Harry Potter Series???

[DARKWENCH]

I love the way JK Rowling writes, I have the whole series of Books and DVD's and was not disappointed in the movie adaptations of the books.

I love this series as it reminds me of when I was a little girl at school in England...

 

I also think that JK Rowling has done a lot for putting witchcraft in the forefront of people's minds who would not necessarily be exposed to it.

Yes it's make believe, but I really think that JK did her homework and made a wonderful story.

 

Just recently my Hubby - Paul - decided he wanted to sit through them all, so the last couple of weeks we have watched each movie, and he was really impressed with the detail that she went to in her stories. Paul, being an actor, was so enamoured with a number of the actors and their portrayal of their characters.

 

What do you think of the Harry Potter franchise?

[RavenFlyer]

I think Jk Rowling's personal story is inspiring, but I find Harry Potter rather uninteresting. I did give it a try and read the first four books and then watched the first two movies. I just couldn't empathize with the characters or care about their journey. I actually found myself cheering for Voldermort to win.

[The Muse]

I adore the Harry Potter series. The books were a HUGE part of my teenage years.

 

They were somewhere for me to escape to when I needed it (and I needed it a lot.) Also, my whole group of friends in school bonded over them.

 

(Sirius Black is my one true love.)

 

 

Also, my love is for the books, definitely not the movies. Mostly everything I loved about the series was ignored in the movies or just not included.

 

I wonder how much better they would have been if they had have been treated seriously like the Lord Of The Rings, and not as a silly attempt at humour.

 

*dying for the new stuff J.K. is working on.*

[8people]

I only relented and read the books after being renamed in middle school to "Hermione"

 

They're good books for children and I enjoyed reading them when younger. They're good stories, I don't understand adult fascination in the franchise though I must admit. As trying to read them now I'm older just highlighted some of the amateur writing portions and didn't really spark the interest anymore.

[DARKWENCH]

I adore the Harry Potter series. The books were a HUGE part of my teenage years.

 

They were somewhere for me to escape to when I needed it (and I needed it a lot.) Also, my whole group of friends in school bonded over them.

 

(Sirius Black is my one true love.)

 

 

Also, my love is for the books, definitely not the movies. Mostly everything I loved about the series was ignored in the movies or just not included.

 

I wonder how much better they would have been if they had have been treated seriously like the Lord Of The Rings, and not as a silly attempt at humour.

 

*dying for the new stuff J.K. is working on.*

 

I too am waiting to see what JK's new stuff is like - it is more adult orientated!!

(Snape was my favourite......)

 

I guess if they had included everything in the books, the movies would have been 8 hours long...LOL... Yes they did leave a lot of stuff out :o(

[DARKWENCH]

I don't understand adult fascination in the franchise though I must admit.

 

 

I can understand your point of view - thank you for sharing it.

 

All I can offer as MY adult explanation, is the fact that I have never grown up, I love kids stories and movies, I think they inspire imagination (which is sadly lacking these days) and as I am an artist, a writer and being involved with the music and film industry - inspiration is what I need.

 

 

 

 

[8people]

Perhaps that is a point of difference then, as I find the majority of my inspiration comes from the natural world and documentaries instead of other sources of fiction.

[Belwenda]

I too love the Harry Potter series. I've read them so often I could teach a course.

The character development is good and I believe that they are well researched as far as the magical referencing . IMO the popularity of the series indicates an acceptance of magic as a force in the world. Even though it is "all in fun" the books plant the seed in youngsters' minds- a good thing!

[Aloe]

I love the Harry Potter series. It's interesting how many characters were drawn from historical figures. My enjoyment of the books doesn't have anything to do with my witchcraft, but does have a lot to do with enjoying a damn good story that doesn't involve any of the 'big three' religions.

[sarasuperid]

The writing isn't the best in these, but its not as bad as other popular fantasy series and the characters are good and worthy of children's admiration. Values like friendship, working together, intelligence and studying, as well as making your own way in life were all good lessons that are under represented in young adult literature sometimes. Forgiveness also played a lovely role in the story, that was well played in the last movie. I was often disappointed by the crap special effects budgets in some of the earlier movies, but the last one really delivered.

[Amberhawk]

I didn't originally get involved in the stories but my son liked them. The home school group we were with at the time were very involved in the story lines also. I guess between the two I decided I should get a better idea of what the heck it was all about.

 

As far as the books went, I found the writing difficult to get through in the first few books but pressed on. They were entertaining and imaginative I guess. I think I found the movies more fun than the books though I didn't like that they severely downplayed the house elves and Sir Nick when transferring to screenplay.

