?

Log in

No account? Create an account
July 2009   01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

I saw the Half Blood Prince yesterday, so I feel it is an appropriate time with the coming of this new movie to finally put into words everything I find Rowling did wrong with Harry Potter.  Now I understand, there are many many people out there who love the Harry Potter series and think Rowling did an excellent job with it.  I have the utmost respect for those opinions and I can understand why they enjoyed it so much.  I personally just think that Rowling took wonderful ideas, characters and a story and just did almost as much wrong with it as she possibly could have.  I want to go through major characters and themes and explain what I think she did wrong and why. 

These are not all my problems just some, I'll focus mostly on villians and things pertaining to them.


The Houses -

The houses I think were mishandled in the biggest way possible.  In theory, the idea behind the houses is close to brilliant as far as the story goes.  Gryfs are supposed to be leaders and bold, brave,  Ravenclaws are really smart,  Slytherin's are very clever and ambitious and hufflepuffs are.... (was hard working really the best she could come up with??) Anyway....  now taking this as a theory it's great.  You have a lot of different qualities that people in the different houses possess, and also considerations that there is no universal way to be in any house, people can be in one house but have the qualities of another still.  There is a lot of room to mix and match and have that really come into play.   And in SEVEN books, how did she handle this?

Gryffindors are good guys.  Slytherin's are bad guys.  Ravenclaws and Hufflepuffs are in the backgroud chillin.

ARE YOU KIDDING ME??  In SEVEN books she had the opportunity to do so much and this is what she ended up with.  ALL the protagonists who mattered were from Gryffindor, and all the antagonists were Slytherin.  And in theory, Slytherin was NOT about being evil!  Having the quality of ambition does not mean you are evil, yet she turned the slytherin house into the ultimate house of evil little losers.  I can picture JK sitting there in a gryffindor uniform waving a red and gold flag furiously.   When she had the chance to redeem Slytherin in the end, when even those who was so annoyed at the way she handled things thought she was going to what did she do?  She had all the slytherins WALK OUT and abandon the rest of the school.  She solidified in her story that Slytherins were all a bunch of evil or cowards or unified against the rest of the heros who were willing to fight and die for one another.  Rowling you suck.   

The Ravenclaws and Hufflepuffs do virtually NOTHING throughout the entire serious...NOTHING.  Hermione should have been a Ravenclaw by ALL MEANS and Percy should have been a Slytherin!!!!  She could have had some great issues going on with Percy being a slytherin conflicts and all that...but nope...not at all...  So in the end Gryffindor rocks, Slytherin sucks, and the other two are there also.  That is what she did with these 4 houses that were set up so cleverly.  A brilliant idea that she just took to an elementary level and simplified with "these guys are good....and these are baddddd"   And who was the only person that she made mention should have been in another house?? oh of course snape, the SLYTHERIN should have been a gryffindor!  You know what the sad thing is I'm not even a slytherin fan!  I wasn't one of those people who loved slytherin and was all into them, I just know when people in a story get a bad fucking rap.

Draco
Talking about the slytherins it seems a good transition to move onto Draco, one of the most mismanaged characters in the series. Draco was an interesting character because he was built as the anti-Potter, a talented rival, and he was going down a very different path in theory, possibly rising towards the death eaters, but who knows?  Because we never see any insight into Draco beyond the fact he's a snivling little punk.  We never see any good, ANY GOOD AT ALL in him.  And we for 6 books see him and harry just trading asshole comments and Harry getting the upper hand on him and laughing.  What a goddamn waste of time and of a character.  She made him so shallow and empty she should have shown an OUNCE of good, something in there.  And this is partially also her mismanagement of Harry too.  Draco would have been a really interesting character to show a duality of good and evil a kid whose being pushed towards evil who doesn't necessarily know what he's getting into or what he wants.  It would have been nice to see him and Harry at SOME POINT IN TIME have to work together. IN 7 BOOKS SHE DID NOT DO THIS ONCE!!!!  She should have had DRACO with them in the 7th book hunting for horcruxs or something like that to help. A twist where over the final book they have to work together. Something like that, anything. What does she have happen?  HARRY saves DRACO'S life and then Ron punches him in the face....the end...........that's redemption?  That's the best she could do??  Basically the first book, the first little disputes between potter and Draco, where draco is a sniffling little jerk and gets his in the end...was the same theme that would continue to the end of the series through 7 books.  Bravo Rowling...Bravo...


