|
My girlfriend and I have both seen all the HP movies and enjoyed them, but haven't read any of the HP books.
With the imminent release of HP 7 the 1st part, we decided to read/skim the Harry Potter series just because we're both on co-op (lots of free time) and heard that the books are supposedly 5x better than the movies.
We started 2 days ago, and the problem is that although my girlfriend is loving the books (she's on Chamber of Secrets already), I've halfway through the Philosopher's stone and I'm bored out of my mind. I just can't get into the book at all, and forced myself to go through more than half of the book.
You heard "HP is loved by children and adults alike" about the HP series, but I think I'm just too old :S I'm going to finish reading the 1st book and give the 2nd one a try before I'll be content with just watching the movies.
Have you read the HP series? If so, did you read them as adults?
 
|
I reread the seventh book and its still fantastic. The first books are a lot more childish- they're not dark at all and are actually pretty shitty in terms of substance
|
I read them and liked them, I think the first few are more interesting for kids but are still good for anyone.
|
Read them all, I was 14-20 I think... If I'd start now I would definately start with book 3, as 1 and 2 are pretty bad imo.. You are not missing much!
Books 3-7 are sooooo good though  .
|
I'm not surprised because the Philosopher's stone was meant for kids in elementary school. Just know that the story gets more mature as you get ahead because the readers of the books and the main characters are growing.
|
How old are you then?
I started reading when I was 11 and the last book was released when I was 17 so I've really been growing up with Harry Potter. The books are for children/teens for sure even if they get a bit more mature in the later books.
|
No one is too old for Harry Potter, the series is great. I'm ashamed to admit how many times I've read the books... Some good memories were laddering on iCCup while listening to the Harry Potter series. If you enjoy the movies, seriously, read the books. 5x better is a joke, the movies don't even compare.
Edit: I'm 20, still reread them.
|
I read them as a teenager.
It's appeal is more or less simplicity of story and believability of the characters. I was entertained, but not necessarily blown away. The publicity and hype that came from the series made me less and less interested, and was more or less reading them as time went on to keep up with everyone else's conversations.
|
The first ones are so short that you can just read them anyway even if they're childish.
|
The first three book are distinctly children's literature, and four to seven have a distinctly darker tone and look much more for teenagers. Ironically, though you'd probably find the substance in the fourth book onwards more interesting, the third book imo is probably the best written in actual writing quality. I never read the 6th and 7th books but whenever I bring up Harry Potter all my friends smother me with rants about how badly the 7th was actually written, so...
|
strange i was never aware that the original title of the first one is The Philosopher's stone until now.
|
Honestly, I eventually got bored of reading them simply because Rowling's writing is a bit long-winded. Read if you want, don't if you don't.
|
Canada2480 Posts
Harry Potter is over-hyped in my opinion
try "A Song Of Ice And Fire" instead
|
i first read the 3rd book of harry potter way back in university as an assignment. i enjoyed it so i said, why not follow hp book series. but reading thru the 1st chapter of book 1, i also got bored, i even fell asleep i believe. i wasn't able to finish the chapter 1 of book 1!
i never tried reading it again nor tried buying the other books... i just followed the movies. for me, the movies are more entertaining than the book (except for book 3). book 3 has lots of events that were not captured by the movie. but then again that's the only hp book i read so i can't compare the others.
anyway, my friends who are addicted to hp said that the best book is still book 3,
|
How old are you? o.o
I read through all the books in high school, but if I had the time, I think I'd enjoy re-reading them again now.
The first two books are a bit meh, especially since you know the big things that happen from the movies. They really pick up from book 3 and on, though.
|
I don't think it's an age thing. I read them as a young adult and loved them. But my friend, same age with very similar taste dislikes them and never bothered finishing the first. It's just taste.
|
lol im curious how old are you?
im guessing you're somewhere around 20, give or take a couple of years.
harry potter imo is a good book, not as spectacular as how they're saying, but decent nonetheless ... i read all the 7 books ... every time the new one came out, i re-read the whole thing from book 1 so that i could grab all the facts from the beginning ...
well being a teenager is obviously much more easier to like the book ... since you can somehow relate your life to that of the story ... imagine only if one day some giant motherfucker visited your house, kicked your dad's butt and took you to a wizard school ... ah good ol' time =)
|
I think its the sorcerer's stone, isn't it?
|
The first three books are very light-hearted, I enjoyed them when I was young and still enjoy them- but they have definitely lost a bit of the luster they had when I was younger.
