Is this where the Harry Potter franchise peaked?

Is this where the Harry Potter franchise peaked?

And now we wait for the pasta

nope, peak was Deathly Hallows pt 1

yes

you know what's depressing? watching the Harry Potter movies for the first time since childhood and realizing how bad they suck.

>you know what's depressing? watching the Harry Potter movies for the first time since childhood and realizing how bad they suck.

Shit, really?
I did rewatch the third one, because even as a kid it was my favourite. Holds up extremely well.
Haven't rewatced the others though.

I tried to do a marathon and gave up halfway through the first one.

Its definitely where my dick peaked

DULLEST

First 3 were harry kino. Goblet of Fire wasn't too bad. I enjoyed the tournament bits but that was the point that they really started in hard with the awfully written teen drama shit and it was downhill from there.

peak was the first movie it just went downhill from there. proof?
they stopped with the house points

It never peaked, it stayed as one of the dullest franchise in the history of movie franchises throughout. 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.

GOB>HBP>POA>DHP1&2>OP>COS>PS

Really? I just recently did it, I got a massive nostalgia trip. It was fun.

It always peaked, it stayed as one of the best franchises in the history of movie franchises throughout. Each episode followed the boy wizard and his pals from Hogwarts Academy as they fight assorted villains has been distinguishable from the others. Aside from the fantastic imagery, the series’ numerous consistencies have been its lack of plot holes and effective use of special effects, all to make magic magical, to make action seem captivating.

Perhaps the die was cast when Rowling vetoed the idea of Spielberg directing the series; she made sure the series would never be a work of art that meant a lot to everybody! Just incredible cross-promotion for her books. The Harry Potter series might be anti-Lucas (or not), but it’s certainly the anti-preque; series in its refusal of annoying characters, boring dialogue and dull plot. We love to face that fact. Now, thankfully, we always can.

>a-and the books were good!
"Yes!"
The writing is intricate; the books were amazing. As I read, I noticed that every time a character went for a walk, the author wrote, instead, that the character "stretched his legs" or some other fantastic idiom.

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 unique imagery and fresh metaphors that she has so many styles 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.

>not starting the pasta with a made up spell
Sad!

no

kek

its reddit just like the rest of em

check'd

>High tier
>Eeee eeee eeeeeeee

memeing piece of shit.

one of my fav books tho tbqh very funny and wild

The first two films are comfykino. Based Colombus.

>tfw to intelligent to enjoy Prisoner of Azkaban

Half Blood Prince is objectively the best Harry Potter movie.

I actually just started doing this. Just finished Azkaban. The first 2 definitely have a similar feel and I realized now more than ever how they really were just kids movies with a big budget. The effects in the first one were particularly awful and I was caught off guard by how rushed the first half hour or so was.

Third one was definitely an improvement. I'm hoping I don't hate the next few. I think I marathoned the last 3 or 4 right before seeing Deathly Hallows pt.2 and never watched any since then.

>rushed
>the movie takes ages before harry gets to hogwarts

whut

HBP would have be better if they focused more on Malfoy's parts.

I wasn't necessarily talking about getting to Hogwarts. But going from first seeing Harry with the Dudley's to Hagrid taking Harry all felt really rushed.

Then again maybe I just have a warped perception since I watched the movie so many times as a kid and seeing it for the first time in like 7 years seems odd to me.

The movie already expanded on his part which I liked. They lucked out that Tom Felton ended up being a GOAT actor.

Too bad about his hair though.

>I'm hoping I don't hate the next few.


From Kino to Twilight in just two flickaroos.

This. The first 2 are good for what they are, kids movies basically. The third showed real promise and did a decent job maturing things a bit.

Then instead of getting progressively darker and more mature with each movie, which could have culminated in a few true epics, we get Twilight tier trash.

just skip to Fantastic Beasts, it's kino

that's not part of the harry potter franchise, it's just some crappy spin-off trying to leach off the success of the original films

The first two have not aged as well as the rest.

Yes, it is.

It's also where Hermione peaked.

Regarding your spoiler... you mean her character right?

nah m8 it was pretty kino
>muh autist wizard
>muh bamf muggle

i like how it tried to be as different as possible instead of pandering and sticking in nostalgiabait

Heh... yeah.....character