Voldemort and Harry

In regards to the duality of Voldemort and Harry Rowling made the same cliched mistake that so many authors and screenwriters made before.  The whole theme that she tries pulling is that Harry is similar to voldemort, they are alike and Harry could turn out good or he could turn out like Voldemort etc. And she tries to show parallels in their childhoods etc... but she failes in a huge way, that Tom Riddle was fucking little psychopath.  Of course he was going to be evil, how did anyone not see that coming???  In the movie the scene where dumbledore meets riddle HOW DO YOU NOT SEE SERIAL KILLER???    This is the mistake so many authors and screen writers make with this theme of "the guy before the main char turned out to be evil, so can the main char"  When they have the main character be really likable, and the guy before him a total asshole who obviously is going to be evil!!
Lucus made this mistake bigtime because Anakin skywalker was an arrogant asshole.  Was anyone surprised he turned?  Of course not he was a whiny little shithead, of course he turned evil.  Luke was a good guy (though he shared his father's whiny traits)  Luke was a likable dorky kind of hero, if he turned in the end of Jedi it would have been like being stabbed in the back because he was such a good guy, but that was the point that even as a good guy he could have turned.  Anakin was an asshole so of course he turned evil, you're not surprised by this, you're not crushed by it.  This is done all the time for some reason. authors want readers or viewers to be ok with what happens, they don't seem to want the audience to be heartbroken or something.  The truth is Anakin SHOULD have been like Luke so that the audience would see that Luke COULD have turned in the end.  And Voldemort SHOULD have been like harry, originally wanting to do good, smart, and talented, but no, he was a little psychotic demon child from hell. 


Horcruxs and the Deathly Hallows
Yeah Rowling you TOTALLY fail here.  You can't have a 7 book series, and then wait until book 6 and 7 to talk or even hint about two of the most major things in the end of the series.  In the end of book 7 its all about the "deathly Hallows" and yet you never hear about them until that book..... 

Stop a moment and think about this.  The magc items that ended up determining the end of the ENTIRE SERIES.... were not ever even mentioned AT ALL...until the 7th book of a 7 book series.  The whole way to kill voldemort was these horcruxes, and the way to stop him was with the wand.  These relics all, do not get ANY mention until towards the end.  Does this show any thinking ahead?  Any good planning?  No, you know what it shows?  Her thinking this shit up AFTER book 5.  You know what that says to me?  WHAT THE FUCK WERE YOU DOING FROM BOOK 1 THROUGH 6?????  

Basically how much of her books were nothing but filler ? (I'll give you a hint, it's above 80%)


Character's deaths
TOTAL FAIL. Moody.  Lupin.  Tonks.  What do all these characters have in common?  They were all major side characters throughout the series who died in book 7.....OFF SCREEN.  ROWLING WTF????  You killed those characters off screen??? First of all, get off your murdering "this is real life" high horse.  You can't have a series that's only semi dark for 6 books and then make it UBER DARK for the last book.  You can't have a death count of .5 a book and then kill like 15 people in the last book and suddenly be like "ooo this is the reality of war"  You change the theme of the whole series, and that is really messed up to the readers. SHE KILLED THE FUCKING OWL FOR CHRIST'S SAKE.  She just went on a killing binge.  Fred??? REALLY you killed off one of the comic relief characters?? and you blew off the other's ear?? *   Rowling what are you DOING?  They're comic relief SIDE CHARACTERS!  And what's his name (Bill?) getting his face mauled?  (why was he even in the series AT ALL for that matter?) and you gotta kill both Tonks AND Lupin and orphan their kid? Like come on.  If the rest of the series was like this it would be one thing, but it wasn't.  It wasn't at all.   And I don't even want to get into Snape, all the people you know loved him and you gave him such a pathetic and anti climatic death.  Just bitten by the snake, the end.  Like, it was so boring and pathetic of a death.  When I read her scenes of people dying and etc, you know what, I saw myself as a writer... WHEN I WAS 14 YEARS OLD.


*  The whole multiple harry's flying idea was the dumbest idea EVER.  In history.  First off, you have a bunch of wizards who can fly looking for you and your plan so that you won't get found is to go up into the sky where you can be obviously seen?  How about you WALK, or take a car or something that's actually hidden.  And you need to take the kids with you?  Really?  Is the order of the phoenix that bad off that you gotta ask the kids to go along on this practical suicide mission??  This is the worst plan ever. EVER.  EVERRRR.

