Masterpiece.
Not the best series ever, but it goes a long way to show how mainstream =/= bad, how books can appeal to a wide audience without losing quality, and how old tropes can still be used to great effect. A personal favorite of mine.
And since other people ordered their books from favorite to least favorite: 5, 7, 4, 3, 6, 1, 2. I don't think the series became GREAT until that Dementor stopped the Hogwarts Express.
rocketpig said:
I really enjoy Song of Ice and Fire but Martin has massive flaws with his writing. First, he needs an editor. In a BIG BAD way. His plots have gone kudzu in a way that would make the Lost writers cheer in excitement. Some characters are useless for several books and he continues devoting hundreds of pages to their stories. Arya spends two books doing nothing more than wander around aimlessly. Sansa is nothing more than a vessel for other characters. Brienne, the Onion Knight, and others draw the reader in but then disappear for ages. And he continues to add more to the story without taking anything away. It's creating a cumbersome world where I have the feeling that everything is going to continue to go to hell and fragment until the last 100 pages of the seventh book, where everything magically comes together for a super-duper finale that pisses me off because it could have happened 2,000 pages earlier without all the "intrigue" of having characters near-miss one another, wander around for books on end, or just do flat-out STUPID things. Third, this isn't Mississippi Burning. It's fantasy. Killing your characters and having bad things happen just for the sake of bad things happening doesn't make for an interesting read. It creates a boring, frustrating, and irritating environment for the reader. Readers make an emotional commitment to characters and the writer should respect that. If characters are going to die in droves, make it count. Don't do it just to show that you can. It's a lazy, confrontational style of writing that just isn't very good. Fourth, the FIRST BOOK'S PROLOGUE deals with the Others killing members of the Night's Watch. Four THOUSAND pages later, we still haven't seen the invasion. He's on course to pack way too much into the last two books by leading his characters around aimlessly for too many pages and too many books. Don't get me wrong, the world he created in books 1-3 was wonderful. The writing is engaging, the world is massively complex, and many of the characters are great. But then he killed almost every character worth reading about. And then he wrote books 4-5 and tied up virtually nothing since book three. On top of that, he added 3-4 more divergent storylines to the series. He's on the verge of writing himself into a corner because at this point, it feels like he's masturbating onto the page instead of focusing on telling a tightly-knit, finely honed story. |
yes, 4th book wasn't as good as the firts 3, but it's quite good too. i haven't read the latest one , wating for translation.
amaral_slb said:
You are like, has Potter grown as a magician to the point where he can defeat Voldemort??? Doesn´t look like it, but someone has to go...... with magic Potter is groing as an individual and a wizard during the books, and at the end it is like he doesn´t "Win"(or lose) because of how good (or bad) he was as a wizard compared to the weaken Vold |
To be fair, Voldemort was an exceptionnal wizard, Harry was not. She made the character of Harry as a more than average wizzard but not more.
It would not have been logic for Harry to kill Voldemort while getting humiliated 1 year before by Snape who is himself ridiculous compared to Voldemort.
I would not have been against giving Harry more power, but the author choose differently.
Mrs Weasley killing Bellatrix was meh I thought, other than that the final book was epic.
Much better than the movie, (Voldemort looks like a pathetic alien in the movies).
I thought movies didn't do the books much justice and have stopped watching them after the Goblet of Fire, Prisoner of Azkaban was particularly atrocious to me.
As books they are OK - better than most but not the best to me.
Film wise it's just too mainstream, oversimplified, and in some cases parts of the plot are missing - otherwise the films would have been extensively long, more of an entertainment than story telling.
Although there are fantasy books that I rate higher than Potter, it's still good to see an author of a BOOK garner this much success in such a short time.
Disconnect and self destruct, one bullet a time.
The Harry Potter book series was fantastic, I agree. So many great characters and moments to be sure. I really can't say enough about how great J.K. Rowling's novels were. ^_^
Also, here's an awesome quote:
Harry Potter is all about confronting fears, finding inner strength, and doing what is right in the face of adversity. Twilight is about how important it is to have a boyfriend.
-Stephen King
anyway guys , i haven't read a book since The wise man's fear a couple of months ago. Can you recomend me some good fantasy book or series worth reading?
| NotStan said: I thought movies didn't do the books much justice and have stopped watching them after the Goblet of Fire, Prisoner of Azkaban was particularly atrocious to me. As books they are OK - better than most but not the best to me. Film wise it's just too mainstream, oversimplified, and in some cases parts of the plot are missing - otherwise the films would have been extensively long, more of an entertainment than story telling. Although there are fantasy books that I rate higher than Potter, it's still good to see an author of a BOOK garner this much success in such a short time. |
What I didn't understand is, apart from the 2 part film the last book was made into, Chamber of Secrets (Which is my 'particularly atrocious' vote) was the longest of the films, made from the shortest of the books.... wheras Order of the Phoenix (which is the point I properly started enjoying the films, though it still has problems) is the shortest film from the longest book. I understand the film medium is more restrictive and things have to be cut (action scenes naturally take a while to protray in films, but can be described in a few pages), but they just seemed to make some odd decisions about what to cut and what to leave in.
In Order of the Phoenix for example Grawp could have even been cut from the book and it wouldn't have changed much else (a little fiddling with the reason behind Hagrid's absence, or even have him be absent for a shorter time) so it should have been an easy thing to cut from the film, yet it wasn't. The first two films horrendousness was mostly due to child acting, but there were some weird plot errors such as in the first film there is no mention of there being dirt on Ron's nose until Hermione points it out. There really is no point putting that line in if it wasn't mentioned earlier about Mrs Weasley trying to rub it off. I think they cut the first bit but forgot to cut the last.
| Rob-Ot said: One of the few mainstream properties that are actually good. |
Absolutely.Including the movies as well.
| NotStan said: I thought movies didn't do the books much justice and have stopped watching them after the Goblet of Fire, Prisoner of Azkaban was particularly atrocious to me. As books they are OK - better than most but not the best to me. Film wise it's just too mainstream, oversimplified, and in some cases parts of the plot are missing - otherwise the films would have been extensively long, more of an entertainment than story telling. Although there are fantasy books that I rate higher than Potter, it's still good to see an author of a BOOK garner this much success in such a short time. |
That's pretty ironic,since most of the fans consider PoA to be the best HP movie after DH2.And I'm one of them .
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2026 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
