lilclerk
Well-Known Member
The funny thing is, all they had to do was use the endings Jo came up with:shrug:
Well that's just silly. Why would they do that?
The funny thing is, all they had to do was use the endings Jo came up with:shrug:
I agree with you on that...but do you know how many people think that that was the worst movie by far?All of the movies are at a distinct disadvantage going in because of the density of the books, which of course have only gotten denser as we go. Finding that balance between covering the important stuff in detail and not cheating the story when it comes to what's left out has been really tough each time. For my money, the PoA movie did the best job of it so far.
I agree with you on that...but do you know how many people think that that was the worst movie by far?
Oh I agree. Probably why I love that movie the most out of all of them. (One of the many reasons.)They're allowed to be wrong. :shrug:
I don't judge HP movies by the same standards that I'm sure many people who love the books do. How well the movie holds together as its own thing (i.e., how much sense it would make for someone who never had picked up a book) is more important to me than how much stuff from the book they can cram into it. :lol: :shrug:
Um...that's interesting...:lookarounGo JKR!!! :sohappy:
I didn't read the review, but this spoiler-free quote from the NY times review was this: "has some lumpy passages of exposition and a couple of clunky detours -- but the overall conclusion and its determination of the main characters' story lines possess a convincing inevitability that make some of the prepublication speculation seem curiously blinkered in retrospect."
What's this a load of? Oh, a load of crap, that's right. Stupid NY Times reviewer.
Um...that's interesting...:lookaroun
I had to look it up. :lol:
blink·ered /ˈblɪŋkərd/
–adjective
1. narrow-minded and subjective; unwilling to understand another viewpoint.
2. having blinkers on; fitted with blinkers.
Sounds like the reviewer is saying "don't expect anything out of left field that the story doesn't already point to." The most obvious interpretation to me is that all the "Will Harry die???" talk ends up looking silly in the end. But maybe I'm missing the point. :shrug:
I'm so tempted to read the NY Times review... quick - somebody slap my wrists!
In all honesty, I'm a bit worried that I'll hear the ending before I get to read it all. I REALLY hope this doesn't happen.
Speaking of that - if anyone on here wants to post about what happens in the book, can we all agree to write "SPOILER" before beginning our post? And maybe typing our post in white so people aren't tempted to read?
I think that it's been stated that somebody is going to start a spoiler thread for the book...however, those who do put spoilers in this thread...should definitely put some notice in it.Great idea Kat!
I don't want to see ANYTHING till I've read the book!
Not even a hint!
I agree with you on that...but do you know how many people think that that was the worst movie by far?
[color=#E5F0FD]Use E5F0FD as the color for truly invisible text. It will match the background and you will have to highlight it in order to read a spoiler.[/COLOR]
I always wondered how to do thatUse E5F0FD as the color for truly invisible text. It will match the background and you will have to highlight it in order to read a spoiler.
Highlight below: (NOT A SPOILER!)
Use E5F0FD as the color for truly invisible text. It will match the background and you will have to highlight it in order to read a spoiler.
This is done like this:
PHP:[color=#E5F0FD]Use E5F0FD as the color for truly invisible text. It will match the background and you will have to highlight it in order to read a spoiler.[/COLOR]
You really are awful!Harry dies! j/k
Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.