×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Deathly Hallows / OOTP Movie Discussion

Zonk posted more than 6 years ago | from the nice-broom dept.

Books 1147

At midnight on Friday Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows was released, ending the ten year run of J.K. Rowling's extremely popular book series. I imagine that there are a few folks here who have already read the book and want to talk about it. Likewise, the movie version of Order of the Phoenix was recently released (a film I was kind of underwhelmed by). So ... what did you think of them? Be forewarned: I imagine the comments will be filled with spoilers.

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

1147 comments

Spoiler alert (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19948791)

Harry is gay.

Re:Spoiler alert (4, Funny)

hunterkll (949515) | more than 6 years ago | (#19948821)

SNAPE KILLS DUMBLEDOR!

Re:Spoiler alert (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19948869)

Main points:

* Snape is Dumbledore's man (is there anyone that didn't believe this?).
* Harry is the seventh horcrux, unintentionally created by Voldemort when he tried to kill baby Harry.
* Voldemort tries to kill Harry, but instead, ends up killing the horcrux within Harry.
* Harry kills Voldemort since all 7 Horcruxes are destroyed and the Elder Wand's true master, is in fact, Harry (through Draco).

Question:

How does Neville get Gryffindor's sword to kill Nalini?

Re:Spoiler alert (2, Interesting)

robgig1088 (1043362) | more than 6 years ago | (#19949015)

"The Sword of Gryffindor presents itself to any worthy Gryffindor." I assume it fell out of the burning Sorting hat.

Spoiler Alert!!!!! (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19948803)

Milk left at room temperature goes bad on page 298.

hallows (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19948807)

snape kills dubmledore

I haven't read SINGLE Harry Potter book (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19948809)

I have not read a single Harry Potter book! I don't know if I ever will. I dislike something that makes people go crazy and tend to stay away from something like that. I think this is ridiculous! Think about it. Some fantasy book is driving people nuts!

Re:I haven't read SINGLE Harry Potter book (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19948945)

You dislike something because it's popular? What are you, 15?

Re:I haven't read SINGLE Harry Potter book (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19949021)

Then perhaps you should find another thread, since you have no place here.

Re:I haven't read SINGLE Harry Potter book (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19949079)

This whole Harry Potter thing is very gay. I put away childish stories at the age of 12. It is shameful that there exist so called "grown-ups" in their 30's who swallow this tripe.

Re:I haven't read SINGLE Harry Potter book (1)

j_sp_r (656354) | more than 6 years ago | (#19949125)

Lord of the Rings was a children's book as well, at least that was the intention of it. Hell I even enjoy watching cartoons like Tom&Jerry, so who cares? If you like it just read the fucking book. Don't go nuts over it, I bought it at three o'clock afternoon when picking up shaving foam, but still it was a good thing to read while having a hangover. And while the first books where childish stories (I read them while I was 12-13), you can hardly call the latest books that. Quite dark themed really!

Re:I haven't read SINGLE Harry Potter book (1)

the_tsi (19767) | more than 6 years ago | (#19949105)

Disliking something simply because it's popular is perhaps worse than liking something simply because it's popular. It is probably popular, at the core, for some sort of valid reason.

Re:I haven't read SINGLE Harry Potter book (1)

Alcyoneus (1107533) | more than 6 years ago | (#19949207)

Popular taste is low taste. True, things are popular for reasons --- mostly bad ones.

Re:I haven't read SINGLE Harry Potter book (1)

the_tsi (19767) | more than 6 years ago | (#19949249)

Prejudice takes many forms. Knowledge is its greatest weakness.

Re:I haven't read SINGLE Harry Potter book (1)

insertwackynamehere (891357) | more than 6 years ago | (#19949157)

I sense sarcasm, but either way it is idiotic to not enjoy something because it's popular. As someone pointed out, are you 15? And I'm not just saying that to be a dick; when I was 14/15/16 I acted the same way towards music and people which was, in retrospect, quite stupid. Things, especially books, become popular when they are good. I guess if you were in Shakespeare's time, you would refuse to see his plays because they were trashy, soap opera-like, and popular. Maybe give Harry Potter 300-400 years and we'll see if it's become classic enough for your taste. Your only denying yourself enjoyment though, because Harry Potter might have turned out to be one of your favorite book series if you didn't put pretentiousness first.

I thought they were absolute shit (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19948811)

Glad to see the back of them.

HTH

Spoiler alert. (-1, Flamebait)

Colourspace (563895) | more than 6 years ago | (#19948813)

JK Rowling gets killed by Polonium 210 but not before she gets to spend her last billion on facelifts.

Re:Spoiler alert. (-1, Troll)

evilbessie (873633) | more than 6 years ago | (#19948981)

Now that I would pay for. Don't get me wrong it's great that kids are reading but seriously adults could we all read something a little more challenging some Eco perhaps, Hofstadter, Orwell or Burroughs even. Ah well never mind, I've chosen not to read or watch anything related to potter because it just doesn't interest me, give me something which makes me think and I'm there. On the other hand the Curious incident of the dog in the night, whilst also a children's book would probably appeal to most of the readers of /. being about a kid with Aspergers syndrome.

