Top 5 Plot Holes in Secrets of Dumbledore | Harry Potter Film Theory 

Happy Super Month! 👩🏿‍🦰

They'd need you to spot all the issues and rewrite half of it!

Happy Super Month

I just rewatched the movie, Push, and it’s the exact same plot idea with the letters and briefcases

Write your own script for it and offer THAT! Beat them to the punch and bring the SCB magic to them!

Well difference is, Theseus's actor didn't have COVID when they were shooting the movie

Yeah I get why she wasn’t in the film, but the reasoning in the story itself is a plot hole.

The United States was very isolationist prior to WW2, and flying over the Atlantic requires thestrals. Theseus can hop to Germany and back in a day, and would be the person who negotiates prisoner swaps between countries.

And it's weird because you'd think her whole job as an auror would be to catch dark wizards, so trying to stop Grindelwald should kind of be part of her job.

@@joshentheosparks7492 Two members of the group are American and travel from America, so saying she can’t go because it’s too far seems iffy.

EXACTLY

UGH I KNOW! I FOR SURE THOUGHT THATS WHAT WAS GOING TO HAPPEN

If it was a red herring, it was a frustrating one.

And it would be perfect with all the conflict between juggles and wizards at the time!!

I was CONVINCED it was going to happen and I was highly disappointed that it didn't 😂

And how did anyone ever figure out what a qilin bow means in the first place? A group of a dozen magizoologists comes across a critter. They decide to name it "qilin" and it bows to some of them, but not to others. OK. So what does this bow mean? If it bowed to me and no one else, I might well tell everyone that it means I'm pure of heart. How could they possibly disprove it? And BTW, being pure of heart doesn't automatically mean that you're the best choice for Supreme Mugwump. You're going to also need some brains and some courage and some leadership skills to actually get anything done.

The only one influenced was the DEAD Qilin. necromancy. it's one of the main reasons he was locked away in Normengard forever.

The other candidate is a Chinese man. No one likes Chinese man, even the qilin, a Chinese magical creature (jk)

@@Makkaru112 And how does the public know that Dumbledore's Qilin wasn't influenced in another way?

I think it would have been better for the quilin (or chillin, or however it's spelled) to bow to Jacob. Especially after he stated earlier that pretty much no one is pure of heart.

****HERE'S MY ANSWER TO HAVING MULTIPLE PLANS WORKING AT THE SAME TIME TO FOOL GRINDLEWALD**** (It's a full wizarding world theory, and I hope carlin brothers see this. It is: ....... ‣ First thing that a person can not always predict the future, there are many, many possible future, dumbledore mentions this in either oop or in hbp while talking to harry that many of the predictions and prophecies whose record is kept in the ministry, don't actually come true. Also when newt describes the demiguis (I may've spelled it wrong), he says that they can see the MOST PROBABLE near future events. If you combine both of these, we can come to the conclusion that in this fictional wizarding world, at any given time, there are many possible futures/outcomes (and as far into the future a sear will go, this number of future possibilities will increase to even millions of possibilities) and a good sear must select the most probable one, and if any less probable one is selected, it may never come true, like many of the prophecies in the ministry. Also, one thing to keep in mind is that it is all just probabilities, it may also happen that in some cases, due to some reasons, the most probable one may not happen, but the less probable one may just happen (I mean that even the less probable one is also probable, well bcz. ... you know... it is less PROBABLE). So it is actually quite complicated even for a sear to predict the right future. ‣ Also, it is not always possible to see any near or far future event which the sear wants. Like if was ever possible to see any future all the times, then grindlewald would've seen the outcome of dueling with dumbledore (talking about the final duel), and hence would've never done it. Similarly, he would've just seen that credence wouldn't be able to defeat dumbledore, infact he will join him and will go against grindlewald in his last moments, and hence he wouldn't have spent so much time in trying to find him then recruit him, then train him to defeat dumbledore. Also, if it was possible to see any future which the sear wants to see, then no sear would ever make any mistake in their life, and would top in every single thing, from tests and exams, to big decisions related to their lives. There can be just so many proofs for this, such as dumbledore could've went to an actual good sear in gof, too see what all these signs are referring to, and will harry be safe in the tournament, and also, grindlewald would've known that the mother quilin will give birth to 2 quilins in the future, and not only one, and also he would've known that if he attacked credence in front of dumbledore, he (grindlewald) will lose his ultimate protection against dumbledore (i.e. the blood pact), and there can be thousands of other such proofs as well which prove this point. ‣ One more thing to keep in mind is that it may also happen that the sear may see something of the future but may not exactly understand what he's seeing. This is something which J proved in his trelawney video, you can see the proof in that video. So, even though grindlewald is considered an extremely intelligent, and skilled sear, but again dumbledore is only playing with possibilities, and it is possible to fool even the greatest of minds sometimes (especially considering the fact that dumbledore was an ex best friend of grindlewald, and knew him very well, and was better than him). ....... These are some of the reasons I can think and prove for why having multiple plans, all running at the same time, may help in fooling, and ultimately defeating grindlewald.

