My thoughts exactly.

 

Spoiler

After that, they make their way to the tower and instead of using a charm to immobilize Harry and cover him with the invisibility cloak like in the book, Dumbledore just sends Harry away, and Harry goes downstairs, stops & watches the following scene through cracks in the floor above him. Malfoy tries to kill Dumbledore but realizes he can’t. Snape arrives on the floor below & signals Harry to be quiet, which he uncharacteristically does. Snape then goes upstairs & sends Dumbledore to his death. The modifications made to this scene from book to film are terrible, and they partially blow what may be the biggest surprise of the entire franchise.

Afterwards, there is no enormous battle. The Death Eaters stroll out silently. I remember the fight in the book being fantastic, and I personally would rather have had a short scene in the beginning with two guys talking about the horrible things the Death Eaters are doing than eliminate the battle at the end. Harry runs after them and confronts Snape, who quietly tells him he’s the Half-Blood Prince. Again, due to lack of attention paid to this plotline, I didn’t really care. In the book, he screams his response. The book has Snape screaming and the film has him using his indoor voice. What a disappointment.

Umm, Taure? I'm a little bit confused about this comment of yours:

Now could you explain to me how, after reading this review, you can honestly believe what you said? Jesus, man, the last fourth of the book has been butchered! How can Bill Weasley be maimed -consequently forcing Molly to finally accept Fluer into the family- if the battle never happens? How can Harry justify sitting back and watching as Snape murders Dumbledore if Dumbledore never incapacitates him?

 

Didn't see that bit.

But regardless, "the last fourth"? That segment will probably be about 5 minutes.

And who knows, by July next year they may have changed that bit.

Uh...

 

The thing is, aren't some of the special effects not finished?

Surely, with all the PR that Fenrir's gonna be in it and the fact that the end battle is the most action in the book, they would include it, it would be retarded not too.

I think the edited version they saw didnt include the battle simply because the effects hadn't been finished.

Or thats my assumption anyway.

 

To call it a battle is a bit of an exaggeration anyway. It's more of a skirmish, and we only see it as Harry is running past it in the books anyway.

 

The first four HP movies didn't impress me at all. OOTP however, was an utter monstrosity.

Disregarding any bias on the side of the Mugglenet reviewer (because no Mugglenet fangirl will think a HP film as the trash they are), I highly doubt staying true to the book is any good thing considering how bad it was.

Things like the content they've cut out, the excessive focus on the romance subplot (which was fail in the first place), and the fangirl's comments on Snape's hair or Radcliffe's acting (I actually LOL'd at the particular comment) does nothing to sway my belief that the movie will be anything other than an epic failure, though this wouldn't be anything new.

I've learnt my lesson from OOTP, and its predecessors. Never again will I waste any money to watch a HP movie.

 

Apparently he's rather good when he's not playing Harry Potter. I don't think I've read a single bad review of Equus.

 

Death Eaters and the Order engaged in full-out combat, Avada Kedravas thrown around with reckless abandon, then the Death Eaters having to fight their way out? Seems like a battle to me.

 

I would say that a battle implies more than about 7 Death Eaters fighting.

 

Eh, I guess it depends on your view of it. I see the book six ending fight scene as a battle. OotP end fight scene had roughly the same amount of combatants, and if that is referred to as a battle scene, the same must be said for the HBP one.

However, you may view both of them as "not really a battle" battles.

 

As I say, I'd more call them skirmishes. Even the "Battle of Hogwarts" in DH I'd say is borderline.

I'm not entirely sure if wizarding Britain is even capable of a battle. Not with a population of 3000.

 

Well, if there are 3000 people in Wizarding Britain, then that would mean that roughly 0.5% of the entire population of Britain would be involved in the skirmish. Adjusting for population size, I would have to think that the Wizarding World would consider it a battle.

/Splitting hairs.

 

If two people are stranded on a desert island, and they have a fight, does that count as a battle?

I agree that you've got to take population size into account, but I do think that there's an absolute point where the fight is too small to count as a battle, regardless of what percentage of a population is taking part.

/finds more hairs to split.

 

I see a battle as an event with two opposing forces engaged over a large scale dispute. With two people on a desert island, it could be spoken of as a very real "battle" for control of the island, where the stakes are actually very large for the entire population of the island. The future of the island depends upon the outcome of the battle.

So, yeah, Yates cut out what I feel to be both a very exciting and potentially visually arresting skirmish. That contributes to why I will not see HBP.

 

Wait...you mean there are people who rapidly pay money to watch this shit? WHY??

So Radcliff is a natural at playing naked dudes who are gay for horsies? Somehow I don't think you helped your point any...

--bornagainpenguin

 

Taure, by definition, a battle is an opposition of two forces. It really has nothing to do with the size.

 

come one, tell us how you really feel.

 

Come one?

I'm pretty sure Yates had never directed a studio film before OotP. That became obvious really quick upon watching it.

They should have gotten Tarantino to direct this. At the very least, the in-depth conversations that are at the heart of HBP wouldn't have been short-changed. Also, sectumsempra would have been great. With Yates, that spell is probably a fucking papercut.