Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

See the trailer

It looks like a CGI roller coaster of fun, but, being that I'm not a die hard HP fan, I'm just going to wait for DVD.

I don't need a Magic 8-Ball to foresee this film breaking new records.

$20 says this film out grosses Avatar and Toy Story 3, easy.

Hell, I'll go one further: I bet this film becomes the top grosing film of all time, since HP is a world wide phenomenon.

Good God another Harry Potter movie.what they plan on doing,turning this into a James Bond franchise.

This is the final HP movie, Parker.

The seventh book, Deathly Hallows, was split into two films.

Again, I bet this film breaks records, easy.

will see this, then do a million hp threads

Kids. That's all I need to say to this.

Originally posted by Impediment
Again, I bet this film breaks records, easy. no doubt.

What the hell?! This has so much shit thats not in the book it's not even funny! What is up with Potter dragging Voldemort off the edge of the bridge? Jesus Christ.

Originally posted by Impediment
This is the final HP movie, Parker.

The seventh book, Deathly Hallows, was split into two films.
.

Unfortunaly Mr Parker does'nt know about books.....

I am going to see it when it comes out!I am not crazy however about it being in 3d but whatever.

Its also gonna be in 2D.

I know and I guess that is ok I still reather have it normal.

Originally posted by ares834
What the hell?! This has so much shit thats not in the book it's not even funny! What is up with Potter dragging Voldemort off the edge of the bridge? Jesus Christ. First time someone has adapted a book into a movie and left shit out/changed shit? See Queen of the Damned.

Originally posted by Impediment
This is the final HP movie, Parker.

The seventh book, Deathly Hallows, was split into two films.

Again, I bet this film breaks records, easy.

thank god.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
First time someone has adapted a book into a movie and left shit out/changed shit? See Queen of the Damned. Queen of the Damned has been universally panned as one of the shiitiest movies of all time.

Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
Queen of the Damned has been universally panned as one of the shiitiest movies of all time. Not really, the film itself is OK, it's just so much not like the novel.

I bet it even makes more money then the Pirate movie!

I cant lie, those harry potter films are good

Okay : Nobody cares if the films aren't true to the books. Even I don't care anymore. And I'm as mad as Hermione when it comes to books.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Not really, the film itself is OK.
Hahahahaaaaahhhahahaa. You need to calm down and really evaluate that film.

Originally posted by Robtard
Hahahahaaaaahhhahahaa. You need to calm down and really evaluate that film. I'm perfectly calm, dude.

The movie compared to the book sucks balls.

The movie itself, about average.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi


The movie itself, about average.

You're probably 1 or 7 people who think that.

Originally posted by Robtard
You're probably 1 or 7 people who think that.


Sure I am.
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Queen-of-the-Damned/109767839048693



More like 1 of 266,415.

I too had accepted the movies the way they are.

Has anyone seen this yet? Is it any good? The general internets conclusion is yes, but what do you guys think?

Going to see it next week myself

apparantly the teaser for Dark Knight Rises gets shown.

Going to see it this afternoon so I can't wait! Let you know about it when I get home! Can't wait!

Originally posted by Nephthys
Has anyone seen this yet? Is it any good? The general internets conclusion is yes, but what do you guys think?

Yeah saw a midnight release. It was a major disapointment.

It starts of quite good, but then takes a trun for the worse near the end. Basically everything after Harry's "death" is a mess. Dumbledore fails to mention how Harry can come back to life so if one hasn't read the books its very confusing. Furthermore, Neville's moment has many uneeded changes. Instead of killing Nagini in front of everyone he is kocked back by Voldemort and kills the snake later to save Hermione and Ron.

And of course the final duel between Voldemort and Harry is a major letdown. It comes off as very rushed and instead of fighting in the great hall they duel in an empty courtyard. The duel istelf is rather weak and boring and Vodlemort dies for seemingly no reason. Then five minutes later Harry tells Ron and Hermione why he died and how Harry is the master of the Elder Wand. Weak. They should have followed the novel.

Then there is the ending... The wizards are all more intrested in talking about the weather rather than conragtulate Harry. He gets maybe a few head nods and a smile or two for his trouble...

That sounds lame as ****.

just got back from seeing this.. i thought it was an ok film, felt it could have better.. rowling took it the only way possible.. overall i would give it 5/10


Originally posted by Kazenji
Going to see it next week myself

apparantly the teaser for Dark Knight Rises gets shown.

i saw it with my showing

They showed the Batman teaser but meh, who cares.