While I fully agree with the whole phrase, it’s not a good reason for, you know, NOT make a good plan. Actually, the entire logic is make the absolute best plan you can think about, and then be still prepared to go wrong and be flexible. Here was more of “ let’s kick the can and we decide what it does when it lands. “

Love that quote. As well as Wentworth Miller's entire portrayal of Snart

But they could have added her with a better justification. Like maybe somebody (like the candidate that oposes Gellert, the Brazilian woman) is imprisoned and they need a plan to burst her out. So Theseus and Newt gets captured and rescue her. Also it does not make sense that in the 'most hidden prison' you can just visit your sibling when you want.

Yeap, funny moment for audience who doesn't hc lore stuff. Boring but ok.

right!??!?!? like i would loved to have a fantastic beasts series that ACTUALLY revolves around fantastic beasts, ironically the writing is so bad

@@johnericsonlopez4704 Thankyou! I have always wanted a movies about magical creatures. I read a series of books years ago about vet students going to a world where they cared for beasts and creatures, wish that was made into a movie 🍿.

I agree, although I feel compelled to add that Picket the Bowtruckle and Teddy the Niffler are there too.

I love these kinds of out-of-universe answers :D

He becomes Chief Mugwump later on, so the world needed to see him get bowed to so they have someone to beg to lead them in the future.

You can be both flawed and pure of heart. Being pure of heart does not mean you don't have flaws. Being pure of heart means that you want to do as much good as you can, that you have your flaws under control, and act according to your good side, not your bad. And that is precisely true for Dumbledore. He is certainly flawed. But he is also certainly pure of heart.

@@euler4273 except in fiction, pure of heart is most definitely meaning either pure good or pure evil and zero in between including thoughts.

@@korsaiyajinkami3766 Perhaps that is what it means in very badly written fiction. Well-written fiction has complex characters that are not just purely good or purely bad, but instead have both a good and a bad side. Just as Sirius says, "We’ve all got both light and dark inside us. What matters is the part we choose to act on...that’s who we really are." In well-written fiction, being pure of heart means that you choose to act based on your light side. Having flaws does not make you not pure of heart.

@@euler4273 no having flaws doesn't make you not pure of heart, but having a dark side does. Also I disagree with your opinion about only bad fiction has pure of heart operate that way. I've consumed enough of both good and bad fiction and I've never seen pure of heart be depicted as a mix of bad and good, because that defies what it means to be pure of heart. Pure meaning that you are completely of one thing. That said I have seen it depicted as people can change over time and one who was once not pure of heart can evolve as a person and become pure of heart over time and the opposite can happen too where someone pure of heart can devolve and lose their way and become impure of heart. Honestly my interpretation of this series is that people can change and one who was once not pure of heart can become such and the opposite can happen too.

Plus the whole super powerful wand thing

@@eragon666s you don't need a wand to apparate

@@yashsharma-hk4uv true but, it doesn't hurt.. especially when its a magical lovk down..

You know that brooms exist, right? ;) also other levitation spells.

@@aleksandergrzybowski8899 you could also apperate above and use a slow fall spell before you hit the ground like in the ministry

what plan ?

@@bokaboka4675 Exactly

Where did Hear that before… oh yea Lord of the Rings

But if Grindelwald can see the future then he knows she is a threat right?

@@melf5057 I think Grindewald can only see parts of the future not the whole future.

Did they try to use the spell on the briefcases in the movie ? note : i kinda lose hope in jk

if they tried that wouldn't that also undo the spells making the real one bigger on the inside? that seems like it would be problematic. and if it's specific that would cause it's own problem since they'd have to know what duplication spell might have been used.

@@kaischreurs2488 - Not just that, but I was always under the impression that Newt’s case was muggle-made. Meaning, that not only would replicating it magically make it easier to track, but would mean that Newt would know which case was his.

