You literally can't disagree

You literally can't disagree

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=k8_NmCUXyiU
youtube.com/watch?v=Q37xJtuQ24w
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

what're we supposed to talk about then?

yes I can everyone's rating 5 so high all of a sudden. 6 and 7 are better.

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

One of the most exciting franchises in the history of movie franchises

How mediocre this series is whilst samefags that he has taste and knows what hes talking about even though he just picked up the series after his favorite game of thrones character died.

>7 HIGHER THAN ANYTHING

What the fuck? Exactly WHAT is good about that slow piece of shit where nothing happened?

But 1 and 2 are the comfiest

...

But you can considering its one 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.

The movies are actually cool, unlike one of the dullest shitposts in the history of movie shitposts. Each shitpost following /lit/ wizards and their pals from /r9k/ as they fight assorted kinographers has been indistinguishable from the others. Aside from the lack of film analysis the shitposts only consistency has been its lack of excitement and ineffective use of images and pasta?all to make fantasy unfantastical to make witchcraft seem kiddie.

Perhaps the die was cast when Quentin vetoed the idea of shitposting on /lit/ directing the shitposts at Sup Forums, he made sure the shitposts would never be mistaken for a work of art that meant anything to anybody?just ridiculously profitable cross-posting for his (You). The shitposts might be anti-Christian (or not), but it’s certainly the anti-atmospherical anaylsis in its refusal of critique and watching for the plot. No one wants to face that fact. Now, thankfully, they no longer have to.

>a-at least the shitposts are g-g-good though
"No!"

The writing is dreadful; the books were terrible and the films were much better. As I read, I noticed that everytime he shitposts, Quentin wrote instead that Brave New World "was a low tier form of art."

I began marking on the back of an envelope every time that shitpost was repeated. I stopped only after I had marked the envelope several dozen times. I was incredulous. The shitposters mind is so governed by cliches and dead metaphors that he has no other style of writing. Later I read a lavish, loving review of shitpost by the same Stephen King. He wrote something to the effect of, "If these kids are shitposting 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 shitpost you are, in fact, trained to read Stephen King.

They were all bad.
None of the movies were remotely enjoyable.
I don't remember laughing, cracking a smile, or anything memorable about these movies at all.

Except one thing. "D... do centaurs really rape the shit out of people? Is that what she's implying? Oh my god they do, oh my god everyone is happy that a cunty old woman is going to experience vaginal trauma of the absolute worst kind in an orgy that will probably kill the old hag."

Other than that, the movies are complete ass.

How old were you when watching the first 3?

>slow
>nothing happens
my god do you read your own posts and think you sound like you even deserve an answer? go watch goblet of fire or transformers

/thread

HOLY KEK people like this are always the most vocal.

They are all good. 4 is the worst.
3>6>7>1=5>8>2>4

See hes doing it now and the post count goes up but the posters one doesn't

Thanks man. There's some autist in here who thinks nobody could agree with my taste.

He's also taken his autism so far he has to comment in every single thread false flagging me as a gamr of thrones fan.

Swap 1 and 5 and you're golden. A good, but not perfect list.

>literally can't
The hell I can't. Prisoner of Azkaban was a fucking disappointment.

3>1>2>6>>>>>>>>>>>

I've been in enough threads to know everyone likes them all differently because they are all good. That's why there's so many differing opinions on rankings. That being said anyone who doesn't think Goblet of Fire is the worst is up their ass and have no idea what they are talking about to begin with

It´s pasta.

so is that one

no shit?

This except that Goblet of fire is the worst by far

you guys need to seriously stop shitposting. The following is the objective truth as divined by Merlin's Beard itself:

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

t. Columbus

I love the first two and they are great but 2 in particular has lots of basic problems. not with the acting even it just falls on the directing

are the first two good adaptations or great yes but they were the easiest and the direction didn't stray from the material

I'm almost crying. That's my ranking too fampie.

Great taste.

agreed, the dancing scene in 7.1 is underrated

this is the one true rank but 6=7.1 is also acceptable

it really is

>5
>better than anything
Yeah, sure, if they hadn't cut half of the fucking book. The pacing was fucking shit, too.

I literally dont care.

yet you're here on this board in this thread.

