20 Biggest Things The Harry Potter Movies Left Out
“It is our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are..."
Since then "end" of the Harry Potter series, the lore of the world has changed considerably. Part of that is down to JK Rowling going all George Lucas and adding mythology details and biographical information for characters retrospectively (whether they needed it or not), while some of it is down to expansions like The Cursed Child and the Fantastic Beasts spin-off. Purist fans might be annoyed, but as far as everyone should be concerned, if Rowling adds to the Wizarding World, it should be graciously accepted. Hers is the Word Of God.
But what is less easy to accept is the changes that Hollywood made to Rowlings' source material when the books became big screen box office successes. Small details would inevitably change, some actors wouldn't fit the aesthetic expectations set by the texts and backstories and plot details changed to better serve the scripts.
That's all mostly understandable, but some of the changes left entire characters and plots on the cutting room floor, sometimes with absolutely no possible justification, making their disappearances as traumatic as watching the ones who actually made it being killed off like Game Of Thrones characters. The cuts still hurt, so it's high-time they were reinstated.
Here are the 20 biggest things from the Harry Potter universe that were left out of the films and why they were right or wrong...
20. Peeves
In The Book
Peeves is a near constant presence from the first book onwards, terrorising students, adding comical relief and acting as a surprising cohort of both Dumbledore and the Weasley twins. While he was incredibly annoying (that was the point), he was also responsible for a couple of great moments, including his assistance in the Battle Of Hogwarts and his antagonism of Dolores Umbridge.
In The Film
Rik Mayall was cast and filmed some scenes, but the character was cut by Chris Columbus (the actor himself blamed the fact that whenever he "did a bit of acting" the child stars kept corpsing so it didn't work out). His role was simply never replaced in the films.
Was It A Positive Cut?
It's undeniable he would have been incredibly annoying in the film, but that's probably not why it's best Peeves stayed cut: the removal of his campaign against Umbridge arguably made her a better villain (certainly a more seemingly infallible one) and made the twins' attack on her even more effective. It's just a shame it had to come at the cost of Peeves' (temporarily) redemptive arc.