Re:Spoiler alert. (4, Insightful)

Niten (201835) | more than 6 years ago | (#19949083)

Ah well never mind, I've chosen not to read or watch anything related to potter because it just doesn't interest me, give me something which makes me think and I'm there.

Good for you! Now why are you in this thread, again?

Re:Spoiler alert. (-1, Troll)

Colourspace (563895) | more than 6 years ago | (#19949089)

Potter's never interested me either. Crap IMHO, though I am sure there's plenty of people round here who would strongly disagree with that. Good for them if they like it themselves, just that I don't. Insightful about the Aspergers, but I can't let you have any of my mod points 'cos I already posted.

Re:Spoiler alert. (4, Interesting)

Osty (16825) | more than 6 years ago | (#19949119)

On the other hand the Curious incident of the dog in the night, whilst also a children's book would probably appeal to most of the readers of /. being about a kid with Aspergers syndrome

Why? Are you saying that Slashdot is filled with people with Asperger's Syndrome? That's highly unlikely. There are plenty of people here who wish they had Asperger's, even going so far as to self-diagnose. The truth of the matter is that while Asperger's is real, it's nowhere near as common as internet message boards would have you believe. It is a good scapegoat for people who never learned how to interact socially with other people.

Re:Spoiler alert. (2, Insightful)

insertwackynamehere (891357) | more than 6 years ago | (#19949225)

Ignoring the Aspergers comment which was kind of unnecessary, it's kind of stupid to tell adults to read grown-up books. Go ahead and read classics if you want, I'm sure many of the adults reading Harry Potter have read those as well. But please don't try and tell people that anything popular and contemporary is trash. You sound like a pretentious know-it-all that way. Newsflash: Plenty of the classics you are thinking of are only classics because they aged well; when they came out, many considered them to be trashy as well. In short: contemporary and popular != trash Seriously, HP could very well be taught in middle schools in 60-70 years. Look at Narnia and LOTR, for example. And I bet all you pretentious numskulls will be worshiping it as quality fantasy.

What? (0, Redundant)

EmperorKagato (689705) | more than 6 years ago | (#19948833)

Harry potter discussion on my Slashdot?

Why? Because... (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 6 years ago | (#19948959)

Harry potter discussion on my Slashdot?
As I understand it, this article exists to provide a place for the inevitable discussion so that it does not infect other articles where it is most certainly off-topic.

Re:What? (2, Insightful)

gozar (39392) | more than 6 years ago | (#19949141)

Harry potter discussion on my Slashdot?

I always use a Star Trek analogy with Harry Potter. It seems like it's all magic, but I'm always reminded of Arthur C. Clark's quote Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. The "Room of Requirement"? It's really a Holodeck. Disapperating? It's just a fast teleporter. The wands? A portable replicator (that one's a stretch). There is all sorts of technobabble, especially in Potions...

Anyway, I'm very impressed how well J.K. Rowling was able to tie almost everything together. This was probably the best of the series, but I'll need to go back and re-read them all!

Re:What? (5, Funny)

arth1 (260657) | more than 6 years ago | (#19949269)

Yes, you do. If all you potterheads went back and re-read the books, over and over again, the rest of us could get on with more important things, like having a row over GPL2 vs GPL3 and emacs vs. vi.

What did I think of them? (5, Insightful)

WIAKywbfatw (307557) | more than 6 years ago | (#19948835)

I thought it was nice that something, even if it was something that I thought was junk, could get kids reading for five minutes.

Now, if only we could find a way to make them read books like 1984, Brave New World, Catch 22 and Fahrenheit 451...

Re:What did I think of them? (1, Informative)

E++99 (880734) | more than 6 years ago | (#19949075)

Now, if only we could find a way to make them read books like 1984, Brave New World, Catch 22 and Fahrenheit 451...

A fine collection of cynical drivel (IMnshO). If they must read scifi, then Dune and 2001, otherwise the Epic of Gilgamesh, the Iliad and Odyssey, Les Miserables, and Crime and Punishment, for starters.

Re:What did I think of them? (1)

Quiet_Desperation (858215) | more than 6 years ago | (#19949179)

I'd rather they were more cynical. A groth and maturity of cynicism in the human race would be the beginning of the end for ideology, politics, personality cults and sycophantism - the four horsemen of modern misery.

Re:What did I think of them? (2, Insightful)

mr_matticus (928346) | more than 6 years ago | (#19949261)

Ha. ha ha. ha ha ha. Cynicism just inspires different ideologies and as long as humans exist, there will be politics. They are absolutely integral to human interaction of any kind. Professional politics is just the overblown and theatrical big daddy of the microcosms of our personal lives.

That aside, "more cynical" people would spell the end of any human race anyone would want to be a party of. It's the end of hope, trust, love, and loyalty. You know, the four pillars of a worthwhile life.

Re:What did I think of them? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19949257)

Believe it or not, the following books were required reading for the english electives I had during my high school:
1984, Brave New World, Catch 22, 2001, Iliad, Odyssey, Crime and Punishment.