Shouldn't take to long to read the first 3 though, they're quite thin.
|
On October 25 2010 09:38 Tazza wrote:
I think its the sorcerer's stone, isn't it?
yea it is
nvm its both
|
hell nah. never too old for Harry Potter.
|
If you actually enjoyed all the movies, I don't see why you can't enjoy the books as well. The books are much better than the related films imo. I've actually read all the books (finished in late highschool) but never seen all the movies (up to the 4th book). Maybe you just miss Emma Watson or something.
|
|
|
Has more to do with writing style than anything else in my opinion. I read all 7 books, and they were definitely more interesting when I was younger. Not trying to exude any sort of personal snobbery, but when you're watching the movies you can be wowed by the visual aspects and not have to deal with the sometimes drawn out, sometimes poorly written dialogue in the books. Either that or you've grown out of the series entirely in which case you probably won't have a good time watching the last 2 movies.
|
On October 25 2010 09:42 Kenpachi wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2010 09:38 Tazza wrote:
I think its the sorcerer's stone, isn't it? yea it is nvm its both
Only in the USA I believe, don't really know why...?
|
There's no such thing as too old for harry potter but you might find the first two books a bit childish. The perspective is intentionally written as initially childish but increasingly adult to match the protagonist's own age. By the 3rd or the 4th your concerns will go away and you'll be glad you read the series.
|
On October 25 2010 09:38 Tazza wrote:
I think its the sorcerer's stone, isn't it?
It's the Philosopher's Stone. The idea of a substance that could turn lead into gold and give an elixer of immortality was not actually invented by Rowling, it was taken from history. Even Dumbledore's old friend Nicholas Flamel was a historical person. For centuries alchemists like Flamel sought to make a Philosopher's Stone, and while alchemy was considered science at the time, by modern standards it was a lot closer to mysticism. When the book was being published in America, the publishers were afraid (perhaps justifiably) that people wouldn't understand the reference to medieval mystical alchemy, so they changed the name to 'Sorcerer's Stone' to make it more obvious that it was about magic and wizards.
|
On October 25 2010 09:38 Tazza wrote:
I think its the sorcerer's stone, isn't it?
It's Philosopher's Stone, you Americanized bastards! 
To be honest, the first book is very tame and straightforward, and not very compelling to adults. If you're above a certain age you can poke logic holes in everything. I don't think Harry Potter got its reputation as entertainment for kids and adults alike until a couple books in.
I'd recommend skimming the first book pretty quickly if it's so mind-numbingly boring to you. It'll get more interesting later.
|
The 4th-7th books are a lot more darker. From then on it gets more serious. The 3rd book is also really entertaining because it's a lot on Harry's parents. The 1st and the 2nd one are definitely more for children. Get through the first 2 and the rest are good
Edit - Philosophers in most part of the world. Sorcerers in America because the publisher knew that philosopher has different connotations in American than in UK.
|
On October 25 2010 10:00 emperorchampion wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2010 09:42 Kenpachi wrote:On October 25 2010 09:38 Tazza wrote:
I think its the sorcerer's stone, isn't it? yea it is nvm its both Only in the USA I believe, don't really know why...?
It was originally the philosopher's stone but they changed it to the sorcerer's stone in the american version for marketing reasons (americans are too dumb to know about the philosopher's stone >__> )
|
i didn't start reading HP until the 3rd book had already come out so i read the first 3 books in like 3 days or so? (this was when i was 10 so i had time)
as time went on, i just got tired of the series.. they became longer and more drawn out while you already knew harry will defeat voldemort. i guess i'll be the rebel that says I liked the first book the most.
|
5673 Posts
If you're a fan of good writing, you'll like Harry Potter. The first few books may seem a little simple, but starting from the Prisoner of Azkaban it gets a lot better. By the time you get to the Deathly Hallows and look back, the arcs, the little sub-sub plots she ties up and the amazing consistency she maintains across the entire series make it a fantastic experience. One of Rowling's strengths is the strong focus she gives to character development and relationships. In fact, once you peel back the magic and look past the perennial battle between good and evil, it's really just a coming of age story, and that's something many people can relate to.
