ABC Family Preview of ‘Deathly Hallows: Part 2’

A preview of the upcoming film, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2, was aired as part of ABC Family’s Harry Potter Weekend this past Thursday. The preview includes new scenes (and some old footage we are familiar with from other trailers) from the final film as well as interviews with Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, David Heyman, Emma Watson, David Yates, and David Barron. Enjoy!

22 thoughts on “ABC Family Preview of ‘Deathly Hallows: Part 2’

  1. Okay, not terribly impressed with this preview. But then again I wasn’t terribly impressed with the previews & trailers for DH 1 & thought I wasn’t going to like it at all. And then ended up loving it. So, maybe the same thing will happen here. Cross my fingers.

  2. It looks like Snape goes back to the scene of the crime. With him in the forefront of the blown-up house of Lily and James. Along with a dramatic lightning thing lighting up his face. Huh. I don’t remember that in the pensieve memories. I’m going to be really ticked off if they mess up The Prince’s Tale. Seriously.

    So the shot of Voldemort and Harry dueling in front of the wrecked castle. When is that in the book? And that dueling core thing – don’t remember that in the book either. I thought it was just a kaboom and it’s over for Riddle. Hmmmm….. I think this film is going to mess up what I have in my head when I read the book.

    But I’ll give it the benefit of the doubt.

  3. We’ve been over this many, many times. But once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more.

    The movies and the books are different. The movies don’t need to follow the books to the letter to be successful. They need to be successful as movies – while telling the same story.

    The reason why I dislike the scene where Harry utters the deathless words (he’s got something worth living for etc) is because he is in a very undignified position when speaking. No one – not even the most gifted Shakespearean stage actor – can speak his lines convincingly when his jaw is being squeezed by another person. The scene does not work in and of itself.

    On the other hand, scenes can work in a movie even if they weren’t in the book.

    Case in point: Snape’s death-bed memories are a collage of the most emotionally wracking moments of his life. The movie can show a different selection of memories and be faithful to the intent of the episode, without having to show exactly the same set of memories. JKR has given enough backstory that we know about things which happened which she didn’t commit to paper.

    The final duel is a bit more touchy, because what happens there is at the heart of the story. This is when Lily’s sacrifice works its deep magic. And/or the bit of Voldemort in Harry keeps him from shuffling the mortal coil when he is AKd. We don’t want that bit messed up. But you know what? All that stuff with the wands, the bit about whether the “true” ownership of the Elder Wand went from Dumbledore to Snape to Voldemort, or whether it “really” went from Dumbledore to Draco to Harry (although it was never in either Draco’s or Harry’s hands) – all that stuff always left me confused. I do not see it as integral to the story. In fact, I see it as unnecessary to the true meaning of the story. So if Kloves / Yates mess around with it in order to make it more comprehensible or dramatic, that’s perfectly fine with me.

    And you know what else? Going back to the graveyard scene in book/movie four, to the duel of the wands, has a lot more emotional resonance than tracing the lineage of the true owner of the wand. Besides being a lot more visually compelling.

    Now set the teeth and stretch the nostril wide,
    The game’s afoot:
    Follow your spirit, and upon this charge
    Cry ‘God for Harry, England, and Saint Jo!’

  4. Red Rocker, “We” may have discussed this many, many times before – But being new, “I” haven’t. Sorry to dredge up old thoughts – but I have a few new ones.

    Your case in point, Red Rocker, is exactly my case in point – namely, if a filmmaker is just going for an idea of what the author wrote (and I realize Ms. Rowling gave the script the greenlight) – when and where does it cross the line for the Harry Potter book fan? Let’s go with your example – Snape’s memories in the pensieve. What does Snape show Harry by standing there emotionally wrecked in front of the house of the woman he loved? Nothing except he was emotionally wrecked. What does Snape show Harry in everyone of his memories in the book? Each memory imparts a bit of information that helped Harry understand better the situation he was in for. Whether it was a memory of Harry’s Aunt, or a memory of Lily’s disgust for Snape, or a memory of Snape’s patronus – they had a purpose in helping Harry achieve his goal. It wasn’t just to say to Harry “Look at me – I’m so sad your Mum died. I’m an emotional wreck.” It was look at me I was an emotional wreck in Dumbledore’s office and it was real, and true and that’s why Dumbledore believed me. It was look at me I was still an emotional wreck after 17 years and this is my patronus that aided you in finding the sword. Etc. etc. These memories are not maudlin, God forbid that come out of Snape character, they are efficient, to the point, and the essence of what the person we know as Snape – was.

    When we start adding “ideas” – we start to lose that ever prepared, meticulous, emotionally sparing, closed off person that Snape is. Snape in the book showed no more than he did for a reason. And I respected that about Snape.

    It’s the same reaction I had when Harry started to flirt with waitress. Why add that? Oh – because the idea of Half Blood Prince is the trio is coming of age sexually. Well yes, but not like that. That’s not the idea of the author.

    (Yes I know she signed off on it. I don’t care.)

    I think if one starts to fool around too much with an idea of what the author intended – we lose so much more than we gain.

