When did you fall out of love with Harry Potter, /tv/?

>When did you fall out of love with Harry Potter, /tv/?
posts on Veeky Forums

Slip of the tongue

Still loved Harry potter untill i read that horrifying cursed child pure shit.

God rowling should kill herself.

Book 4, when the coming-of-age story was over and all that was left was teen drama and dark lordism.

>Or when Rowling made the incredible misstep of the Epilogue - in which Harry is so obsessed and depressed even 20 years later that all his children are named after dead people?

Wow, it's like you never read old books or something. People did that shit all the time there.

>Or when Rowling dripfed nonsense through her broken website for years instead of producing, or allowing the right people to produce, new content?

I dunno. Some of that info was pretty ool.

>Or when she decided to write a series of films set on a 20-page charity book - in the process discarding by far the best part of the series, the setting of the pseudo-Victorian British wizarding world for NEW YORK EDDIE LIZARDFACE LOL?

Movie's looking good so far.

>For me it was when she gave some random guy's fanfiction equality to, and precedence over, her own work.

Now this is where she fucked up.

I fell out of love after book seven. The series told its story and I had seen the end. I still enjoy the books but it's not like I was an uberfan in the first place.

Don't know how anyone can say the films were better than the books, though, when the films left out a lot of details and subplots, like half of Deathly Hallows and Goblet of Fire.

As for the Epilogue, it makes perfect sense that Harry would still be torn up about Snape and Dumbledore; Albus was the closest he really had to a father figure besides Sirius and he likely felt pretty guilty for hating Snape when the guy basically sacrificed everything not only for Lily but for the world.

t. your typical jock

>everyone I know was like "omg important people die, that's so deep and dark"

Thank God I didn't get into the cancerous fanbase until I finished the series. When the series were still ongoing, all I heard was the good shit.

is it still worth it to pick this up? I want to start reading cause I failed at social stuff and wanted to start with this cause I've watched the movie and my sister said it's good.
It seems like a good entry level for beginners?

It's worth it.

Arthur fucking Weasley. Nigga was poor as shit and he still dadded the hell out of that kid. Where the hell is his shoutout?

I once read that, after book 3, Rowling stopped writing Harry Potter books and started writing Harry Potter movies. I think that's pretty accurate.

Wot?

He means that jk stopped thinking about what was best for the book series and started thinking more about what would make the coolest movie.

Eh, I read them all, never really felt the need to watch the movies, moved on to more advanced books.

I mean, shit, I'd read more advanced books than Harry Potter before I ever touched it; like The Dark is Rising; that was my favorite when I was younger.

I mean, I liked it but I was never under the illusion that what I was reading was anything other than whimsical entertainment.

I was weaned on The Lord Of The Rings and The Iliad/Odyssey on cassette, moved on from there, so I've always had a pretty good gauge for what's pulp, what's middle of the road, what's classical in tone and what's boring shite with no slayings or dire oaths.

End of the day Harry Potter was just another series I read as a kid.

Now Redwall, that I have an abiding love for.

That's different, though. Don't get me wrong. he still deserves credit, but even if you're from a broken home a best friend's dad is still a few degrees removed from an actual dad.

Because you can't easily delude yourself into thinking he's yours.

Honestly, it was when she killed off Fred but left George alive. They were always together; either kill them both or spare them both. Killing one of them completely ruins the dynamic she made and followed throughout the rest of the books up until that point and it makes zero sense.

>Or when Rowling made the incredible misstep of the Epilogue - in which Harry is so obsessed and depressed even 20 years later that all his children are named after dead people?

This isn't even my complaint with the Epilogue. The things I didn't like about it were that 1) the quality of writing was well below the rest of the book, 2) it was presented as prose, and 3) it read like a fanfic. It being presented as prose pissed me off the most. The Epilogue really was just stupid fucking fanservice though.

>Does she have absolutely no pride as an author? There's an incredible difference between an author continuing a series after the original author has died and what is going on here. It's baffling. She doesn't need the money. If for whatever reason she felt there needed to be a Harry Potter play, why could she not write it herself? Has she gone clinically insane?

