Too short, too much action, too many names.
She wrote the film this time, not a book. It's like she jammed in as much action as possible, forgetting for any actual character development. Also, the ending is twee as hell.
I finished reading it before it even came out, thanks to the Internet and generous factory workers. I found this very useful, as I could leverage power over people by threatening to reveal who dies. But on the whole, I agree with Lag.com
Why do authors kill so fucking many people at the end of their series? I mean, Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy ends with the Earth being blown up in every dimension that ever existed. It's like they're trying to tie up all the loose ends.
BTW, lagdotcom, what does "twee" mean?
Why do authors kill so fucking many people at the end of their series? . . . It's like they're trying to tie up all the loose ends.
I think you just answered your own question; mass death ensures that no one else (important, anyway) in the story will get into situations that further advance said story. (This, I imagine, is the point where the author has had enough of writing the story.) :p
I thought it was awesome, myself. Don't agree with Lag and Chamale.
I'll reread it soon. Probably my favorite of the series.
Edit: Also, the "action packed" parts were the most awesome ones imo. Battle of Hogwarts must have been the best chapter of the 7 books.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
I was disturbed by the incredibly large amount of plot holes in this one. The one introduced where elves can teleport people, even where there's spells against people teleporting, makes the whole saving Sirius in 3, Draco trying to sneak people in in 6, and the whole Regulus dying bit make no sense at all. The whole book felt rushed and barely a second thought was given to continuity at all.
Leaving the series with such a ton of loose ends and unexplained things doesn't help either.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 1058
Location: Reykjavík, Ísland
I never liked the inconsistencies in the magic stuff in Harry Potter, although I read all the books and finished the last one a few days ago. Like Nach said, elf teleporting, stuff like that. I also really hated the fact that nobody ever asked the most obvious question, what the hell is magic, where does it come from and why do you need to utter these specific words, etc. Also, why didn't Voldemort and the Death Eaters use bombs, guns and other Muggle weapons? Because they are retarded, that's why. Actually, why didn't anyone use guns at all? A machine gun would outperform a wand in killing stuff any day. You can't dodge bullets like you can the apparently super-slow-moving killing spells, which I get the feeling is almost impossible to hit anything with. Yeah, the wizarding community is supposed to be seperate from the muggle community, but there were wizards that knew everything about muggles, so they could have provided them with guns and stuff. Also, they probably could have bewitched a machine gun to have infinite bullets without requiring reloading and wouldn't break down. That would have been a much more effective weapon than a stupid wand. Wizards are retarded.
I also have the perfect defense against "Expelliarmus", just tie a string tightly around the wand and tie the other end to your wrist. Ta-Da! Now you can't be disarmed anymore. Too bad everyone was too stupid to think of such a simple trick. Although the spell wasn't used very much, maybe it would be too much of a hassle anyway. Oh well. If the expelliarmus spell would snap the string, use a magical string instead of a regular one.
The action scenes always felt a bit silly to me, especially the final battle at Hogwarts where I got the feeling they were fighting each other with firecrackers and matchsticks instead of deadly force.
So I guess, I like the books, but am bothered by a few things like these.
(by the way, you might want to put a spoiler tag at the top, just in case)
Edit: Oh, and I also want to say that Harry Potter is a stupid git for not keeping the Elder Wand at the end. He doesn't have to flaunt it, so no one would know. They would just think he was a really good wizard. Stupid, stupid, stupid.
SPOILERS...
It pissed me off when they killed Fred, and not George. It's all or nothing.
Also, why the hell did they light Neville's head on fire. That was slightly disturbing. And he doesn't even give a shit afterwards. It's like they turned him into the terminator. Well, I'm not complaining, Neville is one of my favorite characters.
Also, how they just killed off Nymphadora and Remus just pissed me off. No explanation, just a mention. Remus should have turned werewolf and battled Fenir head on. And how they just killed Picknose. He was under the Imperius curse dammit!
A funny reference, I caught, which probably wasn't intentional is Molly Weasley sceaming "YOU BITCH" at Bellatrix reminded me of the whole YTMND Snape kills Dumbledore drive-by.
And no mention of Charlie Weasley :(
Biggest annoying plothole: Dobby rescuing everyone. If Harry had half a brain he'd summon Kreacher to do his bidding. They left him there cooking. Kreacher, obviously, is no pushover, he owned dungface, and dungface is supposed to be a pretty powerful wizard (he was part of the order, after all).
