J.K. Rowling will fail to do anything in any of her books more adventurous and dramatic than would be allowed in an episode of friends.... no *main* character dies, people join at the beginning and leave at the end, but by the start of the next book its all pretty much the same.

There's no chance the next book will start with harry aged 40, even though that would be interesting (makes a change). I'd even wager a large amount that harry won't die before the last book. Book number 5 was supposed to reveal earth-shattering secrets and change everything around... did it fuck. The reason is that Rowling has (A) no creativity, and (B) not enough balls to do something that might spoil the commercial success of the series.

and i quote "And then Harry played with some cards, but they were MAGIC cards! And then they played MAGIC sports from MAGIC land. And then the MAGIC staircases moved around and confused everyone, which was really fucking useful. And then they jumped on some unicorns or centaurs or some stupid shit like that to go fight magical Lord Darth Evil."

Who cares if it doesnt hang together or the magical system isnt coherent or sensible in any way. At least the characters are complex and finely crafted, right? I mean in the last book, Harry felt ANGST, which meant he insulted his friends for no reason and listened to marilyn manson. 

Err but you lot do realize that the books are aimed at kids, and kids widely don't have the ability to critique something on an intellectual level? When they critique something, it's all about "I liked it," or "I didn't like it." Liking and disliking are, of course, subjective and completely irrational. 

I love you guys, but why would anybody expect any balls from Rowlings. It is aimed towards an adolescent audience, and though she is not up to the quirky imagination of Dahl or the sublime brilliance of C S Lewis, her work is quite good for today's standards. Just not what I really like.

When I want excapism, I want lurid horror, cynical mystery or Sword and Sorcery of the particurly Necromatic variety. Robert E Howard. Lovecraft. Zelazny of the 60's. Ross Thomas, or Neil Gaimon. Those sort of things.

If I'm searching for Ballsy Imaginitive fiction, Lucuis Shepard, J G Ballard, Gene Wolfe, Kate Wilhelm. Those sort of things.

If you are looking for that itch to be scratched from Rowlings, you are bound to be dissapointed from the first page onward. 

But being 'aimed at kids' doesn't mean it has to be derivative shite. The HP books aren't aimed at primary school children after all, so they could be a bit more intellectually stimulating, that is, if J.K. Rowling had a reading age of above 10 years old.

Maybe children can't tell the difference between a good book and a harry potter book, but thats probably because they've never read a good book (too busy watching Party of Five). If the books teenagers read treat them like intellectual midgets with no taste then that's what they'll become, thats what pisses me off.

Childrens books don't have to suck, have you ever read Alice in Wonderland? Or for an older reader, Phillip Pullman's His Dark Materials trilogy is incredible; it was written at the same time Harry Potter was being written and instead of being derivative, it's creative, and instead of killing braincells it's challenging and intelligent. One of the best series of books I ever read, and it gets trampled by Harry Potter for reasons completely unknown to me. Or do people really like not having to think *that much*? 

but i guess it applies to much of your post too, Headthump, which i largely agreed with, although I heartily hope you are wrong in saying "her work is quite good for today's standards".

Maybe I've just been lucky in everything else I've recently read, but if Harry Potter is good by today's standards then i should be able to get on the bestsellers list by drinking 10 pints of imported lager and then pissing my novel in the snow. 

But that would get you credit with the nihilistic artist crowd. 

trilogy. I'm not familiar with it but you make it sound very interesting. Thing is, I could never relate to kids especially when I was a kid. At ten my favorite book was a collection of Tolstoy short stories. I was much smarter and more intellectual then (peaking at the age of twelve, downward spiral sense).

By the time I became an adolescent and teenager however, my taste changed to pretty much what they are today.

My three smug little nieces all read Harry Potter the way Rabinical students read the Talmud. I don't get it, I didn't like the two Potter books that I did read.

I think it may have something to do with the 'elitistic' concepts in the books. The idea of the muggles. It is an elitism they can wrap their itty, bitty little brains around and adopt as their own way of seeing things and looking down their upturned noses at those who are not in on it.

That to me, I believe is its real appeal. 

you might be on to something. But if they wanted to do elitism right, why didn't they just create a Func_ account? 

It is my niece Rhonda who lost my Mission Pack CDs. She had a hand-me-down PI from me for years so it was one of the few games she could play; a little speedrunner devil at one time. Now her system is better than mine and it is loaded with nothing but Sims crap. What a waste. 

Rowling does seem to be poking sly fun at both the English class structure with her "muggle" talk, but also apartheid as well. Mind you, I couldn't read the damn books without wanting to cloud wizard-dom about its collective ears and drag it kicking and screaming into the modern era. 

starbuck your jokes are even better after the 3 months away. ;) 

Voices from a Distant Star.

Unlike Vampire Hunter D, which used multiple media (at the back end) in delivering an awesome anime experience. 'Voices' uses different techniques in the same media. Some of the scenes are literally mere sketches, some fully worked up set pieces. The whole thing hangs together brilliantly, with the simple but well crafted soundtrack acting as subliminal glue.

Hire it, watch it, cry, be at peace. 

...might've had no balls in the literary sense, but the film was excellent. It did introduce some new elements (girl-power Hermione was a scream) but more importantly the director and cinematographer have finally opened up the vista to big screen dimensions. Visually, the first two now seem "made for television".

Did anyone else think "I'm going to use that" when the youngens where descending the divination tower and passed by the window with a stair on the other side of the tower heading upward? Cool!

...and eratum in the previous post: that should be Voices of a Distant Star. 

I think donnie darko was a kickass movie and i loved the six foot tall bunnyrabbit named frank he was so evil looking.The idea of time travel i thought was pretty cool. 

echo and the bunnymen, the church, tears for fears, joy division... the cover of mad world was good too. 

was the perfect fit at the end. 

Brilliant Movie

The vacant, happy zombie expression on the leads face during the ENTIRE movie definitely leaves an impression. 

not only was mad world the perfect end, but i think putting 'The Killing Moon' at the beginning was just as good a choice. Great atmosphere, that movie... captured a familiar but obscure mood/feeling very well. 

agreed.

I'm looking forward to checking out the re-relase of the movie in the Director Cut format. Most these DC's dont really do much, but it could be interesting in this case. 

Was a blast. Sure, it's science fiction that's more heavy on the fiction, but it's a romp -- full of decent effects, sleek production and that foxey merc that somehow got lost in the shuffle (hope she shows up in the third movie -- which they damned well better have, btw, judging by the end of this one). 

Haven't seen Riddick, but the presence of the shockingly talentless Thandie Newton is enough to put me off. I'll probably catch it on DVD.

On another note, I've just downloaded the Aliens vs Predator trailer. I remember before this was announced, getting teased with rumours of Cameron's Alien 5 - but no... looks like we're gonna have to suffer this sci-fi-channel-grade shlock with Paul W S "Everything I touch turns to crap" Anderson at the helm. 

his parents must have been CRUEL 

blessed with precognitive ability 

As much as I desire everything with Anderson's name attached to it to tank miserably at the box office, I kind of want AvP to do well, because at least that should greenlight the above-mentioned Cameron project. 

I'm sure everyone would agree Cameron is the ultimate Alien films director, and he should not only do another, but make a new one every year to satisfy my craving. I'm sure if he wanted to do one it'd get greenlighted immediately, wouldnt it? I hope so.