Personally, I liked the movie a lot. It was definitely flawed, and a lot was left out, and some of the changes were a bit awkward (the showdown between Harry and Voldemort - not my favorite bit). But overall...it was actually really good. Definitely the best of the HP movies, and a good ending to the series.

Just saw the movie. I don't even read the books and I thought that this was an awesome film.

I thought there would actually be a better battle at the end but hey maybe this comes from me not reading the books.

I thought it was better than Transformers 3 but some might disagree with me.

Originally posted by Peach
They showed the Batman teaser but meh, who cares.


obvisouly you don't

but others do.

I thought that it was great I can see what they did wrong but the movie was enjoyable and I still felt under the spell after leaving the movies.

Saw it on the 13th in Brussels.

It was alright, enjoyable but nothing special.

I've seen it today - and the that remains with me right after viewing is
Damn! That kid that Radcliffe hugs at the end must be TEENY!! He's only 5'7 himself!


I thought it was awesome - there was one thing I noticed though that was kinda weird - After they destroyed Hufflepuff's


But, over all, amazing movie. I think I might like six better... but then I have to let both parts of seven meet in my brain and then it may come up with a different conclusion.

Radcliffe has said this is the best movie, both to make and to see. Meh... I'm not so sure about that.

I think they could have done a better job of aging the actors for the 19 year later scene.

It looked like they'd basically spent ten minutes adding a few age lines and some fake facial hair and then combed their hair a bit.

They looked 10 years older AT MOST, and the aging didn't look natural at all.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
I think they could have done a better job of aging the actors for the 19 year later scene.

It looked like they'd basically spent ten minutes adding a few age lines and some fake facial hair and then combed their hair a bit.

They looked 10 years older AT MOST, and the aging didn't look natural at all.


the aging wasn't.. originally they filmed a scene with them in make up but it didn't loom right so they went back and radcliffe, watson and gint re shot the ending and that was later touched up with cgi

Movie was meh. I haven't even read any of the books past 5 and yet I can tell that certain scenes were rushed and kind of half assed. Unavoidable considering how much content they had to cram into the movie. But, I walked away thinking that the movie had moved way too fast and was a little anti-climactic.

I argee about the aging they looked like they were in there fourtys not younger then they are suppose to be.

The other two were James Sirius and Lily Luna, and Hermione and Ron's kids were Rose and Hugo. Really, not unusual names, especially considering that they're kids in the wizarding world, which is very different.

Hermione was the only one that looked a bit weird aged up, because it didn't look like she was really aged at all, just adult clothes and a nice hairdo. I thought the others they actually did a decent job with.

.

Harry had almost gray hair and I still think looked too old.

I loved it. That was always going to be the case, for me, though. Unless it was absolutely terrible and it really wasn't. I think it tied everything up well, I didn't feel as though it lacked anything huge. As far as I'm concerned people who are complaining about not understanding aspects because it wasn't explained fully should read the damn books. Don't expect to see a movie adaptation and have it explain everything in simple terms for you just because you don't want to immerse yourself completely into the story by reading the books and actually filling yourself in on all the info

To me it was very underwhelming, outright silly at some points. Not bad of course, it's a solid movie I guess, but I just expected a lot more, as especially the last two were quite decent really. To me it was the second worst Harry Potter movie.

I overall liked it as probably my second favorite harry potter film. My only minor gripe was I expected a lot more flash from Voldemort in the final battle with Potter. All in all a fitting way to end the series.

Originally posted by Syren
I loved it. That was always going to be the case, for me, though. Unless it was absolutely terrible and it really wasn't. I think it tied everything up well, I didn't feel as though it lacked anything huge. As far as I'm concerned people who are complaining about not understanding aspects because it wasn't explained fully should read the damn books. Don't expect to see a movie adaptation and have it explain everything in simple terms for you just because you don't want to immerse yourself completely into the story by reading the books and actually filling yourself in on all the info

I completely disagree. If a movie has aspects of it that weren't fully explained then it has failed in that regard. It being explained better in the novels doesn't mean jack to do with the movies, because it isn't in the movie!

Star Wars is really bad about this as well.

Originally posted by Nephthys
I completely disagree. If a movie has aspects of it that weren't fully explained then it has failed in that regard. It being explained better in the novels doesn't mean jack to do with the movies, because it isn't in the movie!

Star Wars is really bad about this as well.

I see what you're saying, but I still think if you're going to follow a franchise this size you need to read the original stuff before complaining about little bits you didn't quite grasp in the movie adaptations. Nothing huge was omitted, as far as I could tell. But obviously my mind was probably automatically filling in any blanks because I have read the books It just gets on my nerves when people either say they didn't like the movies because they didn't understand them and haven't read the books, or that they don't need to read the books because they've seen the movies! They are very different, although they follow the main storyline. Well worth reading the books as well as seeing the films.

