Harry Potter

Discussion in 'Movies' started by Gaspo, Apr 16, 2009.

  1. dementia

    dementia Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    6,243
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    May 21, 2005
    Location:
    Denver
    Which makes her books sell, which makes her a good writer.

    Name a modern age book that hasn't been done before.
     
  2. Sock

    Sock Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    1,427
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2005
    Twilight is pretty bad writing, it's appeal is in the cardboard characters and the teenage girls.

    Good writer =/= good writing, however.
     
  3. RebelYell101

    RebelYell101 Well-Known Member

    Age:
    31
    Posts:
    957
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    May 23, 2004
    Location:
    Norfolk, Virginia
    Most of her characters were from ancient mythology anyways (like the creatures). Her storyline was very basic, good guy beats bad guy, bad guy comes back and gets the best of good guy, then good guy comes back to life and kills bad guy. Just because she sold a lot of books does not mean she's a good writer. I happened to like the books, not for the skill of writing, just for the length and imagination. Was fun to read, but it wasn't really meant to be an excellent book as far as writing skill. Especially the first few were obviously slanted towards children, and as the characters grew up she slanted it towards the character's ages. (i.e Harry was 17, she slanted it towards older teenagers) I enjoyed them most, I would say, because I kind of grew up with the characters. I was eleven when the first movie came out, and so forth. So yea, I wouldn't say she is a great writer, I've seen worse, but I've seen a lot better. If success means she's a great writer, then you have to say the writers of the Bible are the best writers of all time, considering more copies of the Bible have been sold then any other book in the world. (I'm not bringing up religion, just the book)
     
  4. tt speedy1

    tt speedy1 Senior Member

    Age:
    28
    Posts:
    673
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2006
    Location:
    FL
    The trailer looks really nice, but the movie is only going to be PG, and this is one of the most violent books. I'm guessing they are going to cut a lot of good parts off that include voldemort's killings, ect... which are really important to understand the horuxes
     
  5. dementia

    dementia Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    6,243
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    May 21, 2005
    Location:
    Denver
    I don't know how you can compare the Twilight series to Harry Potter. Tthe 7th book was the fastest selling and highest selling book in the series - how many series can you say that the last book had *more* sales than the first book and a higher public interest? Not many. In 7 years (1999 to 2006) Scholastic booked $815 million in revenue from the books (before Deathly Hallows). They have sold 325 million books total before Deathly Hollows was released. Twilight is roughly 1/10th the book sales (per copy - not the series as the series is obviously longer). The last Harry potter book (Death Hallows) had sales documented above 50 million and below 100 million. The Harry Potter movies have all grossed drastically more in sales than Twilight, including in post-theater purchases.

    Harry Potter places it into the third bracket of book sales (first being 1 billion+ of which there is only the bible, #2 being 100 million to 1 billion, major history books like Lord of the Rings and a Tale of Two Cities, major publications). The last book *alone* has sold more copies than Webster's dictionary, or a classic book, The Catcher in the Rye. Just because something does not appeal to you doesn't mean its writing is inadequate, as by sheer force the book can sit in a match with some of the top books in history.

    Most books can follow that same plot line if you really choose to make it so basic. Also - to my knowledge Harry never died - just came close. 'Length and imagination' that is part of being a good writer. So she may not use words you need to pull up online to find the meaning, so what? Her primary audience was young adults initially and then she moved to children literature when the first book sold better to a younger audience (imagine that, a fantasy fiction book sold better to people with an imagination - who could have thought that would have happened). If you re-read the books you notice the first book is far more stale, less imaginative and harder to comprehend than the sequels. You can also see her growth as a writer very evident. Why? The end of Deathly Hallows was planned out with the first book, but the remainder of the 7th book was freshly written. You could easily tell the difference between the very ending and the bulk of the book and her growth as a writer through the books. As the readers grew older she wrote in a more mature voice to appeal to the same group of maturity (as her readers obviously grew up with the characters in the story) and still open the doors to more readers, smart marketing and smart writing.

    Regarding religious scriptures, that is different (oh, and Harry Potter has sold pretty comparable to the book of Mormon/Koran if you include the series and not just a single book). This is disregarding that the bible is 64 books in length compared to a single top grossing book (Deathly Hallows). The best part is that if you were to separate the book into 64 sections and market them independently the bible would have sold less copies per book than every Harry Potter book - not mentioning the bible has been around since roughly 70 BC where as Harry Potter was published in... *gasp* 2007). It would be like comparing every history book in the world combined to standard literature. Its mandatory reading for a major religion (as history books are required reading for classes), hardly common fantasy literature (though I would argue its fiction - not here). If you want a better comparison look into the Lord of the Rings and the Hobbit, as they fit into the same genre with better sales. That, however, is a null point because J. R. R. Tolkien has long been considered one of the best writers throughout history.

    Writing complexity should hardly be the basis for comparison of being a good writer. Creating a series which appeals to the masses, sells well and captures an audience in the way Harry Potter has should be the end all of writers.
     
