1000 pages? Here in Australia it's closer to 750 pages in length.

Yes, the hard back versions of OOTP sold here in the states is somewhere in the upper-900's

How's that work exactly? Are your HP books smaller in size and with much wider margins? I don't envy the book-binder's job.

The main difference between the USA and UK editions of the Harry Potter series is that the USA books contain Mary Grandpre's illustrations. This would bulk out the USA version somewhat, even though they are not necessarily large illustrations. Especially in the case of OOTP which is an already long book.

Another, much less significant difference, is North American English usage as opposed to standard English language usage.

I'm curious. Which scenes or chapters from the series (both film and book) are your favorites?

Most of my favorite scenes have to do with Dumbledore, Hermione, Snape, and McGonagall. My favorite chapter in the whole series is "King's Cross," followed by "The Prince's Tale." (Though I'll admit I enjoy the last fourth or so of The Deathly Hallows, everything from the point they come back to Hogwarts on.)

How about the rest of you?

What I really like are some of the lines from the books (some could have been included in the films and others couldn't have because they were descriptions). I love the descriptions of Uncle Vernon and Aunt Petunia - Vernon had no neck and Petunia's neck was really long which came in handy to look over the neighbors' fences.

I also love in the book when Harry meets Ron, Harry asks if all Ron's family are wizards and Ron replies with "I think Mum has a cousin who is an accountant, but we don't talk about it."

I've been listening to Sourcer's Stone on audiobook - so it's the one that it freshest in my mind. But those type of lines are the reason that I love reading the HP books. I enjoy the movies too - but, they left out a lot of the humor (not all, but a lot).

The main difference between the USA and UK editions of the Harry Potter series is that the USA books contain Mary Grandpre's illustrations. This would bulk out the USA version somewhat, even though they are not necessarily large illustrations. Especially in the case of OOTP which is an already long book.

Another, much less significant difference, is North American English usage as opposed to standard English language usage.

That doesn't make any sense at all. . .

The copy of the books that I've read do not have vast illustrations, but merely a two inch by two inch illustration at the start of a new chapter. . . That would hardly add several hundred pages.

And miscellaneous changes in spelling couldn't do that either. . .

I would guess it's more of a difference in the font size and the leading between lines. I know here in the US, we tend to have a good distance between lines of text. I don't know if that's universal. But it would make a big difference in the page count as would the font size.

(this is being brought to you by someone who has never cracked open a HP book. Just someone who has done some work on formatting text documents like newsletters and newspaper articles. )

Out of curiosity - are there any scenes that are in the books that you are glad are not in the films? Most of the time, you hear people complain that something was left out that they were really looking forward to seeing. But as I was listening to "Chamber of Secrets" the other day, I thought to myself, "I'm REALLY glad they didn't put THAT in the movie!" The scene I'm talking about is Lockhart's Valentine's Day surprise with the dwarves dressed like cupids delivering Valentine's to everyone.

Are there any that you are happy were left out of the films?

Most of the first 200 pages of OotP fits that description in my books. Those pages plod along and are terribly dull.

I found the first two chapters of OOTP (book) were really good, especially Petunia getting a howler, and her remark "That awful boy" and what she knew about the dementors. I was disappointed the film skimmed over this bit. Also, there were important clues to the rest of the series during the next few chapters. (ahem, the locket, Kreacher & RAB.) But I am glad that the film omitted the repetitive detentions Harry Potter suffered, not to mention much of his CAPSLOCK grumpiness, and that stuff about Harry not being made a prefect. What was shown in the film of those chapters was quite enough. And I was glad to do without the Quidditch scenes and their aftermath.

Are there any that you are happy were left out of the films?

Yes, I really am glad that the deathday party wasn't put into Chamber of Secrets. I know it was a bit funny in a gruesome sort of way, and that it introduced Moaning Myrtle and gave the trio a good reason for not being at the Halloween feast. But that chapter always leaves me a bit queasy. To see rotting food in a movie would be really too much.

I was also glad that the film Half-Blood Prince left out the book's subplot of Hermione thinking Harry was cheating in Potions because he had a scribbled-over second-hand textbook at his disposal, not to mention the feud between Ron and Ginny over Ginny's romantic activities. And although I did not really like the film scene at the Burrows in the film, would it have improved matters if we had seen Rufus Scrimgeor visiting the Burrow, accompanied by buttered parsnip-covered Percy? I don't really think so.

Out of curiosity - are there any scenes that are in the books that you are glad are not in the films? But as I was listening to "Chamber of Secrets" the other day, I thought to myself, "I'm REALLY glad they didn't put THAT in the movie!" The scene I'm talking about is Lockhart's Valentine's Day surprise with the dwarves dressed like cupids delivering Valentine's to everyone.

Though I do see what you mean about grumpy, hairy old men dressed up like cupids to deliver the Valentines, and the unfair use of dwarves , I really liked Gilderoy Lockhart's Valentine Day breakfast. It was so over-the-top, really burlesquing the whole idea of popular romance and one of the funniest parts of the book. I would have loved to see the disapproving looks of Snape and McGonagall at that breakfast.

Also, I think that the Valentine's Day card Ginny sent Harry, and his bag breaking under the weight of the "cupid" delivering it, was an important clue to the story, which would have developed Ginny as a character, established her connection to the diary and make her appearance in the Chamber of Secrets and elsewhere in the series of films somewhat less random.

