Movie mistakes

[AceOfDiamonds8]

I don't know if this is the right thread to put this in, so sorry if it's wrong...

There's a scene in the Philosopher's Stone movie, just after Harry arrives at Hogwarts and he's sitting in the dorm looking out of the window, where you can see a Chudley Cannons poster on the wall by Ron's bed.
But in the Chamber of Secrets book, it says:

Harry stepped in, his head almost touching the sloping ceiling, and blinked. It was like walking into a furnace: Nearly everything in Ron's room seemed to be a violent shade of orange: the bedspread, the walls, even the ceiling. Then Harry realized that Ron had covered nearly every inch of the shabby wallpaper with posters of the same seven witches and wizards, all wearing bright orange robes, carrying broomsticks, and waving energetically.
"Your Quidditch team?" said Harry.
"The Chudley Cannons," said Ron, pointing at the orange bedspread,
which was emblazoned with two giant black C's and a speeding
cannonball. "Ninth in the league."

Ron couldn't have had a Chudley Cannons poster in their dorm in PS because otherwise Harry would have recognised them when he went into Ron's room in COS.

I have no idea how I even noticed that, it's the tiniest little mistake... xD

[Nyjets4004]

One of the first mistakes were that Aunt Petunia was supposed to be a blonde but in the movie she's a brunette

[Noldus]

Originally Posted by Nyjets4004

One of the first mistakes were that Aunt Petunia was supposed to be a blonde but in the movie she's a brunette

This is not a movie mistake, but a change from the book.

Originally Posted by AceOfDiamonds8

Ron couldn't have had a Chudley Cannons poster in their dorm in PS because otherwise Harry would have recognised them when he went into Ron's room in COS.

I have no idea how I even noticed that, it's the tiniest little mistake... xD

See above! Be happy they even included it

[mrfutterman]

Originally Posted by Nyjets4004

One of the first mistakes were that Aunt Petunia was supposed to be a blonde but in the movie she's a brunette

As already stated, this is not a mistake, but the change of a tiny detail. Completely inconsequential. Petunia's character - mean, spiteful, jealous - is adequately shown in the film: the colour of her hair has nothing to do with her character.

It is odd, though, that they cast a distinguished Shakespearean actor to play a minor part in a film aimed fairly and squarely at American children. Why bother? They could have hauled somebody in off the street for all the difference it would have made.

[snapes_witch]

Originally Posted by mrfutterman

It is odd, though, that they cast a distinguished Shakespearean actor to play a minor part in a film aimed fairly and squarely at American children. Why bother? They could have hauled somebody in off the street for all the difference it would have made.

British actors were cast in ALL the roles because it was one of JKR's stipulations. For that matter, Alan Rickman is also a Shakepearean actor.

[ArryGrotter]

Quite a lot of people are confusing book-film inconstancies with movie mistakes

A movie mistake is a mistake when there is a problem with the Movie-Only!Canon. So for example, a mistake would be that they used the names 'Wormtail' and 'Padfoot' in GoF and OotP without clarifying who they were in PoA

[lcbaseball22]

Or continuity errors like these I just randomly came across when searching for info about the Ultimate Editions...

• A scene is cut where the Ministry sends a letter to reprimand Harry for violating the Decree for the Reasonable Restriction of Underage Sorcery which caused the Dursleys to learn of this rule. This causes a continuity error in the following film where Vernon Dursley already knew that Harry cannot perform magic outside of school. This is because the scene was in the original script and likely filmed; it was not included on the initial DVD release, but will most likely feature on the announced Ultimate Edition.
  
  
• The scene in which Harry, Ron, and Hermione cause a disturbance in Potions class to steal ingredients from Professor Snape was omitted. This caused a continuity error for the film version of Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire where Snape accused Harry of brewing Polyjuice Potion by stealing its ingredients "again". It is unknown whether this scene will appear on the Ultimate Edition, as it was not in the original script; however, the scene where Riddle and Dippet talk was not part of the original script either so it is possible.

[mactheknife]

Originally Posted by gelowo93

In OotP, during one of the DA sessions when Nigel/Colin practises one of the spells on Harry and he gets lifted into the air, if you watch the left of the screen you can see something that looks like the wires to pull Harry up.

I honestly never noticed this , I think i'll go check it out!

[Martok]

Originally Posted by gelowo93

In OotP, during one of the DA sessions when Nigel/Colin practises one of the spells on Harry and he gets lifted into the air, if you watch the left of the screen you can see something that looks like the wires to pull Harry up.

I thought that too at first, but if you use freeze frame, you can see that it's just 2 wands held by other DA members.
Nevertheless, it was poorly edited.

[Whiskers]

So, i was watching the film for the 10th time the other night, and i just realised! At the start of that Film, Harry was under his bed covers doing the Lumos spell repetitively, but he isn't allowed to do magic at home...So it got me wondering, Do you think the Lumos spell isn't classified as magic and can be used freely? Or did the film creaters just screw up?

