Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Anyone wanna know the info, PM me.

Warning: The reply PM may contain spoilers

Explain. I've read it, and I don't see how it's an epic failure.

Originally posted by Soljer
Explain. I've read it, and I don't see how it's an epic failure.

Gladly. What I expected to be a masterpiece suddenly turned into a failure. The dialogues were horrible, the visual explanation was also, and : Almost every character dies as if they were not important and as if they were extras.

I admit I was kinda disappointed with the ending... I still thought the rest of it was good, at least on a par with the other books. Definitely not a failure.
Its not like any of the HP books have been masterpieces. They're all really enjoyable, and considering they're aimed mostly at children I'd hardly expect for there to be... literary devices that are particularly intricate or anything to put them into the catagory of 'masterpiece'.

And I thought the way the Ron/Hermione situation ended up was a TOTAL anti-climax personally.

I agree with anyone that thought the ending was atrocious.

The book itself, though, was wonderful. Assuming you stopped reading at page 749.

NOOOOO HEDWIG!! NOO MAD EYE_MOODY

Yeah... quite.

Tbh I didnt really mind any of the deaths much. The one that really shocked me was Crabbe... and then of course Colin Creevey. I found it weird that kids were dying in a kids book..

What happened to Ron and Hermione...oh and Voldemort...I wanna know what happens to them

I found the ending fitting for a children's book.

It hardly felt like a children's book...

Its written to fast and to many things are left out at the end. In my opinion..

Originally posted by steverules
What happened to Ron and Hermione...oh and Voldemort...I wanna know what happens to them

ermm Read the book maybe?

Originally posted by Quinlan-Vos
It hardly felt like a children's book... True as that is, it is still considered such. Actually, no, it was perfect for a children's book. Death's do happen in children's book. And it had the child-like ending to it. You got to really think like a child sometimes. Then you'd probably appreciate the ending.

the problem is that we were expecting much more then a clasical children book? JK has the fame of the best author of our time. yet the series ended, how should I say, very ...failure I beleive is the word

You can't very well expect every character to come out of a war alive and kicking. No, Deathly Hallows wasn't a failure. I believe it was the opposite. A success. I would have been disappointed if every character ended up living. It was like Lord of the Rings, Tolkien knew where he was going, knew that the ring would be destroyed, yet characters had to end. Rowling knew that either Potter or Voldemort would die, but there had to be death.

I would expected Potter to fianlly die! Thus the book would stand a chance to became classic like Oliver Twist, for example
Who would now read Potter? In as much as ten years the novels will be forgoten as many before. pitty It had all the chances to became a classic

I for one would like to see the rule where the main character has to die so that a book can become a classic.

However.

I agree that the epilogue felt a bit tacked on and definitely did not feel like the rest of the book did. I would have much rather had it end with Harry speaking those wise words... and fade away watching the characters ride into the sunset. After all the drama and flawed-characterness of the book proper, it was like stepping inside a fairy tale "where they all lived happily ever after" aka "all is well."

That doesn't sound like JK to me. She seems to be the type of person that knows that life doesn't end happily ever after and ending before the epilogue would have reinforced this. Ah well.

I didn't think the book was as good as its two prequels (personally, OotP will always be my favorite) but it told the story and it told it the way JK wanted to and imagined it to.

How could it be a failure if it came out the way the author wanted it to? It's not a personal failure.

How could it be a failure if it made millions upon millions? It's not a financial failure.

How could it be a failure if millions of readers had waited, read, and loved it? It's not a failure as a book.

If you think it's a failure personally - that's a very small picture. That's you and your opinion; don't apply it to the whole.

ok, i will try to take all the issues with some sort of order:

Rule: there is no such rule and these type of rules do not exist, but what exists and counts is the impression and the emotion that some one's piece of work can cause. There is no formula about successfull writing. shTo support my disapointement and the statement that cause this I would draw your attention to the following novels, think about it:

Ana Karenina, Oliver Twist, Wuthering Heights, Antigona... the list can continue
Its just an opinion and you should not take it to personal

The other corpuse of issues that you raise: only time will show who was right , the DH owns its popularity to the previuse books, but unfortunately with the happy end it does not diferentiate from the other ferry tells for kids.

Cheers

Originally posted by Unicor777
I would expected Potter to fianlly die! Thus the book would stand a chance to became classic like Oliver Twist, for example
Who would now read Potter? In as much as ten years the novels will be forgoten as many before. pitty It had all the chances to became a classic

The novels will be forgotten because Potter didn't Die? That is just stupid. Children will be reading the Harry potter books for generations to come. I beleive these books, with the immortalization of the movies, will become as classic and cherished as the Lord of the rings, and Narnia novels. Readers appreciate good writing. Rowling delivers very vivid, competent and deep writing. The life of a books popularity stands on the quality of the writing, not a decision that a writer makes for one of their characters.

