Just started marathoning this flick, never watched Harry Potter

File: 1504538958556.jpg (1MB, 1621x2866px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1621x2866px

If you have an IQ above room temperature you will think it is beginning of the dullest franchise in the history of movie franchises. 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.

If you have one ounce of brain matter inside your head left, you wil unavoidably come to the logical conclusion that it is dull.

Depends if you're 12 and/or a woman

>>87328416
the Harry Potter movies are just like the books, they are for CHILDREN and expecting something deep and adult is foolish

File: 1478907564148.png (569KB, 596x888px) Image search: [Google]

569KB, 596x888px

>>87328503
One thread at a time

File: 1484610512428.jpg (11KB, 250x240px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 250x240px

>Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone
>Philosopher's

Wasn't it Sorcerer's? I distinctly remember it being Sorcerer's when I was a kid.

>>87328416
3 is kino. Others are meh.

>>87328724
mandela effect :^)

not hating for no reason, but they are incredibly formulaic, and i have real trouble distinguishing the films from one another (i only saw each one once)

it's quite almost procedural, in the sense that they progress through the years of hogwarts and graduate, so every year you see them become more senior.

other than that, the small missions and sub-villains are pretty forgettable, and the big bad is a straight forward story.

it's well made though, a comfy family film.

>>87328416
"No!"

Imagine marvel capeshit but with english schoolboys

>>87328765
this, but in fairness the first harry potter movie was a huge deal back then, it's simplistic and childish but cute at the same time. nothing special but it's worth a watch. As for the other I can't really tell them apart except for the 2nd and the 4th

>>87328724
>'PHILOSO WHAT?' screamed the American, chunks of partially masticated hamburger spraying in all directions, 'I THOUGHT THIS MOVIE WAS ABOUT MAGIC'

>>87328714
what a picture lmao

>>87328750
I seriously remember every fucking trailer had it as "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone". I even recall telling my mom I wanted to be a wizard like in Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone for Halloween. Please tell me I'm not just going crazy.

>>87328928
It's sorcerer only in the yank version

>>87328928
You're crazy anon. It is, and always has been, the Philosopher's Stone.

>>87328928
i distinctly remember it being philosophers stone

Harry Potter is for babies

>>87328976
Oh, okay. Thank you anon, I thought I might have been losing it for a second there.

>>87329021
>>87329142
Fuck off, retards.

When will you plebs learn that posting anything Potter related is just fadder to the dullest copypastas in the history of 4chan shitposts. Each post following the simpleminded shitposters and his pals from /lit/ as they post assorted shit has been indistinguishable from the others. Aside from the repetitive image, the series’ only consistency has been its lack of originality and ineffective use of humour, all to make /tv/ unintelligent, to make posting seem inert.

Perhaps the die was cast when OP vetoed the idea of killing himself; he made sure the copypasta would never be mistaken for a work of art that meant anything to anybody, just ridiculously annoying cross-posting for his boards. The Dullest Franchise series might be anti-Christian (or not), but it’s certainly the anti-Navy Seals Copypasta 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 first few posts were good though
"No!"
The writing is dreadful; the post was terrible. As I read, I noticed that every time a Harry Potter thread was posted, instead of contributing the OP wrote that the series was “the dullest franchise”

I began marking on the back of an envelope every time that copypasta was repeated. I stopped only after I had marked the envelope several dozen times. I was incredulous. OP’s mind is so governed by cliches and shit taste that he has no other way of posting. Later I read a lavish, loving response of the copypasta on r/4chan. They wrote something to the effect of, "If anons on /tv/ are reading this copypasta, then when they get older they will go on to read r/4chan." And they were quite right. They was not being ironic. When you read “Dullest Franchise Copypasta" you are, in fact, trained to post on reddit.

File: 1504385764500.jpg (38KB, 785x757px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 785x757px

>>87329466
i'll show you a real retard

Something I can't put my finger on is why women seem to love the series so much. I don't really know any guys that genuinely like it, but every woman I know does to some extent. If you could figure out the "abstracts" that appeals to women so enormously it would be valuable knowledge to apply in writing to exploit their demographic like 50 Shades, Twilight, Vampire Diaries, etc.

>>87329612
I liked it when I was a kid. Tried re-reading the books a while back and found them very dull.

>>87329612
no trying to be rude or anything but how old are you? I mean seriously, no need to lie when you're anonymous.

The reason I'm asking is when I was growing up and those films were being released everybody loved them (including me), both books and the movies. It was a real hype back then.

Now that I'm older I can clearly see a lot of issues with the books and the movies but still it was really magical being a part of it and I don't regret a single sleepless hour reading them books.

>>87329466
>can't spend five seconds on google to check if sorcerer's stone is a real thing
>calls other people retards
ok

>>87329612
I can't speak for all women but something I always found appealing about the HP series were "personality test" aspects of the universe -- the main characters are "sorted" into houses with clear-cut personality traits, each character has a unique patronus, each character has a unique wand (with a different design, wand wood, wand core, length, etc). Back in high school when I was REALLY into the series, I used to participate in Harry Potter RP sites, and I knew my wand, patronus, and house. Not every female fan is going to get that into it of course but I think those aspects tend to be very appealing to women. On top of that, the universe is pretty comfy -- the snowy villages, huge castles with fire-lit common rooms, etc. Obviously these things appeal to men as well but combined with the school setting (girls tend to enjoy/look forward to school more) I can understand why girls like it so much. I'm not really familiar with 50 Shades or Twilight or Vampire Diaries so I can't tell you how this correlates with those series.

>>87329914
>I mean seriously, no need to lie when you're anonymous.
are u stupid

>>87328416
The first 2 are shite.
The series peaks at 3.

>>87328416
I hope you got the extended version and a full bluray quality one.
They are all good to great. 1 2 3 5 6 7 are kino.

>>87329612
they seek the comfort in repeated watches to the same few things that make them happy rather than searching for something new.

it's a reflection of their desire to stay protected at home while the men would go out and hunt for food/work

>>87331626
This post is wrong on every level measurable.

Do not pay attention to it.