[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 69 KB, 500x774, harry-potter-7-faux-book-cover.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3148468 No.3148468 [Reply] [Original]

I've spent a life avoiding the mainstream, hitting the classics, and focusing on the obscure gems of literature. Recently, however, I caved in and read through the Harry Potter series.

I finished the last book up about an hour ago. Wow.

I mean, wow. Talk about shattering my expectations; that series was damned incredible. Also, I now fully understand the mentality of people who come up with bullshit reasons to say that it's trash.

What does /lit/ think of Harry Potter?

>> No.3148470

>>3148468
>Also, I now fully understand the mentality of people who come up with bullshit reasons to say that it's trash.
What do you mean?

>> No.3148479

>>3148470
I'm not against someone not liking it, or criticizing it. It's just that something as popular as this has attracted a crowd that will invariably proclaim it to be completely free of any value or substance whatsoever, because they're just too pretentious to look at something in the mainstream with unbiased eyes.

I don't think the HP series is perfect, but now most of its 'critics' come across like that one Star Trek fan who yells at you about how Star Wars was a completely terrible and insignificant film with no merits whatsoever compared to his beautiful preferences in science fiction.

>> No.3148483

>>3148468
>>3148479
Pretty much.
Thread over.

>> No.3148489

I read it as a kid and even was able to spot out a whole bunch of stuff that irked me. I kept coming back for the world building she did though, was a fun and fantastic experience. As the series got on my interest in it waned. After the 4th I was less excited by it. I don't think I really got anything out of it except a fun and shallow adventure. Not sure how it will stand the test of time, a lot of the enjoyment I got from it was that I had something to look forward to and enjoy with my friends.

>> No.3148499

I never even liked it as a child and to see supposedly adults read this kiddie trash makes me just want to throw up.
OP, I bet you never understood the classics and your idea of "obscure gems of literature" is probably HP Lovecraft and Ayn Rand.
I'm glad you finally found something that relates to your emotional state which is that of a 8 year old.

Sage for not literature related.

>> No.3148530

>>3148468
>obscure gems
No such thing, any book worth reading is known and available worldwide, usually translated into English. How the fuck is that obscure?

>> No.3148546

>>3148530
>any book worth reading is known and available worldwide
costanza.jpg

>> No.3148561

>>3148546
>it's like the internet doesn't exist

>> No.3148582

>>3148561
>known

>> No.3148834

>>3148499
How does it feel to be a pretentious douche-ola? I howl at your feeble attempt to be so goddamned intellectual.

>> No.3148843

OP is Rowling upset about the failure of her attempt at real writing. Harry Potter will never be litereature love, it'll at best be hamfisted pastiche.

>> No.3148854

Good job, OP. You're at least as arrogant and pretentious as the people you think are pretentious

>> No.3148863

I read them as an early teen and they really helped to instill a love of reading which I am forever thankful for. I wouldnt choose to read them now, or anything aimed at young teens. There is a place for them and it's an important one and not to be dismissed but it is not alongside adult literature.

>> No.3148867

I've read the first five books. Good entertainment, but they fail in one thing, which is paramount: feeling important.

The whole thing is enjoyable, but so inconsequential. Apart from the general amateurishness of prose (Harry squirted dejectedly), a sense of shallowness is what keeps this from being important literature. I still would take unimportant, but fun over profound yet dull, though.

Also, I didn't like how the main character is unintentionally written as a bad person. She meant him to be good, though flawed due to being a kid. But he's just a little bitch. Of all the protagonists, Potter really is the weakest, least intelligent, least decisive and least amiable, even thought he author obviously thinks the opposite is true, which is not good.

>> No.3148906

>Talk about shattering my expectations; that series was damned incredible

Pleb central.

>> No.3148909

It is a fun adventure story, and the early ones are really well-executed kids books. The later ones kind of annoy me, but that's probably because they're more 'young adult'-ish, and pretty much all young adult stuff bugs me. I understand why people love the franchise so much, but I understand people who say it's trash too - it's a bit disheartening that the most popular books ever are a bunch of shallow adventure stories for kids.

>> No.3148910
File: 34 KB, 600x600, 1352915815716.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3148910

>>>/r9k/4451320

same shit thread here

>> No.3148920

>Ron ejaculated

>> No.3148923

>I've spent a life avoiding the mainstream, hitting the classics, and focusing on the obscure gems of literature
>Recently, however, I caved in and read through the Harry Potter series.

