That's what makes it the best book. The actual story of HP is nothing special, it's the magic school adventures and the trio doing fun wizard shit like Dumbledore's Army, that's what makes the series a fun read. Plus it introduces Luna
I've read the whole series 14 times and phoenix is absolute moron level nonsense. >no direction >endless scene changes >write off good character that nobody actually cared about that much for drama???? >power rangers club
the only marginally well written part was the nazi b***h
This is completely wrong. HPB novel is a lengthly piece of nonsensical drivel with a few expository bitso into Tom Riddle. It is fundamentally the worst written and paced HP novel, with nothing significant happening for the majority of the plot and people being ecstatic over pregnancy not minutes after the greatest wizard in the world died.
The movie on the other hand treats most of the stupid parts of HPB satirically, shows a much clearer impression of Draco's character (who is basically the main subject of the book, the indoctrination of youth), and is paced exactly right. It's the best out of the Yates films.
Your pic would be accurate if it was Order of the Phoenix, because that is the best novel and the worst film by a mile.
I still find his excuses for why the timeskip couldn't have worked to be fairily shitty. Cersei absolutely plausible could have taken years to ground the Crown into the fricking ground; Brienne's failed search for Sansa did not necessarily need to be shown and her internal musings would have sufficed, and when see her again she's like charitable smallfolk-protecting wandering knight figure; Jamie, again, could have still been distracted in the Riverlands for most of the time as some sort of military governer. Imagine the kino of Dany's first chapter in a post-time skip series where it's all fairly interesting but conventional ruling stuff until Tyrion waltz in at the end of the chapter, with that being the whiplash reveal that he's her hand and has been for a while now. You only need the initial Iron Born/Dorne stuff taking place around ASoS to existed in a 4th book before the time skip. I think there is a plausible and good workaround for most things - at most you need only a small part of books 4 and 5 to exist right around the time of ASoS - the rest can absolutely be after a flashforward
Yeah, they really didn't capture the fact that Harry was having anger issues as a result of how he was being treated. Instead with the way the film is framed it really does come off as though Harry was just being mindfricked by Voldemort until his influence was defeated with the power of friendship.
In the books he really IS an angry boy and in 5 he's at his angriest because of how Hogwartz has basically turned into Privet Drive with a different coat of paint and everyone either shits on him or takes as much distance from him as they can.
It's so weird that you guys discuss Potter like it is a legitimate thing. It's for little kids. It would be like us all arguing which Peppa Pig series was better. Honestly, if you are over the age of 10 what do you possibly get out of this series? I'm not trying to piss people off, I'm genuinely curious. Other stuff that is overtly aimed at kids (Peter Pan, Alice, Call of the Wild, Little Prince etc etc) at least have some redeeming features, a degree of quality that warrants at least brief recognition from outside its demographic, but Potter offers nothing that I can see. What is it?
You can't claim that Prisoner of Azkaban and Order of the Phoenix aren't quality novels and pretend to be some kind of judge on literature at the same time.
They are objectively mediocre, mate. The prose is dreadful throughout the entire series, the chatacters are cliches, the plot is predictable. Even the most die hard Potter fans I know in real life don't claim they are quality literature, more a guilty pleasure. You can't honestly argue that it has any literary merit, come on
Fricking hell, are we really claiming that Potter books are actual literature? You have the gall to claim that after the classics he mentioned? Jesus christ that is absolutely unbelievable. I like hp and all but fricking hell mate it is dross compared to the stuff mentioned
>objectively
Holy cope. You know you are allowed to enjoy words on a page, right. If you don't, that's on you
Yeah, enjoy it, that's great. Go nuts. The issue is that the guy claimed you were a poor judge of literature if you thought hp books were bad. That's absurd given that anyone who reads above YA level doesn't think Potter is quality literature. Might enjoy them, sure, but they clearly aren't great books
Order of the Phoenix and Prisoner of Azkaban are good pieces of literature and you don't have a counterargument.
7 months ago
Anonymous
See
They are objectively mediocre, mate. The prose is dreadful throughout the entire series, the chatacters are cliches, the plot is predictable. Even the most die hard Potter fans I know in real life don't claim they are quality literature, more a guilty pleasure. You can't honestly argue that it has any literary merit, come on
Shit prose, shit characters, shit plot. Cliched, overused metaphors, bloated and poorly edited (Phoenix), riddled with plot holes (Azkaban). It is a really fun kids book. That's it. To suggest it is anything more says that you haven't read anything else.
