Thread: How do you imagine Harry Potter characters?

I always picture Neville as short, plump, and clumsy, instead of emo kid he became in the 5th movie. And this is going to sound odd, but my friend told me Voldy grew a mustache in the last book and that's all I thought about when I read it.

I imagined Snape being an elderly, cranky man.
I dunno why though.

i only read the first book and now watch the movies, but whe i read the first one..

I imagined Harry to be a bit more weedy, i know he isn't muscley, but i thought he would be shorter.

I imagined Ron pretty much as he was in the films

I imagined Hermione to be slightly more weedy again and also i visualized her with black hair, even if it said brown:p

Hermione never had the big buck teeth she was described with in the books, so that took me by surprise when the first movie came out. Also, she really doesn't look nerdier than anyone else in the film. So I'd pictured Hermione completely differently to what she turned out to be in the films. After all, there are loads of people who think Emma Watson is good looking and wasn't everyone supposed to be really surprised when she arrived at the yule ball? Like she was a completely different person. But really, in the movie, she just ended up looking like the regular Hermione in a dress.

Also, I always imagined Ron way more lanky and gangly than he was in the movies. Harry was really the same as I expected.

Snape is spot-on with casting for the movies, imo.

The 3 kids are pretty much how I would expect them to look from the books, though Harry maybe a bit skinnier than the actor.

Professor McGonagall is right on, as well.

I don't like the casting for Dumbledore in the movies. Richard Harris played a much better Dumbledore - well, how he was meant to be portrayed from the books, I mean.

Sirius and Lupin were cast well, as well as Bellatrix Lestrange. And I think Voldemort's actor did a great job with him as well.

All in all, how I pictured the characters from the books, they pretty much followed through with casting for the movies.

Originally Posted by Burns

Snape is spot-on with casting for the movies, imo.

The 3 kids are pretty much how I would expect them to look from the books, though Harry maybe a bit skinnier than the actor.

Professor McGonagall is right on, as well.

I don't like the casting for Dumbledore in the movies. Richard Harris played a much better Dumbledore - well, how he was meant to be portrayed from the books, I mean.

Sirius and Lupin were cast well, as well as Bellatrix Lestrange. And I think Voldemort's actor did a great job with him as well.

All in all, how I pictured the characters from the books, they pretty much followed through with casting for the movies.

The actress who played Bella also played Charlie's mum in Charlie and Chocolate Factory so that was weird.

And also I rented antother Alan Rickman movie GalaxyQuest and he sounds like that in all his movies.

Originally Posted by And also I rented antother Alan Rickman movie [I

GalaxyQuest[/I] and he sounds like that in all his movies.

I was buzzing when I watched Die Hard the other day and heard Hans Gruber's voice. Recognised it a mile off, it's so class.

Alan Rickman(Snape) was in that too.
He sounds dull and kind of evil.

I think that the casting for HP was done very well except for one major character...

HARRY POTTER!!!

Am I the only one who despises Daniel Radcliffe as Harry Potter?!

Also, did anyone notice how he talks like he can't breathe through his nose. It bothers the hell out of me.

i think Bellatrix, Snape, McGonagall, and Hagrid were cast well..

i imagined Cho to be a lot prettier than Katie Leung, and Fleur Delacour as a blond Gemma Ward/young Vanessa Paradis hybrid.

all the Weasleys are freckle-less.

Remus w/o stache and with longer hair, i imagined Tonks with short hair but i like the long hair better now.

and i see Sirius more handsome.

Dunno why but when I first read the books, I imagined Dumbledore as beardless, and younger looking.

I refuse to see 5 in the theatres because Umbridge doesn't look like that actress. Umbridge is much more toad like, with an attitude closer to the Housing lady that evicted me from the dorms.

When reading the books, I regret seeing the movies, because i can't help but see the actors. MOst of the cast is good. but i can't radcliffe sucks.
*shakes fist*

I thought Hermione's hair should have been alot bigger and bushier, like it is in the first movie. But then it's tame in the other movies. And she doesn't have the buck teeth, like someone already mentioned.

