JW, how much does it run there. Here, it would be about $14 to see a movie, plus outrageous prices for food/consessions (figure $10 for popcorn, soda and candy). I usually wait for DVD/Blu Ray releases, as a result

Where the heck do you live!?  I thought you were in the U.S.?

I had to look up what JW stands for :S

Anyway, it's 1800 yen for a regular movie, but if you go to the late show it's 1200.
IMAX movies are 2200 regardless of what show you go to.
They were showing Deathly Hallows in a non-IMAX 3D version as well. which was also 2200 but the late show "only" cost 1600.

Consumptions are stupid expensive too, but that's a given.

Sounds about right actually. Around here a regular film is $10 and IMAX is $15. And our prices seem pretty reasonable. XD

I read the books.  I greatly enjoyed the seventh book, and I don't remember feeling that its ending was anticlimactic at all.  The movie feels anticlimactic because of how it was shot, cut, and scored.  I just don't think they did a great job of conveying the events of the book.

I'm curious why did you read the whole series? In fact, I wonder why so many adults read the whole series? I'm not even sure why Potter became such a hit. Of course, being the happy cynic that I am, I could not put my view better than Ursala Le Guin did:

"I have no great opinion of it. When so many adult critics were carrying on about the 'incredible originality' of the first Harry Potter book, I read it to find out what the fuss was about, and remained somewhat puzzled; it seemed a lively kid's fantasy crossed with a "school novel", good fare for its age group, but stylistically ordinary, imaginatively derivative, and ethically rather mean-spirited."

Although well written, I personally find very little original imagination in it. It's no Wizard of Oz, no Alice in Wonderland, no Chronicles of Narnia, certainly no Lord of the Rings... rather to me I found it to be a piecemeal of different classic books and myths put together. I also think it's so popular because adults are reading it far more than kids. The adults are also the ones spending so much money on the books and merchandise and making a brouhaha. Anyway, as you can tell, I'm not a fan at all, although I know we all have different tastes.

I'm really curious (and not trying to be disparaging here at all), how many who have read Potter have read the Wizard of Oz, Alice in Wonderland,  the Chronicles of Narnia, the Lord of the Rings, and other such fantasy classics?

I've read The Lord of the Rings once (and the Silmarillion, Zzzzz), the Chronicles of Narnia books at least three times, and the Harry Potter books twice, although when I came to The Deathly Hallows again I skimmed through about half of it. I thought Potter's world was very creative and the plot more intricate and satisfying than much of the adult fiction I read. Many novels today (and I read a variety of thriller--action/adventure, science, supernatural, mystery, etc.) have deep themes and intriguing plot devices, but the story is sometimes built around one big twist or a narrow subject, and then inflated to 400 pages. They can be boring if the writing isn't particularly beautiful or the characters are unimpressive. To me, there were so many interesting things going on in Harry's world that it was simply fun to read. LoTR was not always fun to read, but it's impact was much more substantial, and left me feeling "better" for having read it.

Yes to all of the above.  And honestly, to dismiss Harry Potter compared to any of those DOES reek of cynicism.  While still short of what Tolkien accomplished with his world, Rowling's work can and should stand with other fantasy classics because of what she managed to do with it.  Although starting as simple children's fare, I think it shows remarkable skill on her part that she manages to increase the maturity and complexity of both the language and the story in each subsequent book, allowing a generation of kids to grow up with the characters and never feel like they're being pandered to.  She also clearly had a very solid plan from the beginning - It's hard to find any series where everything ties together so nicely as it does in this one.  Little things early on in the books (and films) are often there because they're important and come back to be part of the bigger picture later.

Now granted, I'm sort of a casual fan of the books and movies (do I think there are better things out there?  Sure), but I don't understand how anyone can just dismiss them and be totally clueless as to WHY they are significant works.  It's really not a mere fluke of popularity.

The Harry Potter books are like fast food.
I know there's nothing but junk in them, but man are they hard to quit.

I agree that in terms of imagination it does very little that hasn't already been done before.
I remember reading praise for the books for making use of Roman mythology and other old folklore, to which my natural reaction was: "Final Fantasy has been doing that for aeons."

That said, the books have an interesting mythology of their own, they're fun, easy to read and like it or not, people crave those big twists.

As for you question, I have yet to read WoO and AiW, but I am very much familiar with their content.
I only ever saw the first CoN movie and the whole talking animals thing put me off.
I have read LotR and enjoyed it greatly, and I'm currently going through the second book of A Song of Ice and Fire, which may very well be the best Fantasy series I've ever read, although it's a close call with Terry Pratchett's Discworld series.

Harry Potter falls short in comparison to all of the above (apart from Narnia as far as I'm concerned), but like I said, it's junk food.