One of these things isn't true

>> No.3148931

It's a mixed bag OP.

Rowling did do some incredible things, for sure; the whole series feels like she opened up a bag labeled "Memorable Characters" and just poured them out everywhere. The world is fascinating, even if the magic system is left a bit unexplained. A few moments, like the end of Half-Blood Prince, are brilliant; the whole scene of Harry being struck across the face after calling Snape a coward with Hogwarts in shambles and the Dark Mark in the air just shows how much potential JK has as a storyteller. I could go on.

There are negatives as well. Close to the end, the whole Chosen One and prophecy bits feel a bit forced and typical, although there aren't any moments that become flat-out dull or cringe-worthy. Voldemort should have stayed a plot-device and symbolic personification like he was in earlier books, rather than becoming a real character. He fit the story better while he was a mysterious representation of everyone's fears and insecurities, even the people on his side. At times, too many characters are given focus; I mean seriously, who gave a fuck about Percy?

But really, I'm nit-picking. That shit really is stellar to say the least.

Why do we hate this again /lit/?

>> No.3148938

She managed to pull off a character such as Snape. For this alone, Rowling has my respect.

>> No.3148952

The thing I don't like about the Harry Potter series, is that for some reason the main character is just all-powerful at some point. The struggle in the series didn't seem that serious when things just eventually worked for him, specifically.

>> No.3148954

>>3148938
OP here. I'm so glad I read this series without spoilers.
Snape twisted and turned so much I didn't even know what to think.
He deserved better than what he got.
He's really by far the most heroic character.

>> No.3148958

>>3148952
I dunno, everything got explained pretty well. I didn't feel any plot-armor weighing too heavily, except for the end of the very first book.

>> No.3148960

>>3148954
Snape was very obviously a good guy the whole time. It was very easily predictable.

>> No.3148962

>>3148958
Just explaining things doesn't suddenly justify it. Messianic storylines ruin the idea of struggle.

>> No.3148963

>>3148960
It's what I expected also, but he could have easily been a bad guy and I'm glad she kept it so spinning and unclear. Also, the revelations about Snape's motives were touching to say the least.

>> No.3148973

I think the Rowling will be looked on in the future as Dickens is now: a popular and extremely competent writer, who has a a devoted base of obsessive and zealous fans, and who most people acknowledge was important and influential even if they don't much care for the writing itself.

>> No.3148974

fuck off back to /r9k/ to discuss your childrens books

>> No.3148976

>>3148960
I don't necessarily agree. I think Rowling kept it ambiguous enough that it could have been turned in either direction, and the fact that he DID wind up a decent man with a complex and fascinating backstory was a great payoff.

>> No.3148979

>>3148974
>implying
>implying
>implying

>> No.3148988

Harry Potter in a Nutshell much ado about nothing.

I'd give in that she builds up a huge fantasy world which is at any given point believable (differently than the plot and most of the characters... all this stupid drama, driven by stupid non-rational characters (zomg, don't girls love HP te most?!?)). But behind this fantasyworld is nothing else than unfulfilled teenager dreams of a british middleclass girl. But unlikely than all the other teenagers with unfulfilled dreams JKR made a book about it.

>> No.3148996

>>3148988

this.

nothing praise-worthy about HP besides its plot, and even then there are better plots out there. great books for children/young adults, but if you really think it's mind-blowing after twenty you need to learn how to read.

also
>reading for plot

>> No.3148998

>>3148960
that's easier to say in hindishgt but i think at the time it was very ambiguous. Especially after book 6 where he killed Dumbledore.

Or did you see the old switcheroo coming?

>> No.3148999

>>3148976
That was really cool, you know? In the end he really was sort of a douche, and he probably still hated people of mixed blood, but Voldemort killed Lily, and she was the only thing that he as basically a frightened autistic child took comfort in, although she going with James was probably also what drove he to be so hateful anyway. You really feel like Snape doubts the rightfulness of being on either side, but his hate decided it for him, and that's a good character.

>> No.3149000
File: 10 KB, 267x200, princegeorge.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3149000

it's not like she's Joyce or something

>> No.3149002

>>3148988
>Harry Potter in a Nutshell much ado about nothing.
You are a terrible, though sad, cliche monster, did you know it?

