The Harry Potter movies may not be perfect adaptations of the source novels, but they are entertaining films in their own right. Well acted, gorgeously shot, and brilliantly scored, they do well enough for fans who either don't need all the "details" of the novels or who haven't even read them in the first place.
But as good as the films are, they certainly aren't perfect. Like most things, there are both good and bad elements to the Harry Potter franchise, and opinion remains divided regarding many aspects of its production. Some opinions remain unpopular - such as these sourced from Reddit.
Half-Blood Prince Is The Best Movie
Of course, there is no "best" Harry Potter movie, but that distinction often goes to Prisoner of Azkaban or Deathly Hallows Part 2. The Half-Blood Prince, while a good movie, is often criticized for being a terrible adaptation of the novel. However, some - including sixthK5 - find it the best.
According to them, "My favorite Harry Potter movie is Half-Blood Prince. It’s a TERRIBLE adaptation but I think it’s so much filled with 'teenager drama' it’s actually funny and has so many memorable moments (like Harry high on felix felicis). So iconic lol."
Goblet Of Fire Is Irrelevant
Is Goblet of Fire relevant to the overall story? According to Reddit user chekeymonk10, the answer is no. According to them, "Book/film number 4 was irrelevant, and can be skipped on rereads and re-watches without being confused."
DrippyLittlePleb disagrees and gives voice to why this is an unpopular opinion: "I understand this thread is about unpopular opinions, and there can't really be such a thing as a 'wrong' opinion, but man... I just so don't agree with what you just wrote. The book literally shows how Voldemort comes back to life, how is that not a hugely important detail?"
Fred's Death
There's no denying that Fred's death is a little anticlimactic. Movie viewers don't even see it happen, and the grieving scene really is a "blink and you miss it" type thing. But to say that it had no effect whatsoever? And that Fred is annoying?
One Reddit user (whose name has been deleted) claims both opinions, writing, "For me... I'd have to say, Fred's death had no effect on me whatsoever. I thought they were both pretty annoying most of the time."
Michael Gambon > Richard Harris
Prisoner of Azkaban is famous for replacing Richard Harris with Michael Gambon, as Harris passed away from Hodgkin's disease on October 25, 2002 - just a couple of days before the premiere of Chamber of Secrets.
Fan opinion remains divided on which actor was better suited for the role of Dumbledore. One Reddit user says, "I like Michael Gambon more than Richard Harris," and hopper_froggo agrees based on Dumbledore's increased role in the later films, writing, "I just can't see Richard Harris fighting inferi or dueling Voldemort."
The First Movie Is The Worst
The Philosopher's Stone gets a lot of love - a fact that can usually be attributed to childhood nostalgia and its faithfulness to the novel. However, some people find it to be quite a weak movie.
Including Reddit user sectumsemprist, who writes, "The movies get better with each one. To be an acceptable Potterhead, apparently, you have to say only the first one is good, lol." There are no replies to the answer, so it's difficult to gauge the reaction.
Emma Watson Was Not Good
Emma Watson understandably generated a lot of fame by starring as Hermione, and she walked away as arguably the most famous actor of the three core children. It's obvious that a lot of people like her and the work she did as Hermione.
But not everyone, with Reddit user enimagique bluntly writing, "Emma Watson's acting was not great." Another since-deleted Reddit user took it one step further by writing "Agreed, I don't think any of the main 3 are great actors tbh."
Prisoner Of Azkaban Is The Worst Movie
To think Half-Blood Prince is the best movie is one thing, but thinking that Prisoner of Azkaban is the worst is a really unpopular opinion. But that didn't stop B22Brown from writing, "PoA is the worst movie. The director went rogue and tried to turn it into a teen high school movie, basically just ignoring the book."
UhOhIGotAStinkyWinky goes into further detail, saying, "I disliked how they turned Hermione from someone getting basket case-y trying to fit 25 hours into a single day in the pursuit of knowledge into just another teen romcom love interest."
Alan Rickman Changed Snape
One very interesting opinion/theory is that J.K. Rowling altered Snape's personality after watching Alan Rickman in The Philosopher's Stone.
According to wordhammer, "I think JKR changed the characterization of Snape after seeing Alan Rickman in the role. The first movie was released while she was in process of writing HP and the Order of the Phoenix, and Snape's attitude shifted from being a reactive blowhard who enjoyed teasing children to a cool & sarcastic player."
Book Purists Need To Get Over Themselves
Serving as a bit of a meta opinion, Reddit user howsadley thinks that book purists need to get over themselves. Going into further detail: "Unpopular opinion: Book purists who complain loudly about the movies should get over themselves before they become the Star Wars fanbase."
ATLsShah gets defensive and shows why this is an unpopular opinion with "HP book purists complain about a movie adaptation of a book. 99% of book purists for any book/series complain about movie adaptations. Go ask a fan of The Hobbit their opinion of the movie series that came out recently. This is very common practice."
The Epilogue Is Great
Working as an unpopular opinion for both the movies and the books, Reddit user SirAlexH is a staunch defender of the much-maligned epilogue.
They write, "I don't hate the epilogue. I'll admit the names are a bit much but I'm also a sucker for a happy ending and I don't think it's bad simply because it doesn't have an in-depth 20-page analysis focusing on Harry's PTSD." alwaysfrombehind disagrees, throwing back, "I hate the epilogue and I hate the names. Ugh. Such fan fiction fan service."