Harry Potter General

[The Almighty Hamster]

WELCOME WITCHES AND WIZARDS TO THE:
HARRY POTTER GENERAL
(Frog Choir #1)​

 

[It's Thinking 2]

Are the frogs in the choir made of chocolate?

 

[VampireLord1024]

So is this forum meant to talk about all things Harry Potter or just specific things about the movies or books?

 

[Inkingsama]

Flipendo or not, it was still part of a series of games based on the dullest franchise in the history of game 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.

 

[Waffles]

I used to really like Harry Potter (even named my first Twitter account after Luna lol), so I'm always up for talking about it.

Haven't read the books nor watched the movies in ages, though.

 

[The Almighty Hamster]

Are the frogs in the choir made of chocolate?

Luv me some chocolate frogs.

On a serious note, the frog choir is my favourite scene in Harry Potter. It reminds me of being a kid, it's just goofy and fun + I love frogs. :>

So is this forum meant to talk about all things Harry Potter or just specific things about the movies or books?

All things Harry Potter. I get it's originally a book series, but the franchise has grown way beyond the original novels into cinema and video games.

 

[The Almighty Hamster]

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.

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.

I initially enjoyed The Chronicles of Narnia more than Harry Potter, so I binge-watched all eight films again. The first two had that magic spark, but there is a noticeable drop-off after the Prisoner of Azkaban and Order of the Phoenix. It's not that we got older; we simply outgrew the concept. Diagon Alley, the practical effects and makeup, a colourful art direction. It was perfect and they ruined it by trying to go all edgy and mature. The noughties had that weird phase where everything was a brownish-grey sludge. I get Rowling doesn't want to patronize but trying to grow with your audience when the premise of your book doesn't work with it is dumb. It's a YA book, the writing is watered down and simplistic.

Spielberg could have made it a masterpiece. In an alternative universe, Tim Burton directed the Tobey Maguire Spider-Man trilogy. It is what it is. The way to watch Harry Potter is by simply switching off your brain and simply appreciating it for what it is. Not in a Marvel-slop type of way where you just CONSOOOOOM, but don't overcomplicate it. Not every series has to be an elaborately thought-out masterpiece. These are kids' films meant to make them feel special and inspire that little bit of, well, magic! Yeah, it's cliche, kitsch and derivative, but what's wrong with that? Sometimes all people want is to escape into a magical world with elves, wands and castles and enjoy it for what it is. The premise of Hogwarts is school but fun.

Harry Potter is the last gasp of culture Britain produced before dying a sad and slow death into irrelevancy. It's not the best story in the world, but it's my comfort. I like sitting around the fireplace at Christmas with my siblings watching it like old times. The soundtrack is so comforting.

Also, screw Stephen King, he's a creep.

(typing this with barely any sleep, forgive me pls)

 

[The Almighty Hamster]

 

[The Almighty Hamster]

Look at the difference between the two.
First is Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone for the PS1;
Second is Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 for the Xbox 360.

Look, I'm not asking for everything to be a bing-bang-wahoo baby game, but come on a little colour wouldn't kill, would it??

 

[The Almighty Hamster]

Haven't read the books nor watched the movies in ages, though.

The films gloss over a lot of information. Once you're a book-person, there's no going back. The details are just so much more vivid and exciting.

 

[VampireLord1024]

All things Harry Potter. I get it's originally a book series, but the franchise has grown way beyond the original novels into cinema and video games.

I've seen all of the movies, with the last movie that I watched in theaters way back in 2012. I've read a little bit of some of the books, though I never finished them. My cousin used to own that first Harry Potter PS1 game many years ago. I remember I suggested we change the language to something other then English, which we chose French and the characters sounded funny to us.

 

[Inkingsama]

View attachment 1559View attachment 1560

Look at the difference between the two.
First is Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone for the PS1;
Second is Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 for the Xbox 360.

Look, I'm not asking for everything to be a bing-bang-wahoo baby game, but come on a little colour wouldn't kill, would it??

Yeah, this is baffling. I played the chamber of secrets game on pc recently and the game also has a dull palette of gray and brown but the devs made the game so colorful somehow by using saturation, lightning effects or i don't know.

 

[Waffles]

View attachment 1559View attachment 1560

Look at the difference between the two.
First is Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone for the PS1;
Second is Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 for the Xbox 360.

Look, I'm not asking for everything to be a bing-bang-wahoo baby game, but come on a little colour wouldn't kill, would it??

The age of tinting the hell out of every game will not be looked back on kindly.

I'm sick of such dull and depressing-looking games being pushed just for the sake of creating an "atmospheric" and "moody" scenario.

 

[It's Thinking 2]

View attachment 1559View attachment 1560

Look at the difference between the two.
First is Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone for the PS1;
Second is Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 for the Xbox 360.

Look, I'm not asking for everything to be a bing-bang-wahoo baby game, but come on a little colour wouldn't kill, would it??

Well to be fair, Philosopher's Stone looked infinitely better in the PC version than the PS-One. There's even a patch for it to run on modern Windows.

 

[dejiko]

i am an avid reader and LOVE the books, but the movies are a big stinky :<

also hogwarts legacy was so cool to play, i spent so much time just exploring

very immersive!

go slytherin!

 

[sandogma]

Flipendo or not, it was still part of a series of games based on the dullest franchise in the history of game 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.


"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.

You almost had me

https://www.reddit.com/r/copypasta/comments/6wtz0t/harry_potter_copypasta

 

[The Almighty Hamster]

You almost had me
https://www.reddit.com/r/copypasta/comments/6wtz0t/harry_potter_copypasta

I seriously got baited by a Reddit post

 

[The Almighty Hamster]

Well to be fair, Philosopher's Stone looked infinitely better in the PC version than the PS-One. There's even a patch for it to run on modern Windows.

PS1 Hagrid makes it an easy 10/10 tho.

 

[The Almighty Hamster]

Well to be fair, Philosopher's Stone looked infinitely better in the PC version than the PS-One. There's even a patch for it to run on modern Windows.

I have a copy of it somewhere in my room, but could never get it to work on my potato PC. Managed to get Vice City running which was fun. I just don't have the tech knowledge for that. The reviews for it are roughly 6.5/10 on metacritic. I love the art-style.