JK Rowling

I understand the title may be confusing, but let me explain. JK Rowling recently (I believe) said that she thought it was funny that almost no one noticed the snake in the first movie was Nagini, the snake Harry kills in the last movies.
If you were just watching the movies, there is no way for anyone to have noticed this. The people who rendered the snakes did completely different species!
The snake from the first movie clearly resembles a burmese python, while the other snake is unmistakably a retic.
First movie
http://thechive.com/2011/11/16/daily...ump-dar-36-14/

Seventh movie
http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Nagini

While I do have great respect for the artist actually making the CGI for real snakes, it is equally ridiculous for them not to even do the same species.
I also think that in the seventh movie they switched between a regular retic and a tiger, but I'd have to watch it again to be positive.

Thoughts?

I guess I need to refresh my memory of the first movie because I don't even remember him killing any snake!

I did notice the retic used in the last movie and while I didn't make the connection that the snake in the 1st movie was suppose to be the same as the one in the last, I did like that they used some real footage of a real retic and it wasn't 100% CGI.

Edit: Read your post wrong (about him killing a snake in the 1st movie) -whoops- but regardless I didn't notice the species switch (like menioned, I need to watch the 1st movie again now)

The thing I remember the MOST about the snake from the first movie is how it BLINKS when it looks at Harry. :rolleyes: So much for skilled CGI rendering. :cool:

I haven't seen the last movie yet (either of the last two, actually). But I did read all the books and it never occurred to me that the snake he sets loose in the first book was the same snake that he encountered in the last. If that was her intent, she was wayyyy too vague about it. :P

And the craziest bit?

In the first book during the snake scene, it's specifically mentioned that Nagini is a BOA CONSTRICTOR.

*Looks between pics*

*Looks at a boa*

... Nnnnope.

LMAO,

I suppose none of them were snake people so they wouldn't think it was too big of a difference :P.

That is quite funny though, I'm glad I was able to read this thread. Definitely have got to tell my Dad about this.. He'll even scratch his head like the rest of us (him and I are major Harry Potter fans).

More that I thought of after my last post:

Nagini has to be older than Harry to be a horcrux. This is a fact (all the horcruxes but Harry had to be done before Voldie went after the Potters), since I doubt Voldie would use a baby snake less than a year old (not impressive enough).

The snake in book 1 was specifically said to have been BRED in the zoo and raised in captivity. Aka, Voldemort likely never got his mitts on it.

Also, I believe in the books that Nagini was mentioned as being venomous.

Boas aren't venomous.

*Headdesk* Rowling, just take back what you said right now before the reptile community embarrasses you.

Also, yosh for eidetic memory!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SilverDemon

*Headdesk* Rowling, just take back what you said right now before the reptile community embarrasses you.

---

"The problem with Internet quotes is that one can never be sure they are accurate."
-- Abraham Lincoln

;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JLC

"The problem with Internet quotes is that one can never be sure they are accurate."
-- Abraham Lincoln

;)

---

Lol That's funny! Going to have to update my facebook status now

~Karl

All big snakes = same species to most people. :P They're all classified under "big", "scary" and "dangerous". :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SilverDemon

More that I thought of after my last post:

Nagini has to be older than Harry to be a horcrux. This is a fact (all the horcruxes but Harry had to be done before Voldie went after the Potters), since I doubt Voldie would use a baby snake less than a year old (not impressive enough).

The snake in book 1 was specifically said to have been BRED in the zoo and raised in captivity. Aka, Voldemort likely never got his mitts on it.

Also, I believe in the books that Nagini was mentioned as being venomous.

Boas aren't venomous.

*Headdesk* Rowling, just take back what you said right now before the reptile community embarrasses you.

Also, yosh for eidetic memory!

---

In the world of fiction anything can happen. I do remember remarking to my friends after the last movie that retics aren't venomous. :P

I don't think I ever would have made the connection that the snakes were supposed to be the same and honestly I doubt they are, but if they were supposed to be it wouldn't be the first plot hole in the series. :rolleyes:

I never concluded that Nagini was the same snake as the one in the first book. I recognized Nagini as a retic in the last movies, but at our house she is a spider ball python female.

I take most of those internet quotes from her with a grain of salt.

Also lets remember that Nagini is obviously a snake of magical properties, like Hedwig and Crookshanks (even though he is half-Kneazle). Because Nagini was capable of being a horcrux, then she may have had other magical properties bestowed on her. Maybe the venom is from He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named's horcrux (soul fragment). I could see how they could be venomous.

I remember noticing three different species of snake used on three Harry Potter posters for the same movie. I wouldn't call myself a Harry Potter fan so I just assumed that Voldemort had like three snakes or something. Silly me.

