Why is Sup Forums so obsessed with commercialized garbage now?

Why is Sup Forums so obsessed with commercialized garbage now?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=ADBKdSCbmiM
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Sup Forums is a pleb board

>now

because this board is full of preteens, it easily explains the Sup Forums tier quality of most discussions and also never tolerating differents opinions.

>now

>professional roboposter shils: how do they work?

it aint magic
$$$

The great normie flood from the fappening

the best memes come from the stupidest shit good friend

uninspired John post tbqh

>Hey wiggly worms, my name is Gandy and I hate every single one of you

This is a Hollywood board.

>now
Have you been in a coma for the last 12 years??

this

Damn, I know see why people find harry potter memes funny :^)

Sup Forumsmblr and Sup Forumseddit invasion because of stupid memes
Also mods actually banning the cunny posters and deleting their threads, they were annoying but at least they kept the normalfags out.

The board got popular. It isn't a meme that once something(still going on) becomes popular it turns to shit

>now
because normies love it and plebbits think they're cultured. Try and talk abot citizen kane and everyone will tell you you're just pretending to like it

true

2006
>Remember when Sup Forums was good?
>Remember when Sup Forums was good?
>Remember when Sup Forums was good?
2008
>Remember when Sup Forums was good?
>Remember when Sup Forums was good?
>Remember when Sup Forums was good?
2010
>Remember when Sup Forums was good?
>Remember when Sup Forums was good?
>Remember when Sup Forums was good?
2012
>Remember when Sup Forums was good?
>Remember when Sup Forums was good?
>Remember when Sup Forums was good?
2014
>Remember when Sup Forums was good?
>Remember when Sup Forums was good?
>Remember when Sup Forums was good?
2016
>Remember when Sup Forums was good?
>Remember when Sup Forums was good?
>Remember when Sup Forums was good?


No

Is that Dumbledore? Well he is in one of 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.

I still don't get why Harald Schmidt was used for this meme
or if it makes any sense at all

>putting a literal masterpiece together with actual commercialized shit

Why are you browsing Sup Forums?

youtube.com/watch?v=ADBKdSCbmiM

Is that Dumbledore? Well he is in one of the dullest franchise in the history of movie franchises? Seriously why did 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 being SO CASH 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 Tarantino 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-Plane scene series in its refusal of wonder, beauty and excitement. No one wants to face that fact. Now, thankfully, they no longer have to.

>W-What about the attacks on the wookies though?
"HONKA HONKA!"
The writing is dreadful; the leads were weak. As I read, I noticed that every time a character went for a walk, the author wrote instead that the character "got the high ground."

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.