HOME | DD
Neodusk — Fandumb #55: Bite Your Parseltongue
#harry #mcgonagall #potter #comic #harrypotter #webcomic #fandumb
Published: 2015-05-12 08:58:42 +0000 UTC; Views: 32450; Favourites: 411; Downloads: 52
Redirect to original
Description
Come follow me on tumblr: neoduskcomics.tumblr.com/NEXT:
PREV:
FIRST:
Updates Tuesdays and Thursdays.
Over the last couple months and for the first time, I read Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets through the Order of the Phoenix. Before I had only read books 1, 6, and 7. If there's one thing I definitely like more in the books than the films, it's the books' depiction of Dumbledore (he's much calmer and cooler). If there's one thing I definitely like more in the films than in the books, it's the way in which they changed some of the scenes to make them cleverer or more spectacle-filled (i.e. the scene where Ron destroys the locket or the way in which Harry gets Lucius to set Dobby free).
Please comment and enjoy.
Related content
Comments: 65
Compared to other book-movie translations, Harry Potter Got Lucky.
Hiccup Horrendous Haddock and Percy Jackson...not so much.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
yes yes i have been saying that forever
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I mean, good god, what did they do to Toothless? He's four times his original size!
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
And Toothless had teeth!! Whose idea was that?!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
i know its one othe most anoying things ever the only real things the same between them are the names
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
it's always hard to compare the books with the movies, but what I think it's great about the movies is the hard work the actors do to become a the characters that has only a written description. I always enjoy the books better, because they are more detailed (I know, they can't possibly add all the scenes in a 2hr movie), but how the actors plunge into that job... simply amazing.
I don't think I'll ever see another Snape as good as Alan Rickman, God bless his soul. know what I mean?
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
You can't deny the amazingness that is Maggie Smith.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Looks like your character has something in common with Mike Nelson then!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Then there's Pottermore. Which has more content than both the movies and books combined.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Out of curiousity, how does Pottermore reveal said content? Does it do so with book annotations? I'd like to view the extra content but I just don't like Pottermore's interface.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Content in Pottermore are like those hidden item games, you have to click on a character, item, or complete a in story game for it to be unlocked.
There's the Pottermore wikia: pottermore.wikia.com/wiki/Pott… and Elm Goes to Hogwarts I use both as a walkthrough, because sometimes I have a hard time finding items.
Some of the content do come with annotations.
I don't know if the site change, Len-n-n, since I haven't log in like forever.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Great sourface reaction. And true. Maggie Smith FTW.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I liked the actor that played Dumbledore in the first 2 films. He gave me the exact same impression I had of him from the books. Was really saddened when he passed away.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Harry potter was the only book series that temporally turned me into a reader.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I feel the same way. Maggie Smith is quite the bird for her age.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I should probably either read the books or watch the movies. People seem to like this 'Harry Potter' business.
Also, Fred seems to be a big deal, whoever he is.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You should! They´re pretty great.....well your enjoyment may vary with the first films and movies depending on how old you are.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I'm reading the books for the first time ever currently (my mom never let me read them as a kid) I'm on Order of the Phoenix right now and it's so good! I've watched the first 3 movies as well. So far I enjoy both. :3
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
The one thing I had a huge problem with was Deathly Hallows Part 2. Like, I actually enjoyed all the movies except that one, due to (nitpicking incoming in three, two, one) the entire final showdown and aftermath between Harry and Voldemort. Instead of explaining to Voldemort who the real master of the Elder Wand is to get Voldemort to finally show remorse (basically saying, "Dude, if you try to attack me with that thing, you will lose and you will die. The only way for you to get out of this maybe alive is to show remorse."), he just kinda kills him then explains it to Ron and Hermione, people that the information impacts in a very small way if at all. Also, snapping the Elder Wand and throwing it over the bridge as opposed to fixing your own wand and promising to Dumbledore that you'll return the Elder Wand to his grave, where it was ripped from in the first place? Weird. And then finally, Voldemort's death. While a grown man slowly disintegrating into magic dark fairy dust is visually impressive (actually no sarcasm there), it took away from the message in the book. Despite all of the evil that this man did, all the atrocities he committed, he died the same way everyone else did when hit by a killing curse. He was still just a man, and man cannot escape death. His death in the movies made him a sort of supernatural being, because he wasn't hit by a special unnamed curse in the films that made him explode into ashes, he wasn't even hit by the killing curse iirc, he just kinda disintegrated when the Elder Wand flew out of his hand. So was his existence tied to the Elder Wand? How would that work, if he was never its master? It just brings up a lot of questions and muddles up the message. And I feel likethe movie was still trying to make the same message, judging from the amount of work that went into the amazing animated version of The Tale of the Three Brothers.
tl;dr I agree with you for the most part, but the ending of Deathly Hallows Part 2 was just stupid.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
If I recall correctly, he didn't disintegrate when the Elder Wand flew out of his hand, but when Neville killed his snake (the final horcrux) but it's been a while so I could be completely off. I agree with the rest.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Actually, I remember not caring much for climax of deathly hallows part 2, either. I thought it was too drawn-out, and I also would've liked to have seen Harry explain to Voldemort why he lost (though I think it'd have been possible to pull off the scene well without doing that).
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
...I'm having a hard time on subjects like these too.
-J
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
.................................................wtf?
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I actually gave up reading the books XP mainly because my sister kept "borrowing" them.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
The books are better in my opinion. They leave so much out from the books.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Yes, that's the common argument I see against the movies. And it really did become evident to me just how much was left out after having actually read them, so I can more clearly see why some fans were upset, now. I was even upset when I saw the Half-Blood Prince and certain scenes were left out. But, still, I'm a little uncertain over the validity of claiming one was better than the other because one included something inherent to its medium while the other didn't. Like, yes, the 500-page books told more story with more words than the 2-hour films did. A fan of the films could also argue "but the books don't have all the captivating music, visuals, or performances, so I think the movies are better." I think so long as an adaptation gets what I suppose I'd call the main draw or the vital essence of the source material, there's not much point in trying to compare the former to the latter, because the former is never going to deliver the same exact experience as the latter and vice versa.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Especially Dobby's appearance in The Goblet of Fire...seriously where the hell was he?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
They replaced him with Neville, same with Order of the Phoenix. I didn't even see the last 3 movies because I always liked the books better.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well the last 3 movies were alright, Half Blood Prince was boring as shit in my opinion (although Dumbledores death was sad) while Deathly Hallows made up for that.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I think the better term for Maggie Smith as McGonagall is Badass.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Never ever mess with Maggie Smith. 
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Same. Except that last part. The hell? McGonagall wasn't hot, but there's just something about Maggie Smith that just makes you care about her.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
No she was totally hot what are you even talking about.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
She wasnt bad looking in her day though, she was quite the looker
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Um... um... yeah... I... I just... umm.... eww...
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I dunno, i'd have to say the books have more content, like the 4th movie skips a lot of things in the books, granted it isn't easy to get everything from the books into the movies, cause the harry potter films are very long even with only the major points mentioned
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
The books have more content but I could argue the movies have more atmosphere (due to the visuals and music) or more witticisms. I think it's really just a matter of preference.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
yea
then again i never really finished either, i could not finish the final book before getting bored, and i stopped at the 4th movie cause so much was cut out..
i really cannot say i'm a big potter fanatic at all, but i will say that i saw more in the books than the movies
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
| Next =>