7 months ago
Anonymous
Those aren't arguments, you're just making unsubstantiated negative statements.
7 months ago
Anonymous
Refute them, then. Give examples of good prose from the books. Tell me about the great characters. Justify the plethora of plotholes that the time travel opens up, justify why 1/3 of Phoenix wasn't cut in editing. Nobody thinks these books are anywhere near being great literature except you, so the burden of proof is on you. Just give me one single quote from any of the books that is an example of quality writing. Just one thing. You can enjoy the books all you like mate, but claiming they rival classics is just weird. It's okay to have guilty pleasures
7 months ago
Anonymous
>Refute them
Refute an arbitrary negative statement for your entertainment? Anyway, I thought you were done and went back to Cinemaphile.
7 months ago
Anonymous
Not me, that's another guy. Seriously, one line of decent writing. You've got 7 books to pick from, it shouldn't be hard if they aren't just fun kids' books
7 months ago
Anonymous
>Not me,
Sure!
7 months ago
Anonymous
Concession accepted, I guess
Ranked by the merit of succeeding at what was attempted
Stone > Azkaban > Chamber > HBP > Goblet > DH1 > DH2 > OotP
Ranked by actual quality
Azkaban > Chamber > HBP > DH2 > Stone > Goblet > DH1 > OotP
I kind of agree with this, I think the first one is the best book. Beyond that they tried to do too much. She tried to have the series mature as the characters did and I don't think the world facilitated that. What she creared was to constrictive to not be a kids' book so the quality dropped off when she tried to make it more than that
7 months ago
Anonymous
>muh classics >muh """""high""""" literature
Lmao
7 months ago
Anonymous
Yeah. Look, I really like Red Hot Chili Peppers, doesn't mean I'm about to start claiming they are better musicians than Beethoven. I'd rather listen to them any day, doesn't make them better
7 months ago
Anonymous
Red Hot Chili Peppers suck dick
7 months ago
Anonymous
I had no idea they had so much in common with your dad
7 months ago
Anonymous
bro even your mom doesn't suck as much wiener as the Chili Peppers and their shitty alt pop crap
7 months ago
Anonymous
bro even your mom doesn't suck as much wiener as the Chili Peppers and their shitty alt pop crap
Best two comebacks in this entire thread.
They do suck dick, that's the point. I enjoy a lot of their music though. Doesn't make them good. I enjoy reading some of the Potter books, but saying it is better than Jack London or something is just silly
7 months ago
Anonymous
Harry Potter is pretty great children's lit, up there with CS Lewis and L Frank Baum.
7 months ago
Anonymous
wrong
7 months ago
Anonymous
Nobody forces you to rank them. You can recognize the merits of something while feeling more enthusiastic about something else.
I'm not really into classical music, which doesn't mean I dislike it.
If I think something is the most beautiful music I ever heard, then that's what it is, I don't care if others call it slop, and I'm not going to say it's not good if I like it.
7 months ago
Anonymous
>I'm not really into classical music, which doesn't mean I dislike it
It's exactly what it means, you're just a conflict avoidant homosexual trying to not look uncultured
>you were a poor judge of literature if you thought hp books were bad
That's equally as moronic. >anyone who reads above YA level doesn't think Potter is quality literature
Why are you stating your opinion as if it was universal truth or if there was a way to rank them to begin with? If you say you don't like Harry Potter, I accept it. >Might enjoy them, sure, but they clearly aren't great books
Lol then what the hell is the point of reading if not enjoying things.
See
[...]
Shit prose, shit characters, shit plot. Cliched, overused metaphors, bloated and poorly edited (Phoenix), riddled with plot holes (Azkaban). It is a really fun kids book. That's it. To suggest it is anything more says that you haven't read anything else.
>Shit prose, shit characters, shit plot. Cliched, overused metaphors, bloated and poorly edited (Phoenix), riddled with plot holes (Azkaban).
Yeah all subjective things, we get it, but that doesn't make your point truer than other people's opinions.
One has to be a midwit to hide behind self-imposed arbitrary ideals and try to justify what is and isn't good. There is no objective measurement of quality in art.