[Stacey]

I do love Harry Potter. I love the movies and it did make me smile to see all of these kids lined up and down streets around the world waiting for the book releases. It meant that some kids are still passionate about reading because between tv, games and the net I don't think that a lot of kids really read anymore (I know some still do).

 

I've never read the books, I intend to one day but I just haven't got there yet. I do think there are great moral values in the movies and because they aren't centred around religion I enjoy them even more.

 

I have to say that Snape was my favourite, gotta love him but I also did love the Weasley Twins - they were hilarious!

Edited March 13, 2012 by Stacey

[Michele]

I very much enjoyed it, but then I love reading. One of the things I loved most of all was the fact that suddenly children and teenagers (teenagers!!) were putting down their x-boxes and reading a 1000 page book in 3 days. Any book that does that is worth it's weight to me. My son was much younger when the books came out and a friend and I (her daughter was about the same age) used to dress up and go to the "midnight" parties at the bookstores with the kids. It was a wonderful fun thing to do with the kids that wasn't expensive and involved something that didn't numb the brain, lol. My son was never much into it, he got more into LoTR (one of my faves), but at least the parties got him to a book store!

 

M

[Whiterose]

I was one of those that read the 1000 page book in 3days.....sometimes less lol. They started coming out when I was about 11 and I "grew up" at the same rate Harry did so I found I really related to the books. With the early books, I would save up my allowance so I could get the new book when it came out that year. With the later books I could buy them easier because I was in my late teens early twenties and had a better income, so I have the last 4 in hardcover. I even have the UK version of the first three where the terms are different and they use "torch" instead of flashlight and things like that. I loved the movies too, but the books are my favorite. Between VC Andrews, RL Stine, Ann Rice, Stephan King and JK Rowling, that pretty much covers my teen years, with HP being near the top of the list. Awesome series.

[The Muse]

I guess if they had included everything in the books, the movies would have been 8 hours long...LOL... Yes they did leave a lot of stuff out :o(

 

 

 

I would TOTALLY watch those 8 hour long movies! =D

[CelticGypsy]

When the series first came out I was still flying, I was so impressed like many of you all here referencing the children and Teens on my plane that were so engrossed in these books. It was a rare thing indeed to see a DVD player out and some movie or game. I read them when they came out in paperback just to see what all the buzzzz was about, I found them entertaining. If memory serves me right, our Michele even posted a terrific post about the use of the magical word.

 

http://www.traditionalwitch.net/forums/topic/7238-expecto-patronum-not-a-joke-thread/page__p__90962__hl__harry+potter__fromsearch__1?do=findComment&comment=90962

 

That's always a " worth a look " Post and Threads, in my opinion.

 

Regards,

Gypsy

[Gramayr]

We've read them all and have all the books as they came out (my other half used to fight to read them first - I used to hide them on purpose when the post came lol). Seen all the films as well (have most on DVD).

 

Found something interesting the other day whilst on holiday in Edinburgh, JK Rowling used to visit Greyfriers cemetery when she was on the dole - the used to go round all the gravestones looking for names for her book. There are many Potters buried there as well as a McGonegal (probably the worlds worst poet) and one Tom Riddle. Snapes and others are also interred there. The private school next door is covered with hundreds of gargoyles and has four houses ll with exactly the same house colours as Hogwarts. So there you have it, Harry Potter originated in home of 300,000 burials and the home of the most violent documented poltergeist recorded. Just thought I'd add that bit of info in case anyone was interested :)

[Grymdycche]

I didn't get into it initially, when it first went big.. we had bought some of the books for a nephew but at the time it didn't interest me at all. Wizards and all were so "Disney" to me at the time. I'd rented the first movie but the wife decided to go to bed and I figured, why watch a movie alone? I returned it mostly unseen.

Then in late 2006 I saw Goblet of Fire on TV, and thought it was pretty cool, then I saw another movie, and got sucked in. I bought all the books (well, one thru 6 at the time) in one shot , and at a a great discount I might add, the bookstore was going out of business. I got them for my son to read one day, but I started reading them all myself, exactly 5 years ago.

(BTW, HP and Sorcerer's Stone is on ABC Family channel whilst I type this, must be another HP weekend!)

I read them all by May, and looked forward to the last one that coming July.

