mytailorisrich

Love is in the air...

Tue, 30 Jan 2007 10:36:29 GMT

PFFFHAHAHHAHAHAHAAH!!!! --> http://www.derekyu.com/avgpa/gallery.html

For me this is the best one:

The tragedy

Tue, 27 Jun 2006 14:14:49 GMT

Yesterday, rowling said that there will be two more corpses in book 7. What a surprise. But yeh, it is a confirmation from the only reliable source, the author herself. Before writing this, i read this comment by a reader (later i'll explain why i put that in italics) in wich she accused rowling of using the easy method to finish the book, because rowling ran out of ideas and also because she wants to make sure that nobody would ever continue the potter saga (even after she's dead). This girl also said that she read Half blood prince on the net and that she will do the same with the next book because she didn't want to make rowling richer. Well, i'm no psychologist but it seems that if you don't give this reader the development of the plot that she wants, she will dish you like.. soon. And then accuse you of wanting to get rich (well, who wouldn't want to be rich?) A lot of readers do that, it is pretty normal, but for me it is, at least, a bit strange that after you have read 5 books from the same author, you start to dislike her at the 6th book. Specially, since i've read the 6 books and i think that, i'm my humble opinion, rowling style hasn't changed much from one book to another. Yeah, i admit that they have become darker, but with a good reason. Rowling admitted that she had all the books planned from the beginning, in fact, yesterday she said that she had the ending written since.. 1990... (only slight changes have been made). That makes me feel even more sure, that she's not making stuff up because she ran out of ideas or something like that. Characters have to die, why? Well, after talking with some people, i came to the conclusion that some stories just can't have a happy ending. Because it would be unnatural. This is not a fixed rule, it all depends, but let me put this example: a friend of mine considered that the ending of the lord of the rings was good but it wasn't the ending that the saga deserved. She believes that frodo (and maybe sam) should have died. That is her opinion of course, but even if you are against frodo's death, think about it for a second, trying to detach yourself from your opinion for a bit. What makes a good story? The relationships developed in it. Was star wars really that succesful because of the special effects? They had an important role, ok, but if the plot wasn't good, i'm sure that it would be known nowadays as "that movie with amazing special effects... at that time". End of the story. After all the searching, the adventures, everything that frodo experiences... do you think that a happily ever after is the right end? I mean, can you see the protagonists, sitting at their living rooms, telling their story to their grandchildren over and over again? Maybe, but what if frodo had died? Then it would be like the culmination of those strong feelings, the fight. Its the big end, the good won against the evil, but what a victory. Even if the fighter dies, he won! We were getting ready for the final climax, like "woah, this has to be the shit", and then, after the fight with golum,,, frodo.. survives. He can go back happily to his house (in less time that the time employed to get there) and smoke, play cards, whatever he wants to do. Yeah, golum died, so wouldn't the "character death" thing be accomplished with its death? Maybe. My friend thinks that golum had to die but not alone. Anyway, probably i haven't convinced you of the necessity of death in some stories but it wasn't my goal to begin with. I'm happy just knowing that at least you gave it some thought. Anyway, back to potter. I think i mentioned it before, but anyway. After everything that has happened, we are expecting a hell of a final battle. And people dies in battles. Right now, Harry Potter is probably that book that needs a major character death to have a good ending. And everybody that have talked to me knows that i'm a "potter has to remain being the boy who lived" fan but unfortunately, i know a bit about how some stories work. Sirius and Dumbledore died in the 6th book, rowling can't, CAN'T write the final book without more deaths. It just would be "anti climatic". So yeh, it is more than "she just has to kill characters because she ran out of ideas". The question is.. which characters?

Our sessions...

