Gawdzilla Sama
TImeToSweepTheLeg
No- he forgot about it until the last chapter, and only found out what it was because Sirius put a note in with it.
Okay, faint memory floats to surface. Thanks.
No- he forgot about it until the last chapter, and only found out what it was because Sirius put a note in with it.
Suspending disbelief is one thing. Enjoying Harry Potter would require to suspend good taste.
I wouldn't class either of those as childrens' books. In particular, I never knew anyone under twenty to really enjoy Dodgson.
Doesn't sound like this one is giving you much comfort though. I read the first book, a year or so after it came out, but it left me unmotivated to read the later ones.
I'm listening to the audio book read by Jim Dale, and have gotten farther than I have before. I'm at the Quidditch match. I just cannot tolerate Umbridge; she reminds me very strongly of people I deal with.
For all I know you could be a fan of some authors that are actually worth a damn.
I'm listening to the audio book read by Jim Dale, and have gotten farther than I have before. I'm at the Quidditch match. I just cannot tolerate Umbridge; she reminds me very strongly of people I deal with.
And yeah, that forgotten gift was a really, really odd detail. IIRC, Harry didn't even realise the implication.
It does serve as a bit of a Chekhov's Gun though, given how it becomes absolutely essential in Book 7. Although now I have to go read up on how it came into the hands of Aberforth Dumbledore.
Revert to reading adult fiction instead of daft stuff for kids?
You are absolutely claiming that your taste is better than mine. I personally think that Rowling is worth a damn. I didn't lower my standards to somehow accept crap as entertainment, I don't think it's crap to begin with.
I judge fiction that I'm reading for pleasure by how much I enjoyed the experience of reading it. I'm sure I like some authors that you believe are worth a damn, and I am sure I like some that you believe are utter crap. My point is that it's a subjective thing and you are saying that somehow J.K. Rowling is objectively worthless.
It's the not-really-for-kids part that's apparently bothersome.![]()
I wouldn't class either of those as childrens' books. In particular, I never knew anyone under twenty to really enjoy Dodgson.
Doesn't sound like this one is giving you much comfort though. I read the first book, a year or so after it came out, but it left me unmotivated to read the later ones.
Can't we all just get along?
Well, Order Of the Phoenix is on tonight, and my DVR is set. I feel much better now.
But, in the last book is one of my favorite ever perfect "Mess with good people you die"
type lines. The book's version is practically perfect in every way. The movie script/set up makes it much less so.
But, in the last book is one of my favorite ever perfect "Mess with good people you die"
type lines. The book's version is practically perfect in every way. The movie script/set up makes it much less so.
Think Ilsa Koch.Oh, I disagree. Umbridge was absolutely intrinsically evil.
Note how quickly she jumped into the role of the Anti-Muggle part of the new ministry. Had no trouble at all adapting to the anti-muggle position, and completely enjoyed tormenting muggle-borns at the hearings.
She had that evil in her the whole time. It was the overthrow of the ministry where she was able to unleash it.
I assume that you are referring to Mrs. Weasley's line