Title: I Must Not...
Description: change the words.
Skivin'Ivy - November 21, 2006 08:14 AM (GMT)
So, Umbridge's detention quill. In the book, the quill carves 'I must not tell lies' across the back of Harry's hand.
However, this still from the film - http://www.thesnitch.net/galleries/index.p...mbridge%202.jpg
shows it says: 'I will not break rules'.
I wonder why the change?
I sort of think that 'telling lies' is a more complex ethical problem than 'breaking rules'. The later seems to have a narrower focus than the former. The 'lie' that Harry is being punished for in the book, is his claim that Voldemort has returned. There must be a different focus for the punishment in the film...
It may be setting up some of the sadness of the ending - where Harry's rule breaking, by leaving the school without permission, contributes to Sirius's death. Maybe.
What do you think?
bangzoom - November 21, 2006 10:31 PM (GMT)
AARGH!! I hate that they do that. Let's hope they have a good reason for it because "I must not break rules" doesn't fit in with the scene in book six where Scrimgeour wants Harry to act like a ministry spokesman. Harry raises his fist to Scrimgeour, clearly revealing the scar "I must not tell lies" and reminds him that no one in the ministry came to his defense last year when he was trying to tell everyone that Voldemort was back. That is such a great and powerful scene. Somehow "I must not break rules" doesn't have quite the impact.
sonicpotter2000 - November 22, 2006 04:58 AM (GMT)
Am I missing how is this going to change the film? They're just trying to make it different from the book so fanboys predictions of the next line will be different to force them to get a life to stay out of hell. It's the best plan ever! Should i Digress or am i onto something?
Godric - November 22, 2006 03:11 PM (GMT)
Agreed. "I must not tell lies" carries greater clout. Breaking rules is a misdemeanour, lying is a sin, and more insulting to Harry. Incidentally, Harry was aware that he was breaking rules, so having that scratched into his arm wouldn't bother him as much as the false accusation. It also provides another example of how important language is to fantasy, and the extent to which Rowling focuses on the prevalence of misinformation, in Ootp in particular.
athenamay3410 - November 22, 2006 04:00 PM (GMT)
You know, I am surprised at how much JKR allows them to change. Unless the screenwriters and so forth felt that this was such a small detail that it wouldn't be a big deal to change.
"I must not break rules" is kind of lame, and not as meaningful to the story.
Which begs another question- what does this mean for that storyline? Remember, Crouch wasn't given the Kiss at the end of the GoF film, so something else entirely might be going on in this scene.
Should I begin to fear the changes like I did for PoA????
krapp_420 - December 9, 2006 06:42 AM (GMT)
Well, lets face it... They have strayed so far from the books, for no real reason, that this is expected. Stupid, but expected. Now it is like they specifically do not want to repeat the books and are trying to make up their own story "based" on Harry Potter. I have just about given upon the movies. I don't expect everything from the books, but come on now, there is no good reason to change that. Maybe, if there is a big enough on-line rejection of it, they'll change it. Like when they messed up the tombstones on GOF?
athenamay3410 - December 10, 2006 01:20 PM (GMT)
But as far as I can tell in GoF, the tombstone is still incorrect. It still says that LV is dead, or has an incorrect date of death on it.
bangzoom - July 12, 2007 09:31 PM (GMT)
Thank God they changed it back to "I must not tell lies". The other line would have just sucked!
And, as Hrulz said, it set up one of the best lines of the film:
Umbridge: POTTER, HELP ME! TELL THEM I MEAN NO HARM!
HP: Sorry, professor.....I must not tell lies!