age /boundary crossing childlike wonderment witchcraft-based fun or tiresome overlong kid-obssessing twaddle?

i've never bothered to read any of the books or sit through the movies, and i plan on never doing so, but from what i understand the subject matter to be, i'm voting CRAP. the whole phenomenon seems really trite.

placeholder wrote:i've never bothered to read any of the books or sit through the movies, and i plan on never doing so, but from what i understand the subject matter to be, i'm voting CRAP. the whole phenomenon seems really trite.

shut it, muggle!

i've seen the first two movies, and easily enjoyed them both. if stories that involve magic annoy you, then yeah, don't waste your time. i think it's fun stuff. haven't read any of the books, as i don't read. but i expect i'll see the next movie when it's netflixable.

not crap

PS - seriously, i'd vote not crap just for the porn it inspired me to write/direct/produce... Hairy Pooter and the Sorceror's Bone.

I've read all of the books and seen the three movies. I will say this:

The first two movies are for the most part completely interchangeable. Meaning that you can get away with seeing the movies and not reading the books.

The third book is where the series gets interesting. Worth to read, and then see the film - which was extremely well done and makes the first two feel like they were developed for TBS Original Movies or the like.

The fourth and fifth books are flat-out great reads. By no means high literature, but a well articulated exploration of what it means to be on the outside (and on the fringe of said outside) over the course of developing adolesence.

Plus, there's like magicians and wizards and shit.

If you are someone who enjoys reading, it's worthwhile. If you are someone who may not enjoy it so much, I could see how one would want to take a pass.

absolutely execrable!

a long time ago I read the perfect definition of disappointment which ran along the lines of slowly falling in love with a beautiful woman sitting opposite during a long train journey only to watch her pull out a copy of the daily mail (US cousins: a hateful, perpetually enraged right-wing tabloid newspaper). these days I think the same thing about reading Harry Potter.

and the new film?

"36 year-old Daniel Radcliffe returns as 12 year-old wizard Harry Potter in this latest instalment of the popular films. Gary Oldman co-stars as Sirius Black ... who looks to end Potter's young life before he can become Best Wizard Ever of RainbowMagicLand, play a round of Skoozleball with the Fitzwidgets and open the Enchanted Fucking Doors of whatever."

(ps. for kids : not crap)

NOT CRAP.

No, wait, let me explain: I used to be too cool for school about the books (before there were movies). I'd see adults reading them on the train and think "arrested development". Then, I read the first paragraph of the first book and was immediately sucked in. They are well-written (not in a high art sort of way) and pretty gripping. They also have some dry English wit to them which I'm sure I don't get half of, but nevertheless enjoy. The fifth book is pretty amazing, not the least of which is that kids are actually reading a 500+ page book. That's gotta be a good thing, right? I know that's the standard media line, but I like it. It's cool to read. Awesome.

The first two movies, as someone else said, feel like direct-to-cable presentations. You can miss those and be alright. I just saw the third and I highly recommend it. Very stylish and a great story, which gets pared down nicely from the book. I re-read the third book afterwards and they both seemed to complement each other. See this one if you want to see any of them.

As a phenomenon, well, that's six of one etc. Pretty unimportant for my decision.

shortly after one of the books came out, my wife and i were at dinner at hing loon, this great chinese place in seattle. two identically configured chinese families walked in, each a couple w/a young daughter of six or so. each daughter was lugging the new tome, which they could barely carry. the minute they sat down at the table, they both opened the books to the first few pages, and they read for the rest of the time we were there. which was about an hour and a half.

i have never touched one of the books or glimpsed any of the movies

but, provided it is not explicitly pornographic, sexist, racist, homophobic, xenophobic, generally morally corrupt, or dumb, anything that gets kids that into reading must not be crap

tmidgett wrote:but, provided it is not explicitly pornographic, sexist, racist, homophobic, xenophobic, generally morally corrupt, or dumb, anything that gets kids that into reading must not be crap

Not only is it none of those things, Midge, but it depicts an almost utopian society where race or gender are non-issues and every single person is equal to the next. Even evil has a bright side (like real life). Pretty amazing stuff that I would recommend if you ever have a free afternoon and would like to turn off your analytical side for a while.

it does have a poor-kid-as-underdog kinda thing going on, at least that's what i got from the first two movies. i.e. the little aryan kid is able to buy fancy brooms for the whole team, cause his asshole dad is a CEO or something, versus the good kids are more poor and... doude, did i just describe willy wonka or what?!?!

his dad was a supporter of lord v-- before harry's victory as a baby. there is a trend of the rich wizards being death eaters. i think you're right about the poor-underdog thing, since ron is so godforsakenly poor, but on the other hand, potter has a giant heap of gold, and hermione's wealth is generally unknown. however, hermione is an underdog because her parents are muggles.

not crap

-noah