Originally posted by Syren
I see what you're saying, but I still think if you're going to follow a franchise this size you need to read the original stuff before complaining about little bits you didn't quite grasp in the movie adaptations. Nothing huge was omitted, as far as I could tell. But obviously my mind was probably automatically filling in any blanks because I have read the books It just gets on my nerves when people either say they didn't like the movies because they didn't understand them and haven't read the books, or that they don't need to read the books because they've seen the movies! They are very different, although they follow the main storyline. Well worth reading the books as well as seeing the films.

As I said I have read the books... However, one shouldn't need to read the books to enjoy the movie. Yes, the books are awesome and should be read but that doesn't serve as an excuse. As for a huge omit how about Dumbledore's backstory (yes it wasn't essential but still), or Harry's cloak being a Hallow (needed to make Harry "The Master of Death", or most importantly why Harry could return from limbo.

Also was it just me or does it seem that Voldemort dies because all his horcruxes are destroyed rather than his spell backfiring? Afterall, he seems to be turning into ash while still fighting Potter.

I think the movies need to stand up by themselves...and for the most part I do think they do. They are decent films.

I am surprise that alot of people who did not read the books did not get confused. I would had if I had not read it.

I haven't read any of the books but enjoyed the movies. What happens is people try to compare the books to the movies and are usually disappointed because the movie can't compare descriptively to what a book can. You'd lose the audience if you tried to fit in every detail you hope the director can pick and work in the best parts and make it come to life. I think the series was definitely awesome and got better as it went but I didn't care for it honestly until order of the phoenix and was instantly hooked from that moment on.

I have a habbit with comparing but I let that go after seeing the first Harry Potter movie.

The best HP movie is still Priosner of Azkaban BTW.

Originally posted by ADarksideJedi
I am surprise that alot of people who did not read the books did not get confused. I would had if I had not read it.

My mom got confused, I had to explain some stuff to her after she saw it. The Snape revelation scene wasn't very clear for her at all, she didn't get that what was shown meant Snape was the one saving / watching out for Harry in the previous movies.

Originally posted by ares834
The best HP movie is still Priosner of Azkaban BTW. My favorite was order of the phoenix then the last one.

2
7.1
3
5
6
1
7.2
4

That's the order of the movies from best to worst. Now that this fact has been established we can go back to discussing the latest movie.

Chamber of Secrets is the best...

Here is the official order

3, 5, 7.1, 7.2, 4, 1, 6, 2

Originally posted by ares834
Chamber of Secrets is the best...

Here is the official order

3, 5, 7.1, 7.2, 4, 1, 6, 2
Why wouldn't chamber of secrets be the best? Best Voldemort, best Defense of the Dark Arts teacher, least annoying Harry, huge snake (no homo)

Because it has a weak unessential plot which is fairly boring. Doesn't really manage to capture tha magic of the films for me. Plus Dobby and Colin are annoying as hell.

Also, IMO I though Lupin, Umbridge, and Snape are better DatDA teacher. Also Ralph Fiennes is amazing as Voldemort and perfectly captures the character. He was the highlight of 7.2 for me.

Goblet of Fire deserves to be at the bottom of the list.

Originally posted by quanchi112
I haven't read any of the books but enjoyed the movies. What happens is people try to compare the books to the movies and are usually disappointed because the movie can't compare descriptively to what a book can. You'd lose the audience if you tried to fit in every detail you hope the director can pick and work in the best parts and make it come to life. I think the series was definitely awesome and got better as it went but I didn't care for it honestly until order of the phoenix and was instantly hooked from that moment on.

That's because David Yates started directing them, and he was the fourth director to handle the series. He knew how to shoot Harry Potter's universe, dark but quirky, homey but completely alien. He was the best thing that happened to the series.

Sorry, can't edit above.

The first thing that popped into my head when I watched Deathly Hallows II was : Just how shrimpy was that kid who played "Albus Severus?" He must be a runt - Radcliffe is only 5'7'' himself and the kid barely came above his waistline.

They might have CGI'd Redcliffe to be taller.

Originally posted by siriuswriter
That's because David Yates started directing them, and he was the fourth director to handle the series. He knew how to shoot Harry Potter's universe, dark but quirky, homey but completely alien. He was the best thing that happened to the series.

I argee he is the best director for the hp movies!

Originally posted by srankmissingnin
My mom got confused, I had to explain some stuff to her after she saw it. The Snape revelation scene wasn't very clear for her at all, she didn't get that what was shown meant Snape was the one saving / watching out for Harry in the previous movies.

