Look at how inflation and affected the amount of food too XD
Let’s appreciate that return to castle wolfenstein was so good tho
Economy so bad movies can’t afford an original story.
Hogwarts, too, was affected by Brexit.
Not only the color. The food selection has turned rather minimalistic and bland.
Looks more like breakfast than a banquet.
Banquet my ass. More like shitty high school cafeteria lunch.
also hogwarts has no money for proper food anymore
It’s for streaming. Filming with flat colors and static cameras compresses better.
I find that a bit weird, video compression (still) sucks for dark videos, either you need to make the bitrate higher or there will be artifacts.
I’m pretty sure no person i know notices the artifacts. It’s infuriating, i can even point it out and people just assume that’s what the video looks like.
They’re remaking Harry Potter? Why?
To support transphobia.
tbf original was wayyy oversaturated
I don’t know about “wayyy”. Anyone with functioning eyes can compare the two and determine the original looks much better…
In areas where it didn’t make sense it wasn’t. The high saturation in the shown scene helps emphasize the magical feeling the characters are feeling, which the viewer is supposed to emphathize with.
Why is anyone watching that garbage?
Some people are just obsessed with it. I never got into it, I even tried to watch it on acid and it still didn’t interest me, btw don’t do acid and go to a movie theater. I almost walked out of watching Tropic Thunder because I was like wtf is this in the character intros, so yeah acid isn’t always great for public stuff.
Anyway the funny was my ex-fiance was really into HP, one day she asks if she can read the books for me. I said okay. Then ironically she decides the perfect time is when I’m gaming with my buddies online. I still get jokes about it to this day, they were all laughing their asses off and I’m trying to keep a straight face like this is fine.
I enjoyed it as a kid. As an adult, the flaws are really hard to look past. From the goblins with massive noses that run the wizarding worlds economy, and is in kahoots with wizard Hitler, to the eugenics related hereditarianism views, etc. etc.
Every single woman character in her books are ridiculed, or plain evil, if they take up space at all. There are like three non-white women, two are basically clones. And every single character is good or evil based on genes. Harry is a mix of both his parents, having personality traits from both, despite never having met them. That’s not how things work.
It perfectly explains why Rowling pushes the politics she does. Her ideology is based on the long since discredited sciences of the early to mid 1900s, the stuff the Nazis were basing their ubermensch stuff on. Also explains why they so readily go hand in hand with neo-Nazis.
to the eugenics related hereditarianism views, etc. etc.
Wasn’t it the evil people who held those views, and the good people found them abhorrent?
That’s like criticizing Tolkien because Sauron wanted to dominate the world…
(I’m not comparing Rowling to Tolkien. I think she’s an awful person and her writing is mid at best; the entire franchise surviving entirely on nostalgia and a huge marketing budget. But let’s not focus our criticism on stupid thing like “the bad guys had evil worldviews!”)
It would be worth discarding as a “just the evil guys” thing if only the evil guys employed it. Alas.
This is literally in the epilogue, I’ve cut down a paragraph describing the appearance of the group.
Draco Malfoy was standing there with his wife and son […]
“So that’s little Scorpius,” said Ron under his breath. “Make sure you beat him in every test, Rosie. Thank God you inherited your mother’s brains.”
“Ron, for heaven’s sake,” said Hermione, half stern, half amused. “Don’t try to turn them against each other before they’ve even started school!”
“You’re right, sorry,” said Ron, but unable to help himself, he added, “Don’t get too friendly with him, though, Rosie. Granddad Weasley would never forgive you if you married a pureblood.”
Given that Voldemort’s whole thing was “pureblood” you’d think the lesson of the story would be that your
breedingblood doesn’t matter, but alas. If this was a one-off thing then you could discard it, but it’s not. It’s all over the fictional world she’s created.Harry is frequently the target of “you have your mother’s/father’s X”, Hagrid is seen as lesser for being half-troll (not to mention how his brother is treated), “Loony” Luna Lovegood is seen as insane, coincidentally just like her father, and Argus Filch is what’s called a “squib”, someone who is born to magical parents, but is unable to perform magic. Ergo he has to be part of the wizarding world, but he cannot partake in it, and he cannot be a part of muggle society. He’s forever an outcast in the world, working at a magical school, manually cleaning a place where the students treat him like shit.
Those aspects are never resolved in the books. There’s never any reflection on “maybe we should be nice to Luna” or “perhaps your heritage doesn’t matter”, instead Voldemort is evil not because of his provably erroneous beliefs about purebloods, but because he’s… what, attacking the good guys?
Then… Gods. Rowling has talked about lycanthropy being a metaphor for AIDS.
As far as I can recall there are two primary examples of werewolves in the stories. Remus Lupin, a good guy, works as a teacher for a while, but eventually quits because he realises that he is a danger to the children due to his condition.
