Harry who?

http://www.themovieblog.com/archives...s_rip_off.html

I've been thinking this for such a long time. Mrs Rowling seems to have used the same general plot as the last three episodes of Star Wars and hasn't even done a good job of hiding it. Wizards turning to the Dark Arts, tell me I heard that concept before. Everything was completely fine and dandy until she actually found out Luke and Vader only had two battles and that is when she had to stretch her own mind and came up with the crap that rounded off the Order of the Phoenix.

Another point to make is that Harry Potter isn't making much sense logically. Are we to believe some inexperienced teenage kid can take out the supposedly most powerful and evilest wizard using his silly little elementary spells?

"Here's one I learnt in first grade"
"Ow that hurt, now it's my turn, I've been practising Dark Arts for many a year here's the best I can come up with, a stupid spell that will only succeed in giving you a scar"
Duh
Give us a little more credit Mrs Rowling
If I was Voldemort and God help me one day I won't be I would have done him in, in one feel swoop as soon as I got the chance

Anyways, Harry Potter is the same film told over and over again each time with new charcaters, new villains, new magical crappy items that have no use in future films (i.e. Philiosopher's Stone), a few good ideas but nothing more to beat it's inspiration that was less than half it's size

Opinions?

Another point that doesnt make sense is how in the first book when they had to pick a potion to go through the fire why there was a potion still there when voldemort had already gone through, you'd think it would have already been used.

But people tend to use ideas over and over. Its done with lots of films and books.

And if theres anything you cant explain. A wizard did it

My opinion is that you're wrong about this one. I don't think HP rips on Star Wars. If anything it rips on Lord of the Rings, but it doesn't rip on anything. You will see similarities between this and other stories, just as you will with most things. Older stories infulence newer ones, that's how it's always been.

It's a fantasy story. About magic. Not everything's going to make sense.

Oh look. Your source is a blog.

Anyway, have you even read the books? The question of Harry escaping Voldemort time and time again is due to almost sheer luck. He's never "beaten" Voldemort through elementary uses of magic. There's always been an outside force. Voldemorts inability to touch Harry for one. The connection between the two wands, for another. As for Voldemorts failure to kill Harry, if you know ANYTHING about Harry Potter at all, you'd know that it was because Harry's mom (mum) died for him and that's the only reason Harry was left alive and bearing that scar. Seriously, you've never read the books have you?

I don't think the movies are very good in comparision to the books. Or at least, the first few movies haven't been. And the screenwriter for the movies IS NOT J.K. Rowling. So if you're gonna make jabs at the movie script, might as well make jabs at the right people.

I always thought HP ripped on LoTR a bit, to be honest. I saw...parallels between the whole idea of a dark lord (y'know, Voldemort-Sauron/Morgoth yadda yadda) and then the second book; the spider thing. I was really outraged about that at first :p It seemed like a blatant Shelob rip-off to me.

The Harry Potter movies are pretty rubbish imho, but the books are entertaining and I don't see why everything has to make perfect sense. They're interesting, good for 'em, eh.

people tend to not think of this sorta thing, but hey, i like the whole hp stuff, so i would say that (i dnt think i know what the hell im talking about)

Harry HAS grown as a wizard over the course of the series. Up to the point of the end of book 6, he's learned quite a few more spells than when he just started out, some of which can inflict quite a bit of damage on other people, and as Miriel has pointed out, he's never just flat out beaten Voldemort in their encounters, but oftentimes has escaped by the skin of his teeth or through the help of other people or animals.

As for the film concept, you have to be fair: a movie is at most 2 and a half hours long whilst a book can be hundreds, even thousands of pages filled with intricate details which make it unique and more specific. I for one think that the third film, Prisoner Of Azkaban, was a masterpiece, though a lot of it goes to the genius that directed it and the amazing visual looks he added to it, but overall, I think the movies have done a fair enough job of giving the Harry Potter story a visual, if modest representation. They'll never be able to replace the books, and I recommend judging the series by the novels, NOT just by the films.


On a side note, there is a long-held belief in some circles that there are really only 7 story 'types' and everything subsequently is an off-shoot of that with different characters, settings, etc. I'm not a big believer in this, but it might help explain why some people feel like they're seeing the same story over and over again.


Take care all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Miriel

Oh look. Your source is a blog.

