Originally posted by PeachIt is tk in the movies or it has the same effect and why do I need to read the books if the movies are just based off the books and are different. LOL. Anyone saying books when the movies don't follow them to a tee is ridiculous. There's a reason the movie version is 99 percent time different than the book version. It wasn't jk rowling directing it. LOL.
That was a special case, because of the fact that Voldemort and Harry's wands were twins. Even Voldemort was taken off-guard by that happening, because that's not normal.No. There's no such thing as telekinesis in the HP universe. It doesn't exist any more than it does in our real world. That's all spell-casting. Wizards are capable of casting non-verbally. If you've actually read the books, you'd know that.
Don't try and claim you know anything about a book series if you haven't actually read it. If you're just basing your knowledge on the movies, then you don't know shit.
There are vast differences from the movies and the books making the books irrelevant as any director can change anything he wants.
Originally posted by quanchi112
It is tk in the movies or it has the same effect and why do I need to read the books if the movies are just based off the books and are different. LOL. Anyone saying books when the movies don't follow them to a tee is ridiculous. There's a reason the movie version is 99 percent time different than the book version. It wasn't jk rowling directing it. LOL.
In fact in the books from what I have heard the final death is completely different as to where it takes place, the fact Voldemort can't feel his horcruxes being destroyed in the book as opposed to the movie, isn't in the school in front of everyone in the movie when they are battling, and that Voldemort is the only wizard who can fly despite seeing Snape do so in the films.There are vast differences from the movies and the books making the books irrelevant as any director can change anything he wants.
The director going and making changes makes the movies wrong, when it comes to conflict between book and movie events.
Snape does fly in the book. That's not a movie-only thing:
Flitwick’s spell hit the suit of armor behind which Snape had taken shelter: With a clatter it came to life. Snape struggled free of the crushing arms and sent it flying back toward his attackers: Harry and Luna had to dive sideways to avoid it as it smashed into the wall and shattered. When Harry looked up again, Snape was in full flight, McGonagall, Flitwick, and Sprout all thundering after him: He hurtled through a classroom door and, moments later, he heard McGonagall cry, “Coward! COWARD!”“What’s happened, what’s happened?” asked Luna.
Harry dragged her to her feet and they raced along the corridor, trailing the Invisibility Cloak behind them, into the deserted classroom where Professors McGonagall, Flitwick, and Sprout were standing at a smashed window.
“He jumped,” said Professor McGonagall as Harry and Luna ran into the room.
“You mean he’s dead?” Harry sprinted to the window, ignoring Flitwick’s and Sprout’s yells of shock at his sudden appearance.
“No, he’s not dead,” said McGonagall bitterly. “Unlike Dumbledore, he was still carrying a wand … and he seems to have learned a few tricks from his master.”
With a tingle of horror, Harry saw in the distance a huge, batlike shape flying through the darkness toward the perimeter wall.
Deathly Hallows, page 590.
And no, it's not telekinesis; there's a big difference between nonverbal spellcasting and telekinesis; for starters, spellcasting requires a wand. Telekinesis does not. And spells, even nonverbal ones, can be blocked.
And yes, you need to read the books to really know anything. The movies make changes, leave huge amounts out, and just in general are not a good way to really know everything that happens. You can get some understanding from the movies but not much.
Originally posted by The ScenarioThat was one instance where he used a rush to catch one guy off guard but then the next move he was easily defeated while he stood back and watched. Superior speed and reactionary time he had more than enough time to do something other than stand there and let it happen.
Ganondorf dodges arrows in Twilight Princess. Also, there's this:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BVYggDnaJgY#t=2m55s
(This covers being faster, stronger, etc.)Timelines. We can't be sure if he's dead or not.
He's waded through worse than fiendfyre, and avada kedavra is still of questionable usefulness.
Ganondorf can move fast without a horse. He just uses it to be stylish.
He flew while possessing Zelda, and while doing his twilight mist trick. Also in his "god" form. Play OoT and you'll see more.
As GK pointed out, no. Ganondorf summoned several Phantom Ganons during the horseback battle. What does it matter if they're destroyed? Their purpose is to be shields or distractions; if they are destroyed they've done their job. Ganondorf can just make 7 more with a wave of his hand.
I don't recall AK ever being a continuous stream, either. It's always a green bolt, the kind of thing Ganondorf is best at reflecting. Unless you're referring to the priori incantatem, which only really happens when 2 wands with twin cores are used against each other.
