The differences between the Harry Potter books and films are well known at this point, with some pretty significant changes that might not seem particularly out of place if you didn't read the novels.
Ron's portrayal is probably the most obvious example of this. In the books, he serves as the groups major source of information for wizarding cultural touchstones, having grown up around magic whilst his two best friends did not. In the movies, he's often reduced to comic relief, and many of the breakthroughs that he makes in the original texts are instead given to Hermione.
That isn't the only example though, and even the Dark Lord himself wasn't immune from changes in his transfer across to the big screen.
As pointed out by brettsthoughts on TikTok, the character of Voldemort is a lot less deep in the films than he is in the books. As a child, he was supposed to be beloved at Hogwarts, becoming Head Boy and celebrated for impressive feats in later life by his teachers. In the films, he starts out creepy and only gets worse from there.
Advert
Equally in his adult life, he is defeated by children in direct combat several times (when he can actually take on several powerful adult wizards at once) while at the same time he gives Dumbledore a much more difficult time than he should during their duel at the Ministry of Magic.
There are plenty of other examples to draw on, and there are plenty of fans who will never forget how the movies treated the character.
"I'll never forgive the movie writers for how they did the final showdown between Voldemort and Harry... The book was 1000 times better," one read.
"I’ll never get over the fact that the movies cut the whole story of Tom Riddle Senior with Voldemort’s mom and her father! This was crucial for Voldemort’s villain origin story," another added.
There's no doubt that the movies and books are very different propositions, but both have their place, even if there are some annoying gripes to contend with.
Topics: Harry Potter, TV And Film, Warner Bros