Harry Potter Fans Still Can't Get Over These Marauders Details That Make No Sense
Turning a popular children's book series into hit movies must have been a daunting task, but to date, the Wizarding World film franchise has made nearly $10 billion at the box office (via The Numbers). "Harry Potter" screenwriter Steve Kloves said of his success after the final movie was released in 2011, "I think that it's instinct. I think that it's also because I am a fan" (via The Hollywood Reporter). "I have a movie in my head, I try to get it on paper, which is the first challenge, and then I try to see it on the screen."
Kloves also worked closely with author J.K. Rowling, consulting her on background information and where the story would head in the future. Nevertheless, some fans of the book series have issues with Kloves' "Harry Potter" film adaptations, particularly one choice he made for "Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban" that led to a major plot hole.
Redditors still discuss that problem with Lupin and the map
In May 2022, a since-deleted Redditor started a discussion in the r/harrypotter subreddit about the mirror shard appearing out of nowhere in "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 2." This led to u/tramspace sharing their own observation: "Same kind of thing with the [M]auraders [sic] [M]ap. Lupin just somehow knows exactly how to use the map. It never explains that he was one of the people that made the map."
Remus Lupin (David Thewlis), Peter Pettigrew (Timothy Spall), Sirius Black (Gary Oldman), and James Potter (Adrian Rawlins) being the creators of the Marauder's Map was fleshed out in the book but completely glossed over in the 2004 film, with the true identities of Moony, Wormtail, Padfoot, and Prongs never revealed in the script. Redditor u/tandemtactics agreed with u/tramspace, writing, "Literally one line of dialogue could have made that clearer and been a fun reveal."
However, u/ldtka disagreed: "It's not strictly needed, especially in movies, to explain every minute detail. Often times [sic] it's better to power through, which is a major different [sic] in medium between books and movies." While a story's plot holes may not matter as much when watching a two-hour movie compared to reading a book, with so many people confused or just completely lost, there's a good argument for including an explanation.
The movie never fully explains James' stag form
Another important detail from "Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban" that goes unexplained in the 2004 adaptation is the connection between Harry's (Daniel Radcliffe) and his father's Patronuses, not to mention his father's Animagus form. James turned into a stag when the four friends became Animagi, and both his and Harry's Patronuses are also stags.
But as u/nomadicAllegator wrote in the r/harrypotter subreddit, "And they never told Harry that his dad's [A]nimangus [sic] form was a stag, just like his Patronus!" Redditor u/Broadbeck7 noticed how fans who hadn't read the books were confused while watching: "We can criticize the movies all we want, but at least the other movies removed things that weren't entirely necessary to the over-arching [sic] plot."
All the omissions don't completely detract from the fantasy film, which is somehow one of the "Harry Potter" franchise's most critically acclaimed entries (via Rotten Tomatoes). But it does muddle a crucial moment in the story, and that clearly disappointed some fans who wanted to see the similarities between father and son explored more on-screen.