Harry Potter: Beef, or no beef? [Archive]

Mirai Gen

04-11-2006, 04:22 AM

Alright. Let's just get it out of the way.

I really don't mind Harry Potter. It's a fun book series to read. Really.

My biggest problem is that I like it for the same reason people hate it; it's one long, branching storyline with the same plucky 'good guys,' and the same neccesary 'bad guys.' Voldemort is at the head of it all, and Harry always manages to defeat him. I really don't mind that, and I can understand if people do.

And, while we're on this discussion, try to avoid the edgy "I just, y'know, didnt like the material, see? Just wasn't my thing." Well that's fine, but if you could please just explain why you didn't like it, I'd be happy. I just want to see more fleshed out arguements than these one liners:

"It's just all the same, over and over again."
"It's too cliche."
"It was too childish."
"It's just a fad, it's not good."

It frustrates me, because these come from people who have girlfriends/boyfriends/relatives who are obsessed with Harry Potter, and they hear second-hand all of the awesome stuff that happens in the books and go, "Well, see, I really did read it, and I just didn't like it." I have friends who are liars.

*Mega Man music*
You got
A New Rant!

POS Industries

04-11-2006, 06:28 AM

I'll be the first to come out and say that, for many years, I stayed away from the little near-sighted, magical orphan boy. It was hugely popular, and that always disgusts me. Millions of people love Harry Potter, right? Well, millions of people loved Hitler, too. I watched the first movie as well, twice. I found it all terribly annoying. Not to say that the other characters weren't interesting at all, but Harry himself just sorta bothered me. I suppose that, given his name is in the title, the story's going to be all about him.

Well, finally, I read one of the books, and I loved it. Order of the Phoenix, even, which everyone apparently hates. I got completely engrossed in the plot, characters, and overall writing of it. Tore through that sucker in no time. So yeah, you can call me a fan. As with a great deal of things that I get into, it was done so reluctantly, but it all worked out in the end.

Still, I do wish it was less about "All Harry, All the Time" as I've found that I like every single other character more, but you can't win 'em all.

Fifthfiend

04-11-2006, 06:31 AM

I liked the one where Harry finally told Dumbledore to go fuck himself.

That was a long time coming.

The Wandering God

04-11-2006, 07:21 AM

I used to call Harry Potter "fantasy light". This applies more to the earlier books and falls away as the series grew more mature with it's subjects. (And which is why I'd wish that parents wouldn't neccesarily just give them the new books. Especially since the movies are pretty much PG-13 material, and that's with a lot of stuff cut from the book.

So yeah, earlier it was like candy: sweet but unfulfilling, then it became something a bit more.

Honestly? Good writing, but nowhere near enough to earn the kind of accolades this lady is getting. I think it's just a matter of right place/right time.

Still, it got a lot of people to crack open a book, and in the end, I have to approve of that.

The Wandering God

Satan's Onion

04-11-2006, 08:27 AM

I say less and less meat as the series rolls on. It was a cute series at first--tho' the only thing that really separated it from the pack seemed to be and still is its [expletive deleted] media juggernaut--but I think it's just gotten less interesting over the last several books. For one thing, J.K. Rowling's editors seem to be in some sort of pants-piddling terror of her--at least, that's the only explanation I can think of. I really think that an editor without the Fear of Rowling in them could have reduced Book 5's bulk for the better by at least a quarter. (No, I haven't read Book 6. I haven't really been able to summon up the excitement for it, and besides, when 6 came out I was busy with A Series of Unfortunate Events, which is by my personal reckoning miles ahead of Potter and Co., any way you slice it.) It's not a *bad* series, as such--there's a lot worse out there--but I think it suffers because J.K. is apparently still Shit-Hot In Publishing now and anything she puts in there goes. Even the stuff she ripped from fan-fic :p . Even the proposed Harry-Draco-Hermione-Cho orgy planned for Book 7 (you heard it here first, folks :p ).

And fifth--if that was verbatim, then my faith in (or at least my curiosity about) the Harry Potter series might just be restored. Otherwise, pleh.

