Just watched Harry Potter and the Sorceror's Stone again, and wow...

[orangeapples]

Slytherin House just got robbed.

What kind of crap was that?
Hermione got 50 points for being smart
Ron got 50 points for being good at chess.
Harry got 60 points for being nice.
Neville got 10 points for standing up to his housemates; trying to keep them from breaking the rules?

The worst thing we saw from Slytherin was Draco being snobby and informing the faculty of Gyffindor students being out past curfew.

Gryffindor had no right in winning the House Cup. No wonder members of Slytherin House ended up so 'rotten'. They played by the rules and should have won, but had that victory taken from them by a bunch of troublemakers. Even worse in Order of the Pheonix members of Slytherin are working with the Ministry of Magic and are still perceived to be the villains.

 

[Pinkamena]

Hah, well that's one way to look at it XD
I think it's funny to see how the movies have gotten more and more action-filled over the years.

 

[Count Igor]

Well I've viewed it as the three boys and a girl got some points for pretty much.. well, saving the world. Y'know. Stopping Voldemort coming to life and being immortal and all that.

And The Philosopher's Stone ('cos that's the name) seemed quite innocent compared to the others.

 

[Serving UpSmiles]

Dumbledore knew they were stupid reasons, If I was him I woudln't want to tell the school that 3 first years killed voledmort again.

 

[Fbuh]

I really enjoyed that hallucinatory soft core porn scene between Harry and Hermione in The Deathly Hollows Part 1. Of course, my opinions regarding the HP series can probably be ignored. I'm still of teh opinion that Harry and Ron should have died at the end, with Hermino, Ginny, and Tonks all consoling each other. Naked.

 

[Frozen Donkey Wheel2]

I'm still stuck on them having an entire house devoted to people that are pretty much ALWAYS future psychopaths and everyone's just OK with it.

And how about Quidditch? ONE BALL wins the game? Who the fuck thought THAT was a good idea? So even if the entire is amazing at the sport, as long as the opposing team has ONE good player they can still win, even if the rest of their team sucks? How is that balanced? How is that fair?

EDIT: I'll just leave this here, actually.

http://www.collegehumor.com/article/6099253/jk-rowlings-deleted-harry-potter-character


ANOTHER ONE: OK, yes, I know. The snitch is not technically an AUTOMATIC win, it IS worth a ridiculous amount of points, especially when all the other balls score a mere 10 points.

 

[shrekfan246]

Slytherin House just got robbed.

What kind of crap was that?
Hermione got 50 points for being smart
Ron got 50 points for being good at chess.
Harry got 60 points for being nice.
Neville got 10 points for standing up to his housemates; trying to keep them from breaking the rules?

The worst thing we saw from Slytherin was Draco being snobby and informing the faculty of Gyffindor students being out past curfew.

Gryffindor had no right in winning the House Cup. No wonder members of Slytherin House ended up so 'rotten'. They played by the rules and should have won, but had that victory taken from them by a bunch of troublemakers. Even worse in Order of the Pheonix members of Slytherin are working with the Ministry of Magic and are still perceived to be the villains.

Yeah, it's a bit more complicated than just "Who played by the rules the best?" Mostly because the story was written in a way that Slytherin was always designed as the secondary "bad guy" and Gryffindor was the house that readers were supposed to identify with the most, with Harry, Ron, and Hermione being the characters that readers were supposed to project onto. EDIT: And the whole "They defeated Voldemort" thing...

I'm not advocating it, but looking at it simply from a writer's perspective, it's essentially an "unlikely hero overcomes the odds and wins at the last moment*" plot that applies to the houses as a whole rather than individual characters. See also "The Mighty Ducks" movies, Rudy, and other such films.

I know what you're saying though, and looking at it just from that angle certainly skews ones view away from Gryffindor.

*Unlikely in this case meaning from the view of the characters in the story themselves, as readers or watchers should be able to predict an outcome like "Gryffindor wins" from the outset of the story.

 

[Lieju]

Snape was rather unfair when giving points for Gryffindors and Slytherins, though.

But it's kinda unfair how Slytherin are judged. In the latest movie when they take back the school McGonagall just orders all Slytherin to be thrown to the dungeons. Were they all evil douchebags?

It would have been nicer if they'd been less nasty, the students in that house, I mean. I think the Slytherin were descibed as "ambitious" at some point, does that have to include being a mean twat?

And how about Quidditch? ONE BALL wins the game? Who the fuck thought THAT was a good idea? So even if the entire is amazing at the sport, as long as the opposing team has ONE good player they can still win, even if the rest of their team sucks? How is that balanced? How is that fair?

Yeah, it wouldn't work as a real sport. But that's because it and it's rules were invented by the writer to make Harry look good and important.

Although, I think it's mentioned that the matches could go on for weeks or longer, in which case it would be more balanced.
Also in one book they had to win by a certain margin, for some reason, because just winning wouldn't get them enough points to have a chance at championship.