Then there’s Fenrir Greyback who is, and I quote from the Potter wiki
infamous for his general savagery and preference for attacking children
Now what subset of the population is primarily brought to mind when you think of HIV/AIDS? That’s right, homosexual men. I believe up until 2023-ish, I wasn’t able to donate blood in my country because I’m a gay man; my having a preference for men makes my blood dirty. Like mud, perhaps. Mudblood maybe? That’s entirely rooted in the HIV/AIDS hysteria, something which we are still facing the stigma of.
A stereotype we face fairly often, something trans-people also face, is that we’re specifically targeting children.
Out of the two
AIDS victimswerewolves that come to mind, both are dangerous to children, per her own words. Could this just be a massive middle-aged moment style fuck-up? Absolutely, but you’d think a billionaire would have the money to hire editors and whatnot to catch this sort of thing before they happen.
Every single woman character in her books are ridiculed, or plain evil, if they take up space at all.
Hermione is a hero, professor McGonagall is loved by everyone, as well as Molly Weasley and so on.
From the goblins with massive noses that run the wizarding worlds economy, and is in kahoots with wizard Hitler
Just a couple of years ago “people with massive noses” having kahoots with Hitler would be oxymoron.
But now, after genocide of Palestinians…Hermione was ridiculed for thinking House Elves shouldn’t be slaves. Even by her own friends.
To me, her cause seemed just. That was my insight from the books.
Yes, you think it seems just, but the books don’t treat it that way
I get my impression from the books
I stopped reading half way though the books, but I had assumed that the SPEW storyline would come back up later and vindicate Hermione. I was very surprised when I heard it never got brought back up. The last word on that story line was that House Elves were a natural slave race and Hermione was wasting her time channeling that. If you read Hermione’s cause as just, that’s because you have better morals then Rowling.
You’re right, that was hyperbole. What I should’ve written is “every character that expresses traditionally feminine interests”, save for of course, the tradwife, like Molly Weasley whose entire character is just being a mother. Does she have interests beyond being a mother? No, with seven children who has time to be a person?
Hermione doesn’t engage with anything traditionally feminine, she’s a “not-like-other-girls” type character, hell she doesn’t really have any friends that aren’t boys. Even so, she’s often not taken seriously. She’s mocked for studying hard, and she’s mocked for her anti-slavery coalition, which people only really join half-heartedly in order to placate her.
There’s obviously Dolores Umbridge. She’s into cute, frilly, fluffy, pink things. She’s also a sadist. Her punishment for being bad is to be carried off by centaurs to get raped in a forest.
Luna Lovegood was introduced as another character to be bullied, and she remains on the outskirts throughout the book, but Rowling softened up on her once she got extremely popular with the fans of the series.
Just a couple of years ago “people with massive noses” having kahoots with Hitler would be oxymoron.But now, after genocide of Palestinians…
Ah right, the massive genocide of Jews, disabled people, LGBTQ+ people, and other minorities back in the mid 1900s was okay because the Israeli state is now running a genocide of their own. Rowling was correct to be antisemitic actually!
Hermione doesn’t engage with anything traditionally feminine
She actually does, in the ballroom party thing - a beautiful dress and hair, taking a feminine role as a beautiful lady, and all that. That does not invalidate your point though, since there being a single instance (I could think of), just highlights what you said.
Ah yeah, I’d forgotten about that. Pulled up the book to that chapter, and came across this
“Can Dobby give Harry Potter his present?” he squeaked tentatively.
“’Course you can,” said Harry. “Er . . . I’ve got something for you too.”
It was a lie; he hadn’t bought anything for Dobby at all, but he quickly opened his trunk and pulled out a particularly knobbly rolled-up pair of socks. They were his oldest and foulest, mustard yellow, and had once belonged to Uncle Vernon. The reason they were extra-knobbly was that Harry had been using them to cushion his Sneakoscope for over a year now. He pulled out the Sneakoscope and handed the socks to Dobby, saying, “Sorry, I forgot to wrap them. . . .”
[…]
Dobby now handed Harry a small package, which turned out to be — socks.
“Dobby is making them himself, sir!” the elf said happily. “He is buying the wool out of his wages, sir!”
The left sock was bright red and had a pattern of broomsticks upon it; the right sock was green with a pattern of Snitches.
“They’re . . . they’re really . . . well, thanks, Dobby,” said Harry, and he pulled them on, causing Dobby’s eyes to leak with happiness again.
A boy with a vault full of gold, couldn’t give his supposed friend something better than his uncle’s knobbly, “oldest and foulest, mustard yellow” socks. His slave friend appreciates it nonetheless, but like, surely he had nicer socks?
I can’t with this author. The fact that at the end of all of this, nothing has changed; people’s worth is still determined by breeding and bloodline, the slave race is still enslaved, just kind of makes the entire journey seem pointless to me.
