Harry Potter plotholes/ goofs that really annoy you

[Aproductofmyera80s]

I absolutely love Harry Potter, I watch it twice a year, would watch it more if I had the time. One plothole that gets me every time, so Fred and George had the marauders map all that time and didn’t notice that Ron’s rat was Peter pettigrew?
every time I watch it, it grinds my gears.
any one else notice anything?

They did buy Ron a new wand as part of their cash win.

Those films were rubbish. The books are way better.

Hello Jo 👋👋👋

And also, as someone else has mentioned, the fact that none of the kids seem to know really obvious stuff about what happened during the war, like about Neville's parents, stuff that would have been huge news, particularly in a tiny enclosed community.

There's a bit after the mass Azkaban break out where they refer to students whose family members had been killed by the death eaters getting attention but nobody, including themselves, ever points out that Ron, Ginny etc should be included in this - their uncles (Molly's brothers) were some of those killed.

They have said (Jo I assume) that too much magic interferes with electricity so I assume 1000 pupils means that things won't work.

However I know its the film but order of the phoenix they go to the common room and Ordinary Boys is playing.

Is there really not a single member of James Potter's family left alive, who he could have spent some time with? No second cousins keen to support their hero nephew? He had to go to suffer under the Dursleys?

When it comes to that, no other people on that side of the family that shared his mum's blood and could have been a bit nicer to him, while keeping the blood protection intact? I think they probably needed the 'reality check' of being despised by the Dursleys to make it reasonable that HP did not end up a totally spoiled teen.

I personally think it would have been brilliant if Harry had had an older or younger sibling. Someone to have gone through a similar process of loss, Dursley bullying and 'yer a wizzard' as he did, but without the direct 'kid who got rid of Voldemort' insane celebrity. Being Harry's sibling would have been a total rollercoaster.

Or a squib who thought Harry was a pointless young squirt until he had to save the world single-handed, like a teenage Jesus with a wand and (understandable) anger issues?

You can write a whole new story, you know … there are whole websites devoted to “what if he didn’t have to live with the Dursleys” and “what if he had a brother” … 😂

No there were no Potters left. James parents were killed. Leaving James a huge inheritance.

Have you read the books?
The reason for Harry going to the Dursleys was because it was the best chance of keeping him safe from Voldermort. Dumbledore didn't believe he was gone forever and the best and safest way of protecting Harry was by sending him to a blood relative on his mother's side. His mother having shielded him from death. Her blood was protecting Harry. So for as long as he was living with the Dursley's he couldn't be harmed whilst in their care.

I think that magic/electricity thing is explicitly stated in the first book, isn't it?

I had a thought - surely that means the magic field interacts with the electricity, like a magnetic field? So we can have a Whole New Area of Study, electro-magicalism!

This thread has made me think, and at some level, I think the key area where I find myself not suspending my disbelief is the whole ‘Lily’s love and self-sacrifice has such strong effects that it causes killing spells to malfunction, provides lifelong magical protection to her son etc etc’.

Lily stands between a powerful magical serial killer and her baby, begs him to spare baby Harry’s life and kill her instead, but virtually any parent would do that without thinking twice. It’s nothing unusual or particularly praiseworthy — we’re hardwired to protect our young children. Most people would take a bullet to save their child.

Why is this one instance treated as so noteworthy in the magical world? Voldemort, and Grindelwald before him, and their followers, must have killed numerous parents trying to protect their children without magical laws blipping and the curse rebounding on its caster.

Because Voldemort gave her the opportunity to stand aside. Obviously people have stood in front of their loved ones and died in this war - no one is saying they hadn't - but no one else was given the opportunity to step aside and live, and refused to do it.

Voldemort agreed to spare Lily as a favour to Snape. And that's why her sacrifice was different, whereas James' - who had just died to protect them both moments before - made no difference.

Because Voldemort was going to spare Lily. James died for Harry too, but Voldemort didn’t care about killing him, nor about killing countless others who might’ve died trying to protect someone else. It was because Lily was going to be explicitly spared.

Should’ve read the next message before commenting myself!

I don’t see what difference that makes to a parent sacrificing their life for a loved one, though. Or to the magic.

Because she was given the free choice to leave?

Like instead of being run over by a madman... The mad man stops the car and says 'you can go free', but she refuses gets in his way anyway to protect her child

It's a subtle difference,but still....

Because she went willingly. She didn’t try and prevent it, when she could’ve walked away unscathed.

Again, an utterly normal, instinctive thing to do! How many parents would say ‘Oh, all right then, I’ll just step aside, let you kill my baby and choose to have a long life tormented by the memory of my child’s last moments’?

But it doesn't matter that it's an instinctive thing to do, the point is no one else was given the opportunity. The whole point of the entire Harry Potter series is that love is the greatest and most important magic of all. Being willing to die for a loved one when you are offered a choice to survive leaving a lasting protection on those you died for is an ancient bit of magic. That's just the set up, it's the rules of the world as JKR wrote them.

Voldemort actually considers just pushing Lily aside but decides to kill the whole lot of them when she refuses to move and thus causes his own downfall, because he overlooks the ancient magic it will activate because he does not understand and does not value love.

Lily is offered the choice to survive. No one else Voldemort killed was. That is what activates the ancient magic.

You can not like it as a story telling device, but it's not a plot hole. It is a foundational stone of the worldbuilding and the entire theme of the series.

I never suggested it was a ‘plot hole’. I said it was where I struggle to suspend my disbelief —it is banal that an unremarkable parenting instinct is the keystone of magic operating differently to the extent that a killing curse rebounds on its caster, and gives Harry years of protection via technically bring resident with his mother’s abusive family.

I don’t think it’s an unremarkable parenting instinct, or banal, at all. I think the love of a parent for a child is one of the greatest things about life, and the fact that the whole series is
founded on a mother’s selfless act of love is incredibly moving to
me.

@Gremlinsateit Agreed. I always son in those bits. Have struggled reading them out loud to my DD not to cry. It’s not banal.

I completely agree with trying to read those bits out. It always gets me too.
To me the books are about the choice between love or fear (as well as a mother’s selfless love).
As a single mum that resonates