Harry Potter and the Second Coming

He always makes a great villain. He has this way he can look at people that you can just see he considers them slime on the bottom of his boot.

 

Re: Potter Pumper

What the hell?

a) Magic. That's it. That's the only thing in common between both series (and writing styles, for that matter).

b) Pratchett = God.

 

Re: Potter Pumper

It depends which book you read. I did exactly the same thing, because I started to read the second one first (Chamber of Secrets). It just didn't flow properly and youu couldn't relate to the characters at all.

However, I read the series from the beginning after about 6 months or so and found it was actually quite good. The second book is the worst of the lot by far, and you have to read them in order too, since they are designed to build upon each other. They don't work well as stand alones because you don't have the background or the character building that you need to relate to the books.

 

WHAT IS WRONG WITH HARRY POTTER?!!!

The movies are a bastardization of the thing but the books are good.

Terry P's books I've read half of one of them and I think the story starts nowhere, is incomprehensible and goes nowhere.

As for LOTR, the good thing about it is detail, otherwise it has few other strenghts. And that 95% is not drivel! More than half of the fantasy I've read is at least quite good, and its randomly picked, or picked by the cover.

 

I agree I think movies based on books suck and books based on movies suck even more

 

It becomes clear that Harry Potter is like one of those pointalism pictures.
Some people look at it and see a 3D image, and are impressed. I look at it and I just see a bunch of fucking dots, no matter how I try to see it. Just like country music. I just don't see it, while others swear it's good. And about Terry Pratchett, Potter simply doesn't compare. What I meant was the whole "outcast wizard in silly land with funny (in this case, stupid) names and words made up for things." I'm deep in enemy territory posting to this thread, and I'm gonna get out before it turns ugly.

 

It' just a matter of opinion. You don't have to say it sucks.

 

Re: Potter Pumper

Writing style huh, yeah, almost nothing... right. That happens to be what I was talking about. It's like a dumbed down limp dick pop sensation version of a style of wizard fantasy that is done much better elsewhere. Why settle for Potter when there's Pratchett and others.

 

BTW, regarding Sirius' hair cut, how do we know it's what it's going to look like? Just look at Alan Rickman - he's not dressed up as Snape. Maybe Gary just likes to dress like that. Or at least, is in costume, but not makeup. Don't give up hope Canis. He may yet have a fine greasy head of lank in the films. :razz:

 

Though they are both tops in their field, Gary Oldman is a bit cooler than Alan Rickman.

Everybody in this thread must hate me now for going against the grain, but I know what I like.

 

Ah, but when he's not dressed as Snape, with the wig and all, Alan Rickman keeps himself neat and clean. Just look at Gary's hair! It's filthy! He couldn't possibly like looking like that on an everyday basis! Then again, look at Rupert Grint in that photo; he's either in costume and makeup or he really does go around looking like a filthy little girl in his free time....

Okay, that's a disturbing thought. :-o

But I shan't give up all hope. The movies have thoroughly delighted me so far, and perhaps I should give the WB hairdressers the benefit of the doubt before I start dropping off bags of flaming dog-do at their office. Hey, maybe those tattoos are real as well, and not part of the costume! One can only hope!

Oh, and didn't Sirius escape from Azkaban in tattered grey robes, not prison-striped ones? Hmph! Well maybe that's Gary's latest fashion, let's pray.

 

Harry Potter always reminded me of what james and the giant peach would have been like if the author hadnt been a produce obsessed, lsd abusing pederast...

and was english...

but yeah i see many similarities between the first harry potter book and the premise of james and the giant peach, and for the love of god isnt there something better we can talk about?

 

Point being? If we all get in the mood to pull out credentials, you'll find that many people here are older than you, and have far more education than you to boot. 90% of the people I met at the Order of the Phoenix release party at the bookstore outclassed you as well. I suppose we're to be ashamed of liking these books?

So.... What would you like to talk about? If there's something on your mind kiddo, start a new thread and we'll have a nice chat about it. Now that I know you're EIGHTEEN YEARS OLD and a POSSIBLE HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATE, I'm expecting great things of you!

 

what are you talking about, i never said that...?

so why are they talking about books intended for children?

there i took it out, i wasnt trying to act like i am better than anyone, and i know a ton of people in ths forum are much older than me, and jarinor is older than all of them, but i was just trying to point out the fact that i feel the harry potter series is to SILLY for so wise a groupd of individuals

we could talk a better series of books, or a book by a better author.
or we could talk about the homo-erotic adventures of hitler and the beach boys...
or we could just talk about say... our independant movies, mine is donnie darko, or may be requiem for a dream...
either way the harry potter series is garbage the NSC came up with to convince america's youth that everything will always be ok, and therefore passify a generation of fantasy readers...[/quote]

 

Are you saying there is something wrong with being english?

 

no

but there is something wrong with being an imperialistic G. Dubya dick sucking white supremisist thats not allowed to own a gun...

just kidding, i actually lived in england for 2 years, and i think its a great country...

 

Whether the books are INTENDED for children or not doesn't really matter. What does matter is the fact that everyone seems to enjoy them. Or almost everyone. It seems we've had this same argument a time or two before

 

Why does Ron look like a beaten-up bum on that picture?... Gods, it might as well be last years cast from "survivor".

Well, the first movie sucked a little on the side, but actually managed to capture some of the magic from the books... Though I would gladly give my right testicle to get a chance at murdering that stupid howling ghost in the second movie. Also, Snape dosn't look as "evil" as I had imagined, but still evil enough to do the job, what with the greasy hair and stressed accent.

"Read the books, like them, and shut up"

Will do boss!

 

The books are definitely much better than the movies, but considering how bad movies from books usually are, they did pretty well. They did very well with casting. The characters are basically as I pictured them. And they did VERY well with the scenery.

Just thought I'd say I love country music. Though I also like most kinds of music, at least to some degree, except rap. I'm sure there'd be some rap out there I'd like, though.

 

Oh my goodness! You think the movies are good? :roll:

It was nothing short of disastrous! The problem is all the wit is gone. There were so few conversations.
:-x