Jeph Jacques's comics discussion forums

  • 05 Dec 2021, 12:05
  • Welcome, Guest
Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 2 3 [4]   Go Down

Author Topic: Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows (w/Spoilers)  (Read 52501 times)

Johnny C

  • Awakened
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10,039
  • i wanna be yr slide dog
    • I AM A WHORE FOR MY OWN MUSIC
Re: Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows (w/Spoilers)
« Reply #150 on: 14 Aug 2007, 22:56 »

Well, that's basically the purpose of any death in books and movies. Any writer can get by with death, but it's always been a common story device to make the stakes seem higher. Headwig's death proved early on that really no one was safe. Headwig was something seemingly integral to Harry as a character, yet minor enough that you're really never expect Rowling to bother with it.

Hm?

No, death should be used as a thematic device rather than a deus ex machina sort of thing to get the plot moving or to wrench an emotion out of the reader. The difference between a writer who uses death gratuitously and one who uses death organically is that the deaths from the latter writer will always, always be more authentically moving.

The deaths of characters like Remus and Tonks were a bummer but nowhere near as crushing as the end of, say, Of Mice And Men for that reason.

I really liked the book. It was riveting, in fact. I read it in enormous chunks and could barely tear myself away from it whenever I picked it up. Rowling delivered on not only the loose story ends of the series but also the themes - love conquering death more than anything else (look how well it conqured death compared to the Hallows themselves) and greed, corruption and pride causing nothing but temporary power and permanent ruin.

The deaths were my only complaint, and not because there were too many or anything but because they sometimes just didn't feel like anything but death for death's sake - say what you will about "that's how it would happen in real life the deaths wouldn't be as important etc." but we are reading books about teenage wizards and witches. If I want realism I'll open a newspaper. If I want fiction I open a novel, and if someone important dies I better damn well feel something at their loss.
Logged
[02:12] yuniorpocalypse: let's talk about girls
[02:12] Thug In Kitchen: nooo

0bsessions

  • Born in a Nalgene bottle
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,314
  • Change Is Taking the Seventh Dick
    • Quiki
Re: Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows (w/Spoilers)
« Reply #151 on: 15 Aug 2007, 06:20 »

I would generally agree with you if it were serialized fiction, as opposed to a finite story. Death for death's sake is fine as far as I'm concerned in something that's coming to a close. There's nothing left to be done with these characters and they're being taken off the table regardless. I like seeing the message of death sometimes being gratuitous and without any real meaning. The fact it's realistic is a good way of connecting with the reader, I find.

In a comic or TV show, I stand more on your side of the argument. If there's no specific end in sight, you're crippling the overall story and taking away vast possibilities for the sake of a shocking moment (I.E.: Most deaths in comic books work this way and with changing writers, this is why nobody really stays dead in comics, not even Spider-Man's elderly aunt). The thing for me is that in a finite storyline, the characters have already served their purposes and nobody really needs to die unless it's the crux of the story. Of Mice and Men's a story I can't agree with your use of at all as the ending is the entire destination. The book simply doesn't work without that scene. The main reason I don't find that comparrison to hold water is the difference in cast size. Harry Potter went on for seven books and ammassed a huge cast of characters. With that many people, there's really no way to make death a deus ex outside of the character's initial motivation and backstory. Every single death from there on out becomes gratuitous, in a way. In the end, Sirius' death served absolutely no purpose. Cedric's death was entirely unnecessary. The absolute only two deaths that served any real purpose when it gets down to it is Fred (Motivator for Molly, which even then could be written off as her daughter was being attacked) and Dumbledore (Whose death was really such a large part of book six).

90% of death in modern literature is gratuitous and can be written around. The excessive deaths in this book served the purpose of showing that anything can happen and nobody's sake. It ramps up the suspense and keeps you turning the pages.
Logged
I've decided to give up psychology and become a peacock
Quote from: Tommydski in Gabbly
JON MADE ME GAY

Johnny C

  • Awakened
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10,039
  • i wanna be yr slide dog
    • I AM A WHORE FOR MY OWN MUSIC
Re: Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows (w/Spoilers)
« Reply #152 on: 15 Aug 2007, 09:20 »

I'd agree with you if I didn't feel the stakes were high enough to begin with, and certainly high enough to justify keeping it under the final tally of twenty-three deaths, of which six were actually "bad guys."

I'm not arguing that all the deaths were gratuitous. In fact I'd say there were more than two neccessary deaths in the seventh novel alone, and here are the characters I think Rowling had, thematically and storywise, to kill:

  • Burbage
  • Moody
  • Scrimegour
  • Gregorovitch & his unnamed German lady
  • Bagshot
  • Pettigrew, despite how "wtf" that moment was
  • Grindelwald
  • Fred Weasley
  • Snape
  • Nagini (duh)
  • Voldemort

Without those characters' deaths, the plot would have been a lot different. Burbage did the job for establishing that Hogwarts wasn't safe anymore. Moody's death not only established that nobody was safe but it also provided motivation for the characters to strike off on their own, as they didn't want to risk the lives of any more of their friends. Scrimegour was neccessary in order to establish Voldemort's ministry. Gregorovitch, as well as Grindelwald, made sense simply because Voldemort is straight-up murder incarnate. Bagshot didn't really need to be inhabited by Nagini but the results of that disaster put emphasis on how dangerous it was for Harry and Hermione to be going on their own and made Ron's return even more heartening. Pettigrew's death made sense from a continuity standpoint - if the hand was magic and from Voldemort it wouldn't take betrayal lightly. Even though, seriously, that was some weird voodoo shit. Fred Weasely is debatable - his death was motivation for Molly to go as hard as she did against Bellatrix, though from my understanding of the character (and I'm surely not alone on this) I'm pretty sure she would have done the same thing under any circumstances. Snape's death was easily the most important of the entire novel; not only was it a goldmine of character, but it gave Harry a new insight into the idea of the power of love, once again touching on the series' overarching theme and spurring Harry on to face Voldemort unafraid of death. If any character's death works in the Of Mice And Men analogy, it's either Snape or Voldemort - the entire series was heading towards something with those characters. Nagini, well, she was a Horcrux so she had to die for the book to end. And of course, Voldemort or Harry had to die. There were no two ways about that.

I'm going, of course, from the established idea that Voldemort is a cold-hearted murderer who does nothing but love killing, and therefore any of those deaths that were even tangentally related to him were justifiable.

But looking at that list, I'd say that the stakes were high enough. By Lupin and Tonks' deaths I was just thinking to myself, "well, shit" but the fact of the matter is that I already knew I was going to keep reading. I get the odd feeling that if you need the suspense ramped up by a death on every other page rather than the idea that a novel is hurtling towards an inevitable, final and epic conclusion then perhaps the novel is not your ideal medium.
Logged
[02:12] yuniorpocalypse: let's talk about girls
[02:12] Thug In Kitchen: nooo

pilsner

  • Scrabble hacker
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,497
Re: Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows (w/Spoilers)
« Reply #153 on: 15 Aug 2007, 10:48 »

Hey, what a great discussion.

I've been of the opinion from the beginning that JK wanted to make the war in her books seem like real war like Johnny said.  And in real war people die for stupid, stupid, arbitrary reasons.  If you're serving in Iraq, you're best friend can die tomorrow by stepping on a land mine.  No moral.  No thematic purpose.  Except for maybe the ubertheme: war is arbitrary and horrible because people you care for die for no reason at all.

Johnny, I take exception to your distinction between fiction and the newspaper because there have to be some elements of realism in a work -- even one this fantastic -- for us to care at all.  Otherwise it's just Looney Tunes -- Fred gets killed but comes back for the next episode. 

JK has gone on the record (see Lunchy's post) saying that Harry's owl's death represented the end of his childhood and the beginning of his adulthood.  But ultimately, that death and the death of all the other good guys that died in book seven were, I believe, meant to be arbitrary and superficially meaningless, because that is how JK perceives war, and that is how she wants us to perceive it.