Abeni

04-11-2006, 11:32 AM

I'm actually a big fan of Harry Potter, but only the books. The movies were a terrible translation of the characters. The series itself for me was a roller coaster. Really loved the first book, hated the second one, third one was okay, fourth one loved again, the fifth one is my favorite, and the sixth one was terrible. The only thing that really depressed me about the story was the fact that JK killed my favorite character. Sirius Black was so cool, and she had to go and kill him. Why couldn't she have killed Hermione? I hope at least one of the trio dies in the last book to give Harry that last push to defeat Voldemort, but I'm not getting my hopes up.

BTW, anyone else notice that the Dark Mark looks like a muffin? Look on the back cover of the sixth book, Gineko pointed this out to me and now we call Voldemort the Muffin Man. ^_^

Leon-the-Dark-Knight

04-11-2006, 12:03 PM

The best book of the series was Book Four. The last two have been somewhat disappointing. Nothing really happens in Book Five, which is amazing considering it is almost nine-hundred pages long, and the only thing that is different in Book Six is that none of Harry's friends believe that Draco and Snape are up to something. Overall, though, I am a fan of the series, since the books are easy to read, and they are a nice light alternative to the fiction I usually partake of. Here's hoping that J. K. can write us a winner in the final book of the series.

BlackMageGirl!

04-11-2006, 01:40 PM

I'm a fan of Harry Potter myself but, as it has been said before, only for the books. I still haven't read the sixth book yet, which I need to go do still...I liked all of them and I keep going back to read them.

Really do hate all of the toys/movies that came from it, though.

Mirai Gen

04-11-2006, 04:51 PM

Strange. I was somehow expecting to get all of the people who didn't like Harry Potter to rant first.

Learn something new.

The Wandering God

04-11-2006, 05:17 PM

Regulus Tera

04-11-2006, 05:53 PM

I started reading the HP series after watching the first movie, and, unlike the majority of people, I actually liked the book more than the film. In fact, Philosopher's Stone was the first book I ever read, and that prompted me into reading more and more mature and substance-filled books of every kind.

However, as a series, I have noticed that JKR has become somewhat.. dissapointing. I love the plot, but I feel that they reached its highpoint at Goblet of Fire with the pseudo-detectivesque plot and the climax nearly at the end of the book. Order of the Phoenix? I felt the book was well-paced and very interesting, but the final chapters (except Sirius' death) and the revelation seemed dragged on and anticlimatic. Half-Blood Prince seemed to continue this trend. Harry's meetings with Dumbledore looked very forced, though I have to admit Dumby's death was very sentimental and tragic. Also, I realized that the sixth book didn't focused so much in Harry's mind and feelings, which was one of the reasons why I became so attached to the character in the first place. Though it introduced new characters, some of them were.. pointless (can someone say Scrimgeour or Greyback?), adding nothing to the plot and just giving Harry a reason to antagonize with them.

Still, I have to credit JKR. She has managed to create a somewhat believable universe with a very interesting story, and I'm waiting eagerly for the seventh book, thanks to the awesome finale HBP had and the fact that I HAVE to know the fates of everybody who has survived. Nevertheless, I'm praying to whatever God Rowling believes that she manages to make something great of the last chapter, though I don't have my hopes raised too high.

ElfLad

04-11-2006, 09:41 PM

I consider the Harry Potter series to be great stories told by an average author. I love the plotting and such, but the actual writing is somewhat uninspired, especially when compared to a series like A Series of Unfortunate Events. I'm still a big fan, though.

Muffin Mage

04-12-2006, 06:58 PM

I hope nobody spoiled book 6 for you.

The Wandering God
I was on the forum that ran the spoiler campaign. It was amusing.

I kind of like Harry Potter. It's fluff reading, as far as I'm concerned, but I'll pick them up and read them.

Frylord

04-12-2006, 07:33 PM

I love Harry Potter. It rocks. Meh, it was the first "full" series I ever read so, I'm kinda biased. For some freaky reason, I always like the villians in books, but I like how J.K. has made even ME hate Snape, Draco, Greyback, Barty Crouch Jr., etc. I only prefer Lucis (sp?) and Voldemort.

Azisien

04-12-2006, 09:14 PM

It's a really quick read, yet I've kept with the series because I love the concept of the setting, and the characters are nicely fleshed out. I do find I'm getting a little less interested in the series after reading books more for my age and reading level, but I'll be sticking with it until the end. That can't be too far away, right?

Kaelus

04-12-2006, 09:51 PM

Satan's Onion

04-13-2006, 06:28 AM

I hate HP with all my soul. ._.~ I hate the content for the standard reasons, but it's the 11-year-olds who build shrines to Harry that truly make me sick. Not to mention the fanfictions. Ew.

If it wasn't so obscenely popular, I'd probably like it more. Maybe. >.>

I understand. The books themselves aren't so bad, actually; they ain't Instant Classic material, but they do have charm (tho' less and less of this as the bodies pile up, I concede). With a bit of practice writing things after HP, J.K. Rowling might actually become a decent-to-great writer. (Right now, on my personal scale, she's more "mediocre-to-decent").

It's Pottermania that sets me dreaming of bookburnings. Every time I have to delay a pleasure trip to my local Barnes and Noble because of the swarms of hysterical preteens in homemade robes clamoring for "one for me, one for J.K. to sign, and one for my future husband Ron"; every time Dateline or another news magazine--the fuggin' national news, folks--decides that it'll cover the fiery destruction of Denver, first contact with extraterrestrials, and the Cure for All Cancers later, 'cos the people really wanna see some kids frowning astride cardboard brooms while an excited voice-over describes their elation at playing "real Quidditch"--then I must needs be locked away for a while, lest I go Dark Sorceress on someone's ass.

Did you know?: "Muggle" is also a rather archaic term for getting high on marijuana, as in "muggled up". Food for thought...

Frylord

04-13-2006, 11:12 AM

Heh, nice. I still like Harry Potter, but I agree. My sister used to have a flashing banner on her computer that said, "Harry Potter isn't everything, but it's right up there with oxygen." You guessed it, shes a harry potter fanatic.

Fifthfiend

04-13-2006, 11:27 AM

I do have to note - I fucking hate the word Muggle.

Fucking hate that fucking word.

Mirai Gen

04-13-2006, 04:19 PM

It's Pottermania that sets me dreaming of bookburnings. Every time I have to delay a pleasure trip to my local Barnes and Noble because of the swarms of hysterical preteens in homemade robes clamoring for "one for me, one for J.K. to sign, and one for my future husband Ron"; every time Dateline or another news magazine--the fuggin' national news, folks--decides that it'll cover the fiery destruction of Denver, first contact with extraterrestrials, and the Cure for All Cancers later, 'cos the people really wanna see some kids frowning astride cardboard brooms while an excited voice-over describes their elation at playing "real Quidditch"--then I must needs be locked away for a while, lest I go Dark Sorceress on someone's ass.
I think this is what I get so irritated by, but inadvertently. I think most of my aquaintances that go "I don't like Harry Potter," probably just set in stone that they never would, because it's popular.

In related news, have you seen the Conformity/Nonconformity thread?

Esquire

04-13-2006, 08:40 PM

I have a problem with Harry Potter's severe lack of M240 Bravo weaponry. I felt that the inclusion of crew-served machine guns would have made J.K. Rowling a literary genius.

http://www.certifiedcomputing.com/images/M240B.jpg

Sky Warrior Bob

04-13-2006, 09:07 PM

I'm an avid fan of Harry Potter, but I'm not a fan of the movies & I don't have time for reading the books.

...

Of course, I listen to the books, via the very impressive talents of Jim Dale. Frankly, he makes all the books enjoyable, even number 5 (which had I been reading, I think that would've tested my patience).

In order of preference, it goes 4, a tie for 3 & 7, 1, 2 and 5. 5 had some good bits, but it had rough patches as well. The worst bit for me was the bit where Harry was being brought to Sirius's house, which seemed dragged out for far longer than it should have. The details of Sirius's death were likewise problematic for me as it wasn't very descriptive of what exactly happened.

Personally, I suspect that the last book will be the best. Heck, after popping by a HP website I know there are even some secrets still to be revealed such as how Dumbledore's brother is the barkeep of the Hog's Head.

SWB
JKR from the Edinburgh Book festival:

Q: Why is the barman of the Hog's Head vaguely familiar to Harry? Is he Dumbledore's brother?

A: Ooh you are getting good. Why do you think that it is Aberforth?
(Audience member: Various clues: He smells of goats and looks a bit like Dumbledore) I was quite proud of that clue. That is all that I am going to say. (Laughter). Well yes, obviously. I like the goat clue - I sniggered to myself about that one.