  5. I do appreciate the fact that Snape is cold and controlled throughout much of the books, and that this is the persona that makes him Snape. And if the movies were to show him as emotionally demonstrative, they would be messing with the persona. But we’re only talking about some extra flashbacks to reveal the totality of his text consistent experience.

    Yes, JKR pieced together the pensieve memories to tell a tale. But there is more than one way to tell a tale. I don’t accept the necessity that Kloves / Yates have to tell the tale exactly the same as JKR. One of the main reasons being, film is a visual medium. And images speak in a different way than words. I think there is a necesssity to grant Kloves / Yates the license to choose their own images. But even beyond that, there are “value added” extra scenes which were never in the books, but which could have been. There have been several scenes between Harry and Lupin and Harry and Hermione, which added a lot of emotional texture to the movies: the scene on the bridge in PoA, the dancing in the tent in DH1. I loved both those scenes – and I think many others did as well. I think it’s important to grant the filmmakers the license to try such scenes. With the understanding that they won’t always work (for example, Gambon’s statement that Harry needs to shave in HBP, or the chatting up the waitress scene which you allude to).

    It’s all a bit of an experiment, really. Once which I for one am willing to go along.

  6. Oh dear, that last sentence came out all wrong. I meant to say: it’s an experiment I am willing to go along with because for me, the rewards outweigh the costs.

  7. Really, I understand what you are saying. And I can go along for a ride.

    But you hit my pet peeve with DH1 – the tent dance. Ugh. Where do I begin. Maybe with the fact that there was never, ever anything romantic between Hermione and Harry in the books. Not once. They were friends. Platonic, loving friends. Then this tent scene shows up and it looks romantic, feels romantic, even David Yates himself says – there’s a moment where they could start to feel romantic for each other and he liked that tension. Well, that tension was never there in the books. It’s as if Yates, along with a good many people – who are wrong, think that a male and a female cannot ever “be friends” – that there has got to be some sexual tension at some time between them. And isn’t Harry is supposed to be in love with Ginny, and Hermione with Ron? Wouldn’t that make the whole relationship part of the book null and void? What does this scene imply? Years and years from that moment in the tent, Hermione and Harry get together to fufill this dark lurking passion that simmers beneath the surface? Yates put in an “idea” – that was never in Ms. Rowling’s book – with a visual that he admits is meant to stir the sex-stuff up a bit. Ugh, ugh, ugh.

    But I know what you mean and I respect going along with the experiment. But those experiments can accidently blow up the lab for me.

  8. I interpreted the tent scene as the H and H comforting each other – and distracting each other. The potential romantic complication was only a potential. It was by no means the main theme of that dance. And remember the song that they were dancing to – the melancholy, mysterious O Children. It’s not a romantic song, and I don’t think it was a romantic moment.

    But the suggestion that it could have become romantic – is that really so out of reach for these two? Maybe not in the books (although I think that’s more plot driven than character driven). But in the movies, the sympathy between the two is palpable. It doesn’t mean a guy and a girl can’t ever just be very good friends. It just means that the intimacy of a close friendship can be similar to the intimacy of a romantic relationship.

    As for experiments blowing up the lab. I don’t think it’s the experiments that do that. It’s much bigger than that – the storyline, the writing, the tone, the pace, the casting choices šŸ™‚ And fortunately, none of the HP movies have gone south like that (at least not for me).

  9. That’s it? That’s the only reaction to the statement that it’s not a bad thing – and may even be a good thing – to stray from the books in making the movies?

    Is it because everyone else is tired of the discussion? Is everyone reconciled to what is beyond their control anyway?

    Just nod if you can hear me.

  10. I’m nodding, Red Rocker….

    For me, the movies are a pleasant diversion, but they are sometimes just a distraction from the books. I enjoy working through how I would have adapted them, but even then, I’m living inside the world of the books for the most part. That’s what matters to me.

    As for the shot of Snape at Godric’s Hollow — I think that’s just making visual the moment where he learns of Lily’s death (rather than yet another scene of him standing with Dumbledore hearing a bit of news). It’s a lovely reaction shot. I’m hoping they give Alan Rickman every second of screen time he deserves.

  11. Am in absolute agreement that Rickman should get more screeen time.

    That reminds me of what John Le Carre said he felt like doing after he saw Simone Signoret playing Elsa Fennan in The Deadly Afffair, the screen adaptation of his book Call for the Dead. He wanted to immediately go back home and re-write the book with a much larger role for the divine Ms. Signoret.

    Hint, hint…

  12. I agree with Janet that the movies are a pleasant diversion. I really enjoy watching them, but I don’t expect them to follow the books religiously. As long as they conserve the spirit of the books, that’s fine with me, and maybe that is why PoA is still my favorite. It has a couple of great emotional moments and that’s what the book is mainly about, too.

    As for the romantic potential of the tent scene in DH, it might exist or it might not. The vibes I got from it were that Harry and Hermione are comforting each other. Best friends may hug from time to time if they need it. But then – and now you may stone me – I was never interested in “shipping”, I honestly didn’t care who ended up with whom, that’s not what the story was about for me (in spite of it being a coming of age story). So I don’t really care for those things in the movies, either.

