I R R E F U T A B L E

...

Other urls found in this thread:

archive.4plebs.org/tv/search/text/deh/filter/text/
youtube.com/watch?v=oQISw4NDHVA
youtu.be/oQISw4NDHVA?t=1m8s
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Switch 1 and 4 and that's my exact ranking.

you can rate turds all yo want, but a turd is still a turd.

3 was shit

true

6 > 5 > 4 > 3 > 7 > 1 > 2 > 8
tbqh

dullest franchise poster in 3, 2 1...

Its irrefutable Rowling created 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.

at least include the image

So, in the shit scale 3 us the shittiest?

Dumb faggot, your image is so bad

Grow up, numales

good

I've only see the first 4 and thought the 4th was terrible, hence why I stopped even after my ex begged me to keep watching them with her.

I thought chamber of secrets was the third, that's the best one

>no connection to the topic in the first sentence
>no image
0/10

I always confuse all the films after Azkaban, all of them feel similar to me, while everything else feels like it has it's own style per film.

you fucked it up my man

>PoA EVER ranked 1st

This meme needs to die.

>fan/v/eddit comes back
>quality of Sup Forums is down the drain again
What a surprise

...

>You've lost, white man

What did he mean by this?

Chamber of Secrets is my favourite Harry Potter film

Because it allowed Cuaron to make Children of Men which is one of my favourite films of all time

As much as I'd like to attempt to, I can't prove you wrong with regard to one 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.

Anyone who doesnt believe 3 is the only interesting book and that 2 isnt the best movie is an absolute retard or a contrarian.

Nicely done

"irrefutable," dumbass

Why does Odran hangout with under 18 year olds when hes almost 30?

I mentioned the wrong harry potter film -i'm sorry I've had some drink and don't actually give a shit about harry potter but children of men is still fucking amazing

>the virgin teacher
>the chad professor

>a!
what did he mean by this?
was he trying to say something?

I love 1 2 and even 4 is good but the others are even better

ta!

>atlas shrugged
>god tier

Why are you so tasteless? Like it's unbelievable how bad your taste in everything is including sports

Deh!

archive.4plebs.org/tv/search/text/deh/filter/text/

I haven't seen these films in years but that bit where voldemort pops up made me laugh so fucking hard - was this edited? or have I just had too much to drink

It's actually, unironically, genuinely, definitively, demonstrably, seriously in the movie
youtube.com/watch?v=oQISw4NDHVA

1:10

youtu.be/oQISw4NDHVA?t=1m8s
he's just green screened in

I remember watching 2 in a cinema as a kid and a fan of the books and it was so fucking bad I couldn't fucking sit through it.

nope, switch 6 and 3..3 has become too hyped for what it is, 'different'

Fucking keking my fucking ass off

My parents must have thought this was a right ole load of shit when I made them take me to see this.

Did snape die a virgin?

>all those youtube comments talking about how emotional and powerful this scene is

my sides

yeah
after lily started dating harry's dad he went MGTOW then took the greenpill

Scroll further and you'll find people genuinely defending the shot of Voldemort in question

First three were the best. Went downhill afterwards.

Comfy Hogwarts is the best

why do people dislike goblet of fire ? i thought it was pretty cool, and i haven't even followed the potter series

>1 and 2
Radcliffe literally suffered from a disorder that slowed his mental reaction time and he spends half of those movies blankly looking at threatening things and subtly moving his mouth. He only got it under control by 3

Faggot

OP's list is absolute shit, 5, 6 and 7 are all too highly rated.
How you could have 1, 2, and 4 below 5 boggles my mind.

>The best of the franchise
>Shit

good ranking