# Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire - What's missing from the movie? [SPOILERS!]



## Viking Bastard (Dec 5, 2005)

I read the first Harry Potter book long before there was a movie. Then sometime after the first 
film I read Chamber of Secrets. I forgot to read Prisoner of Azkaban before the movie premiered
and while I was going to read Goblet of Fire, I came to the realization that a) being in a very
book-heavy subject at university I just don't find the time for reading much non-school stuff
and b) I'm enjoying the movies somewhat more than I am the books, so I didn't read it.

So I ask of you all: What exactly, subplots and bits of information, is missing from the movie?

Please?

And don't tell me to read the books: I probably will, sometime, but at the moment, I just can't.


----------



## Roudi (Dec 5, 2005)

The Quidditch World Cup.  They lead up to it, the show the stadium and the pre-game hijinks, and then cut to Harry and the Weasleys celebrating Ireland's victory in their tent (this omission disappointed me most... I was looking forward to seeing that game).

Blast-Ended Skroots

Dobby or any other house elves (plot elements surrounding Dobby were reworked with Neville instead)

The Sphinx (I'm pretty sure there was one during the final trial)


In all, though, all of the important elements were maintained, and it's pretty faithful to the spirit of the story.


----------



## Viking Bastard (Dec 5, 2005)

Thanks, but I was thinking something more detailed. A synopsis, of sorts.


----------



## Tarrasque Wrangler (Dec 5, 2005)

All the action after they interrogate Crouch at the end goes down much differently in the book (and is much cooler the way it happens in the book, IMO).  Since there's no spoiler note in the subject line, I'll sblock it for those who've neither read the book nor seen the movie yet.

[sblock]They send for Fudge after Crouch tells them the story, and Fudge arrives with a Dementor bodyguard who proceeds to immediately suck out Crouch's soul.  Thus, Fudge is unable to hear Crouch's testimony about Voldy's return, and he leaves after arguing with Dumbledore believing that Harry made the whole thing up.  This sets up a lot of the background in the next book, in which nobody trusts Harry, the Ministry is out to discredit him at every turn, and there's a schism between Dumbledore and the Ministry.[/sblock]


----------



## Tarrasque Wrangler (Dec 5, 2005)

Viking Bastard said:
			
		

> Thanks, but I was thinking something more detailed. A synopsis, of sorts.



 Most of the stuff you missed was in the "nice, but not necessary" column.  It would have been cool to see the Quidditch World Cup match, but it didn't break the film to not include it.  The only bit I really missed was what I posted above about the ending.


----------



## Viking Bastard (Dec 5, 2005)

So The New Dr. Who bites it, then?


(And I added a spoiler note.)


What's this about the House Elves, I've heard people talk about?


----------



## WayneLigon (Dec 5, 2005)

Viking Bastard said:
			
		

> What's this about the House Elves, I've heard people talk about?




They appear in the second book (and onward) and second movie; Dobby is a house elf. They're very very useful servant creatures that serve Wizarding households and are passed down from master to master. They do most of the cleaning, mending and scutwork. They pass messages and do errands. They can do some magic themselves. They are totally loyal, even to masters that are cruel and evil to them. They can find loopholes sometimes, though it causes them great mental anquish. Hermione formed an activist group to free them - she thinks of them as slaves. They can only be freed if the master gives them the gift of clothing.


----------



## Vocenoctum (Dec 5, 2005)

going from memory:
1) Harry at home, invited to World Cup, scene of the Weasley's coming to his house via the fireplace (which is boarded up), Fred & George give Dudley candy that makes his tongue huge.
2) some stuff at the Weasley's
3) the entire world cup, which includes leprechauns giving out gold, and (veela?) beautiful creatures that make men do anything (important, since Fleur's grandmother, IIRC, is one)
4) They all sit in box seats, with the Malfoy's, Fudge,Bagman, but Crouch just has his house elf sit there.
5) during the riots of that night, the Deatheaters are dancing some muggles around. Harry realizes his wand is gone, there's a voice, the Sign appears, the authorities find Winky (Fudge's house elf) with Harry's wand, use a spell (Priori Incantantum) to see that she cast the Sign. Winky is dismissed.
6) Barty Crouch Jr doesn't appear until the pensieve, so far as all know, he died in Azkaban.

More later...