 

I have to say, while the first book or two were difficult to get through because they're written at a level for little children, they did get better. About the 3rd or so, not only had the writing matured, but the plots were getting thicker and more ingenious. A few things I have to give JK Rowling for:

 

1) Excellent character development. She develops them pretty fully, they way they speak, their vocabulary, etc.. you don't really need a "said Snape" to know it's Snape talking, or Dumbledore.. etc. Each character is unique, consistent, complements the others well, and are usually pretty interesting.

2) Good research- she dug into her mythology and folklore. The biggest surprise, pulling Alohamora out of Madagascaran Geomancy. Never even heard of it before.

3) Good plot twists - who'd guess that Scabbers was an

animagus?

 

....or Rita Skeeter?

 

That all said, I was extremely disappointed with the last book. Crushed. It was suddenly all so cliche. The whole thing with Snape... so trite. And really, Harry defeated the greatest dark lord ever based on "love" and a shit ton of good luck? And what with the plot pulling the Hallows out of it's ass at the 11th hour (in the last book of 7), and Harry being master of the elder wand because of that silly thing with Draco.. Arggh.. contrived and tenuous.

I was expecting so much more, it was a huge anti-climax to me. Like someone stepped in and ghost-wrote the last book.

 

Nonetheless, it was an overall good experience, reading the whole series. And there's certainly a LOT more detail and story in the books than in the movies.. you miss so much just watching the movies.

[DARKWENCH]

We've read them all and have all the books as they came out (my other half used to fight to read them first - I used to hide them on purpose when the post came lol). Seen all the films as well (have most on DVD).

 

Found something interesting the other day whilst on holiday in Edinburgh, JK Rowling used to visit Greyfriers cemetery when she was on the dole - the used to go round all the gravestones looking for names for her book. There are many Potters buried there as well as a McGonegal (probably the worlds worst poet) and one Tom Riddle. Snapes and others are also interred there. The private school next door is covered with hundreds of gargoyles and has four houses ll with exactly the same house colours as Hogwarts. So there you have it, Harry Potter originated in home of 300,000 burials and the home of the most violent documented poltergeist recorded. Just thought I'd add that bit of info in case anyone was interested :)

 

WOW...that is truly awesome info Gramayr - thanks for sharing that.

I will have to keep that in mind when I go to visit Scotland....

[DARKWENCH]

I didn't get into it initially, when it first went big.. we had bought some of the books for a nephew but at the time it didn't interest me at all. Wizards and all were so "Disney" to me at the time. I'd rented the first movie but the wife decided to go to bed and I figured, why watch a movie alone? I returned it mostly unseen.

Then in late 2006 I saw Goblet of Fire on TV, and thought it was pretty cool, then I saw another movie, and got sucked in. I bought all the books (well, one thru 6 at the time) in one shot , and at a a great discount I might add, the bookstore was going out of business. I got them for my son to read one day, but I started reading them all myself, exactly 5 years ago.

(BTW, HP and Sorcerer's Stone is on ABC Family channel whilst I type this, must be another HP weekend!)

I read them all by May, and looked forward to the last one that coming July.

 

I have to say, while the first book or two were difficult to get through because they're written at a level for little children, they did get better. About the 3rd or so, not only had the writing matured, but the plots were getting thicker and more ingenious. A few things I have to give JK Rowling for:

 

1) Excellent character development. She develops them pretty fully, they way they speak, their vocabulary, etc.. you don't really need a "said Snape" to know it's Snape talking, or Dumbledore.. etc. Each character is unique, consistent, complements the others well, and are usually pretty interesting.

2) Good research- she dug into her mythology and folklore. The biggest surprise, pulling Alohamora out of Madagascaran Geomancy. Never even heard of it before.

3) Good plot twists - who'd guess that Scabbers was an

animagus?

 

....or Rita Skeeter?

 

That all said, I was extremely disappointed with the last book. Crushed. It was suddenly all so cliche. The whole thing with Snape... so trite. And really, Harry defeated the greatest dark lord ever based on "love" and a shit ton of good luck? And what with the plot pulling the Hallows out of it's ass at the 11th hour (in the last book of 7), and Harry being master of the elder wand because of that silly thing with Draco.. Arggh.. contrived and tenuous.

I was expecting so much more, it was a huge anti-climax to me. Like someone stepped in and ghost-wrote the last book.

 

Nonetheless, it was an overall good experience, reading the whole series. And there's certainly a LOT more detail and story in the books than in the movies.. you miss so much just watching the movies.

 

I have to say that I didn't warm to the movies straight away either - we saw bits of the first one when visiting friends whose daughter was pretending to be Hermoine and was watching it on DVD - we saw a bit of it but thought meh!! It wasn't until I read the books, and I do have to agree with you that the writing did get better.