>> No.3149009

The thing about this series is that nobody respectable in the literary world, who actually has tried to write such a giant fantasy series, ever gives Rowling shit about Harry Potter, because they know the kind of talent it takes to pull something like that off, and they all wish that they had were the first one to make something so grand be so accessible.

As a general rule, people who claim that HP is total garbage are not people who have experience writing in that genre.

>> No.3149010

>>3148999
Yea, but you don't know any of that until the 6th book.

So to claim that you knew Snape was a good guy "all along" is factious at best.

>> No.3149017

>>3149010
Oh I'm not that other guy, I was just some dude who passed by to agree with you.

>> No.3149018

>>3149010
ficticious*

>> No.3149036

>>3149002

care to elaborate? for you aren't a chliche monster you've certainly a good reason to think this way.

>> No.3149038

>>3148931
The series tried to go from a gimmicky cash grab to a serious battle of good versus evil. Also all the ridiculous devices used to progress the plot because anything is possible with magic should be troublesome to an observant reader.

I don't hate the books, I enjoyed it as a child, but the series is far from stellar.

>> No.3149045

It's been a long time since I read the series, and I don't remember it that well.

I remember the best part being when Harry was pretending to be dead and Malfoy's mother asking him if Draco was safe. That shit tore some tears out of me.

>> No.3149056

>>3148479
Well, what value/substance -does- it have, then?

>> No.3149060

>>3149045
You're crazy.
The best part was clearly everything that ever had to do with Snape's backstory.

>> No.3149062

>You are now in a drunken brawl against Mad-Eye Moody
>He's furious
>How fucked are you?

>> No.3149079

>>3148468
I think it started out as a mystery serial with an interesting theme, and ended as a teen drama.
It's the Friends of books.

>> No.3149091
File: 23 KB, 289x292, 1348807353786.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3149091

>>3149045

>> No.3149113

>I've spent a life avoiding the mainstream, hitting the classics

Weren't the classics the mainstream books of their day?

>> No.3149119

>>3148998
I actually expected that whole switcheroo thing. His actions beforehand didn't really cry out that he was trying to put on a facade. He was too bitter for that.

>> No.3149122

>>3149091
>>3149045
False.
Hermoine erasing her parents' memories of her and leaving to likely die.

>> No.3149126

>>3149119
Every time:
>Snape must be the bad guy because we don't like him for some reason
>Oh no, he wasn't after all!

>> No.3149129

>>3148938
I disliked the series overall, but got through it--by the end with a fair amount of resentment at the hamhandedness evident everywhere. But this Snape thing...you know, you've got a point.

Anyway, it's far from the worst thing I've read, but most things that are worse I put down before finishing. I may have just have had too much invested in it by book four that I had to stick it out to the end.

But OP, you seem to think everyone who criticizes HP is pretentious. That's pure bullshit. There's a lot to criticize, and frankly I think there's so much wrong with the series that I understand those who really hate it. As for me, I find that when I think of it, I just squint a bit with remembered pain.

>> No.3149155

what the fuck is wrong with this guy. this book is surface thinking that is all. No deeper meaning, no truth, and you can count the elements of metaphor and allegory on your fingers

>> No.3149161

>>3149126
Yeah, that too, happening in a couple books, tipped it off. Also, wise old Dumbledore trusted him a lot...

>> No.3149163

>>3148867
As a long time HP fan

I kinda agree with you

>> No.3149164

>>3149155
>measuring a book's worth on count of allegory and metaphor

The pleb, it hurts.

>> No.3149175
File: 280 KB, 650x650, damagecontrol.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3149175

>>3148499
So edgy, I'm quaking!
>>3148530
Clearly you live in your own fantasy world.
>>3148906
It's time to go back to /mu/.
>>3148973
I hate Dickens, but he deserves better than to be compared to Rowling.
>>3149062
>You are now thrust back to WWI
>Mad-Eye Moody is your commanding officer
>How fucked is everyone else?

In all seriousness, I get what OP is saying. It's a good story that can be thoroughly enjoyed by everyone. However, it has no literary merit whatsoever because it is a rehashing of a million bildungsromans/good-vs-evil books/etc. As a result, it suffers from its incredible popularity. 14-year old girls and Anons from r9k will praise it as the greatest literary achievement ever because they don't know any better, and that will cause people who do know better to resent it. All this controversy will cause Harold Bloom to read it and (obviously) say it's shit. As a result all the fanboys from /lit/ (who do not know any better) will also say it's utter shit and that it's existence is a plague on this world and anyone who reads it should be shot along with their families. Pic related, that's it looks like. It all makes me very sad because we could be fighting about real things.

