[GiRTh]

Originally Posted by 08marsh

Wasn't that the point of the pseudonym though? She wanted to have the experience of reading reviews that just commented on her work as its own piece as opposed to something to be compared to Harry Potter.

I seriously doubt she craves a repeat of the Potter success, only a fool would think they'd repeatedly get that. Even the most talented of writer's or critically acclaimed ones tend to have 1 hugely successful piece that they become known for and is most remembered.

She has all the money she could ever need, fame and her name in the history books for all the records they broke. If she was still concerned about chasing the next big thing I'd be a bit concerned. You don't have to continually top such a huge success.

Also her last two novels hit the best seller lists and although not wildly popular still won favourable reviews even before she was revealed as the author so it's not like she's a failure.

I would imagine that only the young cast were glad she ended the series. They can have bigger success but she wont. Few authors have ever reached the level of success she has achieved. That brings me back to my question why did she end it so completely? There is little scope for any future books by her but I still think we'll see something in a few years when she's not getting the same level of success.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by GiRTh

I would imagine that only the young cast were glad she ended the series. They can have bigger success but she wont. Few authors have ever reached the level of success she has achieved. That brings me back to my question why did she end it so completely? There is little scope for any future books by her but I still think we'll see something in a few years when she's not getting the same level of success.

But that's what I'm saying, she hit such a high that there isn't much that could ever top it so why's it such a bad thing that she won't? I doubt she cares, she has that ultimate achievement, the money and the awards so I doubt there's anything that she craves for in that respect and can now enjoy the rest of her life with the benefits of that success.

Maybe she ended it completely because she says she always planned those 7 parts and ended it the way she wanted. I don't think she needs to continue doing it, she writes her other books.

As for the cast, I disagree. They'll be forever known as the kids from Harry Potter no matter what they do. Daniel Radcliffe has more potential than the others to build a big career and be seen as more than that with his diverse acting roles but overall they will be the Hogwarts kids forever.

[MTVN]

Well I guess she ended it so completely because that's how it was always intended to be, it's a series with a very definite beginning and end; from the start of Hogwarts in first year through his school career there ending after his seventh and final year. Part of the problem with writing children's books are that you can't drag them out over too long because your audience grows up and will eventually grow out of them, she paced the books well so that the readers will have grown up at the same time as the books characters did but by the seventh they had fully matured really and the story of their childhood was at an end so it was a right time to bring the whole thing to a close

[GiRTh]

Originally Posted by 08marsh

But that's what I'm saying, she hit such a high that there isn't much that could ever top it so why's it such a bad thing that she won't? I doubt she cares, she has that ultimate achievement, the money and the awards so I doubt there's anything that she craves for in that respect and can now enjoy the rest of her life with the benefits of that success.

Maybe she ended it completely because she says she always planned those 7 parts and ended it the way she wanted. I don't think she needs to continue doing it, she writes her other books.

As for the cast, I disagree. They'll be forever known as the kids from Harry Potter no matter what they do. Daniel Radcliffe has more potential than the others to build a big career and be seen as more than that with his diverse acting roles but overall they will be the Hogwarts kids forever.

I disagree. \Rowling may not want that level of success but others will question why she's never achieved that kind of success again. I also think Emma Watson is the most likely to be the biggest star. In fact, it can be argued that she is already the biggest star.

EDIT. I think there is this feeling that Daniel Radcliffe is not as good an actor as the other two. I think they will get more interesting roles and Emma is already a bit of a female fashion icon. I think her level of fame will only increase over the years and there is also the feeling that she is the best actor of the three.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by GiRTh

I disagree. \Rowling may not want that level of success but others will question why she's never achieved that kind of success again. I also think Emma Watson is the most likely to be the biggest star. In fact, it can be argued that she is already the biggest star.

I think she'll grow into a huge celebrity, but acting wise, Hermione she will forever be. Radcliffe seems a little more of a diverse actor even though I was never a fan of him. He's done a load of acting work, she's still known for being a high profile celeb. I meant Radcliffe has more potential to grow and grow with his acting career outside of Potter, Watson has become more of a fashion/media personality.

As for Rowling's success, so what if people question it? They'd be dumb to question it, how many people strike such a success on multiple occasions? As you say, very few writer's reach that level at all never mind once.

That's not so much exposing her as talentless but a fairly natural thing to happen. If you start out at the top, everything else (no matter how good it is) will only be in its shadow. The books were ended too because the story had a beginning, a middle and an end. It wasn't like The Famous Five or something which can go on forever because they're standalone stories with characters that never age, it was one story split into 7 parts.

[King Gizzard]

I think Harry/Ron shoulda gone out with Luna. Ginny was too much of a pointless character for Harry and there was no chemistry in the film version

[King Gizzard]

Maybe not luna that probably would have been a bit weird

[MTVN]

Should have just stuck with Cho

[GiRTh]

Originally Posted by 08marsh

I think she'll grow into a huge celebrity, but acting wise, Hermione she will forever be. Radcliffe seems a little more of a diverse actor even though I was never a fan of him. He's done a load of acting work, she's still known for being a high profile celeb. I meant Radcliffe has more potential to grow and grow with his acting career outside of Potter, Watson has become more of a fashion/media personality.

