ALCOHOLICUS REMOVUS

ALCOHOLICUS REMOVUS

>alcohol

Ketus getus

ACCIO DUBS

ay

dullest stretched hislegs

oh shit ACCIO GF pls I need this

DUBBUS GETTICUS

>user shows his drugs power level by thinking this looks like a drunk person

You don't go outside much huh

its the sex number xD XD

...

>69

This is honestly almost as funny as baneposting at this point.

Why didn't Harry just say Accio Mount Doom and dropped Slytherin in?

This.

Drunks don't open their eyes that wide, if anything when they're really drunk their eyes will be partially closed because eyelids get heavy at that point.

Drugs are what make eyes bolt open wide.

Also drunks would never carry a bottle of water with them. People on amps, ecstacy would.

>water

yes you fucking would

you are dehydrated all the time when you are hungover, i drink insane amount of water everyday, not cuz its healthy its cuz im fucking thirsty all the fucking time

t. alcohol

>has never been hungover

Eyyy

So what? I'd be out of my head all the time if I had to live with knowing my name would forever be associated with 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 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.