Could Harry have avoided Voldemort if he hid under his cloak?

Could Harry have avoided Voldemort if he hid under his cloak?

Why didn't they just hide under a biggger one the whole time?

Why didn't Voldemort make one his horcrux?

Why didn't Harry shoot Voldemort in the face?

Was Ron autistic? Could Snape fight Harry if they got in a fight underwater? Why did the womping willow not get cut down after killing people?

Because all of these examples are even duller than it already is.

Dull you say?

Good question, but an even more important question is: could Harry have avoided being in one of the dullest franchises 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 r-right
"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.

>Harry hides under his cloak
>The movie ends.

sweet mother of fuck dont ever try to write a script.

Right on time

>Dumbledore can detect Harry under the cloak
>Voldermort can't

try again

a good script writer could work around anything

Or a sniper.

The more important question is what is wrong with Voldemort's face? How did he breathe without a nose? Was Voldemort a literal mouth breather?

The more important question is why did they mispronounce his name the entire film series?

>Adapt to this

>Voldemort at the height of his powers
>every creature in Newt's suitcase
Who would win?

If that old fuck is so strong then why doesn't he just kill voldemort?

fuck dumbledore

he pretty much bitches Dumbledore in the book. The movie just makes him look like an asshole

>But what if he shot him in the face?
>What if he shot me in the face?

The scar let him track Harry, I'm pretty sure at one point he sees him under his cloak

>Why did the womping willow not get cut down after killing people?
Nigger, it's a mother fucking tree.

How hard is it to avoid?

y didnt he make a grain of sand his horcrux

newt would give voldy his boipussy

why didn't Voldemort just kill Harry as a baby lmao