Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1

107
By Mark Ramsey | 2010/11/27

If you were a fly on the wall at Warner Bros., here are the spells you’d hear:

“Since Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1 is doing so well, let’s split Part 2 into a number of sub-parts so large that the parts and their profits stretch to infinity!  Franchise-us Extend-us!”

“What if we create direct-to-DVD animated version of our heroes as toddlers and call it Harry Potter and the Terrible Twos?  Juvenile-us Exploit-us!

“Let’s take the Star Trek path and launch a new franchise called Hogwarts: The Next Generation.  And this time their wands can fire photon torgpedoes! Engage-us Picard-us!”

“Let’s do a prequel!  Dumbledore: The facial stubble years.  Norelco-us Shick-us!”

“One word:  Muppets!  Henson-us Oz-us!”

“How about Harry Potter, the Broadway Musical starring Bernadette Peters and Kristin Chenoweth and featuring lyrics that rhyme with ‘Gryffindor’ and ‘Hufflepuff?’”

“And what lyrics would that be, exactly?” asked a Warners studio executive too thoughtful to last more than six months.

Meanwhile, in the magical world of Harry Potter:

Harry wondered aloud:  “I know it’s an expression, but is it true that Maggie Smith is older than the actual hills?”

And so begins the latest chapter in the Harry Potters universe:  The only universe, I might add, where a character named “Weasley” is a hero.

Time to escape the Dark Lord and his minions, so everyone must drink a brew that will transform them into the likeness of Harry Potter. Because when Valdemort is on your trail there’s nothing safer than resembling Harry Potter!

“Let’s save some potion for Prince William,” said Hermione.  “I fear the Dark Lord himself has stolen his looks leaving only the crown, which is obviously blinding to potential mates.”

“Hermione, the Prince has only lost his hair, he has!” said Weasley.

“I can’t see hair through the glare of the crown, Ron,” she replied. “Enchanto! Overlook-his-flaws-o! Future Queen-o!”

How is it that Bill Nighy keeps getting hired to roll syllables and chew what little scenery fits on the same screen with him?  Not since the great Paul Lynde was a character so far over the top he was invisible to it.  “Over-r-r-r-act-o! Method-o!  Obliviate-o!”

Harry’s on the run, and everyone wants him.  We know this because his face is plastered all over magic-land on posters reading “Undesirable #1.”    Personally, I consider #2 more undesirable, but that’s just me.

How to reach this magical land?  You have to literally flush yourself into it – which brings us back to #2.

Cut to:

Harry and Company are smitten by a locket which they must destroy.

“How can we lose this locket permanently?” asks Harry.

“Store it with my car keys,” volunteers Weasely.

“Give it to Dobby,” suggests Hermione.

“No,” said Harry.  “Dobby refers to Dobby in the third person, and Harry finds that so exceedingly egotistical even Val Kilmer doesn’t do it.”

We have left the cozy confines of Hogwarts in this flick and instead zip from one corner of the British countryside to the next, often in a tent, and usually within sunset distance of a romantic cliff.

“Fan out across the romantic cliffs!” commanded the Dark Lord to his tribe.  “They are catnip to cinematographers and wizards, alike!”

Witness the return of Luna Lovegood, an actress who has studied much since her last Harry Potter role, “and not a second of studying acting, obviously” she pointed out with so little energy I would have assumed she was asleep if I wasn’t asleep myself.

“With a name like ‘Lovegood’ I’m the luckiest woman with a profile on Match.com,” said Luna.

“The second-luckiest,” said Moonraker’s Holly Goodhead.

By the conclusion of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1, we’re reminded that we just spent two and a half hours where, frankly, not a lot happens.  It’s a big, long, expensive promo for the Final Chapter.

All in all, this movie was fine, but you have to imagine Daniel Radcliffe is ready to stretch his wand a little instead of having Harry Potter fans stretch it for him.

107

107 Responses to “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1”

  1. fargo says:

    How is this even a review? This is horrible.

    [Reply]

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    That’s one way of putting it.

    [Reply]

    bullhorn Reply:

    huh? I guess the other way of putting it would be to not let toddlers near a keyboard…

    seriously I’ve taken craps with more coherency than this

    [Reply]

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    Well it sounds like somebody’s mommy was as critical about their craps as you are about this piece!

    bullhorn Reply:

    this is definitely a piece of something alright…

    take my advice: don’t quit your day job (hopefully this isn’t it)

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    Thank you for your advice, Dr. Laura. Now go pick up the next caller.

  2. Ashley says:

    What is this tripe? This doesn’t belong on RottenTomatoes at all!

    It’s plain what your opinion is, but I could have done without the poorly-written fanfiction.

    [Reply]

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    Yes, Rotten Tomatoes is far too good for this! You’re right! Nothing about the name “rotten tomatoes” implies anything but the sincerest and most sober and analytical cinematic analysis!

    [Reply]

    Suhaib Reply:

    I can’t stop laughing on this one !!!

    [Reply]

  3. sfsg says:

    Fargo, the point is to appreciate the clever brilliance of Mr. Ramsey. (I won’t be back on this site soon)

    [Reply]

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    Well may I at least say goodbye before you go?

    [Reply]

  4. Teresa Melone says:

    How is this even a review? It’s hysterical! Reviews are usually useless
    brown-nosing drivel or snipey personal slams, but this, this is better than the movie.

    [Reply]

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    Teresa, you are my hero and heroine all wrapped up into one. Thanks.

    [Reply]

  5. Raya says:

    I’m sorry, is this supposed to be funny?

    [Reply]

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    I’m glad you’re sorry.

    [Reply]

    Sam Reply:

    Touche. You’re also a douche, however.

    [Reply]

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    They always descend to name-calling eventually.

    Suhaib Reply:

    Hahahahah !!!!

    [Reply]

  6. baffled says:

    That’s a really long sad list of attempts to be funny.

    [Reply]

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    Great! I’ll shorten it in the future.

    [Reply]

    Critic Critic Reply:

    Do.

    [Reply]

  7. Gary says:

    You’ve quite possibly written the worst possible interview, bravo!

    [Reply]

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    The worst possible interview?

    It’s a shame. I was hoping for the worst possible review.

    [Reply]

    Josh Reply:

    ha ha, good catch sir. I laughed at that remark :)

    Maybe Gary is psychotic and assumed you were interviewing the characters of the HP universe?

    [Reply]

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    Gary thinks I was interviewing characters of the Hewlett Packard universe, actually.

  8. Stephanie says:

    @fargo – It’s not a review – didn’t you read the first line? This site is not so much about reviews as it is about snarky hilarity. If you want a review, go to Rotten Tomatoes. If you want to laugh, read Movie Juice.

    [Reply]

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    Shhh! Don’t tell all my secrets.

    [Reply]

  9. Raul says:

    People need to relax, i think his reviews are funnny and i love reading them, hes a funny guy. I always laugh in this page.

    [Reply]

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    You and I obviously have no taste, Raul!

    [Reply]

  10. CTM says:

    Was this supposed to be a film analysis? I can see the archived section is labeled “movie rants”, so I assumed at the very least to expect a review of some sort.

    [Reply]

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    If I have managed to puzzle you at least I have achieved something.

    [Reply]

    CTM Reply:

    That’s nothing to be proud of, Mr. Ramsey.

    Furthermore, you haven’t puzzled me. Annoyance would be more accurate. For a site whose angle appears to be entertaining viewers, that would seem to constitute failure.

    Unless ‘puzzling’ viewers is your aim. Or just responding to everyone’s comments with pseudo-friendly wisecracks, like some sort of half-assed buddy ploy.

    [Reply]

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    For someone so annoyed it’s curious that you keep coming back for more. I’m sorry to be so pseudo-friendly, but you make it so easy!

  11. CaptainObvious says:

    I understand that this is not a review of the movie, but it’s a horrible attempt at humor nonetheless.

    Mr. Ramsey, try brushing up on your grammar and punctuation before publishing large pieces of text online.