There is much more I think she did wrong but I'll stop for now.


Posted on 2009.02.02 at 16:11
Dear Espn,
Please take a moment to relax and catch your breath.  You are only declaring the Holmes touchdown the greatest play in superbowl history because it JUST HAPPENED and you're excited like an overemotional girl whose dreamguy just asked her to marry him.  It may be on the list for greatest touchdown passes ever, but you're quick to forget a little play involving a certain Manning and Tyree and a double miracle on the drive to beat the unbeaten patriots. Great play, probably up there in the top plays in SB history.  But to instantly name it the greatest is absurd. 

I hate you.
Justin


Actor attitudes

Posted on 2009.01.15 at 21:14
Peterson leaving CSI and his reasons for it have made me think about him and actors like him and I can't help but think it selfish.  He claims he is leaving because it wasn't challenging anymore and he felt he was getting too comfortable and isn't going to miss grissom etc.  Other actors have done this as well, Duchovny with the x-files etc.  I think this attitude is extremely selfish.  You got a job, signed a contract to portray a character on a show or movie for viewers.  If you have millions of viewers who love the show and character, to leave it I think is just a very selfish move.  They say each person has a right to do what makes them happy, but it's not that simple when others are involved, and they are in this case, 20 something million viewers who love the character are involved.  He says he doesn't just want to do it for the money etc, well what about doing it for all the fans that love your character?  I'm not even a huge Grissom fan so I'm not bitter about him leaving, I was just a bit taken by his smug attitude at the character's "non-importance".   Actors who have it big and decide they're tired of what they're doing and want something else often find life after isn't as easy.  And to me, with people who are struggling to keep jobs they don't even like it's annoying for an actor to leave a set because he's "bored" with doing the same show for years for millions of dollars a year.  It's just pretensious seeming.  "SIGHHH I TIRE OF PLAYING THIS CHARACTER FOR MILLIONS OF FANS AND DOLLARS...I SEEK SOMETHING MORE CHALLENGING." 

It just annoys me.

Patch ideas

Posted on 2007.08.12 at 01:44
Some ideas for patches/symbolsCollapse )

Saying goodbye to the Pretorian Elite

Posted on 2007.08.12 at 01:26
For someone who prides themselves on being a leader, I'll admit to having trouble with the really hard decisions in life.  I feel it may finally be time to separate from the Pretorian Elite, for those of you (no one reads this) who don't know, that is the paintball team I co-started 5 years ago, and have been a captain of ever since.  It would take me far too long to explain my reasons, but long story short, the team has just gone in a separate direction from me, and I don't get along with most of the players on the team. The majority of the team is against me, and I against them and my co-captain, the guy who started it with me, has become their puppet, and is seen as the sole leader of the team, and that has gone to his head.  I hate to say it, but I really do think he is a poor leader, the way he handled the situation with Julie was final evidence of that. 

Now I had been hoping for time to consider this, but I am afraid my time is running out, as the team is deciding whether or not to agree to a sponsorship with a paintball field, barring the team becomes their bitches once a month.  I can't agree to this and then leave the team, it would screw them over as much as they've disrespected me and just all around been dicks, I'm not like that, and I'm not going to do that.  I just have trouble letting go, trouble just saying goodbye to something that I started and was a part of the whole time, it's part mine.  But then I'm realizing that's wrong, it's no longer mine, it's not mine at all.  It's nothing of what it used to be and the direction it's going in, I want no part of.  I admit it's possible I could leave and then the team could go and become famous...somehow I really doubt that, but if it happens it happens.  It's just too bad, because there really is a lot of talent in the team.  If that talent was put to use in the way it should be the team could easily be the best in the northeast.  But they won't do that, their egos are too high, and they are focused on all the wrong things. (They believe the way to get the team noticed is with flashy jerseys and signs and banners etc etc moreso than our play) 

I will be slightly screwing over the team in manpower when I leave, for when I do, Julie, JT and Franky will all come with me.  So they'll lose four members...but they never treated those four like they were teammates anyway.  My friends don't deserve that, and the team doesn't deserve them.  I can start a team with 4 or 5.  That is solid, and then recruit a couple more down the line.  I think we can do it.  Pretty soon I think, at the advise of Julie,  I'm going to tell dan for whatever reasons I believe it is in my best interest to take a step back,  and then just separate myself from them.  In all reality once I do that I don't see much hope of going back.  The most I can hope to do is create my own team with Julie and then offer to Dan an alliance.

