• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

question about Harry Potter: The Goblet of fire

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex
Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf
Originally posted by: FreshPrince
I have some observations/questions about the movie...

* towards the end of the movie, Lord Voldemort revealed that he has many generals, if you will. Lucius Malfoy's face was revealed as one of his generals. Why didn't Harry tell Dumbledore about it? Wouldn't this bring some trouble to the Malfoy's?

I believe in the book he does, or it is implied.

Originally posted by: FreshPrince
* During the movie, they also showed he has the skull and snake tatoo on his arm. Does this mean he's one of Lord Voldemort's generals?

In the book it is explained better, he was one of Lord Voldemort's followers, but turned away from him, like Snape (thus why they were shown together).

Originally posted by: FreshPrince
I have not read any of the books so bear with me...

This movie, compared to the book was not very good. Read the books, they explain a lot more (i'd say even more than the LOTR movies vs. books).

I don't think Karkarov's role has been fully explained/explored in the books to date, but suffice to say, you *don't* turn your back on Voldemort and live to tell the tale. Bear that in mind when considering the true face of Severus Snape. Those who've read the latest books know what I'm talking about.

Jason

I thought that the end could be looked at both ways for him, he was literally required to carry out what he was asked to swear to.
 
Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf
Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex
Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf
Originally posted by: FreshPrince
I have some observations/questions about the movie...

* towards the end of the movie, Lord Voldemort revealed that he has many generals, if you will. Lucius Malfoy's face was revealed as one of his generals. Why didn't Harry tell Dumbledore about it? Wouldn't this bring some trouble to the Malfoy's?

I believe in the book he does, or it is implied.

Originally posted by: FreshPrince
* During the movie, they also showed he has the skull and snake tatoo on his arm. Does this mean he's one of Lord Voldemort's generals?

In the book it is explained better, he was one of Lord Voldemort's followers, but turned away from him, like Snape (thus why they were shown together).

Originally posted by: FreshPrince
I have not read any of the books so bear with me...

This movie, compared to the book was not very good. Read the books, they explain a lot more (i'd say even more than the LOTR movies vs. books).

I don't think Karkarov's role has been fully explained/explored in the books to date, but suffice to say, you *don't* turn your back on Voldemort and live to tell the tale. Bear that in mind when considering the true face of Severus Snape. Those who've read the latest books know what I'm talking about.

Jason

I thought that the end could be looked at both ways for him, he was literally required to carry out what he was asked to swear to.

did he kill harry potter?

 
Originally posted by: LadyBuggy
Originally posted by: freesia39
Originally posted by: Vegitto
They raped the book.

Where's the bit at the end where the twins get all the money?
We raped it out.

it is not necessary. the twins got a lot of face time in this movie.


I digress. It's critical for the plot of the next book/movie, unless they're going to make something up about Harry giving them a huge sum of money from his personal stores for no apparent reason in the beginning of the next one.

truthfully, the twins opening the shop might not even make it into the movies. it doesn't advance the overall plot from what i can recall in book 6. they've at least set it up for their spectacular exit in book 5, if it survives the cut.
 
-spoiler-

Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf
Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex
Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf
Originally posted by: FreshPrince
I have some observations/questions about the movie...

* towards the end of the movie, Lord Voldemort revealed that he has many generals, if you will. Lucius Malfoy's face was revealed as one of his generals. Why didn't Harry tell Dumbledore about it? Wouldn't this bring some trouble to the Malfoy's?

I believe in the book he does, or it is implied.

Originally posted by: FreshPrince
* During the movie, they also showed he has the skull and snake tatoo on his arm. Does this mean he's one of Lord Voldemort's generals?

In the book it is explained better, he was one of Lord Voldemort's followers, but turned away from him, like Snape (thus why they were shown together).

Originally posted by: FreshPrince
I have not read any of the books so bear with me...

This movie, compared to the book was not very good. Read the books, they explain a lot more (i'd say even more than the LOTR movies vs. books).

I don't think Karkarov's role has been fully explained/explored in the books to date, but suffice to say, you *don't* turn your back on Voldemort and live to tell the tale. Bear that in mind when considering the true face of Severus Snape. Those who've read the latest books know what I'm talking about.

Jason

I thought that the end could be looked at both ways for him, he was literally required to carry out what he was asked to swear to.

There is no question that Snape, despite his actions, is on the "right" side. He was unable to forsee the climactic situation, as Malfoy repaired the cabinets without telling *anyone*

Additionally, the latest book has humanized Malfoy and set him up to be the replacement for Snape, juxtaposed to Harry's filling the role of Dumbledore. (assuming that the author wants a nice neat finish rather than leaving it the open ended fight against evil)

Furthermore, considering how closely the author works with the filmmakers, one might take note of the toned down Snape in this episode. While he certainly has less screen time, it is worth noting that while he is generally disagreeable, his character, while sniping, is nowhere as viscious or single-minded as in the novel. On the occasion he does act against Harry, he believes (with some cause) that Harry has broken into his supply cabinet, which is certainly more reasoned than simply hating him for being Harry, as the books make out.

Thank god there was no mention of S.P.E.W. or any other house-elf appearances - that made the books almost unbearable.

Nonetheless, this film was just plain poorly directed, imo. The last one was by far the best of the 4.
 
Back
Top