Bully and victim are not mutually exclusive and the line between then can get blurry. Quite often the victim of one becomes bully to another. It's truly a horrible, self-perpetuating cycle of abuse that continues until someone decides to stop it. This generally comes about through learning empathy. I think it's fair to say that Draco was consistently, and in various ways, both bully and victim throughout the series.
i agree with this! draco was quite a complicated character, and i think that jk rowling never really tried to delve into that, making an argument between whether he’s a bully or a victim
It seems that he is a victim due to his upbringing! He had drilled into him that pure blood are better & he being of the 28 & Malfoy would be at the top. Also Lucius teaching him HIS moral values! Victim turned bully, natural progression!
Draco a victim don’t make me laugh, for one he was never bullied by another student he was the bully belittling Ron for his “blood traitor” values and his family’s lack of wealth, Neville for his “lack” of intelligence, Harry for his lack of any living parents/ or wizarding family at all and finally Hermione for being muggle-born amongst others. Second Draco and his parents Lucius and Narcissa only stopped fighting for Voldemort in the Battle of Hogwarts because they were no longer the ‘second in command’ amongst Voldemort and his Death Eaters as Voldemort started to mock and threaten them for their perceived failures such as the diary being destroyed, unable to steal the prophecy from the Department of Mysteries and it being destroyed and then finally Draco not being the one to actually kill Albus Dumbledore even though he managed to get Death Eaters into Hogwarts. If the diary and the prophecy hadn’t been destroyed they would still be in Voldemort’s favour. As soon as they are no longer treated with respect they cowardly back out of a fight as their Pure-Blood beliefs still align with Voldemort. It is not as if they saw the error of their ways and realised what they believed in and what they were doing was immoral.
lol 😂 but i think the main reason for that is bc hogwarts express starts in london, and nobody expects the train to drive all the way up to scottland, so people automatically assume that hogwarts must be somewhere in england..
I agree but I'd say Ron is more street smart because he grew up in the wizarding world unlike the other two and Harry is the most logical and more of a leader who can do quick thinking in situations like ya know
I think the entire point of the trio is: They all bring different abilities to the table. Hermione IS the smartest of the three. She not only soaks up knowledge like a sponge, but can also combine incredibly complex situations into the correct conclusion. However, intelligence is not everything. She didn't manage to escape the Devil's Snare not because she lacks intelligence, but because she didn't keep a cool head. Something that Ron and especially Harry are far better at than her.
The misconception about Patronuses also comes from Pottermore, as it was put that a particularly evil and dark wizard once tried to cast a Patronus, and his wand instead erupted with maggots that devoured him alive. However, this wizard was truly reprehensible, like Voldemort. I imagine that even a wizard like Grindelwald could cast a Patronus because their soul is not completely evil.
Yeah I mean Snape was able to cast Avada Kedavra after killing Dumbledore just months beforehand so it does make sense that not every “dark” wizard can no longer cast a patronus. I feel that a dark wizard who even has an ounce of good in their souls can cast a patronus. No matter how small that bit of good is, a dark wizard is able to cast a patronus, Voldemort is evil incarnate and incapable of love whilst Grindlewald was able to have some good in him as he was able to love and also never tried to kill anyone to obtain the elder wand, he simply stole it if I’m not mistaken. So you’re absolutely right about Grindlewald being able to cast a patronus. Voldemort is pure evil and darkness whilst Grindlewald is simply a wizard who had good intentions and took the more aggressive approach in his movements.
It's because there's a difference between being a dark wizard and a wizard that does bad things morally. Lockhart was a bad person. Vain and used memory charms on people but he wasn't a dark wizard either. He likely couldn't cast a patronus either though because he sucked at magic not because he was a dark wizard.
Yeah, a Patronus really only requires the caster to be able to do a Peter Pan and "think happy thoughts." It may be more difficult for truly evil people to dig deep and find those moments of intense happiness, but not necessarily impossible.
@@davidalexander3320 - It could also be noted that Lockhart's seeming happiness was superficial and ill-gotten, and he knew it. The man was a walking facade. I think that since all his most notable achievements were frauds and he likely had some deep-seated guilt, which might have interfered with his ability to fish through his memories and find real happiness. When it comes down to it, he was a truly miserable sod deep down.
Well, actually it was Hermione who knew how to destroy devil's snare (light), Ron only reminded her she was a witch and didn't need wood to make fire. It was also Hermione who knew and used the spell producing light. Hermione figured out much more than Ron here, he just helped. But I agree, Ron in books is much more brave and intelligent than movies portray him. And Hermione is often overwhelmed by stress, which was shown for example in her encounter with boggart-McGonnagal at DADA exam.
Hermione said “it likes the dark and the damp” then it was Ron who said “so light a fire”, so technically Ron was the one who actually said the method.
Actually Harry said too light a fire and Ron told Hermione she was a witch so Ron only used common sense but I'm not saying that Ron is stupid just that I think that Hermione is the smartest of the three still but in dada harry is better
@@94808G That's just in the movie, Well at least the relaxing part, It is true that Hermione did jump up right away and move but neither of the boys panicked(thst much anyway), they got stuck because they didn't stand up right away, not because they were panicking. That particular scene is a good example of the fact that Harry can think on his feet, a lot faster than the others, that Ron is almost always a good source of common sense, and that Hermione Isn't always good under pressure when it comes to things that aren't tests. She does get better at this aspect as she gets older though.
The myth that Dursleys was effected by voldemort's soul that was in Harry since he was an infant. That bothered me. Because if that piece of soul was effecting the Dursleys it would effect students in his house especially those he shared a room with. Not every family will be loving towards a child they under obligation because he is family will treat them kindly.
And the Weaslys wouldn't have been so nice when he was at their house, that myth has always bothered me too, I can see where people who have never read the books would believe it, but those who have should remember that in the first chapter of the first book we see the Durselys before Harry gets lift on their doorstep, and they are just as awful as they are after Harry gets lift on their doorstep, that's why it bothers me because it's easily debunked by just reading that one chapter.
Ron is the most intuitive, or attune with ancient magic...he was the only one of the trio that insisted on not using Voldermort's name, which turned out to be correctly felt, as Voldermort put a tracking spell on the name
Could that be that he was the only one brought up in a magical home? I remember a scene in Deathly Hallows, where Ron is the only one who knows the children's stories, and it hit me, oh yeah, he'd be the only one whose mom would've read them.
I don't think that's the problem, actually. Harry wad the embodiment of everything that Snape could have had but didn't. I think it tore open old wounds, day after day again, and Harry looking like James didn't exactly help either. Being mean to Harry might have been his way of coping with the pain, lashing out, if you will. Note: I am not justifying how Snape bullied his students, I'm just trying to analyse why. I will not justify an adult abusing their position over children to hurt them, despite Snape being my favourite character.
I think in the movie scenes where they keep their voices after drinking polyjuice potion, their voices do change to the voices of the other person, they just sound like themselves to us, the viewers, so that we can easily tell who's who.
Another way to debunk that students get their letters on their birthday is by considering the birth dates of some of the students, like Hermione and Sirius, Hermione’s birthday is September 19th, and she starts school a couple of weeks before she turns twelve, Sirius’ birthday was November 3, he started school couple of months before he turns twelve, students born after September 1st don't start Hogwarts until the following year, and I doubt they send their letters a year earlier.
I think you'll find it was only about a week between the first letter and Harry's birthday. That would still have made it July, not August, as Harry's birthday is at the end of July. And as to the theory that children can't receive their letter in time for their 11th birthdays, tell me where it is written in stone. Hermione knew the answer to Snape's questions and Harry did not. Yet, he also tried to read up as much as he could once he got his new books home. There is even a line in chapter 8 where he wonders how Snape would have expected him to remember everything in 'One Thousand Magical Herbs and Fungi'. If Hermione had had the best part of a year to read up on Hogwarts' culture and history, this makes more sense to me. She's a smart cookky, but she'd have to be a prodigy to read up all that material in a month and I don't think she is that. This may seem unfair, depenndent upon when your birthday falls, but there is much about this wizarding world which is either unfair or which makes no sense. Take the Trace, for instance. This is grossly unfair to muggle-bornns, as a child from a magical family could get away with using magic outside of school if the Ministry can only tell the use of magic by location and not individual. Saying that a policy of giving a child their acceptance letter in time for their 11th birthday is unfair does not, in my view, negate the argument. Only a statement from the author, one way or the other, would do that for me.
@@elephant35e that would make sense, but it automatically means that not everyone gets their letter on their birthday. I suppose they are all sent around July.
@@kyleethekelt Okay, I see your point, but if Hermione and Sirius did get their letters a year earlier and they got them in July, they still aren't getting them on their 11th birthday, which is what the theory is saying, every child gets them on their 11th birthday, if they sent them in July, then students not born in July don't get them on their birthday. Which is what my comment was actually trying to debunk.
For myth 1: you said Harry received his first letter weeks before his eleventh birthday, but then said everyone receives theirs in August. If Harry’s first letter was sent the same time as everyone else’s it would have been early July as his birth day is the 31st of July.
I laughed out loud when I heard myth #2 tbh, as I've been on the Hogwarts Express, or Jacobite Express as it's truly called, which as mentioned, is in Scotland lol. The actual train irl takes you to an island if I recall, and going by steam engine is an option, but that's not the only train available. Though, it has been over half a decade since I visited Scotland and went on the train, so specific details might be outdated now
What's interesting about the polyjuice potion is that in the Hungarian translation of the films, it's implied that Crouch Jr. can change his voice. In the scene in which he was talking to Harry at the end of the film, he said a line that was said by Hagrid before, and he sounded like Hagrid.
It's like that in the English one too. That's the one scene that justified how he was able to do Moody's voice. He was showing off by doing Hagrid's. Crouch Jr was a very smart person, not surprised he either had a natural talent for or spent time learning how to mimic someone.
About "Draco is a victim not a bully": I'd say he is both, just like Dudley. In truth, most (if not all) bullies are victims somehow, having learned that violence and demonstration of power is the way to go when you want to achieve something. You don't learn those lessons the easy way, most likely you learn them by being on the receiving end of the violence at first. I admit I haven't read all the books (still working on it), but I assume that the Malfoys are not exactly a kind and loving (or forgiving) family. Failing at something most likely never meant consolation for Draco but pain and humilation. So yeah, he is a bully (and I don't think the movie redemption arc was good enough to actually redeem him) but he is also a victim.
Yes! Thank you! Ron is very logical and smart! It drives me mad the way people treat Ron because of the movies! He's also very brave too! The main thing I want out of TV series is that they get his character right and we actually get Book Ron on the screen. Also totally agree about Draco. They save his butt from the Room of Requirement only for him to immediately turn back to the otherside again. That punch Ron gave him from beneath the cloak was so utterly satisfying that I said, "Thank you, Ron!" aloud when I first read it in the book. Hope the TV series fixes a lot of little things back to the way the books were.
