's pretty amazing, and that was done by Alexandra, and she talked with Noah, who runs the MuggleNet fanart section. We are going to feature it, so Alexandra, thanks so much for sending that in. And also MuggleCast listener, Anne, she carved a MuggleCast pumpkin. Have you guys seen this?
Micah: Yeah, it's...
Micah: ...really cool.
Andrew: Go to Facebook.com/MuggleCast and you'll see our album art carved into a pumpkin. It's really well done. I've had it sitting on my desktop because I love looking at it. It's just really well done, so thanks, Anne, so much for doing that for us. It's right now our MuggleCast profile picture on...
Eric: Oh my God.
Andrew: ...on Facebook.
Eric: That's awesome. Hey, I don't "like" MuggleCast apparently. I'm fixing that now.
Andrew: Also we want to remind everyone about the Podcast Awards. Go to MuggleCast.com and you'll see how you can nominate us. It's really quick. Really easy. And once we're nominated - once we get enough nominations, you guys will be able to vote for us, and this will all be taking place over the next couple of months, so thank you so much for your support in nominating us. Again, just go to MuggleCast.com to get all the information. Speaking of MuggleCast.com you can find everything you need to get in touch with us, to "like" us on Facebook, to follow us on Twitter, to subscribe and review us, and much much more. If you do want to e-mail us just click on contact at the top...
[Show music begins]
Andrew: ...and you'll see a feedback form, and you'll also see our mailing address if you would like to mail us anything to our P.O. Box. And we do appreciate that. One final piece of news: our next episode, which will be 214, that will be our big Part 1 review show, so make sure to tune in. We plan on releasing it November 20th at the latest. We're going to record the day the film is actually released, but of course, it takes a little time to edit it. So we plan to have it out November 20th at the latest. You'll get all our thoughts on it - every little scene. We'll pick apart everything, we'll get plenty of your e-mails, and it'll be a fun show. Thanks everyone for listening. I'm Andrew Sims.
Eric: I'm Eric Scull.
Micah: And I'm Micah Tannenbaum.
Andrew: We'll see you next time for our big Part 1 review show, 214. Buh-bye!
Micah: Enjoy the plot holes.
[Show music plays out]
Written by: The Transcribers