I was disappointed in Umbridge, they could have found a much more toadlike looking woman in my opinion.

I expected Fleur to be alot more beautiful with much longer and more blonde hair than just her neat tiny little ponytail.

I thought Cho would be prettier.

Helena Bonham Carter is perfect as Bellatrix and Ralph Fiennes is amazing as Voldemort. I didn't even recognize him the first time I saw GOF.

I thought Sirius would be alot taller and more handsome, but in the 5th movie I actually sorta had a crush on him...he's just a very charming character, even if he wasn't as tall and handsome as I think he should have been.

Lupin is spot on exactly how I thought he'd be. I expected Tonks to have short bubblegum pink hair, but I think the actress they cast for her did a good enough job.

Luna Lovegood is spot on.

Neville is almost too ugly to look at...when he makes those faces when his huge front teeth stick out (like the incident with madeye moody), bleh...I would have preferred someone a little less ugly and dorky.

Madeye was spot on.

I expected Barty Crouch's son to be alot less cool than he is in the movies. In the book he's begging and pleading and stuff like a wimp, and in the movie he just seems alot cooler.

Igor was spot on.
Hagrid is better than spot on.
McGonagall is spot on.

Victor Krum I expected to be thinner, and less attractive, with a hooked nose and a bit duck footed. But in the movie they try to make him a big thick meathead.

I don't find Ginny Weasely's character in the movies to be pretty AT all, yet they go on and on in the books about how pretty she is. So...meh.

Snape is spot on.

Filch is spot on.

Mrs. Fig...worst casting ever.

Kingsley I expected to be a bit older and more imposing.

The Trelawny from POA is spot on...but the Trelawny from OoTP sorta fails.

Um...that's all for now hehe.

Oh god, I thought that the first film was atrocious. The second was slightly better, and third was positively good, as was the fourth.

Harry Potter is not Daniel Radcliffe. He doesn't look like Harry. For one thing Harry in the books has bright green eyes and Harry in the films has bright blue eyes. How could they overlook such a obvious mistake?

Hermione and Ron both look roughly how I imagined them, although Hermione is too pretty and Ron can't act

Dumbledore is pretty lousy, much too kindly, although the new one is a bit more interesting and mysterious.

I agree that Snape and Mcgonagall are spot on. Although Alan Rickman is a bit tall and not thin enough, he makes up for it in his acting.

Hagrid =

Um, Sirius is alright, although I didn't imagine him with so much facial hair.

I notice noone has commented on Malfoy... I thought he acted it well, but didn't have the right face somehow for Malfoy.

The whole Griffindor quiddich team, especially the 3 chasers was exactly how I imagined them

OH yea lol Uncle Vernon is perfect, although Dudley doesn't quite live up to the description of his vastness in the books. Aunt Petunia is good

Hm, I thought Snape was much skinnier, with hollow cheeks, you know.

Although they Weasley Twins were described being very tall I always imagined them to be a bit corpulent... Aren't there two corpulent twin brothers in Alice in Wonderland, the animated movie? If there are, I imagined them a bit like that...

Mad-Eye Moody: You may be laughing but I really imagined Moody resembling the old man in Zelda Ocarina of Time (nintendo 64) who lived in the laboratory at the Hylia lake...

Originally Posted by Burns

The 3 kids are pretty much how I would expect them to look from the books, though Harry maybe a bit skinnier than the actor

Yeah, I think so, too. And I'm a bit disappointed that Harry's "mess of emotions" he's living through his days in Hogwarts aren't adequately transfered to the movies. I especially love the monster in his stomach that resembles his feelings towards Ginny (I think this appears often in HBP)

Mrs. Fig: I mean she was supposed to be a skinny, humpy, old and small lady, but in OotP she was like 40 years old and far from my imagination

Fleur and Cho should have been prettier, and Fleur a bit more... flossy? Like, if you see her for the first time you think "oh no, not one of those annoying, giggling, gossipping girls..."

the other ones are, as far as I remember, more or less quite adequate.

i stopped reading the books because of the films. sad but true. i had a good image of the whole thing too, oh well.

