Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
Baronash
Feb 29, 2012

So what do you want to be called?

Laverna posted:

Bummer.
Did you notice that when you first read it? Did it make a difference? I know that when I read the first book I knew about the philosopher's stone so I would have been a bit confused by it having a different name.

Personally, I was five when I read the US version of the book, and had never heard of the philosopher's stone. Honestly, it was a magical MacGuffin and the name really didn't matter all that much. I'm really just interested in how much someone got paid to read through the book and Americanize 20 or 30 words.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Baronash
Feb 29, 2012

So what do you want to be called?
It was Crouch's foe glass though, not Voldemort's, and Snape was at that moment intending to do him harm. It's an interesting find though.

Personally, I've always thought that considering Snape a "good guy" is pushing it a little bit, and it's one of the reasons I hate the epilogue. I mean, you have this genuinely awful person and (former?) supremacist making the lives of people around him miserable. Yet, everything is pretty much forgiven (and Harry uses him as the namesake of one of his children) because he served Dumbledore, something he only did as the result of guilt over Lily's death.

Baronash fucked around with this message at 19:03 on Aug 12, 2014

Baronash
Feb 29, 2012

So what do you want to be called?

Inveigle posted:

Link to October 7 news article: "JK Rowling’s cryptic tweets hint at return to world of Harry Potter"

http://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/oct/07/jk-rowling-tweets-harry-potter

Whoever said that Rowling is like a girl who won't stop talking about her last boyfriend hit the nail on the head.

Baronash
Feb 29, 2012

So what do you want to be called?

Wedemeyer posted:

I never did finish the series, shamefully. If it weren't for the movie I'd never have known what happened in the end. Does the final book differ much from the movie?

The major points of the book are covered in the two films. Thankfully, the writers excised the ridiculous talky bits between Harry and Voldemort during their final duel.

Baronash
Feb 29, 2012

So what do you want to be called?

ashez2ashes posted:

I'd like to see Matt Smith in the roll, even if that if a super nerdy pick. For some reason I'm picturing Newt Scamander as a tall, gangly, and awkward British guy. Matt Smith is the epitome of that in my head.

I suppose if Doctor Who is your only exposure to British media, this might seem like a good idea.

It should be Alexander Siddig though.

Baronash fucked around with this message at 01:07 on Nov 3, 2014

Baronash
Feb 29, 2012

So what do you want to be called?

Sato posted:

The movies themselves weren't so bad but they were by no means great or classic. I doubt they'll stand as the definitive adaptation of the series. Azkaban was beautifully shot but I wasn't a big fan of all of Cuaron's interpretations of the world or the characters.

Azkaban gets Harry's hair right, everything else is unimportant. :colbert:

Baronash
Feb 29, 2012

So what do you want to be called?

JesusSinfulHands posted:

We really need some kind of story of Hogwarts in 7th year (probably the most requested thing next to a Marauders prequel) because we need to see how alpha Neville got. Like there's still this residual image in my head of the nerdy awkward kid who likes plants, but anyone who cuts off the head of a snake with a motherfucking sword is automatically the most manly guy in a room for the rest of his life. That's gotta be hard to reconcile because I'm sure he's still awkward and clumsy to some extent.

There is this really popular, very lovely fanfic that deals with this. Someone here will undoubtedly give you the link, and I strongly urge you not to waste your time reading it.

Baronash
Feb 29, 2012

So what do you want to be called?
I like to think that wizard marriages involve jumping through one of those enchantment removing waterfalls.

Baronash
Feb 29, 2012

So what do you want to be called?

Xachariah posted:

I guess I didn't go to the places those predictions were happening then. Sorry.

Dumbledore, the only man Voldemort feared, was dead, and the trio needed to find and destroy all the remaining horcruxes. I'm curious, what exactly did you expect to happen? Voldemort just sits on the sidelines while Harry, Hermione, and Ron destroy his soul between studying for NEWTs?

Baronash
Feb 29, 2012

So what do you want to be called?

PT6A posted:

Good question. Also, how would you die of "natural causes"? I mean, dealing with non-magical ailments like cancer or pneumonia or heart disease can't be that hard. You could just cast a vanishing spell on a tumour or whatever.

Also, it seems like we don't know of anyone that died of natural causes in the entire series, except (possibly) Hagrid's dad. Maybe I'm misremembering, mind you.

Nicolas Flamel and his wife both likely died of natural causes after they ran out of Philosopher's Stone-derived elixir.

Baronash
Feb 29, 2012

So what do you want to be called?

thexerox123 posted:

What are brooms in this analogy? Bicycles? Horses?

Horses would be a pretty good analogy. It's an antiquated method of travel and generally is only used for sport.

Baronash
Feb 29, 2012

So what do you want to be called?

