Why didn't Harry just avoid the dullest franchise and live his life in a fictional universe that doesn't revolve around...

Why didn't Harry just avoid the dullest franchise and live his life in a fictional universe that doesn't revolve around a boy wizard and his pals from Hogwarts Academy fighting assorted villains in a series of films where each installment has been indistinguishable from the others?

waiting for the pasta

...

I genuinely wonder how the pasta will look like now. This is some meta level stuff

Harry potter is perhaps the least dull franchise makes you think
Star trek star wars lotr all more dull

Depends what you mean by dull, really. I wouldn't call HP dull, there's always something going on, some evil plot at Hogwarts that unravels throughout the narrative.
Now Star Wars I would call dull. Can't sit through a single movie without pausing and doing something else.
LotR is good, but dull at times. When I watch the movies again I skip certain scenes that slow the pace and action.

>good joke
hahaha, tell another

I'm glad we agree. I'm not even hating on star wars or lotr but they are more dull than harry potter
T. Retard

Didnt you see the first movie? Voldemort tried helping him by the act of escaping through death, but to no avail, 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.

If we take dull as its dictionary meaning "lacking interest or excitement" I say Harry Potter is pretty interesting and exciting. Lord of the Rings as well. Both have interesting worlds and exciting sequences and twists
Couldn't comment on Star Wars because I've never seen it

>Voldemort tried helping him by the act of escaping through death, but to no avail, the dullest franchise in the history of movie franchises.
Quality stuff. I love the idea of Voldemort's actions being a mercy kill to save Harry from the franchise

>interesting and exciting
magic is never any of this. Anymore deus-ex machina than this isn't possible. You can do a magician thing, like that lovecraftian Tesla movie with the two bales, and that other hack. That's kino. But hairy pussy potter? No. That's just boring.

Sounds like you'd be very much into Jonathan Creek, look it up if you haven't seen it.

Also magic can be done well in fiction as long as the rules and laws surrounding it are clearly stated and never broken. That's a difficult feat though, and HP definitely didn't pull that off.

>Jonathan Creek
Nope, doesn't ring a bell.
>as long as the rules and laws surrounding it are clearly stated and never broken.
Agreed. But this is almost never the case. And probably also hard to put into a movie. In a fun way.
>That's a difficult feat though, and HP definitely didn't pull that off.
exactly.

It is in harry potter
Yes hp and lotr have exciting worlds and events. Star wars is the same shit over and over.

T. Brainlets who didnt get the time turner nor why it was used in book three

Jonathan Creek is about a guy who works for a famous stage magician and comes up with all the tricks. Every episode there's an impossible murder like a locked room, someone disappearing in thin air, killer leaving no footprints in the snow etc. It's really entertaining to watch him solve these seemingly impossible crimes by using his knowledge of stage magic.

The magic not being explained is what gives it it's special mystery. It is magic you don't need to have an autistic system for a wizard dystopia.

>Every episode there's an impossible murder
hmmm, well I don't know. Might give it a shot.

Well obviously they're not impossible, they just appear to be at first glance. But Creek always solves the mysteries and they're pretty much all very good murder mysteries with a satisfying conclusion.

Like the episode where an old man is found dead in his nuclear bunker, seemingly having shot himself. But he was known to have terrible arthritis and couldn't even peel a banana, let alone handle a gun. So it's murder. Yet the body is in the middle of a bunker with ten feet of concrete from every side and the only way in is through three giant steel doors which were locked from the inside (which he couldn't have locked himself due to his arthritis). So what happened?
I dunno, I'm a real sucker for those kinds of murder mysteries.

I got the Time-Turner, and I know it was used within it's explained rules. I wasn't referring to that. Just about everything else in HP doesn't follow a set of rules or laws, they're kept a mystery, and each new book introduces new magic without explaining the actual rules or laws. Not saying that's a bad thing, magic in fiction doesn't HAVE to have their own rules explained. It's still enjoyable.
I just said that to that user because he seemed to think magic couldn't work in fiction because it always leads to deus ex machina resolutions. I was saying that some magic fiction DOES have explicit rules that the story keeps to.

8/10, good effort, late response.