Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows discussion thread (SPOILERS)

[jjshabado]

[ QUOTE ]
I have said this some other places but I think it would have been very cool to end the book after chapter 34 (Kings Cross).

Instead they went with an incredibly cliche and cheesy ending, which while not unexpected, was a bit disappointing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ending it right after Chapter 34 would have been horrible. Although with a little clean-up after it would have been a good ending. Leave Neville killing the Snake and the whole end battle (slightly-modified since Harry's dead), then end with Ron/Hermione/Ginny drinking to Harry's memory and work in a bit of the overall state of the world. Since the Ginny/Harry relationship was slightly understated it wouldn't have been horrible to have Harry die. After book 6 it was fairly obvious that Ron or Hermione couldn't be killed since it would have been pretty lame.

That being said I like the ending. I'm a sucker for that though. The epilogue could have been better, but I don't mind not knowing about the details of death eaters and stuff. We can assume that what happened after Harry survived the first time happened again.

[Supwithbates]

this book needed more plot-integral hermione nude scenes IMO

I thought the epilogue was purposefully sparse to allow the fans to imagine what happens while purposefully closing the door on anyone else writing a sequel.

JK Rowling is a smart woman

[jstnrgrs]

[ QUOTE ]
this book needed more plot-integral hermione nude scenes IMO

I thought the epilogue was purposefully sparse to allow the fans to imagine what happens while purposefully closing the door on anyone else writing a sequel.

JK Rowling is a smart woman

[/ QUOTE ]

I just finished the book. I disagree with those who say that the door is closed for any other Harry Potter books. There is plenty that we don't know about his life, not to mention many other characters, and a whole magic world that stories could be written about.

I'm not predicting more books, just saying that it is possible.

[DonkBluffer]

I think there's a lot of hindsight bias going on. The guys saying it was 'blatantly obvious' that snape was good in the first 6 books, can you quote yourself saying that before DH came out?

I also don't really get how people pick snape as their fav character in the first few books. Isn't he just an [censored] most of the time? I'm going to have to reread them again some time I guess. [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

[CallMeIshmael]

[ QUOTE ]
I think there's a lot of hindsight bias going on. The guys saying it was 'blatantly obvious' that snape was good in the first 6 books, can you quote yourself saying that before DH came out?

[/ QUOTE ]

On 2p2, no.

But to friends, most certainly. I believe I discussed this with both JoA and duron.

[Jack of Arcades]

yeah, I was leaning toward Snape being somewhere in the middle.

Plus, the idea of Snape loving Lily pretty much common knowledge even before book 6.

[CallMeIshmael]

[ QUOTE ]
yeah, I was leaning toward Snape being somewhere in the middle.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I remember you saying that. Whether or not Snape was "good" or "in the middle" is probably debatable. Basically, I thought it was clear that Snape didnt 'kill' dumbledore, and that "Severus, please" meant he was asking him to kill him.


fwiw, off the top of my head, there were several things that snape did that really, to me, shed light on his character being "good":

- DD never tells us why he trusts snape; the fact this was saved for a reveal in book 7, to me, meant it was going to be important, and I feel that is more likely to happen if that reason turns out to be correct

- the conversation between snape and DD that Hagrid overhears (whenever Hagrid says "i shouldnt have told you that" it turned out to be important before that) where snape didnt want to do something

- the twich during the unbreakable vow - thoughout the series, twitching/stuff just like this was used less as a red herring than for plot important nervousness or tells

- In OotP, Snape saves Harry by sending the order to the ministry...Snape had to put several clues together to warn the order; if he fails to warn the order, Harry goes to Voldy, and the order wouldnt think twice about it, since Snape has to put together a cryptic one liner harry says in front of umbridge that could easily be seen as unintelligible

- Snape has several chances to kill Harry in HBP, but doesnt; yes, Voldy wants to do it himself, but I dont think he would mind if he stuns Harry, and brings him to him. Beyond that Snape saves harry from death eaters (im honestly suprised voldy didnt know snape wasnt on his side)

- Snape doesnt kill anyone during the death eater raid; he stuns teachers. Just doesnt feel like a death eater.



If what Dynasty says is correct, and the fan base was split evenly on the snape is good thing, Im surprised. I thought that a close read, especially if you read them more than once, gave a LOT of clues to snape being good.

[Jay Riall]

[ QUOTE ]
Plus, the idea of Snape loving Lily pretty much common knowledge even before book 6.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hows that?

[Jay Riall]

[ QUOTE ]
I think there's a lot of hindsight bias going on. The guys saying it was 'blatantly obvious' that snape was good in the first 6 books, can you quote yourself saying that before DH came out?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not on here no, since I haven't discussed the books on here before. Do my dad and brother who read the books at the same time as me, I said it to them at the end of book 6 and all the way through book 7.

Oh, I also knew who Kayser Soze was, knew Tyler Durden wasn't real and knew who shot JR long before any of these things were revealed [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[calcbandit]

Not to linktard this thread but this is hilarious/stupid.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Tx1XIm6q4r4