Ok, i do read the series but i am not an avid die hard fan. I saw somewhere that the new book is coming out sometime this summer, in June i believe, maybe July. Now i know it isn't just a kids book, but it is 786 PAGES LONG!!!! I mean c'mon, thats a little much. I will try to get it out of a library in December sometime, but it better be freagin good for being that long. Personally, i would have made it two books, so i make more money
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire was almost twice as long as the previous books in the series. I hope that Rowling doesn't forget that these are primarily CHILDREN'S books.
Well i really hope that someday harry potter gets a pointy stick thriven through its ugly skull so my niece won't nag anymore about the new harry potter films,books,merchandicing...
Originally posted by philippe Well i really hope that someday harry potter gets a pointy stick thriven through its ugly skull so my niece won't nag anymore about the new harry potter films,books,merchandicing...
Originally posted by napoleon526 Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire was almost twice as long as the previous books in the series. I hope that Rowling doesn't forget that these are primarily CHILDREN'S books.
Harry Potter wouldn't be half bad if Rowling didn't do the literary equivalant of selling her soul - merchandising. Making your book into a movie isn't bad, but...action figures, board games, video games...
Unfortunately it is a 'good decision' because it makes her a ****-load of money. But who really holds Harry Potter to high literary standards anymore? It's its own freaking industry now. I find it so sad.
Originally posted by napoleon526 Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire was almost twice as long as the previous books in the series. I hope that Rowling doesn't forget that these are primarily CHILDREN'S books.
Yeah. I remember very vividly Harry Potter and the Globet of Fire and I recall much of the curse words...
It's about 786 pages, it's called Harry Potter and the Order of the Phonix and it comes out in June. When it was announced Amazon.com was swamped with pre-orders for the book, it was record-breaking.
I'm an avid fan of it but hate the fact that the fourth book is impossible to hold up. Especially because I have the American hardcover, which has really sharp corners and 1/2 inch margins = a very heavy book.
Originally posted by cgannon64 Harry Potter wouldn't be half bad if Rowling didn't do the literary equivalant of selling her soul - merchandising. Making your book into a movie isn't bad, but...action figures, board games, video games...
Unfortunately it is a 'good decision' because it makes her a ****-load of money. But who really holds Harry Potter to high literary standards anymore? It's its own freaking industry now. I find it so sad.
Ah, yes: this is what I hate about Rowling. She exploited Harry Potter until it lost its charm. She's sold out Potter to Coke for their own merchadising use. There's millions of merchandise and its Pokemon-in-your-face nolstalga. Keep it to the books and movies, and it'll be a hit. But no, licensing once again rules everything and for millions more bucks.
There's been a movement against Coke's use of Harry Potter and for Rowling to void the deal. It's sponsored by the CSPI (Center of Science in the Public Interest) - http://www.saveharry.org
I liked Harry Potter, especially the third book. However, there is nothing original about it. Everything is stolen from somewhere else.
Things stolen from LOTR:
1. The Troll. It especially struck me when I saw the movies that both in the LOTR and Potter I there is a cave troll scene. They even look similar.
2. The Spider. This relates to Vol.II of both, though the two towers did not contain Shelob. But HP has this spider thing (giant spider in the woods) and the LOTR book II has Shelob.
3. Gollum/Dobbie. There is a completely computeranimated character in both films. In HP it is supposed to be a (house-)elf, in LOTR a former hobbit. Both have a twisted personality and try to help the "hero" by killing him.
4. Invisibility blanket. Both Harry and Frodo have something that makes them invisible.
5. The Tree. LOTR has Treebeard and the Ents while HP only has this whomping willow, or whatever it is called.
There are lots of other things, and those are only the similarities with LOTR. I liked the third book best, because Azkaban seemed quite interesting and it has not quite the same story as 1, 2 and 4.
I know, you can find this ring thing most obviously in "Ring der Nibelungen", but LOTR was original to some extent. And the Silmarillion even more. And Rowlins did not only steal from LOTR. Fluffy=Zerberus(Kerberos) guardian of the underworld, etc.
Originally posted by Unregister Ok, i do read the series but i am not an avid die hard fan. I saw somewhere that the new book is coming out sometime this summer, in June i believe, maybe July. Now i know it isn't just a kids book, but it is 786 PAGES LONG!!!! I mean c'mon, thats a little much. I will try to get it out of a library in December sometime, but it better be freagin good for being that long. Personally, i would have made it two books, so i make more money
It is written in forty foot high letters, enscribed with red lightning into a cliff in the Himalayas outside Cardiff, named Richards incidentaly, that They who speak bad of Harry Potter draw the baleful eye and terrible vengeance of the Dark and Shadowed One...
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