----------



## WayneLigon (Dec 5, 2005)

In the book you also meet Ron's adult brothers for the first time. Bill works as a curse-breaker for Gringott's Bank. He and Fleur Delacour become engaged later on. Charlie, mentioned in the film, works with dragons.


----------



## Green Knight (Dec 5, 2005)

Thanks for the post, Tarrasque Wrangler. 



Spoiler



I suspected something like that might happen. After all, the only witness is Harry. And considering how afraid people would be to admit that Voldemort has returned, they'd probably find it a lot easier to believe that Harry made the whole thing up and that he killed Cedric. After all, if Voldemort had returned, then shouldn't Harry be dead? Hard to believe he'd survive a SECOND encounter with the Dark Lord.


 
But of course, I've yet to read the books, so that's just a guess on my part (Yeah, I need to get the books, already).


----------



## Wombat (Dec 5, 2005)

What else is missing?

Well, Krum is actually a character instead of window-dressing.  And he and Hermione have a much more interesting relationship.  And he is there just before Crouch is killed ... which leads to all kinds of misunderstandings.  

Rita Skeeter becomes the bane of Harry's existence instead of a minor annoyance in a scene or two ... which feeds into events in the next book.  

Hermione's House Elf Liberation Front (well, actually SPEW) shows a side of the wizarding world that they would like to ignore, which again becomes a major plot point in the next book.  

Sirius Black is in contact with Harry over a longer period.  

And Ludo Bagman, an amusing but less important sub-plot character, is dropped entirely.

Overall, there is a lot more developement of the characters, their backgrounds, and the whole situation.

The movie took the _major_ action of the book and put in on the screen in a fairly pretty manner; it left all of the pith of the tale behind, making it rather shabby and rushed in comparision.


----------



## Ulrik (Dec 5, 2005)

Wombat said:
			
		

> The movie took the _major_ action of the book and put in on the screen in a fairly pretty manner; it left all of the pith of the tale behind, making it rather shabby and rushed in comparision.




While I agree that the movie feels a bit rushed, I don't think it could be anything else. The book is, what, 700 pages, and Rowling never writes as ploddingly as, say, Robert Jordan.

I can't see how the movie could possibly avoid feeling a bit rushed, or leaving interesting parts out. I think they did a really good job, actually.


----------



## Viking Bastard (Dec 5, 2005)

Wombat said:
			
		

> And Ludo Bagman, an amusing but less important sub-plot character, is dropped entirely.



Yes?


----------



## Rykion (Dec 5, 2005)

Warning Spoilers Ahead

Ludo Bagman was a former pro-Quidditch player and head of the Department of Games and Sports.  He cheated Fred and George in a bet at the Quidditch World Cup and was acting very unusual.  He was actually bankrupt and placed a large wager on Harry to win the Tri-wizard Tournament.  He was doing his best to make sure Harry won, but didn't get any money as Harry tied rather than winning outright.  He had to flee from the goblins he had borrowed money from.

Rita Skeeter published multiple stories on Harry.  It made him look like he was an attention seeking liar, and Hermione his girlfriend who broke up with him to date Krum.  Even Mrs. Weasley believed bad things about Hermione.  The important part to the storyline is that no one will believe Harry when he says Voldemort is back because they see him as a liar.  Hermione discovered Skeeter was secretly an ani-magi that could turn into a beetle.  She caught her in beetle form and forced her to stop the stories. 

As others have mentioned, Crouch jr. was killed immediately after being found by Fudge.  It was revealed that his father had helped him escape Azkaban at request of his dying wife.  They brewed polyjuice potion and used it to change Crouch jr. for his mother, who died shortly thereafter in Azkaban.  Crouch jr. was kept imprisoned by his father, but escaped at the World Cup.  Fudge allowed the dementor to kill Crouch jr. making him a suspect as a death eater trying to prevent word of Voldemort's return from spreading.

It was also explained at the end that Harry and Voldemort had wands made with a feather from the same phoenix.  They each cast a spell at the same time, linking the magical core of their wands.  When Harry won the battle of wills, he forced the magic back into Voldemort's wand causing it to cast its last spells in reverse.  

There is a lot more, but those are the key items missed in the movie.


----------



## RichCsigs (Dec 5, 2005)

It's been awhile since I read Goblit of Fire, but wasn't there something about Harry winning a cash prize for winning the tournament?