The target audience is not adults, but I know many adults who enjoy it as well. It's not Tolkien, but it's still one of the best series of our generation, easily.
+ Show Spoiler [Ending] +Then she'll sissy out and not have Harry kill Voldermot (thx2u wand!) and you'll feel cheated for the rest of your life. Also, Albus Severus? Wut. Sounds like a scientific name for a STD.
|
I remember reading the books when they first come out and enjoying first 1-4ish. After that though it got rediculously stupid, like I've already suspended my disbelief and its still really far fetched. And who the hell says the 7th book is the best? They walk around in the fucking woods for 3/4th it. Then all because of some stupid shit where "just cause I picked this up its not mine" crap happened harry wins. "magical"
|
Nobody's too old for Harry Potter :D! The first books are definitely a little more on the childish side but it's only expected, they're about kids 11-13 learning magic. Read them for the creativity and maybe they'll start growing on you.
|
I'm 20 now, and I've loved the books&movies since they first came out.
And I *still* love them. I'll admit, i'm a giant Harry Potter nerd. I don't see anything wrong with it, either.
My mother is turning 40 and she still loves the books and movies as well.
My dad hasn't read the books(yet)(he's somewhere around 50 idk) but he loves the movies.
Never too old! The first book is incredibly boring, but once you get past it, you get drawn in. I promise.
I had problems starting the series because of that reason. 
|
When the 4th one came out, I caved in and thought "okay, fine, I'll give this a chance." Read 1-4 in two afternoons, thought it was just terrible writing, and as a result have not read 5-7, nor did I ever intend to. Well, maybe not 'bad' writing per se, but I couldn't deal with the third grade reading level and similar predictability. I'm intrigued at the posters saying the last few books get better. I'll might cruise through the series someday after all if it actually stops being "Harry and Friends Have a Great Big Adventure in Wizardland! Hooray!" after a point and becomes an interesting fantasy story.
|
i think you just don't like reading/enjoy good writing. i read then when they first came out, and i've reread a few of the books recently (i'm 18) and my sister(25) also enjoys rereading the books.
|
I find the series a little hard to believe. I mean a ginger kid with TWO friends?
|
On October 25 2010 10:04 Crunchums wrote:
There's no such thing as too old for harry potter but you might find the first two books a bit childish. The perspective is intentionally written as initially childish but increasingly adult to match the protagonist's own age. By the 3rd or the 4th your concerns will go away and you'll be glad you read the series.
fairly accurate imo, really enjoyed the whole series. Even still and im 20
|
I read books 1-4, skimmed through 5, and didn't bother reading 6 and 7. It was probably a combination of me losing interest in reading (altogether) and being tired of the writing style of the author. The movies are ok though - I watched all of them so far, and plan on watching both movies for book 7.
|
Thanks, I'll keep at it then and just hope the it'll get a lot better from the 3rd book onwards.
I'm 20 for people that were asking. Definitely 2 age groups above target audience for the first two books I guess haha.
|
Books 1-4 are good, rest are terrible (some have a few shining moments, i.e. Luna, but that's about it). Movies 1, 2 and 4 are good, rest are terrible.
|
On October 25 2010 11:47 Tyrio wrote:
Books 1-4 are good, rest are terrible (some have a few shining moments, i.e. Luna, but that's about it). Movies 1, 2 and 4 are good, rest are terrible.
O.o
Really?
You thought the best movies were 1 2 and 4? The movies, in my opinion, didn't start getting good until movie 5 (with the change of directors), And personally I thought books 1 and two were a little slow (of course worth reading for me, but I can see other not liking them as much as others). I thought the series really started picking up after book 3. Though, again, i did like the first two books too  .
|
I read the first book when I was 17 I think and the 7th one when I was 22...
My favourite books where 2,4,6 and 1 in that order. Regarding the movies, I found most of them quite boring. Especially first ones. Though 4 and 6 were OK I guess.
I don't understand why people like 3rd book so much. I thought it was boring. And it was that book that stopped my older sister from reading further. So if you don't like the first two there is little hope you will like the rest, in my opinion. But keep trying
|
Lol I was such a big fan of the books I couldn't stand the movies. I used play a game called Harry Potter trivia where me and a friend or brother or w/e would take turns asking each other a question about some weird fact in the book. I'd read them all like 5 or 6 times so I always ended up winning.