Where did I say that? Ganondorf tanked Midna destroying the castle, so unless Voldemort can get above that, he's not hurting Ganondorf with normal spells.
http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Priori_Incantatem
Not sure how else to show this.
AK is absolutely nothing like that Master Sword; flawed comparison. Regardless, the continuous stream doesn't seem to happen unless 2 spells are cast simultaneously, and they connect wands, which Ganondorf doesn't have. So AK is going to be a green bolt which Ganondorf is able to reflect.
This dorf was unaware of the master sword so thus his experiences aren't shared memories from the past games.
What has he waded through worse than fiendfyre in tp ?
In animal form but he's consistently portrayed with normal reaction time.
One fiendfyre can eradicate any phantom dorf and still pursue dorf.
He didn't do so in combat thus it's out of character while in a combat situation in humanoid form.
I don't think that's the case but anyways I am not solely relying on this as the only way he can best Dorf so it's a minor point.
We don't see Dorf tank that attack and the master sword killed him with less damage than destroying a castle.
Ah ok that point is now officially dropped then as that was a special case type situation.
I don't want to clog up this thread further with this mini debate. If Peach or Gk would allow us to debate this topic in the vidoe game versus for a bit that's cool if not I can ask Impediment for permission. If still a no go we will have to wait until the all versus forum gets approved or can meet on another board where we can do so.
I have one in mind as well so pm me if we get turned down by both versus sections here on kmc.
Originally posted by PeachOk, not tk in the truest sense and I did know you needed the wand but it's as quick as a jedi just a gesture but instead of with a jedi's hand it's with a wand.
The director going and making changes makes the movies wrong, when it comes to conflict between book and movie events.Snape does fly in the book. That's not a movie-only thing:
Deathly Hallows, page 590.
And no, it's not telekinesis; there's a big difference between nonverbal spellcasting and telekinesis; for starters, spellcasting requires a wand. Telekinesis does not. And spells, even nonverbal ones, can be blocked.
And yes, you need to read the books to really know anything. The movies make changes, leave huge amounts out, and just in general are not a good way to really know everything that happens. You can get some understanding from the movies but not much.
Ok, I was told differently but I haven't read the books. I know the books go in greater detail and would give you a better understanding but the movies do make huge changes was my initial point. So despite my friend somehow being wrong about Snape there were still major changes.
I probably will eventually read them but due to my own uniqueness, lol Voldemort will always be Ralph Fiennes and the movies I will favor.
Could we create a thread so scenario and I can further debate that here in the vidoe game versus ? I think this could get interesting and would only be temporary but if it's a no go I'll try elsewhere as I don't want to clog the oft into another mini debate.
Edit: Dammit, alrighty then.
The majority of the "huge changes" made in the movies are just straight-up leaving events out entirely.
The HP universe was created by JK Rowling. It's her universe. Hence the changes made in the movies (some random director's "interpretation"😉 are simply incorrect when they come into conflict with what happened in the books written by the person that created this entire world. It's as simple as that.
Originally posted by PeachIt's just based off her work and movie directors have to make changes as they simply don't have the time to cover everything. The director says he wanted to change the final battle so it's his call to make not hers. She got paid and the books are 100 percent her universe whereas the movies are just based off of her work. Most of the changes you are probably right due to not having the time necessary to delve into but the horcrux thing was a major change up completely contradictory to the books.
The majority of the "huge changes" made in the movies are just straight-up leaving events out entirely.The HP universe was created by JK Rowling. It's her universe. Hence the changes made in the movies (some random director's "interpretation"😉 are simply incorrect when they come into conflict with what happened in the books written by the person that created this entire world. It's as simple as that.
Originally posted by PeachThere is no right and wrong it's just different is all. Movies are usually different than the books. I remember how disappointed I was with I am Legend because I read the book first. The book was awesome whereas the movie sucked due to my high expectations.
Yeah. And in that case (and any other like that), the movies are wrong and the books are correct.
Originally posted by General Kaliero
Aura, AK is consistently green. The sustained lightning-like spell there is blue. That's not AK. Which is further supported by the fact that AK is an "unblockable" curse, in that there is no known spell that can intercept it (except in the case of Priori Incantatem). That's why it's so bloody dangerous.
Well I always figured they just didn't get good coloring on it.
Better? 1:00
Originally posted by TheAuraAngel
Well I always figured they just didn't get good coloring on it.Better? 1:00
I'm simply going by what this universe's creator has said and shown.
http://www.ponychan.net/chan/pony/src/131826672610.png
Has Twilight ever actually loaned out any of those things?
