The Prisoner of Azkaban DOESN'T Make Sense (Harry Potter Explained)
Vložit
- čas přidán 3. 10. 2022
- The Prisoner of Azkaban is easily in top three of my favourite Harry Potter movies, the plot, Cinematography, buildup characters, and overall everything was on point. However in this video we’ll be talking about 10 things in the Prisoner of Azkaban that don’t make sense if you didn’t read the book.
𝐒𝐔𝐁𝐒𝐂𝐑𝐈𝐁𝐄 𝐒𝐎 𝐘𝐎𝐔 𝐆𝐄𝐓 𝐘𝐎𝐔𝐑 𝐇𝐎𝐆𝐖𝐀𝐑𝐓𝐒 𝐋𝐄𝐓𝐓𝐄𝐑
Watch More:
- The Life of Harry Potter Characters:
• The Life of Harry Pott...
- Harry Potter Explained:
• Harry Potter Explained
- What Would Characters See In The Mirror Of Erised:
• What Would Characters ...
- Harry Potter Ranking Videos:
• Harry Potter Ranking V...
- Harry Potter Theories:
• Harry Potter Theories
- What Happened to These Characters:
• What Happened to Fleur...
- Harry Potter Small Details:
• Harry Potter Small Det...
- Artwork Credit:
- Pottermore Art: www.wizardingworld.com/
- All Pictures/Clips belong to ©Warner Bros.
*****
Follow me on instagram: houssam_benaim
For Business Inquiries: houssambenaim233@gmail.com
Harry Potter Explained. - Zábava
I actually really like the movies version of time travel. Before the time travel scene, we get little clues about it. We see Harry getting hit with something and him saying ‘ow’. There’s a little 2 second part whenever they leave Hagrids hut and Hermione hears something rustling in the trees (which we learn is the future versions of themselves hiding.) And if you look really closely, you can see the future Harry and Hermione in the background of the scene where Malloy gets punched. It implies that time is like a loop, and most things that happened were gonna happen anyways, and there’s not a whole lot you can change. I think it’s my favorite version of time travel that I’ve seen in a movie
But most of that were included in the book too. All Harry Potter books except the 5th one better than movies.
@@eclipture I didn’t like the 5th movie. It’s my least favorite film of the series. Snape’s worst memory occurs differently in the books. Harry sees the memory in the pensieve, not during occlumency, which is why Snape becomes so angry. He would have been shaken had Harry done that but not angry because that would not have been breaking the rules. The scene where he calls Lily a mudblood is also not included. Cho is not the one who betrays Dumbledore’s Army. And while I think Imelda Staunton did a good job of portraying Umbridge, in the book she was described as looking like a toad and she was even more evil and hateful.
@@MsAppassionata
_"The scene where he calls Lily a mudblood is also not included."_
It was in the 7th book. not 5th. Until the 7th book, J.K Rowling didn't show anything about the relationship between Snape and Lily. (Except the first line Snape told to Harry: Potter! What would I get if I added powdered root of asphodel to an infusion of wormwood? which means *_I bitterly regret Lily's death_* in flower language.)
They did a great job in the ministry of the magic scene. They showed unity, love, friendship, and loyalty better than the book did. Also, Sirius's last line (Nice one James) which wasn't in the book is one of my favorite lines in the whole 7 books and 8 movies.
HOWEVER, BOOK IS BETTER THAN THE MOVIE LIKE ALWAYS
@@eclipture You’re wrong. After James says “You’re lucky Evans (Lily) was here Snivellous”, Snape says “I don’t need help from filthy little mudbloods like her.” That was in book 5. Go back and read that chapter again.
@@MsAppassionata Sorry about my memories 😂. I read it 3 times and I still forgetting which book was it.
And hating Order of the Pheonix is your choice. Not everyone has to like the same thing. But good thing is we both are good potterheads. 😊 And don't forget And in my opinion, none of the Harry Potter movies are as good as the books.
My gosh, I *never* realised the movies don't explain the Maurauders...
Probably bc it’s a whole deferent story
This is movie should have been made into 2 parts so they could have could’ve included more of vital parts that made the book so great.
Don't get me wrong I love the movies but the books are better because they explain everything.
You should remove the
"Don't get me wrong"
Books are clearly better than movies ,man i sometimes feel angry abt how wasted some characters were illustrated just becuz movies were to be created in 2h 45m limit
Don't get me wrong, I like both the movies and the books, but I don't like when everything is explained. I love the mystery of the unexplained. Maybe that's why Harry Potter isn't among my favourite book series. They are too explanatory for my tastes. I prefer books and movies that tell stories in the form of hints and clues and leave it to me to put it together and reassemble the puzzles based on the few pieces left by the work, leaving many parts of the plot open to interpretation and ambiguity. That makes me actively "participate" in the story in a way, I love that. I don't think stories that explain everything are interesting, at least to me.
@@shibitoobscura3348 i feel like u have a good taste in novels .
Can u suggest some novels like this only .
Fantasy / Fiction ,whatever ur fav one is
Hopefully one day tv series where there is 7 seasons, one for each book, 8 episodes per season and episode lenght 45min.
