11

In the movie Deathly Hallows Part 1, Harry Potter did not disguise himself using polyjuice potion at the wedding of Bill and Fleur. But in the book he was disguised as a cousin of the Weasleys, Barny Weasley, because there were threats.

Shouldn't he have disguised himself, as Death Eaters might be around looking for him? Why did they not take that matter seriously in the movie?

  • 3
    Real reason, probably time/cost/overly complicated. – cde Jun 7 '16 at 7:57
  • 7
    And the wedding was heavily protected. Plus they did this way too many times in the book. The films chose to only (partially) disguise them in Gringotts and in the Ministry, and not to do it in Bill's wedding or Godric's Hollow, because we need to see the characters to actually care. ;) – Walt Jun 7 '16 at 8:41
4

IMO, it's simply due to the fact that film is a visual medium.

Harry's disguise made every sense, and so he had it in the book (where you can stuff loads of details with minor explanations), but it was not overly important for the scene. Probably because of that, taking the time (and some special effects money) to show it and explain it was avoided.

Also, having a different actor being Harry would be distracting for some of the viewers, even when explained, and it would also probably feel old (as in "we've seen this trick, why repeat it?").

So, unless there is a real need - from the perspective of the scene, not the plot - for Harry to be disguised, he's not.

0

Granted, this is a bit speculative, but whose appearance would he assume by use of polyjuice potion? Anyone who he would want to look like would be attending the wedding, and having two "copies" of the same person would make it obvious to any Death Eaters around that one of them was Harry.

  • 1
    Er, you can be anyone, you just need a bit of their hair... In the book he turned into a random muggle boy whose hairs they got with a summoning charm. It goes without saying that this boy did not attend the wedding. – Walt Feb 1 '17 at 20:34
  • @Walt: I get all that, but doesn't it seem weird for a random person shows up at a wedding (IIRC, the explanation was that polyjuiced Harry was some distant, unknown cousin, but that's an easy to see through lie). I'm sure movie makers preferred that the audience to see the "real" Harry, but I was trying to provide a sensible in-universe answer. – GreenMatt Feb 2 '17 at 14:28
  • "easy to see through lie" Why? Do you really recognize everyone you see at someone's wedding? We're talking dozens and sometimes hundreds of people and some of them are total strangers to one another. Even the bride and groom don't often know all of them that well. – Walt Feb 2 '17 at 15:38
  • @Walt: "Do you really recognize everyone you see at someone's wedding?" I did at my own! :-) This wasn't depicted as a wedding of hundreds in the movie. I got the sense that most everyone knew of everyone, if they didn't know them personally. I'm sure we can go back and forth with this forever, but I'm not inclined to do that. As I said before, I was just trying to provide an answer that makes sense in the movie universe. – GreenMatt Feb 3 '17 at 14:50
  • @GreenMatt I'm sure that Bill and Fleur were told, "Hey that random guy there? That's harry. It's not a party crasher" – Matthew Barclay Feb 27 '18 at 19:15

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .