I'm also kind of curious what got Ron and Lavender together so suddenly in the sixth book. There was hardly any prologue to it and I mean . . .it's gross, just gross. 

Another thing that REALLY REALLY annoys me . . .well this is more about Cursed Child, (which is awful and bad and detestable and bad and just no and -) WHY DID DRACO NEVER APOLOGIZE TO HARRY????????  

This is the thread... *Deep breath*

Okay so I agree with practically all of you! I liked the books but Everything is so steryotyped. "The neglected child is actually a super powerfull wizard who gets sorted into the champion house, is the best at quiditch (Why is that even a sport? It literally could end up with someone dying on more than one occasion), helps Gryffindor win the house cup alot, gets misunderstood, is friends with the 'losers' (more or less), gets bullied by the fancy rich misunderstood snob and his henchmen, turns out is super important, and COMES BACK TO LIFE! Not to mention the many times he doesn't get in trouble and always manages to escape because of some brilliant plan.

*Gasps for breath*

OKay so techincally Harry shouldn't have been a horcrux in the 7th book because he was bitten by the DEADLY VIPER! He DIED and was SAVED by Fawkes. He didn't have to die. Can someone explain that please? 

I also apologize if I sound rude. I rant and offend people easily, sadly, so yea here is my rant. Whoo 

Harry is so... Hotheaded? Stubborn? I don't even know!!!!!

Sometimes (Actually most times) it's just like, Harry can you shuttup for once? (No, not shut up, shuttup, because saying it quick sounds more annoyed)

But yes, I have read most of the books twice, some 3 or 4 times, and I still do love Harry Potter.

Oh, wait, never mind, not done ranting yet: In the first book, it's all like, Hogwarts is glorious and Harry is luckier than he thinks, and brave, and villain is dead, and everything is great.

But in the other books, it's climax, getting more and more serious and then boom! Over! Plus LOVE and DRAMA and FEELINGS... My oh my is it DIFFERENT. And in the end it's all about more LOVE.

Though I do like both viewpoints, (I exagerated a little...) a bit of a drastic change, don't you think?

Okay, NOW it's over. 

Okay! So, I read Harry Potter actually fairly recently. For the longest time, I was just boycotting it out of spite, so I finally gave in and read it (yes, I'm 13, shut up) last summer. And first off, I can definitely see why everyone loves it so much. It's a good series, and it's fun to read. And some of the complaints, I can see where they're coming from, but to be honest, I think a small amount of credit should be given to the fact that J. K. Rowling probabaly wasn't thinking of the end game when writing book one, which is where a lot of the worldbuilding happens. Also, it's worth noting that a lot of what's so fun about the wizarding world is how silly it is. They eat chocolate frogs and talk to portraits on the wall and a singing hat tells them their destiny. It's not necessarily supposed to make sense. Yes, quidditch is a stupid game, and it doesn't make sense if you think about it at all, but that's not really the point of quidditch, is it? It's supposed to give Harry something to be good at, and a way to bond with other students at Hogwarts, and later to develop Ron's character, and include some other characters such as Viktor Krum. She didn't write it to make sense, she wrote it to be a fun game that wizards play while flying around on brooms, and also to be a metaphor for Harry's Chosen One status. (End Quidditch rant.) But anyway, why don't we poke some holes in it.

Up until this point, the excuse I've been making revolves around it-was-only-book-one-cut-her-some-slack logic. But these two big plot-holes I'm about to bring up are Deathly Hallows material, so she doesn't get any excuses.

Number one: How Harry gets the Elder Wand. So, some other people have pointed out that the if-you-disarm-someone-the-wand-is your logic doesn't work. Every single other time anyone uses Explelliarmus anywhere else in the books, it doesn't have that affect. Notable examples being the Dueling Club in book 2, the final showdown in book 4, and the DA in book 5. But even if this wasn't the case, how Harry does it is doubly stupid. He doesn't even Expelliarmus Draco's wand. He just snatches it out of his hand, Muggle-style. He hadn't figured out the secret of the Elder Wand yet, he didn't even know who's wand he was grabbing. I think the line in the book is something like "Harry realized that they were going to need some wands, so he grabbed a few out of Draco's hand before they apparated away." And how does taking Draco's wand also give Harry the Elder wand? That's like if I had two phones, one that I bought for myself, and one that my parents had bought me for a present, and hadn't told me yet. In this analogy, if someone were to take the phone that I bought, they would also get the other one that I didn't know I had. It sounds like something my sister would make up to fool me. It's just so dumb!

Number two: When Harry realizes that he is a Horcrux, and that he has to die, and he goes into the Forbidden Forest, and Voldemort Avada Kedavra's him, why doesn't he die? Most people say it's because he united the Hallows or it's because Voldemort killed the part of him that was a Horcrux. But that's not actually the reason that Dumbledore gives in the weird afterlife place. The reason that most people don't know this is because it's really dumb. According to Dumbledore, the reason Harry didn't die was because Voldemort used his blood to come back to life in book 4. Therefore, because Harry's blood is in his veins, Lily's charm still works. This makes no sense. They've established that Lily's charm no longer works, and even if it did still work, this means that Voldemort couldn't have killed him since the end of book 4. Book 4!! What have we been doing this whole time if Voldemort never could've killed him. Battle of the Astronomy Tower? Battle of the Seven Potters? No risk. None at all. It's just so annoying. It feels like J. K. Rowling just really wanted him to not die in a way that didn't involve the Hallows, but it would've been better if she'd just gone with the plot device that she already had for not dying, instead pf trying to re-use something she had already worn out the uses for.

There are plenty of other things to complain about, such as the whole J. K. Rowling keeps retconning all her characters (e. g. Dumbledore is gay, Hermione is black) and the dozens of other plotholes (like why they didn't just Avada Kedavra all of the Horcruxes). 

Anyway, there's my hot take.