Loren’s review of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows (Harry Potter, #7) > Likes and Comments

90 likes · 
Comments (showing 1-37 of 37) (37 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Hannah (last edited Aug 25, 2016 12:01PM) (new)

Hannah I really agree with you on your total synopsis, especially about people dying. I think by the time you get to LupinTonks, you are reading so fast to get to the real ending, it is aniclimactic. It's sad, yes, but it becomes a detail, not someone's friends dying. And the epiloge is way too predictable. While it was interesting that they didn't return to Hogwarts, there was no conflict of rules or sneaking around to get excited about. Sneaking around in the forest was dull, and what's with the 007 gear Ron got from Dumbledor? The mechanism fits the needs of the plot too neatly.


message 2: by Nicole (last edited Aug 25, 2016 12:06PM) (new)

Nicole Yes, Yes, and Yes. Thanks.


message 3: by Karen (last edited Aug 25, 2016 12:24PM) (new)

Karen i was surprised to find how totally on the same page i am with you! i really think rowling bowed to pressure, having harry survive. there is no way the general readership (esp american) would have taken it well otherwise (and horrors -- how would they have made the movie version?!!). anyway, whatever her motivation could conceivably have been, the epilogue was truly unforgivable.


message 4: by Jyv (new)

Jyv I agree totally and this is why I gave the book three stars instead of 4 (a pity we can't give 3.5). It was rather a disappointing anti-climax but not as depressing as the previous two books.


message 5: by Scott (new)

Scott Come on people think about it. The book ended as well as it possibly could have. If Harry had died the average rating would be about a 2. I thought the most interesting thing about your little rant was the part about harry never useing the killing curse. He was never going to use the killing curse from the beggining. As proved when harry forgives Dumbuldore, he is not a person who can kill. He just is not the type of person who would kill if he had the choise.


message 6: by Loren (last edited Apr 10, 2008 10:46AM) (new)

Loren Harway Thanks for your opinion Scott.

Just because the average American would have been distraught with Harry's death doesn't mean it would have meant bad reviews and even if it did that doesn't mean the book is bad it just means those people are morons who can't appreciate a good bittersweet ending. Also, if you're going to kill someone - YOU LEAVE THEM DEAD, you don't bring them back to life again (and badly)that's just stupid.

Onto your take on the killing curse: If JK never intended to have Harry end Voldemort's life then she shouldn't have introduced a Prophecy in book 5 that blatently indicates Harry will kill him - That's just misleading. You think it's okay for Harry to strip people of their free will but not kill them? Either way he's lost his moral standing. JK needs to think about Harry's psyche; he's not a little boy anymore and he's seen some really dark things, let's face it, he's not completely okay in the head - JK's obsession with maintaining his purity (by not killing) is an obvious submission to the American people who went up in arms upon hearing Harry might die.

Lastly, The book did not 'end as well as it possibly could have'. As you probably know JK released a Q&A session which answered (deliciously) all the questions that should have bloody well been answered in the epilogue!




message 7: by Melissa (new)

Melissa I have to agree with you on all points. :(

I love HP and everything, but really, fanfiction (at least certain ones) are so much better...

And one other point I want to add is that, in my opinion, Ron and Hermione should have had more to do with Voldemort's death. They've been there throughout the whole entire thing helping Harry, and lending their support..some more than others *coughs*, but whatever.

I can see Harry going off on his own, but I also envision Ron or Hermione or both helping him kill Voldy.

And another point I want to make is Harry's relationship with Ginny. I do not hate Ginny but I just don't think she's the best choice for Harry. For one, Ginny has been loving what she thinks to be Harry the hero since before she was 10. Uhm, hello...creepy anyone? And in the books, she is never really fully developed as a character, and has almost never been in the front lines of the book with Harry. So when did Ginny ever get the chance to get to know Harry, or Harry get to know Ginny for that matter? Ginny's been more of a minor character since the second book, until she's suddenly thrust into the front lines in the sixth book as Harry's girlfriend. And there is a million other points of why their relationship is not the greatest, but I'm not here to discuss about the relationships...

Hermione and Harry. In a tent. Where they might die. And both in need of comfort. And nothing at all happens? Pshh. Yeah right. They're both teenagers with hormones you know. Even if it's not full out relations, I'm sure there would be someone /thinking/ of it.

And Harry not comforting Hermione when she's crying in the tent? Ha.

