Remember when Harry Potter was good?
inb4 that stale pasta that guy posts in every Harry Potter thread
>>64222168
I stopped after2
>>64222168
Stopped being good after Goblet
Teleporting was such bullshit
>>64222202
>stopped being good after goblet
>the goblet literally teleports two people
>>64222168
I can't stand to watch the first 2 films now. I now always start in OotP or maybe PoA if really needed.
>Good
Harry Potter was easily one of the dullest franchise in the history of movie franchises. Each episode following the boy wizard and his pals from Hogwarts Academy as they fight assorted villains has been indistinguishable from the others. Aside from the gloomy imagery, the seriesüf only consistency has been its lack of excitement and ineffective use of special effects, all to make magic unmagical, to make action seem inert.
Perhaps the die was cast when Rowling vetoed the idea of Spielberg directing the series; she made sure the series would never be mistaken for a work of art that meant anything to anybody?just ridiculously profitable cross-promotion for her books. The Harry Potter series might be anti-Christian (or not), but itüfs certainly the anti-James Bond series in its refusal of wonder, beauty and excitement. No one wants to face that fact. Now, thankfully, they no longer have to.
>a-at least the books are g-g-good though
"No!"
The writing is dreadful; the book was terrible. As I read, I noticed that every time a character went for a walk, the author wrote instead that the character "stretched his legs."
I began marking on the back of an envelope every time that phrase was repeated. I stopped only after I had marked the envelope several dozen times. I was incredulous. Rowling's mind is so governed by cliches and dead metaphors that she has no other style of writing. Later I read a lavish, loving review of Harry Potter by the same Stephen King. He wrote something to the effect of, "If these kids are reading Harry Potter at 11 or 12, then when they get older they will go on to read Stephen King." And he was quite right. He was not being ironic. When you read "Harry Potter" you are, in fact, trained to read Stephen King
Remember when Emma watson was hot?
>>64222299
>you all this for a book about kid wizards
>>64222224
Yeah, but at least they limited it then. Being able to go anywhere anytime is lame.
>>64222168
Are we still pretending the first two movies were on par with the later films and not crap?
>>64222489
They are comfy. I like watching them, specially on Christmas.
>>64222168
harry potter #1 was comfy
>>64222489
They were better. More comfy and less edgy. The main plot of Harry Potter is terrible and Fiennes as Voldemort is rather silly.
