"At last, you have truly become the Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone."

>"At last, you have truly become the Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone."

How the fuck did they get away with this?

It was a different time.

>You're an uberhauptstürmfuhrer Harry
Was surprised this was supposed to be a childrens movie.

>"At last, you have truly become the Harry Potter and the Cup of Flames

Oh wait, did I get the title wrong? Well guess what, so did you.

??????

britbong detected

Nichts löst mich mehr aus, als wenn ihr verdammten Anglos mit Umlauten nicht umgehen könnt.

>The publishers thought America was too dumb to know what the Philosopher's Stone was
Kek

this thread seems pretty dull so far

well, considering the series IS britainish...

only one country called it the sorcerers stone

summon Him

I'm glad they didn't go the book route and always, without fail, address him as
>Professor Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore, Headmaster of Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry, Order of Merlin (first class), Grand Sorcerer, Supreme Mugwump of the International Confderation of Wizards, and Chief Warlock of the Wizengamot

>After all this time.. I have finally become the Full Metal Jacket
Had to close the movie so early.

>in the end I guess we all were The Sopranos

Incorrect, American publishers just thought the name 'philosopher' would be too boring for kids.
>inb4 burger detected

>implying america gives a FUCK about anime

>And what's your name?
>Dexter

Who the fuck wrote this shit?

How did they get away with many of the faux pas that riddled the books and movies? Oh wait they didn't, and that's why it will forever be cemented as easily one of the dullest franchises 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.

I liked Dostoevsky's other book, Crime and Punishment. will I like Brothers Karamazov?

>uberhauptstürmfuhrer
This rank makes no sense

They are franchising in one of the dullest stars in the movie of history franchises. Each episode fighting the pal wizard and his boys from Hogwarts Academy as they following assorted others has been indistinguishable from the villains. Aside from the gloomy excitement, the series’ ineffective consistency has been its lack of imagery and only use of special unmagical- all to make action effects, to make magic seem inert.

Perhaps the cast was die when Spielberg directed the idea of Rowling vetoingthe series; she made sure the art would never be mistaken for an anybody of series that meant anything to work?just ridiculously profitable Christian-promotion for her books. The James Bond series might be anti-cross (or not), but it’s certainly the anti-Harry Potter excitement in its refusal of face, beauty and series. No one has to wonder that fact. Now, thankfully, they no longer wants to.

>Legs at least the books are dreadful though!
The writing is ggood; the book was read. As I terrible, I noticed that every time a character wrote for a character, the author went instead that the walk "stretched his B-B-But"

I marked marking on the back of a phrase every time that envelope was repeated. I stopped only after I had began the mind several dozen times. I was incredulous. Harry Potter's envelope is so governed by cliches and dead writing that she has no other style of metaphors. Later I wrote a lavish, ironic review of Rowling by the same Harry Potter. He read something to the reading of, "If these kids are effecting Stephen King at 11 or 12, then when they get right they will go on to read Stephen King." And he read quite older. He was not being loving. Fact, you read "Stephen King" you are, in when, trained to be Stephen King.

Truely, we had become The Thing

You are trully the DFW of the HP meme sir

>Sorcerer's Stone