Transcripts

Transcript – Episode 9

[Show music begins]

Noah Fried: This is Episode 9, for Sunday, August 5th, 2012.

[Show music continues]

Noah: I’m Noah Fried.

Rosie Morris: I’m Rosie Morris.

Caleb Graves: I’m Caleb Graves.

Kat Miller: And I’m Kat Miller. Thank you guys for sticking with us through those technical difficulties.

Noah: All right, Caleb. Do you want to jump into the comments from last week on Chapter 17?

Caleb: Yeah, so we’re going to just dive into some of the comments. We got a lot of great comments from you guys on our site and forum, so this is by no means all of them, but just some that we noticed as we hit the last chapter of Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone. So, the first comment comes from the forums from Ali Wood, talking about the Mirror of Erised and showing Horcruxes, and Ali says:

“I don’t think Harry would have seen where the Horcruxes are. After all, what he sees in the Mirror is himself; he smiles, and then reaches into his pocket, pulls out the Stone, puts it back, and the Stone is in real Harry’s pocket. He didn’t see himself finding the Stone in any specific place, it just appears with him. So, Harry might have seen the Horcruxes themselves, but they couldn’t just appear in his pocket, so he wouldn’t be able to find them. I think the Mirror really only shows people, not places, as well. “

Noah: I think that makes sense. As we know, Dumbledore put on this special spell, such that if somebody looks in – I assume Harry – and they don’t want the Stone for themselves but they want to find it, it would drop to their pocket. There’s no reason why Dumbledore would think anybody else but Harry would do it, but it is just because of that spell. He wouldn’t be able to see the Horcruxes, right? If he looked in the Mirror many years later?

Caleb: Yeah, I agree. And yeah, I think that goes kind of beyond the scope of what the Mirror would be able to do, which kind of transitions into another comment that we got on the forums on that same note. This is from ZeoRegrediens, and the comment says:

“What if the enchantment that Dumbledore placed on the Mirror of Erised enabled the Mirror to focus directly on a person’s desires in regards to the Stone? That would explain why Harry’s deep desires for family were pushed away in favour of displaying such a specific image for Harry and also for Quirrell. I’ve also always wondered how Harry’s desire to find the Stone would be more powerful that his desire to stop Voldemort in that moment when it didn’t seem to work that way for Quirrell. Quirrell wanted to find the Stone and give it to Voldemort; Harry wanted to find the Stone to keep it from Voldemort. In both cases, I think finding the Stone would be the secondary desire. But if the Mirror can focus directly on a person’s intent and desires in relation to the Stone, then it would be able to take a person who doesn’t want to use the Stone and then trigger magic to make the Stone materialize.”

Noah: Well, I don’t know if the Mirror could have done that by itself. It was certainly Dumbledore’s spell. But yeah, he probably couldn’t have seen the Horcruxes. Maybe he could see himself and himself powerful and Voldemort done and the Horcruxes destroyed in maybe a more abstract form, but yeah, definitely he wouldn’t have been able to see any specific locations of those Horcruxes, because obviously the Mirror doesn’t know that.

Rosie: Yeah, and if there’s anyone who can cast a spell on that mirror, make it that specific for looking for desires related to an object, it’s definitely going to be Dumbledore that can do it. Brightest wizard of his age, at least.

Caleb: Yeah, exactly. He makes a comment even about how proud he is of the Mirror and what he’s able to do with it, so I definitely wouldn’t put it past him to be able to modify it for something specific like this.

Noah: I still find it interesting to consider if the Mirror – I brought up on the last episode – has some form of knowledge or some sort of brain in itself, so maybe Dumbledore manipulated that brain a little bit. Or maybe it’s just an object that doesn’t have any sort of consciousness, but if it did, I think that would be pretty cool. You could kind of talk to it.

Caleb: Yeah, definitely. All right. Well, our next comment comes regarding the death of Professor Quirrell, and this comes from the forums from padfoot711. And the comment says:

“One quick thought I had: Did Harry technically kill Quirrell? Or was his death just a sum of events? Harry is always portrayed as innocent – someone who won’t take a life – but in a way, he just killed someone.”

Kat: Yeah, I think he pretty much incinerated him.

[Caleb laughs]

Kat: Quite honestly. Kind of like the Volde-fetti in the last movie.

Noah: A terrible death.

Kat: Yeah.

Noah: Harry murdered Quirrell in cold blood. Actually, in hot blood. His hot magical blood killed Quirrell.

Caleb: Sizzle like a frying pan.

Noah: I just – it seems terrible. No one seemed to care. It was just happy feast time after this, and Quirrell is dead. It was underplayed, I thought.

Rosie: We don’t know how much time has passed between them, at least. But yeah, it’s a bit underplayed.

Noah: I mean, we know he wasn’t necessarily a good dude. We know he went out seeking Voldemort, thanks to the information from Pottermore. But a little bit too harsh? Gets burned alive and nobody cares? Let’s look at the next comment because I think it speaks to…

Caleb: Yeah, the next comment kind of addresses that, and this comes from cassandra1447. And it says:

“I think Quirrell’s death was minimized because PS/SS was intended for children. Think of the average Disney villain death: they die (oftentimes by falling off a cliff or some such) and that’s that. Rowling avoided dealing with the immediate aftermath and reactions surrounding Quirrell’s death by having Harry unconscious for days.”

Noah: Yeah, I accept that.

Rosie: Yeah, in the chat, people seem to be agreeing with that. It was Book 1, essentially a children’s book. It was underplayed because it was a children’s book. Glad to know you guys agree. [laughs]

Caleb: Yeah.

Noah: Do you think Harry had issues in later years considering the fact that he murdered a man? I don’t think he does. [laughs]

Caleb: Well, he – it definitely never comes up in the books, but you would almost think it would. Maybe it’s just because he’s so always in the zone, having to save – or make sure he doesn’t die and save the world that he doesn’t have time to think about it.

Kat: Well, if it had bothered him, he would have seen the Thestrals sooner.

Rosie: Yeah.

Kat: So, obviously it didn’t bother him at all.

Caleb: Hmm.

Noah: Well, I think we know from a quote that he didn’t see the Thestral because he was unconscious technically when Quirrell died.

Caleb: Yeah, when he died.

Rosie: But does it really count as Harry murdering him? I mean, sure he almost [laughs] accidentially burned him to death, but…

Noah: [laughs] He did.

Rosie: It was manslaughter, at least. I don’t think it was with the intention to kill him. There’s a difference, even if it’s a very devious one.

Noah: There’s that line where Harry by instinct grabbed Quirrell’s face. I mean, he knew what his connection was doing. Obviously if he hadn’t, he would have himself been dead. But let’s take him to trial. Would you find Harry guilty of murder?

Caleb: Absolutely not.

Rosie: I would say a plea of self-defense.

Caleb: Self-defense, clearly.

Noah: All right.

Kat: Everyone in the chat is saying no, so they agree.

Caleb: [laughs] That’s good.

Noah: Very well. I am grossly outnumbered.

[Caleb, Noah, and Rosie laugh]

Caleb: All right, and our last comment comes on the topic of when Harry wakes up and seeing Dumbledore, and I thought this was pretty clever insight from LumosNight3 on the forums. It says:

“When he firsts wakes up, Harry mistakes Dumbledore’s glasses for the Golden Snitch. I think the correlation between these two is awesome because both are enigmatic and elusive, and in the scene that follows Harry is chasing after answers, many of which Dumbledore won’t answer. It’s just like any Quidditch game where Harry has to go after the Snitch and sometimes the catch doesn’t always come right away; he has to wait patiently at times. It’s also a nice image here when you consider that the Snitch is Dumbledore’s final great mystery that Harry unravels in Book 7 when he opens the Snitch and finds the Hallow hidden within, right before facing his death.”

Noah: That’s pretty cool. Thanks, LumosNight.

Caleb: Yeah, I thought that was a really cool metaphor, the connection that was made, because they are definitely both rather elusive.

Noah: Yeah. I don’t know, I feel like pretty much what LumosNight said is good. He’s always chasing something.

Caleb: Yeah.

Noah: And then that transforms into Dumbledore’s glasses. Glasses and Snitch. Hmm.

Rosie: It’s because they’re both gold. I think it’s quite a nice link between the value of his quest for a Snitch and the value of his quest for whatever it is that Dumbledore can give him. They’re both very valuable items, even if it is only a pair of glasses.

Noah: I feel like there are lots of images and things in the series that are just linked, that Jo just links. Quidditch, the Snitch, and Dumbledore are often linked, and we know that he’s going to later manipulate a Snitch to open for Harry. So, I’d be interested to see if anyone could make Dumbledore/Quidditch references throughout the entire series. Or Dumbledore/Snitch references. We should keep track of this.

Caleb: Yeah.

Noah: And I believe that about wraps up our listener comments?

Caleb: Yeah, thanks for those. They were really good.

Kat: Hey, guys, we’ve got Ali Wood on the line. Let’s talk to her and see what she has to say.

Noah: Yes! Ali Wood!

Caleb: Awesome.

Caller: Hi, I’m sorry.

Kat: Hey Ali, how are you?

Caleb: Hey, Ali.

Rosie: Hi.

Caller: Hi.

Kat: So, what’s your comment?

Caller: I just noticed something about the movie while I was watching – I noticed that in the book, too – they mention that McGonagall wears green a lot, like emerald green. And I know on Pottermore she told us that green and purple are really universal wizarding colors, but why at Hogwarts would McGonagall be wearing Slytherin colors? I just thought it was weird because she’s kind of anti-Slytherin, you know? So, I don’t know. What do you guys think? [laughs]

Noah: Oh, that’s good.

Caleb: I had never thought about that.

Kat: I had never noticed that before. Yeah.

Caleb: Hmm, so I guess the only reason maybe she is wearing it is because of that green and purple aspect of wizarding attire. But maybe the Slytherin animosity and rivalry is not enough to trump that, I guess.

Kat: I know purple is considered a royal color. Is green? Does that have any sentimentality to it, I guess?

Noah: It is if you’re a Lannister.

[Rosie laughs]

Caleb: Oh okay.

[Noah laughs]

Rosie: I thought Lannisters were red.

Noah: Are they? Oh man.

Rosie: I think they’re red. [laughs]

Caleb: Yeah, you just angered a lot of Game of Thrones fans.

[Noah laughs]

Rosie: However, green is like emeralds, and emerald is a precious stone, so it does work with the royal purple.

Caleb: Yeah.

Noah: Maybe she looks good in green.

[Rosie laughs]

Kat: Maybe. Well, good comment, Ali. Thanks for the call.

Noah: Thanks for all your hard work for us.

Caller: Oh, thanks for letting me be a part.

Kat: Sure.

Noah: Of course.

Rosie: No problem.

Kat: Bye, hun.

Caleb: Adios.

Noah: Ali Wood. She’s great.

Kat: All right, what’s up next, guys?

Noah: We’re going to discuss the book cover conversation. Now, that was cool. We covered – what did we do? We did the American covers, U.K…

Kat: The Ukraine. I remember that one.

