"There's something very familiar about all this..."

Kill Voldemort Parts 1 & 2?

Where's all the hot teenage wizard sex?

/I put on my robe and wizard hat.

The whole article is attention-seeking bollocks. You only have to read the caption under the picture to see that...

Alan 'Mad Eye Moody' Gleeson

/laughable

I don't think I can take another 3 hours of "Harry Potter Goes Camping".

Fark Harry Potter. It makes people idiots in the fact that they can't wait to tell everyone they read a book written on a 5th grade level like they achieved zen from a children's book. Rowling is laughing it up on her private island at all of the adults that got suckered into the overhyped, mandatory reading vacuum.

mikefinch:
Now lets go to another thing: Remember how in TDH they all holed up in the room of requirements because it was the only room they could keep people from entering? And how in the 5th movie they tore the wall down and broke in? The movies are setting themselves up for terrible continuity problems with the books.

They forgot that they required impenetrable walls. Or maybe they just conveniently discovered a spell that would make the walls impenetrable.

But if you think about it, there are plot holes all over the place.

Why didn't Harry, Hermione, or Ron ask Phineas Nigellus to pass messages to/from Dumbledore?
Why didn't Voldemort make the Deatheaters take the Unbreakable Vow?
Why not use truth serum all the time?
Snape told Dumbledore that Voldemort was going to kill the Potters. He asked Dumbledore to protect them as a favor. Is DD seriously implying that he won't protect the Potters unless Snape betrays Voldemort?

SuperDuper28: Fark Harry Potter. It makes people idiots in the fact that they can't wait to tell everyone they read a book written on a 5th grade level like they achieved zen from a children's book. Rowling is laughing it up on her private island at all of the adults that got suckered into the overhyped, mandatory reading vacuum.

but hey, if the books didn't exist, then egotistical morons such as yourself wouldn't have such an easy way to lord it over those you feel inferior, just because you'll never make as much money as she does.

Confoundit:

They forgot that they required impenetrable walls. Or maybe they just conveniently discovered a spell that would make the walls impenetrable.
Everyone in the room was it's 'secret keeper', when Cho, under veritaserum, gives umbridge the location of the room, it's secret is broken.

Why didn't Harry, Hermione, or Ron ask Phineas Nigellus to pass messages to/from Dumbledore?
because Dumbledore was dead, and they had no way of knowing his portrait was still behind the grand scheme


Why didn't Voldemort make the Deatheaters take the Unbreakable Vow?
His folly. He's so sure of his own importance, that the very thought of one of his faithful followers betraying him is unthinkable..
Why not use truth serum all the time?
Because the effect weakens over time, it's difficult to make (takes months) and there are spells that can counter the effects. All in HBP

Snape told Dumbledore that Voldemort was going to kill the Potters. He asked Dumbledore to protect them as a favor. Is DD seriously implying that he won't protect the Potters unless Snape betrays Voldemort?

of course not, but even Dumbledore can see that the deeply regretful Snape would be a valuable weapon against Voldemort

tonberry2k: I won't be seeing it/them.

/Last book was hugely disappointing

*Shrug.* A bit of yes, and a bit of no. The last book did feel a little rushed, and some things felt rather cramped. I was a bit pissed that they killed Hedwig for no damn reason (that poor owl never caught a break...), though Moody's death set up some great vengeance stuff later. (Y'know, Umbridge stealing his eye and using it as a security device. B*tch.)

It could have been done better, but it could have been a hell of a lot worse. At least the very end of it was warm-&-fuzzy. She could've killed off everyone and left Hogwarts & the wizard world crippled, but instead gave those that died a hero's death, and the survivors came out stronger with a world to rebuild. While the story ended the "world" didn't, if it makes any sense. It kinda implies that Harry & Co.'s adventures are over with, but there are new adventures for others, leaving the world open for spinoffs, sequels, and other stuff. Yeah, kinda money-grubbing, I suppose, but it's all in how it'd be pulled off.

Ack, I'm putting way too much thought into a series like this. [/dorkmode]

Anyone else here think that Order of the Phoenix SUCKED?

Hope they don't mess up the remaining movies like they did with that one.

mikefinch: Lets be honest - GOF was the pinnacle of Rowlings writing. THAT book contained enough material for 2 movies.

Given that's the one where Voldemort's plot could have lasted five minutes if he'd just mailed the portkey to Harry as a pair of shoes, the pinnacle is very low and the material rather shoddy.