A friend of mine posted that thing about nagini on facebook yesterday and I couldn't help but correct him. Obviously the movie creators did not have that in mind while making these movies, false claims on Rowling's part.

http://www.lilwaynehq.com/forums/ima...ilies/grad.gif

If it says it was a boa in the book that really just ads insult to injury. They came so close do doing a great job with it in the movie, yet are still so far away.

I think it's all just rumor. If I remember correctly the snake in the zoo was male too and Nagini is supposed to be female. There is no way they could have been the same snake. :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kinra

I think it's all just rumor. If I remember correctly the snake in the zoo was male too and Nagini is supposed to be female. There is no way they could have been the same snake. :rolleyes:

---

http://www.lilwaynehq.com/forums/ima...es/worship.gif another excellent point

"Not much is known about Nagini's early life or when she was acquired by Voldemort. It is unknown whether Voldemort owned Nagini before his fall in 1981, or if he found her during his exile in Albania."

That's quoted out of the second link, so I think that pretty much says the zoo snake isn't Nagini. Plus, as was already said, she had to have been a horcrux before going after the Potter's since Harry was the "real" last one. (Not a HP fan, just a good memory lol)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kinra

I think it's all just rumor. If I remember correctly the snake in the zoo was male too and Nagini is supposed to be female. There is no way they could have been the same snake. :rolleyes:

---

thats exactly what i was going to say just reading the first few threads but didnt want to repeat it if someone else realized this lol

Harry Potter is specifically said to be able to talk to snakes. Therefore, the snake in the zoo was probably just a snake that Harry could communicate with. I believe that scene shows how Harry is first introduced to be able to communicate with snakes, which also ties in with the story in later movies.

Now looking back on this I do believe it is just a rumor.

also....
i google image searched her and what is that its not a retic or burm is it? lol its from the goblet of fire or the order of the pheonix i cant remember :)
http://www.google.com/imgres?q=nagin...1t:429,r:1,s:0
fangs? on a retic?
http://www.google.com/imgres?q=nagin...1t:429,r:6,s:0
no fangs?
http://www.google.com/imgres?q=nagin...70&tx=91&ty=25

From what I remember, JK Rowling didn't know much about snakes. She just wanted scary--giant? Scary. Venomous? Scary! The most detail I remember about Nagini in the book was that she was huge, green, and venomous. It's kind of like she got stories of burmese and vipers mixed and turned it into a super snake of legends. Being the harry potter world, that's acceptable to me because, well, we don't see giants running around either, it isn't a stretch to say there would also be giant venomous maybe magical snakes running around the wizarding world as well, it's not like it's any weirder. Then when I saw the movies I figured "Oh, well, maybe they are trying to sort of base it on reality with a retic pattern but sort of make it different so it's venomous and a different species but they just did a bad job"

But that little quote about Nagini being the snake from the zoo is sort of silly, considering how clear it was stated that this male was born and raised in captivity. I can't imagine Voldemort getting away with using her as a horcrux either lol! I don't know about you, but if a bald freako killed someone and used my captive snake as a horcrux with magic I didn't think was possible, I think I might notice! :rolleyes:


And Nagini now will always just make me think of MY boa constrictor! :D

I haven't watched the movies in a while, but the internet says that in 4 and 5 she is modeled after a Dumeril's Boa.

I was just discussing this with my friends.
For some reason I always associated Nagini in the books as a cobra. As does the majority of fanfiction.

In the books, it was labled somewhere that the zoo snake was a boa. I remember Harry telling someone he "once set a boa constrictor on his cousin". The movie zoo snake was a burm. Harry even asked about Burma.
Movie Nagini was a retic.

Everything is just so jumbled and confusing x_X


Well...I guess JKR can always use the excuse of magic....


And I agree with everyone. No way the zoo snake is nagini.

Sent from my ADR6300 using Tapatalk

The snake in the first link in the post concerning fangs had a head that looked like a carpet, but that's just me.

I think we can all agree that Hollywood won't be able to sneak something like this past us.

guys. GUYS. chill!!!!!

it's just Harry Potter, they're supposed to be kids movies! and the books? i remember my teacher reading them out loud to the class in 4th grade (i'm only 23).

the only people that care about this fundamental flaw in the plot is us, lol

oh yeah and to me, Nagini is one of my rainbow females :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SquamishSerpents

the only people that care about this fundamental flaw in the plot is us, lol

---

I wouldn't say that's true. There are tons of fans out there who care about plot holes, we just care about the snakes related plot holes in the movies and the books. :P

I'll admit that I'm a HUGE Harry Potter fan and while I would say the earlier books were children's books, the later books were pretty dark and it's hard to call them children's book, I almost think it's a stretch to call them young adult books too.