I see only one difference. And from the books. Hermoine is very hard working at school even close to obsessive. While Harry and Ron are lazy when it comes to school work and most of the time if not always do everything at the nick of time. But they are for sure not dumb
@@leto-nlwhat only one difference do you mean? Ron’s character from Book to Film, if you mean that then that’s just wrong because film Ron is completely different to book Ron. Same goes with Ginny, my favourite character, I really hope the TV show makes her at least what she was in the books, though personally I’m hoping we see more of her than we did in either of the current mediums, as I think she’s a character that deserves more time and development than either gave her.
@@dannylagangonzalez6832 yes there lots more difference but the one I mentioned is the most noticeble I think. I also agree on ginny while she was casted good she really got bad writing in the films
I've gotta disagree on the point about Draco. Even in the books it's clear he is only working toward killing Dumbledore because he was threatened with death himself and he felt he needed to make up for his father being sent to Azkaban and restore his families honor. He didn't get as strong of a redemption arc in the book, but he did change and had his own children who went to Hogwarts. He certainly started as a bully, but later on he was a scared boy who made some bad choices, not some strong evil wizard. I think of him more like Wormtail 2.0 rather than some kind of young Voldemort.
That’s not true. In the beginning of half blood prince, Draco was quite proud with the task. As we got farther along in the book, he started to show signs of conflict. Also no where in the 7 books does Draco show that he regrets his views. Being scared of the consequences of your actions isn’t the same as fighting to undo the injustice that you took part in.
Basically to sum everything up: If you only watched the movies, you got a lot of facts wrong if you went touting knowledge of the series or giving a summary of events. Each are a different canon, but the books are the source material and are viewed as the definitive version of events and characters.
They don't understand because the watched me movies before the books and got everything messed up or something, i really dont understand it but its whatever. lovely video per usual keep it up.
i always understood the polyjuice voice issues to be attributed for the viewer’s benefit of reminding us that it’s harry, ron, and hermione. in their world, they sound like who they are portraying. it’s just for us that they use their own voices.
There should have been a "Snape is a good guy" myth. He was only conviced to do one good thing for personal gain (saving Lily) and then ended up indebted to Dumbledore. He was still an arsehole with an interest in the dark arts and who bullied children because he was bullied at school, especially picking on Harry as some sort of "revenge" against James.
6:00 The reason for the keeping of your own voice in the movies was for the benefit of the audience. It's so the viewers would know that it was really them. It is a children's movie after all.
so it is generally accepted that the reason Harry was able to come back is because Voldemort used Harrys blood to make his new body keeping Lilys protection active thus giveing Harry a choice on whether to move on to death or go back and try and stop Voldemort on even ground
Ooo...I just thought of something... wouldn't Voldemort having some of Harry's blood also protect HIM with "love"? Whew. That's too deep even for me lol
Your wrong on the last myth, the real reason harry didn't die in the Forrest was because when voldemort used harrys blood to come back his blood still had lily's protection over it because the blood doesn't go away until Harry turned of age, but because harry was underage and still called the dursleys home harrys blood went into voldemorts system meaning as long as lily's blood lived in voldemort harry would be alive. If it was just the horcrux Dumbledore would have tried to extract it so he wouldn't have to raise harry like a pig for slaughter. There is even foreshadowing to this in Goblet of fire when harry comes back from the Graveyard and explains what happened to albus he gets a look of triumph in his eye that implies he knows harry will survive.
Um wasn't he 17 when sacrafised him and since wizards are of age at 17 the protection was over. But he would of been of age at that scools years end. May have my math wrong but that is that years delema on what part of his 17 year would that have ended. Not denying his blood in moldy voldy or owner of master wand saved him
@emtbrat21 it Wasn't that the protection was over because he was of age it was because he was underage at the time voldemort took his blood meaning that harry was connected to the world through voldemort regardless of how many times he got hit with the killing curse.
Good theory but don't agree bc lily's protection was negated once they shared the same blood. That's why voldemort was able to TOUCH harry at the graveyard after his resurrection. That's why it "has to be the boy".
@@LoveShayslocoHarry was seventeen when he sacrifices himself you are right, he would have turned eighteen a couple of months after, Harry turns seventeen towards the beginning of the book, and they are on the run for almost a year.
With the poly potion and the voices, I think obvious liberties are taken for the sake of the movie in order to help identify the characters. If the voices were not affected, it should have been obvious to Draco that they sounded....rather odd. Although there was the part where they did try to adjust their tone. It is a bit of an open ended one but I wouldnmerely put it down to liberties when filming to help the viewer follow the characters.
Harry didn’t die in the forest because Lilly’s blood existed inside voldemort, you got it dead wrong. It had nothing to do with voldermort’s horcrux taking the hit. “Her blood keeps her sacrifice alive, so while vodemort exists so do you” , it tethers Harry to life. Are quotes from dumbledore.
Well, it was a full combination of factors. Harry had the bit of Voldemorts soul in him, Voldemort had Harry's blood AND Voldemort was trying to use a wand that was loyal to Harry to kill Harry with. All three comboed Harry right back to the land of the living.
But Avada Kedavra did kill the horcrux that was inside Harry. Two things can be right: It kills the horcrux inside Harry, making Voldemort more vulnerable, and the love sacrifice protected him. I also thought that the reason Harry stayed with the Dursley family was to keep the protection on him, and it went away when he turned 17. Maybe I'm remembering wrong.
@Quincelee2 I believe he stayed there because as long as he could call it home and it shared his mother's blood, the protection was active. But when he turned 17, he was no longer a minor in the Wizarding world and didn't call it home. The letter from Dumbledore says to "remember her promise" or something along those lines. That is why the Dursley's leave right before Harry turns 17. They know the protection will be broken and are being moved to safety
_"The real reason Harry was able to come back to life was due to the bit of Voldemort's soul that had been residing in his body since he was an infant"_ This is wrong. The reason Harry was able to come back was because Voldemort had taken Harry's blood which meant Lily's sacrifice continued to live inside Voldemort, keeping Harry alive. It acted kinda like a "lovecrux" for Harry which is why he was able to come back. _"Draco would have at least attempted to kill Dumbledore because he's a narcissist who will do anything so survive"_ While Draco probably is a bit narcissistic, I don't think you need to be narcissist to want to survive. That's basic human nature for everyone. I think it's also quite clear Draco would have not attempted to kill Dumbledore. Draco was starting to lower his wand before the other death eaters burst into the the room. And even after the death eaters tried to pressure him to do it, he still wasn't able to. Harry also thinks he wouldn't have done it. I also think it's quite clear that Hermione is the smartest of the group. This isn't a myth. Hermione is not only incredibly book-smart, she is also the most emotionally intelligent and logical in general. These qualities alone make her much smarter than Harry and Ron. But on top of this she has no problems performing under pressure after the 3rd book. Reciting one devils snare example from the *first* book isn't really convincing lol. Remember in Order of the Phoenix when Hermione fake cried and came up with a plan to lure Umbridge into the forest for the centaurs/Grawp? That was incredible thinking under pressure. Or remember in Deathly Hallows when the death eaters were in the Lovegoods house, and Hermione managed to come up with a plan that would get them out of there safely, while also making sure the death eaters know Xenophilius wasn't lying, AND that they don't find out Ron is with them. Incredible thinking on the fly. So yeah, Hermione is clearly the smartest of the trio. That doesn't mean Harry and Ron are stupid, although they sometimes are 😁
Hermoine isn't the person who made the potion in the 7th book or movie, but their voices were the same in the 7th movie. I am pretty sure at least one of the aurors knew how to make it correctly.
I wouldn't be surprised if they do the muggleborns/kids from muggle households earlier than whenever they send out the letters to households with at least one magical person. Cause they have to send a person to explain everything, help them shop, etc. So they probably sent his out early just in case. 🤷🏻♀
Voldemort created all those horcruxes but never used one once to come back. He used Quirrel and unicorn blood in first book. In 4th book he used a ritual without a horcrux. Fun fact, harry is the only person to successfully use one of voldemorts horcruxes to come back to life… when he was sent in limbo and came back:)
the horcruxes just save a piece of his soul.. he has to find a way to produce a body.. which took him about 10 yrs and the help of others to return the first time.. seems rather useless spell really..
Since he died and went into purgatory where Valdemort limp was, he was dead and this was inside his head. Therefore the only way for him to see Dumbeldore there would be If Dumbeldore was THE Death itself and he could either go back to the living or go with Dumbeldore aka Death and stay dead. That is my theory.
Overall - Hermione Hermione being the smartest of the golden trio is not a "myth" though. It's pretty much a fact. Hermione is not only incredibly book-smart, she is also the most emotionally intelligent and logical in general. These qualities alone make her much smarter than Harry and Ron. But on top of this she has no problems performing under pressure after the 3rd book. One devils snare example from the first book isn't really convincing lol. Remember in Order of the Phoenix when Hermione fake cried and came up with a plan to lure Umbridge into the forest for the centaurs/Grawp? That was incredible thinking under pressure. Or, remember in Deathly Hallows when the death eaters were in the Lovegoods house, and Hermione managed to come up with a plan that would get them out of there safely, while also making sure the death eaters know Xenophilius wasn't lying, AND that they don't find out Ron is with them? Incredible thinking on the fly. So yeah, Hermione is clearly the smartest of the trio. That doesn't mean Harry and Ron are stupid, although they sometimes are lol
The films did Ron's character no favor. Harry reads Lily's diary. Snape: You father was a swine. Harry: My father? Snape: James Potter. Harry: No! You are my father! Snape: Nooooooooooo!
6:58 Nope, it was actually Harry who figured out how to kill the Devil's Snare, and Ron who reminded Hermione to use her damn wand. Here is the excerpt: - Hermione Granger: "Devil's Snare, Devil's Snare... What did Professor Sprout say? It likes the dark and the damp - " - Harry Potter: "So light a fire!" - Hermione Granger: " Yes - of course - But there's no wood!" - Ron Weasley: "HAVE YOU GONE MAD! ARE YOU A WITCH OR NOT?" - Hermione Granger: "Oh, right!"
Ive been to scottish highlands to visit the locations, like the birdge, Hagrids hut location and waterfall use as a background during the quidditch. Absolutely stuning
The reason why it seemed so compelling that the ressurection stone brought Harry back, was because it turned 3 times as it rolled of his palm. The brother in the 3 brother tale also did this. So I always felt like Harry primed the stone (although unknowingly) to bring him back.
6:15 the inconsistencies with the PJ potion might be explained by the movies not wanting to confuse viewers by changing voices too, whereas Moody and PJ was a plot twist, so deceiving viewers actually helped.