----------



## Rykion (Dec 5, 2005)

There was a cash prize, but I don't think much is made of it, and its use, until book 5.


----------



## Ambrus (Dec 5, 2005)

Harry did win a substancial amount of money as a prize for the Tri-wizard tournament but didn't want it since Cedric had to die for him to gain it. He instead gives it to Ron's two older brothers so that they can use it as starting capital for a wizard joke shop they want to open in Hogsmead. He does this because he thinks it'll be important for there to be more laughter in the world now that Voldermort is back. He and his friends end up using some of their magical joke trinkets during the following book.


----------



## Meloncov (Dec 5, 2005)

Ambrus said:
			
		

> wizard joke shop they want to open in Hogsmead.



It's in Diagon Alley, not Hogsmeade, which already has Zonkos.

The book had a heavy subplot about how Ron was poor while Harry is very rich.

Also, the bit about Rita Skeeter being an Anamagus is in book five, not four.


----------



## Tiberius (Dec 6, 2005)

Meloncov said:
			
		

> It's in Diagon Alley, not Hogsmeade, which already has Zonkos.
> 
> The book had a heavy subplot about how Ron was poor while Harry is very rich.
> 
> Also, the bit about Rita Skeeter being an Anamagus is in book five, not four.




No, she's revealed as an animagus in book 4.  This fact is used to blackmail her in book 5 to write the pro-Potter piece for the Quibbler.


----------



## Vocenoctum (Dec 6, 2005)

Rykion said:
			
		

> It was also explained at the end that Harry and Voldemort had wands made with a feather from the same phoenix.  They each cast a spell at the same time, linking the magical core of their wands.  When Harry won the battle of wills, he forced the magic back into Voldemort's wand causing it to cast its last spells in reverse.




And, that Phoenix is Fawkes.


----------



## Vocenoctum (Dec 6, 2005)

Also, Mad Eye Moody is paranoid. He will only eat his own food and drink from his personal flask, so that enemies don't get him.
This is how Crouch Jr disguised the Polyjuice potion in the flask, Moody always used his own.

The movie made it look like he was an alcoholic.


----------



## Bullgrit (Dec 6, 2005)

I've read the first book, but not the rest. So my point of view is from just the movies.

I was able to get past the danger of the Quidditch game, but with this latest movie, I'm having a hard time overlooking the terrible, deadly danger the wizard-world/school puts their young folks through. I mean, they put 17-year-old kids up against fire-breathing dragons, as a spectator sport. They kidnap fellow kids to use as bait for the champions to wrest free from the merfolk in the Black Lake. Then they send the kids into a dark and dangerous maze to battle it out in a final contest. And they force Harry, a 14-year-old child, to go through all this gladiatorial challenge even though they've specifically ruled against under 17s -- that very year!.

And according to the movie, this is all acknowledged as very dangerous -- like what would have happened to the little girl under the lake if Harry had not rescued her? The French girl seemed very concerned that she would have been lost.

Good god! Do the books explain this extremely dangerous stuff better than the movies do? Do the books give any explanations that perhaps these "games" are not as dangerous as they seem in the movie(s)?

Bullgrit


----------



## mojo1701 (Dec 6, 2005)

Bullgrit said:
			
		

> I've read the first book, but not the rest. So my point of view is from just the movies.
> 
> I was able to get past the danger of the Quidditch game, but with this latest movie, I'm having a hard time overlooking the terrible, deadly danger the wizard-world/school puts their young folks through. I mean, they put 17-year-old kids up against fire-breathing dragons, as a spectator sport. They kidnap fellow kids to use as bait for the champions to wrest free from the merfolk in the Black Lake. Then they send the kids into a dark and dangerous maze to battle it out in a final contest. And they force Harry, a 14-year-old child, to go through all this gladiatorial challenge even though they've specifically ruled against under 17s -- that very year!.
> 
> ...




The "Star Wars" galaxy is much more dangerous: open shafts, no railings, 8-year-olds podracing, bad-shot stormtroopers (just waiting for a stray blaster bolt to hit a bystander).