MFD

04-13-2006, 10:31 PM

I do have to note - I fucking hate the word Muggle.

Fucking hate that fucking word.

But... it's in the Oxford English dictionary now!

I'm... not kidding. That wasn't a joke.

Eh, I enjoy Harry Potter, but Rowling's style is a little vanilla to me. It's especially noticeable when we read things that aren't from Harry's perspective (i.e. the PM meeting with Scrimgeour, Bellatrix and Wotserface Malfoy meeting with Snape), and I just don't like it.

The plot and characters, with the exception of Harry, are brilliant, though.

Skyshot

04-13-2006, 10:58 PM

I remember recently watching the fourth movie in my Latin class and wondering, "What was it I liked so much about this series?" Then, while playing Final Fantasy VIII, I picked up and started re-reading the nearest copy to pass the time during summons (seriously). I quickly remembered what it was I liked about it.

If you ask me, Rowlings' strongest point is her presentation. She has this way of telling the story which almost has me laughing -- with her rather than at her. Book Six, the first two chapters have a rather prominent overtone of "bad people seek to do bad things to poor Harry" from two perspectives, and the third chapter opens with Harry sleeping with his face plastered against his bedroom window. Something about that just...you know...it's priceless.

Some things probably could be better -- Snape refers to Harry as an unspectacular wizard, and if that were really the case, it could improve something about the series -- y'know, what with Harry's "Outstanding" in Defense Against the Dark Arts and what not. Other things bugged me, but it was definitely worth the re-read.

DFA

04-14-2006, 11:54 PM

I really enjoyed the Harry Potter series as someone who is not neck deep in fantasy I found the plot interesting and most of the characters well done. Echoing others in this thread I have to agree the movies suck compared to the book but I am a fan of much of the soundtrack.

I think hating a book because it is really popular is rather stupid. If your going to dislike a book dislike it for what's actually written not because of the opinion of others.

Mac

04-23-2006, 06:23 PM

Mondt

04-23-2006, 06:49 PM

To be perfectly honest, I have avoided the whole Harry Potter mania. To me it is over hyped and over appreciated. Now I appreciate what Rowling has done by introducing a new series of books to kids and adults but it gets way to much attention for what its worth. Love it or hate it, thats my opinion.That's what this whole thread is. "Beef, or no beef?"

I liked the books, 4 especially. I don't like book movies, which is why I will hate myself when the Ender's Game/Shadow movie finally comes out and I go to see it.

They just ruin the image of the book for you. Now that I have watched the movies, I can't even remember the image I had made up for Harry, Hogwarts, or anything else.

$20 says that they only made Book 6 shorter was so that they could make the movie fit. After realizing that Book 4 was too long, she had to cut down for the insane fans that e-mail her about how this and that was missing from the movie...

Seran

05-18-2006, 07:47 AM

I'm a fond fan of the books, myself, and I've watched all the movies. I'd prefer the books nonetheless.

Well, you see, Harry Potter is one thing or another to each person. It has this unique style of a story that either appeals to a crowd or does not. Just look at it. A world of non-magical people and magical spellcasters that exist on the same earth, yet the magic remains hidden from the eyes of those born without it, and scattered throughout the earth are schools that teach wizardry and witchcraft. The main hero is Harry Potter who attends a British magic school, who had long ago survived a deadly yet quick and silent spell, and who is much more like the average teenager than he should seem. Lord Voldemort has been giving him great stress just by being alive.

Harry Potter is different and has a style of keeping certain readers entertained and waiting for more, while others just toss it to one side and say, "Boring."

DarkCORN!

05-19-2006, 11:39 PM

I don't like Harry Potter for a few reasons (well, several, but these are most prominent).

One: As OotS so eloquently put it, he regularly manages to trounce wizards of far more power and skill than himself.

Two: Voldemort being the bad guy is getting old. The stories are repetitive.

Three: I despise the characters. Hermione Granger (or whatever) is a know-it-all little bitch, Ron Weasly is a little wanker with the IQ of a gnat and a stupid name. Harry Potter is a wanker who barely knows magic and never uses what he does know.

I have read all the books and seen all the movies. If only to laugh and ruin the ending for people who haven't read the book.

Dibs

05-20-2006, 04:40 AM

One: As OotS so eloquently put it, he regularly manages to trounce wizards of far more power and skill than himself.