>> No.3149181

>>3148468

"Wow"?

Wow. You're an idiot.

>> No.3149182

>>3149062
He's going to fuck your shit way up
I'd sooner fight a wasted Hagrid

>> No.3149183

>>3149164
I was just saying it is lacking in literary elements and depth. The story and characters are fake. How can someone defend this really

>> No.3149184

>>3149175
> bildungsroman
I read somewhere there's an anime or manga version of it? Somehow that seems so very appropriate.

>> No.3149207

>>3149009

>you must be a children's fiction writer to criticise children's fiction

>> No.3149214

I loved the Harry Potter series but there were two things that really irked me.

1. When something bad occurs and it seems like Harry has his work cut out for him and then SUDDENLY, somehow a magical phoenix brings the sorting hat that can magically carry a sword. AND THEN, when he gets bitten by a basilisk and the phoenix returns with its magical tears that heal him from certain death. Also, the fact that as a horcrux, technically, the basilisk tooth should have killed him. Stupid plot holes like that(half of which are in "The Chamber of Secrets") really should have been redone to make it based more on his skill than on luck/coincidence.

2. Rowling began the start of Harry's "romance" with Ginny in the second book and the budding of the romance between Ron and Hermoine in the fourth. In the fifth book, she started to write more into Harry's personal life but then stopped. It's as if she completely erased the romance(she supposedly had written) in her later books. I think everyone could tell that she was planning on fleshing out the personal lives of the two couples but then for some reason, scrapped the details and left allusions to it instead.
>inb4 CHILDREN'S STORY
That doesn't justify butchering proper character development.

>> No.3149215

It got worse as it went on. The first book really has lots of appeal as good fantasy for kids. Since the rules aren't really set, everything seems unknown and exciting. Sort of Roald Dahl-ish, really.

One of the best excerpts of the story is right in the beginning, when Harry's Uncle notices lots of people wearing strange robes walking the streets... I love the feeling.

As the series went on, however, Rowling began to set in stone the rules of the magical world, and that kind of broke it. Without that sense of unknown to fill the blanks, the plot grew shallow and riddled with holes. By book 5 it had already gotten pretty bad, and it's downhill from there.

Also, the "final battle" and the epilogue are cringe-worthy and I wish I had never read those chapters.

>> No.3149219

>>3149175

>fanboys vs fanboys
>argumentum ad hominem

dude, not everyone gets his opinion from a peergroup

>> No.3149225

>>3149183
Well, I agree with you, but the quantity of literary elements is a poor method of judgment. Depth, is more like it.

>> No.3149230

ITT: /lit/ fags who never write anything publishable disrespect a series that their pitiful skills will never hope to match, while fans of that series make it out to better than what it really is with their nostalgia goggles.

It's great. It's not perfect. There you go.

>> No.3149250

>>3149230
I have had acid trips with a lot more depth than any of the HP books

>> No.3149278

>>3149250
I mean, okay, you're cool dude.

>> No.3149328

>>3148931
>A few moments, like the end of Half-Blood Prince, are brilliant; the whole scene of Harry being struck across the face after calling Snape a coward with Hogwarts in shambles and the Dark Mark in the air just shows how much potential JK has as a storyteller. I could go on.
I thought I was the only one. This particular scene gave me goosebumps to the max.

>> No.3149330

J.K. Rowling created the best bildusngroman of our generation and probably the next few as well.

>> No.3149336

>>3149330
> best
longest

>> No.3149365
File: 42 KB, 348x440, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3149365

>>3149219
Actually, this only applies to the people here overreacting about it. They hate it for some of the right reasons, but most of the wrong ones.

As for the peer group comment, I disagree, but that's just like my opinion.

>> No.3149405

>>3149230
The board isn't a writing community. and you don't need to produce something to criticize.

And the fans seem to go with it being fun, not absolutely great.

>> No.3150319

>>3149214
the basilisks tooth was not a horcrux, Riddles diary was.
I still understand your point though.
e.g. basilisk venom just happens to destroy horcruxes

>> No.3150372

>>3150319
Harry was a Horcrux though.

>> No.3150568

>>3150372
oh, i see. i misunderstood the post. fair play.

