MithLuin Posted December 5, 2011 Share Posted December 5, 2011 This thread definitely needs: Potter Puppet Pals [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tx1XIm6q4r4[/media] and A Very Potter Musical [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wmwM_AKeMCk[/media] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mysisterisalittlesister Posted December 7, 2011 Author Share Posted December 7, 2011 amesome video! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InPersonaChriste Posted December 7, 2011 Share Posted December 7, 2011 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elizabeth09 Posted December 14, 2011 Share Posted December 14, 2011 (edited) [font=georgia,serif]Give me LOTR any day of the week and I will read all week if I had the time and all. I think that J. K. Rowlen had a good idea at first, but end it up as a big waist of time.[/font] Edited December 14, 2011 by elizabeth09 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southern california guy Posted December 15, 2011 Share Posted December 15, 2011 I loved the Harry Potter series. I loved Lord Of The Rings too but it got so involved with so many different characters and monsters that sometimes it totally lost me and I barely knew who or what was being talked about. Harry Potter was closer to the level that I could read and comprehend. I loved the whole series! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MithLuin Posted December 18, 2011 Share Posted December 18, 2011 The Lord of the Rings is a much better story and the writing is far superior to Harry Potter. I would not compare the two. Harry Potter is more character-driven and sticks to Harry's point of view almost all the time, though, so that makes it easier for some people to follow and get into. I have no problem liking both, but I know which one counts as the love of my life and which was a fun mystery story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tab'le De'Bah-Rye Posted December 18, 2011 Share Posted December 18, 2011 [quote name='Papist' timestamp='1322576602' post='2342110'] My wife read all the books. She noticed that they got darker with each book. As for me, I had no interest in reading Harry Potter. There are many better quality books I can read than Harry Potter, which is what I will be encouraging my children to do. [/quote] I had the same confusion when i think it was the 1st 2 or 3 harry potters where rated G or PG and than suddenly the third or fourth instalment was rated M, i took this as the enemy acting humble than bam smacking the children around with an M. I can't imagine how terrible it was for good parents to tell there youngins that they could not watch harry potter anymore because of the ratings and how dissapointed these children must have been after watching the 1st two or three episodes. God bless you all Onward christian souls. God ,is good,God is love,God saves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fides' Jack Posted December 29, 2011 Share Posted December 29, 2011 [quote name='mysisterisalittlesister' timestamp='1322778949' post='2343352'] I know, right? I'm sort of regretting starting this thread... Snape, Snape. Severus Snape. Snape, Snape. Severus Snape... [/quote] Is that actually an incantation from the series? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MithLuin Posted December 29, 2011 Share Posted December 29, 2011 (edited) Haha, NO, that's from the 'Potter Puppet Pals' skit entitled 'The Mysterious Ticking Noise' (see the YouTube video at the top of this thread) Actual incantations in Harry Potter tend to use bad Latin. Examples include: [i]Expelliarmus[/i], [i]Avada Kedavra[/i], [i]Wingardium Leviosa[/i], [i]Cruciatus[/i], [i]Alohamora[/i], [i]Sectumsempra[/i], [i]Lumos[/i] These are meant to (in order): Disarm, Kill, Float, Torture, Unlock, Cut, and Light Up Some are very innocuous; others are considered Dark Magic and are illegal. Edited December 29, 2011 by MithLuin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fides' Jack Posted December 30, 2011 Share Posted December 30, 2011 I have to ask - why would the Harry Potter books consider one spell dark magic and another not dark magic? What's the difference? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jesus_lol Posted December 30, 2011 Share Posted December 30, 2011 [quote name='fides' Jack' timestamp='1325269783' post='2360041'] I have to ask - why would the Harry Potter books consider one spell dark magic and another not dark magic? What's the difference? [/quote] because one can lift your textbooks off the ground with magic, and the other makes your enemies writhe in unimaginable pain and then die. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lil Red Posted December 30, 2011 Share Posted December 30, 2011 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MithLuin Posted December 30, 2011 Share Posted December 30, 2011 Yep, basically. In the Harry Potter world, magic is an innate ability (you're either born with it or you aren't). Genetically, it works out to probably be at least two genes, one of which is dominant, one recessive, controlling magical ability. [No, the author didn't say that; I did.] So, it's what you do with it that determines whether you are using your abilities for good or evil. One branch of magic is called Dark Arts, and these are recognized to have nefarious uses. Of course, this subject is not taught at Hogwarts; they have only a class called 'Defense Against the Dark Arts.' Dark Arts allow you to hurt and manipulate people, or rip your soul and place part of it in an object. That sort of thing. Transfiguration allows you to transform one object into another. In and of itself, that is neither good nor bad. Certain transfiguration spells would fall under Dark Arts. Others would not. If that helps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Byzantine Posted December 31, 2011 Share Posted December 31, 2011 [quote name='Tab'le Du'Bah-Rye' timestamp='1324189548' post='2353193'] I had the same confusion when i think it was the 1st 2 or 3 harry potters where rated G or PG and than suddenly the third or fourth instalment was rated M[/quote] Stateside they only got as far as PG-13 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MithLuin Posted December 31, 2011 Share Posted December 31, 2011 The first two movies (2001 and 2002) were rated G. The third (2004) was rated PG. The fourth (2005) was rated PG-13, as were the later ones. None of them are rated R. Harry and friends were 11 in the first movie, and aged one year each movie. So, it begs the question....why would you expect an adventure movie about 17 year olds to be appropriate for a 12 year old audience? 11 year old kids who saw the first HP movie in theaters back in 2001 were now 21 year old adults when the final movie came out this past summer. The actors and actresses are no longer considered child actors, but have moved on to college or careers at this point. The argument has been all along that both the books and movies aged with the kids in the audience. If you read the first two books, they're rather juvenile school adventure stories. The third one introduces the adults as characters...and the fourth one has a much more mature writing style, and is much longer. The 5th, 6th and 7th books are all over 750 pages long...in the hardcover. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now