Caleb: Yeah.

Noah: Ukraine, Spanish covers. Was there German?

Kat: I don’t believe so. Italian, French…

Noah: We did the Italian.

Caleb: Yeah.

Noah: Nobody can make sense of the mice in the…

Caleb: But we have a comment that tries to explain it, so we’ll get to that.

Noah: So, our first comment is from cassandra1447.

“About the covers, I like the U.K. adult version best from an aesthetic point of view. However, my memories of the original U.S. jacket will always ensure I retain a special fondness for it above any other.”

Well, thanks for that.

[Rosie laughs]

Noah: The U.S. cover is certainly my favorite.

Caleb: Yeah, I can definitely identify with that, the first book I had. So, that cover is definitely pretty close to my heart also.

Noah: Rosie, you love the U.K. adult versions, right? The thing about those which make them stand out is that they’re kind of photographs, right?

Rosie: Yeah, the adult covers are great because they are just really beautiful images from the books. Different objects that are very important to the plot of that book. But, to me, it’s always going to be the original U.K. children’s cover. Just that picture of Harry in front of the train at the very beginning, is just – it’s perfect for me.

Noah: Yeah. It’s kind of epic and well-known as much as the U.S. cover is.

Rosie: Yeah.

Noah: But it’s the U.K. adult versions being photographs is very unique to those…

Rosie: Definitely.

Noah: …I would imagine. Our next comment from ancientandmostnoble. That’s very nice.

“I wanted to try explain the mystery of the Italian cover of ‘Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone’. At first I was just as puzzled as anyone else, but then I remembered the scene that describes Harry’s first Christmas supper at Hogwarts. J.K. Rowling states that the wizard Christmas crackers, once pulled, contained many different prizes, some of which included a brand new chessboard that Harry needed to play against Ron, and ‘several live white mice, received by Harry Potter in 1991, all of which disappeared. Harry assumed that they were later eaten by Mrs. Norris.'”

Wow. I want to talk about that later.

“Both the chessboard and the mice are present in the Italian cover, and the fact that Harry is wearing a wizard hat shaped like a mouse also seems to indicate that this is a drawing that illustrates the scene of Christmas at Hogwarts, because among other presents from the crackers were wizard hats.”

Oh!

Caleb: Thank you for solving the Italian mystery.

Noah: Let’s talk about these mice for a second. Were these mice created?

Caleb: Oh my God.

Kat: Oh God. Noah, don’t go there.

[Noah and Rosie laugh]

Kat: They were not ever a desk, or bacon, or anything beforehand.

Noah: Can you eat the mice? [laughs]

Rosie: I think they’re like – I guess they’re like Chocolate Frogs. I always imagined them like – we, in England at least, have these white mice chocolates that you get, particularly around Christmas. But if they are live white mice, then I guess they are just animals that could be presents. No desk pig. [laughs]

Noah: No, no, I won’t necessarily get into that just yet, but…

[Rosie laughs]

Kat: Good. Everyone in the chat says, “No desk pig.” They’re done. No more.

[Everyone laughs]

Noah: I find it interesting, though, that Italians did pick this scene. What kind of symbolic impact do mice have in the series? In terms of Harry’s larger story?

Kat: I mean, they don’t.

Caleb: Yeah, there’s not much.

Noah: So, maybe just kind of arbitary. No, they’re not desk mice, Alistar. That’s silly.

[Caleb, Kat, and Noah laugh]

Noah: Let’s see, another comment from LumosNight:

“I noticed while looking at my U.S. paperback edition of ‘Sorcerer’s Stone’ that in the very distant background there are clouds, but some of the clouds at the bottom don’t actually look like clouds. To me, they look like two Quidditch players and a bludger flying around, which would explain why Harry is flying towards the Snitch in the foreground instead of the Remembrall.”

Kat: Oh. Okay.

Noah: That makes a great deal of sense.

Caleb: Yeah.

Kat: Yes, it does. [laughs]

Noah: Because I originally just thought that they made it the Snitch because it’s more iconic. Mary GrandPré made it the Snitch.

Kat: Right.

Noah: But thanks for that. That puts that in a bit more persepctive.

Rosie: So, we’re going to talk about the Posed Question of the Week from last week, and so I’ll read that out to start with. As you heard, there was some contention between Noah and my own theory about what would have happened to Harry if Quirrell had successfully shot an Avada Kedavra curse at him. Our question to you this week was simple: Just what would have happened to Harry? Would he have been spared by Lily’s love magic once again, or would that have been the end of a much shorter series?

[Noah laughs]

Rosie: So, these comments…

Kat: Yeah, I’d like to weigh in on this, actually, because…

Rosie: Of course.

Kat: …I wasn’t there last week.

Noah: Oh perfect.

Kat: I think a lot of the comments we’ve been getting are that Harry would probably have just died, but I guess what I thought about when I listened to you guys talk about it is that in the end, when Voldemort Avada Kedavra‘d Harry, and he went to the white world or whatever, he had to choose to go there. So, at this point in Harry’s life, I don’t think he would have chosen to die, so I don’t think that the love magic would have saved him. I think he would have died.

Rosie: Oh no. [laughs]

Caleb: Interesting.

Noah: Also, what I had been saying was the fact that the blood wasn’t in Voldemort’s body yet, therefore he wouldn’t have been tethered to Earth.

Kat: Right, exactly.

Noah: However, there is the fact that Quirrell can’t touch Harry because the magic burns him right back if he gets touched, so I would assume that any spells might also be rebounded by Quirrell/Voldemort. So, maybe it just would have rebounded again, and he would have had another scar, a super scar.

Caleb: Whoa, you’re jumping ahead of yourself. Someone has that as a comment.

[Rosie laughs]

Noah: Oh geez. Sorry.

Rosie: Okay, so let’s read some.

Caleb: Yeah, so let’s get to the users’ comments.

[Noah laughs]

Rosie: Okay. killey2011 says, from the main site:

“I think Harry would’ve been saved, but this question did make me think. When Harry was hit by the Killing Curse, it’s Dumbledore that he talks to. Dumbledore makes it very clear that it is Harry’s choice to stay or ‘get on the train.’ If he would’ve been hit by the curse, who would’ve been there? I would assume that the person has to be dead to have talked to Harry, but at this point in the book there is no one that Harry trusts who is dead. So, I think the magic would’ve worked, but in a different way.”

That’s quite an interesting thought.

Caleb: Mhm. Some people on the forum – or on the main site – spinning off this, suggested maybe he would see his parents because they’re obviously dead. But I don’t know if – he obviously didn’t get to build a relationship with them like he does with Dumbledore, so it’s kind of questionable.

Noah: Hmm.

Rosie: Yeah, people in the chat are saying parents as well. So perhaps, but even if he had been able to talk to them at that point, would he have maybe gone with them because he wanted to know his parents more?

Caleb: Oh, I say so. Yeah, I think he would have definitely gone with his parents. I don’t think he understood his role in prophecy, obviously, enough. I see him going with his parents.

Rosie: Which would have been a very, very different series.

Caleb: Yeah. [laughs]

Rosie: Because there wouldn’t have been any more books.

Noah: I think the next comment is about the love protection. I’d love to talk about what the manifestation of that really is.

Rosie: Sure, go ahead.

Noah: So, another comment from Aragog141:

“I personally think Lily’s protection would have worked once again, but for a slightly different reason. Voldemort was controlling Quirrell, so if Quirrell had managed an ‘Avada Kedavra’, it would have essentially been Voldemort’s cast, not Quirrell’s (granted, with Quirrell’s wand). But still, I believe that had that occurred, Lily’s protection would have worked for Harry and the A.K. would have sought its twin.”

A.K.?

Caleb and Kat: Avada Kedavra.

Noah: Oh.

Caleb: Come on.

Noah: [laughs]

“Thus, the unintentional Horcrux would have been destroyed way too early!”

Wasn’t there a comment that Quirrell might not have had a wand in his hand?

Rosie: Yeah, because it says, “Quirrell raised his hand.” But I always assumed it just meant the wand was in his hand that he then raised, so I don’t know if that’s kind of an important detail.

Noah: Or maybe Jo at first – like someone said, she was kind of in the formulative stages of writing. She didn’t know that everyone was going to have wands, you could also do it without a wand. But…

Kat: Cassandra1447 says that Quirrell’s wand gets knocked away by Harry.

Noah: Are we sure, though? I don’t remember reading that.

Caleb: I think that’s right. I remember…

Kat: Thank you, serious nerd!

Caleb: Yeah.

Rosie: Okay. So yeah, wandless magic would have been interesting. It must be really powerful to have an A.K. with wandless magic.

Noah: Do you think that the love protection is actually Lily – a piece of her embodied in Harry, kind of like a Horcrux? Because we know everyone stays with you. Once they die, they stay in your heart. But do we think this is an actual – a physical manifestation, kind of like a piece of soul inside you? Or is it completely on the outside?

Kat: No, I think because it was unintentional – oh, I don’t know, Voldemort’s was unintentional too. I don’t know. I mean, I never thought about that. It’s definitely in the blood, but it’s not part of his soul. Hard to say.

Noah: I think it’s kind of similar to Horcrux magic. I need to – I’m going to write something about it very soon.

Rosie: Ustreamer522053 says, “Like an anti-Horcrux.”

Noah: An anti-crux!

Rosie: Anti-crux.

[Noah and Rosie laugh]

Rosie: Yeah, everyone is agreeing that it’s in the blood rather than in the soul. But yeah, it’s an interesting idea.

Noah: What’s the difference? Between – it’s like physical and spiritual?

Kat: Yeah.

Caleb: Yeah, absolutely.

Noah: Huh. But still, it’s kind of a similar thing. Lily’s presence is inside Harry just as much as Voldemort’s, maybe in a different way. And Harry is like this meeting ground of Lily and Voldemort.

Rosie: Well, that’s kind of creepy.

[Caleb laughs]

Noah: Yeah.

[Noah and Rosie laugh]

Noah: Anyway, I’ll talk about that later. [laughs] Rosie, next comment?

Rosie: Yeah. The next one is from ZeoRegrediens again, and it says:

“I don’t think that Harry would have gone to the King’s Cross scene had he been hit with the curse. Noah is right in that blood tethered Harry to life. Jo has said that when Voldemort took Harry’s blood and love protection into his body, it acted like a Horcrux for Harry (except that it wasn’t damaging to Harry’s soul). I think the only reason he survived in DH is because of this blood anchoring him to life, and that is the only thing stopping him from dying along with the piece of Voldemort’s soul that was inside of him. In the PS scene though, Harry doesn’t have that fail-safe, so I think he indeed could have died at that point. Dumbledore even says later in the chapter that he had pulled Harry off of Quirrell just in time to stop the effort of fighting Quirrell from killing him. So, that seems to indicate that he was very close to death. I think the only thing that could have possibly saved him if he’d been hit by the curse was if the fact that Voldemort was sharing the body that produced that curse enacted the love protection.”