I've literally never heard of the resurrection stone saving Harry. I always heard the Elder wand intentionally only killed the horcrux in Harry or that Harry was spared from death because he willingly offered his own life.
Seems most of the confusion stem from the inconsistencies introduced by the movies as the directors try to put their own stamp onto the books they adopted into the big screen.
Myth #9: Draco is not a bully but a victim... You know someone can be both right? Dumbledore clearly sees Dudly as a victim of the Dursleys because of their parenting so wouldn't Drako also be one? I think Draco liked people thinking he was hardcore and talked big but never actually wanted anyone to get killed.
The myth that Susan Bones' parents were killed in the first war and she was raised by her aunt Amelia. It says quite clearly in book 5 that it was her uncle, aunt and cousins who were killed, not her parents and siblings.
I saw Snape as a very complex character- I think deep down he cared about Harry because of Lily, yet was angry he was James's son instead of his own, and couldn't resist picking on him. In a sense his hardness on Harry was a kindness- Harry's fame could have made him lazy and arrogant, and when his time came to fulfill his destiny might have made him lose to Voldemort. Lily's sacrifice to save Harry would have been a complete waste. As for Draco- Snape had to favor Draco to keep his standing with the death eaters, but his coddling intensified Draco's laziness. But then he saved Draco by killing Dumbledore himself, giving Draco the chance to survive. I actually wish Draco had a serious redemption arc. I would have had him totally reject the Deatheaters and his family, join Harry's side and in the end admit he was in love with Hermione and then married her instead of Ron. What I love about this series is all the creativity it has inspired in me.
"Draco is not a bully but a victim." That statement presumes that the two are mutually exclusive. Why can't a bully also be a victim? In fact, what if the reason they're a bully is because they're a victim, and they just redirect their rage onto others? Or begin to believe that their bullying behavior is justified by their being a victim?
I hope that mugglebones would probably get their letters a little earlier because of the fact that they are suddenly hit with this news that they're different and have to adjust more than just One month before school starts.
I think you're right. Hermione is unlikely to have memorized all her course books by heart if she only got them a month before school began. It's why the idea of them getting their letters sometime near their eleventh birthday makes sense, as Hermione's birthday is in September. She would have had a full year to study her new textbooks.
I agree with every point you made except for the one on Malfoy. I think he was both a bully and a victim (as most bullies at that age are). He was brainwashed by his parents with hate and senses of entitlement and superiority. I would argue if most of us were raised in a family like that chances are we would have ended up a lot like him. Also of all the deviations between the books and the movies, there isn't as much deviation with his story arc. He did hesitate to kill Dumbledore and Harry who was immobilized under the cloak noticed that Draco's wand dropped a bit. In Malfoy Manor, though it was never expressed I think as well in the books as it did in the movies, in the books Malfoy didn't want to look at Harry and I think it's safe to assume that Malfoy knew it was him. In the room of requirements, Malfoy was pleading with Crabbe not to kill him. You could argue with that last one that Malfoy understood that Voldemort would be upset if anyone but he killed Harry, but I think when you put it together you see that Draco didn't actually want Harry dead. It's also been confirmed by Rowling that after the books end, Draco got married and had a kid and his views softened quite a bit, differing from his parents. He may not have completely lost admiration for dark magic but his views of pure blood superiority certainly seem to soften. I think we saw that progression in the books. He never stated it publicly, always openly spewing the pure blood supremacy nonsense, but what we saw was a kid who was at least conflicted. He repeated what his parents taught him and in this sense he is a victim, arguably of a form of abuse. Does that justify his actions or his bullying at Hogwarts? No. But I believe someone can be a bully and a victim, it's not one or the other. I would liken his predicament to Kreacher. Paraphrasing what Dumbledore said (since I don't want to look up the exact quote) "Kreacher is what wizards made him. He is to be pitied". I agree with this sentiment. With most bullies, I pity them. Bullies usually aren't born, they are made. It's pretty clear to me who made Draco the way he was.
"A Squib or Muggle could fly a broom because the magic of flight is in the enchantments." A Wand is to a Wizard's use of magic, as a Broom is to a Wizard's ability to fly. Just as nothing happens when a muggle holds a wand, a broom is just a branch with twigs unless a Magical uses it.
Actually, I imagine that a muggle could fly on a broom, but I'll bet you anything that modern brooms all have charms on them that make them inert when a muggle is holding them.
For myth 9, the redemption arc was in the books too! Harry believes he would not have gone through with it and was lowering his wand, he refuses to identnfy them, and IIRC there’s more when they encounter him in the Room of Requirements with the diadem but I don’t remember that in detail.
And a myth that annoys me is your incomplete explanation for Harry surviving in the Forbidden Forest. He was tied to life because of his blood, with his mother’s protection, still being alive in Voldemort. Without that he would still have been killed along with the partial soul. Nagini isn’t immune to the Killing Curse.
I always took it that the Reason Harry didn't die in the forest was due to a combination of 2 unique facts that gave him the choice if he wanted to either pass on or return to life. The first was that by Voldemort taking Harry's Blood into himself when regaining his new body he also took in a small part of the original protection that Lilly gave Harry when she died to protect him, this tethered Harry to the living world as it made it impossible for Voldemort to actually be able to kill Harry so in the forest he only succeeds in killing the part of his own soul that was contained inside Harry and not Harry himself. Plus also at the time Harry confronts Voldemort, Harry is already the Master of Death by being the true owner of all 3 of the Deathly Hallows, you don't actually need to be in possession all 3 Hallows to be the Master of Death you just need to be the rightful owner of them, The Invisibility Cloak was passed to him by his Father as it had been handed down through the generations from Father to Son, The Resurrection Stone being passed on to him in Dumbledore's will and being the rightful Master of the Elder Wand due to ownership of it becoming his as he disarmed the previous Master Draco at Malfoy Manor who had become the Master after disarming Dumbledore at the top of the Astronomy Tower. So Harry effectively became the "Master of Death" from the very point he Disarmed Draco as that was the point he took ownership of all 3 hallows.
I don’t remember the books that good so its just an opinion. I wouldn’t say that resurrection stone for sure didn't back Harrys life, nor I would say it did. All of the fight of Harry and Voldemort throughout the series is kinda special. Harry has Voldemort in him, Tom puts all the effort againt Harry, making him equal, Voldemort also killed unicorn which made his soul weaker(i believie?) , Harry was the Lord of Death(whatever that means) and at the end, Voldemort fought Harry with his own wand, before that, they had sibling wands. It's not satisfactionary to me to assume that Harry got choice only because he had part of Voldemort's soul in him. Maybe it could be, that he was lord of death, got struck by his own wand + got struck actually by himself(Voldemort ressurected from his blood) and for last he was the horcrux.
Was the prophecy made before Harry and Neville were born? Why didn't the evil lord kill the child at birth? When did Snape and Dumbledore meet, was it a few days after the child was born or a year later? Why did Dumbledore tell the Potters to use the loyalty spell two weeks before his death? After all, the prediction was made a year ago? Why didn't Voldermort kill the boy during the year when the devotion spell wasn't used?
Slight correction, it was once again Lily's sacrifice that enabled Harry to come back in the Forbidden Forest since Voldemort had taken the magic of that sacrifice into himself when he used Harry's blood to rebuild his body. So he basically tethered Harry to life so long as he himself lived or unless Harry made the choice to move on.
Having read Harry Potter when it first came out in 97, I found this very interesting & didn't believe any of the myths. Ron doesn't always catch on to things as quickly as Harry & Hermione but he is clever in other ways. He was the one that suggested Harry take lucky potion to get the memory from Slughorn. For me so much of the latter films I find very annoying as some things are so wrong. The one that upsets me the most is Harry throwing away the elder wand. He would never do that, it's just not in his character to do something where this evil wand could live on. I feel that was the director thinking maybe there was a film to make of someone finding the wand! I can't watch the final film because it upsets me so much!
I believe the potion thing was. In the second movie. They all took the same batch and they are our main trio. So we could hear their voices but to everyone else they sounded like their intended. So we were supposed to hear their voice. As for Harry’s vision. I don’t believe he still needed the glasses. I think he simply forgot to take them off. We hear everyone again with their own voices while they are all Harry because again. Same batch and I believe to everyone else they probably sounded like Harry. We were supposed to hear them as themselves. As for Barty being mad eye. Eye was making and using his own potion. We weren’t supposed to know it was him. So we don’t hear his voice. And no one else would hear him as him because no one else took the same batch. That’s my theory on the potion. And if there are any holes please feel free to point them out!
I figured the reason Voldemort couldn't kill Harry in the last book/movie was because through Dumbledore's planning and some luck, Harry entered the forest as "master of death". He already had the invisibility cloak, he now realizes he has the resurrection stone. And as he later informs Voldemort, ever since disarming Draco he has been the true owner of the elder wand. Which also shows that he didn't need to be in physical possession of the wand for it to answer to him. I would assume that same logic applies to the stone. Even though he drops it in the forest, it still answers to him since he didn't give it to another person or have it taken from him. That's why in his vision/dream/limbo, Dumbledore tells him he has a choice of whether he wants to go back or to go "on" because he is the owner of all three of the deathly hallows.
i think the polyjuice potion issue can be chalked up to the potion not being PERFECTLY brewed. maybe slight imperfections causes certain parts of you not to change
The quote in prisoner “he’s been sighted in Dufftown, that’s not far from here” means that the school is somewhere in moray as that’s where Dufftown is, I live a few miles away, still looking for hogwarts though.
So, while I agree that Hermione is only the most well read, the devils snare thing was all three of them. Hermione said that it likes the dark and damp, harry said to light a fire (something that they mention earlier in the first book that hermione had become quite adept at producing for warmth during the cold scottish highland winters, for anyone wondering why harry didn't just do it) and Ron was the one that kept cool enough to remind Hermione that she's a witch and doesn't need wood. Also, later in that same chapter ron proves how smart he is by beating the large chess set, and Hermione points out something that plays a roll in book 6 in the potion room when she says that most wizards don't have an ounce of logic. Where this comes to pass in the 6th book is when Dumbledore and Harry are in the boat headed to the horcrux and Dumbledor tells Harry "Like many creatures that dwell in cold and dark, they fear light and warmth." Then has to tell Harry that means fire. While damp and dark is different than cold and dark, the fact that it's lost on Harry, tells me that Hogwarts made Harry less logical. Or J.K. just isn't a good writer...
The movies gave a lot of Ron's knowledge to Hermione, and changed a whole of other stuff like giving lines from one person in the books to someone else and just messing up everything.
The biggest myth that makes me angry is that JKR had it all planned out to the last detail and never made a mistake or retconed anything ever and that every detail that seems like it's an error can be explained away. (Why did Harry not see the Thestrals on the way home after the triwizard tournament, AFTER seeing Cedrig die but only at the beginning of the new year?!)
