Game Skyrim Forum

I happened to catch a little bit of the movie "http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0092115/" (IMDB link) the other day. As the credits rolled by, I noticed that "Dad" (Michael Moriarty) was named Harry Potter, Sr. and his son (Noah Hathaway) was Harry Potter, Jr. The movie came out in 1986.

So I'm wondering, is Ms. Rowling a closet "Troll" fan?

[EDIT]

I'm sure "Harry Potter" is such an uncommon name...

Very doubtful.

The chances that she even saw this obscure American movie are quite slim.



(also, this is an awesome B-movie and everyone should watch it!)

no, the actual way she got the name "Harry Potter" is quite different.. she was ordering a nice set of Pottery for a friends wedding, when she went to pick it up the potter was so ridiculously hairy that she could not get the image out of her mind for months.. thus, when she started the book, all she was able to picture was this hairy potter she bought the wedding gift from, thus "Harry Potter" was the first name she was able to think of..

http://i.imgur.com/LjJEW3e.gifv

I even have "Troll" in the title!

As believable as my theory? Definitely!

{Clears Throat} Laaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa-La la laaaaaaaaa. La la laaa laaaa la laa. Speaking of Harry Potter Cinefix did a comparison videos on the differences between the books and the movie, it's quite interesting.

This isn't the first time someone has found something that could vaguely make Harry Potter books look like they are built on plagiarism. I still don't get why that series gets a pass on repurposing so much borrowed folklore and mythology just because it's full of goofy names like muggles.

Because its not exactly uncommon in fantasy to use borrowed folklore and mythology.

Can't get why there is so much hate for Harry Potter. Sure, its not great literature, it never set out to be. Just a mildly entertaining children's story that blends fantasy and the English boarding school genres.

Guess people hate success.

There will not be much left of the history of European literature and art if we condemn artists for heavy mythological inspirations.

I imagine she chose it because it is an unglamorous and vaguely comic name. Being an unglamorous name, any title which featured it

would be comic sounding.

I don't hate the series by any means. I do feel Ms. Rowling gets a wide berth from criticism because of the "Single Mom" faction. Criticize her book and you are soon seen criticizing "single mothers." I'm happy for her and wish her all success, but I get really tired of made up drama, just for drama's sake. Lot's of people overcome adversity and do well for themselves. I don't "hate" her success, but rather the tag-alongs that blow their horns in her praise.

and... she just can't seem to let the series die

You mean as opposed to say, "Max DiMajj"?"

I don't love the series myself, I think I've read them all but I'm not sure because they aren't that memorable. I haven't watched most of the films.

I just feel she comes in for a lot of attacks when there are far worse writers around.

edit: as for not letting the series die thats a fairly common mistake writers, film makers, publishers etc make

"The Legend of Rah and the Muggles", Nancy Stouffer in 1984

Ahhh ok. Thanks!

My own favourite version of the above. Is Leopold Bloom. It is the name of the neurotic accountant in The Producers and one of the main characters

in Ulysses. In this case the appearance of the name in one is influenced by the other. Mel Brookes is a great admirer of James Joyce's work and his film is

peppered with references to the book.

I don't dislike the books/films either. I will admit that the phenomenon left a bit of a bad taste in my mouth at first, though. This had less to do with the success of the series (because, why should I care unless someone is giving me money or taking my money) and more to do with a lot of friends and acquaintances trying to shove them down my throat. I read the first book at the urging of a friend that insisted that I would love it. It was ok...I didn't hate it, but I had no desire to read any more of them or see the films.

I felt that it was "fantasy soup" (bits and pieces from a variety of folklore and other fantasy fiction) distilled down to something that's accessible to kids and folks that aren't fans of most fantasy fiction. Nothing wrong with that, but the 'Potter fans relentlessly pestered me to give it another chance, insisting that, "you like fantasy fiction...how can you not like this!?!?" After a while, it just started to get a little annoying. It wasn't for me, and I just wished that people that loved it would stop trying to force me to read/watch more 'Potter stuff. Leave me be!

Troll and Troll 2, however...that's fantastic cinema.

Fun fact: Did you know Christopher Lee also read the LOTR trilogy once a year? He also was the only LOTR cast member to ever meet Tolkien.

They were childrens stories, not epic fantasy. My kids loved them. (I read them to them when they were in their single digits, and still enjoyed that kind of thing..... )

That's cool! My "envy" of Mr. Lee grows! Could he be, "The most interesting man in the world?"

I would have thought Ian McKellen would have had some connections to Tolkien, too