So yeah, again it would only have been Lily’s love that saved his life, at that point.

Noah: Yeah. It’s interesting that whatever spell was enacted in his body, the love protection is magnified by Voldemort having the blood as well. Thanks for agreeing with me. I still believe that he would have died there, because he wasn’t tethered to life.

Kat: Yeah, I definitely think so. And too, it comes back to the choice. He wasn’t ready to die, so I don’t think he would have.

Noah: Yeah. Yeah, I agree – oh, you think he wouldn’t have died?

Kat: Right, right, exactly. Because he wasn’t ready to. He had to be in the forest, you know?

Noah: Yeah, but would he have died whether he chose or not? Because this spell kind of circumvents the love protection?

Kat: No, I don’t think so.

Noah: All right, so this conversation continues.

[Rosie laughs]

Noah: We’re still undecided, but if anybody in the comments would like to call in and let us know, we will take your call.

Rosie: Ali Wood continues to say that it’s not necessarily Lily’s blood or the blood that goes into Voldemort that is the kind of protection. She says:

“But is the blood that anchors Harry the blood that Voldemort took, or would the bloodline he shares with Petunia work as well? After all, the charm was sealed when Petunia took Harry in. So, does Petunia have a bit of this magic inside her as well? Certainly, Harry does not have all his layers of protection at the time (Horcrux, blood, wand, and Hallows are what I consider his layers of protections, and at this point, obviously, the Hallows are missing and we’re discussing the blood), so would he have been less able to defend himself? He also didn’t know ‘Expelliarmus’, which is his counter-attack (nearly always) against Voldemort’s Killing Curses. If, however, Petunia’s blood would keep him anchored, I think he would have had a choice, but would be far more likely to choose to go on to be with his parents. They are, at this point, the only people he has lost, and he doesn’t have as many people to go back to either. If Petunia’s blood does not offer that anchor, then I think Harry would have died.”

Noah: You know what this means, potentially? Petunia is Harry’s Horcrux!

[Rosie laughs]

Kat: What?

Caleb: In some sort of strange fashion, maybe.

Noah: No, we just said she would have potentially anchored Harry to life. Isn’t that what a Horcrux does?

Caleb: We have someone on the Ustream who says that Petunia does not love Harry.

[Noah laughs]

Caleb: But I think she does in a forced way.

Noah: She does, kind of.

Caleb: It’s very complicated, but…

Noah: But it seems the Fidelius Charm works because of the blood, not necessarily because she has these overt feelings for Harry. But maybe in a small sense she does.

Kat: “In a very platonic way,” says lupinpatronus. [laughs]

Rosie: And she did love Lily. She loved Lily. At least until she started to resent her.

Caleb: Yeah. Sometimes love is a complicated thing.

Rosie: It’s a very complicated thing. [laughs]

Noah: That’s interesting. Just like Snape, nobody actually cares about Harry, but they love Lily.

Caleb: Right.

Noah: And that makes Harry…

Caleb: So by proxy, yeah.

Noah: Yeah. She is the vessel through which anybody gets at Harry, it seems.

Caleb: Yeah, absolutely.

Noah: You know what I mean?

Kat: Yeah, that’s true.

Noah: In every fashion.

Rosie: So, Willowswanderings on the main site says:

“The question you’ve posed makes me wonder that if Quirrell/Voldemort had indeed succeeded in casting the ‘Avada Kedavra’ curse, would Harry perhaps not die but instead because of Lily’s original ‘love-magic,’ history would repeat itself and he (Harry) would get another scar? Or perhaps his present scar would become deeper and Voldemort could more easily penetrate his mind as he does often throughout the series.”

So, would he become a double Horcrux rather than actually dying?

Kat: See, I think the question here is who is casting the Avada Kedavra? Is it Voldemort or is it Quirrell? Because if it’s Quirrell, then Harry would have died.

Caleb: Right.

Kat: If it was Voldemort, then who knows.

Noah: I’m pretty sure Quirrell was in control of his body. Voldemort was following – sure, he was kind of victim to Voldemort being there, but it was all – he was doing it by choice. He was definitely Voldemort’s servant.

Kat: But how do we know that Voldemort didn’t have some sort of power over him, that he wasn’t under an Imperius Curse or something?

Rosie: I don’t think he would have needed the Imperius Curse, because he’s actually on the back of his head at this moment. He literally can’t get away.

Caleb: Yeah, I think it’s Quirrell casting it. But this still – if I’m wrong on that and it is Voldemort, this is an interesting argument from Willowswanderings. Would the love magic still be there to sort of prevent Harry from dying, and would it further the scar? I really like the last part where Voldemort would be able to penetrate his mind more so than he does. That’s really interesting.

Noah: I mean, it’s possible. Would we think more soul would be infused in Harry?

Kat: So, he’d be like a double Horcrux or something?

Rosie: Yeah, everyone is saying kind of Horcrux Inception.

[Caleb and Rosie laugh]

Noah: So, is that a Horcrux within a Horcrux? [laughs]

Caleb: Okay wow, now we’re going to make minds explode. So…

[Rosie laughs]

Noah: Or it could be – maybe he gets a scar on his chest and it’s more epic looking. Like a big lightning bolt and those are two different Voldemorts inside of him that kind of each – I don’t know, that’s for a fan fiction. [laughs]

Rosie: [laughs] Yeah, this is getting a bit complicated now. I think we should move on.

Caleb: Well, so that was a good series of comments from you guys for the Question of the Week. Stirred a lot of discussion. Are we going to move on, or Kat, do we have any more callers? Or…

Kat: Let’s just go on to the Overall Book Analysis discussion.

Noah: All right, so my idea with this is we have finished Philosopher’s Stone/Sorcerer’s Stone, and now it’s time that we look at the book as a whole. We’re going to talk a little bit about the release, the initial release, critical reception of it and just some main questions we want to talk about. Looking at the book in sum, and after that we are going to talk about the book in terms of how it relates to the movie a little bit. And we’re going to be having your questions. You guys should call in with questions about the movie, how it related to the book, just so we can get a whole big discussion of Sorcerer’s Stone as one final finale and then we’ll jump into Chamber of Secrets for the next episode, or in two episodes time. But you know what I mean, we’re going to do a final wrap-up of the book. So, just going off the Wikipedia page of Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone to get some basic info:

“The book was published on 26 June 1997 by Bloomsbury in London, while in 1998 Scholastic Corporation published an edition for the United States market under the title ‘Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone’. The book reached the top of the ‘New York Times’ list of best-selling fiction in August 1999, and stayed near the top of that list for much of 1999 and 2000.”

So as we know, the book was very popular from the start with kids and young adults, and it got really good reviews. There was one New York Times review that basically was pretty positive. The only thing was that the last few chapters were kind of rushed and it seemed the characters were acting too – their behavior was kind of contrived. I’m just going to put this to you guys: what do you think about the pace of the last few chapters? Was it too rushed?

Caleb: I always thought it was pretty fast. You get – it’s definitely a heightened pace compared to the rest of the book. Definitely reading back this time I noticed it a lot more. I don’t know if I did as much the first time because it was just something so new, but this time around it definitely felt a bit rushed.

Noah: Yeah, looking back it’s like bam, bam, bam. They go through the tasks really quickly, and Harry – there are a few occasions where Harry just seems to know exactly what he has to do. He just decides that suddenly Voldemort is going for the Stone – or Snape is – and I have to go, and it just so happens to be the exact right moment to do it. As a – we talked about this on a few episodes back when we had Steve Vander Ark, and he said that the way that everything happens is almost impossible. What do you think?

Kat: Yeah, I read that quote saying Jo says she is Dumbledore and Dumbledore is her, so it’s just – yeah, I think it was maybe a little quick, but how else was she going to wrap it up? I think it was necessary.

Noah: Yeah, and for a kids’ book…

Kat: Yeah.

Noah: …maybe that’s perfect because kids need bam, bam, bam, and they don’t necessarily want to hear pages of character analysis. Not true with the later books because she obviously knew she’d grabbed readers so she could do whatever. But I too thought that it was a little rushed towards the end. So, going on to the Wikipedia page, this is just some cool history:

“Scholastic Corporation bought the U.S. rights at the Bologna Book Fair in April 1997. They thought that a child would not want to read a book with the word ‘philosopher’ in the title and, after some discussion, the American edition was published in October 1998 under the title Rowling suggested, ‘Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone’.”

Now, let’s just take a break there. We know it’s a big controversy that this title was changed. Do we think it was necessary, looking back? Or does it do some damage to the book as a whole?

Kat: I don’t think it damages the book in any way. Was it necessary? No. But it is what it is.

Noah: “Philosopher” has certain connotations, like it’s a – you have “smart, logic, looking into things deeply.” And for whatever reason, Scholastic didn’t think that American children could – maybe they wouldn’t find that as interesting as “sorcerer”, which has this kind of powerful, magical connection.

Rosie: But I don’t think that American children are all that different from British children, and we were all fine with Philosopher’s Stone as it was. I don’t think it actually put many people off buying the book. It was still the most popular children’s book of all time over here, so…

Noah: Oh, WiseOldBaker in the chat is saying that the real damage from “sorcerer” was the fact that it angered the church because of magic. Maybe if it had been Philosopher’s Stone, nobody would have realized that it was…

Caleb: That’s an interesting point, yeah. I don’t think “Philosopher’s” would have turned me away. I mean, in fifth grade when I started reading Harry Potter I picked it out because a friend suggested it to me, so the “Sorcerer’s” aspect didn’t even really – wasn’t what grabbed at me. So yeah, I don’t think it would have turned kids away. And once it took off, obviously there was going to be no stopping it, regardless of the title.

Noah: Here’s a question: when it was released in the U.K. and worldwide, does Hermione say, “It’s the Sorcerer’s Stone,” or does she say “Philosopher’s Stone”?

Kat: What do you mean? Depending on the…

Noah: Because I know in the versions we have, Hermione says, [imitating Hermione] “It’s the Sorcerer’s Stone.”

Kat: Well yeah, in the British version I’m sure it says “Philosopher’s Stone.”

Rosie: You mean within the book?

Noah: No, within the movie.

Caleb: Oh.

Rosie: Oh yeah, she says “Philosopher’s” in the movie. Does she say “Sorcerer’s” in the movie for you guys?

Noah: She says it in ours.

Kat: She does.

Rosie: Really?

Caleb: So – yeah.

Rosie: Wow, they must have filmed it twice.

Caleb: That’s interesting. I never thought about that.

Noah: They must film it differently in a few places then in the U.K. edition, maybe even truer to what Jo may have wanted.

Rosie: It says “Philosopher’s” all the way throughout in the U.K. [film]. I never realized you guys got a different edition.

Noah: We do! I didn’t realize it either.

Rosie: Maybe that’s why my movie kept going so far ahead of yours. [laughs]

Noah: We’re watching different movies! There’s a great essay on MuggleNet that I happened to publish that deals with this in particular. We can put this in the show notes. But…

Rosie: See, now I’m going to have to bring my DVDs with me to LeakyCon next week, and you can all watch the proper version.