[NargleNonsense]

IN THE FIFTH MOVIE. THERE IS LEVICORPUS. FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUU I HAD SO MUCH RAGE.

A whole book early. A whole book! I mean, they didn't even do the spell right! They're like, Wingardium Leviosa-ing everything. Erg.


You know what? Most of OotP was a movie mistake. Except for Helena Bonham Carter, they made that movie watchable because of her.

[ArryGrotter]

Originally Posted by Whiskers

So, i was watching the film for the 10th time the other night, and i just realised! At the start of that Film, Harry was under his bed covers doing the Lumos spell repetitively, but he isn't allowed to do magic at home...So it got me wondering, Do you think the Lumos spell isn't classified as magic and can be used freely? Or did the film creaters just screw up?

I have always understood that Lumos isn't classified. Harry uses it in OotP book and doesn't get a warning about it.

Originally Posted by NargleNonsense

IN THE FIFTH MOVIE. THERE IS LEVICORPUS. FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUU I HAD SO MUCH RAGE.

A whole book early. A whole book! I mean, they didn't even do the spell right! They're like, Wingardium Leviosa-ing everything. Erg.

You know what? Most of OotP was a movie mistake. Except for Helena Bonham Carter, they made that movie watchable because of her.

Please refer to my original post:

Originally Posted by ArryGrotter

Quite a lot of people are confusing book-film inconstancies with movie mistakes

A movie mistake is a mistake when there is a problem with the Movie-Only!Canon. So for example, a mistake would be that they used the names 'Wormtail' and 'Padfoot' in GoF and OotP without clarifying who they were in PoA

Levicorpus is only mentioned in the movieverse in OotP, so this is not a mistake.

[Duke_Franiks]

I would say he only significant mistake in the movies, is the absense of Peeves.

Originally Posted by Whiskers

So, i was watching the film for the 10th time the other night, and i just realised! At the start of that Film, Harry was under his bed covers doing the Lumos spell repetitively, but he isn't allowed to do magic at home...So it got me wondering, Do you think the Lumos spell isn't classified as magic and can be used freely? Or did the film creaters just screw up?

Well I think the movie producers made a mistake,dont you think so too?

[snugglepot]

Originally Posted by Whiskers

So, i was watching the film for the 10th time the other night, and i just realised! At the start of that Film, Harry was under his bed covers doing the Lumos spell repetitively, but he isn't allowed to do magic at home...So it got me wondering, Do you think the Lumos spell isn't classified as magic and can be used freely? Or did the film creaters just screw up?

Yes, the whole of movie PoA was a screw up, in my opinion!

[Martok]

Originally Posted by Whiskers

So, i was watching the film for the 10th time the other night, and i just realised! At the start of that Film, Harry was under his bed covers doing the Lumos spell repetitively, but he isn't allowed to do magic at home...So it got me wondering, Do you think the Lumos spell isn't classified as magic and can be used freely? Or did the film creaters just screw up?

Since you noticed it only after your 10th viewing, it's not so bad a mistake. Creators of fiction often use story telling devices that don't withstand Fridge Logic (things that bug you when your mind wanders, like when you've nothing better to do than getting something tasty from the fridge). In this case, they established that Harry is a wizard and his family doesn't approve (for those who have never been exposed to any incarnation of Harry Potter or just don't remember). In the book this was done by having Harry write an essay under the sheets (to avoid the Frige Logic). Since watching Harry write and essay isn't visually interesting, they changed it to actual magic. A movie is a visual medium after all.

[KingsCross]

The 'lumos under the covers' thing is actually a rather subtle and humourous visual metaphor on the part of Alfonso Cuaron. It's supposed to indicate to the audience that Harry is growing up and he's no longer the innocent boy he was in the first two films...

[Fawkesfan1]

Originally Posted by KingsCross

The 'lumos under the covers' thing is actually a rather subtle and humourous visual metaphor on the part of Alfonso Cuaron. It's supposed to indicate to the audience that Harry is growing up and he's no longer the innocent boy he was in the first two films...

That's kind of how I viewed that part as well. No harm done there. Just showing that he isn't that innocent kid anymore.

@ Duke_Franiks: Agreed. I've missed Peeves's presence. He isn't a big part of the series per say, but he'll be important in the last film some what.

[snapes_witch]

Originally Posted by snugglepot

Yes, the whole of movie PoA was a screw up, in my opinion!

Right on!

[Whiskers]

I'm not sure if this is much of a mistake, But in PS/SS Harry is 11, but his letter is adressed to Mr. Harry Potter, But by law you are not meant to be referred to Mr until you are over 12, it should be Master until then. (At least in Scotland that's the case)

[snapes_witch]

Originally Posted by Whiskers

I'm not sure if this is much of a mistake, But in PS/SS Harry is 11, but his letter is adressed to Mr. Harry Potter, But by law you are not meant to be referred to Mr until you are over 12, it should be Master until then. (At least in Scotland that's the case)

By law? How many years in prison do you get? In the US it's merely a matter of etiquette.