Well said, Amazing. I disagree with Qui-Gon, I do not consider Potter "significant". Popular and significant are too very distinct things. Beethoven is significant. Elvis is significant. Bieber is just popular. Likewise Potter is popular, and I personally do not believe it will go down as being particularly significant. Popular and a great success yes, but never significant like the other fantasy works (Narnia, etc). By the way Amazing, you might want to give The Lion The Witch and The Wardrobe a try. The book is FAR better than the Disney adaptation which was just OK  (actually, I think the BBC production which was made many years earlier is far superior). The Narnia books are full of Christian symbolism. I personally do not care for that, but nevertheless it does show that Lewis did not just jut down the books in order to make a ton of money, he really wanted to write a book that dealt with moral issues. It ended up being a groundbreaking series, and there is good reason why the animals can talk (has to do with Lewis' view on the relationship between man and nature and Heaven). Anyway, I think Amazing's call of Potter as "fast food" certainly is correct!

There are two reasons why I love the Harry Potter books: they have absolutely fantastic characterization, and Rowling has created an amazingly detailed, self-contained world in much the same way that George Lucas did with Star Wars.  She's also a pretty damn good writer, and her prose is both accessible and engaging.

I think it's amusing that you are comparing the Harry Potter books to the Chronicles of Narnia books.  I read all of those as well, and they're more or less junk, except for the rather charming third and fourth books (Dawn Treader and Silver Chair).  They are simplistic and obnoxiously preachy.  Charming in parts, and certainly appropriate for children, but nothing I would recommend to anyone over the age of ten.  The Harry Potter books have something for readers of all ages, and I'm willing to bet that you will be wrong about their future significance.

I think the fact that you're dismissing what's universally regarded as a classic of literature as mere "junk", speaks volumes on your capacity (or lack thereof) to judge literature. Of course everyone has his/her opinion, but calling one of the most influential works "junk" is just laughable. Numerous authors have noted how this series influenced them, including Rowling (seems obvious to me and others that Rowling "borrowed" many ideas from Narnia), the TV series Lost was also influenced by the books, and numerous other books, movies, people... too numerous to try and list.

Pot, meet kettle.  I'm highlighting this because I genuinely think that Harry Potter will retain its status as long as Lewis' works have.  I tend to agree a bit with XLord on this one, as C.S. Lewis is bottom-tier fantasy for me.  His works were far more childish than Tolkien's, and while I still think there's value to them, I don't think they've aged terribly well (and yeah they ARE fairly preachy).  I think a lot of the same things that HP detractors have stated were probably leveled against these now "classic" works during their original days.

Straying a bit far from the original topic, but hopefully the off-topic police will allow me to recommend Michael Ward's Planet Narnia to anyone who hasn't gotten much from the Narnia books and feels like they must be missing something. It gave me a whole new appreciation for C.S. Lewis.

Back to the original topic, I caught the last Potter film this weekend and found it boring overall. I think the problem is that with a series like this, everything that happens in the final movie is what I already knew must happen from watching what came before. It felt very much like the movie was just running through a checklist of things that had to occur.

That is the problem with many movies and books in general, especially a "long" running series such as Potter. I will add this to my Narnia opponents, in the Narnia books, you never know what is going to happen. The books were never intended to be written in a manner that would make them "movie-friendly". Thanks for the note Smeg, this really sounds fascinating! Apparently, others think so too, since it was made into an hour-long BBC documentary!

http://www.planetnarnia.com/frequently-asked-questions

Sweet, didn't know about that. I'll have to check it out.

Anyone checked out the Hillywood Show music video?  It's a Deathly Hallows-based parody played up to Rebecca Black's often panned "Friday."

I never thought much of the song before, but this version is absurdly addicting.  The video itself is cheesy, cute, and very funny.

Just because something is influential does not make it good.  Sarah Palin is influential.  Jersey Shore is influential.  American Idol is influential.  Are any of those things good?  Like I said, I read all of the books.  They're not good (except for #3 and #4 which I like quite a bit).  I agree that they are influential and classics, but that doesn't make them good.  Excitebike is a classic.  Kid Icarus is a classic.  Both of those are pretty terrible games.  You seem to think that because something is universally regarded as an influential classic that automatically means it's good.  It doesn't.  The Ford Model T is a classic.  Would you drive one today?

Dude, Kid Icarus is awesome, what are you talking about!?

Angela! Where's your Deathly Hallows Part 2 review? I've been waiting on pins and needles!

Ahh, I know, I've been falling behind.   Truth is, circumstances have prevented me from seeing the film until tomorrow evening, so I should have something up by weekend's end.

Do explain, how exactly are any of those influential? Just because it's popular, does not mean it's influential. You are correct though, just because something is influential does not mean it's good. However the items you gave as example, I would contend are not particularly influential, just popular (with perhaps the exceptionof Palin who really is not particularly influential nor popular at this moment... and thank goodness for that)!

Typically, when something is an influential classic, then it is likely very good. I did not play Excitebike, so no comments on that. However, I did play Kid Icarus, and I certainly would not call it a terrible game at all. A hard game for certain, but not terrible. I also think your connection between the Ford Model T and driving it today is completely Reductio ad absurdum (ah Latin, such an influential and classic language, and yes, I quote it today)! I would not fly the Wright Brother's Flyer today, and yet that doesn't mean it wasn't important nor influential (it was indeed both). You don't like Narnia? OK, that's up to you. Nevertheless it is still universally regarded as a classic, and I don't think Potter will ever come close.

.

There is nothing left to say now i just can add its the best movie of the series and an awesome end to the great series. I was late as i watched it late. But i had to watch it and I did watch it.