Albus Severus Potter... you were named for two Headmasters of Hogwarts. One of them was a Slytherin, and he was probably the bravest man I've ever known.
however
Severus was a good friend.
>Hurry James Sirius Severus Albus Hagrid Draco Remus Neville Fleur Dobby Cho Cedric Vernon Whomping Willow Dudley Aunt Marge Aragog Riddle Bane Lupin Filch Crabbe Dursley Evans Fudge Shacklebolt Potter! You might miss your train!
Didn't Snape take over as headmaster after having dozens of people murdered including the previous headmaster?
severus died
is this whats considered comedy gold over on /v/ still?
>>71708748
/thread
>>71708759
and a real human being
whomping willow haha
aragog haha
>>71708714
"You're named after a man who got blue balled by your grandmother, lusted after her so much that he betrayed his own political cause, and who - after being guilt tripped by a geriatric homosexual - took part in a double agent mission where he did nothing when people were brutally murdered and tortured. Now run along :)"
>>71708822
well, fanfag?
>>71708822
>>71709017
Anon, if an anonymous person isn't replying, chances are that going for the ego isn't going to help.
What the heck did you expect from 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 Harry Potter series might be anti-Christian (or not), but it’s 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 were 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.
>>71709260
I don't know man, I liked reading those books growing up.
