Are you going to kill me, Harry?

Are you going to kill me, Harry?

>walk the grounds at night
>see moon
What do?

Why didnt they just ask Dumbledore to find Pettigrew

We know they can't change the past relative to themselves but if they just told Dumbledore what as going to happen, he probably could have gotten Pettigrew. He's basically a god in the HP world, you can't tell me he's not capable of finding a rat.

I don't think they can change the past at all really the things hermione does while time traveling don't directly interfere with anything pardoxical. Its a closed loop when they go back and since they always go through the events and are told by dumbledore Buckbeak never dies. There are no alternate realities. The prophecy by professor trewealney cant be changed that always hapened. Sirius and Harry are saved before in the past and present because it had already happened from Harrys point of view even though he doesn conjur the patronus until that future present, where he's in the past.

See: novikov self consistency principle

To add dumbledore wasn't wearing the time turner that day and night like hermione he can't travel back in time without her.

Lupin could have came to him and told him about peter on the map but he doesn't so those events never happen. Also dumbledore seems to know that they should be the ones to go back in time and will suceed in saving buckbeak and co bc he's mad

...

...

>tfw when you realize this is gary oldman

I don't get this meme, Oldman has always been instantly recognizable to me

...

No but you were in what was easily 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.

...

It's Rob Schenider.

...

...

...

...

Did Harry even know a way to kill somebody with magic at this point?

...

No hence the laughter

...

Dude stop.

...

EXPECTO PATRONUM

the fck is this shit thread

>Sup Forums users literally don't even talk about or appreciate film anymore they just meme and shitpost
>so much they are triggered by actual threads
Dude the catalog is shit go back to your epic meaningless thread