Stantz: SuperDuper28: Fark Harry Potter. It makes people idiots in the fact that they can't wait to tell everyone they read a book written on a 5th grade level like they achieved zen from a children's book. Rowling is laughing it up on her private island at all of the adults that got suckered into the overhyped, mandatory reading vacuum.

but hey, if the books didn't exist, then egotistical morons such as yourself wouldn't have such an easy way to lord it over those you feel inferior, just because you'll never make as much money as she does.

Awww, poor Stantz. I must have hit a nerve when I described your kind. Now that you finished Potter like a good little boy you can get to work on "The Little Engine that Could" series.

While it's Harry Potter time, could someone confirm this for me: in the epilogue, they're all at the train stop. One of the kids is saying that someone else was "snogging" with someone (I don't remember the name). The kid was like, "He's ours." Was that person Lupin's and Tonk's child?

But sources insist the reason behind the two-movie plan is artistic rather than financial.

Riiiiight.

Even though I very much doubt it's being done for entirely artistic reasons, this is definitely a good thing for Potter fans.

mikefinch: Austin: Considering how much is crammed into the book, I'm glad they're going to do it right.

How much is crammed into the book? You need to read that book again. The 7th book was by far the worst bag of antlers i have read. Its what happens when editors treat writers like a golden goose and let them get sloppy because they make money. The pacing was terrible and lets be honest - all that action time that took so long to read is a comparative 5 minutes of visual representation.

Now lets go to another thing: Remember how in TDH they all holed up in the room of requirements because it was the only room they could keep people from entering? And how in the 5th movie they tore the wall down and broke in? The movies are setting themselves up for terrible continuity problems with the books. Lets be honest - GOF was the pinnacle of Rowlings writing. THAT book contained enough material for 2 movies. Deathly hallows? Not so much. I bet if someone payed me to take the time i could pump out a quality 2.5 hour script adaptation.

\Everything that was sooo important in TDH? Like what? Keep in mind that just because it took an hour to read doesn't mean it takes an hour to film.
\\Rowling let it go to her head.

I'm sorry, which best selling, multi billion dollar industry/pop culture phenomenon did you create?

Rickerkioz: I'm sorry, which best selling, multi billion dollar industry/pop culture phenomenon did you create?

Yes, your opinion and personal taste are wrong, because some one else made a lot of money. So there.

Those judging the books based on the movies: don't. The movies are the equivalent of Starship Troopers.

Rickerkioz:

I'm sorry, which best selling, multi billion dollar industry/pop culture phenomenon did you create?

I didnt create any - im saying it contains about 2.5 hours of good movie time. Since when does creating a million dollar media work have anything to do with anything? Is every person that critiques movies a film maker? No, but we know when we are watching crap. If being on par with the production force behind a product is a requirement of critique then WTF???? Just because she made tons of money its fantastic? Ummm no.

chiark: mikefinch: Lets be honest - GOF was the pinnacle of Rowlings writing. THAT book contained enough material for 2 movies.

Given that's the one where Voldemort's plot could have lasted five minutes if he'd just mailed the portkey to Harry as a pair of shoes, the pinnacle is very low and the material rather shoddy.

I would agree with you about that.

Churchill2004: chocoboat: mikefinch: The 7th book was by far the worst bag of antlers i have read.

Your use of metaphors is the worst bag of antlers I have read.

I caught that, too, but his rant was too much to deal with this late. My guess- he's ~13 and got pissed that the series became targeted towards an older audience as it progressed.

Hey - if you like harry potter more power to you. I was upset that the target audience was children. At 13 and a half im no child!!!! Harry potter books just screamed for savage dark scenes. But towards the end Rowling seemed to be trying to please both the intellectual adults AND the children. She also did a poor job of pacing her final novel. And a poor job of being creative. What - she couldn't think of some spell that wasnt already in the other 6 books? Much less name it without reverting to some latin root?

And yes - it was a poor use of metaphor. God forbid i get anal enough to proofread posts i make on fark. What is this? the Journal of American Literature? Unless your a TF'er then your not paying to read this crap. biatch and moan when you pay me. (then again, whos going to hire a writer from fark? much less one that refers to books as bags of antlers.)

\Meh

JWideman: Those judging the books based on the movies: don't. The movies are the equivalent of Starship Troopers.

I LOVE THAT BOOK!

\i like the movie because its so campy and B-film.

/I don't remember the thread I got this from

£0£$

I haven't seen a Harry Potter movie since I was dragged to the third one by the SO. I specifically recall going out for a smoke mid way through and conversing with some other people about how long the farking movie was.

