From: bdesham@gmail.com   
      
   Sky Rider wrote:   
      
   > Benjamin Esham wrote:   
   >   
   > > Sky Rider wrote:   
   > >   
   > > > Benjamin Esham wrote:   
   >   
   > [snip]   
   >   
   > > Actually, now that I think of it--did Voldemort intentionally not use   
   > > the Elder Wand on Snape because he feared that Snape was its master and   
   > > that the wand wouldn't work against him? That makes his use of Nagini   
   > > seem logical again. (Not that I would have been able to figure that out   
   > > had I not read the book!)   
   >   
   > Using Nagini was a highly logical act by Voldemort... unusually since we   
   > can see from his actions that logic was *not* one of his strong points.   
   >   
   > Examples of his illogicality include, using the same AC curse on Harry   
   > despite it having failed to kill him three times in succession! Also the   
   > more obvious fact that simply *because* he could not die whilst his   
   > Horcruxes existed all he really had to do was wait the others out   
   > (especially Harry) and eventually they would die... leaving him without a   
   > challenger! :)   
      
   I guess Voldemort's underlying problem here was his reliance on the   
   prophecy. Remember that Trelawney had said that "either must die at the hand   
   of the other for neither can live while the other survives". It's debatable   
   whether the prophecy had any validity other than that which people ascribed   
   to it, but Voldemort *did* believe in it, and so he believed that he would   
   have to proactively kill Harry--not just wait for him to die--or else he   
   [Voldemort] wouldn't be able to "live" (however you might define that).   
      
   > [snip]   
   >   
   > > [Tonks was pregnant]   
   >   
   > Never stated in the movie... and only once during the scene in the forest.   
   > That part felt really disjointed and for anyone not familiar with the   
   > books, it would have come entirely from left field!   
      
   I have to say that if someone thinks the Harry Potter series is crap, and   
   they're drawing this conclusion based solely on the movies--well, of course   
   they don't have the full picture, but I can't fault them for thinking badly   
   of the series. So much of the intellectual depth and interconnectedness of   
   the story have been mercilessly stripped out in the transition to screen.   
      
   I just read "A Game of Thrones", the first in the "Song of Ice and Fire"   
   series by George R.R. Martin, and now I'm working my way through the TV   
   series. One season of the series corresponds to one book, so for the first   
   book, 800 pages were translated into ten hours of show. I can think of   
   /some/ minor things that were cut out, but from what I've seen so far,   
   nothing has been gratuitously omitted. I think that makes the "Game of   
   Thrones" TV show stand on its own merits more easily than the Harry Potter   
   movies.   
      
   > [snip]   
   >   
   > > > There is so much 'wrong' with the film compared to the books I'm going   
   > > > to stop because otherwise I'd be here all day and ultimately it's all   
   > > > pointless anyway now.   
   >   
   > > But Usenet is here for all of us to rant on :-)   
   >   
   > Hence the increasingly long ramble above! :D   
      
   Yes, I was worried that this group was taken over entirely by trolls... nice   
   to know there is still the possibility of legitimate discussions here :-)   
      
   --   
   Benjamin D. Esham  |  bdesham@gmail.com  |  www.bdesham.info   
   God:   HEY DID YOU KNOW I CAN SEE YOUR DREAMS T-REX   
   T-Rex: Oh wow!  I think it’s SO AWESOME that you’ll spy on my dreams,   
          but won’t approve my friend request on Facebook Dot Com!!   
   God:   UH                                      — Dinosaur Comics   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)