Then the movies came out and although I was pretty hyped up about the first one, I couldn't enjoy because I compared every little bit of the book to the movie and got annoyed when they weren't the same lol. Also, I hated that when I went back to read the books after seeing a movie, suddenly my head was filled with all these visions from the movie, instead of the images I'd come up with myself. For example I thought of snape as kind of looking like one the ghosts out of casper (the left one).
They're definitely worth reading, J.K. Rowling is pretty amazing at creating the wizard world, so it really is a top fantasy book.
|
I definitely enjoyed the first three books the most. I guess it was because I was 11 years old back when they came out and being the first actual fantasy/magical books I've ever read, it was just pretty damn fascinating. I remember finishing PoA on my way home on the school bus because the last 50-70 pages or so are pretty damn suspenseful and intense in that one.
The books sort of went downhill for me when they started getting "serious," but I know there are a lot of people who enjoyed the books more as the series progressed. Also, the books probably won't be as enjoyable as they could have been since you've watched all the movies and thus, know the plot and will view the characters as presented in the movie and not from your own imagination. For instance, I imagined Hermione as just an average looking girl, but she's gorgeous in the films. Even Rowling said that Emma Watson is not Hermione Granger. I guess now that I think about it, it could be difficult to try to get into the books after you've watched the movies.
|
The third book and movie are fantastic. In terms of writing the third book is the transition to a darker setting and the third movie broke away from the childish feel the first two had.
|
On October 25 2010 10:42 riptide wrote:
If you're a fan of good writing, you'll like Harry Potter.
This made me cry as nothing could be further from the truth. The rest of the post does have some good points, like character development, which is ok, nothing amazing, but better then some other children's books. But the fact remains they are with out a doubt children and teen books. Some adults may enjoy them, but that does not change the fact that they are children books, and from a literary standpoint they are pretty poor.
Here, from page 324 of The Order of the Phoenix, to give you a typical example, are six consecutive descriptions of the way people speak. "...said Snape maliciously," "... said Harry furiously", " ... he said glumly", "... said Hermione severely", "... said Ron indignantly", " ... said Hermione loftily". Do I need to explain why that is such second-rate writing?
I started reading them when I was 13 or so, and I did read them all, but by the end it was just to finish this thing that I had been doing for almost a decade. I would never recommend it to any adult, and I wouldn't really recommended it to anything past a 3rd grader either. I think there are much better books for children/teens out there, and the same holds true for adults.
|
The movies are so bad. Books are decent-good. Dunno if/when I'll read them again though.
|
Korea (South)1897 Posts
I'm 35, I tried and failed.
Cheers
|
On October 25 2010 10:42 riptide wrote:
If you're a fan of good writing, you'll like Harry Potter.
What???
Maybe shes a writer who knows how to appeal to a certain group of people, but she is hardly a good technical writer by any stretch of the imagination. Like just a shade above Stephanie Meyers
There's a big difference between being a good writer and being a good story teller. I'm not even sure if she's the later, since she constantly gets ripped for being contrived, using Deus ex machinas like a crutch and other shitty writing. I had to read a ton of criticism about her in college because my one professor loved the series but hated that people worshiped her as a good writer.
I actually was trying to find some criticisms just for this, and one of the best comments about how she and George Lucas have the misfortune of being two individuals who stumbled across great stories but ended up butchering it in the end due to their own incompetence
|
book 3 is the best imo. closely followed by book 4. and then 2,1,7 in that order. I found book 5 and 6 awful.
I can see why you would think book 1 and 2 is boring especially since you know all the plot twists already. If you are really bored, i'd recommend trying to read 3 and 4. if it does not work then yea maybe you have outgrown it.
|
I think Harry Potter isn't enjoyed by adults because there's very little to take from or learn from the text, and also, there's very little room for the reader or even the characters to enjoy any sorts of real revelations about JK Rowling's world of magic and spells due to, as Hawk points out a few post before this, the (ab)use of Dues ex Machina.
It's hard to reflect on a lot of massive works like the HP series or something like Star Wars and not feel like it could have been better, but that's probably a better discussion for another topic.
|
The first 1 is worth reading - she creates a pretty cool world. The 2nd and 3rd aren't bad either. After that, it feels like she fired her editor - someone she sorely needed.
By the 6th and 7th everything is just a mess.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