Something they only hint at in the movies is that Ron is the "social" resource. Yes Hermione is very book smart, but Ron knows how the wizarding world works. He grew up in it, and in the books he is definitely portrayed in a better light. Ron/Weasleys are my favorite in the whole series.
It’s possible that crouch jr didn’t get the voice of moody through the potion but instead was just able to mimic it and there was no point doing it while no longer appearing as Alistair moody
Not sure if it was different in the book, but in the movie it was actually Hermione that told them what to do to get away from the devil's snare and it was her that figured out what spell to use to free Ron from it in the Sorcerer's Stone
There was a whole thing about done about how patronus is can't be cast by a person that is evil. That they will shoot out maggots from their wands and they'll devour them if the person decides to perform the patronus charm being an evil person.
There is so much more in the books that the movies simply can’t do justice. It just isn’t feasible, especially with the latter books, due to their extensive lengths. The order of the Phoenix is the longest, with a total of 870 pages. It’s understandable that they can’t fit everything, but what bugs me the most is when they added or changed things around in the movies that just never happened in the books. The first example that comes to mind is Voldemort actually HUGGING Draco Malfoy in the last movie at the end of the battle. Or Voldemort ridiculously disintegrated into flakes?! Come on! Or Harry not fixing his own wand with the powerful elder wand, something no other wand could possibly do. And he didn’t stupidly snap the most powerful wand in the world in HALF and then chucked it! He returned it to Dumbledore’s grave. As long as Harry stayed undefeated until his death, the vicious cycle of murder would die with him. So many little things, lol. The movies are really great too, with absolutely phenomenal casting and incredible production, but they just can’t trump the books for me.
Ron did not get them out of the devils snare. Hermione had the solution (light) she was panicking and didn’t think of casting a spell. Ron told her she was a witch and to use magic. He didn’t use the magic to save them, or come up with the knowledge needed, he was brave, not clever.
It never made a lot of sense to me that Harry didn’t die in the forest. As explained in the series, in order to destroy a horcrux you have to destroy what’s containing it. Because a horcrux cannot survive without the container. Which is the opposite of a soul which remains intact when the container is destroyed. So how come Harry didn’t need to be destroyed in order to destroy that horcrux inside him? I know it’s stated that because of his blood inside Voldemort, that tethered him to life while Voldemort lived. But wouldn’t that also mean once Voldemort died Harry would too? It doesn’t exactly add up.
In fact movie HP1 portrayed Ron AS a great tactician and stretegist 💪 Also it portrayed him as selfless and willing to sacrifice himself for the greater good (opposite of what HP4 did to him being a jealous sore loser).
I wouldn't say myth, so much as Popular Fanfic Trope. One of my faves too when it's done right, to be honest. But it's definitely AU, not confused with canon I would think.
Myth 1- Letters may arrive before the 11th birthday but wouldn't you assume the letters contents would have a concealment charm until the 11th birthday.
2:40 weren't those letters by Hagrid, explaining the wizarding world to harry? Hagrid mentioned, that Harry should know everything about Hogwarts, by now. And I think it had something to with these letters...
No. Hagrid simply assumed that his aunt and uncle explained everything to him. He gets angry at them when he realizes they've been hiding the truth from him all along.
@@Dreadjaws I don't think they r able to tell harry everything he needs to know about the magic world. Hagrid got angry that they lied about his parents. "A CAR CRASH?! A car crash kill Lily an' James Potter?! It's an outrage! It's a scandal!"
@@Dreadjaws why do u say they don't need to tell him...? They hoped by not telling him about his true nature, it might never be an issue... I said they weren't even able to tell him anything, also now what he would have needed to know to understand the world. Which was probably done by Hagrid, in these letters. A muggleborn get's a visit to get everything explained. And I mean...Hagrid send these letters. Why would he be surprised, that harry knew nothing, if every letter was simply an acceptance letter...written by him. He would have known that something is off... Aaand there it is "I knew yeh weren’t gettin’ yer letters" I think it was formulated a bit different, in my mothertongue. It implied (at least in my head), that Hagrid wrote multiple letters, to give harry all the information about the wizarding world, his parents, dumbledore, Hogwarts, etc. It would be such a Hagrid thing to do...
@@AskanHelstroem Dude, I have no idea what you're going on about. These are the facts as stated by the books: - *Dumbledore* sends a bunch of letters to Harry. This is not up for debate. All the letters have Hogwarts' seal, they're official school business. Hagrid had nothing to do with it. - When Hagrid sees Harry he is surprised that the Dursleys haven't told him anything about him being a wizard. He says as much. Again, he was expecting Harry's family to tell him everything because it'd be the natural thing to do. He never suspected the Dursleys to be abusive anti-wizard people. Why would he feel the need to tell Harry anything?
Elaborating on polyjuice: changing one's body to perfectly imitate another's means having the same vocal cords, eyes, and muscles. The only thing that doesn't transfer is knowledge, as it's not related to a physical characteristic of the body
The Myth that Harry Potter is a Wizard. While he never cast a Spell during year 1, he stealthed though the Castle and impressed everyone with his Dexterity catching Snitches... Harry clearly is a Rogue with Arcane Trickster subclass.
In the movies the raven is the mascot of Ravenclaw, I think a raven is a better mascot for the house because eagles are symbols of strength and freedom, not for intelligence or wisdom(yeah, I am a Ravenclaw). Hermione is the SMARTEST person in the trio, yeah Ron is an expert in wizard’s chess but he is a little dumb and reckless, Harry is shown to be clever and resourceful but he’s reckless too.
Regarding Draco Malfoy, I do think he was a victim. Oh, he was a bully as well, but this behavior was the result of being raised by Death Eater parents who told him how superior he was for being a Pure Blood. When it came time to assassinate Dumbledore, his heart was never truly in it. Dumbledore even had a long conversation with him about his attempts, where Albus noted that if he truly meant to kill him, they would not still be talking. After reading Half Blood Prince, I no longer hated Draco. The only thing I felt towards him was pity. And I read it long before the movie came out and butchered that scene.
Polyjuice potion - a person's voice is dependent upon the vocal cords. The vocal cords would change along with the body change meaning the voice would change.
your take on the Draco myth is way off. throughout HBP (book), we see Draco struggle with his task, not just technically (how to actually accomplish it), but more so emotionally (his conversation w/ Snape during Slughorn's party, Myrtle's revelations to Harry about Draco crying), which culminate on the Astronomy Tower and his interaction with Dumbledore. his inner turmoil and conflict are described very well. and although he relapses a bit in DH (during the Room of Requirement fight) it is obvious that 6th and 7th year Draco has greatly matured and realized, like his mother did, that following his father's path with Voldemort will only lead to pain and suffering (Draco suddenly can't identify Harry in DH/Narcissa turns out to be a very powerful occlumens in the forest).
Harry was born at the end oof July so if he was getting letters before his birthday its safe to assume letters get sent out middle of summer before their first year
Biggest myth fans get wrong: Dumbledore is the most powerful wizard of his times. Dudes, by early 1981 Molly Weasley was daily homeschooling Bill, Charlie and Percy with three different age-appropriate programs while breastfeeding Ron, carrying Ginny in her womb and constantly preventing toddler Fred and George from destroying the house and accidentally kill themselves, all while running a household of 9 and growing her own vegetables and chickens.
Bully and victim are not mutually exclusive and the line between then can get blurry. Quite often the victim of one becomes bully to another. It's truly a horrible, self-perpetuating cycle of abuse that continues until someone decides to stop it. This generally comes about through learning empathy. I think it's fair to say that Draco was consistently, and in various ways, both bully and victim throughout the series.
Thank you for explaining this. I found the video’s take quite one-sided. At least as it was presented.
i agree with this! draco was quite a complicated character, and i think that jk rowling never really tried to delve into that, making an argument between whether he’s a bully or a victim
It seems that he is a victim due to his upbringing! He had drilled into him that pure blood are better & he being of the 28 & Malfoy would be at the top. Also Lucius teaching him HIS moral values! Victim turned bully, natural progression!
Draco a victim don’t make me laugh, for one he was never bullied by another student he was the bully belittling Ron for his “blood traitor” values and his family’s lack of wealth, Neville for his “lack” of intelligence, Harry for his lack of any living parents/ or wizarding family at all and finally Hermione for being muggle-born amongst others. Second Draco and his parents Lucius and Narcissa only stopped fighting for Voldemort in the Battle of Hogwarts because they were no longer the ‘second in command’ amongst Voldemort and his Death Eaters as Voldemort started to mock and threaten them for their perceived failures such as the diary being destroyed, unable to steal the prophecy from the Department of Mysteries and it being destroyed and then finally Draco not being the one to actually kill Albus Dumbledore even though he managed to get Death Eaters into Hogwarts. If the diary and the prophecy hadn’t been destroyed they would still be in Voldemort’s favour. As soon as they are no longer treated with respect they cowardly back out of a fight as their Pure-Blood beliefs still align with Voldemort. It is not as if they saw the error of their ways and realised what they believed in and what they were doing was immoral.
@@Ryan_Giggs97 - So you think school bullying is the only way someone can be a victim? What a narrow view of the world you have.
I think the "Hogwarts is in England myth" can be explained. Many non-Brits use the names "England", "Britain", and "the UK" interchangeably.
lol 😂 but i think the main reason for that is bc hogwarts express starts in london, and nobody expects the train to drive all the way up to scottland, so people automatically assume that hogwarts must be somewhere in england..
This is correct, I don't know the difference.
Wait... wait... wait... I thought they were one and the same... O.o
@@nicknyk7174Britain is the island. England is solely the country of England. The UK is the full union of England Scotland Wales and Northern Ireland
@@mybutthasteeth1347 Question, why doesn’t England have its own Parliament and First Minister like Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland do?
For myth 5, Hermionie might be the book smartest but Harry and Ron got street smarts
Exactly- Hermione says she is logical and clever. She even debunked this myth when she was 11 in her first year.
I agree but I'd say Ron is more street smart because he grew up in the wizarding world unlike the other two and Harry is the most logical and more of a leader who can do quick thinking in situations like ya know
I think the entire point of the trio is: They all bring different abilities to the table. Hermione IS the smartest of the three. She not only soaks up knowledge like a sponge, but can also combine incredibly complex situations into the correct conclusion. However, intelligence is not everything. She didn't manage to escape the Devil's Snare not because she lacks intelligence, but because she didn't keep a cool head. Something that Ron and especially Harry are far better at than her.
wouldn't the Hogwarts letters of acceptance come in July or even June? As Harry's birthday is July 31st?
yeah usually the letter arrives in june, august would be way too late, he got that wrong
Especially because the letter said please right back no later than July 31st. Harry literally got it JUST in time which is why they sent Hagrid
The misconception about Patronuses also comes from Pottermore, as it was put that a particularly evil and dark wizard once tried to cast a Patronus, and his wand instead erupted with maggots that devoured him alive. However, this wizard was truly reprehensible, like Voldemort. I imagine that even a wizard like Grindelwald could cast a Patronus because their soul is not completely evil.