----------



## Kid Charlemagne (Dec 6, 2005)

The magical world seems to be much more accepting of danger that the Muggle world.  It's probably bound up in several things - making them seem more outlandish, the magical ability to fix severely broken bones overnight (like Harry's in the first Quidditch match), and the fact that the magical world is much more dangerous than ours, and coddling their young will merely leave them unprepared for life.


----------



## TanisFrey (Dec 6, 2005)

Bullgrit said:
			
		

> I've read the first book, but not the rest. So my point of view is from just the movies.
> 
> I was able to get past the danger of the Quidditch game, but with this latest movie, I'm having a hard time overlooking the terrible, deadly danger the wizard-world/school puts their young folks through. I mean, they put 17-year-old kids up against fire-breathing dragons, as a spectator sport. They kidnap fellow kids to use as bait for the champions to wrest free from the merfolk in the Black Lake. Then they send the kids into a dark and dangerous maze to battle it out in a final contest. And they force Harry, a 14-year-old child, to go through all this gladiatorial challenge even though they've specifically ruled against under 17s -- that very year!.
> 
> ...



The book does explane that adults whom are trained to deal with dragons are on stand by, that the hostages would have been returned, that teachers are circling the outside of the maze waiting to help them out of the maze if they are in troble.  And book 6 explaines that in the wizarding world a person is concideded an adult at the age of 17 not 18 like the US or UK.


----------



## mmu1 (Dec 6, 2005)

There's no logical reason in the books why the wizards are so cavalier about exposing children to insanely dangerous things - never mind how much you try to rationalize it. 

It's just a part of the schtick Rowling uses to make the world appear exotic and strange. (not necessarily a bad thing, mind you, though I happen to think Rowling is pretty lousy at writing logical cause-and-effect and goes overboard with the supposed dangers of the wizard world to create tension) 

The students constantly work with things that might kill them on the spot in Herbology and Care of Magical Creatures, play contact sports up in the air, eat magical candy that was never seen by the wizard equivalent of the FDA (Fred and George, I'm looking at you), are harrassed by psychotic ghosts (who seem to have free run of the lavatrories), there are deadly spiders in the woods and a tree that tries to kill people right on school grounds (without so much as a fence around it) - but it's all just there to make things seem weird and dangerous, because no one ever dies unless the plot calls for it. Basically, in very many ways, early Harry Potter is a Scooby Doo cartoon.


----------



## Rykion (Dec 6, 2005)

The magical world is dangerous.  Magic itself is a dangerous thing.  Since even young wizards have the power to harm themselves and others, they aren't coddled like normal kids.  They have to learn responsibility fast.  They still have many safeguards, and magic is capable of healing injuries in a way that we would consider, well, magic.   It is also important to point out the magical world seems to live in an older age.  Most of the wizarding families do not have any interest in modern muggle ideas and technology.  Treating minors as if they are made of glass and incapable of making adult decisions before the age of 18 is a very modern idea.

Edit:  Students are not allowed into the woods on Hogwart's grounds unescorted.  The dangerous magical candy was being made and distributed without permission.



			
				Meloncov said:
			
		

> Also, the bit about Rita Skeeter being an Anamagus is in book five, not four.




As has been mentioned, it was indeed book 4.  The last chapter, but still in that book.  I purposefully tried to avoid any spoilers for later books.


----------



## mmu1 (Dec 6, 2005)

Rykion said:
			
		

> The magical world is dangerous.  Magic itself is a dangerous thing.  Since even young wizards have the power to harm themselves and others, they aren't coddled like normal kids.  They have to learn responsibility fast.  They still have many safeguards, and magic is capable of healing injuries in a way that we would consider, well, magic.   It is also important to point out the magical world seems to live in an older age.  Most of the wizarding families do not have any interest in modern muggle ideas and technology.  Treating minors as if they are made of glass and incapable of making adult decisions before the age of 18 is a very modern idea.




...which is why students need a signed note from their parents to be allowed into Hogsmeade, aren't allowed  off the immediate school grounds without supervision, and are constantly hounded for the slightest infractions by... hmm, forgot his name, the groundskeeper with a cat.

And the reason for it is not because Rowling created a rational world with its own internally consistent rules, that can be seen as a commentary on modern times, but because she took a stuffy British boarding school replete with all the stereotypes, stirred in a heavy dose of fantasy and danger, and this is what she ended up with.