ImpAtom posted:

To be honest the thing that always confused me the most was "how the gently caress are the Weasleys so poor?"

I mean the answer honestly appears to be that they're insanely lovely with money. "We won the Wizard lottery? Time to blow all that money on a vacation!"

The Weasleys are poor because the Malfoys are rich.

Baronash
Feb 29, 2012

So what do you want to be called?

ashez2ashes posted:

I don't know if you can really make a good one to one comparison with guns/wands though. Guns can't perfectly mend a broken cup or charm your vegetable garden to grow better. They're rather practical too. A lot of the spells (like the killing curse) require a lot of intent behind them to pull off. Just knowing the incantation and wand movements seems like not enough. You've got to really want to get your murder on vs. guns going off accidently.

And yet, you've got spells like sectumsempra that work fine even if the wizard casting it has only the vaguest notion of its usage.

Baronash
Feb 29, 2012

So what do you want to be called?

jivjov posted:

So I was having Deep and Meaningful Shower Thoughts, and I think I may have managed to fix Quidditch.

Instead of the Snitch giving 150 points, it just ends the game. That's it. When the snitch is caught, the game ends and whoever has the most points wins. So the role of the Seeker becomes much more about misdirecting the opposing Seeker than just pressing the Win Button. The Seeker can't just keep an eye on the Snitch and follow it around; the other Seeker could swoop in and grab it. So the Seeker needs to have a good situational awareness of where the Snitch is, but also be good about leading the other Seeker away. This lets Harry the Seeker still be a super cool rockstar special snowflake...but without breaking the veneer of quidditch being a legitimate sport.

I also thought about how to resolve ties, and my thoughts went along the lines of making a couple smaller changes to the game. Make the center goal hoop smaller, and worth 20 points, tie-breaker condition being whichever team scored the most 20-point goals, and a couple other conditions below that. That could even set up some funny line from Ron or Wood (in Book 1 when Harry needs quidditch explained to him) about how the 9th tie breaker condition down is whichever team has the fewest injured players or somesuch.

Quidditch makes more sense when you think of it less as a sport and more as an excuse for Harry to be solely responsible for every Gryffindor victory.

Baronash
Feb 29, 2012

So what do you want to be called?

TheModernAmerican posted:

My thoughts really haven't changed, like you guys said the Dursley's basically disappear after a while, and in the 7th book they literally disappear. (Why in the world the epilogue didn't have Dudley in it at all I don't know. That seems like a really obvious thing to put in. Maybe he has a magical child or something? gently caress you Rowling.) The fact that their presence in the former half of the series is completely unnecessary is unchanged when I get to the end. I guess their inclusion as a Roald Dahl-esque evil parents thing (which, incidentally is a huge problem for me in any case, the beginning of James and the Giant Peach is just as god awful as the Dursley's) is justifiable. Or maybe a way to make the whole mundane = boring, magical = uhh... magical thing really obvious, but then again that should be readily apparent once you get whisked away by a half-giant driving a flying motorcycle to a hidden road in London where you buy a magic wand.

Also, Harry's recovery from what is objectively a frightening amount of child abuse is possibly the most unbelievable part of a series where teleportation via fire is the most popular form of transportation.

Someone said it earlier in the thread with regard to Snape, but I think it holds true that a lot of elements of the first book work when viewed as the silly bit of children's literature it was then, and don't fit as well as part of the Wizard WWII mega-franchise it became. The Dursleys are comically evil because that's what stepparents in children's literature are.

Kids like escapist fiction because it fuels the notion that good things are just around the corner no matter how lovely they think their life is. To wonder why the Dursleys have to be in Harry Potter is to wonder why there has to be a workhouse in Oliver Twist, or why John Canty has to be in The Prince and the Pauper.

Baronash
Feb 29, 2012

So what do you want to be called?

Inspector Gesicht posted:

Order was the book that killed all my enthusiasm for HP when I was 11 years old. There didn't seem to be any arc to events, just a whole load of stuff happening. Harry's angst was understandable but we really didn't need all 750 pages rooted to his viewpoint. Can anyone sum up what happened in less than 75 characters?

Harry poorly deals with emotions amplified by a connection to Voldemort.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Baronash
Feb 29, 2012

So what do you want to be called?

Pidmon posted:

"It's cliche that's why it doesn't matter that people are triggered by the Dursley's abuse"

The Dursleys were a cartoon and if someone is honestly knocking Rowling for not throwing Petunia through the Veil to appease their inability to recognize absurdity then I don't know how that person has ever read a book.

Honestly, they should read A Series of Unfortunate Events, it'd probably give them a panic attack.

Baronash fucked around with this message at 22:12 on Mar 22, 2015

  • Locked thread