Either that or the memories needed for a Patronus cannot be one of happiness gained through extremely evil/sadistic acts.
Yeah I mean Snape was able to cast Avada Kedavra after killing Dumbledore just months beforehand so it does make sense that not every “dark” wizard can no longer cast a patronus. I feel that a dark wizard who even has an ounce of good in their souls can cast a patronus. No matter how small that bit of good is, a dark wizard is able to cast a patronus, Voldemort is evil incarnate and incapable of love whilst Grindlewald was able to have some good in him as he was able to love and also never tried to kill anyone to obtain the elder wand, he simply stole it if I’m not mistaken. So you’re absolutely right about Grindlewald being able to cast a patronus. Voldemort is pure evil and darkness whilst Grindlewald is simply a wizard who had good intentions and took the more aggressive approach in his movements.
It's because there's a difference between being a dark wizard and a wizard that does bad things morally. Lockhart was a bad person. Vain and used memory charms on people but he wasn't a dark wizard either. He likely couldn't cast a patronus either though because he sucked at magic not because he was a dark wizard.
Yeah, a Patronus really only requires the caster to be able to do a Peter Pan and "think happy thoughts." It may be more difficult for truly evil people to dig deep and find those moments of intense happiness, but not necessarily impossible.
@@davidalexander3320 - It could also be noted that Lockhart's seeming happiness was superficial and ill-gotten, and he knew it. The man was a walking facade. I think that since all his most notable achievements were frauds and he likely had some deep-seated guilt, which might have interfered with his ability to fish through his memories and find real happiness. When it comes down to it, he was a truly miserable sod deep down.
Well, actually it was Hermione who knew how to destroy devil's snare (light), Ron only reminded her she was a witch and didn't need wood to make fire. It was also Hermione who knew and used the spell producing light. Hermione figured out much more than Ron here, he just helped. But I agree, Ron in books is much more brave and intelligent than movies portray him. And Hermione is often overwhelmed by stress, which was shown for example in her encounter with boggart-McGonnagal at DADA exam.
Hermione said “it likes the dark and the damp” then it was Ron who said “so light a fire”, so technically Ron was the one who actually said the method.
Actually Harry said too light a fire and Ron told Hermione she was a witch so Ron only used common sense but I'm not saying that Ron is stupid just that I think that Hermione is the smartest of the three still but in dada harry is better
Hermione actually said they need to relax.. and was the first to get through the trap. Had they listened? No spell would’ve been necessary
@@94808G
That's just in the movie, Well at least the relaxing part, It is true that Hermione did jump up right away and move but neither of the boys panicked(thst much anyway), they got stuck because they didn't stand up right away, not because they were panicking. That particular scene is a good example of the fact that Harry can think on his feet, a lot faster than the others, that Ron is almost always a good source of common sense, and that Hermione Isn't
always good under pressure when it comes to things that aren't tests. She does get better at this aspect as she gets older though.
The myth that Dursleys was effected by voldemort's soul that was in Harry since he was an infant. That bothered me. Because if that piece of soul was effecting the Dursleys it would effect students in his house especially those he shared a room with. Not every family will be loving towards a child they under obligation because he is family will treat them kindly.
And the Weaslys wouldn't have been so nice when he was at their house, that myth has always bothered me too, I can see where people who have never read the books would believe it, but those who have should remember that in the first chapter of the first book we see the Durselys before Harry gets lift on their doorstep, and they are just as awful as they are after Harry gets lift on their doorstep, that's why it bothers me because it's easily debunked by just reading that one chapter.
What myth? Heard it as a theory once.
Halfway through and still haven’t seen a myth.
Yes this has bothered me as well, it was quite clear how the Dursleys were much before Harry was ever part of the home
Another myth probably created by people who don't read.
Ron is the most intuitive, or attune with ancient magic...he was the only one of the trio that insisted on not using Voldermort's name, which turned out to be correctly felt, as Voldermort put a tracking spell on the name
Could that be that he was the only one brought up in a magical home? I remember a scene in Deathly Hallows, where Ron is the only one who knows the children's stories, and it hit me, oh yeah, he'd be the only one whose mom would've read them.
The misconception that snape was “pretending” to be mean to harry, the guy genuinely didn’t like harry 😂
I agree. I think he blamed Harry for Lilly's death...however convoluted that thinking might be.
@@flyonthewall8122He didn’t blame Harry for Lily, it’s mainly because Harry looks like his father, which Snape doesn’t like.
Plus there's how the movie onlys made Snape out to be a saint.
I don't think that's the problem, actually. Harry wad the embodiment of everything that Snape could have had but didn't. I think it tore open old wounds, day after day again, and Harry looking like James didn't exactly help either. Being mean to Harry might have been his way of coping with the pain, lashing out, if you will.
Note: I am not justifying how Snape bullied his students, I'm just trying to analyse why. I will not justify an adult abusing their position over children to hurt them, despite Snape being my favourite character.
I think in the movie scenes where they keep their voices after drinking polyjuice potion, their voices do change to the voices of the other person, they just sound like themselves to us, the viewers, so that we can easily tell who's who.
Except that Ron even pointed out in the COS movie that they still sounded like themselves and he had to consciously try to imitate Crab's voice.
Another way to debunk that students get their letters on their birthday is by considering the birth dates of some of the students, like Hermione and Sirius, Hermione’s birthday is September 19th, and she starts school a couple of weeks before she turns twelve, Sirius’ birthday was November 3, he started school couple of months before he turns twelve, students born after September 1st don't start Hogwarts until the following year, and I doubt they send their letters a year earlier.
I think you'll find it was only about a week between the first letter and Harry's birthday. That would still have made it July, not August, as Harry's birthday is at the end of July.
And as to the theory that children can't receive their letter in time for their 11th birthdays, tell me where it is written in stone. Hermione knew the answer to Snape's questions and Harry did not. Yet, he also tried to read up as much as he could once he got his new books home. There is even a line in chapter 8 where he wonders how Snape would have expected him to remember everything in 'One Thousand Magical Herbs and Fungi'. If Hermione had had the best part of a year to read up on Hogwarts' culture and history, this makes more sense to me. She's a smart cookky, but she'd have to be a prodigy to read up all that material in a month and I don't think she is that.
This may seem unfair, depenndent upon when your birthday falls, but there is much about this wizarding world which is either unfair or which makes no sense. Take the Trace, for instance. This is grossly unfair to muggle-bornns, as a child from a magical family could get away with using magic outside of school if the Ministry can only tell the use of magic by location and not individual. Saying that a policy of giving a child their acceptance letter in time for their 11th birthday is unfair does not, in my view, negate the argument. Only a statement from the author, one way or the other, would do that for me.
@@kyleethekeltbut what's with students who are born at the end of August? How are they supposed to get all their Hogwarts stuff in time?
@@cream9756 My guess is that students who are born at the end of August would get their letters a month or so before they turned 11.
@@elephant35e that would make sense, but it automatically means that not everyone gets their letter on their birthday. I suppose they are all sent around July.
@@kyleethekelt Okay, I see your point, but if Hermione and Sirius did get their letters a year earlier and they got them in July, they still aren't getting them on their 11th birthday, which is what the theory is saying, every child gets them on their 11th birthday, if they sent them in July, then students not born in July don't get them on their birthday. Which is what my comment was actually trying to debunk.
For myth 1: you said Harry received his first letter weeks before his eleventh birthday, but then said everyone receives theirs in August. If Harry’s first letter was sent the same time as everyone else’s it would have been early July as his birth day is the 31st of July.
Came here to comment this but I knew in my heart it had already been said. 😌
I laughed out loud when I heard myth #2 tbh, as I've been on the Hogwarts Express, or Jacobite Express as it's truly called, which as mentioned, is in Scotland lol. The actual train irl takes you to an island if I recall, and going by steam engine is an option, but that's not the only train available. Though, it has been over half a decade since I visited Scotland and went on the train, so specific details might be outdated now
"Beauxbatons is an all-girls school."
Funny considering Nicolas Flammel attended Beauxbatons.
What's interesting about the polyjuice potion is that in the Hungarian translation of the films, it's implied that Crouch Jr. can change his voice. In the scene in which he was talking to Harry at the end of the film, he said a line that was said by Hagrid before, and he sounded like Hagrid.
It's like that in the English one too. That's the one scene that justified how he was able to do Moody's voice. He was showing off by doing Hagrid's. Crouch Jr was a very smart person, not surprised he either had a natural talent for or spent time learning how to mimic someone.
About "Draco is a victim not a bully": I'd say he is both, just like Dudley. In truth, most (if not all) bullies are victims somehow, having learned that violence and demonstration of power is the way to go when you want to achieve something. You don't learn those lessons the easy way, most likely you learn them by being on the receiving end of the violence at first. I admit I haven't read all the books (still working on it), but I assume that the Malfoys are not exactly a kind and loving (or forgiving) family. Failing at something most likely never meant consolation for Draco but pain and humilation. So yeah, he is a bully (and I don't think the movie redemption arc was good enough to actually redeem him) but he is also a victim.
Yes! Thank you! Ron is very logical and smart! It drives me mad the way people treat Ron because of the movies! He's also very brave too! The main thing I want out of TV series is that they get his character right and we actually get Book Ron on the screen. Also totally agree about Draco. They save his butt from the Room of Requirement only for him to immediately turn back to the otherside again. That punch Ron gave him from beneath the cloak was so utterly satisfying that I said, "Thank you, Ron!" aloud when I first read it in the book. Hope the TV series fixes a lot of little things back to the way the books were.
I see only one difference. And from the books. Hermoine is very hard working at school even close to obsessive. While Harry and Ron are lazy when it comes to school work and most of the time if not always do everything at the nick of time. But they are for sure not dumb
@@leto-nlwhat only one difference do you mean? Ron’s character from Book to Film, if you mean that then that’s just wrong because film Ron is completely different to book Ron.
Same goes with Ginny, my favourite character, I really hope the TV show makes her at least what she was in the books, though personally I’m hoping we see more of her than we did in either of the current mediums, as I think she’s a character that deserves more time and development than either gave her.
@@dannylagangonzalez6832 yes there lots more difference but the one I mentioned is the most noticeble I think. I also agree on ginny while she was casted good she really got bad writing in the films
@@leto-nl
The only time I liked Ginny was when she told the team to "shut it!"