I've only read DH once though, just so I know what happens, so I might not be entirely clear on these things. *shrugs* Whatever.


message 8: by Loren (new)

Loren Harway I agree on the killing Voldemort united angle. I, too, cannot speak to whether or not the relationships were unrealistic as I haven't read it since the release.


message 9: by Anna (new)

Anna personally i think it was an awsome book and its just a matter of opinion but i think it was really good i think that its dumb to criticise it like that and you cant include every single detail about everything after a death scene. Also about Ginny, I think that J.K just had to concentrate on one thing, that happened to be Harry, the horcruxes and voldemort she cant concentrate on relationships alot AND still have a good story about Harry and his quest thing.


message 10: by Loren (new)

Loren Harway What exactly about the critiquing style did you disapprove of? I acknowledge that the frantic situation called for a lack of detail surrounding The Deaths but I still think the treatment of these beloved characters was fairly poor and lacked the romanticism that JKR usually brings to such tragedies.
I didn't say anything about Ginny in my review so I don't know what you're talking about.
Finally, harry the horcruxes and voldemort are three things and Harry - for the most part - was handled well. Just because you bring focus to a specific plot point doesn't mean it's a good idea, as I think The Hallows proved.



message 11: by Henry (new)

Henry You guys this was a great book and although I totally disagree with you Loren I see where you are coming from also if anybody was wondering "kings cross" (although that might not be what it was that was just what Harry saw it as) is the place for souls to cross to the other side (as explained by Nearly Headless Nick in book 5) and Dumbledore was not resurrected he was just waiting there.


message 12: by Anna (new)

Anna i totally agree, i mean i was looking forward to something awesome. that was a bad way to end the series. it was a good series too! what happened?


message 13: by Tifnie (new)

Tifnie Just a quick reminder to all readers of Harry Potter - this series was originally intended for kids ages 8-15ish. Prior to that, kids had C.S. Lewis (all of 150 pages), Roald Dahl, and other silly novels. What is fabulous about Harry Potter is that you will see an 8 or 9 year old sitting down to read an 800 page book. Prior to HR - that was unheard of. Not to mention that J.K. Rowling brought complexity to young readers far beyond C.S. Lewis or any other young adventure book. She also went somewhere with her stories that few sought possible; she introduced them to multiply journeys, developed multiple characters, multiple plots and twists and then (most amazing yet) is with each book she allowed her young readers maturity, self-education, and above all a quest for more.
Yes, to a more mature reader, HP is lacking on different levels. But to a young reader it filled the void of other fantasy/adventure books.


message 14: by Loren (new)

Loren Harway I agree with you Tifnie, but don't you feel that JK should cater to her existing audience over newcomers? I began reading Harry Potter in its first year as a seven-year old, and I was thrilled to see it mature as I did. You can't expect any fans from the beginning to be less than seventeen or eighteen by the end.
They aren't kids any longer. And not to be massively petty or anything but - it was Ours first.


message 15: by Rachel (new)

Rachel Allen Completely agreed. It was hard to sit through, and the epilogue was rediculous. I can't help but feel that Ginny was introduced just because they didn't want Harry in a front-page relationship. Anything beyond light kissing must have been behind the scenes. If it had been Hermione in Ginny's place, this would be a much different book.

My advice to all my friends was to not read the last few pages. It didn't provide a resolution at all, just an unimaginitive look at the "future" where all three main characters turn their backs on the things they once believed in.

I wish this book had captivated me in the same way the others did. JKR just seemed to have a list of people to kill or use and went through it as quickly as possible by the end. Stupid mistake.


message 16: by Gary (last edited Apr 06, 2010 02:07PM) (new)

Gary HP was a good enough book....But Harry should have never come back alive. If Voldemort had killed him in the forest, How could he come back? I thought no spell could reanimate the dead? And if Harry was given a choice, why not others? JK had also made the book into a slaughter-house. There are just pointless deaths. An owl dying? It just made her look as though she killed people off to make the story seem grown up, like the kid who's reading it feel he knows how to handle adult books. Also, the book lacked some depth. I rated it 5/5 dispite this. Also, Harry and Hermione were alone in the tent for some time. Nothing happend? Nothing?? And the scar hurting thing was somewhat annoying. But, I liked the book.


Summersunshine334 I agree that the elder wand should have been included but I really did feel the sadness when characters died. I think you are wrong about dumbledore in the chapter kings cross.


message 18: by Darcie (new)

Darcie Grunblatt Naw. HP7 is the best book ever. I do agree on the fact that the epilogue wasn't so great. There is this designer that says "once you put on an outfit stare at it in the mirror and take one thing off." I think the epilogue should've been taken off.


message 19: by Rhys (new)

Rhys Galloway I to enjoyed the book and like you said the whole refraction of the spell was pretty weak harry could not have avoided killing someone with one of the curses this entire series its just anticlimactic. I personally thought the epilogue was OK but hey thats just my opinion. Most of the book was great though and I would recommend this book to anyone who likes fantasy.


message 20: by Judith (new)

Judith Finally someoe who agrees with me. I have been dodging evil curses since I made my feelings known. I agree with all of your comments.


message 21: by Elfiegirl (new)

Elfiegirl Jeez.....way to down the harry potter 7 book!