In fact, there is something and fresh about a fantasy story that purposefully makes you regret the killing of a number of good people for no apparent reason, rather than loading every (rare death) of a friend of the protagonist with thematic and plot significance (see, e.g., every piece of crap David Edding's ever commited to paper).

Moreover, the whole arbitrary thing is catching on.

*SPOILER ALERT*

Remember in Serenity when Joss Whedon kills off the pilot dude suddenly, without any apparent plot or thematic reason, and somewhat arbitrarily (the cockpit glass could withstand space particles but not a balliste -- give me a break).  I had major flashbacks to that scene when I read that Tonks and Lupin were dead.

Even further, the good guys seem to suffer a lot more casualities than the bad guys.  Another theme: idealism has its costs.  If the Order had been as willing to use unforgiveable curses from the beginning (and yes I know Harry, McGonnagal and Mrs. Weasley all used them at one or more points -- but they definitely did not do it as often as say, Bellatrix) they probably could have lowered the causualty rates on their side.  But they didn't for moral reasons, and paid the price in blood.

So, in sum, even the meaningless deaths in Hallows arguably contribute to a larger theme that JK has repeatedly espoused: war is hell and good people die apparently meaningless deaths.  Now JK's stuff is pulp, it's not literature.  She's not making any point with all these deaths that Voltaire didn't make in Candide.  But she deserves kudos for introducing a relatively profound point in the context of a pulp work that happens to be the most popular series ever.
« Last Edit: 15 Aug 2007, 10:53 by pilsner »
Logged

Caiphana

  • Curry sauce
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 257
  • WHOOSH
    • dA
Re: Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows (w/Spoilers)
« Reply #154 on: 15 Aug 2007, 12:46 »

I have one thing to say.

Harry Potter is supposed to be a children's book. Allegedly. From the beginning, I thought it was a hell of a lot more like a teen book (hell, it started with a double murder), but still. It's a kid's book. It's not life. It's fiction. In real life, Harry, Ron, or Hermione would have died, people essential to the plot of life.

Also, Harry is an incredibly static character, has anyone noticed that? In seven years, he didn't really change. Doesn't that seem odd to you? You can't make ONE portion of the book (ra, ra, yay, death!) like life and ignore the rest. What the hell is up with that? Raise your hand if you didn't change at all from the age of eleven to seventeen. Okay, then.
Logged
..so long as the word "cookie" is in your country's vocabulary, it's an okay place to be.

Those who forget the past may be doomed to repeat it, but those who refuse to learn from the past and move on are fucking idiots.

pilsner

  • Scrabble hacker
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,497
Re: Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows (w/Spoilers)
« Reply #155 on: 15 Aug 2007, 12:54 »

JK's repeatedly said that she was writing books 1-7 for the same kid as he or she grew from 6-10 to 16-20.  So no, Book 7 is not a children's book oriented to the same age group that book 1 was.  Philosopher's Stone was children's fiction, whereas Hallows was more young adult.  It's the difference between Susan Cooper and Ursula K. Le Guin.

As for Harry being incredibly static, I only partially agree.  If the one gets the impression that Harry doesn't change much within any given book that's a consequence of Rowling's poor authorship.  Certainly in Book 5 for instance, it was Rowling's intention to have Harry go from angry, lonely, and scapegoating his friends to achieve a more profound understanding of friendship by book's end.  But as for your claim that Harry doesn't change throughout the series -- I couldn't disagree more.  Do you see the boy in Book 2 casting Crucio?
Logged

Caiphana

  • Curry sauce
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 257
  • WHOOSH
    • dA
Re: Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows (w/Spoilers)
« Reply #156 on: 15 Aug 2007, 13:12 »

Yes. Harry would have cast Crucio (if he knew what it was) in book two, if someone was messing with Ron or Mione.

Harry has always been driven by his emotions.

All I know is that I saw eight-year-olds with HP7. And HP7 was not a book for an eight-year-old.

It STARTED with a double murder. Started. Is that something a kid should be reading about?