 

[Agent Larkin]

I'm still stuck on them having an entire house devoted to people that are pretty much ALWAYS future psychopaths and everyone's just OK with it.

And how about Quidditch? ONE BALL wins the game? Who the fuck thought THAT was a good idea? So even if the entire is amazing at the sport, as long as the opposing team has ONE good player they can still win, even if the rest of their team sucks? How is that balanced? How is that fair?

I'm going to feel like such a nerd for this but...

The snitch doesn't = an automatic win. When the snitch is caught the game ends and the team that caught it gets 150 points. If I remember correctly that's how Ireland wins the Quidditch World Cup because even after Krum gets the snitch the Irish were still ahead on points.

Now I could be horribly wrong but I think that's it.

 

[Genixma]

Well I've viewed it as the three boys and a girl got some points for pretty much.. well, saving the world. Y'know. Stopping Voldemort coming to life and being immortal and all that.

Now that you mention it, that just renders the first book/film/game extremely unneeded. Because they found out by the second book/film/game (technically) that he was alive and immortal ANYWAY! And then spends the last three books undoing it. So they just kinda postponed the inevitable. Well crap there's one loop hole I've never noticed.

 

[shrekfan246]

I'm still stuck on them having an entire house devoted to people that are pretty much ALWAYS future psychopaths and everyone's just OK with it.

And how about Quidditch? ONE BALL wins the game? Who the fuck thought THAT was a good idea? So even if the entire is amazing at the sport, as long as the opposing team has ONE good player they can still win, even if the rest of their team sucks? How is that balanced? How is that fair?

I'm going to feel like such a nerd for this but...

The snitch doesn't = an automatic win. When the snitch is caught the game ends and the team that caught it gets 150 points. If I remember correctly that's how Ireland wins the Quidditch World Cup because even after Krum gets the snitch the Irish were still ahead on points.

Now I could be horribly wrong but I think that's it.

You're right. Fred and George made bets with...someone...can't remember who...that Krum would catch the Snitch but Ireland would win.

 

[DEAD34345]

And how about Quidditch? ONE BALL wins the game? Who the fuck thought THAT was a good idea? So even if the entire is amazing at the sport, as long as the opposing team has ONE good player they can still win, even if the rest of their team sucks? How is that balanced? How is that fair?

That's what happens in every fictional sports match ever, the only difference with Quidditch is that it's built into the rules. It does make every position other than snitch-catcher (or whatever it was called) hilariously pointless though...

 

[Sariteiya]

What got me about that whole movie was that even if Harry had done nothing, things probably would have turned out the same. Voldemort couldn't get the stone out of the mirror, and Dumbledore came along about five minutes after Harry showed up anyhow. In fact Voldemort actually got CLOSER to winning because Harry was there.

As for the house cup, Slytherins are assholes anyhow. Literally, it's like their house requirement.

 

[Pappytech]

Well, yeah. In hindsight, they were incredibly stupid reasons to win the House Cup. At the same time, Dumbledore was trying to reward three 11 year old kids who just saved the world without causing a panic for the rest of the school. And back in the first few books, the House Cup was a big deal. Although, as time went by, the competition got less and less prominent.

As for Slytherin house, they were mostly bad guys. Every quasi-villain in the series was from that house, so we're naturally supposed to assume their all evil. Does this mean there are no good Slytherins? Of course not, I'm sure there are a few nice ones. They just don't matter. At all.

And Quidditch is awesome.

 

[orangeapples]

I'm still stuck on them having an entire house devoted to people that are pretty much ALWAYS future psychopaths and everyone's just OK with it.

And how about Quidditch? ONE BALL wins the game? Who the fuck thought THAT was a good idea? So even if the entire is amazing at the sport, as long as the opposing team has ONE good player they can still win, even if the rest of their team sucks? How is that balanced? How is that fair?

LOLOL friend of mine and I had a converstaion about the whole Slytherin house concept and somehow we got to, "If the sorting hat places a person in Slytherin, shouldn't they just kill that person and save the world a whole lot of trouble?

And about Quidditch, same friend and I we talking about how funny it would be for a team to be ahead by 160 points when the losing team catches the snitch causing themselves to lose the game.

Yeah, I have no idea why the snitch is worth 150 points other than to make Harry seem more important to the game.

 

[gamepopper101]

To quote the Nostalgia Critic from the Secret of NIMH 2 review: "Well maybe Hogwarts isn't that great a school. What was the child mortality rate of that place now? Hell, they drown students as a form of sport!"

 

[Plinglebob]

Hah, well that's one way to look at it XD
I think it's funny to see how the movies have gotten more and more action-filled over the years.

Whats even funnier is watching them all in reverse order and watching all the leads shrink/hear their voices get higher the further back you go.

 

[s0m3th1ng]

I cringe when I watch the earlier movies...children just can't act.