Ahh I see. With the Parseltongue and Hermoine walking into that room w/ all the blood, I figured the woman had died... I just thought it had been like RIGHT before they got to the town.

Didn't he?! DOBBY IS A FREE ELF! lol

I agree with epchick in that the nude scene didn't bother me. It was a bit of hollywood glamor, but it fit. I thought the glowing, flawless faces were well done.

We just saw it. I thought it was very well done. I'm totally looking forward to the second part, and I also love that they stopped it where they did.

Also, the Three Brothers story was incredibly well done.

Very well-said, Alumiyum. BTW @whomever said Bathilda was an Inferius--no, she's not. Inferi are corpses being controlled by a Dark wizard, this was Nagini hiding inside of Bathilda's skin and physically (not magically) making her move.

/nerd

Dunno if I said, but the midnight showing was BANANAS. About 20 people got up and did The Mysterious Ticking Noise! :D I, of course, want to see it again, but I know it won't be nearly as fun as the first time. I heard on the radio that the film made $125.1 million in the first weekend in the States alone. There were still long lines to see it at the local theaters that Saturday afternoon.

I wish they had focused more on Kreacher's story and on the "burial" for Mad Eye, but I understand why they didn't. Also, I thought the Harrmione nudity was unnecessary but if the locket's job was to make Ron lose it, then there ya go. I'm ok with almost all of the next film being dedicated to the Battle at Hogwarts, especially b/c they totally omitted the battle from the last film. That took out the love between Remus and Tonks, Greyback's attack on Bill, the solidifying of Bill and Fleur's relationship...battle scenes are sooooo important as are the things that happen afterward. Aaaarrrggghhh is it July yet??

I saw it this afternoon, and it certainly didn't disappoint. I'm gonna have to dig out the book and read it again, because I really don't remember much about it other than the ending.

I think there's some room for interpretation here, and I can see why you'd think what you do. However, I can also see where those who think Bathilda was an Inferius are coming from.

This article from wiki is too short, but it has a couple appropriate passages:

"She lived in Godric's Hollow, and died in 1997, after which her corpse was animated by Lord Voldemort to contain his magical familiar Nagini."

See also:
"It is possible that Bathilda's body was animated as an Inferius, and thus controlled by Voldemort's will. As Inferi are never shown to speak, this would account for why Nagini had to speak for her instead."

Either way, Voldemort had magically altered Bathilda. Since she was a corpse, and since that corpse was being magically controlled, I'm in the Inferius camp.

I don't have the book handy, but my memory is that during the "Potterwatch" broadcast, mention is made that Bathilda Bagshot's body was found and showed signs of having been used by Dark Magic, but maybe I was just reading more into that than is said.

That said, I still think she was an Inferius (Inferia?), for a number of reasons. JKR spends a lot of time earlier in the book talking about Inferi and how they will be used -- remember, for example, how Harry warns the Dursley's that the Death Eaters will be using Inferi? She doesn't usually make a point of such things unless we are actually going to see Inferi during the course of the book, and Bathilda Bagshot is the only candidate. Her body clearly was preserved for a many months, so Dark Magis was at work. And we have no indication or reason to think that Nagini can do any magic. Like Sydney said, Voldemort had to have animated Bathilda Bagshot's corpse and made it possible for Nagini to inhabit it. That, by definition, is an Inferius.

I guess only JKR knows for sure.

They did say that...I interpreted it to mean they could gather that Nagini was involved (or at least, that something was inside her) since the body would have been essentially destroyed after Nagini came out. I'm in the not an Inferi camp because the Inferi in the cave seemed to be more easily recognizable as reanimated corpses. Bathilda is described in the book as having glassy eyes and appearing to be ancient, but since Harry and Hermione both assume her physical appearance is due to extreme age, it seems to me she isn't recognizable as an actual corpse. And there's the fact that Harry has already encountered Inferi before, and could probably recognize them more readily than someone who hadn't. Voldemort wouldn't know that at that point in the book, but readers would. Voldemort would have had to do some fancy wand work to stuff Nagini in there, but because Nagini is one of his Horcruxes (and because he can speak Parsletongue) there is a lot she can do without him actually being right next to her. More than an ordinary snake, anyway. I tend to think it's something more creative and sinister than Inferi since Voldemort has a love of drama and is, of course, themostpowerfuldarkwizardofalltime.

