Mugglenet.com's Harry Potter Should Have Died - Emerson Spartz [52]
Verdict
Sorcerer’s Stone set the stage and the “look” of the whole series, but Prisoner of Azkaban added an aura of mystery and darkness. The first movie had a ready-made audience of children, but Prisoner of Azkaban had to keep the interest of teenagers and adults alike. Considering the amazing number of special effects and new characters, plus an extra-complicated time-turning plot, the verdict is that Prisoner of Azkaban sets the standard for what a top-notch HP movie should be.
Is it appropriate for Harry to use Unforgivable Curses?
Yes!
It is appropriate for Harry to use Unforgivable Curses because he has very justifiable reasons each time. After Sirius is pushed through the Death Veil in OotP, Harry has to go after Bellatrix and try to stop her. It’s only logical. And to slow her down, he tries to do the Cruciatus Curse on her. Yes, it’s true that he is taught in GoF never to use an Unforgivable because the Ministry considers them illegal, but come on—the kid has just seen his godfather murdered! Of course he would lash out to avenge Sirius, and Bellatrix is a horrible Death Eater who has escaped from Azkaban, so she deserves it. And there is a sense of justice since Crucio is the spell she used to torture Neville Longbottom’s parents into insanity, as Harry learns in GoF. But Harry fails at doing the Cruciatus on Bellatrix anyway, because he doesn’t really intend to—even if he thinks he did.
In HBP, Harry tries to do the Cruciatus Curse on Snape as he flees from the tower. Again, Harry has just witnessed a murder and is out of his mind with rage. He wants to stop the man he blames for Dumbledore’s death. But Snape is able to deflect the Cruciatus Curse both times, and shouts: “No Unforgivable Curses from you, Potter!” [HBP, p. 602]. Snape is just lucky because Harry really means to hurt him. The boy can’t have known that Dumbledore’s death was planned in advance, and that Snape never wanted to do it, which he discovers in DH. But Harry does what is appropriate given what he knows at the time—any Auror would do the same to an escaping criminal. Even if he’ll be sorry later, it all makes sense at the time.
The last time Harry uses Crucio is in DH, and it’s probably the time that is most questionable. When Amycus Carrow spits in the face of Minerva McGonagall, Harry doesn’t hesitate to give him the full force of the Cruciatus Curse. This time the spell works perfectly. Harry admits later that he enjoyed it because this time he really meant it. He gives credit to Bellatrix for teaching him this [DH, p. 593]. But hey—all is fair in war, and the Battle of Hogwarts had just started. Carrow was a Death Eater, and Harry knew that both Carrow and his twisted sister had been torturing members of Dumbledore’s Army and younger children, so there was no reason to spare them pain. Harry isn’t right to react in this way—but it is at least somewhat forgivable, and while McGonagall tells Harry it was foolish, she also says he was being gallant to defend her. So the bottom line is that it doesn’t bother McGonagall all that much, and Harry certainly never goes to jail for it, so the Crucio is appropriate for the circumstances. Harry knows that in times of war the rules are different, and it is important to meet fire with fire.
Pain is a side effect of war. Harry had to know how to use the same spells the Death Eaters were going to use on him, or he might have died. After all, when Molly Weasley duels Bellatrix in DH, she must use an Unforgivable Curse to kill her. She’s a good character, too, but isn’t that appropriate during a battle?