I liked the series as a whole, but I felt this last novel was rushed. It was over too soon.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Blublu wrote:
Also, they probably could have bewitched a machine gun to have infinite bullets without requiring reloading and wouldn't break down. That would have been a much more effective weapon than a stupid wand. Wizards are retarded.
Haha, I was just discussing that with someone last week.
Blublu wrote:
So I guess, I like the books, but am bothered by a few things like these.
I couldn't agree with you more.
Blublu wrote:
Edit: Oh, and I also want to say that Harry Potter is a stupid git for not keeping the Elder Wand at the end. He doesn't have to flaunt it, so no one would know. They would just think he was a really good wizard. Stupid, stupid, stupid.
I was under the impression he did keep it, he just didn't plan on using it. Also if you think about it, it would be so much smarter for everyone to have more than one wand. Say they did expeliarmus you despite the string and all that, just pull out your spare.
Everyone just reeks of stupidity. Albus letting Tom roam his school as he desires when he comes to ask for a job, without supervision. Or Tom thinking a room filled with thousands of items is a place only you happened to have found.
You'd think he could've been more intelligent and hidden the diadem in the chamber of secrets, no one knows about that AND you need parseltounge to get in.
You can just go on and on about how dumb the characters are.
Like why the heck did Tom try to AK Harry in the end? Didn't he already try this 5 times now, and every time it failed? Why should it suddenly start working now?
DK64_MASTER wrote:
It pissed me off when they killed Fred, and not George. It's all or nothing.
I predicted a while back she would kill off one twin, it's more painful that way. I'm glad to see she had the intelligence to make at least one death seem like a loss.
What annoys me is that she wrote absolutely nothing about how George ended up coping with it, or what happened to Weasley's Wizard Wheezes after.
DK64_MASTER wrote:
I liked the series as a whole, but I felt this last novel was rushed. It was over too soon.
Yes it was rushed. So rushed in fact, the editors didn't even get around to fixing many grammar mistakes in the last few chapters. It's almost like the publishers knew they could sell millions of copies of the book even it had vomit rubbed between the pages, so they didn't bother finishing up the editing.
And over to soon? I'm still waiting for the ending. There were something like two dozen important characters that lived, and the ending contains a grand total of 5 of them. Of those 5, it mentions one became a teacher, and the other 4 got married and had some kids. Other than that, absolutely nothing.
Am I the only one thinking a proper ending would mention most of the characters that survived and a bit about them, and go into some detail about the main character? Perhaps tell us what Harry does these days? Where he lives? Does he get mobbed when he goes to Diagon Alley? Did some new bumbling idiot at the Ministry of Magic try to arrest him for the murder of Tom?
And they mention some kids, yet we have no idea how these kids are treated. Shouldn't there be some comment about how the kids of the most famous hero in their world are treated at school?
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
I think the epilogue is kinda lame, but I can see the point of having it. I entirely disagree with you Nach when you say you wanted it to be longer, I felt it was pretty much what was needed to leave off on a good note, and a longer epilogue would have pissed me off I guess.
I definitely think the aftermath to the Hogwarts battle should have been longer though (as opposed to 5 minutes, like it was in the book). I guess what I'm saying is wrapping things up should have been done in the present day, not the future, imo.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
I didn't say the epilogue should've been longer, I said it should've had an ending. I don't care where she put it, or how it was set up, there should have been something. To me, ending with that joke about 5 characters is nothing. If she would've had a bit before that with some school aftermath I probably would've been okay with it.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
It pissed me off when they killed Fred, and not George. It's all or nothing.
I predicted a while back she would kill off one twin, it's more painful that way. I'm glad to see she had the intelligence to make at least one death seem like a loss.
What annoys me is that she wrote absolutely nothing about how George ended up coping with it, or what happened to Weasley's Wizard Wheezes after.
Yeah, It is more painful... Except we didn't see George's pain. We had freaking Percy get pissy, of all people. I wanted to know what happened to George. I was predicting something along the lines of "And George ended up in St. Mungos, as he was never the same without his looney counterpart."
None of the deaths (from book 7) seemed to have had an impact on any of the characters in the book, except for Dobby, which wasn't very entertaining to read. Dobby got a couple of pages of obituary, and Tonks/Lupin get 2 sentences. Way to give closure.
Also, I really wanted to see the dynamics of Draco Malfoy and Harry after the final fight. They seem to be on good terms at the end, but what about Lucius?