On the flip side, who cares. In the movie they open each case and discover the contents (that honestly could simply be the real case in muggle-mode). They perform no magical tests, granted the group might have simply prepared in case they did. However the result is the same either way. Cast a disspell, or open the case, either way they know it's a fake and now that case is out of the running.

@@calebpurvis6195 The "Who cares" argument could literally be made about all the "plot holes" they found if we are being honest. So it's not really a good argument in the discussion is it? As for the result being the same: No. To counteract a spell you need the counterspell in this case the one breaking the duplication. So if they use them the logical consequence would be that the duplicates disappear altogether or go back to being whatever they were made from. So you would essentially do one spell and end all fakes. Additionally you need to have the briefcase to open it you just need to be in reach of it with magic to do magic against it. So either way the Muggle made duplicates are far more complicated for Grindelwalds men to handle.

but only germany thinks grindewald is innocent, why would the whole world vote for him? and why did the original king guy allow grindewald to manipulate the election if he doesnt want him in office?

This!

At this point I just go to watch them hoping to be entertained. They are entertaining so I was happy. But yeah they are not 'good' like the books were.

@@anvime739 - This one was a fun little political spy thriller, and the actors were much better. Honestly, the first one was also technically a spy thriller.

What issues?

@@ChienaAvtzon Yes. As a HP movie was very disapointing imo. But as a 'fantasy thriller' it was fun. Not incredible but fun.

Mugglog, if you will

Then they should explain it though.

Also imho, the Qilin doesn't do the electing. Notice the wide shot afterwards, I think the people there do the voting through casting the symbols in the sky, but we don't see the tabulation, you just get the impression that it's mostly for Grindelwald. After the alive Qilin does the bow, you see another wide shot with nearly everyone casting the symbol for Victoria whats-her-name.

@@firelordkushroll i think maybe cuz of the future seeing thing. Knowing what the container looks like, Grindlewald's henchmen could've searched for only one object. However, either way, he would still know who was carrying the container as well, so he could just opt for looking for the person instead, so they all had to look the same as well via polyjuice potion.

That’s true

@PokemonNPK Fair point but if that's the case wouldn't he be suspicious of her and have her followed if he (Grindlewald) saw a glimpse of them all on the train? I know it doesn't happen in the movie but food for thought. If he sees Bunty with Newt and company on the train then he would know to be threatened by her and have her investigated/followed thus finding the briefcase or that she's making copies. For your theory to work in essence she should never be seen with any of the others until the final reveal.

@@bavumilemkhonza7091 Or as a simple assistant, he doesn't view her as a threat. That's a common motif in bad guys in fantasy.

@@bavumilemkhonza7091Good point, however Bunty was the only one not given verbal instructions while the others were. Grindlewald can’t see into the future at all times that’s not how Seer abilities work, he heard parts of their plans in the flashes he saw and had to piece together their plan using these pieces so he never really knew the complete plan he just made a well educated guess based on what he saw and what he knew about the individuals involved. Since he didn’t hear anyone give Bunty any instructions he assumed she wasn’t involved, he may not even have seen her at all since everything said was involving the rest of the group but not her. She also wasn’t with the group for most of the time. After she left the train and took the briefcase, which Grindlewald never saw, we don’t see her again till the final confrontation with Grindlewald at the mountain top. Even the group didn’t know she was involved with the plan. The group being clueless the whole time while believing they were the ones executing the actual plan kept Grindlewald clueless while at the same time making him feel like he was always 10 steps ahead of them at all times.

@@GODLOVERBAM Its common everywhere in real life, like that guy fixing some electrical things in some office in your building that you happen to share an elevator with yesterday. People overlook service workers all the time, an assistant is a nobody in most peoples mind (unless their assistant is sick and they have to figure out when/where that meeting is)

I think they realize this, they're just fishing for comments

I agree completely, especially with the voting still taking place, and would like to add that maybe it is possible to teleport away from the mountain, but not to it.

If he had the ability while he and Dumbledore were together Albus might have an idea how it works. He was likely with Grindlewald at times he got visions and I'm sure he explained how the visions came across.

Why the f*ck would you watch it more than once?!

ding ding ding

That makes so much more sense, I wish they'd had someone in the film say this! I was so frustrated because Bunty keeps saying "no one can know everything", but she seemed to be the one who always knew the parts that mattered.

Also, Theseus and Lally figured out that Bunty had the real case. Dumbledore and Bunty both hint at it, while conning Newt to take a very specific fake. However, she is seen during the chase. Though, only from behind. She is the mysterious figure, in green, following Newt.

