Is there a more exciting franchise in the history of movie franchises? I don't think so

Is there a more exciting franchise in the history of movie franchises? I don't think so.

The Austin Powers franchise

Intending to watch the series again, or at least the first three.
I remember the first film was a very well-crafted tale for children, but I may be wrong. Was the second one as good, or worse?

> It's the "Harry Potter gets mature now and the final confrontation begins" movie
> And again
> And again
> And again
> And again
> And again

Both one and two are the same, style wise. If you like the first one, you'd probably like the second too.

Gonna fuck up the pasta real quick.

Are freakin you kidding me!? Its 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.

Alright then.

The problem I have with the later films is that they try to be more mature by using darker themes, but fail to do so. Like, they remain rather shallow and the characters are never truly three-dimensional. So they made "adult Harry Potter", but with the writing of a children's book.

ghostwriters in the dark? really?

no its literally the best

>exciting
Fucking hell, I even like Harry Potter though the books were better and I think you're a goddamn idiot.

Hrm.

I think I am the authority on this matter since I sat and watched all eight films this past weekend.

Can't speak for the books, but the movies ranged from "functional" to "unmitigated piles of trash." What a waste of a weekend.

The films are great, just marathoned them in IMAX

>Can't speak for the books
Have you not read them? They're decent reads.

Which is why the films are such a tragedy. Had they started doing them after the series was finished, and perhaps kept the same director for all seven and more competent screenwriters), they may have been able to maintain consistency throughout, suffering only through faults in the cast or source material (never said the books were PERFECT).

I suppose it's impossible to compare, considering the ages of the actors, and length of the series, but consider The Lord of the Rings. More-or-less filmed at the same time (with the exception of later reshoots), and constantly being reworked, with each rewrite moving closer to the original texts. Ultimately the whole trilogy was a great success, for something adapting what was believed to be impossible to adapt to any acceptable degree (even the animated versions were odd and only partial).

Pic related, Gandalf or Dumbledore, can't remember who because HBP was a mess.

>its another bookfag episode
only one that isnt great is goblet of fire

>what a waste of a weekend

Come on user. You know you wouldn't have done anything but jerk off to anime or sit on Sup Forums.

He's the average edgy autist on Sup Forums, of course he cant enjoy himself without pissing in bottles, touching himself and shitposting.

They're very enjoyable movies that become more substantive and engaging with each installment, excepting Goblet of Fire, which is worse than Prisoner of Azkaban.
I'm looking forward to the new movies, even though Grindelwald really isn't as badass or powerful as Voldemort. And I'm also looking forward to The Cursed Child never becoming a movie ever ever.

1 and 2 are great because of the director then it begins to crumble.

>never becoming a movie ever ever.
>looking forward to the new movies
But with retards like you it will become one. You have no standards and they plan to exploit that

cursed child is complete shit.

Even Rowling seems to be backing away from Cursed Child. She only put her stamp of approval on it for the money but I don't think she would give the OK to turn it into a MOVIE with her name slapped on it. It would tarnish the entire franchise and all future movies.

>gets 7
>and again
>and again

pleb

basically