What would stop a teacher who has a favorite house from giving that house 1000 points every time they do something. Couldn't they just rig their favorite house to win by 1000000000 points.
>>71011695
They work on the honor system. Obviously Dumbledore has no honor
>>71011742
HOWEVER
Because its for children, manchild.
>>71011695
Are you implying Snape wasn't honest? He may have had a favorite house, but he didn't gave points for nothing.
>>71011695
>What would stop a teacher who has a favorite house from giving that house 1000 points every time they do something.
that's exactly what snape did with slytherins, they're little green shits
>>71011695
why are you people even bothering to discuss this autistic shit?
>>71012031
Its marketing for a cash in and play that there is almost no hype for
>>71011888
I'm just saying its a fucking retarded system when any teacher or prefect can just give as many points as they want to the house they represent.
>>71012062
Yes I get paid to shill on a chink board that no execs anywhere even know exists.
>>71012109
Nice how much did you get for Dredd and Purge 1?
>>71012109
>M-muh secret club
>w-we are legion
>>71011695
Because Dumbledore will slap that teacher's shit, but not before giving some bullshit reason for taking the points away that the teacher/prefect/whatever-little-britbong-crumpet tosser gave to the house.
>>71012194
Well the news identified the hacker known as 4chan so I don't think any executives at hollywood care about the couple hundred autistic people shitposting on here.
I'm British and we had a house points system in primary. We didn't have heads of houses tho but I guess its just the fact that they're adults and know better. It's just a thing to encourage good behaviour and work. So why would the heads particularly care about it beyond that.
By being in 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 series 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 Potter series might be anti-Christian (or not), but its 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.
>well at least the books rawkxD
Not at all.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
>>71012417
I hope no one falls this time
>>71012417
>she made sure the series would never be mistaken for a work of art
BTFO