>> No.3150800

>>3149113
The irony is that the classics are mainstream in a way.

>>3149038
I think Rowling really loved to write and it wasn't a gimmicky cash grab. You can see in early interviews when the first one had just been released, she just really loved to write and was very modest about her abilities.

>> No.3150813

>>3149129
What would be cool is if there were some way to critique it back when we were kids reading it.

Most of us read it as kids. The readers here that read it as adults I think kind of can criticize it but this analogy still may work well.

My son loves to swing on a swing set in our backyard. I can't even fit in it and if I somehow would the swing set poles would start flying out of the ground and I'd break it.

My son loves the set but it's not really suitable for me so I shouldn't be really saying all the flaws it has.

>> No.3150822

I grew up reading Harry Potter and they're pretty good books all things considered. Looking back the world building and how magic works could have used some more attention but I suppose Rowling didn't want to let concrete rules get in the way of effective storytelling.

I always thought that something was building up to muggles having a hand in stopping Voldemort though. Throughout the first half of the series and on there was a strong undercurrent storyline about pureblood and mixed blood, whether one was more important than the other. All the pure families were hopelessly antiquated and out of touch with the muggle world while the modern world wizards were more familiar with both. I was a bit disappointed that it was seemingly a 'pure magic' ending but i'm not sure how else to do it. Maybe a sniper taking Voldemort out at the last second, the way it ended just seemed to leave regular people as stupid and expendable.

The series constantly goes up in my opinion as more and more trashy series for young kids pops up. Rowling might as well be Dostoevsky compared to Twilight and the Hunger Games.

>> No.3150823

>>3150813
I didn't start reading until I was 13-14 years old really

>> No.3150828

>>3150822
well the question is why would she make such arbitrary and stupid conditions anyway if she was planning to remain inconsistent?
and secondly
>effective story telling
what?

>> No.3150830

>>3149250
You would fucking hope so. An Acid trip can easily have more depth than ANY writer that has ever written anything.

>> No.3150838

>>3150830
writers, musicians, poets, and artists spend their lives trying to describe the ineffable

>> No.3150841

>>3150828
You know, things that are exciting over what would be more realistic. Like why is it that nobody else knows about mind reading in harry potter except a few characters? Voldemort and Harry doing mental battle is more for story telling than something that fits into the universe. Nobody else seems to either know how to do it or block it besides Snape, Dumbledore, Voldemort and Harry. Its effective how Rowling uses it even if it doesn't make a lot of sense.

>> No.3150848

>>3150823
Well I guess the last one came out in 2007 so most of us would have been at least 16/17/18 so that is pretty old but still I loved it.

I'm surprised every here is saying the first one was the best and it got worse. I recently read the first one and it's pretty terrible compared to the last.

As a kid I have no memory of the first one and always thought they got better every time.

I guess it's hit and miss. As a kid Harry Potter was one of the most important things in my life, it was something completely fun, like playing mario 64 and going adventuring on my grandparents farm.

As kids, well I didn't anyway, critique works. I saw it as the same with video games, sometimes there were frame jumps and glitches and you just dismiss it as whatever shit happens, I wasn't looking for perfection and at the time Rowling taped into something that made you feel like you lived a second life.

Sure it's not the same now reading them but I also can't find a book that gives me the same feelings and immersion I got as a kid reading, be it Pynchon, Joyce, Orwell whatever.

>> No.3150856

>>3150838
Yes. That doesn't have anything on acid though.

>> No.3150857

>>3150841
you ever hear of gary stew and mary sue

>> No.3150859

The books kept getting more bloated and indulgent. Order of the Phoenix was utter tripe, so much adolescent angst wank. If I wanted that I could've lived it. Trust me, JK, I got it within the first five pages, I didn't need the additional hundred.

And, yes, there were a lot of good characters. I loved all the professors and the main cast, but Slytherin was always a caricature, all the "love interests" had zero dimension and were obviously just placeholders, and the world failed to continue to evolve or hold up to the wonder of the first three books. Nevertheless, those first three were magical, wonderful parts of my youth, and if I forget about what came after I can unabashedly say they were great.

>> No.3150865

>>3150857
Of course but just because Rowling doesn't want to go down in the weeds to explain all the tidbits of magic, she seemed to get bored of explaining spells around book 3 and 4, doesn't mean her characters are gary or mary sues. Plus an author of an original work can't make a mary sue, thats almost purely a fanfiction term.

