Harry Potter 7

[Bijo]

Harry Potter. Harry Potter? Harry PÓTTER? These books and films are to be collected and placed into a gigantic barrel filled with oil whereafter it is all set ablaze by the staccato of a fighter jet's gun.

*runs off*

Harry Pótter. Hah.

[Lord Winter]

Rowling hates her characters and have some weird death fetish. How else would you explain 12 deaths in one book?

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Ever read A Song of Fire and Ice. Rowling only killed off a ton of secondaries and non of the golden trio. :(

I have to agree with Sapi the fire was just way to convient.

[GeneralHankerchief]

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

I would have preferred the fire over the basilisk fangs, actually. Just to show that the Dark Arts are self-destructive, etc. But it was stupid to use them both. One or the other.

[Marshal Murat]

I was really disappointed in some parts.



Snape...
Snape...
Snape...

[GeneralHankerchief]

You might wanna put that under spoiler tags.

[edyzmedieval]

Going to get it today. Was a big fan, but now I lost interest.

[English assassin]

Is it just me, or are people going to look back at Harry Potter and ask, what the **** was that all about?

As a series it just doesn't seem to work. Books 1-3 are sort of sub Jennings boarding school japes for fairly young children. OK writing but not great. Books 4-5 suddenly take themselves seriously, with, you know EVIL, and civil servants (but I repeat myself). Poor writing, great length. Not really suitable for young children.

Books 6 and 7 I have no idea as I have not read them but I imagine more of the same.

Who is the series aimed at? Narnia, or LotR, have one target audience for the whole series. If you enjoy one, you can read all the others. This series, you can give the first three books to a 7-8 year old, but the last ones need an older reader if only for sheer stamina, not to mention deaths and stuff. On the other hand the first three are too twee for anyone over 10 to enjoy.

IMHO its two mini-series. She got lucky by the time she was writing book 4, readised that adults were, inexplicably, reading her kids' books and she was hot stuff publishing-wise, and went off on a turgid prose mega-bender.

Good luck to her, but I can't see the books having lasting appeal.

[naut]

Gripes:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Ron's ability to remember snake tongue he heard over 5 years ago.
The convenient fire and fangs.
How did Malfoy become master of the wand? Wouldn't he have to beat Snape?
The fighting scenes where horribly written, and half of the plot explaination during them was appalling.

Otherwise I enjoyed it.

[edyzmedieval]

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

The book is too dark, totally unsuited for kids as young as 10-12 years old. The scene where Voldemort "violates" Dumbledore's tomb to take the Elder Wand, that is waaay off the mark.

Plus, I did find some things really sad, like the death of Hedwig and Dobby.

[ShadesPanther]

Gripes:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Ron's ability to remember snake tongue he heard over 5 years ago.
The convenient fire and fangs.
How did Malfoy become master of the wand? Wouldn't he have to beat Snape?
The fighting scenes where horribly written, and half of the plot explaination during them was appalling.

Otherwise I enjoyed it.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Well He said it to open the locket (which btw was so obvious was the way to open it when he got it)

Malfoy became master because he disarmed dumbledore when he entered the tower in book 6.

I agree some of the fight scenes were poorly done