04 Dec 05
Originally posted by abejnoodYour utter brilliance astounds me.
Harry Potter is a toasted meatball, though. He's a Horocrux, and he is going to find a brilliant way to overcome this fact. I have already discussed this in another thread.
http://www.redhotpawn.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=30311
I am speechless.
04 Dec 05
Originally posted by ark13I beg to differ. Rowling as one of the highest paid authors in the world has all the authority to do exactly what she wants. The editors don't have any ability to argue with her. She could write any cr*p, and they'd have to keep it in.
You're joking? This fourth book was the best of the series. Rowling finally got the freedom to write a more in depth book that actually included some social interactions. This was the first book that I really enjoyed.
I just saw the movie and liked it. It was certainly the best of the four. It cut out a lot of important parts, but was enjoyable and humorous. I'd reccommend it.
Over the course of the series, her books have got longer and longer. Didn't happen with CS Lewis and doesn't happen with Terry Pratchett. I think (and this is a personal opinion) this is an ego thing. Currently, she can can do no wrong and whatever she writes, sells. But will the books last - and longer than than the movies?
05 Dec 05
Originally posted by Darth SpongeGood, but sometimes all in a rush. One criticism is there was a scene in the middle with Harry, Hermione, Ron and Hagrid walking through the forest at night, Harry finds a figure on the ground and next thing he's outside Dumbledore's office. Some bad editing in the version I saw, maybe? Other than that I liked the dragon scene, but maybe overplayed. Mad Dog Moodie was excellent. Harry in this one, seems to be a bit of a clueless hero - he didn't take a leadership role like in others. On balance - excellent fun, but not the best. Too complex, too many things unexplained, which will always be a problem in filming such a long book - despite the two-and-a-half hour length.
it's pretty good. Ralph Fiennes as Voldemort is awesome.
05 Dec 05
Originally posted by buffalobillThis is what I heard...
I beg to differ. Rowling as one of the highest paid authors in the world has all the authority to do exactly what she wants. The editors don't have any ability to argue with her. She could write any cr*p, and they'd have to keep it in.
Over the course of the series, her books have got longer and longer. Didn't happen with CS Lewis and doesn't happen ...[text shortened]... wrong and whatever she writes, sells. But will the books last - and longer than than the movies?
All of the first three books were approved at approximately the same time, but Rowling was forced to cut quite a bit out of the first three because the publisher didn't want to risk publishing a huge book that no one reads. But then after the popularity of the first three was apparent, Rowling was given more freedom in terms of length.