This can all be explained by one thing:
>pic related

Yeah, I know,
>She doesn't need the money.
but the fact remains that she only doing this for the money. Another user summed it up perfectly here:
>"She was living on welfare when she wrote HP. She has cashed in on the series to an extent that is incredible.
"Games, Toys, Books, Candy, anything you could name HP was on.
"She jewed out her franchise and stumbled into what I call the Pet Rock effect (I'm sure there is a more official and proper name). Essentially it is a product that gathers a following so large that it will not and can not ever fail, regardless of the quality of the product. Harry Potter isn't a literary masterpiece. It's a mediocre to decent written book series that has been overrated to absurd points. Same as Twilight, except Twilight is marketed specifically to teenage girls.
"That demographic (10-18) has been historically incredibly hard to crack, but when you can manage to crack it, you will stumble into obscene amounts of money.
"JK Rowling has abused the copyright system to her own advantage. Mind you, this is a woman who literally took out an injunction against people who accidentally received their books early.
"Rowling is a loser who accidentally started a book phenomenon with Harry Potter."

>Or when Rowling dripfed nonsense through her broken website for years instead of producing, or allowing the right people to produce, new content?

"She even said herself HP was over, but returned to the series after her attempts to write outside the series flopped. She's an egomaniac who manipulates her fans and her fame."

By the book 6 it became so lackluster I haven't read the 7th.

>"She jewed out her franchise and stumbled into what I call the Pet Rock effect (I'm sure there is a more official and proper name). Essentially it is a product that gathers a following so large that it will not and can not ever fail, regardless of the quality of the product. Harry Potter isn't a literary masterpiece. It's a mediocre to decent written book series that has been overrated to absurd points. Same as Twilight, except Twilight is marketed specifically to teenage girls.

With the 8th story and the new movie, is HP now most whored out cashgrap franchise in history(other than starwars I guess)?

...

When Rowling got edgy as shit.

That's a fanfiction, isn't it.

Honestly? It started with the OotP, and was total by about halfway through DH. It was well before the epilogue. I just felt like she got lost or something and it effected the quality of the story.

That said, I still adore the first three books, and they will forever be childhood favourites.

Yeah, it is.

>comparing Harry Potter to Twilight

Nigga, you take that back.

>The things I didn't like about it were that 1) the quality of writing was well below the rest of the book, 2) it was presented as prose, and 3) it read like a fanfic. It being presented as prose pissed me off the most. The Epilogue really was just stupid fucking fanservice though.

Explain nigga

The Epilogue was blatant fanservice. It answers the who gets married to who (at least for the main trio), how many kids they have and their names. What's funny is that while it was pure fanservice on the part of Rowling, the most vocal haters of the Epilogue were fanfic writers (many of them felt it ruined their fanfic stories&shippings).
Furthermore by Rowling's own admission, the writing for the epilogue is so lazy it didn't match Hermione and Harry together just so Ron could be happy too.

>when did you fall out of love with harry potter
when i turned 12

STRETCHED

>For me, it was when Rowling accused all fans irked by her idiotic claim that "Hermione was never white" of being racist pigs

What Rowling said was that Hermione's ethnicity was never specified in the books and that it doesn't have any bearing on how the character should be portrayed. Then a bunch of autists trawled through the books and found one sentence where Hermiones is shocked at something and Rowling describes her as "white-faced", which they then clung to as some sort of smoking gun evidence that a black woman being cast as the character in some stupid play represented an unforgivable betrayal of the Harry Potter canon.

The whole controversy was genuinely one of the most idiotic things I've seen on the Internet, and it revealed a lot more about the kneejerk hysteria of the alt-right crowd than it did of any hypocrisy on Rowling's part.

They're fun and engaging adventure stories and they should make a good entry point for reading fiction if you haven't read much before, yeah.

>tfw never got into Harry Potter at all outside of the Prisoner of Azkaban GBA game you got as a gift

Was a pretty dope game though. (I mean listen to this shit that got wasted on GBA technology. Was it ever properly made in like the movie OST or anything?)
youtube.com/watch?v=v27H0t490zk

I don't think I ever fell out of love with Harry Potter, I just grew into different books. When I was a kid I was obsessed and reread them compulsively. I suppose the films are alright; they're professionally made action movie adaptions aimed at people who might not have read the series, but I've never felt the urge to revisit any of them. The feeling of watching the movies paled in comparison to reading Order of the Phoenix all night long after its midnight release the summer before fifth grade, and it's somewhat irking that a lot of the fanbase seems to be more familiar with Yates's adaptions than they are with the books, but whatever. That's probably true for every media franchise based on literature.