The best part of the book was when they said something along the lines of Snape being the most courageous of all of them, and then they mention that he was in Slytherin, yet had the courage of a Gryffindor.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
DK64_MASTER wrote:
None of the deaths (from book 7) seemed to have had an impact on any of the characters in the book, except for Dobby, which wasn't very entertaining to read. Dobby got a couple of pages of obituary, and Tonks/Lupin get 2 sentences. Way to give closure.
She is no longer Tonks in this book ;)
But yes, it seems as if that was added as an afterthought. Especially in the last chapter where it says they need to have Teddy over more often, where if that chapter was written when his parents were already dead, Harry being Teddy's godfather, Teddy probably would've moved in with him at some point way earlier.
DK64_MASTER wrote:
Also, I really wanted to see the dynamics of Draco Malfoy and Harry after the final fight.
Yes, I would've liked to see if Harry returned his wand and stuff.
DK64_MASTER wrote:
The best part of the book was when they said something along the lines of Snape being the most courageous of all of them, and then they mention that he was in Slytherin, yet had the courage of a Gryffindor.
He had a lot more than the courage of Gryffindor. If I read that part right, he also was a bat animagus meaning he was good at transfiguration which is one of the aptitudes of Gryffindor.
It seems to me the hat stuck him in Slyrtherin because he asked for it, instead of that being where he really belonged.
Some of it becomes more noticeable with the second read through though. I didn't realize till the second time that Snivilus wanted to look into Lily's eyes as he was dying.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Was Snape ever revealed to be a pure-blood? I think with all his actions during that flashback scene, he must be one, but then again Voldemort hated halfbloods and he was one.
I think the sorting hat stuck him there due to the combination that he was a pure blood, liked to talk about pure bloods, and that he wanted to be in Slytherin.
But then again, not all purebloods have to go to Slytherin (Sirius).
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
DK64_MASTER wrote:
Was Snape ever revealed to be a pure-blood?
Was the half blood prince pure blood? Gee lets think about this.
DK64_MASTER wrote:
Voldemort hated halfbloods and he was one.
Tom was a full muggle and half squib son. Not like Harry who was from full blood and mudblood (hey at least she's magical), who were both heads back in school.
DK64_MASTER wrote:
I think the sorting hat stuck him there due to the combination that he was a pure blood, liked to talk about pure bloods, and that he wanted to be in Slytherin.
But then again, not all purebloods have to go to Slytherin (Sirius).
You need to notice the book entitled "The Half Blood Prince" again.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Was the half blood prince pure blood? Gee lets think about this.
DK64_MASTER wrote:
Voldemort hated halfbloods and he was one.
Tom was a full muggle and half squib son. Not like Harry who was from full blood and mudblood (hey at least she's magical), who were both heads back in school.
DK64_MASTER wrote:
I think the sorting hat stuck him there due to the combination that he was a pure blood, liked to talk about pure bloods, and that he wanted to be in Slytherin.
But then again, not all purebloods have to go to Slytherin (Sirius).
You need to notice the book entitled "The Half Blood Prince" again.
Ah right, I was missing something obvious there.
So I guess if you really wanted to be in a certain house (and if you had comparable magic potential), you'd be put there.
Another great moment by Snape was during a flashback, when Dumbledore asked him if he loved Harry, only because he was Lilly's son, or did he really love him. He answers "always".
Voldermort's reaction to the revelation that Snape was never on his side seemed very anti-climatic, so did the part when Harry first "died" Rowling spent too much time musing on how Harry had to face death, and had no more room left for plot. I could divide the book like so:
50% of Harry mumbling about finding the horcuxes / hallows
20% plot development
15% of Harry/Ron/Hermoine hiding from death eaters/complaining
10% of Harry's scar
5% of character development (mainly Snape)
I would have liked to have seen more character development and less about horcuxes.
But yeah, I'd read the series again. And again.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
DK64_MASTER wrote:
Rowling spent too much time musing on how Harry had to face death, and had no more room left for plot.
I felt she wanted to spend enough time paraphrasing the new testament.
The whole Harry walking to his death, not fighting back even though he can, dying and coming back, his death protecting everyone from Tom (AKA The Devil), just left a bad taste in my mouth.
I really didn't enjoy that the ending kind of had JKR forcing her understanding of the bible onto the reader, and even having a line "I died for you people" was just too over the top.
Although I had to laugh when I saw on another forum that someone said the whole idea behind the last part was so original and moving, and a literary work of art the likes of which haven't been seen before.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 1058
Location: Reykjavík, Ísland
Nach wrote:
I was under the impression he did keep it, he just didn't plan on using it. Also if you think about it, it would be so much smarter for everyone to have more than one wand. Say they did expeliarmus you despite the string and all that, just pull out your spare.