As many directors as these movies had, its probably tough catching all the stuff that we think is completely obvious, whereas an uneducated eye wouldn't really notice.

I suspect that Nagini was already a snake that had magical powers, and when Voldemort entered her to sustain his life, he realized that she was different than the other snakes because he didn't kill her after being in here. Thus forming the special bond between them....holy cow I am a nerd :oops:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kinra

I wouldn't say that's true. There are tons of fans out there who care about plot holes, we just care about the snakes related plot holes in the movies and the books. :P

I'll admit that I'm a HUGE Harry Potter fan and while I would say the earlier books were children's books, the later books were pretty dark and it's hard to call them children's book, I almost think it's a stretch to call them young adult books too.

---

i'm a HUGE Harry Potter nerd too!

it's true that the last few books got a LOT darker but i also think Rowling may have had that in mind as she was writing and as her fans were growing up.

and yeah, i just think it's so funny that there is a thread speculating about her intentions and the lore behind Nagini! i love it!

Sorry to possibly revive a dead-post ... but I saw this and got a good kick out of it.

But in my opinion, this has to be of rumor, JK Rowling had no knowledge of snakes and probably didn't care. But more importantly then that the original quote starting this rumor could not have even come from jk herself.

http://thechive.com/2011/11/16/daily...ump-dar-36-14/

^^ see up in the original post, jk says that Nagini is the original snake from the first book which she calls "the philosophers stone"
... I'm no Harry Potter nerd but ... isn't the first book "the sorcerer's stone?

if JK Rowling is messing up the titles to her own books ... well ...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ajpolicastro

Sorry to possibly revive a dead-post ... but I saw this and got a good kick out of it.

But in my opinion, this has to be of rumor, JK Rowling had no knowledge of snakes and probably didn't care. But more importantly then that the original quote starting this rumor could not have even come from jk herself.

http://thechive.com/2011/11/16/daily...ump-dar-36-14/

^^ see up in the original post, jk says that Nagini is the original snake from the first book which she calls "the philosophers stone"
... I'm no Harry Potter nerd but ... isn't the first book "the sorcerer's stone?

if JK Rowling is messing up the titles to her own books ... well ...

---

2 titles in different countries. Sorcerers stone in the US and Philosophers stone everywhere else I think

sent from my EVO

It was first published in the UK as "Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone" but the US publishers thought Americans were too stupid to know "Philosopher's Stone" refers to magic, so they made it "sorcerer's."

the snake in the first movie was not Nagini, just a random snake at the zoo.

hmm well that makes me feel quite ignorant for not figuring that actually =[ lol sorry!

Yeah I don't think I've ever heard JK Rowling refer to the first book in it's US title.. only as "The Philosopher's Stone".

Just an FYI, the idea of the "philosopher's stone" is just as old as the ideas of unicorns, dragons, and krakens. JK Rowling did not invent the idea of a stone that can turn lead into gold and create a life-giving elixer. Just like the werewolves and hippogriffs introduced to us in book three, the dragon from book one, magic wands, the association of wizards and owls, and any number of other aspects of the magical world she created, she did not invent those ideas, but rather she built upon centuries of mythology that we can all relate to and are comfortable with in varying degrees.

Not only that, but there really lived a "Nicolas Flamel" who lived some six hundred or so years ago, which the Harry Potter character is based upon.

For anyone who is a fan of Harry Potter, I highly recommend getting your hands of copies of the BRITISH prints. These are how the books were originally written and edited, and how (IMO) they should be read. Don't forget that JK Rowling is a Brit, not an American, and her words have been changed when printed in the US to be better marketed to an American audience.

i know exactly what youre talking about! it always bothered me...

I live in Canada and I was kinda stunned when on a trip to the states found the books were re worked for the US market. If I lived in the US I'd be mildly offended that the american publishers felt that it needed to be 'translated' into 'American' that readers could not figure out that a box placed in the boot of the car was in the trunk of the car.

You guys, I think you're missing the big picture. Nagini. Is a magical serpent. Magical. She is definitely based off a retic, but in the world of Harry Potter, she's not just any retic. She's probably a different, magical species all together.

So don't get too upset that she's a venomous python, she's a magical creature! She can be whatever her creator wants her to be. C:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShamelessAardvark

You guys, I think you're missing the big picture. Nagini. Is a magical serpent. Magical. She is definitely based off a retic, but in the world of Harry Potter, she's not just any retic. She's probably a different, magical species all together.

So don't get too upset that she's a venomous python, she's a magical creature! She can be whatever her creator wants her to be. C:

---

thats very true! lol i didnt think of it that way..