[Everyone laughs]

Kat: Okay.

Rosie: Although they’ll be the wrong region, won’t they?

Noah: While we’re on it, there were a few different – oh, actually, I can see the reviews. There’s something on Wikipedia just about this, so let me just read this for a second.

“Rowling claimed that she regretted this change and would have fought it if she had been in a stronger position at the time. Philip Nel has pointed out that the change lost the connection with alchemy, and the meaning of some other terms changed in translation, for example from U.K. English ‘crumpets’ to U.S. English ‘muffin’. While Rowling accepted the change from both U.K. English ‘mum’ and Seamus Finnegan’s Irish variant ‘mam’ to ‘mom’ in ‘Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone’, she vetoed this change in the later books.”

Rosie: Good.

Noah: So, it’s not just the title, but it was various other word changes that they thought maybe Americans couldn’t handle.

[Rosie laughs]

Noah: Like “mam” for Seamus in terms of “mom” and “English muffin” instead of “crumpets.”

Kat: I mean, maybe the little, little, little kids, but – I don’t know.

Rosie: I can understand the crumpets thing slightly more, because they are a particular kind of English thing, but I think having Seamus Finnigan say “mam” instead of “mum” or “mom” is just – it’s an accent thing, same as Hagrid. I mean, do they change what Hagrid says in your books? Because it’s all just about how he says it.

Kat: Right.

Caleb: Yeah.

Noah: It’s just kind of an interesting thing to think about. I’d love someone to take the two versions and calculate all the differences and then decide what that means for America, what that means for U.K.

Kat: Are we sure that doesn’t already exist? Like, on the Lexicon or something?

Noah: It could. He gets all that up there, doesn’t he?

Kat: Yeah. Oh, wait, GinnyAnnabethEverdeen pointed out that they say “jumper” which in the U.S. is a sweater, so…

Caleb: Oh yeah, that’s another one. Yup.

Noah: [in a high-pitched voice] “It’s my jumper!”

Caleb: Oh my God.

[Noah and Rosie laugh]

Kat: Someone – lupinpatronus, I think – Michael – accepted our challenge. So, I think he’s going to go through the books and see what he can find.

Noah: Nice!

Caleb: Awesome.

Kat: Aww, he says he’s just kidding!

[Rosie laughs]

Noah: And you just disappointed thousands of fans, lupinpatronus.

Caleb: Geez.

Kat: That’s right! Sorry buddy, you’re stuck.

[Caleb and Rosie laugh]

Noah: All right, so one more thing to think about in terms of the book’s publishing: we now know that it was published on purpose with the androgynous name. Jo decided instead of publishing as by Joanne Rowling, she did just J.K. Rowling. Now, this – she believed at the time would – she thought it would sell to an audience of young boys better if they weren’t reading from a woman writer. So, what do you guys think? Is there some truth in this? Would it not have been as popular had she just – had she gone Joanne Rowling? Or, did she make a mistake?

Rosie: I think it wasn’t her choice, originally, for her to say J.K. Rowling instead of Jo Rowling. She would have preferred her own name, but the publisher in particular was afraid that boys wouldn’t take to a woman writer. And there was, I think, some precedent for that decision. But, I think, seeing as how popular it became, and I guess she kind of came out as a woman writer and no one took that particularly badly, no one stopped reading the books because of it. I think she would have been fine if she had – hopefully. She would have hopefully been fine, at least, if she had published under her own name.

Kat: And who – what child looks at the name of the author? Nobody cares about that, when you’re five, six, seven, eight years old. Even now, I generally don’t care who the author is of a book. If it looks interesting, I’m going to read it.

Caleb: When I picked it up, back when I started reading it, I knew it was a female author and that didn’t turn me away from it at all. I was just so anxious to jump into it, so it definitely didn’t stop me. Yeah, even though it was “J.K.” I knew it was a female author.

Rosie: I think the main reason for it is, it was trying to play it like Lord of the Rings, like the Narnia series, where you have C.S. Lewis…

Caleb: Oh.

Rosie: …and you have J.R.R. Tolkien.

Noah: Yeah.

Rosie: You have all of these fantasy authors who do use initials within their names.

Kat: Hmm.

Caleb: It’s a good point.

Rosie: And it really goes into that tradition more.

Kat: Yeah, I’d never thought of it that way.

Caleb: Hmm, yeah.

Noah: Now, one step further, what if Harry had been female? Would this book have sold as well? I mean, it’s perfectly fine if Jo had thought that this was a male protagonist in her head, but what if Harry had been Harriet, or some other female lead? Would that have sold as well to young audiences?

Caleb: That’s an interesting question, because you think of a series that has done fairly well also, The Hunger Games, which – it’s a female protagonist. But would it have been as successful without something like Harry Potter to take off before it? I don’t know if it would have been as successful, and if that’s true, that’s really unfortunate. But I don’t know.

Noah: That’s my feeling, too.

Kat: Yeah, I agree with that. I feel like the reason Hunger Games, and Katniss in particular, is so popular, especially with men, is that it’s a violent book. And Harry Potter – at least the first book – does not have that, so what is there to catch the boys’ attention, really?

Noah: There’s also a strong concentration on the love story in The Hunger Games, and as much as it’s violent. It’s like you can’t have a book these days with a woman lead or protagonist teenager lead without it being some kind of love story attached. I know part of the whole story of Katniss and Peeta is like she’s trying to get away from this love story, she almost uses it to be successful. But the love stuff doesn’t feature too much in this series. So if, let’s say, this female Harry was pretty much the same, and she didn’t have this connection with boys and a love story going through, I don’t think it would have been accepted even if it was virtually the same story.

Kat: It wouldn’t have been as popular. Especially not right off the bat, I don’t think.

Noah: No, and I feel like she would have had to play the love stuff up more for it to be more popular.

Kat: Yeah, probably. Yup.

Noah: I don’t know, that’s just the way we are as a culture now. Do we have a quote from Jo about her choosing the androgynous author name?

Rosie: We have something from the Telegraph from 2000, where she says, “It was the publisher’s idea. They could have called me Enid Snodgrass, I just wanted the book published.” So…

Noah: All right! [laughs]

Rosie: …in the end, [laughs] she just didn’t really care. She just wanted to get her story out there.

Kat: Enid Snodgrass. Wow, that’s a name.

Noah: [in a high British voice] Snodgrass!

Caleb: I think that’s definitely understandable. It positioned her to obviously get her book published, to be a celebrity worldwide, and even become a more powerful feminist and push for women’s power in so many things. So, I think it’s given her such a great opportunity anyway.

Noah: Okay, so now we should do – should we go for the movie discussion?

Kat: Absolutely, let’s do it.

Caleb: People, start calling in.

Kat: Here we go, we have a call from Michael. He’s lupinpatronus in the chat there. Hey, Michael.

Caller: Hi, can you guys hear me?

Kat and Noah: Yeah.

Kat: Thanks for calling.

Caleb: Hey.

Caller: Oh, God. [laughs] I’m really – my heart is still pounding because I accidentally committed myself to looking at all the differences between Philosopher’s and Sorcerer’s Stone.

[Kat laughs]

Caleb: Yeah, we expect it.

[Noah laughs]

Caller: I don’t have a copy of Philosopher’s Stone! [laughs] I only have Sorcerer’s Stone, so…

Caleb: Oh no.

Caller: But I will try to work on that. So, we’re talking about the movie.

Kat: Absolutely.

Rosie: We are.

Noah: Initial thoughts?

Caller: Initial thoughts on the movie, okay. Well, I – personally, I – out of all the movies, as a film student, I prefer Prisoner of Azkaban because I look back on the first two and I just think – the funny thing is, so many people love the first two, I know, because they’re so close to the books. But, in a way for me, the way Chris Columbus was so close made it so boring for me.

Noah: Interesting. And Alfonso Cuarón is awesome.

Caller: Yeah, I think he did – I think he gave it a more artistic twist, because Sorcerer’s Stone plays it so safe with so many things, especially camera angles and the set design and – well, and of course, the acting was just not quite up to par from the kids. The adults, of course, they were fine. But I don’t know. I love Sorcerer’s Stone now just for nostalgic reasons. I just basically watch and go, “Oh my God! They’re so cute!”

[Caller and Kat laugh]

Caller: But yeah, I can’t really like – they’re not my favorite films, the first two.

Noah: Yeah.

Caller: But I do think that – I’m impressed by the closeness to the books, but sometimes I’m always surprised of things they kept and the things they dropped. Like, I love the throwaway thing of Hagrid being like, [as Hagrid] “Oh yeah, well, you know, Norbert is in Romania now, whatever. I don’t care. That’s not a plot point anymore.”

[Caller and Kat laugh]

Kat: Good Hagrid!

Noah: That was excellent.

Caller: Well, I do work for Audiofictions, so I try.

[Caller and Rosie laugh]

Noah: Nice.

Caller: But yeah, no, I think that’s – I think it’s funny sometimes, the plot points that they chose to retain and some of the ones they dropped that ended up actually being important.

Kat: Like everyone in the chat right now is saying, “Peeves! Peeves! Where’s Peeves?” That’s true.

Noah: And when do we get Norbert? We didn’t get rid of Norbert.

Caller: Off-screen, just gone. Well – and Peeves – I love Peeves and as a fan, I wish he had been in the film. I can see why he was cut. I think it would have been more important to retain the ghosts throughout the films. They dropped Nearly Headless Nick after the second one.

Rosie: I think it’s mainly because they were quite expensive to do. I know the Potter movies got so much money that they really should have been able to do anything by that point, but I think they cut Dobby from some movies, as well, because the price of making those special effects was just far too much whilst they were actually in production of the movies.

Caller: Yeah, some of the things they dropped – I’m sure, they probably spend their whole budget on the Quidditch scene.

Rosie: Yeah. [laughs]

Caller: [laughs] So – but yeah, no, I think that’s reasonable that there were some things that had to be dropped just because of effects purposes. But I think – I guess as far as just minor plot things – I know you guys have talked about how ridiculous it is that McGonagall takes so many points from them in the book. It’s even more absurd in the film because you take out the dragon aspect, and then it’s literally just, [as McGonagall] “You were walking around the school at night! And you walked, so I’m going to take 150 points from each of you!” That’s ridiculous.

Rosie: And why didn’t they include Neville at that point as well? I mean, why not have Neville in the Forest? Why only the four of them? It doesn’t really make sense.

Caller: I would think that they did that just because you’ve had Malfoy out of the film for too long – this is a thing with adaptation. You can’t drop your main villain in conflict – well, Malfoy is a secondary villain, but you can’t have him gone for too long or people – [laughs] movies just assume that their viewers are stupid and they’re like, “Oh, well they’ll just forget or they won’t care about the conflict anymore.” So, you have to kind of bring that back into it. Kind of like – this happened with – far-off reference, but Beauty and the Beast, the Disney adaptation. They had dropped Belle out of the conversation when the Beast and Gaston are having their confrontation at the end of the film, and they actually went back and looped her back into Gaston’s dialogue…

Kat: Hmm.

