I'm looking for legitimate criticism of the Harry Potter movies

I'm looking for legitimate criticism of the Harry Potter movies.

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causal_loop
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

there isn't any

10 year olds

DH part 1 was zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

It's hard to look for criticisms for one of the best franchises in the history of movie franchises throughout. Each episode followed the boy wizard and his pals from Hogwarts Academy as they fight assorted villains has been distinguishable from the others. Aside from the fantastic imagery, the series’ numerous consistencies have been its lack of plot holes and effective use of special effects, all to make magic magical, to make action seem captivating.

Perhaps the die was cast when Rowling vetoed the idea of Spielberg directing the series; she made sure the series would be a work of art that meant a lot to everybody! Just incredible cross-promotion for her books. The Harry Potter series might be anti-Lucas (or not), but it’s certainly the anti-prequel series in its refusal of annoying characters, boring dialogue and dull plot. We love to face that fact. Now, thankfully, we always can.

>a-and the books were good!
"Yes!"
The writing is intricate; the books were amazing. As I read, I noticed that every time a character went for a walk, the author wrote, instead, that the character "stretched his legs" or some other fantastic idiom.

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 unique imagery and fresh metaphors that she has so many styles 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)

after azkaban rowling stopped writing fun magical adventures for kids and started writing grim dark boring YA trash and the films reflected this accordingly

Overall or do you mean the individual films? Because HBP was a mess.

They're uninteresting.

Literally who gives a shit about werewolves, fairy olympics, and a sport that is inherently flawed.

There was no mention of Roonil Wazlib in the 6th film.

HOWEVER

There was too many.

...

They're supposed be British teenagers yet after all the sleepovers and camping Hermione still doesn't get fingered even once.

It's just one of 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.

You're too late m8.

You've been beaten to the punch mate

>They're supposed be British teenagers yet after all the sleepovers and camping Hermione still doesn't get fingered even once.

>They're supposed be British teenagers yet after all the sleepovers and camping Ron & Harry don't fuck even once

FTFY

...

Can anyone tell me how Harry beats voldemort in the first book/film?

The power of love?

Oh yah. Great writing. This happens again throughout the series although a few of the books/movies are more enjoyable because of the horcruxes, atleast theres an objective with those.

>legitimate criticism
>movies for kids
Choose one. It's just for fun, dude. Nothing special here.

high production quality kids films

Goblet of Fire is kino though, great use of colors and large scenery

I always thought Harry himself was a really bland character and radcliffe had no charm while playing him.

Pleb detected

>Goblet of Fire is kino though
LOL

5 > 7.1 > 3 > 6 > 7.2 > 1 > 2 > 4

I haven't watched it yet...

One obvious issue is that the films would sometimes reference plot points from previous books that had been cut from the previous film adaptations, so you don't really get a 100% coherent plot if you haven't read the books.
This was probably a product of the ever-changing people behind the camera and the perils of adapting a series that isn't finished yet and not knowing what's going to be significant later.

Harry can't act until the third movie.

Quidditch makes no sense and the snitch is just a plot device to make Harry a hero.

CGI has aged horribly.

They generally improve with each film but the third one is still the best.

>They generally improve with each film but the third one is still the best.
There is something really charming about the first one though. Everything is very warm and almost tangibly magical whereas the later films are almost uniformly more gloomy and gothic.

It's an adaption, quidditch shit was stuck from the book.

1,2 and 4 are comfy

the rest are dogshit, trying to be dark and edgy and fail at every turn

The Nancy-drew-like detective stories felt like an unrealistic depiction of characters of the principle cast's age.

They are too clever for three teens with objectively terrible upbringings, and their apparent intellect doesn't fit with their complete lack of emotional self-awareness.

I grew up

More like leave one of the dullest shitflinging in the history of the internet to me!! Seriously each episode following Chris Chan and Captain Autismo from Reddit as we shit up the board has been indistinguishable from the others. Aside from the quips, the series’ only consistency has been its lack of originality and ineffective use of subtle improvisation, all to make reposts unmagical, to make action seem inert.

Perhaps the die was cast when gook Moot vetoed the idea of janitors moderating the board; he made sure discussions would never be mistaken for a quipfest that meant anything to redditors?just ridiculously unfunny (You) gathering for his paycheck. The Harry Potter threads might be anti-Kino (or not), but it’s certainly the anti-BvS series in its refusal of worthwhile discussion, theories and excitement. No one wants to face that fact. Now, thankfully, they no longer have to.

>a-at least the pastas were funny though
"No!"
The writing is dreadful; the image was terrible. As I read, I noticed that every time a thread started one way, the nigger wrote instead that the post "was one of the dullest"

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. Chris Chan and Captain Autismo mind is so governed by copy and pasting that xir has no other style of writing. Later I read a lavish, loving review of Sup Forums by the same Stephen King. He wrote something to the effect of, "If these redditors are browsing reddit or 9gag at 11 or 12, then when they get older they will go on to waste their lives posting on a Chinese Cartoon imageboard." And he was quite right. He was not being ironic. When you read "Sup Forums" you are, in fact, trained to spout shit memes without getting upvoted

>5

No. 5 is barely better than 4.

kino

The only good ones are the first two.