No, apparently he returned the wand to Dumbledore's tomb, hoping he himself would die a natural death so no one else would become master of the Elder Wand. Like it would make ANY difference whether the wand was located in his hand or that tomb. Not. Stupid git. I mean, he could use the Elder Want to easily repair his old wand, a feat that was beyond even the wand expert Ollivander. Sheeis. How stupid would one need to be to turn down that kind of power for no reason whatsoever. Answer=VERY.
Like it would make ANY difference whether the wand was located in his hand or that tomb. Not. Stupid git.
I've always felt that Harry Potter wasn't the brightest bloke on the block. But yeah, one could make the argument that "absolute power corrupts absolutely."
What was Voldemort's motive for turning evil. I don't seem to remember what it was. Did he just hate his father for abandoning, became a bully, and eventually decided to murder all non pure-bloods?
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Blublu wrote:
Nach wrote:
I was under the impression he did keep it, he just didn't plan on using it. Also if you think about it, it would be so much smarter for everyone to have more than one wand. Say they did expeliarmus you despite the string and all that, just pull out your spare.
No, apparently he returned the wand to Dumbledore's tomb
Yes, I guess you're right. I didn't see any reason why he couldn't keep it and die a natural death.
DK64_MASTER wrote:
What was Voldemort's motive for turning evil. I don't seem to remember what it was.
Ancient texts talk about children born from rape being demons, which was basically Tom's case.
Although this series also points out how Tom was never loved as a child in the slightest, while Harry who wasn't loved by the Dursleys was loved as a baby.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 1058
Location: Reykjavík, Ísland
DK64_MASTER wrote:
Blublu wrote:
Like it would make ANY difference whether the wand was located in his hand or that tomb. Not. Stupid git.
I've always felt that Harry Potter wasn't the brightest bloke on the block. But yeah, one could make the argument that "absolute power corrupts absolutely."
What was Voldemort's motive for turning evil. I don't seem to remember what it was. Did he just hate his father for abandoning, became a bully, and eventually decided to murder all non pure-bloods?
I don't know, but the Elder Want doesn't provide Absolute Power anyway. If Harry went and found the stone-thing (like any sensible person would), he would have become "master of death", which might have given him some additional power, but it is clearly stated in the book that the Elder Want alone doesn't grant any power beyond that in battle. That is, if he's unprepared, he's vulnerable, but otherwise unbeatable.
But I don't see any negative aspect of that because you would have that situation no matter what kind of wand you were using!!!! ASheeis. If you are attacked while you have no wand, you're toast. It does not make a difference whether your wand is the Elder Wand or not. Holy Shit. Harry Potter is so stupid. Harry Potter is a stupid git.
I've always felt that Harry Potter wasn't the brightest bloke on the block.
Harry: So, Mr. Ollivander, you say that with years of training I might be able to stun some people with this wand.
Ollivander: Yes.
Harry's answer: I'll take it!
Smart answer: Can you direct me to a store that sells Kalashnikov assault rifles?
I've always thought that wizards have put too much confidence in their wands. The "old magic" caused by Lily dying for her son blocks that rockin-wild "new magic" used by wands. However, it never strikes Voldemort, or his followers, for seventeen fucking years, to buy a .357 and blow Harry's brains out.
Joined: 5/2/2006
Posts: 1020
Location: Boulder, CO
I never really got a good feel for it...
Was it supposed to be set in the present? I dont remember any mention of technology more advanced then trains...
Harry may have to settle for a Tommy gun
In Goblet of Fire, Harry writes, in a letter to Sirius:
"They told him they'd have to cut his pocket money if he keeps [buying donuts], so he got really angry and chucked his PlayStation out the window. That's a sort of computer thing you can play games on. Bit stupid really, now he hasn't even got Mega-Mutilation Part Three to take his mind off things." (Page 27-28)
Goblet of Fire was published in July 2000, and the PS2 was released in Britain in November of 2000, so it does seem consistent with modern events.
Joined: 6/5/2006
Posts: 188
Location: Malmö, Sweden
Harry's parents die in 1981 (as seen on their Tombstone). Harry was one year old at the time iirc. He's seventeen during the course of the 7th book so... 1997?
Even the best player is limited by the speed of his fingers, or his mind's ability to control them. But what happens when speed is not a factor, when theory becomes reality?