I thought Draco in the first two movies was great with the slicked back hair like his father's. But then he gets sort of stupid looking with that long flimsy hairstyle in the other movies. They should have kept it slicked back. Oh...and I always imagined Harry's hair as it is in the 4th movie, kinda long and messy. I can't believe those idiots cut it so short for the 5th movie! I also don't see the green eyes in Harry in the movies.

Originally Posted by stuetzl

Although they Weasley Twins were described being very tall I always imagined them to be a bit corpulent... Aren't there two corpulent twin brothers in Alice in Wonderland, the animated movie? If there are, I imagined them a bit like that...

No, actually the Weasley twins are always described as short and stalkier than the others, like Charlie. And Ron and Percey and Bill are taller and thinner. But in the movie the twins are really tall and skinny, and that sorta confused me a bit too...but I like them tall and skinny better for some reason. :p

Oh, and you're thinking of tweedle-dee and tweedle-dum.

Originally Posted by Aquanina

I thought Draco in the first two movies was great with the slicked back hair like his father's. But then he gets sort of stupid looking with that long flimsy hairstyle in the other movies. They should have kept it slicked back. Oh...and I always imagined Harry's hair as it is in the 4th movie, kinda long and messy. I can't believe those idiots cut it so short for the 5th movie! I also don't see the green eyes in Harry in the movies.

Oh indeed! especially now after reading the first book again. Harrys hair can't even be cut! it stays messy and all over the place no matter what!. Fricking GRR!!

they really messed up in the 5th movie.

Originally Posted by Aquanina

I always imagined Harry's hair as it is in the 4th movie, kinda long and messy. I can't believe those idiots cut it so short for the 5th movie!

Originally Posted by Led

Oh indeed! especially now after reading the first book again. Harrys hair can't even be cut! it stays messy and all over the place no matter what!. Fricking GRR!!

they really messed up in the 5th movie.

haha, I just commented on his hair in one of the other threads...

I actually pictured Harry's hair from the books to be shortish on the sides, but long enough on the top to stand up and look untidy. I think it was TOO long in the 4th movie, but maybe a bit too short in the 5th, though I'd prefer the 5th if given the choice.

Originally Posted by Burns

I actually pictured Harry's hair from the books to be shortish on the sides, but long enough on the top to stand up and look untidy. I think it was TOO long in the 4th movie, but maybe a bit too short in the 5th

I actually agree with you that it was a bit too long in the 4th movie...I liked it BEST in the 3rd movie. It looks exactly as it is described, very untidy, kinda spikey on the sides and stands up a bit in the back. It is a bit TOO long in the 4th movie...but the 5th was just disappointing.

Though, (we'll see if I'm right or wrong) but I think they decided to so drastically cut Harry's hair in this movie for some variation, and it will again be longer in the last two movies.

Originally Posted by Aquanina

Though, (we'll see if I'm right or wrong) but I think they decided to so drastically cut Harry's hair in this movie for some variation, and it will again be longer in the last two movies.

Yeah you're prolly right. It's different in each movie, and it seems like they do it that way on purpose.

Harry's hair was supposed to be jet black. It was always sort of dark brown in the movies.
Fleur was pretty but not as pretty as described in the book. As it is the case with Cho Chang.
Dumbledore looks like a crackhead in the movies. Whats up with him always tying his beard. I prefer the Dumbledore from the Sorcerors Stone.
Dudley is not quite fat enough. Hes supposed to be as wide as he is tall and that is not the case in the movies.
Hagrid is perfect.
Ron and Hermione fit well.
Cedric was a dissappointment.