Hogwarts

its a childrens story book mate

Competition breeds excellence

>>79224956
Hey yeah... And for that matter... What was with all that "magic"? Like, do they not know that there's no such thing as magic? I mean, they even had wands...

File: 1476775254937.jpg (1MB, 1578x2842px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1578x2842px

Even worse than getting put in a house, these kids have to live in one of the dullest franchises in the history of movie franchises. Each episode following the boy wizard and his pals from Hogwarts Academy as they figaht 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 r-right
"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.

>>79224956
What's the point of the sorting hat if harry just went where he wanted?

Divide and conquer. If the whole student body were a unified force they could get all pissy one day and overthrow the teachers. Then you'd have Lord of the Flies in a magic castle.

That would probably make for a better book, but not what Rowling was intending.

>>79224956

I think the better question is, what house would you want to be in? Not necessarily which one you would be picked for.

I'd like to get with some Ravenclow sloots myself.

File: 11249787_1489259974731458_1089629503_n.jpg (32KB, 480x480px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 480x480px

>>79225498

>Rowling vetoed the idea of Spielberg

FUCKING WHAT?!?

GET THE PITCHFORKS AND TORCHES NOW!

>>79225498

I've seen far worse in literature. I read a book once where every time somebody ate something it was "with great gusto." Goddamn that nigger loved his gusto.

this is commie talk, you need different houses to create opposition and strife to create a sense of purpose to create motivation to work towards a cause
you give each house a heritage, a story to be proud of, and you have them carry that heritage forth to the best of their abilities
of course everyone will dislike the slytherin house, but that only makes their struggle stronger, for they see that the world hates them, and they see that the world is woong, and that it is their duty to prevail despite everyone else doing everything to stand in their way

this is why houses are a good thing faggot, harry potter sucks by the way don't ever post about it on tv again

>>79226419
Spielberg wanted to make it an animated movie with Haley Joel Osment playing Harry. He ended up declining the movie, not being vetoed.