I've gotta disagree on the point about Draco. Even in the books it's clear he is only working toward killing Dumbledore because he was threatened with death himself and he felt he needed to make up for his father being sent to Azkaban and restore his families honor. He didn't get as strong of a redemption arc in the book, but he did change and had his own children who went to Hogwarts. He certainly started as a bully, but later on he was a scared boy who made some bad choices, not some strong evil wizard. I think of him more like Wormtail 2.0 rather than some kind of young Voldemort.
That’s not true. In the beginning of half blood prince, Draco was quite proud with the task. As we got farther along in the book, he started to show signs of conflict. Also no where in the 7 books does Draco show that he regrets his views. Being scared of the consequences of your actions isn’t the same as fighting to undo the injustice that you took part in.
Basically to sum everything up: If you only watched the movies, you got a lot of facts wrong if you went touting knowledge of the series or giving a summary of events. Each are a different canon, but the books are the source material and are viewed as the definitive version of events and characters.
Agreed!
They don't understand because the watched me movies before the books and got everything messed up or something, i really dont understand it but its whatever. lovely video per usual keep it up.
i always understood the polyjuice voice issues to be attributed for the viewer’s benefit of reminding us that it’s harry, ron, and hermione. in their world, they sound like who they are portraying. it’s just for us that they use their own voices.
But wasn't it actually mentioned in Chamber of Secrets that Harry and Ron needed to "sound more like Crabbe and Goyle" or am I misremembering that?
@@LeoTheDarkAngel That is said in the book, so their voices didn't change.
I always saw that as their voices do change ,but they have to work and mannerism and the certain way every person speaks 🤷♀️
It was. Their voices actually did change to Crab and Goyle's.
There should have been a "Snape is a good guy" myth. He was only conviced to do one good thing for personal gain (saving Lily) and then ended up indebted to Dumbledore. He was still an arsehole with an interest in the dark arts and who bullied children because he was bullied at school, especially picking on Harry as some sort of "revenge" against James.
6:00 The reason for the keeping of your own voice in the movies was for the benefit of the audience. It's so the viewers would know that it was really them. It is a children's movie after all.
Yes, that was always my interpretation as well. Even as a child.
so it is generally accepted that the reason Harry was able to come back is because Voldemort used Harrys blood to make his new body keeping Lilys protection active thus giveing Harry a choice on whether to move on to death or go back and try and stop Voldemort on even ground
Ooo...I just thought of something... wouldn't Voldemort having some of Harry's blood also protect HIM with "love"?
Whew. That's too deep even for me lol
Your wrong on the last myth, the real reason harry didn't die in the Forrest was because when voldemort used harrys blood to come back his blood still had lily's protection over it because the blood doesn't go away until Harry turned of age, but because harry was underage and still called the dursleys home harrys blood went into voldemorts system meaning as long as lily's blood lived in voldemort harry would be alive. If it was just the horcrux Dumbledore would have tried to extract it so he wouldn't have to raise harry like a pig for slaughter. There is even foreshadowing to this in Goblet of fire when harry comes back from the Graveyard and explains what happened to albus he gets a look of triumph in his eye that implies he knows harry will survive.
I would go as far as to say both are correct gibing him the benefit of both
Um wasn't he 17 when sacrafised him and since wizards are of age at 17 the protection was over. But he would of been of age at that scools years end. May have my math wrong but that is that years delema on what part of his 17 year would that have ended. Not denying his blood in moldy voldy or owner of master wand saved him
@emtbrat21 it Wasn't that the protection was over because he was of age it was because he was underage at the time voldemort took his blood meaning that harry was connected to the world through voldemort regardless of how many times he got hit with the killing curse.
Good theory but don't agree bc lily's protection was negated once they shared the same blood. That's why voldemort was able to TOUCH harry at the graveyard after his resurrection. That's why it "has to be the boy".
@@LoveShayslocoHarry was seventeen when he sacrifices himself you are right, he would have turned eighteen a couple of months after, Harry turns seventeen towards the beginning of the book, and they are on the run for almost a year.
With the poly potion and the voices, I think obvious liberties are taken for the sake of the movie in order to help identify the characters. If the voices were not affected, it should have been obvious to Draco that they sounded....rather odd. Although there was the part where they did try to adjust their tone. It is a bit of an open ended one but I wouldnmerely put it down to liberties when filming to help the viewer follow the characters.
I'm not a ravenclaw, but I still hate that the movies changed it and then it changed all the other lore from it being a eagle
Harry didn’t die in the forest because Lilly’s blood existed inside voldemort, you got it dead wrong. It had nothing to do with voldermort’s horcrux taking the hit.
“Her blood keeps her sacrifice alive, so while vodemort exists so do you” , it tethers Harry to life. Are quotes from dumbledore.
Well, it was a full combination of factors. Harry had the bit of Voldemorts soul in him, Voldemort had Harry's blood AND Voldemort was trying to use a wand that was loyal to Harry to kill Harry with. All three comboed Harry right back to the land of the living.
That, and the elder wand doesn't kill its true owner (Harry), so it killed the piece of Voldemort....
But Avada Kedavra did kill the horcrux that was inside Harry. Two things can be right: It kills the horcrux inside Harry, making Voldemort more vulnerable, and the love sacrifice protected him. I also thought that the reason Harry stayed with the Dursley family was to keep the protection on him, and it went away when he turned 17. Maybe I'm remembering wrong.
@Quincelee2 I believe he stayed there because as long as he could call it home and it shared his mother's blood, the protection was active. But when he turned 17, he was no longer a minor in the Wizarding world and didn't call it home. The letter from Dumbledore says to "remember her promise" or something along those lines. That is why the Dursley's leave right before Harry turns 17. They know the protection will be broken and are being moved to safety
@@user-me7iw6ft8z Voldemort could touch Harry because he used some of his blood to resurrect himself in Goblet of Fire.
_"The real reason Harry was able to come back to life was due to the bit of Voldemort's soul that had been residing in his body since he was an infant"_
This is wrong. The reason Harry was able to come back was because Voldemort had taken Harry's blood which meant Lily's sacrifice continued to live inside Voldemort, keeping Harry alive. It acted kinda like a "lovecrux" for Harry which is why he was able to come back.
_"Draco would have at least attempted to kill Dumbledore because he's a narcissist who will do anything so survive"_
While Draco probably is a bit narcissistic, I don't think you need to be narcissist to want to survive. That's basic human nature for everyone. I think it's also quite clear Draco would have not attempted to kill Dumbledore. Draco was starting to lower his wand before the other death eaters burst into the the room. And even after the death eaters tried to pressure him to do it, he still wasn't able to. Harry also thinks he wouldn't have done it.
I also think it's quite clear that Hermione is the smartest of the group. This isn't a myth. Hermione is not only incredibly book-smart, she is also the most emotionally intelligent and logical in general. These qualities alone make her much smarter than Harry and Ron. But on top of this she has no problems performing under pressure after the 3rd book. Reciting one devils snare example from the *first* book isn't really convincing lol. Remember in Order of the Phoenix when Hermione fake cried and came up with a plan to lure Umbridge into the forest for the centaurs/Grawp? That was incredible thinking under pressure. Or remember in Deathly Hallows when the death eaters were in the Lovegoods house, and Hermione managed to come up with a plan that would get them out of there safely, while also making sure the death eaters know Xenophilius wasn't lying, AND that they don't find out Ron is with them. Incredible thinking on the fly. So yeah, Hermione is clearly the smartest of the trio. That doesn't mean Harry and Ron are stupid, although they sometimes are 😁
My theory is that Hermione just never really knew how to make polyjuice in the movies because when others make it it changes their voice
Hermoine isn't the person who made the potion in the 7th book or movie, but their voices were the same in the 7th movie. I am pretty sure at least one of the aurors knew how to make it correctly.
I'm confused. If Harry's birthday is July 31, and letters showed up prior to his birthday, then they aren't sent in August.
I wouldn't be surprised if they do the muggleborns/kids from muggle households earlier than whenever they send out the letters to households with at least one magical person. Cause they have to send a person to explain everything, help them shop, etc. So they probably sent his out early just in case. 🤷🏻♀
usually the letters arrive in june, august would be way too late, he got that wrong
@@LadyBeyondTheWall Yeah, the Ministry sends special people to Muggleborn households to explain magic and then take them shopping.
Voldemort created all those horcruxes but never used one once to come back. He used Quirrel and unicorn blood in first book. In 4th book he used a ritual without a horcrux. Fun fact, harry is the only person to successfully use one of voldemorts horcruxes to come back to life… when he was sent in limbo and came back:)
They stopped him from dying though which is the main point
the horcruxes just save a piece of his soul.. he has to find a way to produce a body.. which took him about 10 yrs and the help of others to return the first time.. seems rather useless spell really..
Since he died and went into purgatory where Valdemort limp was, he was dead and this was inside his head. Therefore the only way for him to see Dumbeldore there would be If Dumbeldore was THE Death itself and he could either go back to the living or go with Dumbeldore aka Death and stay dead. That is my theory.
Imagine shooting at somebody who isn’t wearing a vest and then the bullet miraculously bouncing back to kill you, twice
“You’ve never heard of Beedle the bard?” Ron asked the two 7 year old wizards beside him
Hermionie book smart Harry mugle street smart Ron wizard street smart
That's actually a pretty good way to describe them.
Overall - Hermione
Hermione being the smartest of the golden trio is not a "myth" though. It's pretty much a fact. Hermione is not only incredibly book-smart, she is also the most emotionally intelligent and logical in general. These qualities alone make her much smarter than Harry and Ron. But on top of this she has no problems performing under pressure after the 3rd book. One devils snare example from the first book isn't really convincing lol.
Remember in Order of the Phoenix when Hermione fake cried and came up with a plan to lure Umbridge into the forest for the centaurs/Grawp? That was incredible thinking under pressure. Or, remember in Deathly Hallows when the death eaters were in the Lovegoods house, and Hermione managed to come up with a plan that would get them out of there safely, while also making sure the death eaters know Xenophilius wasn't lying, AND that they don't find out Ron is with them? Incredible thinking on the fly. So yeah, Hermione is clearly the smartest of the trio. That doesn't mean Harry and Ron are stupid, although they sometimes are lol
The films did Ron's character no favor.
Harry reads Lily's diary.
Snape: You father was a swine.
Harry: My father?
Snape: James Potter.
Harry: No! You are my father!
Snape: Nooooooooooo!
I absolutely love this video it was 100% accurate and debunking all those myths
Please anybody, where can I find the music that Starts at 1:13 🙏
6:58 Nope, it was actually Harry who figured out how to kill the Devil's Snare, and Ron who reminded Hermione to use her damn wand.