>> No.3150872

It's good and it's the best of mainstream comtemporary literature.

>> No.3150876

>>3150865
well what I am saying is that the actual "tibits" are retarded and make the conflict easily resolved and convoluted

>> No.3150885

>>3150859
I think Rowling trapped herself in her own storytelling.

It made sense for Harry Potter to have adventures around hogwarts when he was 11 or 12, he's young as shit. But 14-16 should have been fine for him to wander around europe learning and exploring all sorts of magic shit.

Thats why the deathly hallows is such an improvement over the later books because it does something fresh and new and is an adventure over school, relationship drama while important stuff happens and is relayed through newspapers.

But it made a lot of money so i'm sure Rowling won't complain.

>> No.3150918

>>3150319
I apologize if you misinterpreted what I said but I never meant that the basilisk tooth was a horcrux. I was talking about Harry himself. How would the basilisk tooth destroy the horcrux in Tom Riddle's Diary but not the one within Harry himself?

>> No.3150933

>>3150918
Because Rowling hadn't thought about Horcrux' yet. The more in-universe answer is you probably have to actually kill a living Horcrux to destroy it for good. Neville chopped Nagini's head off with the sword, rather than just wounding it. Maybe Harry was on the verge of exploding in a cloud of dark magic before he got his ass saved by the Pheonix.

>> No.3150944

>>3149214

Autistic asshole, did you have any relationships when you were a teen? Ginny liked him but he only saw the younger, obsessed sister of Ron. Part of why they work so well is she gets over it and becomes a cool, desirable female. Then he gets with it after the girl he likes (that chinese bitch) dumps him

>> No.3150956

Terrible ending.
Right up until the last book, she kept introducing crazy concepts as if to save her the trouble of explaining things (Fiendfyre? Really?).

I also thought her depiction of the great evil that Voldemort was insidiously spreading around as being racial superiority/stereotyping very trite.

>> No.3150959

>>3150944
This. Teenagers are pretty shallow. The only mistake Rowling made was the "And they all got married with each other and had babies with retarded names" ending. As if people always marry their childhood sweethearts.

>> No.3150965

>>3150959

totally. this guy expected harry to be grooming his future wife from the age of 11. Creepy as fuck and not realistic.

>> No.3150968

>>3150965
Well it wasn't like he wanted to bang her at the start. If anything it was Ginny that was after her brothers best friend. It seemed more like Harry was just settling for the only piece of ass he could actually get, even if it was a ginger. I never really saw what Ginny had going for her beyond that she wanted to make out with every guy in Hogwarts. It probably doesn't help that the actress they got for her in the movie isn't really attractive at all.

>> No.3150978

6th Harry Potter movie is on TV right now

these movies are so bad, and yet I will still watch them all freaking day if I can (except the 4th and 7th movies, which are just shit)

>> No.3150994

>>3150968

She was a Mary Sue. Desired by everyone, awesome at Quidditch, awesome at magic, etc etc. I preferred Cho because she had her faults.

>> No.3151022

Harry Potter is god damn awful.

Horrendous prose, flat characters, contrived plots, plot holes, Dawson's Creek melodrama, inept villains, formulaic structure and the most ham-fisted Nazi allegory ever put to paper set aside, it's a stretch to give any book a second thought when its ultimate message is just "love and friendship always triumph over evil."

>> No.3151053

>>3150978
I watched them all recently when I was sick and I thought they were really good. I love all of the experimentation that seems to be going on with the directors, producers, camera men, special effects team, art team etc. It's like Warner Bro's threw them all this money and they had a blast.

I love the quirky sense of humor like in the goblet of fire with the strange costumes, trumpet players etc

They are actually really well shot films and are really enjoyable instead of being very enjoyable but not well shot or vise versa like most movies.

I think if they wern't the biggest grossing films of all time people would give them more artistic merit.

>> No.3151089

>>3150959

The whole reason that the ending turned out that way was because she didn't want to leave any room for anyone else continuing the series - be it her later on down the line, or someone else after she dies......

>> No.3151569

I loved them as a kid and don't critique them as an adult.

>> No.3151574

How come the Weasley twins didn't see Ron sleeping with with a guy named Peter if they had the marauder's map the whole time?

