MovieChat Forums > Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix (2007) Discussion > Why bother with other spells?

Why bother with other spells?

posted 9 years ago by me-1523
20 replies | jump to latest

If the purpose of a duel is to eliminate the opponent, the Avada Kedavra spell is all you need. Why do these witches and wizards even bother with fire/ice/water/glass attacks, disable spells, stun-lock spells, knock back spells, charm spells.... seriously, just AK them and be done with it.

If I were in a wizard duel, I'd be shouting AK so much green bolts would shoot out of my wand like a machine gun.

If I don't want to kill my opponent, then the mind control curse instead. But really, what's the point of any other spell if it's a duel to the death?

[–] snapespet1 9 years ago

WOW-so-you're a MURDERER? You would SO EASILY MURDER? Harry ALWAYS does Expelliarmus BECAUSE he doesn't want to bring harm. YOU go straight to MURDER.

You're not badass. You're no Slytherin, but I bet you THINK you are. You're a COWARD, who doesn't know WHERE to begin in a proper fight. Even VOLDEMORT put up a PROPER fight....you go straight to KILL. COWARD. Ollivander SKEEVED giving you a wand.

Witches and wizards DON'T use Avada Kedavra beacause they DON'T want to MURDER. And YES....I KNOW I sound INSANE. Harry Potter is the ONLY fun left in my life, and YES, I know I am taking it too seriously. But to say-avada...are you NUTS? Did you READ the books?

Do you ever get down on your knees, and thank God you have access to my dementia?

[–] me-1523 9 years ago

If your opponent is trying to kill you, it would be wise to try and kill them first.

And have you considered switching to decaf?

[–] ptims1 9 years ago

Probably because the spells you mentioned are, by their very definition, unforgivable curses. Chances are the righteous heroes of the story would have a natural aversion to utilizing curses meant to kill, control, or torture. It goes to the very nature of understanding the motivations of the characters, not what would simply end the fight soonest.

Read my signature would you kindly?

[–] Harbinger_3781 8 years ago

Happened to agree.

Don't mind upstairs. Sometimes during a life/death situation it's always important to go for the dead spot, kill or be killed. For if you hesitate, if you in any way show mercy to your opponent who's wholeheartedly trying to go lethal on you, you die: Simple as that. Guys like the one upstairs, condemning people who have the sense to stay alive by any means necessary while in a pinch... he'd be likely the one to die first when the time comes. Heroes had to do the right thing - this moral detriment prevents them from getting their blackwings stretched. Suppressors on... not a good idea.

But you know what Dumbledore's Army really lack? Hand-to-hand combats. They should have got Sam Fisher or Mike Banning crossover to teach them how to do a backhand disarm on Death Eaters who gets too close and punch them in the throat - an opponent heavily relies on their combat weaponry can get easily incapacitated when the weapons are taken.

[–] johnmarti59 (2356) 4 years ago

Decaf hah-hah. He shouted you down.

[–] Mylobage 8 years ago

This is the worst post I've ever seen.

Don't like what I'm saying? Then call 1800-Ima-CryBaby and ask for Waaaaaa.

[–] Burk48917 (11386) 2 years ago

Uhhhhhh....Settle down.

[–] Dejay 8 years ago

Yeah this annoys me as well during the Harry Potter movies. They is a lot of "If You Kill Him, You Will Be Just Like Him" and not enough "Pragmatic Hero". If the world is at stake, you don't mess around. They should have killed Barty Crouch and all the other death eaters in Askaban as soon as Voldemort returned, they should have killed Umbridge and those Deatheaters that jumped them in the coffee shop. And Lucious Malfoy for that matter after the diary. In deathly hallows I would have laid deadly traps to lure the snatchers in by saying "Voldemort" and then kill them all.

By flinching away from that they let a lot of death and bad things happen.

But then again it's a children's story :)

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/IfYouKillHimYouWillBeJustLikeHim

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/PragmaticHero

PS: Of course the whole book series is kind of glorifying child abuse :) The professors should have fought the battles that Harry was forced to fight but they never gave him reason to confide in him.

PPS: Yes I'd definitely be a dark wizard in that universe ;)

[–] watcher101 8 years ago

You know, there are a lot of other uses for magic besides dueling and killing.

[–] george-92-427497 8 years ago

The best answer you can get for your question is "mana. It isn't mentioned in the books neither in the movies but is a common sense based on the logic of "witchcraft and wizardry" (the "magic world" if you'd like). Such as muggles - we humans - who have strength to do something, wizards have ability to cast a spell. And the strenght as we know is not endless. At some point we get tired. Just so wizards do. We have a certain amount of power to use our strenght. Wizard have a certain amount of mana to use their abilities.
Strenght-Power = Abilities(Intelligence)-Mana
So the use of special spells, like Unforgivable Curses, takes a great part of a wizard's mana. That's why anyone can't cast Avada Kedavra over and over, expect he's a great wizard with much intelligence and very powerful like Lord Voldemort or Albus Dumbledore.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic_(gaming)

The link referred to gaming but relates with anything has to do with magic.

[–] Costumer (1826) 6 years ago

You really shouldn't attempt to graft the rules of another universe written by different authors onto this (or any other) series.

In the universe Mana Doesn't Exist. It is never mentioned or referred to. It can be assumed that there is a limitless supply of whatever energy is used to power magic.

You can infer, given other clues, that witches and wizards do grow tired. It can be inferred, but not proven, that is do to the mental effort to channel and shape the magic.

Any fictional universe must set its own rules. It doesn't really matter what those rules are, so long as once set, the author is consistent.

Is this perfectly done in the Harry Potter books and films. No, but I think they try.

[–] mirko-lausic 8 years ago

*beep* Avada Kedavra, why don't they just use guns?
It's quicker, more efficient and covert (as in harder to see coming) than spells.

As Avada Kedavra needs to be pronounced to do damage AND it doesn't have nearly the same projectile velocity as a pistol does, you will always have more time to shoot them before they can curse you.

I can't even think of how many times having a sniper on the roof would have solved all the problems they had to go through so much work to tackle.

[–] johnmarti59 (2356) 4 years ago

It's more FUN the watch the way they fight. One-shot and dead is not fun (at least to some) This way is fun.

[–] FFNogoodnik (775) 3 years ago

Because not every duel is part of a fight for the future of the Wizarding world.

It could simply be a competition or even a fight between friends over a game of quidditch.

[–] Abed303 (282) 3 years ago

It's not revealed until the next installment, but it states that committing murder tears the soul. Perhaps too much of it has some negative consequence for caster.

[–] [deleted] 3 years ago

They really should change the rules when using forbidden spells.
They already regulate what spells students can use by year, why not do the same with the unforgivable curses?

Stun/disable if you can, and kill if it comes to that. Witches and Wizards are apparently more progressive than humans, surely they have self-defense laws?

[–] Abed303 (282) 3 years ago

At first, I immediately agreed. If someone's actively trying to kill another the victim shouldn't let any concern for their attacker affect their chances of survival. Where it gets tricky is stunning and disabling spells are shown to be just as effective without taking life. Harry and the gang do fairly well against full-grown death eaters without killing any of them.