Sat, 08 Apr 2006 12:16:19 GMT

I'm really tired. I have only slept... wait,, i don't even consider that as proper sleep. Yesterday night 3 friends and i went to my aunt's flat (my aunt is living abroad now) and spent one superb freaky-potter night. Our original plan was to watch the 4 movies in a row, but we got caught in our "debates" and we could only watch 3 of the 4 movies. If i write this entry today is to keep a record of our.. nightly activities and crazy theories (well,,, maybe not that crazy.. you have to bear in mind that it was 4 in the morning when most of those theories came out so...). Anyway, we started (while Juls was serving us her delicious salad) with our main preocupation (er.. yeah well, after what do we do with our lives and stuff... so,, the second preocupation), which is.. the 7th book.

(Paragraph division courtesy of Tado)

We agreed that there are a lot of possibilities that it starts with snape and draco, because that couple left us in a really bad cliffhanger. Tere thinks that if draco is not killed by the 1st chap, he won't be killed ever because she thinks that voldemort has no reason to keep him alive. Moreover, he failed. He wasn't capable of killing dumbledore and that was his mission. He needed to accomplish it if he wanted his family (and himself) to survive. I don't agree with her completely. I think that draco will probably fall in the next book because of his situation. Right now draco is like,, in the middle. He can't go back to voldemort because of his failure and he can't go to "the right side" because everybody considers him a killer (well, except harry but its not like he will go making a "draco-has-a-good-heart-at-the-very-very-bottom campaign). What do you do with a character so defined as him? He has belonged always to the "dark side" (of the moon, pink floyd), so its not like he can happily revert his thinking and embrace the order of phoenix and potter friends.For me, the easiest solution would be kill him but i know that rowling will do something with him before that, because that moment of hesitation with dumbledore deserves some kind of redemption for draco (even if she kills him right after that).

Another issue was who will get killed among the "right side". Desi thinks that harry may die and the rest agreed with her but its not likely because we believe that after all the suffering and all the pain he has been through harry deserves a happy life or at least a voldemort-and-freaks-free life. I think that if rowling was a woman who lived alone, without children and single, there would be more possibilities that harry dies. But since rowling is NOW a happy woman, with her children, loving husband, etc, etc.. she may give harry also a happy life, because as tere says, rowling is harry (not hermione nor mcgonahall). Desi also mentioned that rowling herself talked about the possibility of ron "not finishing this course" but since he finished it,, well,,, i still think he is in "danger" like hermione or neville. Everybody can die here.

And in the middle of all these thoughts, we watched the 1st and the 4th movie. With the 1st movie there were all smiles and "aawss". With the 4th movie... there were all drooling and.. er.. anyway. We weren't happy. Some friends of mine didn't like the 1st movie because they consider it like "very childish". But the truth is that, for a potter reader, its at least, a nice movie. Why? because of the many little details. For instance, have you ever noticed that the in the scene at the dursleys kitchen, when harry is opening his letter, dudley is wearing an uniform that is exactly as the one described by rowling? (source: desi). Can we find those details in the 4th movie? HA! We wish. Not only you can't find a frikkin detail, you MISS tons of basic elements. The 4th movie should have been titled: Ode to Harry Potter. I love the character and i think the actor that plays it is cute ;) but that doesn't mean that i wouldn't appreciate if he appeared less on the screen in favour of other characters. Ok, harry is the main protagonist, but there are a lot of details and "side stories" that aren't mentioned at all. And they are basic!. Oh yeah,,, and the HORROR of the absence of severus snape, lucius and draco malfoy. Specially draco, who says like 4 lines in the whole movie. Really sad. I won't mention the fact that they change the location of the weasley's seats during the quidditch tournament because i understand that warner didn't want to hire an actress to play the role of narcissa malfoy, who would only have a line during the whole movie. I mean, c'mon,, warner? they aren't that rich... Hiring another actress would be a waste of money and they are not in a position to do that.... (Being ironic now in case you didn't notice).

Anyway, i'm like mentally exhausted right now, so i will probably continue with this "little" summary of our meeting. I need to take a nap to restablish the blood circulation to my legs.