5 is underrated famalam get some taste. Its certainly better than 4. Most of the thread puts it in their top 4. It was originally three hours. The pacing is fine. I justed watched it was very good and very well paced. Most of them start to cresendo at the 1.5 hour mark and climax at the 2-2:15 mark

the book had a ton of meat to be cut and a movie is different from a book

most of the things that happen in the book are random everyday occurences and they huge books. they had to focus on harry and the trio.

They're very forgettable.

youtube.com/watch?v=k8_NmCUXyiU

Half Blood Prince is the best. You literally cannot dispute this.

No they arent. Most of the shit praised on here like 10 cloverfield lane or edge of tomorrow are forgettable.

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

I know, shit taste, but what can I do

It hard because that direction was tight. That cave scene in theaters....

You're absolutely right to rate 5 so highly, the autist book fanboys who say it's the worst one and a travesty drive me fucking crazy. They have no idea what constitutes a good movie.

If you like 5 so much you should like yates others a bit more. 1 2 too high even though they are very good.

the same happens with 6. and 7.1 is underrated even being faithful to the book

7.2 is yates best rated and its probably easily the worst even if its good.

>meat to be cut
Like fucking St Mungus? On of the most interesting places in the franchise.
Or Sirius' character development when they were staying at his mother's house which would have made us actually care about him?

>The pacing is fine

>We're at my uncle's house for a couple of minutes
>Now we're at Sirius's place for another minute or so
>Hey this looks pretty cool maybe we could-Oh! Time to go to Hogwarts I guess!
And on and on. We can't appreciate any of the locations because they won't let us stay there for more than a few moments, except for Hogwarts but that's normal.

The ending was pretty good though.

i know, but I just can't help it, babby Potter too cute

easily his worst*

2 > 3 > 1 > 7.2 > 7.1 > I can't tell 4 5 and 6 apart

I fucking love goblet of fire

I'd probably swap 5 & 4, goblet felt rather neat and tight, unlike messy 5

listen all sperging. st mubdongos fuck who cares. fuck it. it focuses on what it needs to. and the entire beginning until they get to hogwarts is paced fine. they go back to grimmauld place later on. its not rushed. sirius has development because he is on screen with harry and co. and steals the scenes. he's such a nice guy. it makes his death very sad

again idk what they cut but they cut 40 min including the brain scene.

>were at my uncles house for a couple minutes
you mean the dursleys yea there's no need to stay
they were at sirius' for like 7-9 minutes and then they go to the ministry. the ending was good but apparently it had the most cut. sometimes less is more I think its pretty good an adapation. it should focus on harry more

Wizard People Dear Reader > any of the actual movies

>goblet felt neat and tight
wtf

its batshit and all over the place. the directing is ridiculous. close ups constant swooping pannings and zooms

>its batshit and all over the place. the directing is ridiculous. close ups constant swooping pannings and zooms
pure cinema
maybe you should learn about it

t. average Sup Forums neet

I literally cannot remember what happens on 6 besides le spoilers xdxd

I watch HP for dank magic, not cinematography and kino bullshit. Gobby of Fire had plenty of that.

never got the love for prisoner of azkaban. i remember semi-being into hp as a kid. didn't read the books but had a wallpaper thing plastered on my room, a journal, played the playstation game a lot, etc. i went in excited for the third movie, but i remember disliking it so much i stopped caring altogheter.

a year ago i watched it again, along with the ones that came after (which i hadn't seen), and i still don't get how it's any different from the other ones. it's just as generic, and boring.

i'm sort of amazed people can tell them apart enough to make rankings. the final two are different, but the other ones feel the same to me.

no I actually saw them all in imax and I literally mean the framing is shit. it was noticably jarring. cliche swooping isn't good swooping. god damn you're retarded. newell is terrible. I'm talking about the choices of the directing being cliche and you're acting like just because there's movement its good. no its bad azkaban was better

and the directing is adhd.

4 is genuinely very good, and again, only gets shit on by bookfags who take issue with what was omitted from the books. What good would it have done to include the quidditch world cup match?

I'd even go so far as to say that Gambon's much maligned portrayal of Dumbledore was for the better. It's not the character from the books but it works well.

the dank magic is better in every single other one.

>3 at the top
Quite literally everyone agrees. it's the only one that has a cinematic feel while the rest are sterile puppet projects.