Re:What did I think of them? (1)

mimiru (1130095) | more than 6 years ago | (#19949097)

You seem to have read or at least checked them. Can I ask you a question? (or anyone here for that matter) I've seen the 1st movie and was not interested. I saw the 1st LOTR movie and went out and bought the whole series (and the Hobbit). I didn't put them down until I finished them all. Books are unlike movies though. Will I like Harry Potter at all?

Re:What did I think of them? (1)

WIAKywbfatw (307557) | more than 6 years ago | (#19949241)

Personally, I found the Harry Potter books to be unchallenging and unstimulating.

Perhaps that's because I wasn't a teenager (or even a pre-teen) when I first read one of them, but I doubt that: I still appreciate the Chronicles of Narnia, even though they're of the same genre and also aimed at young children. If I had to give a simple explanation, I'd say that JK Rowling isn't as good a writer as CS Lewis, which is why I find myself appreciating the latter but not the former.

Clearly though, Rowling's writing is good enough to satisfy millions of kids (and adults) around the world, so, sure, give one or two of the books a try: they can't cost that much on eBay and what do you have to lose?

Re:What did I think of them? (1)

insertwackynamehere (891357) | more than 6 years ago | (#19949263)

I love the Harry Potter books, and I'm not a sappy preteen saying this (although at one point way back I was :P) Anyway the movies suck. I see them through a mixture of being bored and being a fanboy of types. But read the books, or at least try them. Forget the movies. They do not hold together AT ALL; they rely on the fact that they can assume their target audience already knows the story. If you don't know the story, then it seems like random scenes of bad actors pretending to do magic.

Re:What did I think of them? (2, Funny)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 6 years ago | (#19949151)

Now, if only we could find a way to make them read books like 1984, Brave New World, Catch 22 and Fahrenheit 451...
In order to conform with the ideas of the book Fahrenheit 451, all copies have been burned.

Re:What did I think of them? (1)

my $anity 0 (917519) | more than 6 years ago | (#19949165)

Did you read the seventh book?
1984, Brave New World, Catch 22, and Fahrenheit 451 is about governments or societies that pull wool over peoples eyes and makes them do things they wouldn't normally do.

Harry Potter 7 is just about the same thing, with Elves and Goblins and Giants and Magic in it.

Hack. (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19948837)

Finally, the 10-year reign of paint-by-numbers "newly introduced character X -- is he good or is he eeeeeeeevil" cliched crap is over.

Re:Hack. (0, Flamebait)

ResidntGeek (772730) | more than 6 years ago | (#19948897)

You're retarded It was only Snape you were supposed to wonder about, and he was one of the most important characters in the books because of it.

Re:Hack. (1)

mrshowtime (562809) | more than 6 years ago | (#19948995)

OMG you are so right! I found it hilarious when "Mad eye Moody" was actually a clone and that the real mad eye was a good guy! Great twist there Rowlings.

Should have renamed the film something else... (4, Interesting)

yroJJory (559141) | more than 6 years ago | (#19948853)

...as it barely mentioned the Order of the Phoenix.

The latest film has the same problem as all the other Harry Potter films:

They focus only on the epic tale of Harry versus Voldemort and not on the far more epic story of Harry's emotional journey to be ABLE to face (and presumably) defeat Voldemort.

If you see the film with someone who has never read the books, they tend not to care one iota bout any of it and the reason is all to clear: the characters never develop. They never change. They never become who they need to be in order to confront the horrible evil that is taking over their world.

The books are amazing because, while there is an epic story of good versus evil, the reader is brought along for the ride to grow alongside the main character. But the movies watch the action from a safe distance and only really focus on the parts that have action.

Re:Should have renamed the film something else... (1)

twistedcubic (577194) | more than 6 years ago | (#19949081)

I'm one of those people who has never read the book. I've seen the last two, mostly to please my gf, and they both were o.k., I guess, but not much better than any of the other numerous mediocre movies out now. However, as I saw the beginning of the movie, it looked really familiar, which was strange. Then I realized that sometime last year my gf was reading the beginning of the book aloud, and I must say, it was a lot better than that excerpted movie beginning. If you don't read the books, you have no idea why/how Harry is living with those people, or even who they are. Also, that fight scene where Sirius Black gets killed is underwhelming, though it seems like it was meant to be more.

Re:Should have renamed the film something else... (1)

Broken scope (973885) | more than 6 years ago | (#19949121)

It would have made a much better television series, the movies just leave out far to much.

Re:Should have renamed the film something else... (5, Insightful)

jlindy (1028748) | more than 6 years ago | (#19949271)

The latest film has the same problem as all the other Harry Potter films
The film suffers the same problem that all books over 300pages suffer. That is that the book to movie conversion runs at roughly 150 pages per hour. Any book running over 300 pages is going to suffer at the hands of bonehead editors and the such.

