Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Book Covers Released!

[Dash]

The Covers for HPatDH have been revealed:

http://movies.ign.com/articles/776/776487p1.html

[Ixidor]

I find the books have become overly repetitive, hopefully this will change things up.

[skyblue12]

People still read this ****?

you may think it's **** but a lot of others don't..

[Ixidor]

you may think it's **** but a lot of others don't..

Seriously though, why do people like these books so much? The first couple were good but then it just sort of peetered off... definate drop of quality imho. (Harry not being about to die in any of the first 6 books sorta killed a bit of the suspense for me too... I wish JK hadn't announced there'd be 7 books at the start :( )

[thecharlie]

Seriously though, why do people like these books so much? The first couple were good but then it just sort of peetered off... definate drop of quality imho.

Again, this is your opinion. There are millions out there who would gladly disagree with you. I personally still love the series, and when you're 6 books into the series, there's no reason for you to stop at the last one. I can't wait, and the covers look AWESOME

[Dash]

People still read this ****?

I personally didn't start reading them until the first 4 books were already published but since then I've been a fan. And seeing as how it's made quite a good amount of money, I'd say there are plenty of people who still read it, even though you may not.

[Ixidor]

Again, this is your opinion. There are millions out there who would gladly disagree with you. I personally still love the series, and when you're 6 books into the series, there's no reason for you to stop at the last one. I can't wait, and the covers look AWESOME

I never said my statement was anything but opinion! I'm sure there are million of people who'd jump at the chance to say any one of my interests were **** and I respect that opinion!

I personally didn't start reading them until the first 4 books were already published but since then I've been a fan. And seeing as how it's made quite a good amount of money, I'd say there are plenty of people who still read it, even though you may not.

I'm sure there are still millions of people who still read it... but that doesn't mean it's good. Hell, millions of people voted to re-elect a certain US president. ;)

[rabbit]

(Harry not being about to die in any of the first 6 books sorta killed a bit of the suspense for me too

I know what you mean. It's like watching Schindler's List or any other WW2 based movie, when you already know that the Germans lost.

And I can't believe so many people went to see Star Wars 1-3, when they already know what happens to Anakin.

[Ixidor]

(Harry not being about to die in any of the first 6 books sorta killed a bit of the suspense for me too

I know what you mean. It's like watching Schindler's List or any other WW2 based movie, when you already know that the Germans lost.

And I can't believe so many people went to see Star Wars 1-3, when they already know what happens to Anakin.

I see what you're trying to do, but the scenarios aren't the same.

In Schindler's list the germans do lose, but it's how much damage they do on the way out and how it effects people's lives. I'd go as far as to say schindler's list wasn't even about the germans winning or losing, it was about how it affected the jews living in germany at the time. Also, since none of the characters in schindler's list are overly well known pretty much anyone can die and anything can happen.

In Star Wars 1-3, theoretically we watch it for HOW stuff happened, not just WHAT happened. Call me crazy but I found the first 3 harry potter books good and after that it just became repetitive for me. I must admit I haven't read the 6th book because the 5th book was just boring to read for me. Maybe she's improved, I don't know.

The reason me or you or anyone would read harry potter books would be to discover the HOW something happens and it's my personal opinion that JK Rowling isn't a skilled enough writer to adequately keep an audience fully engaged throughout 7 books. Is she a good author? Undoubtedly.

Do I think she's over extended herself here to the point of a poinant decrease in quality of her works? Yes.

Maybe it was unfair calling it @#%^, in fact I know it was. I will edit my post to more closely reflect my opinion and be less offensive towards others.

Summary: If a story's purpose is not to tell what happens but to tell how and why, it must be good enough of it's own merit to stand on it's own two legs. It is my opinion that rowling has over used the formula and her books have become boring.

Feel free to disagree with me!

[rabbit]

Don't know about you, but I read the books to find out what happens. You say that knowing that there are seven books stops you from enjoying. Well, you generally know that movies are 1.5-3h in length. Does that stop you from enjoying too?


and it's my personal opinion that JK Rowling isn't a skilled enough writer to adequately keep an audience fully engaged throughout 7 books.

Keep in mind your age and what the primary age group these books were written for. I recall reading Book 1, and it was difficult reading when things are called "lightputteroutter" or whatever that thing was called.

[Ixidor]

Don't know about you, but I read the books to find out what happens. You say that knowing that there are seven books stops you from enjoying. Well, you generally know that movies are 1.5-3h in length. Does that stop you from enjoying too?

Sorry, let me clarify. Because there are 7 books it means in the first 6, the HOW is the meat of the story. The WHAT is relatively inconsequential because nothing can happen to the man character unless JK Rowling announced the 7th book to be titled "Ron and the Deathly Hallows".

It is my personal opinion, and entirely opinion, that the HOW has been lacking in her most recent installments to the point where I've become disinterested.

The thing for movies, like Psycho taught us, pretty much anything can happen. **SPOILER FOR PSYCHO**In the case of Pyscho, the main actress dies within the first 3rd, there's no way harry potter could have died within the first 1-3 books and still have called them "Harry Potter and the XXXXX".**SPOILER**

Keep in mind your age and what the primary age group these books were written for. I recall reading Book 1, and it was difficult reading when things are called "lightputteroutter" or whatever that thing was called.

I'm 17 now and I was... 12(?) when I first started reading the Harry Potter books. I'd say I was pretty much THE target audience for her and it's just nonsensical to have a series that's not released all at once that doesn't grow with your fans. I understand she's made the books more complex and darker to compensate for her aging fan base it's just I feel as if she's still trying to write for 12 year olds.

I dunno, I just feel that her books were great at their time but failed to evolve with her target audience. I'm sure many others will disagree with me. I'm *tempted* to start reading again just to see how she finishes off the series... but yeah I definately won't be camping outside chapters for a midnight release! (Also, to give you perspective, I read the 5th book the second day it was out and read it non-stop for a day. I was a HUGE fan and I found it really let me down.)

[Jkim]

http://rebeekers.com/harrypottaaa.jpg

Zomfg. so buying this book

[rabbit]

Book is going to be 784 pages (UK edition, so CA edition should be same), second longest, after the Order of the Phoenix.

-- as reported by veritaserum.com

[skyblue12]

http://rebeekers.com/harrypottaaa.jpg

Zomfg. so buying this book

oh gee.. another one of these -_-