That would be because he's not a wizard. Sure, the book *says* he is but, as one of my good friends is prone to say, he acts more like a barbarian/shaman. He solves almost all of his problems with physical violence or by attempting to break things and the little magic he does happen to use (which is typically an accident or result of sheer dumb luck) is more fit for a shaman or a druid than a wizard.

[ray.z]

05-20-2006, 09:40 AM

The first time I read Harry Potter was after the forth book came out. I recieved as a gift all 4 books and devoured them (not literally) in I think a week or two.

Anyways, while waiting the fifth book to come out, I watched the movies that came out, and, I was sadly dissapointed. Never-the-less, I continued to wait patiently for the fifth book.

However, as time went on, I grew less and less patient, and after reading the books a couple of times (book three was the best), I slowly became more and more resentfull of Harry Potter and more and more I wished he would die a slow and painful death.

Certainly enough, when the fifth book came out, I didn't purchase it straight away - I just looked at the last couple of chapters of it and found out that Sirius Black died.

Oh well it was over by then anyways (and I ruined it for a few people as well :p ).

As a result, I never read the fifth book (I tried once, but got bored in the first chapter paragraph), or the sixth, I have not yet (nor do I plan to ever) watched the fourth movie, and everytime Harry Potter is brought up, I loudly proclaim
I WISH HE WOULD JUST DIE!!! There.

Seran

05-20-2006, 12:07 PM

I don't like the character Harry Potter that much. In fact, I don't exactly like many of the characters. The only one I'm more fond of it Ron Weasley, and he's a numbskull.

FenrisWolf

05-20-2006, 04:13 PM

The books are good, the Movies have their moments, and the merchandise is crap.

And I also get told I look like Daniel Radcliffe. It pisses me off. >_>

Mirai Gen

05-20-2006, 06:34 PM

One: As OotS so eloquently put it, he regularly manages to trounce wizards of far more power and skill than himself.
Disagree. Usually it falls to some sort of sheer luck or "Because you're brave" speeches. Given the fact that it's a kids book, I don't mind. It's like bitching about how the Transformers get their names after they get their alternate modes. "Well then how did they talk to each other before they got their forms! Huh! Explain that!"

It's a cartoon. Chill.
Two: Voldemort being the bad guy is getting old. The stories are repetitive.
Disagree on the grounds of it being a series. Voldermort's the bad guy because he's nearly goddamn immortal. Also, I don't see how it's 'repetitive' because each book branches out the overall plot, mostly relating to what happened to the Potter family, Voldermort, and Harry.

As I mentioned...My biggest problem is that I like it for the same reason people hate it; it's one long, branching storyline with the same plucky 'good guys,' and the same neccesary 'bad guys.' Voldemort is at the head of it all, and Harry always manages to defeat him. I really don't mind that, and I can understand if people do.
Three: I despise the characters. Hermione Granger (or whatever) is a know-it-all little bitch, Ron Weasly is a little wanker with the IQ of a gnat and a stupid name. Harry Potter is a wanker who barely knows magic and never uses what he does know.
You hate the characters for their flaws? Damn. And here I thought Ron's stupidity was a comedic touch, and Hermione's knowitallisms were balanced by her knowledge. As for Harry barely knowing magic...I don't really understand how you got that.

I only argue because I think that hating a character for their flaws is just ludicrous. I hate characters who don't have flaws because the author never expressed them. I think Rowling's are realistic.

Magus

05-26-2006, 03:26 AM

I like these books, but I only felt the need to borrow them from the library and read them once as they came out, I did buy the first one back when I was younger, but that was it. So I'm not some huge fan. Six, though, was boring. Just plain boring. A lot of foreshadowing of the ending, but it was boring. Five was the last good one I read.

Personally I feel a little embarassed reading them like all of us people who started reading them when we were like ten and are now embarassed to read them when we're like seventeen. But it's not my fault I got into a seven-part series, and of course they mature as they go on, I really felt that after the whole Neville's parents TORTURED INTO INSANITY part in the fourth one, though the third started it a little.

The movies are okay, too, but I don't go out of my way to watch them, even worse than I am with the books. So far my relatives have rented and then bought them so I've been able to see them, I actually went to see the first one at the movie theater because my aunt bought like twenty tickets and I happened to be visiting and everybody else was going, I'd have been silly not to see a free movie showing of one of the books I'd read at the time, being eleven or twelve.

