HP deaths Re: Harry Potter Ending

[Carol]

Stephen Vandecasteele wrote:
> 
> > I have stated this in a very respectful manner so I suppose its
time to be frank. Your correct, I have not read the books, I could
care less about the books, and care even less regarding anyones
opinion of that. 
> 
zanooda responded: 
> Believe me, *I* couldn't care less about you not reading the books,
and I think it's not my place to tell you to do it :-). What I said
was that I was glad you didn't mind spoilers, because this makes it
easier for the rest of us to write on the list. I was praising you for
being understanding and not blaming us for spoiling you, that's all :-).
 
> zanooda, who doesn't like being misunderstood ...

Carol responds:

I'm the one who encouraged him to read the books. (I still think he's
missing out by not doing so, but I won't say any more about it since
it appears to be a sore point.) But I want to reiterate the point that
zanooda and Potioncat made--providing spoiler space is a *courtesy*,
and it seems to me that New Steve might have thanked us for our
consideration before saying, politely, that in his case the spoiler
space isn't necessary. But what about our other new member, who also
hasn't read the books? If we can't warn her that spoilers are coming,
she needs to know that posts on this list are likely to include them.
That said, I will no longer include spoiler warnings in my posts even
though the spoilers will most likely be there, and not just in my
posts. We know who lives and who dies, we know all about the Hallows
and Horcruxes, we know where Snape's loyalties lie and what his
motives are. All the major mysteries have been solved.

And those spoilers *are* spoilers for filmgoers even though HBP hasn't
been shown yet and DH is still in preproduction, simply because those
of us who have read the books have a pretty good idea what's going to
happen in the films--not everything, of course, because the filmmakers
omit scenes and characters, change the dialogue, reassign lines, and
even, as in the case of the attack on the Burrow in HBP (or the stupid
shrunken heads in GoF), invent scenes and details that weren't in the
books. 

Speaking of GoF, the treatment of Barty Crouch, Jr., is very different
in the film version of GoF than in the book. (For example, Barty Jr.
has his soul sucked out by a Dementor in the books. It's easy to
understand why the filmmakers altered that detail to a life sentence
in Azkaban--which fits nicely with what Crouch!Moody says in both the
book and the film about Unforgiveable Curses. Soul sucking is too
horrific for a film with a PG13 rating.) With regard to the other
changes, the filmmakers are clearly trying to simplify the plot.
(Whether they succeeded or not is another question.) 

Aside from plot changes that may be necessary to suit a different
medium, those of us who have read the books may find certain bits
(such as the tongue-twitching or flicking in GoF) "uncanonical" and
therefore annoying. Not having read the books would be an advantage in
that respect, at least--the viewer wouldn't have any preconceived
notions about how a character should be portrayed or how a role should
be cast. But those of us who *have* read the books can't help feeling
differently or expressing our views on the subject. That's one of the
reasons for this list. And while we can't discuss the films on the
main list, we *can* discuss the books here (in relation to the films).
After all, the films wouldn't exist if it weren't for the books
they're based on, any more than the Keira Knightley version of "Pride
and Prejudice" would exist if it weren't for Jane Austen's novel of
the same name.

To return to GoF, I wonder--and New Steve is the right person to tell
me--how intelligible the Barty Jr. plot is to those who haven't read
the books. Was it confusing to have "Professor Moody" show up again in
the OoP film when he had been revealed as an imposter named Barty
Crouch, Jr., in the previous film? Was it clear who the real Alastor
Moody was and what happened to him? (Why call the real Moody
"professor" in OoP when he never actually taught?) 

Is it clear to you what happened to the Longbottoms, Neville's
parents? Yes, they were Crucio'd (as Neville states in the OoP film),
but so was Harry near the end of GoF (film and book), and his Crucio
is not regarded as a fate worse than death (Sirius Black's comment to
Harry when he shows him the photo of the old Order--never mind the
alterations in *that* scene). Do you understand from the films alone
what happened to the Longbottoms that would make Neville (in the film
version) want revenge? Also, is it confusing that Barty Jr. is found
guilty of the crime in GoF, yet OoP shifts the blame to Bellatrix
Lestrange?

Those are points in which, it seems to me, the films would have
benefitted from following the books more closely.

Carol, who wants to know which points New Steve finds confusing in
*all* the films, but particularly GoF and OoP, from which so much was cut