Every true Harry Potter fan knows that Neville Longbottom actually couldn't be more important to the overall plot.
Part of the same prophecy as Harry, as brave and as selfless and even responsible for destroying the final horcrux - Voldermort's snake, Nagini - it's clear that while he might seem bumbling and shy, J.K Rowling's wizarding world wouldn't be what it is without Neville.
That's why we, like many fans, were horrified to discover that the film's second protagonist only features in for under 30 minutes in the whole 19 hour and 40 minute film franchise.
Yep, in figures totted up from the IMDB pages of each of the six Harry Potter films, it has emerged just how long each character appeared on screen - and Neville's is perhaps the biggest travesty.
Advert
In total, the character, played by Matthew Lewis, is seen on screen for 28 minutes and 15 seconds.
In the first film, Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone, a young Neville only gets 3 minutes and 15 seconds of screen time.
Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets offers him even less exposure, with 1 minute and 15 seconds in total.
Advert
Neville's smallest role was in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1, where he only got... wait for it.... 15 seconds (although, this perhaps isn't surprising since a lot of the film focused on Harry, Ron and Hermione destroying horcruxes outside of Hogwarts).
Meanwhile, his biggest gig was in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2 - again, not a shocker, seeing as this is when he emerged as hero, killed Nagini and basically blossomed into the brave, selfless hero that we all knew him to be.
While Neville's screen-time might seem a little short, it's actually pretty average compared to other Harry Potter favourites.
Advert
Harry's school-time nemesis, Draco Malfoy was only in the film franchise for 31 minutes and 30 seconds, meanwhile his big time nemesis, Lord Voldemort was in all of the films for a total of 37 minutes and 15 seconds.
Hagrid appeared for 45 minutes and 45 seconds overall, and as for Professor McGonnagall? Well, she got 28 minutes and 45 seconds of screen-time.
Even Harry, Ron and Hermione don't feature for as long as we thought they would.
Advert
Harry appeared for just shy of nine hours in total - which is just less than half of all the films - while Ron cropped up for just over three and a half hours, and Hermione for just under the same amount of time.
But... how is Harry only in half the film franchise, you might ask? After all, the movie is literally named after him.
Well, as one Twitter user explains: "To those who are confused: this is how editing works. Average shot length in a modern movie is only about 4 seconds!"
Advert
It's also worth noting that 'screen time' specifically means a moment where the character is starring in the shot.
So, basically, the character might have been 'in the room', but if the camera wasn't directly on them, it doesn't count. Got it?
We still think Neville deserved a hell of a lot more time. Hell, we'd have happily watched a whole film centred around him searching for his toad, Trevor.
Featured Image Credit: Warner BrosTopics: Harry Potter, TV News, TV Entertainment