Books Compared To Movies

[Wolfmight]

warning: spoilers below

After seeing all 3 harry potter movies after reading the books.. I have to say the books were much better. The movies dont tell you some of the names and skip alot of stuff to shorten the time. The majorly shortened movie believe it or not was Prisoner of Azkaban. The intro and ending were wayy off in time. The ending was actually sad to me because they didnt have the part about the letter on the train.. and were was the other quitage game?
try to list things the movie left out to encourage others to read the amazing book version.

1. The intro didnt have the scene were Volget was watching TV and started talking about Sirius Black.

2. When harry got the Diagon Ally.. he barely stayed there for one day or did he even sleep? The book had him there for a week.

3. The firebolt came too late.. the book hage an issue over that mysterious firebold harry got and Mcgonagal wanted to make sure it wasnt a trap.

4. Snape wasnt hidden under the invisibility cloak near the end and burst out like he ran out of his cocain.

5. Harry didnt get any presents in the begining and I dont even think they said if it was his 13th birthday.

6. Not sure about hermione, but she never seemed to dress up for the movie's role in the first place.

7. Alot of the magic was missing such as when Ron broke his leg.. they put a cast on it? A muggle cast?

8. Christmas seemed to be quite crowded around Hogwarts.. whilst the book says the place was deserted since everyone took off except very few like 10 people.

9. The ending was the worst part missing I thought.. without the letter sent from Sirius Black explaining how he went to hide and how he will see harry again. Plus Ron got the owl Sirius sent the letter with. This makes the intro for the 4th movie harder to create and they will have to change stuff up so harry could get contacted by his godfather.

10. The ending with the smeared face of Harry was very cheap.. My friend asked if the film was messed up, but then the credits came on... The extra 10-15 mins train scene wouldnt have hurt.



well I have no idea if they are even going to make a 4th movie.. the book is 745 somethin pages long and the previous three books were only around 300-400. It would be a whole different story.

[volskid2002]

After seeing all 3 harry potter movies after reading the books.. I have to say the books were much better. The movies dont tell you some of the names and skip alot of stuff to shorten the time. The majorly shortened movie believe it or not was Prisoner of Azkaban. The intro and ending were wayy off in time. The ending was actually sad to me because they didnt have the part about the letter on the train.. and were was the other quitage game?

i agree with you, the books are way better than the movies. i would much rather read the books again than to see the videos again. the books are so much more in depth and moer detailed.

[Wolfmight]

I notice reading the book allows you to remember the names better. The movie only says em once or twice and expects you to know after that. (would be funny if they said they're name each time in the movie tho )

[volskid2002]

lol yea tat would be funny .

[hungrylilboy]

books are a lot better. The Beach is an awesome book to read but the movie was simply ok.

Same with most Stephen King films. They really suck but the books are brilliant

However, i think it depends when u read/see the film. If u see the film after ur gonna compare it and as a book is far more detailed then it comes over better

however if u see the film first, then read the book, as the film has all the action condensed, the book may seem longwinded