@@ChienaAvtzon That is my favorite part about this movie, and the only thing that feels fully realized throughout the whole thing. The little interaction between Dumbledore and Jacob making Newt think he knows which case the Qilin is in is so well played, and I love the way that Newt immediately leaps to grab that case once Dumbledore leaves. It actually made me think that Dumbledore knew what he was doing because of course Newt would want to be the one with the Qilin, so making him think he has it provides a much better distraction for Bunty, who is a much less obvious target.

@@johnschauer6832 - Of course, Dumbledore knew what he was doing. Even all the random misadventures in Berlin were planned as a cover for Bunty. It is just portrayed the best in the Room of Requirement, with how each character reacts to playing Three-Card Monte with the cases. Jacob explains the game. Dumbledore cons Newt into taking a specific case. Theseus figures out Newt is being conned. Bunty hints that she has the real case. Lally only wishes Bunty luck, despite Theseus still being in the room.

That sounds like the kind of person Newt would hire as an assistant, too.

Didnt they already write a story?

27 Butts

Yes!! I’d love a Harry Potter movie written by @SuperCarlinBrothers!

I've been saying this about movies for the past 10 years, probably even longer 😅

@@aphishoutofwater7019 This isn’t a theory for marvel films. They need to plan SFX beforehand for budget reasons. However, the writers did the MCU by usually work those set pieces into the story. Here… not so much.

similar to what they did with Cursed Child. I think they had some cool stage tricks and wanted to use all of them in a Harry Potter setting, so they wrote a ridiculous story to fit them

Yeah, and its pretty annoying that he says its a plothole, its not!!!!

Or it could be because he has the elder wand maybe

Very wrong. "because if anyone apparated there they would just fall down" we see multiple times that wizards can protect themselves from falling (even in the same series, at the beginning of CoG), also brooms exist lol. Getting there is trivial, and security doesn't exist, as usual in magical world :) ehh

Even if true...it's kind of a non-answer. And it's probably not true, hinging on a particularly strict and arbitrary definition of the particulars of a spell that you just made up.

@@common.sens3 but it is in so far as the movie doesn’t explain it. We can sit and discuss and make up a hundred different reasons why something might happen but if the movie makes no attempt to explain it…it’s still a plot hole. If theres no protection below the platform, why not have Newt and a flying creature apparate just below the field then fly up?

I agree.

I guess, but then we have to answer 1) why the no apparition zone was made so small, just make it a bit larger - kinda unlikely given how important that event is, 2) how the heck Gridelwald knew it was even the case, is there a method to detect the no-apparition zone limit? never explaned.

Then couldn't you just apparate above it and land on the place a few feet above if you can do it a few feet off the edge? The more you think the dumber the movie is...

@@respecthalo2963 you are right! Though, for me apparition is just not too well thought out concept. An ability to immediately escape any situation ever - great, I expect to see it being used all the time, especially in dangerous situations. But read the 7th book and the thought of "why don't they just disapparate from there???" will be always with you.

Except... Brooms exist?

thing is with close inspection, I’m pretty sure they would’ve found that switch ahahaha

That's so bizarre. I mean, what's the point of voting if everyone will vote for whoverer the Qilin bows to anyways? Is it just a formality then, the "vote"? (I think the correct answer is that the screenwriters didn't think things through.)

​@@7Nebulae7they still need to vote since it's an election. People didn't expect to have a qilin, they haven't had one in a long time. It wouldn't be a legal election if they didn't vote (and some ignored the qilin and didn't vote for Grindelwald)

I understood that he is able to see many different futures based on the choices of people. So by having many people making many random choices the future is very unclear because there are too many 'what if' futures for him to see.

Exactly. If he could just see the entirety of the future, he would have seen in the very beginning that he loses and just give up.

@@GODLOVERBAM - That would explain how Grindelwald was captured alive, at the end of WWII 😆

Yeah I don't think the future is set in stone. Even stuff like prophecies always seem to have some wiggle room to them

Exactly. It is even explicitly stated in the movie: “Gellert Grindelwald is the new leader of the magical world, by acclamation”, meaning an election took place (using the fireworks to cast their vote)

I think he can only see parts of the future & he can’t choose which parts. In the first movie, he had a vision that an Obscurial was in America & he knew Creedence’s adopted mother was involved somehow, but he couldn’t see who the Obscurial actually was.

Newt literally said, that Grindelwald only sees glimpses of the future.