Oh yeah, you killed wizard-Hitler but the wizard-nazi ideology is not just at large, but commonly practised by everyone, including by the good-guy rich-orphan turned wizard cop and his friends.
That sort of stuff just flew past, when you were a kid at the time. I always hated how the house elves were treated, but never could put it into words… But yeah, the more you look into the series as an adult, the worse it just gets. And that whole quote… y i k e s.
Fuck Rowling, I hope that piece of trash hits her toes in the sharpest corner.
Molly Weasley whose entire character is just being a mother. Does she have interests beyond being a mother? No, with seven children who has time to be a person?
Excuse me, but I can’t agree with your position here.
Is a woman not allowed to realize itself through motherhood?Also Molly was smart and fierce (remember fight with Bellatrix Lestrange?
Hermione doesn’t engage with anything traditionally feminine, she’s a “not-like-other-girls” type character, hell she doesn’t really have any friends that aren’t boys
And I personally know such girls.
It’s perfectly normal for a girl to be like that.
Also her persona and stance evoke respect in the reader, as well as a sense that she is being treated unfairly.
There’s obviously Dolores Umbridge.
Haven’t you met cruel teachers / persons in power who acted all nice?
And it’s not like Dolores was the only villain in the books.
Luna Lovegood was introduced as another character to be bullied, and she remains on the outskirts throughout the book, but Rowling softened up on her once she got extremely popular with the fans of the series.
And her persona was revealed as a kind and brave hero.
It’s important for quirky children to feel represented.
Rowling was correct to be antisemitic actually!
Goblins didn’t strike me as jews exactly because they were friends with Harry Potter’s world Hitler.
A big nose and banking isn’t enough.Is a woman not allowed to realize itself through motherhood?
itself
Are you for real right now
English isn’t my first language and certainly isn’t my best
Excuse me, but I can’t agree with your position here.Is a woman not allowed to realize itself through motherhood?
Of course. And according to Joanne KKK Rowling, that’s the only way you can be a woman; if you can produce children. Women are the ones with the large gametes! That’s the definition of woman, nothing else. Screw all cis-women who don’t fit the mold.
You’re not allowed to be too feminine, but also if you don’t adhere to white-feminine beauty standards you’re also bad.
Also Molly was smart and fierce (remember fight with Bellatrix Lestrange?
I do! “NOT MY DAUGHTER YOU DON’T!”
No matter what, Molly is nothing but a mother. There’s no character there beyond that.
And I personally know such girls.It’s perfectly normal for a girl to be like that.Also her persona and stance evoke respect in the reader, as well as a sense that she is being treated unfairly.
You’ve missed my point. My point is, there are many ways of being a person, and many ways of being a girl or a woman. Rowling doesn’t believe that, and the narrative she pushes explicitly defines what is and isn’t from her perspective, an acceptable way of being a woman. She very clearly values men over women.
Ember Green did an excellent video essay that touches on this topic.
Goblins didn’t strike me as jews exactly because they were friends with Harry Potter’s world Hitler.A big nose and banking isn’t enough.
Edit: As a child I looked past these things. I didn’t see them, I lacked the cultural context. I’m no longer a child, and now it’s blatantly obvious.
These books were written by a grown-ass woman who couldn’t possibly be so stupid as to name the only fucking Chinese character Cho Chang on accident. Her name is almost Ching Chong!
She couldn’t have been ignorant to the nazi rhetoric she spewed out, or the pro-slavery bits.
The books are soaked with racism, ableism, and misogyny and I don’t understand how anyone can go back to them as an adult, having obtained the cultural context, and still think the stories are okay.
And according to Joanne KKK Rowling, that’s the only way you can be a woman; if you can produce children.
Harry Potter books don’t have that assertion to me. There are different positive female figures in the books.
There’s no character there beyond that.
Did you read my comment? There were examples of characters beyond that. Your own examples, in fact.
pro-slavery bits.
Hermione is opposed to slavery, even though elves themselves don’t consider it so (who knows why - they are magical creatures).
And Hermione is a positive figure. I was sympathetic with her goal when I read the books.
I actually didn’t notice that, I mean I never really put much thought into it and never finished watching the movies. That’s kind of weird though when you explained the details.
It’s not garbage (and books too).
If you, perchance, want to discourage people from consuming Harry Potter because of Rowling’s views, then state so explicitly. It would send a clearer message.
You’re going full keyboard warrior in this thread despite acknowledging Rowlings bigotry. They are children books, no one needs you to defend every plot hole, racist caricature or political grievance she decided to include. You’re an adult, why are you putting this much effort into defending a terrible person and her terrible writing?
Surely you have better things to do. There are better books to read. There are better authors to stan.
You’re going full keyboard warrior in this thread
I can say the same about those, who replied to me and downvoted me.