Meh, whatever. I love HP. All the books. Some more than others. I just think JKR could have done better, that's all.
Logged
..so long as the word "cookie" is in your country's vocabulary, it's an okay place to be.

Those who forget the past may be doomed to repeat it, but those who refuse to learn from the past and move on are fucking idiots.

pilsner

  • Scrabble hacker
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,497
Re: Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows (w/Spoilers)
« Reply #157 on: 15 Aug 2007, 15:12 »

I'd have definite hesitations about my hypothetical eight year old reading hp7, or watching hp5 for that matter.  JKR could definitely have done better.  At the end of the day, she's not a very good writer.  Good enough, though.
Logged

Caiphana

  • Curry sauce
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 257
  • WHOOSH
    • dA
Re: Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows (w/Spoilers)
« Reply #158 on: 15 Aug 2007, 15:18 »

I agree with you wholeheartedly.

She did a great job creating a world that millions of people want to live in. That's something, that.
Logged
..so long as the word "cookie" is in your country's vocabulary, it's an okay place to be.

Those who forget the past may be doomed to repeat it, but those who refuse to learn from the past and move on are fucking idiots.

LeeZion

  • Larger than most fish
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 109
Re: Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows (w/Spoilers)
« Reply #159 on: 15 Aug 2007, 21:32 »

I don't understand why a lot of people say there's too much death in the Harry Potter books. If anything, what happened in book seven was very much like life, while J.K. Rowling pulled her punches for what came before. Does anyone really believe, at the end of book five, that six underage wizards could take on an army of fully grown Death Eaters all of them willing and able to kill for their cause and not one of the six ends up with any permanent damage?

The same thing happened in book six, but at least that had a logical explanation with the Felix Felicis. And Bill doesn't exactly get out unscathed.

As for one other comment, I have to disagree:

Harry is an incredibly static character, has anyone noticed that? In seven years, he didn't really change. Doesn't that seem odd to you?

He does change, and sometimes in remarkably subtle ways. Contrast the trip to Hogwarts in books five and books six. In book five, when Cho Chang sees him in the compartment with Neville and Luna, he thinks to himself that he wishes she'd seen him with cooler friends. But in book six, when Romilda Vane tries to tempt him away from Neville and Luna, he flatly tells her, "These are my friends." That's a lot of growing in a single year.

Similarly, in book five, when Harry is furious with Dumbledore, Phineas Nigellus has to lecture him, reminding him that following Dumbledore's instructions has never led him into any harm. But in book seven, after Dumbledore's insturctions HAS led him into harm, he defends Dumbledore against Aberforth's accusations that people would have been better off if Dumbledore hadn't got involved.

If there's anyone guilty of not changing, it's Her-Annoying-Me Granger.
Logged
"If now I have found grace in thy sight, put, I pray thee, thy hand under my thigh, and deal kindly and truly with me." (Genesis 47:29 KJV)

Johnny C

  • Awakened
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10,039
  • i wanna be yr slide dog
    • I AM A WHORE FOR MY OWN MUSIC
Re: Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows (w/Spoilers)
« Reply #160 on: 16 Aug 2007, 00:25 »

what happened in book seven was very much like life

Right, with the wizards.
Logged
[02:12] yuniorpocalypse: let's talk about girls
[02:12] Thug In Kitchen: nooo

Jimmy the Squid

  • Vulcan 3-D Chess Master
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,589
  • Feminist Killjoy
Re: Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows (w/Spoilers)
« Reply #161 on: 16 Aug 2007, 04:21 »

Dude he was talking about the centaurs.
Logged
Once I got drunk and threw up in the vegetable drawer of an old disused fridge while dressed as a cat

the_shankmaster

  • Bizarre cantaloupe phobia
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 228
  • Sweet Niblets
Re: Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows (w/Spoilers)
« Reply #162 on: 19 Aug 2007, 00:57 »


If there's anyone guilty of not changing, it's Her-Annoying-Me Granger.

