mynameisreza

Contributing writer for The Artifice.

Junior Contributor II

  • Lurker
  • Sharp-Eyed Citizen
  • ?
  • Articles
    1
  • Featured
    0
  • Comments
    5
  • Ext. Comments
    5
  • Processed
    3
  • Revisions
    2
  • Topics
    2
  • Topics Taken
    0
  • Notes
    2
  • Topics Proc.
    3
  • Topics Rev.
    0
  • Points
    239
  • Rank
    X
  • Score
    111

    Latest Articles

    Latest Topics

    2

    Did "Harry Potter and the Cursed Child" have a valid reason for existing?

    Now that is has been a while since it’s release a well rounded consensus can be established. Disregarding the overall quality of the execution of how the story was told, did it have a reason for existing? Did anybody feel that the book justified its existence by providing a well needed chapter of emotional development missing from Harry Potter’s character arc?

    • Maybe an approach could be, what does Harry Potter and the Cursed Child add to the universe and understanding of Harry Potter that wasn't there better in just the books, films, and cult followings? – Kevin 4 years ago
      0
    • It is important to note that Cursed Child is a piece of theatre co-written by two other people. It brings HP to the stage while still presenting something new. It is completely different and it definitely has a reason for existing, as evidenced by the tickets sold out from now until eternity. – Christen Mandracchia 4 years ago
      0
    • This is a difficult topic to approach because, technically speaking, there is no reason any form of art should exist. It might serve a good function but it serves a constructed one, either through the artist's vision or through society's desires. When looking at the latest installment in Harry Potter, I would keep the facts strictly true and twist the discussion toward a more interesting one, which might be: does an author have the right to promulgate or continue a story even if it is to the story's detriment? Perhaps this isn't a question worth answering, but it is worth considering especially with the possessive nature of fandom today. – atiku 4 years ago
      1
    • Was "Harry Potter and the Cursed Child" a worthy continuation to the Harry Potter series? I actually think this a very interesting topic to explore. It's true that it is a piece for theatre above anything else but it still continuing the story of the novels. I also have the question of whether the story should have been told in novel form verses in stage form. Why continue the story in a different format? – MatthewSimmons 4 years ago
      0
    • I believe that this is a very interesting topic that would make a great read. It is quite arguable whether or not there is a valid reason for it's existence. I'm sure some feel as if it was a wonderful continuation, while others find it just a way to extract more money from devoted Potterheads. I personally would take this on by writing how The Cursed Child helped you learn more information about your already beloved characters. – jccrockett 4 years ago
      0
    • The Cursed Child has a reason for existing insofar as it brings Harry Potter to a new medium--the stage. Though A Very Potter Musical exists, JKR had never been part of a theater adaptation of the series, and by creating the play, an opportunity for a new audience to experience the series, and long standing fans have a chance to experience the series in a new format.The actual story, however, didn't seem to be a worthwhile addition to the canon. In the sense of continuity, the characters did not read the same in the play as they do in the books or movies. And then in the sense of fiction practice and ethics, characters should arguably let free after a series has finished--the author has already constructed a story that should leave the audience with distinct enough impressions of the characters for readers to determine for themselves what comes of their lives. – mrgawlik 4 years ago
      0
    • I myself am very contradicted about this. I go back and forth about it a lot. Overall though, I think I've come to the conclusion that it was great to see how Harry's kids turned out. I would've never thought Albus would actually become a Slytherin. I never thought that people would think Scorpious would be the son of the dark Lord. It was fun to see these new characters go through their own adventure, especially since i was so enthralled with them after reading the epilogue – Jenae 4 years ago
      0
    • I think its better to question if Rowling should have allowed others to (in my opinion mar her legacy) interfere with her works. Did the co-authors do justice to the series or was it more of a money making attempt. Was the character development and style what fans came to expect from Rowling, how has The Cursed Child helped or hurt her readership or how her fans view her now as opposed to before The Cursed Child came out? – ADumbuya 4 years ago
      0
    1

    Is Batman v Superman necessary?

    It seems that DC is trying so hard to force a DC cinematic universe that they are forgetting that good individual movies come before the spectacle of watching multiple superheroes clash with each other.

    • Agreed. It seems as if it is all just a precursor to the League of Justice. I think Avengers worked well because individual story lines were developed so when there was an ensemble superhero cast we could all watch our favorite. But I am more of a Marvel girl. – Munjeera 4 years ago
      1
    • Exactly. With DC's poor rushed attempt to form their Justice League, we have to acknowledge that they're in an industry rivalling against Marvel. This competition and craze to cash in on the superhero movie buzz is causing some very bad films right now. – KellyKova 4 years ago
      0
    • I so agree with this. The fact that the audience was introduced to a new Batman really hurt the film; Affleck did a decent job, but since this particular DC universe hadn't established his character, Goyer made us watch his parents die again, not once, but TWICE in the film -- utterly ridiculous! – Kathleen Lassiter 4 years ago
      0
    • > I think Avengers worked well because individual story lines were developed so when there was an ensemble superhero cast we could all watch our favorite. ===== I think a major difference between DC and Marvel though is that the DC heroes are (not to be combative) more well known. Superman, Wonder Woman, Batman these are iconoclasts. Compared to C-listers like Iron Man and Thor (whose relatively well known as a Norse Diety but much less known in his Marvel Incarnation). The Marvel characters NEED introduction and Marvel did that brilliantly. They made Iron Man a rock star and I know comic nerds who still couldn't name 3 Iron Man villains. There may be problems with Superman v Batman but I definitely can't fault the idea of skipping all the introductions to characters that have been in the front of pop culture since the 70s. – wolfkin 4 years ago
      0

    Sorry, no tides are available. Please update the filter.

    Latest Comments

    Amazing article! I’m definitely going to bookmark this for future reference.

    Using Zen Philosophy to Improve Creativity and Overcome Writer’s Block

    Malcom X is one of the best biopics i have ever seen

    The New Wave of Biopics

    Very interesting.

    Sex in Cinema: Poetry vs. Pornography (Explicit Content)

    I think wind waker is the best 3d zelda game.

    Does Ocarina of Time Still Hold Up By Today's Standards?

    Wow, this was one of my favourite movies growing up. It’s very rare to see a movie like this nowadays, one that is marketed towards kids while not sacrificing the opportunity to provide valuable moral principles.

    Willy Wonka & The Chocolate Factory: Lessons for Parents and Children