Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** Another possibility is that the Thunderbird test run wasn't QUITE properly diluted (perhaps the ratio was too skewed towards the venom), so it DID impact even pleasant memories, but to a lesser level.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 307 (click to see context) from:
** A related idea to the "is it murder v. is it just an execution" thing: think about executions in real life. Lethal injections are expensive and time-consuming: you need a doctor to insert IVs, a bunch of expensive chemicals, and the whole thing takes several minutes, if not an hour or two. Three people shooting the condemned in the back of the head, [[Film/TheBoondockSaints Boondock Saints-style]], is undoubtably quick and any pain is sure to be briefly felt. But we don't do that because, for one thing, it's too personal and messy, and it's considered more humane to do lethal injection. A death potion, with the condemned spending their last minutes experiencing a happy memory, is probably the Wizarding equivalent of a lethal injection.
to:
** A related idea to the "is it murder v. is it just an execution" thing: think about executions in real life. Lethal injections are expensive and time-consuming: you need a doctor to insert IVs, [=IVs=], a bunch of expensive chemicals, and the whole thing takes several minutes, if not an hour or two. Three people shooting the condemned in the back of the head, [[Film/TheBoondockSaints Boondock Saints-style]], is undoubtably quick and any pain is sure to be briefly felt. But we don't do that because, for one thing, it's too personal and messy, and it's considered more humane to do lethal injection. A death potion, with the condemned spending their last minutes experiencing a happy memory, is probably the Wizarding equivalent of a lethal injection.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** Educational standards could have changed in the decades between the two series and the Boggart lessons simply changed from Transfiguration to DADA class.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
**** Actually, cancer was originally the Latin word for a crab. It was Hippocrates that likened some tumors and swollen veins to crabs.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** Why does the Wizarding community need to see someone in a good light to use their name as an expression?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** Actually, horses originated in North America and spread to other continents from there. So they aren’t the best example anyway.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
[[/folder]]
[[folder: Salem]]
* If "Mercy Lewis" and "Deliverance Dane" are have entered US Wizarding lexicon, then they must have been witches. Which means that Mercy was a Scourer, as she was an "afflicted" girl who accused others, though she briefly recanted before resuming. It's hard to believe that the US Wizarding community would see her in a good light, to use her name as an expression. So there must be more to her story than in real life. Deliverance Dane makes sense, as she was accused. But the rest of the story from Pottermore doesn't make any sense. The people who were magical, weren't innocent of the crimes for which they were accused." They were accused of being witches and they were. And none of the judges could have been scourers, because their post-trial lives are accounted for.
[[folder: Salem]]
* If "Mercy Lewis" and "Deliverance Dane" are have entered US Wizarding lexicon, then they must have been witches. Which means that Mercy was a Scourer, as she was an "afflicted" girl who accused others, though she briefly recanted before resuming. It's hard to believe that the US Wizarding community would see her in a good light, to use her name as an expression. So there must be more to her story than in real life. Deliverance Dane makes sense, as she was accused. But the rest of the story from Pottermore doesn't make any sense. The people who were magical, weren't innocent of the crimes for which they were accused." They were accused of being witches and they were. And none of the judges could have been scourers, because their post-trial lives are accounted for.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 212 (click to see context) from:
to:
*** [[spoiler: It's shown on-screen that the rain melts the words off of the newspapers and replaces them with different headlines.]]
** I think the answer on this is going to have to be, as with all things in this universe, IT IS MAGIC.
** I think the answer on this is going to have to be, as with all things in this universe, IT IS MAGIC.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** The only thing that has ever been confirmed about the Elder Wand in the books is that it does what it wants. And humans are very bad at understand what wands do and why. Note that it is absolutely ''never confirmed on page'' that Harry is ACTUALLY master of the Elder Wand--Harry just guesses, based on what happened between him and the various wandholders and what Dumbledore's plan had been. We do not know for sure that it changed its allegiance because Draco Malfoy was disarmed, we just know that Harry thinks it did. Ollivander tells Harry that Draco's original wand ''may'' be his after taking it from him physically. ''May.'' Depending on the circumstances of its being taken. Therefore, it is entirely possible that the Elder Wand did not change its allegiance from Grindelwald to Tina at that time--it's a wand, and wands can't tell humans how they work or why, and the event we're all comparing this one to has never actually been confirmed on page to have happened the way Harry Potter (well known for being 100% correct about all things all the time, always) claims it did.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** If Jacob had met the right banker in the right mood, it might have worked. Not every banker is as unimaginative and heartless as the one he got. Get a hungry one, willing to listen for as long as the pastries last, and he might be able to show him enough of the business plan to convince him that it plus much-above-average pastries could be a safe bet.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** I always heard it as ''un''jinxing the toilets, given as one in a series of examples of the menial jobs she is assigned. That's what makes sense in the context she says it in.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
