Was he miscast or is he just a really bad actor?

Was he miscast or is he just a really bad actor?

LOOK AT THE TOP OF HIS HEAD

Ralph Fiennes is the one redeeming quality of this dull series.

How dull would you say this series is?

t. normie

t. retard

This is very true. 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.

There's only so much you can do with garbage material. Rowling dropped the ball in the 7th book, because Voldemort went from being an interesting and frightening villain to just some one-trick Hitler wannabe.

There's only so much that the writers could do to fix that, and there's only so much that Fiennes could do to make their writing seem decent. Because in GoF and OotP, he was actually kind of frightening.

Do you just have a file where you have all of this copypasta stored away? Is that easier or better than having a thought?

either way he sucked ass and i expected a menacing, intelligent, manipulative character.

he just turned out to be an ugly overtly evil retard who only had followers because his power level was higher than theirs and he'd kill them if they disobeyed him, which made me wonder why the death eaters went through so much trouble to bring him back in the first place.

I just LOVE this reddit pasta!

blame Rowling's idiotic writing, not Fiennes, who made the most of a shitty script and was extremely entertaining

i bet you are on of the guys who say nic cage is a bad actor

Why is Notes from Underground in low tier?

no i love raising arizona and he's in quite a few movies i enjoy

oh i do, i don't think it's a case of bad acting. i think it's a villain who's built up and built up and then ultimately revealed to be "it's fucking nothing"

it's definitely the writing. but it's the writing that gave me high expectations in the first place. i was genuinely intrigued by voldemort and tom riddles history and couldn't wait to see what he was like and it was just a bland evil guy.

Was pretty sad when HP became outright Jew propaganda.

Jews were disliked in Germany FOR A REASON. To compare Mudblood Wizards to Jews is fucking retarded because as is given example in the books, Mudshit M.Users (like Hermione) can be really OP, whereas full blood like Neville can be shit.

J.K. Tried to do the old "Jews were killed for no reason lol!" but it doesn't work because Jews were the source of EVERY PROBLEM.

also he was supposed to be super smart and made stupid mistakes all over the movies and books

He was always pretty bland in the books to be fair.

Though I will say Tom Riddle is great, especially in the movies.
Voldemort is not. It would have been a lot better if he just remained a empty threat in the background, and you only really saw his evil through his servants and influence. Sort of like Sauron but with more personality. He should have been defeated before he was fully brought back in some clever way instead of that weird cringy war thing.

Elaborate.

yeah i mean i never quite understood why they hated "mudbloods". maybe i forget if there was an explanation, but as far as i can remember pure bloods had a superiority complex based on just having pure blood. was there something dangerous about letting non-magic born witches and wizards into the magical world? did it risk exporsure to the rest of the world? there was no distinguishable difference between them.

also why was snape so high ranking in the aryan wizard organization if he was half blooded?

Snape always proved to be exceptionally valuable to Voldemort, and given how talented he was at Potions and dueling, he was probably valuable to many of Voldemort's followers as well. Given the chance, they'd probably turn on him as soon as he was no longer an asset. For instance, when Voldemort used Nagini to kill him in the Shrieking Shack, because he believed that Snape was now a liability. Snape's decades of faithful service (which Voldemort still believed up to the moment of his death) counted for nothing.

Elaborate how?

They should have gotten an actor with a nose tbqh