Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1 & 2 watch

Announcements
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    (Original post by Boom Boom Pow)
    I didn't read the last book so could someone explain a couple of things I didn't quite grasp?

    1)Why didn't harry die?
    It's a mixture of two reasons that the films never really made entirely clear.

    Firstly, Harry is the master of the Elder Wand. It couldn't kill him so it went for the Horcrux inside him and this knocked him into limbo.

    Secondly, Harry's mother sacrificed herself to save him. This invoked ancient magic and protected Harry from the killing curse leaving a scar on his head. His blood ran with this protection hence why Voldemort/Quirrell couldn't touch him and would burn. Voldemort then took in Harry's blood during Goblet of Fire and with that took in Harry's mother's protection. This allowed him to touch Harry.

    However, this also acted as a tether for Harry. As long as Voldemort and his mother's protection within Voldemort lived, Harry would live. Dumbledore knew this, there's a small hint about a gleam of triumph, in Goblet of Fire.

    Somebody might be able to clarify if it was both of those reasons or one specifically which allowed him to survive. I can't remember for sure.

    In the book also, Harry's willing sacrifice to save his friends from further pain is like his mother's. And therefore any curse that Voldemort casts after Harry's 'death' on his friends doesn't work for very long.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ape Gone Insane)
    It's a mixture of two reasons that the films never really made entirely clear.

    Firstly, Harry is the master of the Elder Wand. It couldn't kill him so it went for the Horcrux inside him and this knocked him into limbo.

    Secondly, Harry's mother sacrificed herself to save him. This invoked ancient magic and protected Harry from the killing curse leaving a scar on his head. His blood ran with this protection hence why Voldemort/Quirrell couldn't touch him and would burn. Voldemort then took in Harry's blood during Goblet of Fire and with that took in Harry's mother's protection. This allowed him to touch Harry.

    However, this also acted as a tether for Harry. As long as Voldemort and his mother's protection within Voldemort lived, Harry would live. Dumbledore knew this, there's a small hint about a gleam of triumph, in Goblet of Fire.

    Somebody might be able to clarify if it was both of those reasons or one specifically which allowed him to survive. I can't remember for sure.

    In the book also, Harry's willing sacrifice to save his friends from further pain is like his mother's. And therefore any curse that Voldemort casts after Harry's 'death' on his friends doesn't work for very long.
    The way I understood it both of those reasons are right. The second especially, although I don't think all that stuff with Ollivander and wand allegiance would have been so important if the first reason was not true. I've read some people suggesting that it was because Harry was in possession of all 3 Hallows but I don't really agree.

    Quick question... when Voldemort kills Snape: why doesn't he use Avada Kedavra? I know it's more useful to the plot etc, is that the only reason? And why doesn't he just disarm him? Is it because he doesn't understand/value such simple (or non evil) things? Or because he would then consider the living Snape a threat? Or something else entirely?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    (Original post by -honeybee-)
    The way I understood it both of those reasons are right. The second especially, although I don't think all that stuff with Ollivander and wand allegiance would have been so important if the first reason was not true. I've read some people suggesting that it was because Harry was in possession of all 3 Hallows but I don't really agree.
    I agree with it not being the hallows. After all, he does drop the stone and they just make you the 'Master of Death' in terms of power (kill, bring back and hide), not actually being able to conquer death.

    Quick question... when Voldemort kills Snape: why doesn't he use Avada Kedavra? I know it's more useful to the plot etc, is that the only reason? And why doesn't he just disarm him? Is it because he doesn't understand/value such simple (or non evil) things? Or because he would then consider the living Snape a threat? Or something else entirely?
    Firstly, Harry couldn't have gotten the memories.

    There's never been a clear reason why he didn't Avada Kedavra him, I guess being killed by Nagini is just as effective. As for disarming thing, that is a common misconception linked to the Elder Wand. Many wizards, throughout its history, thought it better to kill for the wand rather than understanding wand allegiance. People like Ollivander did, but mere wizards probably thought that the ultimate way to win an unbeatable wand was by killing its old master. Hence why it has a history of bloodshed. Voldemort would want to make sure, and killing Snape is probably the same as disarming him in his mind. He doesn't understand the 'wand allegiance'. He just thinks that it passes from powerful wizard to powerful wizard through death. It took him until the end of the book to figure out that just physically having the wand was not enough.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ape Gone Insane)
    I agree with it not being the hallows. After all, he does drop the stone and they just make you the 'Master of Death' in terms of power (kill, bring back and hide), not actually being able to conquer death.
    Yep I think the same. And he doesn't actually use any of the hallows at the point of his 'death' (cloak off, wand away, stone dropped).