Fricking hell, are we really claiming that Potter books are actual literature? You have the gall to claim that after the classics he mentioned? Jesus christ that is absolutely unbelievable. I like hp and all but fricking hell mate it is dross compared to the stuff mentioned
What do you get out of anything else you enjoy? Enjoyment you daft c**t. You aren't superior for turning your nose up at a cultural phenomenon that practically everyone in the known universe loves.
Reading this back I clearly seem like an utter prick. I don't mean to, I am genuinely curious
It was very formative for the age-group who currently dominates this site. Some of the older kids in the 90s would have started reading the books, which were a phenomenon, and then some of the younger kids in those years grew up with the movies, which were a phenomenon. A large part of the 25-40 year olds in the west have some sort of attachment to this property. There will probably always be threads about it made by oldgays in the years to come, but you'll find that as zoomers become the dominant demographic there will be less and less love for it. Teenagers now couldn't give a shit about Harry Potter since they didn't grow up with it.
Reading this back I clearly seem like an utter prick. I don't mean to, I am genuinely curious
From an execution standpoint its still completely solid as a work of fantasy literature. I wouldn't say you can distinguish the quality of it as being below other children's fantasy literature without operating in bad faith. Besides, fantasy really isn't judged on technical execution, the aspects that tend to make a sci/fi fantasy novel "stick" are how well they create, well, fantasy. In part how memorable the world and characters are (not even necessarily how internally consistent a setting is). Tolkien and Herbert aren't exactly thrown in the same league as faulkner or hemingway when it comes to writing prose, but they're considered seminal authors because of how interesting their worlds are and the aesthetic aspects of the characters and setting.
Harry Potter's setting and characters ooze charm and atmosphere compared to most other fantasy works. It's clearly above actually mediocre and pedestrian works of pop fantasy like twilight or the inheritance cycle, and even authors like Sanderson who write more consistently have never matched Rowling's actual skill at memorable design. When it comes the fantasy aspect of fantasy writing, it's honestly clear that harry potter is top-notch in terms of design and aesthetics.
It describes the anger and frustration you feel as a male teen when you realize that the only reason you were put in school wasn't so you could have a good time with friends, it was to indoctrinate you into whatever flavor of public consensus the government currently wants, and if you notice this you're the one who is weird and troublesome and nobody wants anything to do with you. But even though the anger and frustration does man credit, he must learn to temper it with good will and wisdom or his blind righteousness may be manipulated and cost him the lives of those close to him.
The biggest issue with the HBP movie is that the titular storyline is so cut down, it might as well not be there at all. Snape's reveal at the end >Yes, *I'm* the Half-Blood Prince
Means nothing and never comes up again.
Ranked by the merit of succeeding at what was attempted
Stone > Azkaban > Chamber > HBP > Goblet > DH1 > DH2 > OotP
Ranked by actual quality
Azkaban > Chamber > HBP > DH2 > Stone > Goblet > DH1 > OotP
HPB is awful like all of Yates' schlock. The tone is all over the place, the characterizations are anemic and awkward, the color grading looks like actual diarrhea.
Yates is a hack of all hacks. The ending with Harry being a coward watching Dumbledore die rather than being frozen invisible and unable to help was moronic. Same with the death of Voldemort not being witnessed by everyone at the end of 7. After he took over the editing becomes frantic and all over the place, probably because shot coverage and can’t direct. I’m assuming he was a Freemason friend of JK and got the job that way. Hack!
lmao I just noticed the background of the HBP poster is horribly shopped random city skyline (london?) Why the hell would they have that as the background instead of hogwarts?
Goblet is the worst movie
Phoenix is the best book
Phoenix and Goblet are basically built for HBO Mini Series. They never should've been movies.
>full hour episodes for each tornament task with prep in the episodes in between, penultimate ep is cliffhanged with harry meeting voldy
kino
>Phoenix is the best book
there's a whole lot of nothing substantial going on in that book
Wrong. It's angrykino of the highest order (of the phoenix).
That's what makes it the best book. The actual story of HP is nothing special, it's the magic school adventures and the trio doing fun wizard shit like Dumbledore's Army, that's what makes the series a fun read. Plus it introduces Luna
>it introduces Luna
This is a strong point, not gonna lie
Goblet is the best book
Phoenix is the worst movie
pheoneix is garbage, 6 is better
I've read the whole series 14 times and phoenix is absolute moron level nonsense.