I like the books. They are fine. Rowling is not fine.
IMO art can and should be separated from the author’s person and should be judged by itself.Life is complicated and multifaceted.
Ex harry potter fan. First 3 books were fun mystery books in magical world. No complaints there. After book 3 they went off the rails.
Matilda has a school with a bad teacher and parental figures. The Secret Seven has school aged kids solving mysteries. No one is complaining about them. But books 4-7 tries to go into the politics of the world, and they fall apart.
But books 4-7 tries to go into the politics of the world, and they fall apart.
In my case the plot was maturing with me. (I was a child of Harry’s age when the first book came out)
It’s
nothot garbage (and books too).Ftfy.
Yes, Rowling does have garbage views. Everyone knows that she hates women, Jews, and non-white people as is evident by her garbage stories, and her political actions. It’s rubbish and shouldn’t be platformed.
she hates women
Hermione, professor McGonagall, Molly Weasley for example - they are prominent and loved characters.
All TERFS hate women. It’s misogynie all the way down.
Hermione was written as a know-it-all goody-two-shoes that while useful to the boys for being smart (and a convenient love interest) was still presented as a silly character that, get this, wanted to end slavery lol – so she had to be taught that actually slaves don’t mind being slaves they just don’t like having bad slave owners – so she needs to stop being so unreasonably emotional about it and just shut up
I admired her. Am I alone?
Books positioned her as a hero. Especially in the later books, where she shouldered almost all of the burden.
no, so many girls do – that’s totally valid – but imo it’s important to recognise why people focus on the misogyny – Hermione exists in the story to almost exclusively serve the boys (the one time she doesn’t ie SPEW she is mocked and ridiculed for it) – and the fact that she’s very competent is inspirational in a vaccum – but she still ultimately fits very neatly into her designated caretaker role under patriarchy – which is inherently regressive and misogynistic
so I guess my point is that it’s still useful to admire Hermione for what she could represent while moving on from HP to read better written characters – eg Takver from The Dispossessed by Ursula Le Guin
I wonder what your opinion on professor McGonagall
I don’t think it needs a remake. I’m not at all remotely interested in the material.
The egg looks plastic for some reason
TV panels are light years better at displaying lower light colors and differentiating between blacks than they were in 2001.
As things like OLED technology and HDR offerings have advanced, directors, set designers, consumer designers, cinematographers, and editors across all of post production have been able to work with more of the palette as a result.
Older works needed to be over lit and wash out nearly everything on screen just so that every pixel darker than light tan didn’t meld into one blob of color. That is no longer necessary and, as a result, the worlds shown to us in our living rooms look more real and lived in than ever.
Unless you have a TV from the 2010s in which case fuck you.
Yes, but really, no, in this situation… Look at the other comment https://pawb.social/comment/24159500
This is likely the case, done like the matrix where there are differing scenes, exposures, coloring and/or filters between worlds so the viewers can differentiate.
This is proven bc I can watch old HP on my old 2011 FHD TV and it doesn’t look entirely different than my newer UHD HDR screen. It’s that way on purpose. Otherwise older films would all be blown out with coloring or contrast too, and they’re not. Only retouching when going from VHS to DVD and/or DVD to Blu Ray, etc. Format changes do usually get a remastering.
I’d say it’s accurate (considering JK Rowling) that it’s reduced to only a few colours.
Wtf is the breakfast shown from the 2026 version? It looks like an American school cafeteria meal. Where are the goblets? Why are there trays? Kids don’t need to carry their food. It magically appears and disappears on the tables from the house elves.
Does the food even cost them anything besides…wait, do they even have mana pools?
I kind of hate that I have this knowledge, but in the setting of Harry potter, one of the only things you can’t simply create with magic is food. The food at Hogwarts is prepared by house elves who essentially teleport it to make it appear on the tables.
House elves are racist/woke/expensive/striking/wrong-religion now 😜
The house elves were always fucked up
I don’t see how. Wasn’t it the evil people who had house elves anyway, and the good people freed and befriended them?
I’m not here to defend Rowling, but depicting an injustice in fiction isn’t the same thing as committing an injustice.
She’s a terrible person in other ways, but I don’t think writing about house elves is what makes her terrible. Unless there’s more in the books that I don’t know about…
…the house elves are in Hogwarts too. They are not staff, they are school property. Harry owns a house elf after book 5. The books openly ridicule Hermione for being the only sane person and trying to end house elf slavery because apparently the house elves like being enslaved and she’s just overreacting. Need I go on?
Ah, I didn’t know about all that. I’ve only seen the movies
Wait till you see the bankers
Make sure to include a giant star of David in the film adaptation too, that will surely beat the antisemitism allegations /s
Surely they can’t be tha…oh.
Oh, my.
Hadn’t you heard? Everything is fucking stupid now.