For the future writers: please please please don't introduce any kind of time travel (yes, seeing the future is equivalent), unless you know EXACTLY what rules you pick and you understand the consequences of sticking to them. If you don't, you get a mess of a plot line, where the antagonist can see the future but also not really, also you get a bunch of unanswered/unanswerable questions that ruin the stakes.

@@ChienaAvtzon I may have missed that specific line, but that still leaves quite a bit unanswered

@@aleksandergrzybowski8899 Completely agreed. I'd also argue the same should stand for many other magical elements. It's a good wrting practice in general to extrapolate how newly introduced mechanics affect other aspects of the story

you coments is so generic that it makes no sense

That's very interesting.

Could be. Although Dumbledore himself as an old man still didn't know who did it, so the Qilin bowing didn't inform him.

This is the kind of argument that would spawn from King Crimson, what is it doing in the Wizarding World?

Literally everything is a matter of random circumstances, there is not any way to figure out how the future is going to go scientifically. Grindelwald can see glimpses of the future, and no matter what you do to throw him off, what he's seeing is going to happen anyway.

Yup…. plus, there was always the implication that Newt enchanted a muggle-made case.

Except that Grindelwald foresees ww2 in the first movie, meaning he can see at least 12 years into the future, probably even further since he saw the atomic bomb, which was in 1945 (The US started developing them in 1939 tho so it's not guaranteed).

@@Bloodraven20 are you agreeing with me for them having a Percy Jackson theory? Because if so yay. I also want a owl house theory but that can come later.

Not... really. Since he and Albus have a conversation on muggles it is clear that he, Grindelwald, studied them. Something that Voldemort didn't. So, it falls again into nothing.

@@annabourbon good point. Guess that leaves it to 1. Why decoys? 2. Why on earth did they make things so complicated and not simply magically duplicated them? Rather dull, yet still additional information for Grindelwald to process. In my mind it still makes sense, tho it does seem rather unnecessary.

Except when he sees the future of three election day and sees bunty handing newt the true case, revealing to him that every other case was a red herring. Really it's like these guys don't know how magically seeing the future works

Exactly, when I saw the movie and the part where they talk about how their plan is to be confusing and unexpected, it immediately made me think that the real point was to confuse the fans while they were watching the trailers... but they then ended up with a plot that just... wasn't good. I would have enjoyed it way more if it had gone the route of what some people had been predicting, even if I had heard the exact prediction beforehand.

Thanks!

Yeah, thats what I thought. But the Quillin says "this person is worthy" which makes more people choose them!

@@sarahglover3286 Yea its a suggestion but you don't have to follow the Qillins advice, like that one who still shot up yellow after grindelwald had been "chosen"

Wow this would be quite an endeavor!

Mr and Mrs Dursley of number 4 privet drive were proud to say that they were perfectly normal, thank you very much. (and so on)

Yeah, Santos had only 2 lines in the movie, and the other guy hasn't spoken even once 😂

@@firelordkushroll I think what SCB were talking about is why not have all of the forces just standing at the entrance of the bottleneck..not a just a few. Regarding the giant squid, wrong. According to the harry potter wikipedia, the giant squid was "Born Early 1976 or earlier" Which means its entirely possible that the manticore's tentacle is mistaken for a giant squid's tentacle, as all they know for sure know about the giant squid is "its red or purple".

Very very very very very very true

The problem with the whole "possible futures" idea is that we have confirmation that time is linear in Harry Potter as early as Prisoner of Azkaban. Going back in time doesn't change the present, and attempting to change the future seen by a Seer by taking actions in the present only leads you to that future. That's how time-based magics (including the future-sight of Seers) function in the Wizarding World. Any point seen is a point set, and nothing can change it. And I swear, if you say anything about The Cursed Child... Well, then I won't be able to take you seriously at all. That's practically fan-fic writing quality, and flies in the face of everything the Harry Potter series teaches the readers about magic in the Wizarding World. Nothing to say about the apparating bit, there's some inconsistencies with how apparation and disapparation works in the Wizarding World. Thus, I can't agree or disagree with anything stated about that. Good point, though.

