Movies & TV Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for movie and tv enthusiasts. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

The destruction of the Weasley house added no plot element and it was not in the book.

The Weasley home was basically supposed to be the safest place for Harry (aside from Hogwarts). Why did the film writers decide it was okay to destroy it?

share|improve this question
up vote 10 down vote accepted

There are quite a few instances in the Harry Potter movie series of loyalty to the books being sacrificed to make more audience-and-money-grabbing action scenes. That's pretty much the entire plot of the last one. And remember the first trial in the fourth movie?

share|improve this answer
+1. Now we can close all "why did X happen in the films but not in the books?" questions as duplicates of this one. – rand al'thor Jul 4 at 23:28

From the IMDB FAQ page for Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince:

In a new scene created for the movie, the Burrow is attacked by Bellatrix Lestrange and Fenrir Greyback during the Christmas break from Hogwarts. The scene was added in because the film's middle act would otherwise have had no action, and it would also show that there are no safe places anymore. The scene also helps develop Harry and Ginny's relationship a bit more because, during the scene, Harry runs after Bellatrix and Ginny rushes to help him. Also, Lupin and Tonks are featured in this scene, which establishes that they are a couple. Finally, the scene ends in a rather melancholic note given that the Burrow holds practically everything the Weasleys ever worked for, and since they were already quite impoverished, it adds to the darker tone of the movie.

share|improve this answer
Ehhhh i don't like it.... The book had alot of action that the movie decided to cut out. Why add action AND remove action at the same time....? – Craig Dec 9 '11 at 14:13
The quote emphasizes that destroying the Burrow moves two emotional storylines along, which is still unsatisfying, but kind of logical. – vastra360 Mar 4 '14 at 3:03

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.