I literally can't distinguish them after the third. Was the fourth one the one with the cup?

>fuck who cares
People who actually care about the worldbuilding and the story.
>and the entire beginning until they get to hogwarts is paced fine
Sure thing m8 :^)
>sirius has development because he is on screen with harry and co. and steals the scenes
A great actor stealing the scenes he's in counts as character development now.

>they were at sirius' for like 7-9 minutes and then they go to the ministry.
And most of that time is spent in Harry's room where he complains about shit.
>sometimes less is more
And sometimes less is shit.

Its wasn't gambons choice its newells shit directing. Gambon read prisoner of azkaban and in it was perfect. Barty crouch jr is licking himseld. Newell directed with no poise and no subtley its as if he had no confidence so he had to turn the directing up to 11.

I'm not a bookfag I'm judging it as a film the acting is the worse and the directing is cnsistent yes but its ridiculous

How do 12+ year olds like this franchise? It insists upon itself

5 and 6 were fucking trash, retard

why I thought Voldys resurrection was quite neat, and the goblet trials didnt fall short either

>I literally can't distinguish them after the third.
You're not supposed to be able to. it's meant to be safe and consumer friendly as possible.

hey faggot the books are standalone or comolementary. they can't include everything they included what was needed for the main story to work best

>never got the love for prisoner of azkaban
Great worldbuilding, magnificent directing and atmosphere. And it had the hottest Hermione.

The others are much cooler

4 is the cup and the dragons and the mermaids
5 is students in the secret room training magic

Alfonso Cuaron

1 absolutely based quirrell guy
2 some bullshit about spiders and a snake
3 oldman going apeshit
4 was goblet of fire
5 was that cruel milf teacher?
6 literally no idea
7 the boring one where nothing happens?
8 pretty good battle at the end but really can't remember much else

Goblet of fire is shit

SHIT

7 is outright terrible and 8 is terribly paced.

I honestly want to see someone try a condensing cut that combines both to a run time around the other 6.

Splitting the final film was one of the worst things they could have done.

why 6 is so forgettable?

Reminder that anyone who ranks #3 as best should go back2reddit.

Literally kill yourself they all feel different due to the directing and cinematographers and atmosphere

4 5 6 7 8 are very different. 7 and 8 are very different alone. 6 is gothic

>they can't include everything
No, they can't. What they could do is make a cohesive film instead of the mess we got.

You're fucking stupid. The original print was 5.5 hours long. 8 is badly paced. 7 is great. Deathly hallows has the only midway point to split up with a climax in dobbys death and it works in the film. One film would been 100 times more rushed than 8. They would have to ignore the hallows and focus on the horcruxes

it is extrenely cohesive. the only one that isn't is Goblet

Literally kill yourself, /r/movies buff. come back when you can defend them outside of your second grade understanding and name dropping.

Because this board is full of actual plebs

You can't fix garbage that was only made for profit and after the fact that the creator just wanted the series to end.

1 and 2 felt like a genuine attempt at creating childhood wonder with magic and new way of life.

3 was good for world building, but this is where the entire series went off the deep end in its style.

Everything afterwards felt like a hollow production that warranted a watching if only for the sake of completion, I honestly can't remember any real excitement in watching any of them premiere except the deathly hallows pt.2 which was okay I guess.

Best rankings ITT

Reminder there's an autist in this thread who starts arguments and shitposts because he has no life and he actually doesn't even care or like the series. But he's here every single time.

Here's the one true ranking, you fucking plebs!

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

In my 20's I imagine? My sister who is older than me swore the books were AMAZING so I picked one up and couldn't get through the first chapter.

You just knew the writer was an old woman by her tone and how she tells the story.

youtube.com/watch?v=Q37xJtuQ24w

tl;dr Harry Potter is shit.

This, its the worst and anyone who says different needs to get out

>5 in the last
Shit taste

They truly were the marvel flicks of their time

my friend, the only book a woman has ever written well is the guns of august.

Yes, you do have shit taste.

I think the level of poise and subtlety on display was fairly appropriate for a series about teenage wizard hijinks. Dramatically I thought the fourth film was the most engaging and most well-rounded overall, other than maybe the fifth.

Mein neger.

Nice fucking rank but I'd switch 4 5 personally.