Here is the excerpt:
- Hermione Granger: "Devil's Snare, Devil's Snare... What did Professor Sprout say? It likes the dark and the damp - "
- Harry Potter: "So light a fire!"
- Hermione Granger: " Yes - of course - But there's no wood!"
- Ron Weasley: "HAVE YOU GONE MAD! ARE YOU A WITCH OR NOT?"
- Hermione Granger: "Oh, right!"
If evil wizards can do patronus. I can imagine voldemord having a good memory be:
*that one time i killed that guy, damn it felt good* 😂
Another Myth: Luna is this ethereal and sureal being. (in reality Luna is a conspiracy theorist and sometimes imposed her ideal onto others). 🤔
Ive been to scottish highlands to visit the locations, like the birdge, Hagrids hut location and waterfall use as a background during the quidditch. Absolutely stuning
I know so many people get them wrong 😂
You’re amazing 😊❤
The reason why it seemed so compelling that the ressurection stone brought Harry back, was because it turned 3 times as it rolled of his palm. The brother in the 3 brother tale also did this. So I always felt like Harry primed the stone (although unknowingly) to bring him back.
Or to go off that he had the cloke and won and the stone so whould that make him master of death
6:15 the inconsistencies with the PJ potion might be explained by the movies not wanting to confuse viewers by changing voices too, whereas Moody and PJ was a plot twist, so deceiving viewers actually helped.
I've literally never heard of the resurrection stone saving Harry.
I always heard the Elder wand intentionally only killed the horcrux in Harry or that Harry was spared from death because he willingly offered his own life.
I'm pretty sure that the Elder Wand was completely incapable of killing Harry, because he was its true master after disarming Draco earlier in book 7.
Seems most of the confusion stem from the inconsistencies introduced by the movies as the directors try to put their own stamp onto the books they adopted into the big screen.
Polyjuice always took on their voice, it just didnt change voice so we the audience could tell the difference between protagonists
Myth #9: Draco is not a bully but a victim... You know someone can be both right? Dumbledore clearly sees Dudly as a victim of the Dursleys because of their parenting so wouldn't Drako also be one? I think Draco liked people thinking he was hardcore and talked big but never actually wanted anyone to get killed.
The myth that Susan Bones' parents were killed in the first war and she was raised by her aunt Amelia. It says quite clearly in book 5 that it was her uncle, aunt and cousins who were killed, not her parents and siblings.
I saw Snape as a very complex character- I think deep down he cared about Harry because of Lily, yet was angry he was James's son instead of his own, and couldn't resist picking on him. In a sense his hardness on Harry was a kindness- Harry's fame could have made him lazy and arrogant, and when his time came to fulfill his destiny might have made him lose to Voldemort. Lily's sacrifice to save Harry would have been a complete waste.
As for Draco- Snape had to favor Draco to keep his standing with the death eaters, but his coddling intensified Draco's laziness. But then he saved Draco by killing Dumbledore himself, giving Draco the chance to survive.
I actually wish Draco had a serious redemption arc. I would have had him totally reject the Deatheaters and his family, join Harry's side and in the end admit he was in love with Hermione and then married her instead of Ron.
What I love about this series is all the creativity it has inspired in me.
"Draco is not a bully but a victim." That statement presumes that the two are mutually exclusive. Why can't a bully also be a victim? In fact, what if the reason they're a bully is because they're a victim, and they just redirect their rage onto others? Or begin to believe that their bullying behavior is justified by their being a victim?
I hope that mugglebones would probably get their letters a little earlier because of the fact that they are suddenly hit with this news that they're different and have to adjust more than just One month before school starts.
Muggleborns get a visit from someone from the school to explain everything and help them figure things out.
I think you're right. Hermione is unlikely to have memorized all her course books by heart if she only got them a month before school began. It's why the idea of them getting their letters sometime near their eleventh birthday makes sense, as Hermione's birthday is in September. She would have had a full year to study her new textbooks.
Another tenacious myth is that Hufflepuffs are a bit stupid and have less magical abilities than students of other houses
I agree with every point you made except for the one on Malfoy. I think he was both a bully and a victim (as most bullies at that age are). He was brainwashed by his parents with hate and senses of entitlement and superiority. I would argue if most of us were raised in a family like that chances are we would have ended up a lot like him. Also of all the deviations between the books and the movies, there isn't as much deviation with his story arc. He did hesitate to kill Dumbledore and Harry who was immobilized under the cloak noticed that Draco's wand dropped a bit. In Malfoy Manor, though it was never expressed I think as well in the books as it did in the movies, in the books Malfoy didn't want to look at Harry and I think it's safe to assume that Malfoy knew it was him. In the room of requirements, Malfoy was pleading with Crabbe not to kill him. You could argue with that last one that Malfoy understood that Voldemort would be upset if anyone but he killed Harry, but I think when you put it together you see that Draco didn't actually want Harry dead. It's also been confirmed by Rowling that after the books end, Draco got married and had a kid and his views softened quite a bit, differing from his parents. He may not have completely lost admiration for dark magic but his views of pure blood superiority certainly seem to soften. I think we saw that progression in the books. He never stated it publicly, always openly spewing the pure blood supremacy nonsense, but what we saw was a kid who was at least conflicted. He repeated what his parents taught him and in this sense he is a victim, arguably of a form of abuse. Does that justify his actions or his bullying at Hogwarts? No. But I believe someone can be a bully and a victim, it's not one or the other.
I would liken his predicament to Kreacher. Paraphrasing what Dumbledore said (since I don't want to look up the exact quote) "Kreacher is what wizards made him. He is to be pitied". I agree with this sentiment. With most bullies, I pity them. Bullies usually aren't born, they are made. It's pretty clear to me who made Draco the way he was.
"A Squib or Muggle could fly a broom because the magic of flight is in the enchantments."
A Wand is to a Wizard's use of magic, as a Broom is to a Wizard's ability to fly.
Just as nothing happens when a muggle holds a wand, a broom is just a branch with twigs unless a Magical uses it.
Actually, I imagine that a muggle could fly on a broom, but I'll bet you anything that modern brooms all have charms on them that make them inert when a muggle is holding them.
For myth 9, the redemption arc was in the books too! Harry believes he would not have gone through with it and was lowering his wand, he refuses to identnfy them, and IIRC there’s more when they encounter him in the Room of Requirements with the diadem but I don’t remember that in detail.
And a myth that annoys me is your incomplete explanation for Harry surviving in the Forbidden Forest. He was tied to life because of his blood, with his mother’s protection, still being alive in Voldemort. Without that he would still have been killed along with the partial soul. Nagini isn’t immune to the Killing Curse.
I always took it that the Reason Harry didn't die in the forest was due to a combination of 2 unique facts that gave him the choice if he wanted to either pass on or return to life. The first was that by Voldemort taking Harry's Blood into himself when regaining his new body he also took in a small part of the original protection that Lilly gave Harry when she died to protect him, this tethered Harry to the living world as it made it impossible for Voldemort to actually be able to kill Harry so in the forest he only succeeds in killing the part of his own soul that was contained inside Harry and not Harry himself. Plus also at the time Harry confronts Voldemort, Harry is already the Master of Death by being the true owner of all 3 of the Deathly Hallows, you don't actually need to be in possession all 3 Hallows to be the Master of Death you just need to be the rightful owner of them, The Invisibility Cloak was passed to him by his Father as it had been handed down through the generations from Father to Son, The Resurrection Stone being passed on to him in Dumbledore's will and being the rightful Master of the Elder Wand due to ownership of it becoming his as he disarmed the previous Master Draco at Malfoy Manor who had become the Master after disarming Dumbledore at the top of the Astronomy Tower. So Harry effectively became the "Master of Death" from the very point he Disarmed Draco as that was the point he took ownership of all 3 hallows.
I don’t remember the books that good so its just an opinion.
I wouldn’t say that resurrection stone for sure didn't back Harrys life, nor I would say it did.
All of the fight of Harry and Voldemort throughout the series is kinda special. Harry has Voldemort in him, Tom puts all the effort againt Harry, making him equal, Voldemort also killed unicorn which made his soul weaker(i believie?) , Harry was the Lord of Death(whatever that means) and at the end, Voldemort fought Harry with his own wand, before that, they had sibling wands. It's not satisfactionary to me to assume that Harry got choice only because he had part of Voldemort's soul in him. Maybe it could be, that he was lord of death, got struck by his own wand + got struck actually by himself(Voldemort ressurected from his blood) and for last he was the horcrux.
Was the prophecy made before Harry and Neville were born? Why didn't the evil lord kill the child at birth? When did Snape and Dumbledore meet, was it a few days after the child was born or a year later? Why did Dumbledore tell the Potters to use the loyalty spell two weeks before his death? After all, the prediction was made a year ago? Why didn't Voldermort kill the boy during the year when the devotion spell wasn't used?
Slight correction, it was once again Lily's sacrifice that enabled Harry to come back in the Forbidden Forest since Voldemort had taken the magic of that sacrifice into himself when he used Harry's blood to rebuild his body. So he basically tethered Harry to life so long as he himself lived or unless Harry made the choice to move on.
The myth that the snake from the zoo in the first book is Nagini, even though it’s male and a completely different species
I love the UA-cam channel "super carlin brothers". Their theories are so interesting and well put together.
Having read Harry Potter when it first came out in 97, I found this very interesting & didn't believe any of the myths. Ron doesn't always catch on to things as quickly as Harry & Hermione but he is clever in other ways. He was the one that suggested Harry take lucky potion to get the memory from Slughorn.
For me so much of the latter films I find very annoying as some things are so wrong. The one that upsets me the most is Harry throwing away the elder wand. He would never do that, it's just not in his character to do something where this evil wand could live on. I feel that was the director thinking maybe there was a film to make of someone finding the wand! I can't watch the final film because it upsets me so much!
🎯💯
And yet the Elder Wand is neither good nor evil. It is all the person behind it.
and the fire at the burrow … so much added drama when the books had plenty of drama, in fact too much to be shown in every movie..
I believe the potion thing was. In the second movie. They all took the same batch and they are our main trio. So we could hear their voices but to everyone else they sounded like their intended. So we were supposed to hear their voice. As for Harry’s vision. I don’t believe he still needed the glasses. I think he simply forgot to take them off. We hear everyone again with their own voices while they are all Harry because again. Same batch and I believe to everyone else they probably sounded like Harry. We were supposed to hear them as themselves. As for Barty being mad eye. Eye was making and using his own potion. We weren’t supposed to know it was him. So we don’t hear his voice. And no one else would hear him as him because no one else took the same batch. That’s my theory on the potion. And if there are any holes please feel free to point them out!