>> No.3151688

>>3151574
I can't think of any answer, maybe Peter was always escaping or something/

>> No.3151706

>>3151053

I think this also applies to the books as well. If they had not been so successful, people would be more comfortable saying how excellent her writing is.

>> No.3151728

>>3151688
>>3151574
Maybe they didn't want to have that awkward talk. Or maybe it's the whole what happens at boarding school stays at boarding school.

>> No.3151731

>>3148960
You're looking at it through adults eyes.

As a kid/teenager I had no idea Snape was gonna turn out good.

>> No.3151732

>>3151706
I don't know because I love the books as a child and think the books are still good as an adult but I loved the movies as a child and think the movies as an adult are so enjoyable and full of artistic merit.

But actually yes I agree, I think they get less credit because it doesn't sound as cool to say potter is awesome, as kids we wouldn't have given a fuck. That's not to say people just don't like them and think they suck just because they do not because they're popular as hell.

I think for children, it's just coincidental that they are the most popular things ever, if only 1 kid had of read them they would still be awesome as fuck.

>> No.3151733

>>3151053
>I love all of the experimentation that seems to be going on with the directors, producers, camera men, special effects team, art team etc. It's like Warner Bro's threw them all this money and they had a blast.
Wait, what? Did we see the same movies? The most out there choice was Cuaron, and that's presumably because they wanted a darker tone and scenes with a little more depth. I mean, they chose Chris Columbus over Terry Gilliam solely because of target demographics and saleability. The aim was to make money, and they did that well, they had no illusions of making art or anything like that.

>> No.3151735

>>3151731
I didn't either

>> No.3151738

>>3151731
>As a kid/teenager I had no idea Snape was gonna turn out good.
You must not have been too bright.

>> No.3151739

>>3151733
Who is they that wanted the money? As I said, the company sure as hell did but the workers don't seem to have.

The set designs are beautiful and quirky, the same with the costume designs and makeup artists. The acting is pretty good too. The music is great.

Watch the films more closely, there are loads of experimental camera angles, transition shots, pans etc.

The are really beautiful films visually and fun as hell.

That's what I recently took from them anyway. I also didn't watch them in order(I didn't have some of them, had to download them etc)and they were still great to watch on their own.

>> No.3151743

>>3150848
>As kids, well I didn't anyway, critique works. I saw it as the same with video games, sometimes there were frame jumps and glitches and you just dismiss it as whatever shit happens

This

Stop being so autistic you faggots.

It's a book about FUCKING MAGIC and you're complaining it's not realistic enough for you? Oh Harry used xyz fictional spell on a fictional creature and last time he did that A happened not B?

Who cares that's not the most unbelievable thing about the story.

>> No.3151744

>>3151733
Oh and I'm talking 3 on-wards, not the first 2, i forgot to say that.

>> No.3151747

>>3151739
>Who is they that wanted the money? As I said, the company sure as hell did but the workers don't seem to have.
What planet are you on? Everyone got paid, quite a few people became mad millionaires through their involvement. Everyone was in it to make money.

As for everything else, nothing was really quirky (why couldn't they have chosen Gilliam?), the most experimental camera shots are in the third movie with Cuaron directing, and most of the time it looks like he's getting fucked in the arse and then having to fix it in editing (I doubt very much he inteded the whole train sequence to look like that).

>> No.3151749

>>3151731
In book 3 when Snape stands in front of the kids to protect them from the Womping Willow I could tell he was a good guy deep down.

>> No.3151750

>>3151747
I already said. They got thrown money and it SEEMS like they thought well fuck yeah we got all this money, lets make some awesome films that aren't just trash for the masses.

I see them oozing with artistic merit, maybe you can't see it but I do. Maybe you don't want to see it because it's popular as fuck and that can't mean it's got any merit or maybe you just have a different opinion, that's fine.

I disagree with what you're saying, I doubt you have watched them very closely.

>> No.3151751

>>3151731
This, you fucking nerds. I'm 19, so that means I was 8 when the first movie came out. I go to the movies to see fucking magic, not analyze the plot.

Don't complain that it was too obvious if you're a manchild who saw it when you were in your 20's.

>> No.3151752

>>3151750
>I doubt you have watched them very closely.
I'm giving you specific examples. Let's compare:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VKhEFVAoScI
to
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ga_r6AGZ2eU

I would have liked Harry Potter films to be better, since I had to take younger family to most of them. They just weren't. And judging by things like the scene above, I get the distinct impression Warner shied away from going to far from standard cinematography.