3 > 7.1 > 6 > 2 > 7.2 > 1 > 5 > 4 objectively.

That's called nostalgia

Daniel Radcliffe has a small dick.

Every time I learn something new about HP, it's taken straight out of folklore.

Rowling doesn't have an original thought in her talentless head.

I bet she went to school with someone called Harry Potter too.
No wonder publishers turned her down dozens of times.

Yes I'm bitter.

1>2>3>4>7.2>6>5>7.1 4 probably deserves to be last but is redeemed by the graveyard scene.

What is the inherent flaw in quiddich?

the seekers are disconnected from the game
might as well be playing an entirely seperate game

>all of Ron's best lines given to Hermione in the later movies, rendering him a non-character
>Yates
>far too much good material buthcered or cut entirely (especially Riddle's past)
>too much shitty teen drama
>everybody wearing muggle clothes after PoA
>generally poorer atmosphere after PoA
>Yates
>poo filter in Half Blood Prince
>Deathly Hallows both parts too drawn out
>stupid fucking retarded changes in Deathly Hallows pt 2 third act
>not recasting Ginny after the bong genes turned her into a troll
>changing wizard duels into retarded flying colours bouncing around
>Yates

Probably forgot something, but most problems can be traced back to Yates.

>Harry can't act until the third movie

what movie were you watching retard? the acting in the third is by far the worst

...

Is he a druggy or is he just thee big nobhead lads?

There's only a few cringy lines in the third movie compared to the first 2, and given that it's basically still a children's series until the 4th one it's somewhat forgivable. The third one has the benefit of being far more concisely condensed than the first two, and way better directing and cinematography in general.

Half Blood Prince and the Prisoner of Azkaban are objectively the most visually appealing and appropriate to their tones in the whole series. Yates really just fucked up on book condensation, which really, given the fact that the 4 films prior to him had three different directors, wasn't much of his fault anyway. Part one of the 7th film was actually good; he just dropped the ball hard on the ending.

so much blue/teal

...

The biggest fault with HBP was dropping all but two of the pensieve scenes. And also making young Tom an obvious creepy weirdo rather than the charming sociopath he was supposed to be.

The time traveling shit literally ruined the whole franchise. If such a thing existed Dumbledore could have easily reversed his curse and therefore wouldn't have been doomed to die and none of that shit would have happened the way it did

Too many wogs at Hogwarts

Ignoring the terrible stageplay the time travel in HP (which I agree should never have been added and wasn't worth a one-book stupid gimmick causing all these headaches) only creates stable time loops. You can't undo anything that's already happened.

They did the same thing with that Eragon movie. They completely cut out the wound he received on his back at the end of 1, and it turned out it was a very very vital plot point of number 2, and to a lesser extent, 3 and 4.

If any movie needs a reboot, it's that.

I hate that Ron got so shafted in the later films.
I mean I love Emma Watson, I thought she was absolutely gorgeous, but I do feel sorry for Ron, and it did ruins the films.

> You can't undo anything that's already happened

Fucking hell you retard, everything in the past has already happened

Don't get me wrong, it is still clearly a very flawed system of rules, but the main thing people talk about is how stupid it is that the Snitch is the end-all of the game. This part of the system is actually great, you just have to look at the game from another perspective.

People are comparing it to most sports, where the focus is the ball that goes into the goals at either end of the field, and then think the snitch is a stupid caveat to the rules. Actually though, the main focus of the sport IS the snitch, and the rest of the people have support roles. The Beaters are around to prolong the game by keeping the Seeker from finding the snitch. The Chasers are around to rack up points, which do not usually matter in terms of who wins the games, but are incredibly important in tournaments. Quidditch is meant to played in a tournament, not one off games, as in the one off games the points the chasers make are insignificant. However, in a tournament, the points help set the spread. So winning a match doesn't necessarily mean that you advance in the tournament, you have to win the match by a certain amount in order to progress in the tournament! In one of the books, Harry has to hold off on winning (because they know they're going to win), until the chasers have made enough points to put them into the next round.

So, if you change the focus to the snitch, and realize that the points from the chasers are actually for tournament purposes, then it isn't quite AS stupid.

That's not how the time travel works in Harry Potter.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causal_loop
Everything that occurs is the result of the time travel already. Nothing can be changed using time travel.

Cursed Child retconned this

Prisoner of Autism was the ONLY good Harry Potter movie

Prove me wrong

Cursed Child is trash.

The Cursed Child and Prisoner of Azkaban use two different time travel methods, and neither one can work with the other. Not to mention that it was stated in the original books somewhere that time turners can only send someone back 5 hours. Both of these facts used in Prisoner invalid the entire plot for Cursed Child.

I don't know what JK Rowling was thinking stating it was canon, even though she didn't write it. Only one can be canon for the entire universe to make sense. I take PoA as canon over Cursed Child, and a lot of HP fans agree.

>I can't read

Teen pandering in later films
Color correction is ass

Scotland is just like that.