Something something dullest franchise and something something

>>85611121
The boring middle-class British version Twilight

>>85611121
I liked IV. and Hallows I.

fine day we're 'avin, eh?

why didnt harry just learn a spell that improves eyesight?
why didnt hermione become crucial to the defeat of voldemort ( since she has time wizard powers)
why is ron so irrelevant?
how come voldemort didnt just abra kadabra everyone?

File: 1501259309971.jpg (486KB, 2880x1197px) Image search: [Google]

486KB, 2880x1197px

>DUDE U CANT DETECT KINOxD
God what an utter fucking flyover plebeian
You teaboos disgust me more than t____ys

File: 1483418897402.jpg (548KB, 1616x2896px) Image search: [Google]

548KB, 1616x2896px

No surprise that a dull attempt was made to save face for the dullest franchises in the history of movie franchises.

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.

>>85611155
>1997-2007
>2005-2008

Damn that Rowling and her satanist ways time traveling to make Harry Potter the british version of Twilight!

>>85611327
I know this a meme but seriously
>ayn rand
>god tier

>>85611121
PoA > Deathly Hallows Part II > Half Blood Prince >>> OotP (Better then the book TBQH) > First movie > Goblet of Fire > Deathly Hollows part 1 > CoS

Really only PoA stands alone as a good movie.

Be honest, is there like a script that's set to respond to every Harry Potter thread, is there one guy who gets a kick out of this copypasta, or is it a set of you lads doing it for free?

>>85611121
those posters are so ridiculous

>>85611327
>thinks John Steinback is worse than Great Gatsby