 

I did and didn't enjoy the last book - parts were brilliant and yes, parts were sadly contrite - feels like it was a bit rushed to get it out to the public.

 

The 2 part movie for "The Deathly Hallows" irritated me a bit - I didn't like Part 1, it was kind of dark and boring with not much happening - but I did enjoy Part 2 - I thought Alan Rickman's performance as Snape was nothing short of brilliant.....

 

I can't wait to see what her new offering is going to be like!!

[Grymdycche]

I tend to favor the first 3 movies; to me, the first one is the most magica; the sense of wonder, mystery and awe, the intro to the wizarding world, etc.. plus I loved Richard Harris as Dumbledore, but I'm not a huge fan of Gambon's portrayal. Harris gave me the sense of what a classic wizard should be- old, wise, patient, confident, with an understated sense of immense power and an underlying je ne sais quoi that they know more than most people could in 3 lifetimes.

 

But I recently figured out that a good chunk of the reason for my fondness of the first 3 films, was, of all things, the score. John Williams magnificent themes (as usual) really add to the mystery, wonder, awe, and fun of the series. He left after PoA though, and starting with Goblet of Fire, different composers took over. It's never felt the same to me. It lost it's sense of mysterious and fun wonder, and just became another drama.

 

That all said, the 2nd movie was just too darn long and really quite corny at times. But I loove Dumbledore's headmaster's office. Old leather bound books galore, armillary spheres all over, oil lamps, candles, boxes, telescopes, assorted wizardly knick knacks.... I'm slowly turning my room into that.

[Mountain Witch]

I loved Richard Harris as Dumbledore, but I'm not a huge fan of Gambon's portrayal. Harris gave me the sense of what a classic wizard should be- old, wise, patient, confident, with an understated sense of immense power and an underlying je ne sais quoi that they know more than most people could in 3 lifetimes.

 

Agreed. Gambon just doesn't give you that ages-old wisdom feel.

 

But I loove Dumbledore's headmaster's office. Old leather bound books galore, armillary spheres all over, oil lamps, candles, boxes, telescopes, assorted wizardly knick knacks....

 

Agreed as well. But I want a Fawkes, too!

[Gramayr]

Have to agree with Grym on the last one - not as good as the rest. Maybe they should've got Peter Jackson to direct it but that would make it a right arse-acher of a movie (LOTR had me rubbing my backside to get my blood circulating when I got up out of the cinema).

Another snippet of knowledge - a Dumbledore is another name for a bumblebee in one English dialect (west country I think but could be wrong)

[Belwenda]

Thought the 3 rd film " prisoner of Azkaban" the best of the movie series; most realistic, the magic did sort of lessen over the years.... i found the final movies satisfying though and stil enjoy watching them. i'm a huge Gambon fan so enjoy his Dumbledor although Harris at least didnt over act the part; as he usually does (did) IMO.

[Grymdycche]

I liked PoA, and that seemed the best Dumbledore performance that Michael Gambon gave out of the 6 movies he did. (Six if you count DH as the two parts it is)

One thing unique about PoA is that Alphonso Cuarón , the director, hired Paul Kieve, a British magician as a consutlant. Many of the scenes you see of random magic were not CGI but actual magician tricks, like when Dumbledore waves his hand over the candle flame during his Hogwarts speech, or some scenes in the Leaky Cauldron like the self sorting chairs.

 

There's a scene to watch carefully- when the scene first opens, it's morning in the Leaky Cauldron, and you see a busboy cleaning up the tables with his rag.. he picks up an empty, used wine bottle off the table, wraps the rag over it, and then continues to wipe tables with a now empty rag. Where'd the bottle go? Actually it's a magician's prop, the bottle looks real but it's made of soft silicone, and collapses easily.. it's still in the rag. I've done the same thing with certain bottles of Guinness draft, where the whole bottle is covered with a huge wraparound label. If you carefully cut the label off and re-tape it, it looks like a whole bottle from a slight distance..

 

One other tidbit, like Gramyr pointed out, Dumbledore is a term for a bumblebee.. Rowling envisioned him as someone who paces and hums to himself all the time, thus, a bumblebee.

But there's also a secondary meaning.. a dumbledore is also a hat. And in Latin, "Albus", his first name, means "white".. so Albus Dumbledore is "White Hat" -one of the good guys. The death eaters would've been the black hats. Also, "white hat", "grey hat", and "black hat" are terms used to refer to computer hackers based on their ethics and practices.