>> No.3151758

>>3151752
I again disagree man. Personally I liked how Child of Men was shot but I didn't really get much of an emotional connection to any of it but i digress.

One example that stood out to me doesn't mean you watched them all closely, their are tiny liittle 10 second camera angles that are awesome.

>> No.3151761
File: 188 KB, 336x396, 1352436745221.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3151761

>Harry, this year it's not safe for you at Hogwarts!!! Yes, again..

>> No.3151777

>>3151761
>Do I have to stay with my abusive family?
>Yes Harry.

>> No.3151780

/lit/'s butthurt over HP is tangible, this always happens, I love it.

>> No.3151848

>wake up
>"I think I'll check out /lit/!"
>la la la la la!
>>3148973
OH GOD.

While I understand what you're saying, I hope you realize that Rowling writes children's books. "Dickens vs. Rowling" is a reasonable comparison only if you replace the competent adults of the 19th century with the children and teenagers of the 21st, and excellent writing with mediocre writing.

There is no modern writer who can compete with what Dickens was to the Victorian era. The closest thing we have is television shows, unfortunately.

>> No.3151850

>>3151848
What about Nick Hornby?

>> No.3151852

>>3151850
The lack of a modern Dickens isn't due to a lack of good authors, it's due to the lack of an adult readership. The majority of people just don't read anymore.

>> No.3151855

>>3151848

>The closest thing we have is television shows, unfortunately.

It's depressing to be sure but in a way I sort of respect just how far television has come as a storytelling medium in so short a time.

Shows like "The Wire" are Dickensian in scope.

>> No.3151864

>>3151852
You mean we're never going to have Hornby coming off a plane and someone yelling "what happens to such and such a character?"?

As far as numbers of adult readers go, I think you're overestimating the literacy rates of the time. Dickens is writing around the mid 19th C, literacy isn't similar to today's levels until ~1900, which is partly why he used to do public readings.

>> No.3151870

>>3148479

True but on the flip-side there are those from the other side who will inevitably seek to proclaim that people who don't appreciate something because it's popular are biased which leads some to bias themselves against a particular ideal. Often the initial group are obstinate against valid criticism that comes up because they disagree simply with the stance the other group takes.

>> No.3151871

>>3151848
>There is no modern writer who can compete with what Dickens was to the Victorian era.

Uh, yes there is: Stephen King.

(That isn't a compliment for King, BTW, it's a low-rating of Dickens.)

>> No.3151874

>>3151871

someone is awfully catty today

>> No.3151883

I think the thing with Rowling is that she writes really good children's books.
The first four books are enjoyable and fun, filled with a sense of wonder and magic.
Then there's a tone shift starting with the fifth book, as she senses her audience growing older, and adult/young adult literature is way out of her depth. The romance was laughably bad, the nazi analogies hamfisted and the drama forced.
Not saying the first 4 books were fantastic, nor that the final 3 books are 100% shit, but she really couldn't write serious literature

>> No.3151888
File: 214 KB, 400x399, frodo.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3151888

Why didn't Dumbledore just use the time-turner to go back in time and strangle babby Tom Riddle?

>> No.3151891

>>3151888
Because in reality it was all just an elaborate ruse to bully Harry because everyone thought he was a little shit like his dad.

>> No.3151898

>>3151888
What if fordo was a girl?

>> No.3151902

>>3151898
Then no homo sub plot.

>> No.3151904

>>3151864

Hmm... The literates of today who don't read vs. the few literates of that day that did read. I wonder if the numbers are similar.

>> No.3151911

>>3151904
sldkfjeas
I mean the non-literates of that day vs. the literates of this day that don't read.

Ah, never mind.

-joins the illiterates-

>> No.3151925

>>3151904
Doubtful in terms of numbers, not only based on low literacy but also on relatively low population. I'm only talking about England here, but it'd be something like a quarter of the population and a third to a half of the literacy (based on people getting married being able to sign their own names, so a very low measure of literacy).

>> No.3152141

>>3151888
Because there would not have been a Voldemort for Dumbledore to strangle Tom Riddle.

>> No.3152216

>Starts fairly normal
>Rumors about evil guy
>Potter's teenage problems
>Rumors turn out to be true
>Deus ex Machina
>Bad guy loses

Every book is like that.