Luckily... (2, Informative)

ResidntGeek (772730) | more than 6 years ago | (#19948857)

Deathly Hallows fortunately played down the anti-intellectualism of the previous books. Harry admitted he should be able to heal wounds by magic (but still didn't admit any fault of his own for not knowing), Hermione's wide knowledge proved very useful on their little trek, and even Ron decided he should look cool in front of the kids at Hogwarts by spouting off a random fact he'd heard from Hermione. That was good, I liked that.

thinly-veiled homosexual propaganda (-1, Troll)

tolomea (1026104) | more than 6 years ago | (#19948871)

Harry Potter is thinly-veiled homosexual propaganda, read all about it here http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2007/7/16/162353/730 [kuro5hin.org]

Yeah. Cause kuro5hin is where I go to read "facts" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19948939)

no text

Re:thinly-veiled homosexual propaganda (1)

BlueParrot (965239) | more than 6 years ago | (#19949085)

Harry Potter is thinly-veiled homosexual propaganda, read all about it here http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2007/7/16/162353/730 [kuro5hin.org]
The thing that worries me is that that is actually too stupid even for a parody, so I guess it might actually be real... Oh well, Einstein has a quote on that: "The difference between genious and stupidity is that genious has its limits."

sounds like 9/11 propaganda (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19949143)

That author better be gay himself otherwise he sounds like one of those closet cocksuckers

JRR Tolkien comparison (3, Interesting)

apodyopsis (1048476) | more than 6 years ago | (#19948883)

I know this might prove controversial, but I have always compared Potter to Rings.

In the way they are both multi-volume, long, rambling engaging fantasy stories which good stuff to read, but in a terrible writing style

Don't get me wrong, I *am* a fan and have all of them - but neither are great well written works of prose.

Whats the betting she'll revisit the muggle/wizarding world in a couple of years? There is waaay too much money available not to in my humble opinion, its just too tempting a cash cow now.

Not a Tolkien fanboy, but... (4, Insightful)

Alaren (682568) | more than 6 years ago | (#19949053)

...comparing the two is pretty insulting to Professor Tolkien. It's true that they are both fantasy, both popular, and both compelling in their way (I happen to have enjoyed both series despite their flaws), but the similarities end there.

J.R.R. Tolkien more or less invented high fantasy as we know it, bringing the folk tales and fables of Europe into the realm of literature. The breadth and depth of the world he created to this day exceeds just about everything else out there. Whether you love the depth or find it boring, you cannot deny that the work Tolkien put into Middle Earth eclipses Rowling's middle-grade novels.

It would be silly to make a blanket statement that one is "better" then the other; tastes differ, and as you pointed out, neither are exactly stylistic masterpieces. But Tolkien's work was groundbreaking, in many ways the first of its kind. Rowling caught the wave of popular opinion and surfed it to fame and riches; her books do not represent anything out of the ordinary for the genre (fantasy) or the audience (middle-grade). They're entertaining works, but they only live in the house that Tolkien (and some of his contemporaries) built.

Re:JRR Tolkien comparison (1)

PCM2 (4486) | more than 6 years ago | (#19949065)

Oh, fuck it, I'll bite. In what way are Tolkien's works not well-written works of prose? Granted, "The Hobbit" is pretty much a children's book (kind of like the Harry Potter books). But "The Lord of the Rings" consistently gets counted as one of the greatest novels ever written -- quite unlike any of the Harry Potter books -- so I'm curious as to what about it makes you think it's written in a "terrible writing style." Is it just because you grew up decades after it was written and so were exposed to countless imitators (Dungeons and Dragons included) before you were introduced to the real thing?

Re:JRR Tolkien comparison (1)

Mhrmnhrm (263196) | more than 6 years ago | (#19949253)

I rather doubt that Rowling will *personally* write another Potter-world book. She's now dished out seven of them (itself a herculean task), and said point-blank she's done. Not only that, she's got a couple of little ones running around, and as any parent will tell you, chasing kids (and especially teens) is hard work. However, I will not discount the possibility that she may authorize and license other authors to write stories within the world she created, maintaining "benevolent dictator" status over it, much like George Lucas has done with the Star Wars universe.

Finished the book yesterday [no spoilers] (1)

Aphrika (756248) | more than 6 years ago | (#19948885)

And I must admit that the seven book series holds together well as a whole (Lucas take note!). She's obviously taken a few leaves out of Tolkien's epics to round this one off in the way that you feel satisfied, and don't feel the need for more.

Grief, it's hard to talk about a book without giving anything away, suffice to say that if you haven't read the series, of have been put off by the 'kids books' aspect, or surrounding hype, it's a damn good series of books (something you don't really see much today), that deserves to be read. Not since LotR and the Chronicles or Narnia has there been such an epic read.

As an aside, I would also warn people to avoid the Wikipedia article on the book, as it does go into great detail about the plot.

I'm pretty happy with it (3, Interesting)

dbolger (161340) | more than 6 years ago | (#19948893)

First off, I'm just going to assume everybody who clicks into this thread has read the book, because otherwise half the thread is going to require spoiler warnings.

