sixth harry potter book gone gold!

God, I hope one of the editors hasd the balls to stand up to her and point out the fact that she could cut out a vast amount to make things less tedious. The Order of the Pheonix was good, but it was unjustifiably long. The third one was the best and that wasn't particularly long at all, and the length of the fourth one was justified.
 
Reaktor4 said:
dont shush me, ratz :flame:

Im not a rat, naw am I a rat with a z on the end of my name, good sir.
 
:LOL: Oh the drama here :E Woot I'm close to a cool postcount ;)
 
Ritz said:
Im not a rat, naw am I a rat with a z on the end of my name, good sir.
I want to be a rat, like that dude in the 3rd Harry Potter film... that bit was poorly done imo. If you hadnt read the book or got someone that had to explain it to you after, i just didnt have a clue what was going on, what the significance of this rat dude was.
 
nah el chi id have to disagree, that book wasnt too long at all. The content was there from page 1 to the last page
 
oldagerocker said:
I want to be a rat, like that dude in the 3rd Harry Potter film... that bit was poorly done imo. If you hadnt read the book or got someone that had to explain it to you after, i just didnt have a clue what was going on, what the significance of this rat dude was.

Thats why you had to listen to the words in the film

Gasp!
 
I have a kid at my school who looks exactly like harry potter. we call hime "jack", because that's his name.

personally i don't like the harry potter series... all a load of wizards and whitches and impossible creatures... 'm not into any of that. Now cya, i'm off to play Lord oif the rings: BFME, then i'm going to gasp over some screenshots of world of warcraft, then probally slay some vampires and shit.
 
Fat Tony! said:
nah el chi id have to disagree, that book wasnt too long at all. The content was there from page 1 to the last page
Hmmm... I just think it dragged quite heavily in places - there was some stuff that didn't contribute to the story or the characters overall. It just seemed to me that it could've been cut down but that no-one in the publishing company/editorial process stopped to contest this with her. The fourth book totally warranted the length it was, that was full of different story strands, good character development, etc. Order of the Pheonix just didn't need to be as long as it was. And the death, sad as it was, was a bit of an anti-climax. And Harry was a c*nt, even though that's the point. Ron Weasley for king, that's all I'm saying :)
 
Harry was indeed a **** in the 5th book, the book was too long (Not I cant handle reading it, its just got unneeded things in it) and his death was a big anti-climax, and it was abit to sudden and stupid "Whooooops, triped into the death door thing!"
 
Ritz said:
Harry was indeed a **** in the 5th book, the book was too long (Not I cant handle reading it, its just got unneeded things in it) and his death was a big anti-climax, and it was abit to sudden and stupid "Whooooops, triped into the death door thing!"
'zackleee.
In fairness, Harry was supposed to be a tosser. Most teenage boys are, after all. But it's hard to sympathise with him when he's so obnoxious. Just like teenage boys, actually.
Like I said, Ron Weasley for king.
 
Ritz said:
Thats why you had to listen to the words in the film

Gasp!

I tried... but i was watching with 2 ladies next to me and it was hard to concentrate :naughty:

The explanation imo did go by too fast for my feeble mind anyway, even though all the 10 year old kids behind me got it. :p
 
Books were good...films were bad. Largely due to the kid that plays Harry Potter in the films. His acting is so bad and his smile/laugh is incredibly false.
 
Daniel Radcliff is his name. Yes his acting sucks, but its alot better then the first film when the whole film he just stood around like a lemon going "Buh?" at everything.

Interesting fact! - In the first film, harry only casts 1 spell the whole film, the rest is spent standing around as Ron/hermione say stuff.
 
Well, I think Daniel Radcliff has got some acting experience before too, hasnt he? I guess it hasnt helped much tho.
I Havent seen the first film though. I watch it when its shown on tv, if its ever shown.
 
Toffee said:
Well, I think Daniel Radcliff has got some acting experience before too, hasnt he? I guess it hasnt helped much tho.
I Havent seen the first film though. I watch it when its shown on tv, if its ever shown.
Actually, my recollection is that he hadn't: Rowling picked him simply because he looked like her Harry. I think Rupert Grint (Ron) has, and he's certainly been in movies other than HP. Not sure about Emma (Hermione) but like Rupert, she's definatly improving (well, they all are). That said, did anyone else feel that Ron got virtually no screentime in the third film? I seem to remember seeing his brothers more...
 
Ruppet grint and Emma watson had never been in a film before, Daniel radcliff played david copperfield in the Drama...David Copperfield on British tv.
 
I never read any of the harry potter books...

So do I get a cookie?
 
Tr0n said:
I never read any of the harry potter books...

So do I get a cookie?

No you get a cookie taken away.
 
Ritz said:
Ruppet grint and Emma watson had never been in a film before, Daniel radcliff played david copperfield in the Drama...David Copperfield on British tv.
If he's had some proper acting experience, then why is he still sh*t? Ron and Hermione are much better than that Radcliffe fool (whom two of my friends fancy for some inexplicable reason) If there's no other saving grace, the casts for those films are absolutely superb.
 
Tr0n said:
At least I still have the milk.

Your milk rights have been revoked!

Le Chi, it was a long time ago he played David, he was very young.
 
Meh, I'm just being pointlessly spiteful because he annoys me. I couldn't do any better.
 
I can't have milk or a cookie...then what can I have? ;(
 
I could, apart from the gender issue. He does'nt act at all in the first, he trys in the second, and he is starting to get it in the 3rd
 
Ritz said:
I could, apart from the gender issue. He does'nt act at all in the first, he trys in the second, and he is starting to get it in the 3rd
Agreed. "But Hagrid there is no platform nine and three quarters" is probably the most cringeworthy line in cinema history. Much improved in the third though, I seem to remember he delievered a line really badly when fighting the dementor by the lake, but he's rather watchable now :)
Ritz said:
Ruppet grint and Emma watson had never been in a film before, Daniel radcliff played david copperfield in the Drama...David Copperfield on British tv.
Thanks for the info :)
 
Back
Top