Strangely, at the time if something adult like Elric of Melnibone had come out I'd have been ready and willing to see it, too. B^) I've always been a fantasy reader. Lord of the Rings movies were like a dream come true to me when they came out, and I was only thirteen or so, how many thirteen year olds actually read? You all probably did, but lets look at statistics...

EVILNess

05-26-2006, 09:26 PM

Satan's Onion

05-27-2006, 05:43 AM

I think the latest was Half-Blood Prince, actually. Nevertheless, you can thank your friend for giving me a damn good laugh. I only hope I never meet a Lemony Snicket detractor so hardworking...

Azisien

05-27-2006, 09:45 PM

Bleh, I got the Half-Blood Price ending spoiled for me too. It's actually pretty rude, you know. :p

I had been browsing 4chan (yeah, my mistake) when they were in the harry potter frenzy, and I opened a picture of someone with the 'NO U' guy shouting SNAPE KILLS DUMBLEDORE! Fuck, I was angry for a while. I spent the whole goddamn book, from PAGE ONE, going Snape kills Dumbledore, Snape kills Dumbledore, Snape kills Dumbledore...

dojindog

05-28-2006, 01:02 AM

I have no beef with the potter man or with the J.K. lady in fact I kinda like them both for the countless internet jokes which have spread rapidly across the nation just about the name alone.

It's the gosh darnited mooser fooling (shortened and censored) fan-base that gets me so angried.

spazzhands

05-28-2006, 12:57 PM

I'm not the biggest fan of the series, but to be honest I think all the people who hate something SO MUCH that they have to try to spoil everyone else's experience of it needs to get himself a life! Its geekier than if they loved it!

If you don't like harry potter, don't bloody read it! Its just a book!

UZ_White

05-29-2006, 12:49 AM

I think the whole dying at the end of HBP was predictable. I opened the book and thought to myself "You know? JK Rowling is gonna do some stupid and contrived plot device to piss of hardcore readers." I was right, of course. Yep, good old page 606.

50$ on Ron's Mom/Dad dying at the end of the next book.

Muffin Mage

05-29-2006, 09:52 AM

I want Sirius to come back at the end of book 7 and be all "What now, suckas!"

If you noticed, Harry was the only one who ever said he actually died, as such. Everone else, particularly the people who knew what was going on, only said that he wasn't coming back. There is a subtle difference.

Toilet Rancor

05-29-2006, 10:30 PM

My last gf was really into harry potter, and i ended up reading the books when I had nothing better to do. They were entertaining if anything. I don't have anything against the series except for all the freaking posters and screaming kids everywhere whenever a movie comes out. And in the last book it definately hints at the possiblity that snape might not be with voldemort. :p

Mirai Gen

05-30-2006, 04:22 AM

I'd be willing to bet that at the end of the series, there's one climactic final moment when Snape shoves Voldemort and therefore kills himself so that Harry can finish off the dark lord.

Not that I'm whining. I'm probably going to be at the edge of my fucking seat if she does it right.

Archbio

05-30-2006, 05:06 AM

http://www.itrustsnape.com/

Mirai Gen

05-30-2006, 03:28 PM

Wow, when I first saw that, I thought it was iTrust Snape.

Red Fighter 1073

05-30-2006, 10:12 PM

Friend of mine hates Harry Potter. He hisses whenever someone mentions the series, that being said he preordered, bought, and stood in line for the last book, whatever it was "Order of the Phoenix?"

He read the last 3 or so Chapthers of the book out loud to eveyone else in the line, and then when he had finished he took out a black Sharpie and wrote Dumbledore dies in the end. on his white T-Shirt and stood near the entrance to the store so the people in line could see.

He then wore the shirt to school for a solid week.

Yeah, he may be an asshole, but he is a diligent asshole.

wow, that's so assholish, but still pretty funny. Hard to believe he went that great of a length. He must've pissed off so many people. I'm surprised some rabid fan of the series didn't rip him apart..

Anyway, I kinda like the books. I'm not that interested in them. I'll read it if I went to my school library and needed a book, but I wouldn't buy the seventh book or try to borrow it when it comes out.