Rowling's style of writing is definitely not where her strenghts lie, and everybody I know who has refused to read Harry Potter has used this as a reason. However, I think people who say this are cutting off their nose to spite their face. What she lacks in writing skill, she more than makes up for in enjoyable, well crafted characters, and amazing plot. Deathly Hallows is by far my favourite of the series (7, 5, 4, 6, 2, 1 - fot those who are interested).

I was pretty sure that Snape was on the side of good before I started reading, but by the time he was made Headmaster, I had actually figured that I had been mistaken, and was wondering how she was going to have a decent ending with him as a bad guy. The last few chapters were magnificently brought together, with payoff after payoff after payoff.

The only disappointment in terms of plot, I felt, was that not a single Slytherin stayed behind after the evacuation of the school. I know, they are supposed to be cunning and self serving, but Harry was almost put into their house. Surely there must be a handful of Slytherins who, like him, are borderline and would have enough bravery to stand beside their schoolmates against the deatheaters.

However, that aside, I am very happy with the book, and am glad to see I didn't waste my time on a series just to have it thrown in my face at the end (*cough* Dark Tower *cough* Wheel of time).

Installing OSX got me more excited! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19948907)

Getting Mac (probably the best computer related decision I've ever done!) and installing OSX got me more excited than anything Harry Potter could ever do with his magic wand!

Slightly off-topic, but I got to admin - this OSX is _so damn beautiful_ and everything works like magic! This is saving me a lot of time! I can finally be productive instead of fixing this and that all the time like I had to do when I still used PC. Mac makes me want to learn to program! Everything is so unified that it is just so great!

Re:Installing OSX got me more excited! (0, Offtopic)

aichpvee (631243) | more than 6 years ago | (#19949025)

Imagine how excited you'll be when you get a real computer!

why is this on /.? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19948925)

Books are good enough to read through once, movies are rather meh. I don't know why people make such a big deal about harry potter, it isn't really that good. Definitely not news-worthy. _

Re:why is this on /.? (1)

ResidntGeek (772730) | more than 6 years ago | (#19949051)

Popularity is generally not based on merit. See Snakes on a Plane, Britney Spears, Chrysler 300, etc. People like what other people like, if the chain reaction moves the right way it hits critical mass. That said, I find that the Harry Potter books are quite good, worthy of popularity (though perhaps not enough to make the author richer than the Queen).

Spoilers within (4, Funny)

dirk (87083) | more than 6 years ago | (#19948929)

To steal from Joel McHale, who would have thought Hermione was a dude? I certainly didn't see it coming!

My thoughts (no spoilers) (2, Interesting)

Rik Sweeney (471717) | more than 6 years ago | (#19948933)

I enjoyed OOTP. The book is overly long and probably the weakest of the series, but what I find most interesting in the films is watching Daniel Radcliffe et al growing into their roles. OOTP is an incredibly long book and, like all the movies, it's like reading the book in fast forward. The book's better than the film, but it was still very very good.

I finished Deathly Hallows this morning after spending all of yesterday ploughing through it.

And I really, really loved it.

JK Rowling has been very clever with the books and I don't know if the entire series has been foreshadowed, but throughout the final book she drops little hints that I, if I had actually been paying very close attention to, would have figured out before the climax.

You can scoff all you want that it's a kids book and you'd rather die than read it and if this is the case, then I pity you. I felt exactly the same way until I tried them, and it's very rare that a book can make me laugh while I'm reading it.

Now that it's all over I feel very sad that there might never be another author in my lifetime who can create characters that fit together so well.

Plot mistakes? (spoilers) (2, Interesting)

Wooky_linuxer (685371) | more than 6 years ago | (#19948965)

If Snape could enter Grimmauld Place, then why didn't he told the Death Eaters where it was? Voldemort should be aware that wherever the Headquarter of the Order was, Snape knew it, and with Dumbledore's death Snape would become a secret keeper.

Not really a mistake but... how did Griffyndorf's sword got away from the goblins?

How could Dumbledore best Grindenwald if the latter had the Elder Wand? also, how did he not defeat Voldemort completely with the Elder Wand when they dueled?

How did Dumbledore's painting know of the plan to take Harry off Private Drive, in order to counsel Snape?

Re:Plot mistakes? (spoilers) (2, Interesting)

Rik Sweeney (471717) | more than 6 years ago | (#19949095)

If Snape could enter Grimmauld Place, then why didn't he tell the Death Eaters where it was?

Because Snape was never a traitor.

Not really a mistake but... how did Griffyndorf's sword got away from the goblins?

The Goblins obviously made it for them, they didn't care that a fake sword got deposited in Gringots.

How could Dumbledore best Grindenwald if the latter had the Elder Wand? also, how did he not defeat Voldemort completely with the Elder Wand when they dueled?

Because Dumbledore was a better wizard than Grindenwald, having the Elder wand didn't automatically make you a good wizard.

How did Dumbledore's painting know of the plan to take Harry off Private Drive, in order to counsel Snape?

Dumbledore either discussed it before or after his death. The paintings have memories (see Chamber Of Secrets).