In movies my favourite is Harry Potter and deathly hallows both parts (even if they sad). My favourite book is Harry Potter and order of the rising pheonix❤️
the movie that i watched didn’t have the whole common room scene with mcgonagall and ron seeing sirius idk if it is a different thing i need to watch it on or something but i’m really confused ( i watched the movie on apple tv(
Nice
The whole time travel thing would make it so that Harry and Hermione ended up with past Ron right? Because they never went back to their own time
They lived out the hours until they caught up with their time, you don’t travel back to the future in this method of time travel.
So the time froze? Or did Harry’s time speed up?
They caught up to when they used the time turner, so it's still the same Ron.
My least fav book because I'm not a fan of the time travelling mess. In terms of movies 3-8 are fairly meh because they had to cut quite a lot stuff off.
Then again, GOF is my fav movie so there aint too much logic behind it, just how it feels.
time-travelling is really cliche I agree, but I strongly disagree with you because it's done well and adds a unique and interesting dynamic to the movie and builds tension really well
as for GoF, it can't be my favourite because we were denied quite possibly one of the very best Quidditch experiences in the entire franchise just mere minutes into the movie.. one of the worst decisions ever made by a director. I remember so many people in the theatre were vocally very disappointed with that when I saw it, AS WAS I
My favourite one 😌
Hy mate l have a small question when Sirius Black first meet Harry Poter his grendson was he around an age of 32 ? years old as he was 12 years in azkaban prison.
Potter was 13 at the time
@@MitchellBPYao thenks mate but l was asking about the age of Sirius not Harry but still thenks.
@@dominikdubai6570 32 ig as Potters die at the age 21 meant Sirius was also 21 at that time and 12 years on azkaban that sum up 32
@@LilyEvans108 thenk you , very much.🙂❤️
not another one of you weirdos shortening "i guess" to "ig"@@LilyEvans108
As yes, Harry Potter.. the more you look into the franchise and plot the more you realise how poorly it is written
Yes. For me, it's the most NO logical book/film for one simple fact: The Marauders, when school children, are able to create a map that gives the location of everyone in the castle. However, the adults thought it was "brilliant" to place Dementors there, as the same Dementors had already failed to keep Sirius contained, so why use them again? And in a school? Did They find it healthier? See, adults are "idiotized" in the plot all the time, just so that the children's cast "brilliant", just because the story is for children's (It's okay if you're an adult who loves Harry Potter, but you can't pretend that the plot is intended and classified (targeted) as children's and young people).
Wouldn't it be more practical to create and use maps similar to the Marauders' and distribute them to security guards hired for this purpose to watch the map 24/7?
It would be the most logical, most coherent, most adult, but that destroys the children's narrative where Harry Potter Mary Sue needs to be the heroic protagonist, doesn't it?
the books follow the most convenient plot for Harry Potter to be the protagonist. That was what disappointed me the most, after all the world and Lore is interesting. But the plot doesn't seem mature to me as much as my (adult) friends suggested. It ended up that I went with a lot of expectations and I didn't like it. But I confess that if I lower my level of "credulity" a little and remember that it's a plot intended for young people, I can even enjoy it. The problem was that my friends "sold" me the Harry Potter series as something very mature and adult (I don't know why I believed them, they are obviously fascinated with it just out of childhood nostalgia, which prevents them from evaluating the plot more critically [in the same way that I'm fascinated by my favorite childhood films and books and I can't, okay?]).😅
That movie is one long trailer. The fool Director thought lets put this scene here, that scene there and make it non stop excitement. Catering to people who can't be bothered to read the book.
The students are allowed to do magic on the train in the books, and I'm assuming magic in Diagon Alley wouldn't be that big of a deal either. Although, in the book it's Arthur that fixes Harry's glasses, not Hermione.
Isn't this better than The Goblet of Fire and Half Blood Prince Movies. Those are my fav books and in the movie those.are my least fav. There few reasons. Watch MovieFlame's explanation
Half Blood Prince movie is my favourite
@@denizkenger52
I love all Harry Potter movies. But this is my second least favourite movie. And my second favourite book.
They cut a lot of Tom Riddle's memories. And burning the burrow scene doesn't make sense and that scene wasn't in the book. Harry's and Ginny's relationship was ruined in that movie. Lavander Brown showed 5 minutes on screen. Tom Riddle only showed 6 minutes on screen. Half Blood Prince's Book (Main part of the movie) only mentioned twice. and Dumbledore's death didn't made me cry on move but I cried to that scen on book. But they did a great job in the scene of the hocrux cave.
the Burrow burning scene was absolutely awful in every way@@eclipture
Dumbledore's death was also terribly conveyed and like you, I felt very little@@eclipture
wowowo im just starting watch h potter franchies ,in prisoner of azkaban more i want find the answer more i lost😂
One thing I don’t get is WHO did the first howl to save Harry from lupin as a werewolf??? Hermione did the second but seriously who did the first one?
It was hermonie. Just like harry saving harry the first time.
basically their actions which affect the present events, as we see later in the film, are legitimate because they happen in the relative future (i.e. Harry and Hermione's actions while time-travelling, during travelling back to the past, still happen in the "future"). But because of how time-travel works and the concrete link between past and future, their "future" actions all have already occurred and so are seen in the first instance.
Hi
thats what happened in the past so thats why she threw the rock
🎉🎉🎉🎉 really? The prisoner of Azkaban is my least favorite movie. To each their own I guess
Bad plot writing by a below mediocre author