>no direction
>endless scene changes
>write off good character that nobody actually cared about that much for drama????
>power rangers club
the only marginally well written part was the nazi b***h
They skip most of the young Voldemort kino and miss used the parts of it they put also 24/07 grey filter
Too long for a single film. Book series is mediocre in the first place.
This is completely wrong. HPB novel is a lengthly piece of nonsensical drivel with a few expository bitso into Tom Riddle. It is fundamentally the worst written and paced HP novel, with nothing significant happening for the majority of the plot and people being ecstatic over pregnancy not minutes after the greatest wizard in the world died.
The movie on the other hand treats most of the stupid parts of HPB satirically, shows a much clearer impression of Draco's character (who is basically the main subject of the book, the indoctrination of youth), and is paced exactly right. It's the best out of the Yates films.
Your pic would be accurate if it was Order of the Phoenix, because that is the best novel and the worst film by a mile.
>This movie
>The extended grey, dull, teen-drama filled with angsty romances
>The best of Yates's film
I know the bar is low, but come on now.
those original book covers are so good.
>best book but worst season (4) out of the book adaptations
Forgot image
this book was so much fun to read. why did he have to ruin his fricking series with AFFC. i dont get it.
I still find his excuses for why the timeskip couldn't have worked to be fairily shitty. Cersei absolutely plausible could have taken years to ground the Crown into the fricking ground; Brienne's failed search for Sansa did not necessarily need to be shown and her internal musings would have sufficed, and when see her again she's like charitable smallfolk-protecting wandering knight figure; Jamie, again, could have still been distracted in the Riverlands for most of the time as some sort of military governer. Imagine the kino of Dany's first chapter in a post-time skip series where it's all fairly interesting but conventional ruling stuff until Tyrion waltz in at the end of the chapter, with that being the whiplash reveal that he's her hand and has been for a while now. You only need the initial Iron Born/Dorne stuff taking place around ASoS to existed in a 4th book before the time skip. I think there is a plausible and good workaround for most things - at most you need only a small part of books 4 and 5 to exist right around the time of ASoS - the rest can absolutely be after a flashforward
Phoenix is the worst movie.
Absolute waste of time
Yeah, they really didn't capture the fact that Harry was having anger issues as a result of how he was being treated. Instead with the way the film is framed it really does come off as though Harry was just being mindfricked by Voldemort until his influence was defeated with the power of friendship.
In the books he really IS an angry boy and in 5 he's at his angriest because of how Hogwartz has basically turned into Privet Drive with a different coat of paint and everyone either shits on him or takes as much distance from him as they can.
It's so weird that you guys discuss Potter like it is a legitimate thing. It's for little kids. It would be like us all arguing which Peppa Pig series was better. Honestly, if you are over the age of 10 what do you possibly get out of this series? I'm not trying to piss people off, I'm genuinely curious. Other stuff that is overtly aimed at kids (Peter Pan, Alice, Call of the Wild, Little Prince etc etc) at least have some redeeming features, a degree of quality that warrants at least brief recognition from outside its demographic, but Potter offers nothing that I can see. What is it?
Reading this back I clearly seem like an utter prick. I don't mean to, I am genuinely curious
You can't claim that Prisoner of Azkaban and Order of the Phoenix aren't quality novels and pretend to be some kind of judge on literature at the same time.
They are objectively mediocre, mate. The prose is dreadful throughout the entire series, the chatacters are cliches, the plot is predictable. Even the most die hard Potter fans I know in real life don't claim they are quality literature, more a guilty pleasure. You can't honestly argue that it has any literary merit, come on
>objectively
Holy cope. You know you are allowed to enjoy words on a page, right. If you don't, that's on you
Yeah, enjoy it, that's great. Go nuts. The issue is that the guy claimed you were a poor judge of literature if you thought hp books were bad. That's absurd given that anyone who reads above YA level doesn't think Potter is quality literature. Might enjoy them, sure, but they clearly aren't great books
Order of the Phoenix and Prisoner of Azkaban are good pieces of literature and you don't have a counterargument.
