Explain Harry Potter to me

[Klaus]

I didn't get into the Harry Potter craze at the ground floor. At first he reminded me of a watered-down Tim Hunter (The Books of Magic), so I never got around to reading the books (books are a tad expensive in these tropical parts). When the movies came out, I opted to see them, and expected to like them, since the books were such a hit. But the first two movies struck me cold. This week I borrowed Prisoner of Azkaban DVD from a friend and watched it. Everyone told me it was the best of all three. But alas, I could not get engaged in it.

What is it about Harry Potter that is so brilliant? The character isn't a hero, he barely does anything in his own movies. If justice were to be done, they should rename the series 'Hermione Granger', 'cause she's the one with not only the skills and wits, but also with the initiative to do something. She has the ideas and generally outshines Harry in all three movies.

So, what am I missing here?

(Sidenote: the hippogriff was very cool, but the werewolf looked like a shaved, starving gnoll)

 

[Ranger REG]

What is it about Harry Potter that is so brilliant?

So, what am I missing here?

It got kids to read ... LOADS of them.

I guess the concept of putting your wildest imagination in a school setting is very appealing than finger-painting.

 

[Crothian]

They aren't brilliant. I find them entertaining. It has some good ideas for a modern magic school and such. They are a very fast read and the books are easily better then the movies.

I wouldn't be that concerned with not liking them.

 

[Klaus]

But is Potter the same putz in the books that he is in the movies, i.e. having others do the 'hero' stuff?

 

[buzzard]

While it is true that in the early stories Harry is something of a limp dishrag, he does get better in the later books. The truth is that some people really don't want to do great deeds or save the world. Some just want to have a fairly normal, uneventful pleasant life. I think Harry in the early books fits that type. However circumstances work to prod him into having the take the bull by the horns no matter how much he doesn't want to.

The latest book got a lot of reviews which had comparisons to the politics of WW II. I can see this as being pretty valid. Harry is something rather like Western Europe after WW I. They already had some pretty terrible losses, and really don't want to have to do more. The society around Harry is something like this, and in many way he reflects the mage society which surrounds him.

So does Hermione count as a Churchill? I'm not quite sure. The analogy doesn't quite have to be that close.

The other aspect of the series which has a good deal of appeal is the subtle wit. More of it is apparent in the books, since much has to be lost to make a movie, but there are all kinds of small jokes which pervade the series. They make good fun of the existense of a secret wizarding society.

It may well be that you would be better off trying the books if you really seek to like the movies. Worst comes to worst, you could probably con me into shipping you copies of the books.

buzzard

 

[JoshWilhoyte]

The movies are only so-so, the books are what is brilliant. The style of writing in engaging, the characters and setting leap off the page. The plots are much more complicated and involved. There are twists and turns, with book long plots with other plots running through the entire series. The kids literally grow up in front of you in the novels. There are some downsides, but all in all they're clever, intelligent and above all else fun. Don't watch the 4th movie until you've read the first four books if you can help it. It's got some of the biggest flips in the series, and the movie is taking out half of it.

The movies are ok, fun, and escapist entertainment. But the novels have mysteries that you can figure out from the clues but aren't likely to unless you spend alot of time on them. There's a huge amount of informed speculation about where the books will end up. Not everyone likes the books, but IMO, everyone should give the first book a read through, just to see if they would like it. They just get better as they go.

 

[The Brigadier]

Why don't you read the books first before making your mind up on them.

 

[buzzard]

But is Potter the same putz in the books that he is in the movies, i.e. having others do the 'hero' stuff?

Depends on which book. The current one will begin to show a change in him as matters have to fall into his hands.

buzzard

 

[elforcelf]

The books are much better. I think 75% got cut out of 2 and 3 of the movies that was in the books.

 

[Ambrus]

But is Potter the same putz in the books that he is in the movies, i.e. having others do the 'hero' stuff?

Pretty much. Things keep happening to Harry in the earlier books and its only because he keeps getting forced to deal with them that he ever does anything; but he's definitely reactive rather than proactive. He'd be a frustrating player to DM for. It's only in the sixth book that he starts showing some actual smarts and initiative, and its long overdue IMHO.