Re:Plot mistakes? (spoilers) (1)

Wooky_linuxer (685371) | more than 6 years ago | (#19949193)

Perhaps I didn't express my doubts clear enough. Snape was not a traitor, but he did his best to look like one - even on Dumbledore's orders. How he could get away with not telling Voldemort and the Death Eaters its location? Specially after they seemed to suspect Harry was there.

As for the sword, I was thinking about how it got back to Neville after being retrieved by Griphook.

The Elder Wand supposedly made his master unbeatable in a duel, and Dumbledore beat Grindenwald, and again he did not beat Voldemort afterwards. If skill was involved there would be no benefit in having such a wand, methinks. I assume Draco Malfoy managed to put it away from him since he wasn't really dueling Malfoy. Perhaps the wand wasn't effective with Dumbledore since he obviusly didn't kill Grindenwald, but there is still the question of how he beated Grindenwald to start with. Rowling said there would be debatable things even after the last book.

I concede that Dumbledore might have knowledge of the plan beforehand, but there is nothing in the books that support this. At this point it is just a guess, a good one I say.

Re:Plot mistakes? (spoilers) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19949171)

1. Moody put spells to keep snape from telling anyone else where the death eaters were. They say this in the beginning of the book.

2. The goblin said Godric Griffyndor stole the sword from the goblins back in the day.

3. The elder wand was powerful, but a wizard of much greater power would be able to beat a wizard of lesser power even though the lesser wizard had the elder wand. It states in the book that the only reason Grindenwald became so powerful is the elder wand. I know it says the elder wand should never lose a duel, but it may simply have meant it was so powerful it would be hard to lose a duel. Also Voldemort apparated out of the ministry before the duel was over, and dumbledore was slowly dying (Black hand).

4. There may have been more than 1 paintings of Dumbledore, much like the painting in Sirius' house that was connected to the Headmaster's office. Maybe Snape told dumbledore that they were taking harry away, and dumbledore gave snape some advice to throw them off the trail.

These are not problems, they are things that you fill in between the lines. If she went into detail about every little thing, the book would have been 5x as long and quite boring. She has the fast paced style where you have to keep up with her and fill things in yourself. Whether this is good is debatable.

Re:Plot mistakes? (spoilers) (1)

decairn (669433) | more than 6 years ago | (#19949221)

"Not really a mistake but... how did Griffyndorf's sword got away from the goblins?"

In times of need the sorting hat will get what the user requires. Neville had it on his head.

Answers, I think... (5, Interesting)

Hamster Lover (558288) | more than 6 years ago | (#19949237)

If Snape could enter Grimmauld Place, then why didn't he told the Death Eaters where it was? Voldemort should be aware that wherever the Headquarter of the Order was, Snape knew it, and with Dumbledore's death Snape would become a secret keeper.

Isn't it obvious? Snape wasn't working for the Death Eaters, he was working for the Order and Dumbledore. This was a major plot of the book. I really do not understand why you are confused about this.

Not really a mistake but... how did Griffyndorf's sword got away from the goblins?

This was hinted to in the book in that Gryffindor's sword can only remain in the possession of one who's valor and need of the sword are true. One cannot simply possess the sword out of greed, which is how the goblin Griphook acquired it.

How could Dumbledore best Grindenwald if the latter had the Elder Wand? also, how did he not defeat Voldemort completely with the Elder Wand when they dueled?

Again, the answer was hinted at in the book if not a running theme throughout the series. Dumbledore admits to Harry that they were both skilled wizards, but that Dumbledore was perhaps a bit more skillful. That fact, taken together with the theme that runs throughout the books that it is not what skills or magical items you possess so much as what you do with them that is the key. I think that is your answer.

How did Dumbledore's painting know of the plan to take Harry off Private Drive, in order to counsel Snape?

I suspect someone in the Order other than Snape is in communication with the painting.

tu3girl (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19948967)

BSD fanatics? I've the party in strret About a project reasons why anyone 40,,00 coming consider worthwhile MAKES ME SICK JUST 486/66 with 8 rules to follow

I was mostly dissapointed in the book.. (4, Interesting)

wanax (46819) | more than 6 years ago | (#19948977)

Maybe it's that I read waaaay too much speculation about it, all with interesting theories on how Harry would defeat Voldemort without having to introduce trick wands.... but I just felt that she took the easiest possible route out of the story, giving characters dramatic about-faces when necessary. I mean... Kreacher suddenly becoming Harry's biggest fan? Cop out. Percy's sudden change of allegiance, apology and starting to joke? Excuse me?

I also felt that she let Dumbledore off the hook, and his character would have been much more compelling if he had killed his sister (or something similar)... or maybe, just maybe, we didn't have to have Dumbledore re-appear and explain everything? I mean come on. Add to that most of the deaths just didn't make sense. Except for Mad-Eye (and possibly Dobby), basically all the other major deaths were random, they had no purpose in the story and didn't advance the plot in any major way. The only sacrificial death was Harry, and he didn't even die (and don't get me started on the overly sappy epilogue).

