>acquire gun
>shoot Voldemort in the face
>repeat as necessary
>no more wizard wars
explain to me why this wouldn't , /tv/
Why do good guys and bad guys go to school together?
Why didn't she just brew some ricin?
>>71990386
#NotAllSlytherins
The wizard world has strict gun control laws.
>>71990353
He's in Scotland. They're not even allowed airguns.
>>71990491
they don't even know what guns are
>the Ministry has informed muggle police that Sirius Black is carrying a "gun," a type of metal wand that muggles use to kill each other
>>71990521
>not apparating to the USA and stealing a gun with a summoning spell
Homosexuals twirling thier gay wands singing a faggot show tune to activate a spell, meanwhile anons are firing bullets at 3000m/s with a simple click
Tell me again why wizards are a threat?
>>71990543
Yeah I don't care, it's a children's book.
Maybe the whole horcruxes thing?
>>71990446
>implying that your retarded muggle poisons can do shit against wizard medicine
this is your daily reminder that muggles UNIRONICALLY
S E W
E
W
their wounds closed!
It's the UK. How/where would he acquire a gun in the first place?
>>71990674
>>repeat as necessary
>>71990686
Apparate to Mexico
>>71990674
Couldn't he just keep shooting voldy to turn him into a disembodied spirit thingy like he was in the first book, giving him effectively infinite time to find and destroy all the horcruxes?
All he has to do is non-verbally cast the Imperius Curse and make his enemies turn the guns on themselves, for fuck's sakes.
Because then it wouldn't be 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.
>>71990353
I've always thought this too but we see first hand how easy it is to treat broken bones with magic. I imagine physical injuries, even gunshots, aren't very effective when you consider healing magic. I wish she went into more of this shit when she wrote her books.
>>71991153
is this pasta?
>>71991276
you can't heal instant death from a bullet to the head or heart, anon