When my brother inlaw watches it with me and my sister I will have to exclaim it to him as well or my sister could.

.

Went and seen this yesterday and enjoyed it good finale to the franchise

just not 5/5 stars some critics are giving it but certainly better then Part 1.

I argee with that^

Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
They might have CGI'd Redcliffe to be taller.

Or just searched until they found an under - nutritioned shrimp.

love it!!

This is realy a nice movie

Does anyone know when it will be out on DVD? My guess is near Christmas.

It was a really great movie. A good end to the series.

was just ok to me. Decent effects and ferrel was fun to watch

oops wrong thread

I've heard many different interpretations as to what actually killed Voldemort so let the speculating begin.

You know, a lot of people wait for the movie on DVD to see it, so you just kind of posted a spoiler in the thread title. Luckily, I don't care for the movies, but you probably could have said in the title, "Question about Deathly Hallows Part 2 for those who have seen it."

Originally posted by quanchi112
I've heard many different interpretations as to what actually killed Voldemort so let the speculating begin.

Poor writing, even for a children's story, is what killed him.

I would think people would had guessed that he dies anyway.

Originally posted by ADarksideJedi
I would think people would had guessed that he dies anyway. I can't believe anyone who had an interest in Harry Potter would be shocked Voldemort dies. I am utterly stunned.Originally posted by Robtard
Poor writing, even for a children's story, is what killed him. As to the thread what do you think actually killed him ? Specifically.

By killing the last anchor to the physical world being the snake.

Voldemort dissipated away. Harry was one too but he died earlier

Terrible loophole writing. Needed to be more fleshed out.

I killed him

seriously bad writing

Originally posted by the ninjak
By killing the last anchor to the physical world being the snake.

Voldemort dissipated away. Harry was one too but he died earlier

Terrible loophole writing. Needed to be more fleshed out. I agree. It was just a matter of time at that point but I have heard differently.

Merged.

Yep, another **** up in the movie. The book is quite clear that Harry was responsible for his death, but in the movie he just fades away when Nagini is killed. Terrible, terrible writing.

Originally posted by ares834
Yep, another **** up in the movie. The book is quite clear that Harry was responsible for his death, but in the movie he just fades away when Nagini is killed. Terrible, terrible writing. Well wasn't Nagini the last piece of his soul so it does make sense that once that's destroyed his body cannot sustain itself anymore.

No. His body still has a part of his soul as well... Hell, what do you think that spirit in the first movie was? It was the bit of his soul that was not in a horcrux. And then of course we have Voldemort in the fourth movie.

Originally posted by ares834
No. His body still has a part of his soul as well... Hell, what do you think that spirit in the first movie was? It was the bit of his soul that was not in a horcrux. And then of course we have Voldemort in the fourth movie. I figured when his original body was destroyed that piece of his soul was lost forever so this body didn't have any part of his soul and was relying on the other horcruxes.

That's not what happens. Your soul isn't destroyed when your body is. Hermione says this in the books and I'm fairly sure she mentions it in DH part 1. Plus as I said we see Voldy's spirit in TSS.

Originally posted by ares834
That's not what happens. Your soul isn't destroyed when your body is. Hermione says this in the books and I'm fairly sure she mentions it in DH part 1. Plus as I said we see Voldy's spirit in TSS. His soul was already split up in so many parts it was just a small piece of it anyways. The movies differentiate from the books I mean Voldemort can't even feel horcruxes being destroyed whereas in the movies he feels it. Why else would he disintegrate if he had a piece of his soul in his own body when the snake died ?

No, I agree that is what's happening. It's just stupid and contradicts what is otherwise presented in the movies.

Originally posted by ares834
No, I agree that is what's happening. It's just stupid and contradicts what is otherwise presented in the movies. It did seem out of place and Harry specifically mentions killing the snake and then it's just those two left. Overall this was my favorite harry potter flick.

It would be my favourite, if not for Voldemort going all retarded with his "Avada Kedavra" sounding more like El Mundo than some badass Dark Wizard. Even people in the theatre were laughing. :/

At that point I just felt like throwing up!

Never read the books, this one is my fav HP movie.

Originally posted by Makashidude
It would be my favourite, if not for Voldemort going all retarded with his "Avada Kedavra" sounding more like El Mundo than some badass Dark Wizard. Even people in the theatre were laughing. :/ I liked when he screamed Avada Kedvara.

Originally posted by The Nuul
Never read the books, this one is my fav HP movie.

I read the books but this is my favorite movie of all of the HP.