I have never read a Potter book, though the movies I have seen have been ok. I have just read Hunters of Dune, I am a big Dune fan, and they decided to split the final book into two books instead of having an over 1,300 page book. I can say I would rather have something split and done right rather then have something butchered and done wrong.

What I didn't understand was how DD was able to defeat Grindenwald if he had the unbeatable wand? If the wand was able to be defeated, why was it such a big deal that Harry get it?

mikefinch
JWideman: Those judging the books based on the movies: don't. The movies are the equivalent of Starship Troopers.

I LOVE THAT BOOK!

\i like the movie because its so campy and B-film.



I am a big fan of B-films for what they represent, innovations and creativity. Recently watched some Flash Gorden Saves the Universe and was wondering one thing if anyone knows. Did anyone ever use what I call the Star Wars Into Text before Flash Gorden and did anyone use it again before Lucas did in Star Wars?
Just a film buff and been wondering about that.

Churchill2004: teto85: But I would rather not see 50 minutes of Harry, Ron & Hermione just camping out.

It's true that a lot of the book's length is them on the run, but think about all the events that occur while they're "camping". All the run-up to the attack on the wedding + the Battle of Hogwarts would be enough to make a movie of in and of itself. All the stuff that happens in between is easily enough to make another.

Though obviously they can't slice it up that way. I wonder where they will cut it... I can't think of any obvious spots.

The Harry Potter series, absurdly devoted fans aside, truly is a masterpiece, and will be remembered as such. You're right that Rowling has earned every penny of her fortune. I hope her next work is just as good, though there are rumors she wants to work on a younger children's book. Which, for the record, would be an extreme waste of talent.

Possibly in the middle of their running, when one of the trio goes AWOL?

More Harry Potter movies?

Someone notify Fred Phelps. (new window)

I guess China has very flat pyramids, because so far as I can tell, that scheme only had two levels. the company and the "investors".

Alleyoop: /I don't remember the thread I got this from

lol!

John Dewey: (Making the books shorter.)

Full of win!

thegod082: While it's Harry Potter time, could someone confirm this for me: in the epilogue, they're all at the train stop. One of the kids is saying that someone else was "snogging" with someone (I don't remember the name). The kid was like, "He's ours." Was that person Lupin's and Tonks' child?

Yup. Teddy was snogging Victoire. Teddy is the baby Lupin, and Victoire is Bill and Fleur's kid.

/nerd

I'm surprised they didn't make ythe last 3 two parters.

Mugato: Harry Potter and Squeezing Blood from the Philosopher's Stone.

Yeah a pretty smart move, plus JK Rowling got 2nd in the Associated Press Celebrity of the Year '07, for writing the final book. Finishing third was Al Gore, whose year included an Oscar, an Emmy, a Nobel Peace Prize and the global concert Live Earth.

/Priorities in the press.
//Not a Gore sympathiser.

Is it just me or does Harry (Daniel Jacob Radcliffe) look like a FAILed attempt at a "Some Assembly May Be Required" Ken visits Transylvania doll?

Sounds good to me, I think the last 2 movies felt like Extreme Cliff Notes versions of the books. Enough that I wondered if I'd have any idea what was going on if I hadn't read the books.

Well duh. They'll need some extra time for the newly incorporated Dumbledore gay love scene.

/Wait, what's this about money?

You harry potter haters need to get the fark over yourselves. If you're "too cool" for HP and all the frenzy that goes around it, what the hell are you doing on Fark? Go back to your pitiful smug lives and leave everyone else alone.

/not a real HP fan, movies were OK, didn't read the books

harry potter movies are pieces of shiat.

/loved all the books
//saw Prisoner of Azkaban movie and was turned off
///Saw Goblet of Fire to give it another chance, was worse

Not that this will help the layoff situation at Scholastic Books.

They are really making a movie out of that piece of fan fiction? Quite amazing. Really.

Harry Potter and the Chronicles of the Kingdom of the Golden Compass

What is it about you Harry Potter fags and the constant spoilers, book or movie, fark you act as if all this shiat is common knowledge and everyone has read it, every farking time.

/shut it

John Dewey ...[hilarious addition to "classics in one minute"]...

Dude, with about two more sentances of background for each book, I think you could corner the market for the Readers' Digest "Greatest Summary Writer In The World" Award. As they stand, that was freakin' hilarious! Please hurry up with the rest.

P.S. ... could you please include The Hobbit & LOtR ??? PLEASE?
Damn dude, that was funnier than the "LOLCAT Thread is Dead" Thread. Hell, this whole thread is funnier than anything I have read or seen in months. (But the "LOLCAT Thread is Dead" Thread comes close.)