Trying to look for deeper meaning and complex social designs in Harry Potter, rather than treating it like what it is - light, fast-paced entertainment - can get absurd _very_ quickly...


----------



## Rykion (Dec 6, 2005)

mmu1 said:
			
		

> ...which is why students need a signed note from their parents to be allowed into Hogsmeade, aren't allowed  off the immediate school grounds without supervision, and are constantly hounded for the slightest infractions by... hmm, forgot his name, the groundskeeper with a cat.




The children aren't allowed outside school grounds because their parents expect some degree of supervision on the part of the school.  Ditto for the unsupervised trips to Hogsmeade.  I mentioned young wizards are a potential danger to themselves and others.  Learning responsibility and decision making is important, but supervision and guidance are still needed.  Filch does like to severely punish students, but he is one of the old guard.  It goes back to my living in an older age comment.  In the past, children had a lot more responsibility, and schools used severe punishments to keep them in line.

Harry Potter books are light reading, and the world doesn't make perfect sense.  Like a comic book or other entertainment it really doesn't have to.  I don't worry too much that Batman is putting Robin in danger, or that the X-men were a group of super teens constantly in danger because they followed a crazy old man.  It still has many times the logic and consistency of most movies and TV shows.  It combines the old fairy tales and modern boarding school fiction in an entertaining way.


----------



## Taelorn76 (Dec 6, 2005)

My biggest issue with the series is when the wizardry community, who mind you live with and among muggles don't know what a TV or telephone. Heck they live in England and don't know what soccer is.


----------



## Rykion (Dec 6, 2005)

Taelorn76 said:
			
		

> My biggest issue with the series is when the wizardry community, who mind you live with and among muggles don't know what a TV or telephone. Heck they live in England and don't know what soccer is.




That's because it's called football.    A lot of magical people do know something of the muggle world, others don't.  Remember that their houses can be invisible to muggles and they can use magic to travel without ever seeing a muggle.  Some of them really live a life apart from the rest of the world.

Edit: I do believe that it is used more as a humorous element than something completely logical in the setting.  Though as I have mentioned it could really happen within the setting, but would not be likely to be so prevalent among wizards.


----------



## mmu1 (Dec 6, 2005)

Rykion said:
			
		

> That's because it's called football.    A lot of magical people do know something of the muggle world, others don't.  Remember that their houses can be invisible to muggles and they can use magic to travel without ever seeing a muggle.  Some of them really live a life apart from the rest of the world.




You know what the real problem is, as far as wizards living in a world of their own? Why their cluelesness about things like cars and football rings false? They're not different _enough_. For the most part, they're just like you and I, which makes all these supposed differences - ignorance about technology, silly robes, parchment, pumpkin juice, whatever - seem more like pointless affectations. Especially when characters talk about something - like Quidditch, for example - and you could do a few simple word swaps and make it into a perfectly "modern" conversation about soccer.


----------



## Kid Charlemagne (Dec 6, 2005)

Astoundingly on-topic:  Order of the Stick


----------



## mojo1701 (Dec 6, 2005)

I wrote a semi-coherent rant to a friend of mine over MSN Messenger once about how he's screwed coming out of Hogwarts. I might post it here, if I can find it, and if I don't have to clean the language up too much.


----------



## Rykion (Dec 6, 2005)

mmu1 said:
			
		

> You know what the real problem is, as far as wizards living in a world of their own? Why their cluelesness about things like cars and football rings false? They're not different _enough_.




The same could be said of most fantasy and sci-fi worlds.  Most fictional societies closely mirror our own, or ones from the past.

There are still enough muggle born and half-blood wizards to introduce some more modern concepts into wizard society.  Even people in full wizard families might take muggle studies to stay somewhat informed of the normal world.  

This thread has really gone OT.  Most or all of the important stuff that was cut from the movie has already been mentioned, so hopefully no one minds.


----------



## Vocenoctum (Dec 7, 2005)

Bullgrit said:
			
		

> I mean, they put 17-year-old kids up against fire-breathing dragons, as a spectator sport.



Cut from the movie was the teams of mages standing by to stop the dragons if it went to far. When it ends, Cedric is badly wounded for instance, covered in burn cream. Also, the dragons in the book are remarked as being nesting mothers. The Golden Egg is in a nest among other eggs. The dragon won't stray from the eggs. Harry has to bait the dragon away, swoop down and grab the egg. The stupid (IMO) scene in the movie with him flying all over so he can defeat the dragon is just fundamentally flawed. At how many points could Harry have gone back and gotten the egg? (his supposed objective).