As for Rowling's success, so what if people question it? They'd be dumb to question it, how many people strike such a success on multiple occasions? As you say, very few writer's reach that level at all never mind once.

That's not so much exposing her as talentless but a fairly natural thing to happen. If you start out at the top, everything else (no matter how good it is) will only be in its shadow.

If Rowling has no big a success as Harry Potter then she will be considered a one hit wonder. She may not be bothered by that but I think people will say it.

[Glenn.]

When Oprah interviewed her she said herself that she'd never top Harry Potter and wouldn't want to.
The Potter Universe is still growing strong 7yrs after the last book was published. Theme parks spanning the globe, Pottermore and the spin off movies in development.

I think its a case that she lived with the story and it's characters for so long, that she herself will never be rid of it and she shouldn't be. It's her world or more importantly her version of that world.

The press and critics are always going to compare what she does to Harry, that's why she released her newest novel under a different name. The same novel won critics over before they discovered that she'd wrote it.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by GiRTh

If Rowling has no big a success as Harry Potter then she will be considered a one hit wonder. She may not be bothered by that but I think people will say it.

Well they can but that would be trying to put her down and criticise her for no reason.

She's not a one hit wonder because her subsequent work has hit the bestseller lists and gotten great reviews, it's just Harry Potter will always be the biggest success which of course it will be. She can't write a worldwide phenomenon time and time again. No reflection on her as a writer, it's impossible.

A one hit wonder constitutes doing one thing that makes you famous and then doing nothing or vanishing afterwards. She's not done that.

Having one thing you're the most well known for is not what one hit wonder means.

Al Pacino will be forever known as the guy from The Godfather and is probably his biggest success, but he still has some solid work outside of it. That doesn't make him a one hit wonder, it just means The Godfather is his most well known work.

Jk Rowling's writing itself isn't the best literature in the world but I find she's a solid storyteller.

[GiRTh]

Originally Posted by 08marsh

Well they can but that would be trying to put her down and criticise her for no reason.

She's not a one hit wonder because her subsequent work has hit the bestseller lists and gotten great reviews, it's just Harry Potter will always be the biggest success which of course it will be. She can't write a worldwide phenomenon time and time again. No reflection on her as a writer, it's impossible.

A one hit wonder constitutes doing one thing that makes you famous and then doing nothing or vanishing afterwards. She's not done that.

Having one thing you're the most well known for is not what one hit wonder means.

Al Pacino will be forever known as the guy from The Godfather and is probably his biggest success, but he still has some solid work outside of it.

I dont people consider Al Pacino to be the guy from he Godfather. He has a huge Cv of work and is known for being more than an actor who does commercial movies.

You may not consider her a one hit wonder but I think others will always compare her work to Potter, obviously. Which brings me back to why did she leave so little room for future projects?. I think that will end up being a poor decision by her.

[Glenn.]

There was no call to carry the story on, that's why she ended it. The series spanned Harry's story. It had a beginning, a middle and came to a natural end.

Have you read the books by any chance Girth?

[GiRTh]

Originally Posted by Glenn

There was no call to carry the story on, that's why she ended it. The series spanned Harry's story. It had a beginning, a middle and came to a natural end.

Have you read the books by any chance Girth?

I have read the books, yes.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by GiRTh

I dont people consider Al Pacino to be the guy from he Godfather. He has a huge Cv of work and is known for being more than an actor who does commercial movies.

You may not consider her a one hit wonder but I think others will always compare her work to Potter, obviously. Which brings me back to why did she leave so little room for future projects?. I think that will end up being a poor decision by her.

Because, as I say, it was 1 story. Not a series of books based around a character and then she suddenly decided to end it. She came up with a story that was 7 parts. She wrote the 7 parts and the story came to a close. Hence my The Famous Five comparison earlier. It wasn't designed as something that could just go on and on.

It's not closed that she could never return to it, have you read them?

Of course people will always compare it to Potter, what I'm saying is that that's not the definition of a one hit wonder. Hence my Al Pacino comment. He has a big CV but The Godfather is his most well known work around the world. Does it mean it's the only thing of note he's done or will do? No, it simply means it's his most famous part.

JK Rowling has written subsequent books and they've been bestsellers and won over the critics, that's not a failure just because they didn't become a worldwide phenomenon.

It just smacks of trying to find fault and knock her down. Like people were waiting to say "Oh look, lightning hasn't struck twice so she's nothing". No matter what any of the people who were involved with Potter go on to do, Potter will be their most well known work for a long time to come. Doesn't mean it's the best thing they'll ever do or they won't achieve anything else but because Potter is such a huge franchise and so high profile that very little could ever top it.