Caller: …because they felt that it was getting too far off course. They were like, “Oh, we’re forgetting that this whole conflict is about Belle.” And so, as far as this particular situation, I think it just worked better to drop – to keep Ron and Malfoy and Hermione and Harry because they’re the main conflict, because Ron was not in there originally.

Kat: Right.

Caller: So, I think that worked better as far as keeping that dynamic between those four characters. You just have to – because Neville is just – we love him, but he is a secondary character.

[Noah laughs]

Kat: That’s what I was just going to say. Yeah, at this point, he is so unimportant to the plot or anything, so what’s the point of having him in there?

Caller: Mhm, yeah. I could talk about this for hours but I’m sure there’s other people who probably want to call you guys, [laughs] so I can let you guys go if you want.

Kat: All right. Well, thanks for the comment. Thanks for calling.

Noah: Yeah, absolutely. You should come on a show sometime.

Caller: Oh, I plan to. I think I’ve scheduled that with Kat. So…

Noah: Great. You have excellent voice impressions.

Kat: Yes, everyone in the chat is loving it.

Caller: [laughs] Oh yeah, I’m not even watching it. I’m just so nervous right now. I’m just like, “Ahh, this is live!”

Kat: You should do a voice on your way out.

Caller: Oh, I should do a voice. Well, how about – I love doing Harry, Ron, and Hermione, so maybe they can…

Kat: Perfect.

Caller: [as Harry] So, we’ve got to go, Hermione, because we’ve got so much homework to do, you know, and I don’t know where any of the planets are. [as Hermione] Oh, Harry, that’s just – okay, well, if you would ever just read your book once in a while, your Astronomy book, maybe we could do that. [as Ron] Well, I need help too. I need help too. Because I’m just…

[Caleb and Noah laugh]

Rosie: They’re loving this.

Caller: [as Hermione] Let’s go, all right. That was lovely, now you’ve wasted all of their lovely time and this is way too long now. All right. Well, thank you, Alohomora! team, for having us on.

[Caleb laughs]

Rosie: And thank you so much.

Kat: Bye, H/R/H.

Noah: Oh my God.

Caller: [as Hermione] All right, goodbye.

Kat and Rosie: Bye.

Caleb: Thanks, Michael. [laughs]

Noah: That was incredible!

Caleb: Noah, I think your position as best voices has just been taken.

Rosie: [laughs] That was the amazing voice talents of Michael, and you guys can go and check him out on the MuggleNet Fan Fiction podcast, Audiofictions if you want to hear more of his amazing voices.

Kat: Yeah, he does great voices. He’s really good on the podcast.

Caleb: That’s fantastic. [laughs]

Kat: Yeah. Let’s read some of our movie comments here.

Rosie: We have some tweets that were sent out during the actual movie. So, we have one from @Snapescape about Peeves, saying that:

“Rik Mayall was cast as Peeves. Scenes were shot but crew didn’t know how to make him look like a poltergeist so it was cut.”

I would love to see what those scenes looked like because Rik Mayall would have been perfect as Peeves. He’s a brilliant actor and it would have just been completely chaotic and it would have been brilliant.

Kat: Yeah, why didn’t they include that on the DVD? I want to see that footage.

Rosie: I don’t know, I guess it was just too early for them to really think about it.

Noah: I mean, it makes sense. How do you create a vision of a poltergeist, if it’s not quite a ghost, and we know what ghosts look like? Poltergeists are supposed to be a little bit more physical.

Kat: Well, they’re solid. They’re not see-through. Or transparent, whatever.

Noah: Yeah, so maybe they thought it would have looked kind of doofy. I imagine a very pasty white character actor kind of on the smallish side floating up in the air. That might be tough to create cinematically.

Rosie: Yeah, how would you make them look more dead than a ghost – or more alive than a ghost – but less alive than a human?

Kat: But I don’t think poltergeists were ever alive, right?

Rosie: No.

Noah: No.

Rosie: But how would you physically show that?

Noah: I imagine like Ghostbusters, some funny character actors flying after the trio.

Rosie: Turning into Casper the Friendly Ghost.

Kat: [laughs] Yeah, I could see that.

Noah: But I guess I can see his story being cut as not too much of a loss. I didn’t necessarily feel a need, the way it was going. And also, to your comments before about the ghosts not being throughout the entire thing – I guess for this level of film, it’s okay for them just to make their cameo at the end and then for them to focus basically on plot movers. And maybe it would have helped the scenery if they were flying a bit – if they were flying around, it would have kept everything more magical. But I don’t know, I feel like they did their work there pretty well.

Kat: Yeah, I mean I guess they turned Ron into Peeves in a way, because he’s the comic relief at this point instead of Peeves with all his “Potter you rotter,” all the songs and stuff that he sang going through the halls.

Noah: Yeah. It would have been cool to see him in the second movie, too, where he is also – he is singing Ginny’s love song. So many moments that are lost in the movies that could have been released as bonus material.

Rosie: Yeah, and the fifth movie especially with the Fred and George leaving scene…

Kat: Yeah.

Rosie: …with him saluting them as they leave, the kind of masters of chaos that they are.

Kat: Someone in the chat says that they always imagined Peeves as Andy Dick.

Caleb: [laughs] That’s really funny.

Kat: I just thought that was pretty funny. Yeah, I could see that.

Caleb: That would have been a funny casting.

Noah: Maybe they’re not missing too much, but maybe in new remakes twenty years from now of the movies, Peeves will make an appearance. You never know.

Kat: Twenty years? You think they’ll be remade in twenty years? I think it’ll be more like fifty.

Noah: Fifty?

Kat: I don’t think they’ll be remade when Jo is alive.

Caleb: Yeah, I agree.

Kat: I don’t think she’ll allow them to be.

Caleb: I hope not. I don’t think I want to see them remade that soon.

Noah: Maybe five years, animated series, guys? WB?

Caleb: No. God, no.

Noah: Trying to bring the magic back? [laughs]

Kat: No.

Caleb: We’re doing all the magic being brought right here on Alohomora!.

Noah: That’s right!

Kat: Yeah, that’s right!

[Rosie laughs]

Noah: Yeah, MuggleNet.

Kat: Bazinga! Sorry. Okay, continue. Next comment.

Noah: So, I was looking at the – this is from me, this is from Noah – watching the movie, the whole Quidditch game, looking at Flint, he is just this perfect, almost evil character. He’s got that ugliness, we’ve talked about that before. Slytherins are just portrayed as horrible in this movie. I know everything is from Harry’s consciousness, but just in the same way that Jo set us up to hate Slytherins, the movie does a very good job, and this is all part of that narration. We don’t see the narrator in the book, but the narration in the movie is set design and the way things are given to us, and that’s like an extra layer. It’s kind of the window that WB is making us look through, or the director of the movie is making us look through. So, we have to be very conscious of that window and – didn’t you think the Slytherins were a bit evil and is that good? Is that great? Or it sets up prejudice for later on, right?

Kat: Well, I mean, we get that immediately when we meet Draco, so…

Noah: But Flint was just so – I don’t know, those teeth! Those teeth, and there’s one point where he’s screaming at the – I don’t know, one of the Slytherin Chasers to get the Gryffindors, and then they start beating on them with all these fouls.

Rosie: But it’s not just the Slytherins that they kind of change the physicality of to make them appear in a certain way. They – for poor Matthew Lewis, they stuck – they gave him fake teeth and stuck things behind his ears to make them stick out to make him look more like a silly character.

Kat: And he wore a fat suit up until the sixth movie.

Rosie: Yeah.

Kat: But I mean, maybe – Rosie, you can correct this for me, probably – and this is definitely a prejudice. I do not believe this in any way shape or form. I’m just putting this out there.

Noah: Careful about that.

Kat: Isn’t it kind of a – isn’t it said that people in the U.K. don’t have the best teeth? Isn’t that kind of like a predisposition that some people think? I don’t believe that because I know plenty of British people…

Rosie: Some people think that. It’s more that we have normal teeth, and that we see all of these famous Hollywood movie stars who have the perfect teeth that are kind of scary. It’s all kind of that real life versus Hollywood divide.

Noah: Yeah.

Rosie: I wouldn’t say that England traditionally has bad teeth, at all. [laughs] Our dental care is fine, especially our NHS dental care which is free. [laughs] So, I think it’s just the – yeah, it’s kind of showing evilness through physicality, but it’s not necessarily an English thing. [laughs]

Kat: Okay, good.

Noah: Yeah, the movie is just playing on all our natural, go-to – not necessarily prejudices, but just conventions of seeing movies. Like, we – considering this was marketed towards kids, WB wanted to make sure that they see who the evil characters are, who the good characters are. And we don’t like the ugly ones, but we like the cute ones. That’s just – it’s the way these stories work, and elements of them are in the books. It’s cool to see the application of it, but I think you’ll find it, as people are saying in the chat, in every story.

Kat: But I think there are probably people out there who think that Marcus Flint guy is pretty cute. Not me, but I’m saying I’m sure there’s someone who does.

Caleb: Wait, really?

Noah: Really?

Kat: I don’t know. No. Wait, no.

[Rosie laughs]

Kat: I’m waiting for somebody in the chat to say that they think he’s okay.

[Rosie laughs]

Kat: So far, a bunch of no’s.

[Caleb laughs]

Rosie: They’re disagreeing. [laughs]

Kat: Oh, yes! LizSnape92! She says, “Yes.” There you go.

Noah: Good calling her out.

[Everyone laughs]

Kat: Good. Give us a call, Liz. We want to hear from you. [laughs]

Noah: In the meanwhile, I think we have some Twitter replies. From @Snapescape – thank you, @Snapescape, for all your continued comments on all of our podcasts. You are awesome. She asks:

“Do you prefer the old school uniforms or the new ones?”

Rosie: They change several times throughout the films. I think as they grow up, they get kind of more fashion-focused. So, the early uniforms were very much more towards, I guess, what my school uniform was like, what general school uniforms are like in England. And they kind of get more fashion-focused as the movies progress into more Hollywood movies.

Noah: Yeah, they wear normal clothes. Sweaters and such.

Rosie: Yeah.

Kat: I miss the little hats. I like the little hats.

Rosie: The hats are so cute! [laughs]

Kat: I know. I have one of those little hats. It’s Hope – who was on our first episode – it’s her hat. And she gave it to me to kind of hold on to when she moved to Colorado. And I look at it every day, and I wish it fit my head, because I’d wear it for Halloween. Just saying.

[Rosie laughs]

Noah: Kat, I would say you should take a picture of yourself and flip it into the window so everyone could see it. But, to spare any more technical difficulties, we will not do that.

[Kat and Noah laugh]

Caleb: Oh gosh.

Noah: But yeah, do we think in the actual books Jo would have imagined that at a certain point they’re not wearing robes anymore, they start getting into normal clothes? Or was that purely the movies?