The books are good, but I just hate how, starting with book 5, at least one guy dies. That's kinda dumb.. I mean, do it if it really fits, but don't do it for the hell of it. I remember JK saying something during the production of book 5 that she would kill off one character in each sequel.. Like I said, pointless deaths.

Also, the latest book was kinda ruined for me because I read that Dumbledore died. Though, I chose to read the spoiler thread so oh well..

Also, the character relationships in book 6 were just dumb. Especially Harry with Ginny. I mean, pick someone that is your own age! Also, it's Ron's fucking sister! So unbelievably stupid..

Satan's Onion

05-31-2006, 03:57 AM

For what it's worth mentioning, Red Fighter, she's been killing characters (albeit initially not-very-important ones) since I think book 4. Now she's just killing off *important* characters (presumably so Harry's properly traumatized and motivated to finish of that darn ol' Voldy once and fer all).

ZERO.

05-31-2006, 04:35 AM

Im going to bet that at the end of the series Ron and that nerdy chick that I cant seem to spell will die, making Harry one mad motha fucka.

After that some epic battle with the dark lord and Hary wins and at the ending he learns some incredible life lesson about love or some other nonsense.

spazzhands

05-31-2006, 11:40 AM

Actually, I'd be willing to bet my left testicle that Harry is going to die at the end of the next book. Seriously, how else is JK going to avoid being forced to write a load more sequels?

Mirai Gen

05-31-2006, 02:26 PM

Actually, I'd be willing to bet my left testicle that Harry is going to die at the end of the next book. Seriously, how else is JK going to avoid being forced to write a load more sequels?
If she is a true writer, she won't.

Than again, the massive piles of cash are good instigators.

Archbio

05-31-2006, 03:18 PM

If she is a true writer, she won't.

Are you saying Arthur Conan Doyle wasn't a true writer?

As for the deaths in the Harry Potter books, I thought it was one of the most convincing parts of the series.

Mirai Gen

05-31-2006, 03:25 PM

Are you saying Arthur Conan Doyle wasn't a true writer?
Well, I dunno who that is, but my point was merely "When a story's complete, sequels only hurt."

This is coming from a writer, so you gotta realize I have a strong view on this.

Archbio

05-31-2006, 03:31 PM

From the Wikipedia article on Sherlock Holmes:

Conan Doyle wrote the stories over the course of a decade. Wanting to devote more time to his historical novels, he killed off Holmes in "The Final Problem", which appeared in print in 1893. After resisting public pressure for eight years, the author wrote The Hound of the Baskervilles, which appeared in 1901, setting it before Holmes' "death". The public, while pleased with the story, was not satisfied with a posthumous Holmes, and so Conan Doyle resuscitated Holmes two years later. Many have speculated on his motives for bringing Holmes back to life, notably writer-director Nicholas Meyer, who wrote an essay on the subject in the 1970s, but the actual reasons are not known, other than the obvious: publishers offered to pay generously. For whatever reason, Conan Doyle continued to write Holmes stories for a quarter-century longer.

Fifthfiend

06-01-2006, 12:05 AM

Well okay but Doyle had an excuse, I mean, he could probably have used the money.

You could've offered JK Rowling a bunch of money to write more books, back before she had a billion dollars worth of money.

I mean, you know? How much money are you supposed to pay a billionaire, that you're going to make her say it's worth the money?

Muffin Mage

06-01-2006, 12:21 AM

If she is a true writer, she won't.

Than again, the massive piles of cash are good instigators.
If she's a true writer, she'll milk the series as long as it makes money and gives her personal satisfaction. If I've learned anything by reading about successful artistic people, it's the combination of those two that keeps them going. Because the problem with being a starving artist is that you end up starving.

Mirai Gen

06-01-2006, 06:18 AM

If she's a true writer, she'll milk the series as long as it makes money and gives her personal satisfaction. If I've learned anything by reading about successful artistic people, it's the combination of those two that keeps them going. Because the problem with being a starving artist is that you end up starving.
But...JK Rowling is the last person to end up starving I can name.

Right up there with every other fucking rich bastard.

Except Paris Hilton. I wish she would starve.

And the reason I said that is because I believe that 'milking the series' kind of defies what it is to write. You can't milk a product and get 'personal satisfaction', at least not in the ideals of continuing a series you think is 'done'.

But, yeah, at least Holmes had an excuse to come back to life. Writer was fucking broke.