Although I would have liked to see more of the memories that Dumbledore showed Harry in HBP the film, some of them, I agree, might not have fitted into the PG slot, in particular those two with Morfin Gaunt in them. What HBP memories were you glad were left out of the film of that book?

You're right about Ginny - they didn't really do a good job of developing her character in the movies.

As for the HBP memories - I'm going to have to read it again before I can answer that. It's been a while (and I'm old ) I'm finishing POA right now - so, another couple of weeks.

But I will tell you that the HBP movie really seemed confusing throughout most of the film.

I was thinking about this question the other night, and wondered what you guys might think.

We know that the bond between wizard and wand is very strong. We also know that wands are something more than "inanimate objects," and while they cannot "think" they are somewhere in between living and non-living things.

That being said, do you think it would be possible for a witch or wizard to use the Avada Kedavra curse on themselves if they used their own wand to do so, or do you think that the wand would refuse to destroy it's owner?

Hmm... that's quite the question, DiGs. I'd say that it's unlikely a wizard would choose to die in that way. The one example of suicide in the books that I can think of is

Given that, I can't say we've ever been given any evidence that a wand could be used to commit such an act.

That said, I think your second option is most likely. Unless the wizard were very strong-willed (and that would be hard to find in someone willing to die that way), I think the wand would flatly refuse or perhaps send the spell flying awry.

We know that the bond between wizard and wand is very strong. We also know that wands are something more than "inanimate objects," and while they cannot "think" they are somewhere in between living and non-living things.

That being said, do you think it would be possible for a witch or wizard to use the Avada Kedavra curse on themselves if they used their own wand to do so, or do you think that the wand would refuse to destroy it's owner?

No, it wouldn't be possible. The wand would not work properly to destroy its owner and I think it would snap if the owner tried. That is what the whole series is about, from the opening chapter in Philosopher's Stone, to the second last chapter of Deathly Hallows. Voldemort's wand couldn't work properly against Harry Potter because Harry Potter's phoenix-feather wand was the brother wand of Voldemort's phoenix-feather wand.

Voldemort also strengthened the relationship between himself and Harry Potter by taking Harry's blood to regenerate himself in Goblet of Fire.

I don't see how that follows, wagga, but maybe if you supported those claims some more I might see it.

I did think of something. While not exactly a direct answer to the question, it's the best I've been able to think of:

In Deathly Hallows,

That may indicate that no wizard could use his own wand against himself for similar reasons. Its loyalty to the wizard's well-being would trump the wizard's desires. This isn't conclusive, though.

I don't see how that follows, wagga, but maybe if you supported those claims some more I might see it.

I did think of something. While not exactly a direct answer to the question, it's the best I've been able to think of:

In Deathly Hallows,

Spoiler

the Elder Wand refused to kill Harry (its rightful master) at Voldemort's request, and the spell rebounded and killed Voldemort instead, partially due to Harry's own Expelliarmus Spell.

That may indicate that no wizard could use his own wand against himself for similar reasons. Its loyalty to the wizard's well-being would trump the wizard's desires. This isn't conclusive, though.

But that is just it. It isn't just that Harry got a wand that was the brother of Voldemort's wand. In BK 1, Harry's parents are killed at Godric's Hollow. Because Harry's mother chose to give her life rather than see Voldemort kill her baby, Harry was shielded from Voldemort, especially when Dumbledore lodged the 15 month-old with Petunia, Lily's sister. Voldemort who thought he would make 7 horcruxes to ensure he lived, but didn't get to say the spell when the AK deflected back on him, was unable to die properly. But he couldn't live properly either, just hanging on as a disembodied spirit. And when he tried to return physically by using the Philosopher's Stone, Quirrell, his host, was killed by Harry's mere touch.

In COS we see one of these horcruxes in operation. The diary was the vehicle for Tom Riddle's "memory" which almost left the diary to take over Ginny. Lucius Malfoy had been the one entrusted to keep the diary, whilst Moaning Myrtle was the one whose death enabled Tom Riddle to make his first Horcrux.

In POA we meet dementors which are metaphors for the sort of depression that could cause a wizard to turn his wand on himself. But a dementor acts directly. It isn't until GOF that Voldemort, himself, makes an appearance, having used the hapless Bertha Jorkins' death, Nagini, the last horcrux, and the escaped Wormtail to reconstitute himself. At the end of GOF, Voldemort, using Harry's blood, amongst other things, is restored to his physical self, but although he had overcome his inability to touch Harry, Voldemort couldn't AK Harry, as he had planned, due to the close relationship between his and Harry's wands.

In the next book Voldemort tried to capture a prophecy copy, then in the following book, he commissioned Draco to kill Dumbledore, the only one who really knew exactly what the prophecy predicted. By the beginning of DH, Voldemort was after the Elder Wand, the most powerful wand of them all to replace his own Yew & Phoenix feather wand. Draco disarmed Dumbledore at the end of HBP, not Snape, or Voldemort, himself.

Thus there was no way that the Elder Wand would kill Harry. It behaved in the same way that the two Phoenix Wands had done earlier, in the GOF graveyard. That is why I don't think that a wizard could genuinely turn his own wand against himself. Either the wizard would be too depressed to do any magic at all, or else the wand would disobey.