*** Except she wasn't punishing lying, she was punishing telling the truth!
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 515 (click to see context) from:
** ''Crimes of Grindelwald'' may answer this when it comes out, but I'd say it's entirely possible that either Dumbledore was subbing for the DADA professor for whatever reason (as Snape would later do for Lupin in PoA) or that ''riddikulus'', being a spell to make a hostile creature change its shape, indeed straddles the line between Defense and Transfiguration.
to:
** ''Crimes of Grindelwald'' may answer this when it comes out, but I'd say it's entirely possible that either Dumbledore was subbing for the DADA professor for whatever reason (as Snape would later do for Lupin in PoA) [=PoA=]) or that ''riddikulus'', being a spell to make a hostile creature change its shape, indeed straddles the line between Defense and Transfiguration.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 74 (click to see context) from:
to:
** With regard to Grindelwald thinking in German, 1.) We don't know that he's actually German, or Scandinavian, or eastern European in any capacity. We don't know his nationality, only that he went to Durmstrang, which the original books mentioned was even possible for British students. 2.) Not only is it expected that a dark wizard would know Occlumency, but it's also expected that the head Auror at MACUSA would be adept at it, especially when he's shown in confidential meetings and discussions with the president -- not something you'd want just anyone to be privvy to.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 435 (click to see context) from:
** Well, in the original scrip there's no mention of her greeting him like there's a grudge or anything. It's only when he's about to remind her that she's no longer an Auror that she gets irritated with him. (The script doesn't actually clarify that that's what he's about to say when he's cut off, but it's fairly clear from context.)
to:
** Well, in the original scrip there's no mention of her greeting him like there's a grudge or anything. It's only when he's about to remind her that she's no longer an Auror that she gets irritated with him. (The script doesn't actually clarify that that's what he's about to say when he's cut off, but it's fairly clear from context.)
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 58 (click to see context) from:
*** The Wizarding World is full of massive hypocrites? Seems to me that that is exactly the sort of crappy thing they might do.
to:
*** The Wizarding World is full of massive hypocrites? Seems to me that that is exactly the sort of crappy thing they might do.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** FridgeBrilliance: The only use of the word "squib" in the movie is when Graves tells Credence that's what he is. And given that Graves is Grindelwald in disguise, hence a European rather than an American, he may have slipped and used the British term rather than whatever the local nickname for "wizarding-blooded nonmagical person" is.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** Maybe that single breeding produced a whole litter of them, and magical creatures don't suffer from inbreeding depletion?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** It could be to do with the timeframe, after the first world war, noble families in reality, were running dangerously low on descendants, the joke about noble inbreeding mostly comes from this, they wanted to keep their bloodlines noble, so mixed class marriages were off the table, it is noted in the sequel that wizards and witches also took part in WWI, Newt's brother being one of them, before the war perhaps the whole "no mingling with NoMaj" thing was more of a suggestion, rather than a rule, but after the war, The MACUSA started to enforce it as many pureblood sons died in the war, remember just because they are wizards doesn't mean they couldn't be patriotic, and while wizards generally look down on muggle inventions, wizards have to concentrate to cast spells, hard to cast when the otherside is raining down bombardments, or someone took their "lucky stick" for firewood in the cold trenches.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
**** In the book, Grindelwald waits long enough to hit Gregorovitch with a spell before making off with the wand, which is what transferred its allegiance.
**** Grindelwald gained the wand's allegiance from Gregorovitch because he waited long enough to hit him with a spell before making off with it. Tina did not do the same to Grindelwald -- he was ensnared by the Swooping Evil, and she summoned his wand using Accio, not Expelliarmus.