Kat: Oh, definitely the movies. Because it says all throughout the books that they’re in the robes.

Caleb: Yeah.

Rosie: Yeah.

Caleb: I think that’s a movie thing.

Kat: I mean, don’t they even get points taken away from them because they don’t show up to Hogwarts in their robes?

Rosie: At least once, yeah.

Kat: Yeah, I thought so.

Rosie: In the very beginning.

Noah: Oh.

Rosie: But, then again, there is – in the U.K. we have sixth form, which is when you do, I guess, your N.E.W.T.s rather than your O.W.L.s. And for my sixth form, at least, that was something that we were allowed to wear our own clothes to. So, we had uniform up until what would have been the fifth book stage, and then, for sixth and seventh we would have been allowed to wear our own clothes. So, there is a kind of coming-of-age, growing up, “being able to wear your own clothes” aspect to it, which is kind of what I think the movies are going for. But they would have been wearing their uniforms for much longer than they are shown to.

Noah: The next Twitter comment, from @Silverdoe25:

“Why the arbitrary changes like the name of the Forbidden Forest?”

I guess to the “Dark Forest,” they mean.

Rosie: See, I’m not entirely sure if it’s “Dark Forest” in my movie. I thought it was “Forbidden Forest,” so that might be another thing that was changed.

Kat: Where does it say “Dark Forest”? I remember hearing “Forbidden.”

Caleb: Yeah, I’ve never caught “Dark Forest” before.

Noah: I think in the movie it’s called the Dark Forest, instead of the Forbidden Forest, is what…

Caleb: In the American version? Or…

Noah: At least in the American version.

Kat: I – no, because I just watched it and I heard “Forbidden Forest.”

Rosie: I thought I heard “Forbidden Forest” in mine, as well.

Kat: Oh, you know what it is? It’s Filch. He says something about going into the dark – the forest is dark at night. Something – the dark forest at night. I think that’s what it is, the dark forest at night.

Noah: I feel like I’ve heard it called the Dark Forest, though.

Rosie: Maybe it’s both.

Noah: Or maybe it’s changed to Forbidden Forest, and it’s supposed to be Dark.

Kat: No, because it’s Forbidden in the book.

Noah: Okay. Okay, we’re getting several comments now, correcting us. But…

[Rosie laughs]

Kat: Yeah, Deb25 says that, “‘You’re going into the dark forest,’ Filch says.” But I think he’s saying dark forest, as in – he’s describing the forest, he’s not calling it the Dark Forest.

Noah: It is in fact dark, and we can possibly say that the Forbidden Forest has a certain darkness to it that other forests do not.

Kat: Right.

[Noah laughs]

Kat: Yeah, so it’s more as an adjective than – thank you, Ustream user 820231. [laughs]

Noah: Here’s a lovely comment from WiseOldBaker:

“With Firenze looking dark in the movie and angelic in the books, did it make a difference for you?”

Because remember in our discussion of Firenze before, he was light and angelic, but in the movie, he is dark – kind of darker. Black hair, dark skin. We won’t see him again.

Kat: I think it’s probably easier to do darker effects, especially in a dark background, dark forest, where they can be less detailed in the graphic department, probably. I don’t know, it didn’t bother me. Honestly, I didn’t even think about it.

Caleb: Yeah, I didn’t think about it, so I guess the angelic aspect in the book had more of an impact than how he looked in the movie.

Rosie: But I don’t really like the centaurs in the film. I think they are – they look kind of creepy, I guess. I don’t know if that is because of the darkness. They don’t look human enough for me to believe that they are part human and part horse. They are…

Noah: And in fact, they are intellectual, too. They shouldn’t look so beastly, because…

Caleb: Yeah.

Noah: …they have a…

Rosie: The way the faces look, they’re almost – they’ve kind of lost their noses, a little bit like Voldemort does. There’s something about them, that face just kind of reminds me of that kind of evil look that Voldemort eventually develops. They’re too inhuman, as Michael, lupinpatronus, has just said.

Noah: And remember with the book, you had the difference between dark and light, between Bane and Firenze, and that creates a – some kind of dialogue…

Rosie: A divide between them, yeah.

Noah: Yeah.

Rosie: Oh well. [laughs]

Noah: You know, I kind of wish we see more centaurs in the movies, but unfortunately we don’t. I believe not until the fifth…

Rosie: Again, I think that’s because they were too expensive, because they are completely CGI creatures. It would have been easier for them to have maybe filmed humans, rather than the CGI face. I don’t know.

Noah: Yeah.

Kat: Right. Oh again, lupinpatronus in the chat is saying, “Like the Narnia centaurs.”

Rosie: Yeah.

Kat: Yeah.

Rosie: They’re just kind of overcomplicated, and it just doesn’t work as well as it could have done.

Noah: Yeah.

Kat: I mean, we do see them again in Order of the Phoenix, but they’re basically just running by, so they don’t have to be detailed or given facial features at all.

Noah: It’s kind of a shame, because with these characters, even though it’s money to make, there’s just such great dialogue here. Especially from Firenze. I mean, we get the dialogue, but in all the movies…

Rosie: [laughs] Someone says Ryan Gosling for Firenze.

Noah: Oh my.

Caleb: [laughs] Oh my gosh.

Kat: I would watch it.

Noah: Another change from the movie was the fact that James Potter is made into a Seeker instead of a Chaser. Remember that? When Harry and Ron discover the trophies, and the fact that James was a Quidditch player, he is a Seeker, not a Chaser.

Kat: Right.

Rosie: Yeah, I think that was done to be – to make him seem more like Harry.

Noah: Yeah, of course.

Caleb: Yeah.

Rosie: But it’s nice that he was a Chaser in the book, I think. There’s almost one connection too many.

Caleb: Yeah, I agree.

Kat: But it’s funny because I think it connects better with him being a Seeker because of him playing with the Snitch the whole time. But yes, I understand he’s a Chaser.

Rosie: Which makes me wonder if maybe Jo had watched the movie and forgotten her own details slightly more when she was writing that scene later on.

Kat: Well, there are lots of examples where the movie canon has kind of infiltrated the book canon.

Noah: Yeah, and as lupinpatronus is saying, it’s making it easier for viewers if we just stay with Seeker. The kids don’t necessarily know multiple Quidditch positions yet, so it makes a great deal of sense.

Rosie: Also, you have to kind of tryout for these roles, although Harry didn’t, so perhaps when James was a Chaser, that was the only role available for him, but he ultimately wanted to be Seeker and tried out again later on, and that’s why he had the Snitch later on.

Kat: Oh, like…

Rosie: He could have been both roles, as people are suggesting.

Kat: Right, like…

Rosie: Like Ginny.

Kat: Like Ginny. Yup, that makes sense.

Noah: Well, I don’t know if that’s true though, is it? Do we know that he played as a Seeker?

Rosie: That’s a detail we don’t know, but there is – we see him playing with the Snitch later on.

Noah: Right.

Rosie: So, it could happen.

Noah: Oh, oh, got it, okay. You know, that’s interesting. I feel like, though, the Chaser is a different personality than the Seeker.

Rosie: Ginny played both.

Noah: Ginny is very versatile.

Caleb: Yeah, but she was a much better Chaser than Seeker.

Noah: Yeah, because I feel like each Quidditch position has some form of personality trait that goes along with it. Maybe you have to be a certain character or state of mind. That would be interesting to analyze.

Kat: Then which one does his personality fit more?

Noah: James?

Kat: Yeah.

Noah: I think Chaser, kind of like a Beater, involves more of a go-getter, more of a slightly more agressive personality, and a Seeker is willing to go between the violence and kind of manipulate the scenes and get to the object or goal, the Snitch, and I think those are different personalities. Both outgoing, but for different reasons. And a Beater, perhaps, would be a bit more aggressive and willing to get right in there, kind of like the Chaser but without any goals in mind. They are helping along the way.

Rosie: See, I think your version of James and my version of James are very different people, because I would have said he was more of the go-getter. But I always wondered – maybe, if he did change roles, maybe he was doing it to try and show off for Lily. I mean, Seeker is considered a more impressive role, so perhaps he wanted to change from a slightly boring Chaser, where there’s already three of them, into something that was individual and makes him stand out slightly more.

Kat: Right. Yeah, I agree with that completely. I think his personality fits better into the seeking role than the chasing.

Noah: Of James?

Kat: Uh-huh.

Noah: I don’t know.

Kat: Especially because of the real-life Muggle Quidditch players that I know who are Seekers.

Caleb: I would side more with Noah. I still think he’s more of a Chaser.

Noah: Yeah.

Rosie: There seems to be a male-female divide in this.

Kat: Battle of the sexes!

[Caleb laughs]

Kat: That’s right.

Rosie: Oh no! [laughs] Hopefully we will find out more in Pottermore.

Noah: As we know, the game of Quidditch itself is tied to…

[Rosie laughs]

Noah: …relationships or at least I’ve made that connection.

Rosie: Oh, Noah.

[Noah laughs]

Kat: Yeah, I think you’re the only one who thinks that.

Noah: I had a pretty hearty conversation with people in the forums about that.

Kat: Oh.

[Rosie laughs]

Noah: It was good. I mean, pretty much everyone disagreed with me, but it was a good discussion. [laughs]

Rosie: [laughs] Good.

Noah: We have one more comment from AJ.

“Hey guys! I wanted to discuss a bit of the creative license taken in this movie, namely Professor McGonagall turning from a cat into a human in her Transfiguration classroom. While I get that they showed a shadow of the transformation early in this film, I question why they didn’t wait until the third film to have her show it to the class. Any thoughts on why they did it now, rather than waiting for the film where being an Animagus has a bigger role in the plot? Thanks for taking my question, and thanks for allowing me to be a part of the podcast!”

Of course.

Rosie: I think it is also that kind of – the fact that Ron was saying, “Oh, we’re late. Thank God she is not here because we would have been in trouble if she were.” And then she is there. She is the cat, she turns into the human. I think it’s all for that little joke there and that little magical shock as opposed to a plot role.

Noah: Yeah, I thought it was brilliant and it had – it brought continuity from the beginning scene where she is changing into a cat to remind the viewers – it was just a clever funny bit that was a little extra. That was great.

Caleb: Yeah, they’re walking into their first Hogwarts class, the first time they’re studying magic, and it’s just a cool display of that.

Noah: Yeah, and it gives us a little bit more feedback on what Transfiguration is because it is all about transformation. So, it’s a great opener to the Transfiguration class because she is herself transforming.

Rosie: Deb25 in the chat says:

“Film 1 is all about exposing audiences to the many aspects of the wizarding world.”

So yeah, it’s a nice way of introducing the fantastic magic of an Animagus…

Noah: Yeah, yeah.

Rosie: …years before it becomes important.

Noah: Exactly, and that is why they couldn’t fit necessarily everything in because they wanted to get a sampling of all the different magical influences of the wizarding world.

Rosie: Definitely.

Kat: So, what particular part of the movie do you guys like that is true to the book and is not true to the book?

