How did a franchise with such uninteresting antagonist took off?
 Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
 Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
How did a franchise with such uninteresting antagonist took off?
How did a franchise with such uninteresting antagonist took off?
Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
because they're movies for children and teens
they're not made to be analyzed for any meaning
>because they're movies for children and teens
pretty much this, the point is that your little second grade ass goes WOW at the magic and wizard school and shit
There are hundreds of Harry Potter analysis channels on youtube. What does this say about the human race?
consooming media was a mistake
Rowling was just some ESL teacher who wrote a dumb kid book that took of inexplicably, then had to learn how to write and build an entire world
aah yeah we should all watch the deep Cinemaphile movies like Midsommar
movies to fall asleep to
DEH!
I thought Snape was the antagonist for the first movie? I haven't actually watched them since they came out
Hogwarts was the main antagonist up until the 5th movie
The real villain was the lack of child safeguarding policies at the school
Basically, it hit the sweet spot right before internet became a mainstream thing and the yearly sequel stuff still felt new (star wars, lotr). Kids still read books. I think half my class, both boys and girls, read Harry Potter. Everyone watched the movies. I think the most important aspect and reason for its success was the school setting and how easy it was for a kid to self insert. We basically played "fanfiction" with ourselves as Hogwarts students every recess.
on the face of it Voldemort is just le power-hungry bad guy
but Ralph Fiennes performance is seriously good
also most people in my generation grew up with the films so they were somewhat relatable, in a way other franchises aren't
Hairy Ravenclaw girls
It's the Hufflepuffs.
Blonde Slytherin stacies
Take*
Did take not did took*
You just described the entirety of the MCU.
mcu has endless antagonists, not just 1 main one
How is this an uninteresting character
Chris Columbus kino on the first two gave it enough steam to carry 8 movies.
Why is he using a controller to watch movies?
if it wasn't for the 3rd movie there wouldn't have been any steam you dishonest weasel
always makes me laugh when people defend 3
>score when Marge is floating away
>shrunken heads with jamaican voices on the knight bus and in the 3 broomsticks for no reason and they were not in the book
>Tom, the normal innkeeper from the 1st movie, has been recast as some deformed hunchback that drives a BMW and leaves it parked in the street outside
>Using fake cats & rats for Ron & Hermione
>Mr. Weasley and Harry's private conversation is entirely ADR because the director had to record them in a spot where a boom mic could not fit
>Ron leaves his hand up on the glass in the train in an entirely unnatural position for no reason other than le creepy ice on the window shot
>shoehorned in more blacks with darker skin that are not in the book to fill diversity quotas
>lots of awkward dialogue and clothing choices because the director wanted them to be more like normal western teens such as when seamas and harry talk over each other about the fat lady "she can't even sing, exactly" like the director gave them the same line instead of normal conversational dialogue
>fat lady recast to some annoying slag and entire door location changed for no reason
this is when I stopped paying attention on my most recent watch but still have a few more just from memory
>radcliff's acting when he's supposed to cry
>pisspoor werewolf design
>sirius has been on the run for months and is the most wanted man in the world with his face on every paper and wanted poster yet he is still wearing his prison garb
>harry woo-hooing while riding buckbeak
I could on but there's also a ton of problems with the book itself which is not really the directors fault
>sirius waiting 12 years to escape
>peter petigrew living as a rat at the weasleys for 12 years
>the power of time travel given to a student just to take extra classes
>dementors openly attacking students on the train yet are still allowed to patrol the school
>firebolt being the end of the movie
>flitwick character changed
>shitty hogwarts choir not mentioned before or ever again in any movie
>hagrids hut sucks now
>womping willow sucks now
>hermoine having super strength lifting harry with one arm played for laughs
>housekeeper at the leaking cauldron knocks on the door and the door flings open and some giant monstrous howl blows her back with the force of a hurricane, door slams shut, "I'll come back later". Played for laughs with no explanation and is never mentioned again
>cabinet moves, dean immediately knows it's a bogart with no other information
I'm sure if I watched the movie again there are glowing problems with it in nearly every scene but Cinemaphile turns a blind eye and gives this movie a pass for all of it's horrible decisions, changes, and shit that is not in the book all because the Hispanic that made Children of Men directed it
so fricking tired of you autistic frick always posting the same shit in every thread fren
please desist
i'm 36 and as much as i don't care to this day i genuinely think POA is one of the best movie of the 2000s and genuinely a good adventure fantasy for kids ever released nothing to envy to star wars or any other shit
again desist with that reddit shit please
it's objectively the peak of the whole thing and you just can't fricking deny it no matter what
it's ok to have shit taste friend. Azkaban is not a bad movie, probably one of the best movies released that year. But with that said it's not in the top 3 of the best Harry Potter movies.
WHATEVER ANON
it's not the best harry potter movie
but it's the best movie in the franchise
Those are fair points and I will admit that the first two movies are excellent, but I still like the movies after 2.
>score when Marge is floating away
what's wrong with it?
>shoehorned in more blacks with darker skin that are not in the book to fill diversity quotas
but anon, blacks could be anywhere...
even funnier in the 5th movie they changed him to Ravenclaw because it fricked with the continuity of the universe for him to be in their class.
Almost 100% accurate. PoA is second best after HBP though.
Is anyone on this board not an ESL moron?
just me
The future of magic.
He was basically a background character until the 5th movie which is were Harry Potter universally goes to shit. The majority of the first 4 movies just deal with Harry's school shenanigans.
The first 4 movies/books do a good job of hyping up Voldemort as this big mysterious villain that everyone's afraid of but never really enters the story as a proper character, except as this weird deformity on the back of turban guys head that gets like 10 seconds of screen time and as the ghost of his teenage self.
this franchise is so gay when you realize dumbledore could have dumpstered voldemort 1v1 at any time under any circumstances
harry potter is a barely competent wizard with plot armor, meanwhile dumbledore is the GOAT and more powerful than any of the two great wizarding evils to ever exist
Nah, Voldey came around after dumbledores prime
Dumbledore's prime was beating grindlewald, after that he fell off. If you look at the first two movies you see the age dumbledore is supposed to be, the movies after that cast him way too young
even as a withered old man dumbledore effortlessly dunked on voldemort in the duel in the ministry atrium
at literally no point was he ever even so much as on the back foot, despite having to both offensively counter voldemort but also babysit harry
Dumbledore also had the Elder wand when he fought Voldemort.
Its an infantile series that is popular with midwits and women. Its like a more accessible version of Lord of the Rings for normies that focuses on what they really want is just 24/7 magic its like if Lord of the Rings was a bimbo prostitute and Gandalf and Saruman were having magic battles every week in order to make money from crowds of spectators. Thats the entirety of Harry Potter's popularity is that its essentially a flanderized version of lord of the rings focusing on certain aspects that are hyper expressed because its all people want.
The reason why say normies dont like Lord of the Rings so much is that the magic in it is muted and put to a minium so that medieval armies can duke it out and have real meaning and subtlety to the story.
You see Harry Potter is the literary and movie equivalent of people who want big breasts, big asses, plump lips, painted on faces, big dicks, steroided bodies. They are all uncouth and decadent expressions of what are naturally occuring features. Its the same reason why food is loaded with sugar and salt because people have lost all sense of discpline and only want strong immediate gratifications of all their base desires. These people are fundamentally stupid and do not understand or appreciate the idea of having depth and patience to develop a nuanced story.
>big breasts, big asses, big dicks, tasty food are actually le bad!
The digits are wasted on you, you statueposting cuckold
DULLEST
U
L
L
E
S
T
Noone nose