Which ones your favorite?
>>67788966
Idk but not the 4th one, all that teenager drama was awful
the first two are the only ones that truly felt authentic
1: 5/10
2: 6/10
3: 9/10
4: 6/10
5: 4/10
6: 5/10
7: 7/10
8: 8/10
>>67788966
3 or 5, hard to pick.
1 has the comfiest opening by far though.
Boring shit like the books.
Next.
>>67789211
you shut your goddamn mouth you filthy mudblood
Half Blood Prince without a doubt.
Really all of David Yates HP films are great. Pure cinema. Beautifully shot and directed.
Warner Brothers should've put all their cards in with Yates for their DCEU movies. Maybe he can unfuck their shit from Snyder.
>>67789167
>he actually liked Goblet of Fire
3 and 4 tbqh. I have a soft spot for the 4th. Its comfy to me. 5 is the worst. Absolutely forgettable
>>67788966
The first three are the only good ones, the best being Prisoner of Azkaban.
i really like GoF but it was also my favorite book. really they're all great except that horrible turd PoA. i'll never forget that fucking freeze frame ending or the goddamn jamaican shrunken head
>>67789413
>>67789404
Kill yourselves.
Quite literally and actually none. Harry Porter was 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
There's nothing more comfy than early Harry Potter
>>67789540
Time to kill yourself.
Order of the Phoenix was the worst, most boring pointless HP movie
Its like a whole movie of filler they could have just skipped that book
>>67789540
Sometimes it's really hard to tell if copy pasta makers are just messing around or really full of autistic asshurt
I never watched the last 3 or 4 I don't even know. This shit got really boring as I grew up
>>67789570
Time to develop some taste in both film and literature, /v/umblr
>>67789540
>hogwarts academy
2/10
>mfw there's an actual character called parvarti
>mfw she was in the books
Goblet of Fire.
>>67788966
I would honestly kill a house-elf if we could've had an extended edition version of Goblet. That book was probably the peak of the series and if the characters had all been properly explored (I'm looking at you Mad-Eye Moody and Barty Crouch) this series would go down as GOAT
4th is the best book
6th is the best movie
>>67789573
5th had the best ending out of any of them
>>67790029
The more I think about it, the more right I think you are. It was a very sobering ending compared to the other books. It just gets overshadowed by book six where, guess what? The exact same thing happens again (Harry losing somebody special to him. A little part of him dies etc. etc.)
>>67789598
Why is it wrong? Are you implying you know better than academics and a homosexual black male?
>>67789540
Atlas Shrugged, kek. "Democracy in America" is GOAT social construct. You cuck.
>>67789540
>I began marking on the back of an envelope every time that phrase was repeated
People, this is called autism.
>>67790240
But is he wrong? That is the question
>>67789432
The fourth book is my favorite too, which is why I hate the movie so much. I don't see how anyone could like both, they're like night and day
>>67790217
It's obviously a bait image
>>67789432
>i really like GoF
>they're all great except that horrible turd PoA.
>>67790284
Well tbqh he's somewhat right. The books are naive stuff for children and the movies are mostly dull.
The best movie was the 3rd. Cuaron was able to pull out the interesting aspects of the book to make something artistic, emotional and entertaining.
Yates was terrible in 5 and 6 and I never fully watched the 2 last movies.
>>67790217
>>67790240
>>67790284
>>67790599
will you faggots please stop responding to stale copypasta? How fucking new are you?
>>67790599
You don't like the Yates ones because they're actually british. Not trash made for anglophile teenagers from flyover states
>>67790666
Why is it wrong?
>>67790599
The books are entertaining, you don't always have to pick novels that will enrich you. Literary snobs are obnoxious
>>67790743
>just turn your brain off bro!
>>67790704
>You don't like the Yates ones because they're actually british
I'm sorry but what? The Yates movies were probably the least imaginative takes on Harry Potter possible. Think about what Yates actually added to the interpretation as a director... this faggot?
>>67789413
agreed
The first 3 are the only books short enough to be properly adapted into film. After that they cut out everything that made the books so good, and the movies became superficial mockeries of the source material.
>>67790788
Yates films were british
The first three are an anglophiles idea of british
>>67790786
who are you quoting?
>>67790873
and what? British = quality?
>>67790873
So because the director is British that automatically makes them better? How damaged are you?
Cuaron is a hundred times the director Yates is
>>67790975
>So because the director is British that automatically makes them better?
No but thats the reason why you consider the first three better
>Cuaron is a hundred times the director Yates is
Correct