See
Shit prose, shit characters, shit plot. Cliched, overused metaphors, bloated and poorly edited (Phoenix), riddled with plot holes (Azkaban). It is a really fun kids book. That's it. To suggest it is anything more says that you haven't read anything else.
Those aren't arguments, you're just making unsubstantiated negative statements.
Refute them, then. Give examples of good prose from the books. Tell me about the great characters. Justify the plethora of plotholes that the time travel opens up, justify why 1/3 of Phoenix wasn't cut in editing. Nobody thinks these books are anywhere near being great literature except you, so the burden of proof is on you. Just give me one single quote from any of the books that is an example of quality writing. Just one thing. You can enjoy the books all you like mate, but claiming they rival classics is just weird. It's okay to have guilty pleasures
>Refute them
Refute an arbitrary negative statement for your entertainment? Anyway, I thought you were done and went back to Cinemaphile.
Not me, that's another guy. Seriously, one line of decent writing. You've got 7 books to pick from, it shouldn't be hard if they aren't just fun kids' books
>Not me,
Sure!
Concession accepted, I guess
I kind of agree with this, I think the first one is the best book. Beyond that they tried to do too much. She tried to have the series mature as the characters did and I don't think the world facilitated that. What she creared was to constrictive to not be a kids' book so the quality dropped off when she tried to make it more than that
>muh classics
>muh """""high""""" literature
Lmao
Yeah. Look, I really like Red Hot Chili Peppers, doesn't mean I'm about to start claiming they are better musicians than Beethoven. I'd rather listen to them any day, doesn't make them better
Red Hot Chili Peppers suck dick
I had no idea they had so much in common with your dad
bro even your mom doesn't suck as much wiener as the Chili Peppers and their shitty alt pop crap
Best two comebacks in this entire thread.
They do suck dick, that's the point. I enjoy a lot of their music though. Doesn't make them good. I enjoy reading some of the Potter books, but saying it is better than Jack London or something is just silly
Harry Potter is pretty great children's lit, up there with CS Lewis and L Frank Baum.
wrong
Nobody forces you to rank them. You can recognize the merits of something while feeling more enthusiastic about something else.
I'm not really into classical music, which doesn't mean I dislike it.
If I think something is the most beautiful music I ever heard, then that's what it is, I don't care if others call it slop, and I'm not going to say it's not good if I like it.
>I'm not really into classical music, which doesn't mean I dislike it
It's exactly what it means, you're just a conflict avoidant homosexual trying to not look uncultured
>you were a poor judge of literature if you thought hp books were bad
That's equally as moronic.
>anyone who reads above YA level doesn't think Potter is quality literature
Why are you stating your opinion as if it was universal truth or if there was a way to rank them to begin with? If you say you don't like Harry Potter, I accept it.
>Might enjoy them, sure, but they clearly aren't great books
Lol then what the hell is the point of reading if not enjoying things.
>Shit prose, shit characters, shit plot. Cliched, overused metaphors, bloated and poorly edited (Phoenix), riddled with plot holes (Azkaban).
Yeah all subjective things, we get it, but that doesn't make your point truer than other people's opinions.
One has to be a midwit to hide behind self-imposed arbitrary ideals and try to justify what is and isn't good. There is no objective measurement of quality in art.
Fricking hell, are we really claiming that Potter books are actual literature? You have the gall to claim that after the classics he mentioned? Jesus christ that is absolutely unbelievable. I like hp and all but fricking hell mate it is dross compared to the stuff mentioned
You’re gonna have to cope. You can’t just seethe.
Lol. Have you ever read books for grownups anon?
Order of the Phoenix and Prisoner of Azkaban are better works than Catcher in the Rye, and everyone claims that's supposed to be good literature.
Okay, I'm done. To be fair, I did think I was on lit when I first posted, that's my bad. Enjoy your Potter anon
>You can't like [THING] because... YOU JUST CAN'T OKAY!
Sneed
What do you get out of anything else you enjoy? Enjoyment you daft c**t. You aren't superior for turning your nose up at a cultural phenomenon that practically everyone in the known universe loves.
It was very formative for the age-group who currently dominates this site. Some of the older kids in the 90s would have started reading the books, which were a phenomenon, and then some of the younger kids in those years grew up with the movies, which were a phenomenon. A large part of the 25-40 year olds in the west have some sort of attachment to this property. There will probably always be threads about it made by oldgays in the years to come, but you'll find that as zoomers become the dominant demographic there will be less and less love for it. Teenagers now couldn't give a shit about Harry Potter since they didn't grow up with it.