Noah: I miss that the Snape – the potions task was taken out.

Kat: Yeah, me too.

Caleb: Yeah, that was disappointing. I would have liked to see that.

Noah: That could have been…

Rosie: They really do rush through the tasks at the end and it would have been nice if they had included all seven.

Noah: Don’t they? I mean, even if Hermione was back there, maybe Harry could have worked it out on his own. But maybe that would have been too much of a change from the book.

Kat: Yeah. I would have been okay with them leaving out the knocked-out troll but I definitely wanted the potion in there.

Rosie: Ustreamer 542260 says it would have ruined the pacing and I think that is exactly the reason why they took it out. It would have been too much of a slow scene where Hermione literally just had to stop and think for a while. It works well in the books but visually it wouldn’t have been interesting.

Noah: And it strikes as anti-climax after the chess scene, so…

Rosie: Yeah.

Caleb: I can agree with that but I also think there is a way of still making it high stakes. Hermione or Harry is trying to rush her and she is just trying to stay calm, and there is still a way I think they could have filmed it where it is high energy and Harry walking through fire. It could have been a really cool way…

Rosie: Yeah, definitely.

Caleb: …to go into seeing Quirrell.

Noah: Yeah. What other major changes did you guys see?

Rosie: I guess the dragon bit where – we discussed earlier where Hagrid just says they have shipped him off to Charlie and we don’t get to see them trying to smuggle a dragon through the castle. That would have been quite fun and quite tension filled. My poor dragons! [laughs]

Caleb: [laughs] I know. I would have liked it, too.

Kat: Hey guys, we got a call coming through from…

Rosie: Brilliant!

Kat: …Jessica Baker. Hold on. Hi, Jessica.

Caller: Hey!

Caleb: Hey!

Noah: Hey!

Rosie: Hi there.

Kat: So guys, this is wiseoldbaker. You might remember her, she was on Episode 8. Welcome back.

Caller: Hey, how is it going?

Kat: Good.

Caller: First, I wanted to thank you guys for talking about the centaur thing. That really helps me out, actually. Secondly, I wanted to ask you guys – because I didn’t get a chance to watch the movie with everybody today. I was just kind of in the chat. But isn’t this the movie where Professor Flitwick kind of looks like the little old balding man?

Rosie: Yes.

Caleb: Yeah.

Noah: Oh, good point.

Caleb: Yeah.

Caller: Yeah, and then the later movies he’s like a young man. Did that bother anybody else? Because it kind of confused me…

[Rosie laughs]

Caller: …when I was watching the movies later on when I got older.

Noah: I mean, it is the same actor, right?

Rosie: Yeah, it’s Warwick Davis again.

Noah: Should they have kept him old?

Rosie: I think they literally just forgot that they had already included him.

[Noah laughs]

Rosie: I’ve actually been – had the privilege of interviewing Warwick Davis, and I think I actually asked him about this at one point. And I think he preferred the younger outfit because there were less prosthetics. It was just a smaller beard and he could have gone through costume a lot quicker.

Noah: Oh, I’m sure.

Rosie: Which was probably the main reason why they did make it younger, because he had to sit through all of the goblin costumes for so long. All of the noses and all of the ears, and everything. It’s just…

Noah: Yeah!

Rosie: …a lot easier for him to do the short beard and short look and young look than the old ones.

Noah: What did you guys think of the goblins, real quick?

Caleb: I think they did a good job of it.

Rosie: I thought they were brilliant.

Kat: Yeah, they were good.

Caller: Yeah, I liked those guys too. I was just wondering what you guys thought about Flitwick, because I do remember when I was younger getting confused because I couldn’t remember who Professor Flitwick was…

[Kat and Rosie laugh]

Caller: …when the younger guy popped up.

Rosie: Flitwick is cool but I always – I keep forgetting that they got rid of Binns. There’s another whole professor that we…

[Noah laughs]

Rosie: …never see in the movies.

Kat: Yeah, that’s because he’s a ghost.

Noah: And he was also really boring.

Rosie: And he’s the boring one. [laughs]

Kat: Oh yeah, the boring one.

Noah: Kids don’t like boring no matter how much continuity it has for the book.

Kat: Yeah, I suppose that’s true.

Noah: [laughs] He just got cut. But it makes sense with Flitwick being an actual – a youngish character who in the books who can fight. It makes sense that he shouldn’t be an old man.

Kat: Yeah, I would agree.

Noah: RIP, movie Binns. [laughs] It’s funny because he’s a ghost. [laughs]

Kat: Cool. Well, thanks for the comment, Jessica.

Caller: No, thank you guys.

Kat: Good talking to you.

Noah: And Jessica, I’m sorry that I’ve kept you in the dark about the secret project that you and Ali Wood and various others will be working on possibly, but that’s coming soon.

Caller: Thank you. I appreciate that because you kind of left the bait and my Ravenclaw instincts have made me high strung for the past couple of days.

[Caleb laughs]

Rosie: We like our secret projects, so just keep an eye out for that one.

Noah: Something is coming. All right.

Kat: Buh-bye.

Caller: See you guys.

Noah: See ya.

Rosie: We’ve got a great comment in the chat about another movie difference from Eule1, E-U-L-E-1, and it says:

“There are only Harry’s parents in the Mirror. I want to see his complete family.”

Because in the books, obviously, we saw all of his grandparents and everything behind them.

Kat: That would have been great. It would have been so easy too, I think, to just cast a bunch of people that looked kind of like them.

Caleb: Yup.

Kat: It would have been so easy.

Noah: Yeah. Maybe they wanted to keep just the parents. They didn’t want it to be just about the whole family. They wanted to magnify only his parents.

Kat: Yeah. I mean, obviously. But still. I’m like ten percent purist when it comes to the movies compared to books, and…

Noah: [laughs] Yeah.

Kat: I mean, that’s one of the things – I think I’m purist about the sentimental things, and something like that I feel like would have been easy to do and they could have put it in there. I don’t know.

Rosie: It would have shown that he came from a wide-ranging family of people that loved him rather then just kind of two people. Admittedly they are the important ones…

[Noah laughs]

Rosie: …within the plot and everything, but it would have been nice for him to have had this whole family, this huge great bunch of people who loved him when he’s felt so alone for so long.

Noah: I wonder what kind of shot it would have been, though, from a cinema standpoint. They would have had to do a shot from Harry’s angle and you’d be looking up – I mean, he’s too short to look down. How would they pan that to see all the people behind him?

Kat: I don’t know, let’s ask Sierra. She’s calling in. Maybe she has an opinion on it.

Noah: Cool.

Kat: Hey, Sierra.

Caleb: We hear some voice – oh.

Caller: Hi.

Kat: Hello.

Caller: They left Peeves out of the movie.

Rosie: They shouldn’t have left Peeves out of the movie. No, they shouldn’t have done.

Kat: Where are you calling from?

Caller: Ireland.

Rosie: Ireland.

Kat: Oh. Well, thank you for calling!

Noah: That’s pretty far. That’s awesome.

Rosie: Ireland is far for you, but not for me. [laughs]

Noah: Oh! [laughs]

Caleb: Where did she say? I didn’t quite hear her. Where did she say she was from?

Kat, Noah, and Rosie: Ireland.

p>Caleb: Oh! My people. Yes.

[Rosie laughs]

Noah: She’s gone. She just vanished.

Rosie: Oh dear. But yeah, she was saying about Peeves not being in the movie and they really shouldn’t have left him out, as we were saying earlier.

Noah: Yeah.

Caleb: Agreed.

Noah: All right, so let’s take a few more calls, and then that’s pretty much the show. Hello?

Caller: Hi.

Noah: Hi.

Rosie: Hi.

Caller: You know when you were talking about the Dark Forest or the Forbidden Forest?

Kat: Mhm.

Rosie: Yes.

Caller: Well, I think the reason why they had the two names is because it is easier to remember. Like, England – they have a whole bunch of names for England.

[Rosie laughs]

Caller: So, that’s it and I love your website. Bye!

Kat: Bye!

Rosie: Thank you very much.

Noah: Bye!

Kat: Thank you.

Rosie: I think that was Carol Ann again.

[Noah laughs]

Rosie: So, she was saying that it was easier to remember the Forbidden Forest as the “Dark Forest” because it’s less specific, it is obvious that it is dark, and that it is quite similar to having lots of names for England. But the thing about England is that there is only one country called England and there is a country called Scotland and a country called Wales and actually two countries which are Ireland. Together, Scotland, Wales, and England are Great Britain, and with Northern Ireland as well we are the United Kingdom. And Ireland itself is a separate country. So, it’s a bit confusing, but we are all different areas.

Noah: Yeah. But – yes, of course different places. Do we have any more call-ins, guys?

Kat: Oh, here is another AJ. Hold on. Hello!

Caller: Hello!

Kat: Hi AJ.

Caleb: Hey.

Caller: Well, I was kind of thinking – it’s kind of a little bit amusing for me that I just thought about, was that in the movies they don’t include – Fred and George were joking around how they were going to send Ginny a toilet seat, and then when Harry faces off…

[Sounds of a child playing in the background]

Caller: …with Quirrell and ends up unconscious in the hospital wing, Dumbledore mentions that Madam Pomfrey had to stop Fred and George from giving him a toilet seat. And I just thought that was amusing, I would love to have seen that in the movie.

Noah: And it probably would have been easy, too, to include.

Caller: It would have been very simple to include.

[Sounds of a child talking in the background]

[Noah laughs]

Caleb: Who do you have guest starring with you there, AJ?

[Kat laughs]

Caller: Oh, my kids are playing in the background. My three-year-old is playing with his Transformers on the floor.

[Everyone laughs]

Noah: That’s really cute. Can you imagine Richard Harris just handing Harry a toilet seat?

Caleb: I would have loved it.

Caller: That would have been very amusing.

[Caller and Noah laugh]

Rosie: It’s such an easy joke to add in as well. I mean, if they kept in, “Alas, earwax,” they could have kept in a little thing about a toilet seat.

Caleb: Yup.

Kat: Yeah, and I feel like that is something we should talk about, is Richard Harris obviously because…

Noah: Richard Harris Dumbledore, yeah.

Kat: Yeah, he is no longer with us, so how do people feel about that? Do we feel like he could have pulled off the more intense, angrier Dumbledore in the later movies?

Rosie: Personally I don’t, but then I was quite unhappy with what happened to Dumbledore throughout the later books.

Noah: As was I.

Rosie: I loved Dumbledore from the early books and Richard Harris was perfect for those ones in Philosopher’s Stone and Chamber of Secrets, but as Dumbledore…

Noah: Isn’t he just immensely close to your vision of Dumbledore?

Rosie: Yeah. He is absolutely perfect.

Caleb: Yeah.

Rosie: But obviously as Dumbledore changes and gets darker, I think he wouldn’t have been able to do it and Michael Gambon is much better for that role.

Caleb: Agreed.

Noah: Yeah.