    Firstly, Harry couldn't have gotten the memories.

    There's never been a clear reason why he didn't Avada Kedavra him, I guess being killed by Nagini is just as effective. As for disarming thing, that is a common misconception linked to the Elder Wand. Many wizards, throughout its history, thought it better to kill for the wand rather than understanding wand allegiance. People like Ollivander did, but mere wizards probably thought that the ultimate way to win an unbeatable wand was by killing its old master. Hence why it has a history of bloodshed. Voldemort would want to make sure, and killing Snape is probably the same as disarming him in his mind. He doesn't understand the 'wand allegiance'. He just thinks that it passes from powerful wizard to powerful wizard through death. It took him until the end of the book to figure out that just physically having the wand was not enough.
    Haha yes I agree. I guess the wand allegiance thing is comparable to 'love' etc. and he doesn't see it as important. And the bold bit - he thinks death is the worst thing, what we've been shown throughout the series really. Snape's death also emphasies Voldemorts detachment with people/relationships, i.e. he killed his most faithful servant unnecessarily, in a pretty inhumane way.

    Not related but something I noticed when I watched DH pt1 the other night... Bellatrix says she wants kill Harry when they're at the table at the start. Surely she should have learnt by now that Voldemort alone wants/needs to kill him. Every time I watch that scene I just think he should kill her or do a bit of punishment or something!
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    I gots a question!

    If Harry is a horcrux and basilisk fangs destroy horcruxes, shouldn't Harry's horcrux part of him have been destroyed in Chamber of Secrets when he was bitten? :holmes:
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    (Original post by -honeybee-)
    Haha yes I agree. I guess the wand allegiance thing is comparable to 'love' etc. and he doesn't see it as important. And the bold bit - he thinks death is the worst thing, what we've been shown throughout the series really. Snape's death also emphasies Voldemorts detachment with people/relationships, i.e. he killed his most faithful servant unnecessarily, in a pretty inhumane way.

    Not related but something I noticed when I watched DH pt1 the other night... Bellatrix says she wants kill Harry when they're at the table at the start. Surely she should have learnt by now that Voldemort alone wants/needs to kill him. Every time I watch that scene I just think he should kill her or do a bit of punishment or something!
    Yup, not to mention how unstable he was at that point realising that Harry was destroying his horcruxes one by one.

    As for the bold part, I reckon she would love that. :mmm:

    (Original post by aja89)
    I gots a question!

    If Harry is a horcrux and basilisk fangs destroy horcruxes, shouldn't Harry's horcrux part of him have been destroyed in Chamber of Secrets when he was bitten? :holmes:
    It didn't kill Harry. The Basilisk fangs destroyed the containers that held the part of Voldemort's soul. Harry didn't die because he was saved by Fawkes' tears. Had he died, I imagine the Horcrux and Voldemort's soul inside him would have perished as well.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I've seen it in IMAX Manchester...
    3D adds nothing at all to the film, it was cool seeing it big though. there are some pretty epic scenes so you will enjoy it.
    I don't know how much a regular ticket is in London though (Here IMAX was like 12 quid) but at the end of the day think of it as a way of preventing the 'oh I should've seen it in IMAX feeling' for the price of a take-out or two :P

    If the price of a regular 2D ticket is anywhere under like £11 then go 2D IMO.
    But your mate has got the tickets so it just depends how stingy you wanna be :P
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    3D adds nothing to the film. Try and watch it in 2D if you can and save yourself few pounds.Maybe i'm cheap but i wouldn't pay £18 for a film in the cinema.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Just got back from the cinema. What can I say?
    The movie was ****ing fantastic. I loved every minute of it. My heart beat so fast all the way through. I cried.
    I am utterly impressed.
    I have to admit though, some scenes could have been a bit better, some were not like I imagined it when I read the book.
    But still, it was epic. I can't remember the last time I enjoyed myself so much when watching a movie.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Saw it last night at last, so impressed.
    A lot of the book missing but thats always the way with the films, and this was so well done.
    I don't think I'm ever going to get over The Princes Tale scene.