ETA: I have the book in my apartment and get really excited about discussions like this since most of my friends are sadly lacking in the nerd department, so if no one beats me to it I'll go through it later and see what it says exactly.

It says that the snake was inside her, that she was dead for quite a while and that the boddy collapses as soon as the snake leaves it, so sounds like the snake supports the body, so I don't think it's an inferi

that's actually all it says...

That also makes me vote not-Inferius...hmmm.

Please do -- even if I beat it to you. :D

But if that's all it was, then the corpse would have decomposed. As far as that goes, if it was just a corpse, Nagini couldn't have gotten inside without . . . er . . . removing what was already there in exactly the right way to preserve the "shell" (which would in turn, I would think, increase the rate of decomposition).

The suggestion (based on Rita's unread book) is that she had already been dead a few months before Harry came to Godric's Hollow, and she wasn't found until 3 months after his visit there. The fact that her body seemed at least somewhat preserved for so many months -- and nothing was said on Potterwatch about her being "hollowed" -- indicates to me that more is going on. Harry and Hermione's failure to recognize her as an Inferia can easily be attrributed to the dark and to Harry's desire that she really be Bathilda Bagshot. (And I need to say that I love the Tolkien reference in her name.)

In any event the definition that JKR gives us of Inferius is simply a corpse controlled through magic to do the bidding of a wizard or witch. Whether Voldemort does that by using her simply as a puppet (like with the Inferi in the lake) or more elaborately with Nagini, still seems seems to fit the definition of an Inferius to me.

I'm in my office and don't have my copy of The Deathly Hallows handy. Otherwise, I'd look this up myself...

I remember from the Half-Blood Prince (the book, I don't remember the movie clearly enough to know whether it followed the book here or not) that Inferi aren't affected by most spells. I think they can be killed only with light-bearing type of magic (i.e. lumos, patronus, etc...). (Note: I'm not saying that lumos can kill Inferi - I was just using it to explain what I mean by light-bearing magic.) In Deathly Hallows, what spell did Hermione use to expel Nagini from/kill Bathilda? That might be our best clue at this point.

Love the nerdiness of this conversation! :D

I interpreted what the book said to mean that she was essentially like a suit by that point, with Nagini being the controlling force directly, and Voldemort indirectly. Since Inferi have been described as being actual human corpses that are controlled by a wizard (zombies with puppet strings, sort of) I think of them as a more simple form of what Bathilda ended up being. Voldemort on several occasions comes up with creative solutions that are more evil and inventive than anyone had ever tried before, and I think this is one of them.
Good call! I can't get to mine for a couple of hours, but I'm going for it as soon as I get home.

Hermione didn't use a spell to expel Nagini from Bathilda (who was already dead). Nagini "left" Bathilda's body after asking "Are you Potter?" and receiving Voldemort's command: "Hold him!" Hermione was still downstairs. No spells other than "Lumos!" were uttered until Nagini was "exposed."

As for spells and Inferi, none of the usual curses hurt them because they are already dead. Dumbledore does say that they "fear" light and warmth.

I got to my copy of the book. The remark on "Potterwatch" was that "the remains of Bathilda Bagshot have been discovered in Godric's Hollow. The evidence is that she died several months ago. The Order of the Phoenix informs us that her body showed unmistakable signs of injuries inflicted by Dark Magic." Not much help there, except it means something more than Avada Kedavra, which shows no sign of injury.

But I'm still going with Inferia based on this remark from Harry to Uncle Vernon: "'I hope so,' said Harry, 'because once I'm seventeen, all of them -- Death Eaters, dementors, maybe even Inferi --which means dead bodies enchanted by a Dark wizard -- will be able to find you and will certainly attack you.'" Whatever else she was, and even if she didn't act like the bodies in the lake, Bathilda's corpse was a dead body enchanted by a Dark wizard.

That's my answer and I'm sticking with it. :D

Confringo - blasting curse