Anyway, have you even read the books? The question of Harry escaping Voldemort time and time again is due to almost sheer luck. He's never "beaten" Voldemort through elementary uses of magic. There's always been an outside force. Voldemorts inability to touch Harry for one. The connection between the two wands, for another. As for Voldemorts failure to kill Harry, if you know ANYTHING about Harry Potter at all, you'd know that it was because Harry's mom (mum) died for him and that's the only reason Harry was left alive and bearing that scar. Seriously, you've never read the books have you?

I don't think the movies are very good in comparision to the books. Or at least, the first few movies haven't been. And the screenwriter for the movies IS NOT J.K. Rowling. So if you're gonna make jabs at the movie script, might as well make jabs at the right people.

---

Ha ha you killed him! seriously though you try to bash something that you don't know anything about.

You could dislike anything analyzed this much. If you can't accept that Harry can save the day as a teenager, how on earth do you accept Final Fantasy plotlines :(

As for the it rips off other plotlines or is the same plot over and over...Eh, I don't think so :p I rather love the Harry Potter plots :jess: In the books, it all fits together rather nicely.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blackmage_nuke

Another point that doesnt make sense is how in the first book when they had to pick a potion to go through the fire why there was a potion still there when voldemort had already gone through, you'd think it would have already been used.

But people tend to use ideas over and over. Its done with lots of films and books.

And if theres anything you cant explain. A wizard did it

---

It's stated pretty explicitly in SS/PS that there was very little of the potion left because somebody had already drank it.

Well, for the series, having 6/7ths of it, its going to sell for more than i paid as a unit than individually one day

I liked the series when i was about 10, but now im not that into it, but ill read the newest one for reason above ^ ^

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Miriel

Seriously, you've never read the books have you?

---

Bingo! :love:

Uh...I don't think HP is like Star Wars at all. xD What a silly idea. The only remote similarity is the good vs. evil concept, but that's a common theme in many works of fiction.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kirobaito

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blackmage_nuke

Another point that doesnt make sense is how in the first book when they had to pick a potion to go through the fire why there was a potion still there when voldemort had already gone through, you'd think it would have already been used.

But people tend to use ideas over and over. Its done with lots of films and books.

And if theres anything you cant explain. A wizard did it

---

It's stated pretty explicitly in SS/PS that there was very little of the potion left because somebody had already drank it.

---

Then it would be assumed that rather than going through the whole logic process it would be easier to just drink the potion that had already been drunken out of.

There's only like three stories that anyone's ever told ever anyway so meh.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Captain

On a side note, there is a long-held belief in some circles that there are really only 7 story 'types' and everything subsequently is an off-shoot of that with different characters, settings, etc. I'm not a big believer in this, but it might help explain why some people feel like they're seeing the same story over and over again.

---

Mind sharing what those are?

I would assume that one would be a Coming of Age story, which pretty much sums up HP

Harry Potter is like Star Wars in that the hero doesn't get the girl, but the secondary hero does. And I hate that in both of them >:[

I did feel that book six was wildly more like a Final Fantasy or RPGs in general, than any of the ones before it (a mystic quest to find the things that comprise Voldemort and will allow you to kill him? Hello looking for parts of Dracula's body in Simon's Quest!) maybe that's why it's one of my favorites. It read like a great big fanfic. Or maybe that was book five. I thought that about one of them anyways. I thought it was book six though;o;o;o;;;;;;;;

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rubah

Harry Potter is like Star Wars in that the hero doesn't get the girl, but the secondary hero does. And I hate that in both of them >:[

---

Would you rather see Luke bone his twin sister? :P

*resists urge to link to Sexy Losers*

"Mind sharing what those are?"

If I recall correctly:

'Overcoming the Monster'
'Rags To Riches'
'Quest'
'Voyage And Return'
'Comedy'
'Tragedy'
'Rebirth'

It's all from some overwrought book I had to read several years ago, but I really don't believe in it and frankly, wouldn't put much stock in it either as it's just one person's opinion that garnered some attention, but is by no means a universal truth.

Take care all.

how can hp be realted to starwars?its not as if the wands are representing lightsabers is it?

I think if Heromine(sp) is such an obscenely great student/wizard/witch, she's not owning as much as she should, or to the least live up to what the book made her seem. I'd send her to kill things over Harry anyday, only 'cause of her hipe.

The reason harry has hipe is because he survived, and he's just really good at not dying. His magic skills are kind of remedial though, like special ed magic 101. :(

Miriel basically said everything needed to be said.