Caleb: Yeah, I think there was a lot – we’ll talk about this more later but I think the criticism for Gambon taking on the role and not looking as much like him is fair, but I do think he did a great job of handling those more intense aspects.

Rosie: Definitely.

Kat: See, I prefer Michael Gambon, quite honestly. He looks more like my Dumbledore – with the exception of the fact that he never wears the glasses, but…

Caleb: Yeah.

Kat: Yeah, I like Richard Harris, but I think he was too soft-spoken, too quiet, not – he didn’t seem – I don’t want to say smart but there was no intensity to his character, no – I can’t quite put my finger on it but it just wasn’t enough for me. It wasn’t enough.

Rosie: I think for the beginning, Dumbledore was meant to be kind of this grandfather figure, the kind of Merlin guiding you through, and he becomes much more of an action hero later on. So again, it’s kind of – it’s two roles, and I think it’s fine the way it is. And it’s just very sad that we did lose Richard Harris when we did.

Kat: Yeah. It would have been interesting to see him, but I don’t think he would have pulled it off.

Rosie: No.

Noah: I feel like there’s a quote, also, that Gambon just didn’t read the books really. He just kind of did the role, and I think that might have influenced my viewing of him as just – he wasn’t – he didn’t know Dumbledore really to do the role.

Kat: Yeah, but Alan Rickman – didn’t he say that he hadn’t read the books either? Pretty sure about that one. And…

Noah: Is that true?

Kat: …he was spot on as Snape, obviously.

Noah: Yeah.

Rosie: But he talked to Jo. He got secrets that no one else did, so he knew his character more, even if he never read the books.

Noah: This is true.

Rosie: I think Snape is an interesting one because obviously the books are from Harry’s point of view and Harry is so kind of misled with Snape for so long that it’s more important for Alan Rickman to have had the conversation with Jo and to know Snape from outside of the books than the Snape from inside of the books. It’s a very different kind of medium, film, and I think he does it brilliantly.

Noah: Yeah, I think he’s coming to a new show on Broadway actually, close to where I work. I forget what it’s called, but he loves the theatre, and that just comes through in his portrayal.

Rosie: Okay.

Noah: Has Kat disappeared suddenly?

Rosie: I think she stepped out for a second.

Noah: She’s checking on her cats.

[Rosie laughs]

Noah: Guys, while Kat is gone, you should all know Kat loves cats.

Kat: I have two cats. Just saying.

Noah: She has two cats.

Kat: Okay, I’m back. Sorry about that. All right, let’s take our last call for the day. Hey, it’s Michael!

[Everyone laughs]

Caller: [as Hermione] Hermione’s back!

Noah: Oh wow, that is awesome. You do the female voices so great, I can’t imagine – do you have a technique?

Caller: [as Hermione] Umm, no.

[Noah and Rosie laugh]

Caleb: Oh my God.

Caller: [as Hermione] I – no, this is just how I naturally talk. [back to normal voice] No, that would be terrible. Wouldn’t that be awful if I couldn’t turn that off?

Rosie: [laughs] Michael, do you have a Luna voice as well as Hermione voice?

Caller: Oh God, my Luna voice is – I have a good Cho, but my Luna – I wish I could do that accent. I so wish I could do that accent.

[Rosie laughs]

Caller: But I read her once on Audiofictions and I was not happy with that reading. There’s people on Audio – the rest of the team does a much better Luna than I do, but…

Noah: Michael, can you tell us what various characters of the Harry Potter series think of our podcast?

[Rosie laughs]

Caller: [as Hermione] Well – no, actually I’m not going to start because that’s not fair, because Harry – Harry is – it’s his series, so go ahead, Harry.

[as Harry] Well, you know, I love looking back at the series with Alohomora!. I think it’s lovely. I think – and Noah – Noah, I love your voices. I love them so much.

Noah: Do you?!

Caller: [as Harry] Yeah, I do. And it’s just very magical, and it’s just incredible to look back at my life and see how everybody analyzes what I’ve done throughout the years. It’s just – it’s incredible, and I’m – oh, Ron is poking me. He wants to talk, so…

[Caleb and Noah laugh]

Caller: [as Harry] Ron – ow, ow, ow, ow! Okay, okay.

[as Ron] Okay! Let me talk now, let me talk.

[as Harry] All right, all right, all right.

[as Ron] Okay, I think that – I don’t even know, I’m talking in the microphone, I think this is what – Hermione told me to talk like not too close, so I think I’m doing it right. I love Alohomora!, too. I can’t think of anything to say that Harry hasn’t already said, so I’m going to let Hermione talk now.

[Caller and Noah laugh]

Caller: I’m doing movie Ron, I’m making him really dumb.

[Caller and Noah laugh]

Noah: It’s unfortunate, but true. He’s just comic relief.

Caller: Yeah. That made me sad, especially Chamber of Secrets when Hermione steals all of his lines. [laughs] I get why they did that, but – oh sorry, I’m supposed to be letting Hermione talk.

[Noah laughs]

Caller: [as Hermione] Yes, yes, it’s my turn now. Yes, I do believe you go into a very thorough, deep, thoughtful, incredible analysis of the books. There are things that I look back at that I had not even thought of.

Noah: And that’s saying something.

Caller: [as Hermione] It’s incredible. Yes, and I did translate The Tales of Beedle the Bard, so yes that is saying something. And I think that’s all we have to say. Cho is here but she’s crying.

[Noah laughs]

Kat: Big surprise there, right?

Caleb: Do we need to give her a moment? Or…

Caller: [as Cho crying] Well, I just want to talk about Cedric, but you’re not at Book 4 yet…

[Everyone laughs]

Caller: [as Cho crying] …so I won’t.

Rosie: [laughs] So, we’ll have to come back to you, Cho in Book 4, and we’ll talk about Cedric then.

Caller: [as Cho crying] I’d love to talk about him then.

[Everyone laughs]

Caller: I don’t know why they’re all in my house right now, but…

[Caller and Rosie laugh]

Caller: …they’re going to have to go.

[Caleb laughs]

Kat: Well, thank them all for joining us, very much, and thank you, Michael, again.

Caller: Oh, thank you guys. Your fans are so sweet and they should – not to plug but I’m going to plug – go listen to Audiofictions, kids.

[Rosie laughs]

Caller: But after you listen to Alohomora! because that’s where – I think a lot of you guys don’t understand that I’m actually the project manager for Audiofictions. [laughs] I saw people in the chat being like, “He should be on Audiofictions!”

[Noah laughs]

Kat: Yeah.

Noah: He is.

Caller: So, go check that out, but after Alohomora!, right?

Kat: Right.

Noah: Well, the great thing about Alohomora! is that we want to plug all of our MuggleNet projects. We have MuggleSpace, which is a social network for Harry Potter fans, we have M.N.I. that Caleb works for, we have Fan Fiction and Audiofictions – there are so many places where you can interact and we want to be the kind of ground where all those places meet, so thank you for being on the show, Michael. We’re definitely going to have you again.

Caller: [as Hermione] Yes, we can’t wait to talk to you again soon.

Kat: Great. Thanks, Hermione. Have a good day! [laughs]

Caller: [as Hermione] All right. Goodbye, again. [laughs]

Kat and Rosie: Bye!

Noah: [as Hermione] Goodbye.

Caleb: All right. Well, thanks to Michael again for joining us for that wrap-up. And just in general, since we didn’t have a single guest host this week we had pretty much all of you guys. We want to thank you for joining us for the watch-along earlier today. I know some of you got up really early or maybe in some parts of the world, stayed up really late, so we appreciate that.

Noah: Yeah!

Caleb: We enjoyed the comments during the show today, especially through sticking through our technical difficulties.

[Noah laughs]

Caleb: But we thankfully got it worked out so that you guys could join us, and I’m really glad that that worked out. And your comments, questions, thoughts, everything – we really appreciate it. This show cannot happen without you guys, so we’re glad that it worked out.

Kat: And this will happen again, and it will be fixed for Chamber of Secrets. We promise.

[Rosie laughs]

Kat: We promise.

[Caleb laughs]

Noah: With various other tidbits, possibly…

Kat: Yes.

Noah: …with images and videos…

Kat: Right.

Rosie: And thank you to everyone who left us a voicemail. We will go through them all, and we will hopefully use them at some point in the future. It’s a little bit more difficult for us to play them out right now, but we will definitely work out how to use those in our podcast in a couple of weeks time.

Kat: Yes, exactly. And if any of you want to be on the show and on a future, pre-recorded episode, as you know there’s a couple of ways you can go about doing that: you can submit content on the Alohomora! website, which is Alohomora.MuggleNet.com, and you can also send us a recording of yourself analyzing a part of the books. You have to have appropriate audio equipment, so make sure you have a microphone, headphones, and you’re able to record yourself. And go ahead and send that to alohomorapodcast at gmail dot com.

Noah: You can also contact us on Twitter at our handle @AlohomoraMN.

Caleb: And just one last reminder, make sure you follow us on Twitter. This is really only going to be good for you guys that are listening live right now, because our next show will be released during LeakyCon, which we will all be heading to this week, which we’re all really excited about.

Rosie: So excited.

Caleb: Hopefully some of you guys will see us there. We are doing something special at LeakyCon, and if you’re not following us on Twitter, you will not be in the know. So, please make sure you follow us for updates.

Noah: You can also follow us at Facebook: Facebook.com/OpenTheDumbledore. You can listen to us right on the page. Just click on the “Podcast” tab, choose an episode, and enjoy. And contact us on Tumblr. We’re always sharing stuff that you give us while you’re reading the books, lots of different contact. That account is MNAlohomora.Tumblr.com. And our phone number, don’t forget, to leave us voicemails: 206-GO-ALBUS. That’s 206-462-5287. And, of course, our main website: Alohomora.MuggleNet.com. That’s where you can access the forums, all the content, the essays, the fan art – everything Alohomora! is at that account right there, and for any kind of other messages, e-mails to us, just go to – send an e-mail to alohomorapodcast at gmail dot com.

Rosie: And, don’t forget, you can also subscribe to our iTunes feed and get this very podcast when it’s released sometime next week, and it will go straight out to you if you have subscribed to us on our iTunes feed. So, thank you very much for joining us.

[Show music begins]

Rosie: I am Rosie.

Noah: I’m Noah Fried. Thanks so much.

Caleb: I’m Caleb Graves.

Kat: And I’m Kat Miller. Thank you for listening to Episode 9 of Alohomora!.

Noah: Open the Dumbledore!

[Show music continues]

Rosie: [voice echoes] If you can hear, please say… [unintelligible]

Caleb: [voice echoes] Yeah, I hear Kat through the Ustream.

Noah: [voice echoes] We’re getting somewhere!

Rosie: [laughs] [voice echoes] Sounds like we’re all in a cave. I hear [unintelligible] says someone.

Caleb: [voice echoes] Can you hear me now?

Rosie: [voice echoes] Can you hear me?

[Noah sings the show music]

Noah: [in a silly voice] Open the Dumbledore! [continues singing and claps] Clapping. Clapping.