Dondre ~what in tha name of everything magical!?!~ I'm still flabbergasted that VOLDEMORT (shudder), THE DARK LORD,...is killed by a simple reflecting spell


message 23: by Tori (new)

Tori Gronemeyer Yeah, um, to you people who keep asking, "Why did she bring Harry back from the dead and not others?" Were others attached to Voldemort like he was? No. Harry was alive while Voldemort was alive. It's that simple. Harry did not attempt to kill Voldemort in the forest and that's why he was able to still be alive. BECAUSE VOLDEMORT WAS STILL ALIVE!!! Plus with Ginny, there are plenty of times where he "hangs out" with her. JKR just doesn't elaborate. It's the things like, "had a good time playing Quidditch with Ron, Ginny, Hermione etc." and similar lines. He still spent time with her, enough time to know her and for it to be normal that he should realize that he's in love with her. Gosh, you people are all too citical for my tastes.


message 24: by Joe (new)

Joe @Dondre - maybe because his soul is ripped in 7 pieces (one of which he just destroyed himself)


message 25: by Lindsey (new)

Lindsey Wait—you were rooting for Harry to use Avada Kedavra? Never mind, I don't want to have this discussion. But the comment about Fred— "Ah, well, there's two of them—" that is unforgivable. Seriously, how can you have Gred without Forge? "Oh well, who needs spaghetti, at least we've got the meatballs. Who needs a hockey stick if you've still got the puck? WE DON'T NEED MILK, WE'VE GOT THESE OREOS!!!!" I'm having heart palpitations here! Yin and Yang, Rhyme and Reason, Abbott and Costello, Fred and George, Ben and Jerry's—they've got just one thing in common: they're mainly guys' names with "and" in between them. (JK)
But seriously—not cool. I may need to have Charlie sic Norbert on you.


message 26: by Maggie (new)

Maggie Strange Whats wrong with you?? I LOVE that book>:(


message 27: by Sergei (new)

Sergei Franson When you wrote this review I think you forgot that the elder wand didn't belong to Voldemort, it was Harry's. Voldemort wasn't killed just by the reflecting spell, the Elder wand betrayed Voldemort, because it wasn't his.


message 28: by Shirah (new)

Shirah I do not mean to insult you. I only hope to explain a few things. I have read the book several times and it took me a long time to finally grasp all of the symbolism.
Lupin and Tonks deaths were explained in an interview with Rowling. She said "one of the most horrifying things about war is that is leaves children fatherless and motherless." Their deaths were a tribute to all the children in the world who lost a parent due to war.
As for The Elder Wand and the other Hallows...do you remember in the first book when Olivander explains to Harry that his wand shares the same core as Voldemorts? Yeah, their cores came from the same phoenix feather therefore making Harry and Voldemort's wands "brothers." Also recall in the GOF when Voldemort and Harry duel. Their wands connected; Harry's parents, Cedric Diggory, and Frank all came floating out of Voldemort's wand; big dome of magic surrounded them blah blah blah. This occurance is called Piori Incantatem. As the two "brother wands" were forced to duel, they recognized their relation to each other and refused to destroy each other. VOLDEMORT COULD NOT KILL HARRY WITH HIS OWN WAND and vice versa. Neither could live while the other survives either (The prophecy). So Voldemort captures Ollivander who explains all of this to him. So Voldy borrows Malfoy's wand and it cracks. That wand wasn't powerful enough so Voldemort seeks the Elder Wand, the most powerful wand in the world. This was the only solution in defeating Voldemort. So it wasn't barely introduced in the DH or even HBP. The cloak was introduced in SS/PS and the Elder Wand was warmed up to in the GOF and as early as SS/PS.
I hope this information helps you better appreciate the rather elusive style Rowling uses and helps you enjoy the final Harry Potter book :)


message 29: by Rand (new)

Rand I strongly agree with you and thank you for writing this review. I've been a HP fan from the first book published. After reaching the chapter where Fred was killed I couldn't continue reading the rest of the story and was really disappointed and heartbroken. What is the point of killing one of the Wesleys is beyond me!!!!
Before publishing new stories and killing characters, writers should know the there are fans out there who get attached to the storyline with every detail. All I can say is that this writer lost a huge fan... So disappointing.


message 30: by Somerandom (new)

Somerandom "What is the point of killing one of the Wesleys?"