That's true, but you've got to admit that if she were anything other than what she was, the boys wouldn't have stood a chance.
Logged
-I thought you said you put the "tennis" in "Tennessee!"
-I guess I kind of left it there.

SeanBateman

  • Guest
Re: Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows (w/Spoilers)
« Reply #163 on: 19 Aug 2007, 15:59 »

Caiphana you are really very stupid.

Also, I feel like some of the deaths on that list didn't actually happen. Wasn't Ted Tonks raising his grandson in the epilouge?
Logged

the_shankmaster

  • Bizarre cantaloupe phobia
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 228
  • Sweet Niblets
Re: Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows (w/Spoilers)
« Reply #164 on: 19 Aug 2007, 19:31 »

No.  Ted Tonks died.  His wife raised Teddy.
Logged
-I thought you said you put the "tennis" in "Tennessee!"
-I guess I kind of left it there.

pilsner

  • Scrabble hacker
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,497
Re: Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows (w/Spoilers)
« Reply #165 on: 19 Aug 2007, 23:20 »

Caiphana you are really very stupid.

Is this a joke?  Caiphana's comments in this and other threads have been thoughtful and thought-provoking.  The opposite of stupid.
Logged

SeanBateman

  • Guest
Re: Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows (w/Spoilers)
« Reply #166 on: 20 Aug 2007, 05:37 »

Caiphana you are really very stupid.

Is this a joke?  Caiphana's comments in this and other threads have been thoughtful and thought-provoking.  The opposite of stupid.

No, they've been reactionary and self indulgent. Which is stupid.
Logged

pilsner

  • Scrabble hacker
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,497
Re: Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows (w/Spoilers)
« Reply #167 on: 20 Aug 2007, 07:01 »

"Reactionary"?  Relating to reaction or ultraconservative politics?  I do not think this word means what you think it means.  As for self-indulgent, well this is an internet forum -- all the posts are self-indulgent.  It's not like we're curing cancer here.

I guess we're going to have to agree to disagree on the merits and profundity of Caiphana's posts.
Logged

Lines

  • Awakened
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10,330
Re: Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows (w/Spoilers)
« Reply #168 on: 20 Aug 2007, 07:38 »

It STARTED with a double murder. Started. Is that something a kid should be reading about?

No offense, I'm just kind of tired with people using this argument. The book didn't actually start with a double murder, but the aftermath. Rowling never really really showed us exactly how they died until book 7, even though we start hearing/seeing glimpses in book 3. The characters are in an upheaval because Harry's parents were killed, but they didn't go into graphic detail about it. Really, I saw this as a series to begin when you're 11 and grow up with, making the first few books suitable for children, but the other books you read as you get older. If I had an 8 year old, I would surely let them read the first two books and feel fine, but I'd be more worried with book 7, because that one definitely isn't a children's book. And considering Rowling meant them as books to basically grow up with, just because book 1 is a kids book does not mean that book 7 has to be.
Logged
:grumpypuss: :grumpypuss: :grumpypuss:

Caiphana

  • Curry sauce
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 257
  • WHOOSH
    • dA
Re: Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows (w/Spoilers)
« Reply #169 on: 20 Aug 2007, 12:25 »

Is this a joke?  Caiphana's comments in this and other threads have been thoughtful and thought-provoking.  The opposite of stupid.
No, they've been reactionary and self indulgent. Which is stupid.
*reads and shrugs* I don't care if you don't like me, sweetheart.

pilsner- hmmm. Thank you for the defense.

Linds- I see where you're coming from, and it makes sense. I keep thinking of myself and putting myself in the shoes of the little ones. I feel BAD for the kids who are currently eight, starting the HP series. They know that all the books are done, but they can't read all of them now? Why not? AUGH!
« Last Edit: 20 Aug 2007, 12:28 by Caiphana »
Logged
..so long as the word "cookie" is in your country's vocabulary, it's an okay place to be.

Those who forget the past may be doomed to repeat it, but those who refuse to learn from the past and move on are fucking idiots.

