Now that the dust has settled, what is the general consensus

Perhaps the die was cast, blah blah blah

First 3 and a half are comfy.

>films
They're flicks at best

File: 1501710434999.jpg (548KB, 1616x2896px) Image search: [Google]

548KB, 1616x2896px

Quote possibly the dullest franchise of all time. Having said that, Harry Potter has to be one 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.

File: 1479852904059.jpg (1MB, 1588x2862px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1588x2862px

Now that the dust has settled, it is unanimous among men of high culture and good taste that this is the dullest franchise 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.

>>86793359

Despite dullest franchise poster's claims, the books ARE better than the movies.

Books:
Goblet of Fire > Prisoner of Azkaban > Deathly Hallows > Chamber of Secrets > Order of the Phoenix > Half-Blood Prince > Philosopher's Stone

Movies:
Deathly Hallows 1 > Prisoner of Azkaban > Philosopher's Stone > Deathly Hallows 2 > Half-Blood Prince > Chamber of Secrets > Order of the Phoenix > Goblet of Fire

>>86793691
>Half-Blood Prince not the worst book AND film

wow

File: g rated.jpg (112KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 1280x720px

>>86793359
Low fantasy written by a pop novelist for the sole purpose of procuring a movie deal suitable for children and direct merchandise marketing.

>>86793691

I never got why people who enjoyed the prisoner of Azkaban. Liked the movie?

I disliked it so much. Idk if it's the new Dumbledore or if it's Sirius black

>>86793799
also it's where hermione stopped being fuckable

>>86793799

He was deerrrr friend!!!!!!

>>86793498
>>86793540
t. mouthpiece

But you are right.

File: 1411336241463.jpg (396KB, 979x1264px) Image search: [Google]

396KB, 979x1264px

absolute shite through and through.

>>86793894
>Avatar

>>86793359
only 1 - 3 are good, the rest completely change the tone

>>86793930
#1 movie of all time that changed the cinema forever

File: f63.jpg (41KB, 396x382px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 396x382px

>>86793691
>Books
Shit
>Movies
Even more shit.

Why the FUCK don't we have a Warhammer 40k movie series. Why the FUCK does the GW Jew fuck everything up?

>>86794118
>autismhammer babby calling anything shit

>>86793359
Who keeps making these dumbass harry potter threads this past week? Theres gotta be a few each day now, wtf