Harry Potter spells

File: 11124.jpg (2MB, 1616x2864px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1616x2864px

I wouldn't expect anything to make sense in one of the dullest franchises in the history of movie franchises though.

Seriously each episode following the boy wizard and his pals from Hogwarts Academy as they fight 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
"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.

>>84159551
Only the adults could do that. I don't think they explained in the movies but in the books at least the adults could perform magic by just concentrating really hard on the words. Less experienced child wizards had to learn the speaking versions first.

>>84159714
Come on. At least try.

>>84159714
Based "No!" poster.

What was the point of pronouncing the spells in a certain way when all magic is mental and the incantations only serve to make it easier for little kids? Those little fuckers don't know latin. Why not just make them say whatever the fuck and teach them how the magic works?

>>84159714
at least wait a few posts to make it look like you haven't started this tread just to post this pasta

Only very powerful wizards and witches can perform magic without encantations. Average wizards/witches need to know the spells verbatim. Even very powerful wizards start out learning the proper pronounciations. Also witches and wizards all need wands to perform magic most powerfully. There are exceptional creatures that are very powerful and can do magic without wands but they were banned from having them bc it would make them especially powerful (elves for example)

>>84159551
what's even the point of learning to crawl as a baby if you're just gonna end up walking? baka, shit makes no sense

>>84159551

Did you seriously expect the anti-Trump hack piece of shit JK Rowling to actually know what she was doing?

>>84159551
My headcanon is that spell names are just mantras that help you practice channeling your magic correctly.

more like:
did scabbers see ron jerk off?
did he spy on ginny in the shower?
why did rowling not put hermione in ravenclaw
on in hufflepuff etc

>Pronunciation important with their dumb Brit accents
Retarded

Anyone can do spells silent (however some must be said allowed such as the killing curse) The problem is learning it hence why they go to school to learn how to do it.

>>84159832
good thing they didn't have to learn to 'spell'
HA!

File: 1489244494880.jpg (207KB, 953x953px) Image search: [Google]

207KB, 953x953px

Harry Potter was a shit fictional universe. That's why.

hp's for fat girls

>>84159551
because kids who read the books wouldnt be able to be teased and try the magic.

why didnt quirrel just torture harry with the cruciatus curse while he picked up the stone?

why didnt tom riddle just kill harry in the chamber of secrets?

why didnt they destroy the port key when they had harry right where they wanted him?

why didnt anyone use the imperius curse on harry and just have him walk off a cliff?

why did rowling think it was a good idea to introduce prophecies?

>>84159714
is that pic satire? because if great gatsby is 'god tier' to anybody, they have shit taste

>>84160114
Villain logic. If Tom Riddle had murdered Harry in that chamber. Rowling wouldn't have been able to milk her franchise up to 7 books/8 movies. She wouldn't have gotten past two in that case.

>>84160114
Half of these are because Voldemort thinks he has to and wants to kill Harry himself because prophecies
>Why didnt they destroy the port key
Smug self-satisfaction, plus they had a teenage boy bound surrounded by high level Nazi soldiers. They didn't really expect the Power of Love saving the day
>Why prophecies
because she ran out of ideas
>Tom Riddle
Wasn't fully physical so couldn't wield a wand IIRC, so he sent the Basilisk after him