[Glenn.]

Then surely you understand that the story had to end where it did?

I think if she wanted to she could write more, she said herself she has enough in her head for at least another two.

If she really wanted to milk it she could have a whole new set of adventures for his kids at Hogwarts.

[GiRTh]

Originally Posted by 08marsh

Because, as I say, it was 1 story. Not a series of books based around a character and then she suddenly decided to end it. She came up with a story that was 7 parts. She wrote the 7 parts and the story came to a close. Hence my The Famous Five comparison earlier. It wasn't designed as something that could just go on and on.

It's not closed that she could never return to it, have you read them?

Of course people will always compare it to Potter, what I'm saying is that that's not the definition of a one hit wonder. Hence my Al Pacino comment. He has a big CV but The Godfather is his most well known work around the world. Does it mean it's the only thing of note he's done or will do? No, it simply means it's his most famous part.

JK Rowling has written subsequent books and they've been bestsellers and won over the critics, that's not a failure just because they didn't become a worldwide phenomenon.

It just smacks of trying to find fault and knock her down. Like people were waiting to say "Oh look, lightning hasn't struck twice so she's nothing". No matter what any of the people who were involved with Potter go on to do, Potter will be their most well known work for a long time to come. Doesn't mean it's the best thing they'll ever do or they won't achieve anything else but because Potter is such a huge franchise and so high profile that very little could ever top it.

Originally Posted by Glenn

Then surely you understand that the story had to end where it did?

I think if she wanted to she could write more, she said herself she has enough in her head for at least another two.

If she really wanted to milk it she could have a whole new set of adventures for his kids at Hogwarts.

I didnt say any of those things about her. I think she's an adequate writer who got lucky.

As for her writing more. I cant think where she can go. Maybe a prequel telling the Tom Marvalo story but that is not a Harry Potter book per se but more a book set in that world. There's plenty of scope for that al la Lord of the Rings but I was surprised she ended the Harry story so completely. I understand that what she planned but I still found it surprising.

[Kizzy]

No, I don't think they should have got together bit disappointed anyone did tbh, I wanted harry to end up with luna though really.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by GiRTh

I didnt say any of those things about her. I think she's an adequate writer who got lucky.

As for her writing more. I cant think where she can go. Maybe a prequel telling the Tom Marvalo story but that is not a Harry Potter book per se but more a book set in that world. There's plenty of scope for that al la Lord of the Rings but I was surprised she ended the Harry story so completely. I understand that what she planned but I still found it surprising.

I didn't mean to insinuate you did. I was referring to your "what people might say" scenarios.

As for Harry's story, that's as it was always intended. It was never meant to be an ongoing thing where she could pick it up and write another at any time. It was one story with a definitive ending and it did end.

There was no way to leave Harry's story open unless she didn't end the story she started and dragged it out, which is no good.

Of course she was lucky. Everyone who reaches that level of fame/success/achievement is lucky because it takes more than talent to get you there. Lightning doesn't strike twice, so expecting that run of luck twice or more over is impossible. She struck gold with a story that captured the imagination of millions which goes beyond the general level of her writing. Her first book it was too so it's not surprising it's not perfect.

But I liked that the writing style improved and grew with each book. Compare book 1 with 7 and you see the stark difference. Having that level of pressure with your first published story must be incredibly daunting with huge pressures.

[Glenn.]

She's currently working on bringing Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them to the big screen. It will have nothing to do with Harry Potter the only thing tying the two is the world it's set in.

[Ninastar]

Ron/Hermione were always meant to be together IMO, I totally think she's just saying this to get the HP hype up a little bit. Just like the Dumbledore is gay thing she said

also, I never liked Harry/Ginny either... It was kinda just thrown into the books and then on screen it was even worse. No chemistry at all. I'm not sure who I wanted Harry to end up, but I did think he was cute with Cho when she wasn't a crazy bitch. Luna too, but in the books there wasn't much to go on. I liked them on screen though.

[Marsh.]

Dumbledore being gay was quite obvious though when you couple it with the final book.

[Z]

Cho Chang in the film version was so jarring, that thick Glaswegian accent totally ruined the character for me, just seemed so at odds with the plummy English accents that the others have (before anyone mentions McGonagall, I know, but hers is a very slight Scottish accent) - totally took me out of the world of Harry Potter whenever she was on camera speaking.

I thought the epilogue was really badly done, in the final book, like clumsily tacked on at the end and just seemed like a hasty way to tie up loose ends and create a future for her characters when the book should really have been very final and have ended after their seventh year at Hogwarts.

[Marc]

Harry and Hermoine should have been an item instead they both married gingers.

Although I guess the scenario JK Rowling came up with makes them all sort of related.

[Z]

Yeah I think that's more or less why she chose to end it in that way, so they were like one big happy family rather than Harry and Hermione being like James and Lily and then Ron having no one.