@@christianrose9166 This isn't quite accurate. I think there's a quote from Dumbledore where he rhetorically asks if Harry thinks that all the prophecies in the Department of Mysteries have come true, implying that many haven't. So time isn't completely fixed, and what is seen can be averted. It just follows the old Greek prophecy style, where believing and behaving as if the prophecy is true will make it come true. Like Oedipus, if he was raised in court with two loving parents, would never have found himself at the crossroads to kill the stranger that he only later knew as his father, and to marry a woman he only later knew as his mother. It's only because his parents threw him out into the wild to die as a baby that the prophecy could come true. I still don't like the possible futures explanation, though, because we've never had someone have a vision of two separate futures. That is more my issue. A better way to phrase the idea is just that they need to create a vision of the future that Grindelwald sees and pursues, believing that it shows him winning. If Grindelwald were to see himself obtaining the case, for instance, having two cases means that the future can proceed exactly as is seen by Grindelwald and the good guys can still succeed. In that way, the only way for Grindelwald to lose is for him to unknowing choose to follow his own downfall. You wouldn't have to change much to interpret things that way, so it does come across as clunky writing using the possible futures interpretation.

@@elettramelodia8990 top notch assessment.

Except in the HP universe, past present and future are set; just think back to the time turner shenanigans

The thing is, we know from crimes of grindelwald that the future is predetermined to at least WW2, right? Like, he shows the atomic bomb detonation to the crowd.

I thought that too

Ooh, I think you may be onto something with the briefcases! Also, the whole thing with recent movies, is pretty much why I haven't really seen too many of them. When I want to watch a movie, I'll watch an older one I own on DVD.

Yes, they vote by acclamation. It's definitely incorrect to say the Qilin chose the new leader and the people didn't vote. This movie has so many problems of its own, no need to add extras.

@@firelordkushroll Somehow I didn't expect any more movies out of this franchise

Well, Bunty did not know Kama was sent to spy on Grindelwald. Add Dumbledore to the mix, and you need half a dozen. They just used four.

Agreed.

Couldn’t have said it better!

Next week on "How the Mag Turns"

My head spins just from reading this😂

Newt and Theseus are pure-bloods and much younger than the Dumbledores.

At the end of the second movie, Jacob seems quite confused about where they are, when they stood in front of Hogwarts. I think that he could see it later because he knew about it. As soon as he enters the castle, he somehow understands it and is able to see it. In "history of Hogwarts" they don't mention this because they simply don't know. Never has a muggle entered the castle and knew about it. I don't know if this is true, I haven't any evidence for it, but for me it seems logical. I mean, we all know the situation where we don't see something, just because we aren't aware it exists. But as soon as someone points it out it seems so obvious.

Magic has boundaries. Outside of the boundary he sees ruins but once he crosses the threshold of the boundary, he can see it.

@@adriebaby4137 yes, that's an even easyer answer. But i thaught that for sure some muggles went in the ruins some time, but couldn't see the real Hogwarts anyway. That's why i believe it has to do with knowing about it. I mean, imagine muggles stepping into the castle and discovering about magic. Wouldn't be that cool.

Hogwarts appearing as ruins is part of the many magical protections to keep Muggles away. This would include spells that make the area seem...uninteresting to Muggles. A place they don't bother to notice, like Diagon Alley. And probably spells that actively repel Muggles, like making them feel overwhelming anxiety or fear when they try to enter. Or making them confused or disoriented when they go nearby, putting them in some kind of trance that makes them leave the area. There's a lot of different stuff wizards can and do use to keep muggles out of places they aren't supposed to be. But one thing we do see in the books is what happens when a muggle does enter a space they "can't see" - Hermione's parents in Diagon Alley. To me, this supports the idea that the repellant charms are more for preventing entrance altogether rather than obscuring reality entirely from every Muggle who might venture in. And really, there's situations where Muggles would need to be permitted entrance to Hogwarts. If their child is competing in the Triwizard Tournament, if they want to visit their child in the hospital wing, if they need to identify their child's body, etc. It would be highly impractical, possibly even dangerous, if they weren't able to see the real building and people on these occasions.

@@rowan3682 Exactly. That supports my idea of "you can see it if you know about it", because all those people (parents) are muggles that are somehow involved in the wizarding world and will learn about the place (st. mungos, diogon alley, hogwarts...) before they get there.

SO YOU ARE!

I kinda figure that's all wrapped up in the horror of it all; that things had gotten so heated that more than one of them were using lethal spells is bad enough, but that it hit a bystander just drives home how out-of-hand things had gotten. He can't let go of that even after nearly a century.

It is interesting that Bunty was the only member of the team that was disguised.

ngl this is what i thought, but i reckon the events up to this era of him winning the duel with grindlewald is when he has that more prominent change in his personality

It is not because the BIL of Bella is dead? So by GoF there are only two Lestranges: she and her husband.