Anyways, I somewhat disagree about the movies though, more as in the first two or three were decent and close to thge books, while the fourth and somewhat the third, started to cut a lot out. I know you cannot make like a six hour movie, but still I only watch the movie because of my love for the books. I would watch the movies if they were longer but included more from the novels. I know a lot of people think three hour movies are pushing it, but if the movie is good enough I would watch it from start to finish, no matter how long it is.

Quote:

---

Harry's mom (mum) died for him and that's the only reason Harry was left alive

---

This is quite literally the most pathetic explanation to why he is still alive. If you were told you cheated death because your mother died for you would you be satisfied enough with the sense that made? I can't believe how many people seem to be content with this joke of an explanation
And what about this Avada Kedavra curse that finished Diggory off? How are we to take Voldemort seriously if he doesn't have the balls to use the same thing on Potter

First of all, Voldemort DOES use the Aveda Kevadra on Harry, which causes the Priori Incantatem. (For full details READ THE DAMN BOOK!)

Second of all, it's not that his Mom gave her life for Harry, and Voldemort just went "Meh! That's enough bloodshed for today!" It's that since she gave her life for him, it offered some protection, which deflected the Aveda Kevadra. While the effect seems a little contrived, as was mentioned before, it's no more difficult a pill to swallow that most Final Fantasy plots.

I think one of the series charms is that, up to this point, Harry has had to depend on dues ex machina ways of surviving Voldemort...which is something that Harry is very aware of. I doubt that Harry will ever be as powerful as Voldemort, even at the end, but he has other forces working for him, like the love of his friends and family. Voldemort doesn't understand this, and that is really Harry's only edge, even though it is a powerful one.

Like most fantasy, Harry Potter works best when you don't overthink everything.

I blame the internet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mobiletype

Quote:

---

Harry's mom (mum) died for him and that's the only reason Harry was left alive

---

This is quite literally the most pathetic explanation to why he is still alive. If you were told you cheated death because your mother died for you would you be satisfied enough with the sense that made? I can't believe how many people seem to be content with this joke of an explanation
And what about this Avada Kedavra curse that finished Diggory off? How are we to take Voldemort seriously if he doesn't have the balls to use the same thing on Potter

---

It's a magical world where loves grants eternal protection.

And Voldy DID use the Killing Curse on Harry (which explains the green light and that scar, also don't forget the Priori Incantatem) which combined with THE POWER OF LOVE deflected the curse. Honestly, you......do NOT read the books, don't you? If you don't, don't just simply bash a masterpiece for Jesus' sake. R34D 73H B00K F0R 1N D3P7H 3>

http://www.halloweencostumes4u.com/M...0003/16370.jpg http://www.anniescostumes.com/RU18039.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mobiletype

Quote:

---

Harry's mom (mum) died for him and that's the only reason Harry was left alive

---

This is quite literally the most pathetic explanation to why he is still alive. If you were told you cheated death because your mother died for you would you be satisfied enough with the sense that made? I can't believe how many people seem to be content with this joke of an explanation
And what about this Avada Kedavra curse that finished Diggory off? How are we to take Voldemort seriously if he doesn't have the balls to use the same thing on Potter

---

It was established very early on that in Harrypotterland, love was the greatest power. It may be cheesy, but that's how it is in the magical land of witchcraft and wizardry. So it makes SENSE that Harry's life was saved by his mothers love and the sacrifice she made because of her love for Harry. I don't understand how that's a pathetic explaination. It makes perfect sense to me, even if it is really ooey gooey cheesy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mobiletype

http://www.themovieblog.com/archives...s_rip_off.html

I've been thinking this for such a long time. Mrs Rowling seems to have used the same general plot as the last three episodes of Star Wars and hasn't even done a good job of hiding it. Wizards turning to the Dark Arts, tell me I heard that concept before. Everything was completely fine and dandy until she actually found out Luke and Vader only had two battles and that is when she had to stretch her own mind and came up with the crap that rounded off the Order of the Phoenix.

Another point to make is that Harry Potter isn't making much sense logically. Are we to believe some inexperienced teenage kid can take out the supposedly most powerful and evilest wizard using his silly little elementary spells?

"Here's one I learnt in first grade"
"Ow that hurt, now it's my turn, I've been practising Dark Arts for many a year here's the best I can come up with, a stupid spell that will only succeed in giving you a scar"
Duh
Give us a little more credit Mrs Rowling
If I was Voldemort and God help me one day I won't be I would have done him in, in one feel swoop as soon as I got the chance

Anyways, Harry Potter is the same film told over and over again each time with new charcaters, new villains, new magical crappy items that have no use in future films (i.e. Philiosopher's Stone), a few good ideas but nothing more to beat it's inspiration that was less than half it's size

Opinions?