I was coming up with new logos for a team, kinda my way of helping to convince myself to leave, I'll post them next so anyone who has in fact found this journal can see.


didn't go so bad

Posted on 2007.08.07 at 23:33
It took picking up two guys not on the team and both Julie and doni, but we managed a 6-3 victory over scott's team.  The game was relaxed, and it wasn't that serious which is a good thing.  I'm not sure if they felt that way on the other end, but it seemed like it.  Anyway, it was good to win, I wish I could have played better myself.  I was a bit bothered that civita implied instantly we only won because of who we picked up, all things considered I thought it was pretty even and I hate having "You only won because..." held over my head.

The question now is what to do about next week.  The kid who played short is about twice as althetically talented as dave with twice the arm, but I told dave he'd have the position for the rest of the year, and I'm not going to go back on my word.  Julie told me the team wouldn't be bothered by keeping things the way they are....but we're 2-7 or something, they're really sick of losing, and this guy gave a spark at the position, in all reality, the team is going to be like.....Justin...WTF??  But I'm going to keep it the way it is, Dave will play short and Brian will play wherever else and I'll deal with the bullshit that will come.  Julie suggested movig Brian to third...but that seems to be this team's "what to do with the player we don't want to play short stop" since forever.  Is third an important position?  Yes, but in all reality if you have a short and a third baseman and one is slower than the other....the slower one is going at third, that is what makes sense.  I'm not doing what gives the team the best chance to win because of my friendship with another player, is that right?  I don't know, I'm going to do it, but I don't know if it's fair to the others, and I don't know if that makes me a bad captain if I'm making decisions based on friendship and not what's best for the team. 

Say I was really close friends with Holly.  Would it be fair for the team if I put her at short stop?  Would the team have a right to be angry and to question my judgement?  Now I don't mean to compare Dave to holly, I'm just trying to show a point that if there are players better available for the role is it fair to the team to have him playing a position there's someone better for because he's my friend, because I don't want to hurt his feelings?   Julie said it's fair because dave's on the team and Brian is just helping out,  but I know for a fact my team doesn't give a shit about that, and maybe they should, but they would just as soon have brian doing everything possible to help us win. 

It's tough also when I have people constantly questioning my leadership and abilities, it makes me not want to make decisions like this that won't lead to winning, because it gives them reason to further question my ability.  I'm sick and tired of people underestimating my ability as a leader and thinking they could do it so much better, but when I make decisions that don't benefit the team, I'm just fueling the fire.   I'm not going to go back on my word, I'll keep dave where I said I would, but it just is a lose lose for me in the end.  I lose respect and loyalty from the team for making a decision clearly not helping in our goal to win, or I lose respect from my friend who would be hurt if I moved him.  I've obviously made my choice there, and in the end I may suffer for it.  I've already all but been ousted on the paintball team (My time with that team is over) a team I started and have been a captain of for years, and Scott and friends went and made their own guy team.  It's just really really stressful.  I want to lead, I belong in a leadership role, I goddamn know what I'm doing and I feel like so few acknowledge that.

ugh

Posted on 2007.08.07 at 15:33
My team's game against Scott's is today, and I'm not looking forward to it.  My team doesn't hit, and because of that, we're not looking too good.  My only advantage is I know Scott's team and how most of them hit etc, but that may not be enough.  We don't have Dave, who is one of our best hitters and no JT (Although he would be playing for Scott's team anyway.)  I don't want to lose this game only because I have a feeling they really want to win.  I don't want them having the satisfaction of beating my team, but I don't think I can help it.  I'm going to play my ass off, but there's only so much I can do... also odds are we're going into the game down guys.  If both Bobby and Eric show, we're going to be fine (with Julie)  but if either of them miss, and that case is extremely likely, we'll be down one, and if both miss (Which is ALSO likely) ... christ.   AND I just got news Mark isn't playing which makes us even another down!!!! CRAPPPPPPP

Beach pictures inspired by book

Posted on 2007.08.07 at 04:23






some more book pics

Posted on 2007.08.07 at 04:17


MoreCollapse )

Couple pictures from Novel

Posted on 2007.08.05 at 04:16



MoreCollapse )


Previous 10