> They kidnap fellow kids to use as bait for the champions to wrest free from the merfolk in the Black Lake.



The children were in no danger, Ron even remarks that Harry is stupid for waiting to make sure they're all rescued. (He waited a long longer in the book than the movie.)


----------



## WayneLigon (Dec 7, 2005)

Bullgrit said:
			
		

> And according to the movie, this is all acknowledged as very dangerous -- like what would have happened to the little girl under the lake if Harry had not rescued her? The French girl seemed very concerned that she would have been lost.
> 
> Good god! Do the books explain this extremely dangerous stuff better than the movies do? Do the books give any explanations that perhaps these "games" are not as dangerous as they seem in the movie(s)?




In the books wizards are considered full adults at 17 (they can choose a vocation, and they can test for the apparate (teleportation) license), thus the age restriction Dumbledore places on the TriWizard Tournament. Probably because he was afraid Harry would enter. The Tournament had been discontinued many years earlier because of the high death toll, but Dumbledore revived it as a way to reach out to the other schools. 

In the book there is actually a poem that goes along with the second task, which strongly suggests that people who are not rescued will die, but Ron says that it's just to make sure you get back before the time limit is up. I thought there was a thing later where it was said that they actually were in danger but the book is so huge I can't find it by skimming.

Many times, things are actually even _more _ dangerous in the books. I'm pretty sure The Whomping Willow has killed or maimed people before. People who go into the forest die and not just from the hoardes of giant spiders in there. 

Actually, Quiditch is _more _ dangerous in the books. I'm pretty sure they mention that a few people die in the game at the professional level every year and it's not uncommon for a student to buy it as well. They're doing complex aerial acrobatics at a hundred miles an hour with no helmet and no protection  Many of the games we see in the movies and books are much shorter than normal, generally because Harry is just that good a Seeker - the game ends when the Seeker catches the Golden Snitch. Some Quidditch matches have gone on for days in brutal tests of endurance.

Being a Wizard is dangerous business and they don't sugarcoat it for the kids. They start to hint at things in the last two books that - to my mind - mean that your years at Hogwarts are just a means of keeping you comparatively safe and hoping to train you to a minimum level of competancy so you're not a danger to yourself and others.


----------



## Jeremy (Dec 7, 2005)

At the end of goblet of fire, of all the things Harry can tell Dumbledore about, he tells him about how his wand and Riddle's connected.  There's a flash of recognition from Dumbledore and he whispers something like Praeori Incantatum.  After which he immediately surmises that Harry saw his parents.  And just as Harry begins to brighten, Dumbledore immediately contradicts himself by stating that no spell can wake the dead from their sleep.  What's going on with that?


----------



## WayneLigon (Dec 7, 2005)

Jeremy said:
			
		

> And just as Harry begins to brighten, Dumbledore immediately contradicts himself by stating that no spell can wake the dead from their sleep.  What's going on with that?




He doesn't contradict himself (though I would also say that Dumbledore never gives the complete truth about anything until someone can handle it - If there is a means of contacting the dead, it's probably terribly dangerous and not something you'd want to tell Harry about because a major part of his makeup is wanting to know more about the parents he never met. If he has an obsession, that's it. He'd find some way to use that spell, possibly with terrible consequences). The 'prior incantations' are just memories, echos, like the Patronus. They can speak and such, but there is nothing 'really' there. (Again, that might not be the total truth - I get the definate idea that the students are told very litttle about the really major magics that are possible) The actual effect is to show the previous spells that wand has cast, so it shows the deaths of Cedric, the groundskeeper, then Harry's parents. I think in the book there's suppossed to be a mistake about the order in which Harry parents were killed, but I can't remember.


----------



## Rykion (Dec 7, 2005)

WayneLigon said:
			
		

> I think in the book there's suppossed to be a mistake about the order in which Harry parents were killed, but I can't remember.




In the first printing Harry's dad appears before Harry's mom.  I had a friend that came up with a major conspiracy theory until it was pointed out as a mistake.  It is corrected in the later printings and Harry's mom appears first.


----------