If you asked me my opinion on the series now I would say it's excellent children's literature because when I was a child I was completely engrossed and entertained, but I guess I'm afraid that if I reread it I might not enjoy it as much as I did when I was nine. I want different things from a book now

I really do not like that Rowling is constantly and transparently milking her fans for nostalgia, publicity, and to soapbox her politics, and I do my best to ignore all the cashgrabs, manufactured controversy, and attention-seeking "reveals" in order to preserve my positive memories of reading the series in elementary school.

>thinking you're patrician for playing a video game (not art) instead of reading a book (art)
It's not a surprise that somebody as intellectually lazy as you is a Stirner fan

Your post reveals a lot more of your autism than it does of your pontificating on an anime board.

I always hated it.

Oh please. You and I both know Rowling wrote Hermione as a white girl. She doesn't get to retroactively rewrite her books, just because she likes the attention she receives for it.

She drew Hermione herself and she was white. In all the art she was white. In the movies she was white. And yeah, niggers don't get white with shock. Rowling is a fucking retard.

Whether Rowling herself imagined Hermione as white when she wrote her is beside the point. The argument she was making was that whiteness was never an explicit or important element of the character and her ethnicity basically irrelevant to how she should be portrayed in any adaptation.

Which, again, is retarded.

So Ginny doesn't get any say in the naming of her kids?

>Harry, I was th-thinking we might name our son after my father-
>HES GETTING NAMED AFTER MURDERED PEOPLE GODDAMMIT

If Rowling imagined Hermione as white while writing her (which we both know she did), then its absolutely an important element of the character.

Very good post.

Not related to most of your points - I hate myself for it but whenever someone says they like Harry Potter I have to do that 'BUT HAVE YOU READ THE BOOKS' thing.

She is 100% a white middle class English girl. The point of the mudblood prejudice is that she's never had to face anything like that before. If a black girl was being racially abused throughout the series, don't you think that would got at least the slightest bit of narrative focus?

dumb

>the writing for the epilogue is so lazy it didn't match Hermione and Harry together just so Ron could be happy too

Wot?

When I stopped reading it over and over again and Rowling shat all over what it was

>When did you fall out of love with Harry Potter

when i read 'stretched his legs' for the 30th time

Nope. The bullshit level was incredible on both sides. In an Observer article, director John Tiffany is quoted as saying he was "shocked [that] people couldn't visualise a non-white person as the hero of a story"--as if that was the fucking point. Rowling called critics of the casting of a black actress as Hermione as "a bunch of racists"--you know, like the "racists" who were worried about a blonde Daniel Craig taking on Bond, who had never looked like him.
And nobody needed the "white-faced" line. Hermione was fucking white, from Rowling's earliest drawings of her, and arguing otherwise was disingenuous bullshit on her part. If she had just done what she claimed, and "simply state[ed] quite firmly that Hermione can be a black woman with my absolute blessing and enthusiasm,” no problem. Calling all critical or skeptical fans "racists" and "idiots" was absurd.

Precisely. Imagine the whole house-elf/SPEW storyline with a black Hermione, or her anger at Draco calling her "mudblood" if she was black. Holy shit, it would have been great, but a completely different story. Much of Hermione's character and experiences is firmly based on her white, British, middle-class upbringing. Rowling jumped the shark.

They should have just said it was a black actress playing a white character.

Yep, the correct answer is "in this play, in this casting, a black actor is playing Hermione and will be great. Don't worry about it."
Not: "I never said she was a honky, you racist idiot scum!"

>dat pic
>sweatyforehead.jpeg

>some excuse for posting this

>tfw your character gets recast as a frumpy Nigerian and everyone's praising it as incredibly bold and progressive

6 was the best book though

Fuck outta here. I bet you think Order of the Phoenix was the worst, too.

If they make a movie of this Cursed Yaoi trainwreck (and someday they will) I wonder who Rowling will have play Hermione?

I make one post and I'm already teaching you to be sensible. You're welcome, little guy.

6 was surprisingly comfy - a lot of just hanging out at Hogwarts - but I think people were expecting a lot of action and to really kick things forward towards the finale.

1 and 2 are a bit too kiddish - which is fair because that's what they were supposed to be but judging in the context of the entire series they stand out as really childish. 3 is ... forgettable? Don't have any strong memories of reading it desu, all about the film.