SeanBateman

  • Guest
Re: Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows (w/Spoilers)
« Reply #170 on: 20 Aug 2007, 14:39 »

"Reactionary"?  Relating to reaction or ultraconservative politics?  I do not think this word means what you think it means.  As for self-indulgent, well this is an internet forum -- all the posts are self-indulgent.  It's not like we're curing cancer here.

I guess we're going to have to agree to disagree on the merits and profundity of Caiphana's posts.

No I'm pretty confident in my wording. Thanks though.
Logged

LeeZion

  • Larger than most fish
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 109
Re: Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows (w/Spoilers)
« Reply #171 on: 21 Aug 2007, 16:35 »

Uh, since this is a Harry Potter forum, we need to get the conversation back on topic. I'll start.

OMG TEDDY AND VICTOIRE ARE MAKING TEH KISSES LOL
Logged
"If now I have found grace in thy sight, put, I pray thee, thy hand under my thigh, and deal kindly and truly with me." (Genesis 47:29 KJV)

bryanthelion

  • Beyond Thunderdome
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 582
  • I'm a lion, and I'm flyin'.
    • My blog
Re: Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows (w/Spoilers)
« Reply #172 on: 22 Aug 2007, 07:50 »

Ginny and Harry did it  :-o
Logged
"Cause I might be a werewolf...but why would an inquisitor of the pope be in a webcomic forum?"

Caiphana

  • Curry sauce
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 257
  • WHOOSH
    • dA
Re: Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows (w/Spoilers)
« Reply #173 on: 22 Aug 2007, 11:53 »

They did it at least three times, yes.
Logged
..so long as the word "cookie" is in your country's vocabulary, it's an okay place to be.

Those who forget the past may be doomed to repeat it, but those who refuse to learn from the past and move on are fucking idiots.

Lines

  • Awakened
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10,330
Re: Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows (w/Spoilers)
« Reply #174 on: 22 Aug 2007, 12:42 »

Well, that is how you make babies.

Here's something I'm curious about - Whatever happened to Mr. Lestrange? Did he die in Azkaban or what? I think I missed that and I noticed he hasn't been around...
Logged
:grumpypuss: :grumpypuss: :grumpypuss:

bryanthelion

  • Beyond Thunderdome
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 582
  • I'm a lion, and I'm flyin'.
    • My blog
Re: Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows (w/Spoilers)
« Reply #175 on: 22 Aug 2007, 13:13 »

I mean they like did it

Also, look at my quote for my impression of the book
Logged
"Cause I might be a werewolf...but why would an inquisitor of the pope be in a webcomic forum?"

Caiphana

  • Curry sauce
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 257
  • WHOOSH
    • dA
Re: Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows (w/Spoilers)
« Reply #176 on: 22 Aug 2007, 13:17 »

...Yeah; they had sex. What's your point, kid?
Logged
..so long as the word "cookie" is in your country's vocabulary, it's an okay place to be.

Those who forget the past may be doomed to repeat it, but those who refuse to learn from the past and move on are fucking idiots.

bryanthelion

  • Beyond Thunderdome
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 582
  • I'm a lion, and I'm flyin'.
    • My blog
Re: Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows (w/Spoilers)
« Reply #177 on: 22 Aug 2007, 15:19 »

Hmm

My point was, Chainsaws arent in hogwarts...

I dunno, I was kinda hoping that Harry would die. Then Ginny would become an auror. But NO that didnt happen, they had to kill voldemort! Which was lame.
Logged
"Cause I might be a werewolf...but why would an inquisitor of the pope be in a webcomic forum?"

Johnny C

  • Awakened
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10,039
  • i wanna be yr slide dog
    • I AM A WHORE FOR MY OWN MUSIC
Re: Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows (w/Spoilers)
« Reply #178 on: 22 Aug 2007, 16:48 »

Also, I feel like some of the deaths on that list didn't actually happen.

Same here. Which is why they shouldn't have happened.
Logged
[02:12] yuniorpocalypse: let's talk about girls
[02:12] Thug In Kitchen: nooo
Pages: 1 2 3 [4]   Go Up