That is kind of the point, actually. Death is senseless and pointless during wartime, which makes Fred's death all the more realistic. There was really no point to killing him off, but that's just what happens when you have a war. People die pointlessly.


message 31: by Anna (new)

Anna Hovey I must agree, Voldemort's death was very anticlimactic and disappointing. The Hallows were a random thing to add, and they weren't very important.. But at least they explained Harry's cloak was different from others. It made me kind of angry when Harry was looking in the Pensieve and Dumbledore was explaining to Snape that Harry has to die.. But Harry dying kind of added a surprise. Plus he ended up living which was also a surprise. I feel like when he uses his Invisibility Cloak while in Hagrid's arms was really pointless though.


message 32: by Kalkedan (new)

Kalkedan Bezabih I respect your opinion, but I disagree. I think the book was beautifully crafted. She used great vocabulary and the book flowed well. That was one of the things I actually enjoyed most about the book. When I read the first one, I decided Rowling paid more attention to the plot than the actual writing, but her writing has significantly improved throughout her books. I also disagree with the fact that there wasn't enough humor in the book. I don't think it was "too dark." She added humor at just the right places, and in my opinion, if she had added more, I think the book would have been to light-hearted and we wouldn't be able to grasp how deadly serious the situation was. I think the sadness that came with this book made it more real and believable; it gave us a sense of empathy for the fictional characters in the book and what they had to go through. It was the type of book that made you stay awake at night pitying imaginary friends. I agree, Hedwig's and Dobby's deaths were heart-breaking, but I think Mad-Eye Moody and Fred's deaths were also significant, especially Fred. To think that a brother has lost his best friend, a part of him... To think that he watched his brother laugh his last laugh before his heart stopped... Well, if that doesn't stir your insides, I don't know what will. I also think that not seeing Lupin's and Tonk's deaths were pretty horrifying because it was so unexpected and sudden. There was no warning. Harry had cared for them both a lot, so I think their death's were also significant. I also think the Hallows were a brilliant idea; it was a magnificent way of threading everything together! It all made sense to me. The elder wand DID matter. It said in the story that the possessor of all the hallows could be a master of death, and Harry owned the invisibility cloak, Dumbledore gave him the wand, and technically, the elder wand was his. That was the only reason he could come back to life after he died. Without the elder wand, there wouldn't have been a happy ending. And without the wand, Harry would have never been able to fix his old wand. I'd also like to say that I sincerely enjoy bathing in the fact that Harry had not once in the entire series used the killing curse. I like to think of him as a hero, not a killer. He had morals and values, and refused to take away another life. I think that was very noble, wise and respectable of him.


message 33: by Aɳɳα (new)

Aɳɳα I very much disagree!


Bibliophile Reflections Wow... That was such a bad review, I couldn't believe it. I hope you read this, although I am sure you won't. I found this book interesting and as addictive as the others were. I can't really see the flaws considering that Rowling had to write a book which would meet the fans' expectations. I don't think you understand how stressful it is to write the end of one of the greatest Book- Serie of this generation. The Harry Potter Serie is definitely one of my favorites, although I am not a huge fan, but still, we ought to consider how difficult it must have been to push Rowling's imagination even further.
And as for all the deaths and stuff, I think you're a dumb ass. I mean, what's that about: Fred getting killed, but there's still his twin. WTF? Are you retarded or something? Or the Mad Eye death: "he was an asshole anyways." Someone's death shouldn't be less important just because he was tough or because he had a twin to replace him.
Such a jackass, man.


message 35: by Sunny (new)

Sunny I agree with this review. Especially the ending. Normally when you have a wizard like Voldemort who has gone out of his way to make himself almost immortal, it should be pretty difficult to kill him. Lastly, the epilogue was pretty much garbage. You have Harry go through all this trouble and now his life's just normal? I don't think that someone who goes through such traumatic experience can have a normal life. I've seen better endings for the book on facebook. Here's one I like
http://io9.com/the-awesome-harry-pott...


message 36: by Dai (new)

Dai I disagree with one thing...
"Voldemort is killed by a reflecting spell.
What?
WHAT?
Are you KIDDING me?
Could it possibly be more anticlimactic?"

I think the symbolism is that he's finally killed, in part, by his own hand. All of his acts, being purely evil, end up reflected on him in one way or another (eg accidental Harry horcrux), and in the end he dies by that reflection, and falls as just another bad man, not the superior creature he saw himself having become.
*sidenote: I see this as the worst departure from the books in the entire series of films; in the film finale Voldemort has this completely supernatural-looking death instead of just collapsing, which spoils the message even though it was admittedly pretty awesome-looking.


message 37: by Jeremy (new)

Jeremy R Wow. Just wow. You totally missed everything Rowling was trying to say in this book. I am discouraged that people like you exist.


back to top