  6. RebelYell101

    RebelYell101 Well-Known Member

    Age:
    31
    Posts:
    957
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    May 23, 2004
    Location:
    Norfolk, Virginia
    You have to always be sarcastic like you've proven a point? You can't argue with any logic that she's a great writer. Also, Harry did die, he was speaking to Dumbledore who was dead. I'm pretty sure that makes him dead. Writing complexity shouldn't be considered? Seriously? So we should consider the masses interest? That's just ignorant. That's like saying, "The Patriots weren't the best team, two years ago, because the Dolphins had more fans! Therefore, the Dolphins are better." No. The Patriots were obviously the better team. Just because more people are interested in the topic she chose to write about, does not in any logical way mean she's the better writer. That is just so silly. The Bible has been around longer, but that doesn't matter according to your logic. More people have bought it. Also, Harry Potter (the first one) was publish in 1997, or 98, I don't remember which, I saw it earlier when I was looking up JK rowling earlier. Also, in 2007, her book was 15th in the best selling category. The writer from Twilight was then, and still is the best selling author. Most people agree she did a horrible job with Twilight. I know I couldn't stand the books.
     
  7. dementia

    dementia Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    6,243
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    May 21, 2005
    Location:
    Denver
    If you want to factor in writing complexity you may as well automatically disqualify any best selling books throughout history, including the bible.

    Why? Complex books are not read by the masses and cannot be comprehended easily. If complexity of writing was a significant factor in books why don't you throw some quantum physics and psychology books into the meta list of requirements for good writers. A writer is based on their ability to market and create lovable characters to the masses in simple form. The ability to create an alternate world which drives the reader into the book is what makes a writer a good writer. The Harry Potter books are appealing, have lovable characters, have real world situations people can relate to, and pulls more than just the average reader in (for example, many people who never read otherwise had picked up the Harry Potter series and finished it as their primary source of reading material). I, personally, was unable to drop each book until I read them. I sat down, and in one sitting, finished the book, literally no food or bathroom. Then, after I was done, I re-read it one or two times to read between the lines and further understand the back story (with bathroom / food).

    As with everything, there are weights attached to certain aspects of it. For example, tests vs exams vs homework vs classroom attendance in school courses. Obviously exams > tests > homework > classroom attendance for your overall grade, they aren't weighted equally (or I am sure I would have failed many of the classes I got A's in due to classroom attendance). I was never arguing that complexity isn't something worth driving for, but it by far does not disqualify her from going down in history as being one of the best writers in our current time (the only other recent book with sales comparable to Harry Potter books is The Da Vinci Code - somewhat comparable is 'The Purpose Driven Life').

    Regarding the books, look up the stats. Twilight sold 1.3 million books in the first 24 hours where Deathly Hallows sold 8.7 million in the first 24 hours. I don't know where you are pulling your stats from but you can Google for Scholastic's stats on Harry Potter and find from many fans sites that 1.3 is the general consensus for Twilight.
     
  8. RebelYell101

    RebelYell101 Well-Known Member

    Age:
    31
    Posts:
    957
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    May 23, 2004
    Location:
    Norfolk, Virginia
    I didn't say Twilight, I said she's sold more of her books. I don't think Twilight made it in the top ten. But, you have to look at this as well, the Bible has been around for that long and it's still selling, you really think in thousands of years, people will still be reading Harry Potter? I doubt it. Her books won't be very popular in fifty years. I'd bet, at least.
     
  9. dementia

    dementia Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    6,243
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    May 21, 2005
    Location:
    Denver
    Even I have 4 copies of the bible - hardly a valid excuse.

    The bible is also replaced frequently - books wear out when used often. Families also generally own multiple bibles for the multiple members of their family members (and usually multiple per family member from my experience), where as families of other religions generally share 1 or 2 books.

    Also, 'the bible' is including both new and old testament, a large portion of the time they are sold in two separate books, and multiple religions practice from the same book, and many people of alternate religions own a bible to better educate themselves (believe it or not, most of the people I know who aren't Christians generally are far more open minded and far less ignorant than the typical 'Christian' and thus divulge in expanding their knowledge of other religions).

    Once again, not comparable.
     
  10. RebelYell101

    RebelYell101 Well-Known Member

    Age:
    31
    Posts:
    957
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    May 23, 2004
    Location:
    Norfolk, Virginia
    Oh, I'll agree the two books, or composition of books, aren't comparable. I'm saying the authors are. Before the Bible was composed, they weren't sold, they were handed out in scrolls, or separate books. I don't know, I'm just saying I don't look at her as a good writer.
     
  11. BabyLeo

    BabyLeo Well-Known Member

    Age:
    30
    Posts:
    857
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2005
    Location:
    Brooklyn
    Yes because I'm sure you can dish out 7 best-selling books.

    Way to ------ing blow it for those who haven't read it. I've read it but that was totally unnecessary.




    I did that. My mom tried to make me see a doctor about it. I kinda threw something at her when she interrupted me.
     
  12. inverse

    inverse Banned from GR

    Age:
    31
    Posts:
    3,445
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Location:
    New Zealand
    Hagrid dies in book 7, Minerva McGonagal gets married to professor Sprout in book 6, and Harry Potter bangs Hermione with his finger in book 8. But that's just speculation.
     
  13. kovan

    kovan Senior Member

    Age:
    33
    Posts:
    4,158
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2005
    i'm not a big fan of reading
     
  14. RebelYell101

    RebelYell101 Well-Known Member

    Age:
    31
    Posts:
    957
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    May 23, 2004
    Location:
    Norfolk, Virginia
    I used to be that way, until the Harry Potter books, actually, once I read them I started reading a lot more.
     
  15. dementia

    dementia Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    6,243
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    May 21, 2005
    Location:
    Denver
    Everyone dies in book 7 lol, the last two books are like wizard war.

    And I would hope Potter bangs Hermione in book 8, considering they are married with kids of their own and such.
     

Share This Page