Generally, I think the book was missing most of JKR's trademark wit, that made the rest of the story so enjoyable... and had too much of her maddening 'hand of god' habit of introducing new magical concepts to get the characters out of sticky situations instead of them having to figure a way out themselves.

Re:I was mostly dissapointed in the book.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19949163)

War is chaos. It should be no surprise that the deaths appear random.

Spoiler: Voldemort is Luke's Father... (3, Insightful)

VidEdit (703021) | more than 6 years ago | (#19948983)

...and Hermione manages to push Voldemort out of the Hogwarts airlock and blast him with the main engines...oops, I'm mixing my non sequiturs...

All in all, the Deathly Hallows was a satisfying read. Rowling did a good job of creating the illusion of a Grand Unifying Theory of the previous books and make it seem like there was a clever thread running through them that sustained until the end. She is very good at writing herself out of the corners she paints herself into.

Draco's Wand (1)

paul248 (536459) | more than 6 years ago | (#19948989)

I don't have book 6 on hand to search through, so I might as well ask here...

What exactly did Draco do in book 6 that gave him ownership of the Elder Wand?

Re:Draco's Wand (1)

gozar (39392) | more than 6 years ago | (#19949091)

He disarmed Dumbledore at the tower at the end of the Half Blood Prince. That means he defeated him and came into posession of the Elder Wand.

Re:Draco's Wand (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19949131)

draco used expelliarmous in the tower and knocked the wand out of dumbledores hand while he was busy silently freezing harry under the clock. dumbledore didn't get his wand back before snape turned up and killed him, so the spell that claimed the wand was dracos disarming spell

Re:Draco's Wand (1)

nsupathy (515587) | more than 6 years ago | (#19949153)

He disarmed Dumbledore before Snape gave the killing curse. So technically, he is the first person to conquer/defeat Dumbledore and hence the Elder Wand shows allegiance to him.

Re:Draco's Wand (1)

Targon (17348) | more than 6 years ago | (#19949187)

Draco was supposed to kill Dumbledore, but couldn't bring himself to do it. Snape showed up and did it, but for whatever reason, the wand decided that it should go to Draco.

Copyright and Trademark Warning (1)

SEWilco (27983) | more than 6 years ago | (#19949001)

Harry Potter is not your property. Slashdot can expect a removal notice for using its characters to benefit itself.

Unfortunately, that doesn't seemed as far-fetched as it should be, based upon recent activities by lawyers working for several organizations.

People who die (SPOILERS!!!) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19949007)

Harry Potter dies and comes back to life because a fragment of his life was still in Voldemort's body.
Lupin and Tonks (now married) die after having their kid.
Fred Weasley dies along with Lupin and Tonks (in the battle for Hogwarts).
Rufeus Scrimgeour (Minister of Magic) dies at the hands of Voldemort.
Severus Snape is murdered by Voldemort who wants to use the Elder Wand (Snape is actually a GOOD GUY as a look into his pensieve will tell you).
Dobby the House-elf is killed at the hands of Bellatrix Lestrange's knife).
Bellatrix Lestrange is killed by Mrs. Weasley.
Wormtail dies at the hand of his.. silver hand for not killing Harry.
Mad-Eye Moody is either stunned off of his broom or killed flat-out at the beginning of the book.
Hedwig is killed by a stray killing curse.
The Professor of Muggle Studies is killed at the very start of the book.
Near the end of the book, to get the last object-related Horcrux (the diadem of Ravenclaw), Crabbe dies when he uses some weird fire spell.
Voldemort dies at the hands of Harry.
Grindewald was killed at the hands of Voldemort (in his quest for the Elder Wand).
The German wand-maker died (his name starts with a G, I don't remember it) at the hands of Voldemort wanting a reason as to why Lucius' wand got blown up.


Just incase anyone was wondering. Not my list, taken from a friend. I do not guarantee its accuracy, but I would assume it is all right.

Just finished (2, Interesting)

zygotic mitosis (833691) | more than 6 years ago | (#19949047)

I just finished the book this morning, and I must say, you did a heckuva job, Rowling. All the ends are wrapped neatly, the book didn't get too long or short winded on any subject. There are a few things you might have to backtrack a page or two on because it's confusingly worded. For example, I had no idea who escaped Gringott's with the sword at first. Harry denies to himself that Lupin and Tonks have died by saying they were just sleeping, and in my tiredness I thought it was literal. I think that pgs 180-400ish might get kind of long, it's a lot of arguing and moving about, usually little action. The last chapter, I wish, was longer. Who's Draco married to? Who raised Lupin's baby? I figured for sure that Bill and Fleur would adopt it, but it doesn't friggin mention it, and then Harry suggests "uh, let's have him live with us!" or whatever, and the kid is 19! Poor Snape. Did the books ever explain how Lily ended up with James, then? I can't recall any more. Also, I thought this book 7 would explain the howlers "REMEMBER MY LAST, PETUNIA." from 5. That's a loose end!