4, like the film, is really weird. There's so much stuff that's introduced and never comes up again - Ludo Bagman, Crouch etc. It's bridging the gap between the first and second halves of the series, and doing so rather awkwardly.

5 is GOAT. Have memories of reading it on holiday as a kid, definitely the one I've read the most.

6 as above. 7, well, about manages to guide the series to a satisfactory conclusion.

Huh?

The third one directed by Cuarón is the first decent movie. The first two I think were Chris Columbus shit weren't they? On par with crap like Young Sherlock Holmes anyway. Why WB insisted on him instead of Terry Gilliam is beyond me (well, he is infamously a massive shit to work with and no doubt Dumbledore would have died a lot quicker and the risk of actors quitting over a minimum 7 film run would have been too high. Then there'd be budget issues...)

This is Rowling posting.

>She doesn't need the money.
If you ever make a lot of money relatively quickly you will begin to understand how easy it can be to spend a lot of money. Many millionaires become bankrupt and most lottery winners are not set for life.

Ginny was probably too enamored with the fact that she landed Harry Potter to care.

>Does she have no pride as an author?

It should be apparent when she continuously retcons minute details in an attempt to maintain cultural significance and makes an annual apology for killing of a specific character, thus showing that the death of said character had no point but to draw an emotional response from the reader.

If there's any amusement to be had from the whole ordeal, it's that her love of money has locked her into a yoke she can never escape from: by constantly attempting to expand and appease her fan base, she will never be able to write anything non-Harry Potter related for as long as she lives, and in truth I think this particularly irritates her (see her bitterness over the underwhelming sale numbers for A Casual Vacancy). I can only hope that there is justice in the world and that this huckster has her soul eaten away from the inside by the cost of her financial success. For being so money grubbing and doing to literature what celebrity chefs did to food, I think she does, in part, deserve it.

It's true. That's how it actually happened.

That irritated me. I like to think that Ron was able to grow from an irritable teen to a man worhy of hermione's love. Fuck Rowling for saying otherwise.

I never got into it as a kid. The large books always intimidated me. I only saw the first three or four films.

I want to read it nowadays though. I like reading important or popular books so I know about them. It's hard to get into. I read three chapters of the first book and haven't read any more in two years.

The first book is very kiddish but it is an way read. I was able to read it in an afternoon a few months back. They get less kiddish as the series goes on. Honestly, though, the first book and the first movie were pretty similar. You could probably just wath the movie and then move onto the second book.

>she will never be able to write anything non-Harry Potter related for as long as she lives
Huh? Aside from Casual Vacancy, she's written three crime fiction novels so far, and they're selling fine. Just because she isn't topping global sales charts with every book doesn't mean she's not writing shit for fun and making lots of cash.

By the time she'd written the 3rd book sales across all formats for the first 2 were 1.5M copies. Actual book sales were under 400k for the first one over two years. This is with a highly sophisticated marketing strategy and high value brand name too.

The Cursed Child on the other hand sold 2M in 2 days. Nobody gives a shit about Rowling (who seems to be distancing herself somewhat as the fan reactions trickle in), just about their next canonical HP fix, it could be written by Jack Thorne for all anyone cares.

And the reviews for the cuckoo one were mostly middling. There were some outright negative ones before and after the big reveal too.

Uh-huh. So, an author writing adult crime novels is selling a lot less than she did writing the most popular kids/YA/all-ages phenomenon fantasy series of all time. What a shock. Do you know how few books sell 400,000 fucking copies in two years?? The average U.S. book is now selling less than 250 copies per year and less than 3,000 copies over its lifetime. This is like calling some pop stars' solid selling albums failures because they don't match their first massive hit record.

>/tv/
Kill yourself my man.

>So, an author writing adult crime novels is selling a lot less than she did writing the most popular kids/YA/all-ages phenomenon fantasy series of all time.

That's exactly the point. She will continually come back to HP because of it's popularity and because its an easy cash grab.

>Do you know how few bestselling books only sell 400,000 fucking copies in two years?? The average U.S. book whose author is a completely unknown 20-something-year-old is now selling less than 250 copies per year and less than 3,000 copies over its lifetime.
FTFY

bump5

I wanted to suck on Hermoine's toes so badly as a kid.

I apologize for nothing.