---

Yeah, so what, you don't like Harry Potter. So you've made your point. But I don't see why your common sense should turn around others thoughts on books or anything else for that matter. I'd like to see you come out with something as good as Harry Potter.

Come one mate, it's a book, it's not real. So just accept it or just don't read it. It's no use blurting it all out for the world to know.

Well we all know how this one ends Harry kills Voldemort in an epic duel but the concept of using wands instead of light sabers surpasses me...

I think Harry Potter is hilariously retarded, and every time someone writes out some of the faux-Latin "spells" I can't help but laugh hard.

The books kept my interest when I was in middle school and high school, but now I don't think I could actually read one. They're insanely contrived and repetitive, and not very interesting to read from a structural standpoint.

All these counterarguments make minimal good sense but tell me, what does Potter have to fear from Voldemort if he can somehow deflect everything he can throw at him through the power of love. Seriously this concept of love is not as well thought out as the Force is. Where are the limitations, the cans and can't do's, what can one acheive through it, how can one abuse it? Surely Voldemort can learn to use the power of love (through hate) to defeat this boy

I seriously am wondering if you read the books...

Anyways, Harry cannot deflect everything with the power of love. The thing is that he was protected from being touched by Voldermort in books 1, 2, 3 and most of 4 because the blood of his mother, who died to protect him flowed through him. In Goblet of Fire, when Voldermort is ressurected, Harry's blood is used, thus making it possible for Voldermort to touch him. As said earlier, Harry narrowly escapes and only because the core of Harry's wand and Voldemort's wand came from the same phoenix.

At this point in the series (As in up to the end of Half Blood Prince), the only protection that Harry has based on love is two: he is unable to be possessed by Voldemort and also long as he stays at a relative's he is protected. The first is because Harry knows what it is to love, Voldemort on the other hand does not. He is incapable of love. One filled with such hatred and malice cannot possess someone filled with love. Note it was only when he thought of those he love, did Voldemort retreat from his body. The second one returns to the fact that his mom died to save him. Because of this and complicated spells that are no explained in the novel, as long as Harry can call 4 Priver Drive his home and have a room there he will be safe (in the house). Voldemort's greatest weakness is that he does not understand thus underestimates the power of love. Love and the Force are two different things. How you equate the two is beyond me.

I am not equating the two merely just pointing out how poorly constructed the Force makes this theory of love look especially seeing how it is so essential to understanding the basic ideas behind the surviving power of this boy. Yet I jolly well can treat them as equals in the sense that both are the most heaviest influences on understanding some of the basic supernatural content displayed in the two series

Many cinemagoers bought the concept of the Force since it had depth, it was visually pleasing, was modestly original and connected well with the fans. The Force is indeed popular and easily forms the core of the religious aspects and beliefs of the series unlike this so-called power of love, hardly anyone in the Potter world goes around saying "may the power of love be with you" or any other captivating phrase. Yet it did save his life and would be a pretty cool thing to have flowing through the blood in your veins but like a few other disorganised ideas it is dispensible and quite possibly forgettable

I'm starting to see the point here.

You simply don't like Harry Potter. Ok, that's cool. Whatever.

But don't go around acting the like the books don't make sense, when A) There are explainations for everything you've questioned about the Harry Potter plot. b) These explainations make sense c) Your main beef seems to be with the movies which are only a small percentage of what the books are.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Miriel

I'm starting to see the point here.

You simply don't like Harry Potter. Ok, that's cool. Whatever.

But don't go around acting the like the books don't make sense, when A) There are explainations for everything you've questioned about the Harry Potter plot. b) These explainations make sense c) Your main beef seems to be with the movies which are only a small percentage of what the books are.

---

Agreed.

It's not a question about me disliking Harry Potter, if that was the case I wouldn't have gone the distance of reading the books. But having spent a little time in thought I smelt some rehashing and pondered on whether the whole thing was as cracked up to be what it was. I merely thought a few others would see where I was coming from, but sadly since this is not the case I think we should just bury our differences on this topic and move on.

As a last comment from myself the explanation for some of the events that took place are lame and probably won't ever convince me which is something I am willing to stand by. But like all good franchises these accounts seem to gain consent to the overwhelming majority and that probably was Rowling's objective