Re:Just finished (1)

FredAkbar (871106) | more than 6 years ago | (#19949205)

I wondered about those as well, though in the case of Dumbledore's Howler ("Remeber my last, Petunia"), that was explained in book 5 or 6. Dumbledore was referring to his previous letter, in which he told Petunia that she must allow Harry to stay in her home, because of the magical protection that would be given to Number Four, Privet Drive, as long as Harry lived there. The Howler was a reminder to Petunia, which is why after hearing it, she seems to have a change of heart and allows Harry to stay.

For fuck's sake... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19949061)

It's "Deathly Hallows" NOT "Deathly Hollows". It has nothing to do with a Johnny Depp movie. Does everything need to be extracted, simplified, reheated and served in a paper cup for you fuckwit Americans? Have a nice day, Slashbot bitches. Oh, and Linux SUCKS.

Deathly Hallows ending and Order of the Phoenix... (1)

Hamster Lover (558288) | more than 6 years ago | (#19949073)

While The Deathly Hallows was enormously satisfying in that it answered just about every question that was ever raised over the course of the series, I found the ending to be...a bit abrupt and somewhat neglectful. I really would have liked just one more small chapter detailing a bit of the aftermath of Voldemort's downfall. What happened to the rest of the Death Eaters? Did Harry return to Hogwarts for one last year? Is he an auror? What do Ron, Hermione and Ginny do? What about Teddy? Did he come to live with Harry and Ginny, given that Harry was his godfather? It just felt like the book was more concerned with detailing the overthrow of Voldemort than winding down all of the relationships the reader built up with the various characters over the series. Yes, some of the answers come in the epilogue, but it was a bit lacking.

Order of the Phoenix was good, but perhaps the film is more notable for what was cut from the book than what made it into the movie. If the next two movies follow the same lines as Order of the Phoenix, a lot of fans are going to be deeply dissatisfied. Order of the Phoenix is the longest and most complex book in the series up to this point and yet it is the shortest of the Harry Potter movies.

Entertaining, not Enlightening (3, Insightful)

vertigoCiel (1070374) | more than 6 years ago | (#19949127)

After reading the final book, my opinion on the series is still the same: they're extremely entertaining, gripping, and emotionally engaging books, but their literary depth leaves something to be desired. Don't get me wrong - I love the series, but I just wish it had some more depth than the usual good vs. evil tale.

Slashdot: News for children? (-1, Flamebait)

grolschie (610666) | more than 6 years ago | (#19949129)

Discussions on /. about childrens books? This just in:

In 1960 Dr Seuss released his best-selling and critically acclaimed book "Green Eggs and Ham". I imagine that there are a few folks here who have already read the book and want to talk about it...

So unbelievable (4, Funny)

antifoidulus (807088) | more than 6 years ago | (#19949133)

What really spoils the story is that Harry Potter dumps a hot asian girl. I mean come on, give the audience some credit. I can believe in kids whipping up spells, but dumping a hot asian girl, now that is just the realm of fantasy!

Re:So unbelievable (0)

Dixie_Flatline (5077) | more than 6 years ago | (#19949227)

C'mon, every guy has at least one hot redhead on his list. And it's not so unbelievable when you think that he traded the weepy HAB for the redhead that watches sports with him.

Weeping and carrying on trump hotness any day. Doesn't get more true than that. :D

Misprint (1)

bigattichouse (527527) | more than 6 years ago | (#19949175)

ours had a misprint.. pages 500-532 were missing, while 532-56something where in there twice. A few other chapters had the same problem. We're keeping the misprint, and just went out and bought another copy (after verifying all the pages were in the right places)

The three choices (3, Interesting)

the_tsi (19767) | more than 6 years ago | (#19949211)

It seems to me that the climax of the entire series hinged upon three choices that Harry made in this book. They epitomize everything Rowling was trying to convey: that the choices individuals make are ultimately what determines "good"ness or "evil"ness, and they are not concrete extremes that guide actions but rather a result of choices that are made in every aspect of life.

1. He had to decide to face Voldemort willingly, accept that he is going to die, and understand that he is doing this to save his friends. Courage and selflessness are the keys to defeating the emotions that power Riddle: greed, selfishness, and fear.

2. He had to decide, after being struck with the Killing Curse, to return. Death is easy. It is the easiest thing every living organism *will* do -- life (and staying alive) is a constant struggle not to die. When in King's Cross talking to Dumbledore, he had the opportunity not to go back; he had the chance to take the easy route. Again, he had to decide to return to save his friends.

3. When finally facing Riddle, now that both were free of any sort of magic to protect themselves, he had one final choice: To take life to protect his (Avada Kedavra) or to show mercy, compassion, love, even to his gravest enemy. By choosing Expelliramus, even after being explicitly told numerous times NOT to use this particular spell, he truly sets himself apart.

I was dead on with one of my predictions... (1)

mark-t (151149) | more than 6 years ago | (#19949273)

Almost immediately after reading the 6th book, I hypothesized that Harry Potter himself was a horcrux for Voldemort, fashioned to be so when Voldemort's killing curse backfired. I'm sure I wasn't the only one to guess such, but I was nevertheless quite pleased with myself when I read that I was right.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...