Are the Harry Potter movies good?
If I say no are you gonna watch it anyway? Out of spite?!
>>215063119only the first 2
>>215063128No.I might not watch them even if you say yes.>>215063134Hmm.
>>215063119Are you age 12 to 16?They are fine, but nothing special and rapidly decline in quality after the 3rdAre you outside that age bracket? They are shrug/10, with incredibly dated CGI
>>215063119The first ones is the most magical experience a 9-12 years old can get from a movie
no they're the marvel movies of their time
>>215063119I enjoy the first three. Afterwards you notice that the books just became too big to be put into a 2 hour movie. Especially the 6th, without having read the book I don't think I could've followed it.
>>215063119Yes they are good as a visual inspiration for when you read the books for the seventh time and can actually see and feel the world around you while reading. The movies are too short to have everything in them but they are alright imo
>>215063134Correct.
>>2150631191is great2 is just ok3 is probably the best of them4 is when it really starts to go downhill, my least favorite5 would have been pretty decent without the barty crouch plot 6 is pretty ok7 part 1 is good imo, despair kino7 part 2 is just ok. Pretty short, nothing but fights, and a happy endingFantastic Beasts and where to Find Them is a nice little flick, got some whimsy in it fantastic whatever CRIMES OF GRINDELWALD 2 is one of the worst movies you'll watch. Not even a "so bad it's good", so bad it's "we have to kill mudbloods to stop the holocaust" badyeah yeah whatever SECRETS OF DUMBLEDORE 3 is even worse, only made decent by Mads playing Grindelwald instead of Depp Cursed Child we can only pray that never makes it to the big screen it's so bad
Lulu Wilson can't act
movies are just okay, books are excellent, I can't wait for the full cast recorded audio books
>>215064704>5 would have been pretty decent without the barty crouch plotisn't that 4?
>>215064953looked it up, you're right. That's my bad. I thought Order was Barty Crouch, but it's actually GobletOrder introduces Umbridge
>>215064893Wait, you are saying she ever tried acting, and wasn't just herself in front of camera?
>>215063134They're the only ones I can rewatch.
>>215063119First three are okEverything after that is purely optional.If you are watching Fantasy Beasts at all, you are either a torture victim or a double retard
>>215064704Stopping the holocaust wasn’t a bad idea but the fantastic beasts movies weren’t unified enough for this to work.If they wanted to do that then you should do a classic trilogy structure. First movie is super bright and whimsical it’s all about finding cool beasts and Pokémon in g it up. You get to know and love all the characters. There is an antagonist wizard who wants the same beast it’s simple stuff. The antagonist is part of Wizard Nazis, a mysterious clan of South America (Argentina). Second movie Protagonist goes to Durmstrang School for business. This is the movie where Dumbledore and Grindlewald make love and things still have a charming tone. Suddenly oh my gosh, Grindlewald has a warning! Muggles are at war and we are next to die! We need to kill them first! Dumbledore rushes in and says noooo G this is wrong my love! Meanwhile Protagonist finds all the secrets of the Wizard Nazis and saves London from destruction! Movie three, Grindle has a giant army. Movies very similar but the main protagonist dies to sacrifice himself and only Dumbledore and a cute chick survive to save the day!Overall, it’s very simple but entertaining.
>>215063119The story assumes you're a self-inserting child. That's not to say it's a bad way to make a movie (or write a book), but it's a recipe for the kind of a child movie that's not very enjoyable to adults watching it for the first time.
