This sickens me

[weemadando]

My complaint was that she does draw so heavily on existing literary and cultural sources that it seems wrong for her to criticise someone ripping her off.

I have little respect for her as an author, but concede that her books are an excellent tool for getting children reading and shitting fundies at the same time.

Have you read them? Or are you just saying this because her books are a fad and therefore must be crap?

Not yet, but Sarah is threatening me with repercussions if I continue dissing them without reading them. I've got to finish "Gangster" by Lorenzo Carcaterra first though.

And by all accounts the film stuck by the book fairly closely so I don't see how I can be criticised for citing it.

[Zaia]

Not yet, but Sarah is threatening me with repercussions if I continue dissing them without reading them. I've got to finish "Gangster" by Lorenzo Carcaterra first though.

And by all accounts the film stuck by the book fairly closely so I don't see how I can be criticised for citing it.

Good. I knew I loved her for some reason... (J/K, Sar if you ever read this )

How can you complain about her (J.K.R.) bitching about what is going on? They are her words! I still stand by the fact that her WORDS are her book--the movie is a completely different entity. Sure, it was close to the book, but a hell of a lot was left out. Can you say that LotR:TFOTR was close to the book, so therefore anything that resembles that movie must be plagiarism on the book? Of course not. You can't say that because Harry Potter reminds you of other stories (Hello? Gandalf--Merlin? Does that qualify as plagiarism?) that it is plagiarism. It simply isn't.

Maybe next time you should be completely informed before you formulate an opinion on the subject matter and entitle a thread "This Sickens Me." Just a suggestion.

[Mr Bean]

Not yet, but Sarah is threatening me with repercussions if I continue dissing them without reading them. I've got to finish "Gangster" by Lorenzo Carcaterra first though.

Ahh one who discussis without having acutal read the books? Baad weemadando

And as Zaia said and then you started a topic about it without haveing acutal read the books? Tisk Tisk

As for the movie having both a Aunt in the Publishing Business and a Uncle with a few to many kids I had the Joy(*Cough Cough) of taking them to the Potter Movie at the time it was released and while it was close to the book in all honsetly I have to say it was not the same

[Knife]

The first trick is to get them to like reading long enough to read good books. I don't think that anyone here advocates getting kids to read the Comunist Manifesto just to get kids to read, but if a kid will read a silly book or something that wouldn't appeal to say, a 18 year old, then atleast they are reading and hopefully like doing it enough to continue reading for many years to come.

The good thing about the Harry Potter books is that they are interesting to the kids and good books of their own right. I am very much into literature and can tolerate very little trash, and I thoroughly enjoyed the series. The only people I've heard who have had problems with 7-year-old children attempting to read 400-page books were the psycho-Christians who thought their kids were being brainwashed into Satanism.

Well I have read the books and thought that they were pretty good. I'm not a fanatic like my wife and kids but I will read anyother books that come out in the series. And the psycho Christians just make me giggle.


Any derogatory remark were sarcastic jibs at punkgothhippie's opinion about what people read when their kids, changes them. I took the comment as a negitive and decided to be sarcastic.