Deleted line(s) 121,122 (click to see context) :
** The wand chooses the wizard. This troper has always held that the Elder Wand switches allegiance when it wants to, or finds a more powerful or appealing wizard to ally with.
*** This is how I thought of it. When Draco got the wand from Dumbledore, Dumbledore died before the wand was picked up again. It's possible that Dumbledore wouldn't have lost control of the wand if he had lived, because he's the most powerful wizard and the wand may '''want''' to stay with him. The only reason it went to Draco in this theory is that Dumbledore '''couldn't''' possess it again. When Harry disarmed Draco, it was an average wizard being disarmed by another average (or maybe the wand thought of Harry as powerful) wizard. So, it swaps the loyalty a little more easily, because at worst, one average wizard isn't more preferable than another average wizard, or at best, the wand went from an average wizard to a stronger one. In this theory, it could make sense that Grindlewald retained possession of the wand by being disarmed by a witch or wizard (depending on who exactly "defeated" him) that was less likely to give the Elder Wand the lifestyle it'd gotten used to and )possibly) enjoyed.
*** This is how I thought of it. When Draco got the wand from Dumbledore, Dumbledore died before the wand was picked up again. It's possible that Dumbledore wouldn't have lost control of the wand if he had lived, because he's the most powerful wizard and the wand may '''want''' to stay with him. The only reason it went to Draco in this theory is that Dumbledore '''couldn't''' possess it again. When Harry disarmed Draco, it was an average wizard being disarmed by another average (or maybe the wand thought of Harry as powerful) wizard. So, it swaps the loyalty a little more easily, because at worst, one average wizard isn't more preferable than another average wizard, or at best, the wand went from an average wizard to a stronger one. In this theory, it could make sense that Grindlewald retained possession of the wand by being disarmed by a witch or wizard (depending on who exactly "defeated" him) that was less likely to give the Elder Wand the lifestyle it'd gotten used to and )possibly) enjoyed.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** Jacob actually comments that he was in the service for too long and that it has limited his opportunities. One can assume that the soldiers who returned to the U.S. earlier snapped up the better jobs and Jacob had to pick from what was left.
Added DiffLines:
** What could be more "wicked" and "unnatural" to an AntiMagicalFaction than a magical HalfHumanHybrid?
Added DiffLines:
** More or less confirmed in the next film. Grindelwald is quite happy to recruit from the Ministries, as he did with Abernathy. But Grindelwald is quite blunt with Queenie that Tina being an Auror causes problems for both of them. Tina does not seem to be willing to compromise her principles, so Grindelwald regrettably has to handle her as an enemy, even though she would be an appealing addition to his Acolytes.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** A deleted scene from the second movie gives the actual reason: years ago, Grindelwald apparently had a vision of Albus Dumbledore being killed by a powerful Obscurial. Since he and Dumbledore made a blood pact not to fight each other directly, he's trying to find the Obscurial so that he can get his most powerful rival out of the way.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 444 (click to see context) from:
** As of Crimes of Grindelwald, the specific use is made clear: To kill [[spoiler: Albus Dumbledore since a Blood Pact prevents them from fighting directly.]] Though he would probably be useful for intimidation and assassination in general.
to:
** As of Crimes of Grindelwald, the specific use is made clear: To kill [[spoiler: Albus Dumbledore since a Blood Pact prevents them from fighting directly.]] Though he would probably be useful for intimidation and assassination in general. [[spoiler: Also, a deleted scene from Crimes of Grindelwald reveals that Grindelwald had a vision of an Obscurial killing Dumbledore, and Dumbledore tells Newt that he assumes that's why Grindelwald wants one.]]
Added DiffLines:
** If I recall correctly Chastity's body was seen in the rubble of their house, so...that would appear to be her fate.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
**** You might've hit upon it with your mention of cancer, actually. "Cancer" was originally used to refer to a constellation -- the crab constellation. We only call the disease "cancer" because someone in the ancient world noted that one of its symptoms reminded them of the constellation, or of crabs, or some nonsense like that, and so we unfairly adopted the name to describe the disease to the point where the two are almost inseparable nowadays, despite the original use of Cancer also remaining with us. Maybe "Obscurus" also used to have some benign connotation that the publishing house is invoking, and its relation to a horrible, child-killing disease is just an unfortunate coincidence.