Personally, i think Keeping Potter alive was a brave decision. I think most people were clamoring for him to die. People love to see heroes die. Many times, a hero does need to die, but Potter is not a hero. Potter was thrust into those situations and had people plotting out his life long before he even went to hogwarts. Having Potter die would make him a martyr, a hero and an instant legend. This would not have been consistent with his character or the story. Potter was not a hero and was never supposed to be perceived as one. Having Potter die would just add unecessary tragedy to a 7 book series that revolves around tragedy. It would have been redundant to kill him. Potter went through some shit, he didnt save the world, but he saved some people along the way while trying to save himself. after Hogwarts, Potter's life is very mundane when compared to what he went through, this makes his character feel even more real.

Originally posted by siriuswriter
I


That doesn't sound like JK to me. She seems to be the type of person that knows that life doesn't end happily ever after and ending before the epilogue would have reinforced this. Ah well.



Dude, Potter went through 17 years of hell. Like really, HELL. At first he had no family, and then anytime a family member by blood or stature came into his life. Potter was forced to see them die. Although, Potter liked Hogwarts more than anything at the time. I'm sure is was very harrowing to go back to a school every year where, every year someone tries to kill you and your friends. The only true happiness Potter had during those years was the happines he experienced with his friends. I think the ending was very much like real life. Many people grow up with broken childhoods, as orphan or living in a dysfunctional family. Their child hood and adolescene is very trying and filled with much violence. When they themselves, become adults, however, if they have worked hard enough in striving to have something better. They usually always obtain their goals and end up living pleasant lives where their child hood experiences fade away into memory.

I mean, i can understand why people would have expected more from the ending. I think the ending she chose should have been expected. It was the most practical, but im not saying that is good or bad. The only thing happy about the ending was that Potter accomplished his goal to survive. You dont think the epilogue was necessary?

potter
Harry

Epic failure? I would strongly disagree to that gross mischaracterization, but I will say that Ms. Rowling failed to meet the standard she set for herself in the character of Lord Voldemort and then his subsequent "final duel" with Harry Potter.

Throughout the series, Ms. Rowling used exposition and third party statements to establish that Voldemort was not only a supremely gifted wizard but also "the most brilliant student Hogwarts has ever seen," and yet every time we see him, she undermines that reputation. Voldemort's only intelligent move was his arranging for his name to be tabooed so that they could capture Harry; otherwise, every other action and attempt he made demonstrated remarkable incompetence from a man who is supposed to be the most brilliant wizard alive. The most common excuse is "LOLZ HE WAS GOING INSANE" -- there is no excuse for incompetence -- especially when it becomes the predominant trait in your antagonist. The purpose of the antagonist is to threaten and represent an extremely formidable challenge for the protagonist. Here? Voldemort fails.

Their final duel? An equal failure. After Harry was murdered by Voldemort in the forest and then returned to life, I immediately knew that there was no way that he was going to die. Deus ex machina after deus ex machina after deus ex machina coming out of the woodwork to save Potter's ass; I would have been utterly terrified if I had been Voldemort. The little shit just wouldn't die. Even after Harry's sacrifice seemed to nullify the full damage of Voldemort's magic, Voldemort claims "we duel on skill alone" and seems confident of victory. As a reader, I never got the impression that Potter was ever in any true danger. And then, after Harry spends an hour and a half logically pointing out Voldemort's errors concerning the Elder Wand, Voldemort goes ahead and tries to kill him anyway, owning himself... for the second time. So, apparently, "brilliance" translates to "extraordinarily stupid and/or deaf". Voldemort apparently can't learn from his mistakes?

In this way, she renders her villain impotent and forgetful, and thus is the ultimate tragedy of Lord Voldemort: he sucks.

Perhaps if Rowling took the time to show Voldemort kicking someone's ass (just AK'ing them doesn't count. If I shoot someone in the head, it doesn't demonstrate superior skill) in the form of him owning someone in a duel, I might have been more impressed.

Ok here we go again... I will try to answer this, but not today

meh it had its moments.you could tell it was a"get it out as fast as i can to make as much money as ican scenario"but it was still a decent read

in the end,you've just got to remember it IS a childrens' book after all.

Originally posted by Anoushka
in the end,you've just got to remember it IS a childrens' book after all. Tried that card a long time ago. Didn't work. But I support the idea!

seriously??

why do people insist on making it more complicated than it needs to be

because its in our nature

I wanna know what happens in the book. I tried reading and I couldn't get passed chapter 4, I kept dozing off or getting destracted in something else.

The worst part is the ending, especially the final battle. That was a waste of time, the epicless ending ever. And yeah, voldemort seem brainless in this book...