    "Lily..? After all this time?" "Always."

    Tears everywhere!
    • PS Helper
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    PS Helper
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by -honeybee-)
    Quick question... when Voldemort kills Snape: why doesn't he use Avada Kedavra? I know it's more useful to the plot etc, is that the only reason? And why doesn't he just disarm him? Is it because he doesn't understand/value such simple (or non evil) things? Or because he would then consider the living Snape a threat? Or something else entirely?

    (Original post by Ape Gone Insane)
    Firstly, Harry couldn't have gotten the memories.

    There's never been a clear reason why he didn't Avada Kedavra him, I guess being killed by Nagini is just as effective. As for disarming thing, that is a common misconception linked to the Elder Wand. Many wizards, throughout its history, thought it better to kill for the wand rather than understanding wand allegiance. People like Ollivander did, but mere wizards probably thought that the ultimate way to win an unbeatable wand was by killing its old master. Hence why it has a history of bloodshed. Voldemort would want to make sure, and killing Snape is probably the same as disarming him in his mind. He doesn't understand the 'wand allegiance'. He just thinks that it passes from powerful wizard to powerful wizard through death. It took him until the end of the book to figure out that just physically having the wand was not enough.
    Noooo he clearly didn't use AK because he thought Snape was the master of Elder Wand therefore AK from the elder wand wouldn't have worked on him, and he needed to die another way!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Luceria)
    and the reason the curse rebounded.
    ahhh I see, thank you!!

    On a different note: I thought that the Elder Wand, because it belonged to Harry and not Voldermort, would not cast any spell on Harry at all because it would rebound? That's why in the book the first spell was the one that killed Voldemort? In the film however, they obviously have a massive fight, was this just for this film?? This is actually a really silly question?!
    • PS Helper
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    PS Helper
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by littlehobbit)
    ahhh I see, thank you!!

    On a different note: I thought that the Elder Wand, because it belonged to Harry and not Voldermort, would not cast any spell on Harry at all because it would rebound? That's why in the book the first spell was the one that killed Voldemort? In the film however, they obviously have a massive fight, was this just for this film?? This is actually a really silly question?!
    It was mainly for film yes. In book the circle round each other, with Harry mocking him. In his mocking, Harry explained Snape's love for Lily, the fact Voldemort is nothing (he in fact even calls him Tom to belittle him further) and that Draco was the master of elder wand till Harry overpowered him. Then one spell is shot from both people (Voldy = AK, Harry = expelliarmus) and the wand flies away and Voldy crumples to the ground. His body is placed in a separate room to everyone else's.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Saw this film for the second time yesterday, it gets better every time I watch it! Incredible!
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Finally going to see it this afternoon, getting excited
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gryffindor)
    Saw this film for the second time yesterday, it gets better every time I watch it! Incredible!

    I havnt even seen the second part yet Gryffindor seening on Thursday Morning,obviously reading some other posts already know whats going to happen now in the second part,me thinks some members were very impressed by the last part
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    why does snape get killed by voldermot wasnt he good after all and just playing a bad character in all the harry potter films? wasnt that professor dumberdores plan all long to make those think close to voldermot that snape had re-become a death eater can someone explain that to me please
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Does anybody know why snape and lily have the same patronus?:confused:
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by wizardtop)
    why does snape get killed by voldermot wasnt he good after all and just playing a bad character in all the harry potter films? wasnt that professor dumberdores plan all long to make those think close to voldermot that snape had re-become a death eater can someone explain that to me please
    Because Voldemort thought Snape was the master of the Elder Wand (and Voldemort thought the only way for himself to become it's master was to kill it's previous owner). However it was actually Draco who disarmed Dumbledore (and therefore became the master of the Elder Wand) and Harry later disarmed Draco then became it's master. And yes what you've said about Snape is true.
    • PS Helper
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    PS Helper
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by Michael_4180)
    Does anybody know why snape and lily have the same patronus?:confused:
    Just as Tonk's patronus reflects Lupin because she loves him, so does Snape's with Lily.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: November 12, 2011
Poll
Do I go to The Streets tomorrow night?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.