Great video please do a part 2
I figured the reason Voldemort couldn't kill Harry in the last book/movie was because through Dumbledore's planning and some luck, Harry entered the forest as "master of death". He already had the invisibility cloak, he now realizes he has the resurrection stone. And as he later informs Voldemort, ever since disarming Draco he has been the true owner of the elder wand. Which also shows that he didn't need to be in physical possession of the wand for it to answer to him. I would assume that same logic applies to the stone. Even though he drops it in the forest, it still answers to him since he didn't give it to another person or have it taken from him. That's why in his vision/dream/limbo, Dumbledore tells him he has a choice of whether he wants to go back or to go "on" because he is the owner of all three of the deathly hallows.
I agree on that
8:42 That actually so true. Did you know that Voldemort has a patronus, a mini lop bunny actually
i think the polyjuice potion issue can be chalked up to the potion not being PERFECTLY brewed. maybe slight imperfections causes certain parts of you not to change
Nope, it wouldn't explain the voices when used in the 7th movie.
The quote in prisoner “he’s been sighted in Dufftown, that’s not far from here” means that the school is somewhere in moray as that’s where Dufftown is, I live a few miles away, still looking for hogwarts though.
So, while I agree that Hermione is only the most well read, the devils snare thing was all three of them. Hermione said that it likes the dark and damp, harry said to light a fire (something that they mention earlier in the first book that hermione had become quite adept at producing for warmth during the cold scottish highland winters, for anyone wondering why harry didn't just do it) and Ron was the one that kept cool enough to remind Hermione that she's a witch and doesn't need wood.
Also, later in that same chapter ron proves how smart he is by beating the large chess set, and Hermione points out something that plays a roll in book 6 in the potion room when she says that most wizards don't have an ounce of logic. Where this comes to pass in the 6th book is when Dumbledore and Harry are in the boat headed to the horcrux and Dumbledor tells Harry "Like many creatures that dwell in cold and dark, they fear light and warmth." Then has to tell Harry that means fire. While damp and dark is different than cold and dark, the fact that it's lost on Harry, tells me that Hogwarts made Harry less logical.
Or J.K. just isn't a good writer...
The movies gave a lot of Ron's knowledge to Hermione, and changed a whole of other stuff like giving lines from one person in the books to someone else and just messing up everything.
The biggest myth that makes me angry is that JKR had it all planned out to the last detail and never made a mistake or retconed anything ever and that every detail that seems like it's an error can be explained away. (Why did Harry not see the Thestrals on the way home after the triwizard tournament, AFTER seeing Cedrig die but only at the beginning of the new year?!)
👍👍👍
Something they only hint at in the movies is that Ron is the "social" resource. Yes Hermione is very book smart, but Ron knows how the wizarding world works. He grew up in it, and in the books he is definitely portrayed in a better light. Ron/Weasleys are my favorite in the whole series.
It’s possible that crouch jr didn’t get the voice of moody through the potion but instead was just able to mimic it and there was no point doing it while no longer appearing as Alistair moody
Not sure if it was different in the book, but in the movie it was actually Hermione that told them what to do to get away from the devil's snare and it was her that figured out what spell to use to free Ron from it in the Sorcerer's Stone
My favorite way Harry gets his letters is in the form of eggs.😅😂😅😂
There was a whole thing about done about how patronus is can't be cast by a person that is evil. That they will shoot out maggots from their wands and they'll devour them if the person decides to perform the patronus charm being an evil person.
Yeah, but you have to be truly and completely evil for that to happen. Most villainous people are not as black hearted as that.
Draco was lowering his wand in both book and movie, and let's not forget Dumbledore telling Draco that it was like his heart wasn't in it
One of the big Myths was that there was a lot of animal sacrifice was in the books. Almost on the verge of almost getting the books banned.
There is so much more in the books that the movies simply can’t do justice. It just isn’t feasible, especially with the latter books, due to their extensive lengths. The order of the Phoenix is the longest, with a total of 870 pages. It’s understandable that they can’t fit everything, but what bugs me the most is when they added or changed things around in the movies that just never happened in the books. The first example that comes to mind is Voldemort actually HUGGING Draco Malfoy in the last movie at the end of the battle. Or Voldemort ridiculously disintegrated into flakes?! Come on! Or Harry not fixing his own wand with the powerful elder wand, something no other wand could possibly do. And he didn’t stupidly snap the most powerful wand in the world in HALF and then chucked it! He returned it to Dumbledore’s grave. As long as Harry stayed undefeated until his death, the vicious cycle of murder would die with him. So many little things, lol. The movies are really great too, with absolutely phenomenal casting and incredible production, but they just can’t trump the books for me.
Ron did not get them out of the devils snare. Hermione had the solution (light) she was panicking and didn’t think of casting a spell.
Ron told her she was a witch and to use magic.
He didn’t use the magic to save them, or come up with the knowledge needed, he was brave, not clever.
It never made a lot of sense to me that Harry didn’t die in the forest. As explained in the series, in order to destroy a horcrux you have to destroy what’s containing it. Because a horcrux cannot survive without the container. Which is the opposite of a soul which remains intact when the container is destroyed. So how come Harry didn’t need to be destroyed in order to destroy that horcrux inside him? I know it’s stated that because of his blood inside Voldemort, that tethered him to life while Voldemort lived. But wouldn’t that also mean once Voldemort died Harry would too? It doesn’t exactly add up.
In fact movie HP1 portrayed Ron AS a great tactician and stretegist 💪 Also it portrayed him as selfless and willing to sacrifice himself for the greater good (opposite of what HP4 did to him being a jealous sore loser).
People, it's fiction! FICTION! 🙄
What about the myth that Snape is actually Harry’s father? That one drives me nuts. Some people must think that they’re watching Star Wars. 😂
I wouldn't say myth, so much as Popular Fanfic Trope. One of my faves too when it's done right, to be honest. But it's definitely AU, not confused with canon I would think.
Myth 1-
Letters may arrive before the 11th birthday but wouldn't you assume the letters contents would have a concealment charm until the 11th birthday.
The devil's snare scene in the movies is one of the absolute worst, I hate how it changes Ron's whole dynamic
2:40 weren't those letters by Hagrid, explaining the wizarding world to harry?
Hagrid mentioned, that Harry should know everything about Hogwarts, by now. And I think it had something to with these letters...
No. Hagrid simply assumed that his aunt and uncle explained everything to him. He gets angry at them when he realizes they've been hiding the truth from him all along.
@@Dreadjaws I don't think they r able to tell harry everything he needs to know about the magic world.
Hagrid got angry that they lied about his parents.
"A CAR CRASH?! A car crash kill Lily an' James Potter?! It's an outrage! It's a scandal!"
@@AskanHelstroem They don't need to tell him anything, but they didn't even tell him he was a wizard.
@@Dreadjaws why do u say they don't need to tell him...?
They hoped by not telling him about his true nature, it might never be an issue...
I said they weren't even able to tell him anything, also now what he would have needed to know to understand the world. Which was probably done by Hagrid, in these letters.
A muggleborn get's a visit to get everything explained. And I mean...Hagrid send these letters.
Why would he be surprised, that harry knew nothing, if every letter was simply an acceptance letter...written by him. He would have known that something is off...
Aaand there it is "I knew yeh weren’t gettin’ yer letters"
I think it was formulated a bit different, in my mothertongue.
It implied (at least in my head), that Hagrid wrote multiple letters, to give harry all the information about the wizarding world, his parents, dumbledore, Hogwarts, etc.
It would be such a Hagrid thing to do...
@@AskanHelstroem Dude, I have no idea what you're going on about. These are the facts as stated by the books:
- *Dumbledore* sends a bunch of letters to Harry. This is not up for debate. All the letters have Hogwarts' seal, they're official school business. Hagrid had nothing to do with it.
- When Hagrid sees Harry he is surprised that the Dursleys haven't told him anything about him being a wizard. He says as much. Again, he was expecting Harry's family to tell him everything because it'd be the natural thing to do. He never suspected the Dursleys to be abusive anti-wizard people. Why would he feel the need to tell Harry anything?
Elaborating on polyjuice: changing one's body to perfectly imitate another's means having the same vocal cords, eyes, and muscles. The only thing that doesn't transfer is knowledge, as it's not related to a physical characteristic of the body
❤Awesome thanks as always
The Myth that Harry Potter is a Wizard.
While he never cast a Spell during year 1, he stealthed though the Castle and impressed everyone with his Dexterity catching Snitches...
Harry clearly is a Rogue with Arcane Trickster subclass.
In the movies the raven is the mascot of Ravenclaw, I think a raven is a better mascot for the house because eagles are symbols of strength and freedom, not for intelligence or wisdom(yeah, I am a Ravenclaw).
Hermione is the SMARTEST person in the trio, yeah Ron is an expert in wizard’s chess but he is a little dumb and reckless, Harry is shown to be clever and resourceful but he’s reckless too.
I figured Harry was simply knocked out momentarily, and then when he woke up, was very careful and cautious.
Regarding Draco Malfoy, I do think he was a victim. Oh, he was a bully as well, but this behavior was the result of being raised by Death Eater parents who told him how superior he was for being a Pure Blood.
When it came time to assassinate Dumbledore, his heart was never truly in it. Dumbledore even had a long conversation with him about his attempts, where Albus noted that if he truly meant to kill him, they would not still be talking.
After reading Half Blood Prince, I no longer hated Draco. The only thing I felt towards him was pity. And I read it long before the movie came out and butchered that scene.
Polyjuice potion - a person's voice is dependent upon the vocal cords. The vocal cords would change along with the body change meaning the voice would change.
your take on the Draco myth is way off. throughout HBP (book), we see Draco struggle with his task, not just technically (how to actually accomplish it), but more so emotionally (his conversation w/ Snape during Slughorn's party, Myrtle's revelations to Harry about Draco crying), which culminate on the Astronomy Tower and his interaction with Dumbledore. his inner turmoil and conflict are described very well. and although he relapses a bit in DH (during the Room of Requirement fight) it is obvious that 6th and 7th year Draco has greatly matured and realized, like his mother did, that following his father's path with Voldemort will only lead to pain and suffering (Draco suddenly can't identify Harry in DH/Narcissa turns out to be a very powerful occlumens in the forest).
Harry was born at the end oof July so if he was getting letters before his birthday its safe to assume letters get sent out middle of summer before their first year
Biggest myth fans get wrong: Dumbledore is the most powerful wizard of his times. Dudes, by early 1981 Molly Weasley was daily homeschooling Bill, Charlie and Percy with three different age-appropriate programs while breastfeeding Ron, carrying Ginny in her womb and constantly preventing toddler Fred and George from destroying the house and accidentally kill themselves, all while running a household of 9 and growing her own vegetables and chickens.
and they all reached adulthood successfully, including hermione and harry, and still had the strength to defeat bellatrix.. this is phenomenal power..
It's fair to say a mother's love...as proven with harry. Is the strongest magic.