Now if only the troony janny didn't delete every skibidi thread, that would be good for media that connects boomers and today's generation
From an execution standpoint its still completely solid as a work of fantasy literature. I wouldn't say you can distinguish the quality of it as being below other children's fantasy literature without operating in bad faith. Besides, fantasy really isn't judged on technical execution, the aspects that tend to make a sci/fi fantasy novel "stick" are how well they create, well, fantasy. In part how memorable the world and characters are (not even necessarily how internally consistent a setting is). Tolkien and Herbert aren't exactly thrown in the same league as faulkner or hemingway when it comes to writing prose, but they're considered seminal authors because of how interesting their worlds are and the aesthetic aspects of the characters and setting.
Harry Potter's setting and characters ooze charm and atmosphere compared to most other fantasy works. It's clearly above actually mediocre and pedestrian works of pop fantasy like twilight or the inheritance cycle, and even authors like Sanderson who write more consistently have never matched Rowling's actual skill at memorable design. When it comes the fantasy aspect of fantasy writing, it's honestly clear that harry potter is top-notch in terms of design and aesthetics.
Well said, anon
None of the books are much good re-reading them as an adult
Dullest book, dullest movie. What would you expect from the dullest franchise?
What's so good about Order? I loved Prisoner but Order has so much filler shit in it.
It describes the anger and frustration you feel as a male teen when you realize that the only reason you were put in school wasn't so you could have a good time with friends, it was to indoctrinate you into whatever flavor of public consensus the government currently wants, and if you notice this you're the one who is weird and troublesome and nobody wants anything to do with you. But even though the anger and frustration does man credit, he must learn to temper it with good will and wisdom or his blind righteousness may be manipulated and cost him the lives of those close to him.
The biggest issue with the HBP movie is that the titular storyline is so cut down, it might as well not be there at all. Snape's reveal at the end
>Yes, *I'm* the Half-Blood Prince
Means nothing and never comes up again.
i never read the books but hbp is easily the best film besides maybe azkaban
Ranked by the merit of succeeding at what was attempted
Stone > Azkaban > Chamber > HBP > Goblet > DH1 > DH2 > OotP
Ranked by actual quality
Azkaban > Chamber > HBP > DH2 > Stone > Goblet > DH1 > OotP
HPB is awful like all of Yates' schlock. The tone is all over the place, the characterizations are anemic and awkward, the color grading looks like actual diarrhea.
What do you mean? Prisoner of Azkaban is both the best book and the best movie.
Wheres the dullest pasta god this place went to shit
the meme became dull, it happens
memes don't last forever
>I never read Harry Potter but you're asking for trouble posting about it in good terms here
Yates is a hack of all hacks. The ending with Harry being a coward watching Dumbledore die rather than being frozen invisible and unable to help was moronic. Same with the death of Voldemort not being witnessed by everyone at the end of 7. After he took over the editing becomes frantic and all over the place, probably because shot coverage and can’t direct. I’m assuming he was a Freemason friend of JK and got the job that way. Hack!
This movie has one good scene, the one where Harry and Dumbledore fight the army of Gollums, which puts it above OotP, which has no good scenes.
Voldemort vs Dumbledore is a way better scene than the evil fortress of solitude.
I always watch 1-3 separate from 4-8 they seem like they should be separate. 3 is pushing it for 1 and 2 though.
Tard romance plot overly emphasized.
Luna should have won
Runtime was getting shorter and shorter, plus they let Yates stay in the chair for the last 4 flicks
in what world is half blood prince the worst movie?
>top tier
goblet of fire
sorcerers stone
chamber of secrets
>solid tier
half blood prince
deathly hallows part 2
>i dont get the appeal of it tier
prisoner of azkaban
>fantastic beasts tier
deathly hallows part 1
order of phoenix
HBP is the lore dump book, you can't adapt all that in 2 hours.
Also, Gambon was a shit Dumbledore and Emo Potter was too ingrained by that point, so all the actors were as wooden as their wands.
lmao I just noticed the background of the HBP poster is horribly shopped random city skyline (london?) Why the hell would they have that as the background instead of hogwarts?