    Now Snape, my most hated character in the books (and one of the best loved at the same time) – if they mess up his story I will be mad. But I agree that the movie makers don’t have to follow the Prince’s tale in all details, either, as long as they preserve the spirit. And I am all for more screen time to Alan Rickman. šŸ˜‰

  13. I completely agree that these movies don’t have to hold true to every detail in the books. Reading, making your own scenes in your head from the words and watching a visual interpretation are very different. It’s been few and far between that I’ve had exactly the same picture in my head as what I see on the screen but I still love the movies and the books in their own respective way.

    I also agree with more screen time for Alan Rickman, he always plays the wonderful bad guy that you love to hate, for instance Quigly Down Under, Robin Hood: Prince of Theives. He’s very enjoyable and despicable at the same time and not many actors have that capacity in my opinion. The whole cast of HP was picked so perfectly in my eyes.

    My view of the tent scene is also for a distraction from the horrific events unfolding around these two poor kids. Hermione has just lost Ron and Harry is coming to terms with the fact that he’s the one who has to end all these terrible things happening. It was a moment in time for them to ‘forget’ what was happening outside the tent. And if there was any sexual tension there then that’s fine too. I believe spending so much time together there can develop some tension. It’s whether they choose to act on it.

    In the end it’s all about what each person takes away in their own way. And I personally have had very few complaints about what the filmmakers captured on screen.

  14. The Snape at Godric’s Hollow scene might replace Snape and Dumbledore at the hilltop. It’s a visual way of shortcutting his devastation for a film audience.

    It all looks fantastic, but come on, alpha Ginny kissing Harry again?? Aargh, why do they make him so romantically passive in the films?

  15. Yes, Arabella! I agree. Why is Harry so tentative in the films? It’s like he’s scared of her.

    And yes – that might be the replacement for the hilltop scene. That wouldn’t bother me. And I don’t mind Snape dying is some boathouse I never saw or heard of before. I do mind when they fool with motivation and character. Also I’m not sure about the shot of Snape right before he gets bit by Nagini. If he has time to raise his hand like that – then maybe he had time to draw his wand. But from what I remember from the book it was more or less an instant before the snake ball thingy was on his head. *sigh*

    Now that I’m thinking about it – if the filmmakers chose to create a whole new death for Snape – a really good one – a totally knock out drag out death scene- I wouldn’t mind. Anything would be better than a snake ball thingy on your head.

  16. Anything would be better than a snake ball thingy on your head.

    I take that back. Dying like Elvis, still sitting on the toilet, would be about the same as the snake ball thingy.

  17. A lot of people die on the toilet. I have this from Dana Scully in an episode of the X-Files, the one where people kept dying in mysterious ways and she kept giving the rational, scientific explanation for their demise. The death-on-the-toilet-bowl has to do with the elevation in blood pressure which happens when you – oh, never mind.

    Anyways, my pet theory – which I’ve offered before – is that Snape was JKR’s least-beloved child, and she wished a horrible death on him for the crime of not keeping to his place as a mean spirited teacher but rather becoming the equivalent of a wizarding world rock star, what with his shaggy locks and swirling dark cape and sexily smouldering eyes.

  18. “…the equivalent of a wizarding world rock star, what with his shaggy locks and swirling dark cape and sexily smouldering eyes.”

    Uh, are you speaking of Severus Snape, Red Rocker, or Alan Rickman as Severus Snape?

  19. Oh, sorry. Got carried away there. It’s the cape that gets me, see. On most people capes just hang there limply. They look kind of silly, really. I mean, can you imagine what Gambon would look like in a cape? But Rickman? Rickman wears Snape’s cape with panache. The cape floats around him, it snaps, it swirls, it’s like a commercial for volume enhancing hair shampoo.

    But getting back to the point, I actually did mean JKR’s Snape, the nasty Potions Master whom she modeled on a bullying teacher she’d known, the unhygenic, slovenly, socially challenged former Death Eater who despite her best efforts slid into the role of anti-hero and from the shadows developed into a compelling and complex personality.

  20. The bit about the shampoo commerical made me laugh out loud. Rickman’s cape wielding is a tour de force, but also that wig – such swing, such bounce, smooth as velvet, black as the night. Yes, quite a departure from Ms. Rowling’s greasy, stringy, dirty idea. And that is one idea that movies got wrong – that I totally and unendingly approve of. Honestly, if I saw Ms. Rowling’s version of Snape on the screen – well, let’s just say I wouldn’t be nearly as interested in Snape’s manner of death.

    It’s funny, but everytime I see a man with dark shoulder length hair – I have to stop myself from being strangely attracted.

  21. I agree Bennu that I wouldn’t have so much interest in how Snape dies if he played out to be the same as he did in the books. Rickman’s Snape really makes me want to root for him in the end. Maybe not at first but knowing what happens and how much he really was a good guy at times. It really makes me want to see a more touching ending to Snape than just being there in the Shrieking Shack unnoticed for the most part.

    I think it’s Rickman’s voice and manner of speaking that really grip me even though you’re both right about the cape and the wig!

Leave a Reply