    *EXAMPLE*

    “Meanwhile, in the magical world of Harry Potter:

    Harry wondered allowed:”

    A quote followed by a quote? What a unique interpretation of written English, Mr. Ramsey! You’re on par with the other cretins who think they’re clever enough to publish comedic drivel for the masses. And didn’t you mean to say “Harry wondered aloud” instead of “allowed?”

    What exactly does “wonder allowed” mean, Mr. Ramsey?

    Feel free to reply with a childish comment in an attempt to defend your internet-honor. I’m sure it’ll do wonders for your fanbase.

    [Reply]

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    Thanks to you I have fixed that error. Don’t know how I missed that one.

    I’m trying to come up with a childish comment to defend my internet-honor, but all I can think of is “your mother.”

    [Reply]

    CTM Reply:

    CaptainObvious has it right. Your attempt at humor varies between hamfisted and nonsensical, and your responses in the comments section are, curiously enough, more of the same. (I think you would have been better off just ignoring most of them, the way you tackled them.)

    Why not just review the film properly? Why make unsupported jabs at Warner Bros. (who, by the way, had no input on splitting the film–nor would they in any of those other strange suggestions you made–since they didn’t produce it) and spend most of your article writing, as one poster put it, “poorly-written fanfiction”? For laughs? None of the commenters thus far have said your article was funny, so it couldn’t have been that, surely. *rolls eyes*

    [Reply]

    CTM Reply:

    As for your above reply to my other post, my annoyance has nothing to do with my decision to “leave” or “stay”; I was annoyed with your article, and initially with how you attempted to defend it. Now I’m just amused, because normally someone in your shoes would have the good sense to shut up and ignore abusive comments.

    Do you make a hobby of this in all your “reviews”?

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    Stop looking into my shoes!

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    Thanks for your comment which you just asked me to ignore. That’s why we all make comments, after all. To be ignored.

    Roll your eyes that-a-way.

  12. David says:

    Majority report: Your writing is not ready for prime-time.

    Someone who personally jumps on every criticism in his comment section with snark doesn’t have the maturity to deserve recognition under the prestigious RottenTomatoes aggregate. Don’t get so defensive – there is no merit here to defend. I hope MovieJuice doesn’t pay you, because all you do is make inane quips to make yourself laugh. You have just made an enemy.

    [Reply]

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    Yes, editorializing about Harry Potter movies inspires many an enemy!

    [Reply]

    Jake Reply:

    Thanks for having thick skin, Mark. Every few months I think, “I wonder what’s been Juiced lately?” (Only in reference to HP can we capitalize verbs) and I always enjoy myself. Keep editorializing! Ha!

    [Reply]

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    It don’t get much thicker! Thanks Jake!

  13. Josh says:

    Good catch on the bizarre decision to disguise everyone as Harry. That’s definitely something I hadn’t considered when I read the book / saw the movie. I get the feeling you disliked the film as much as I did, but why rate it as fresh instead of rotten on RT? Unless you mean it sarcastically or as a joke.

    [Reply]

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    Because I liked it just enough to push it over the border I guess. I’ll bet it does not stand up to repeat viewings so well, though.

    [Reply]

  14. TommyB says:

    Hi Mark,
    thanks for the review. You just have to pick the right movies to review and you’ll get comments in abundance.
    I, for one, will skip this one, because other reviewers, who haven’t read the book, had problems following what was going on in the movie.
    I already had that feeling with the last installment. It felt bumpy and slapped together with important things missing.

    Speaking of comments: I still wonder why you haven’t written a review about “Inception”.
    It could have been a feast to review it. I felt like writing a rant after seeing it. Well, apart from wishing that I’ve never seen it in the first place.
    And you would have gotten hundreds of comments from angry fanboys.

    Well, looking forward to your next review.

    [Reply]

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    Well the truth is that I missed the window on Inception. These things are of interest only within the first two weeks of release. Then….blah. We all have to move on.

    But you’re right – I wish I had been ready in time. I could have written pages just on Ellen Page, who has as much star power as wet blanket.

    Thanks for the note!

    [Reply]

    Suhaib Reply:

    As much star power as wet blanket :D

    Mark, you should write something about her in “Juiced Stars”, though her being a star is questionable.

    [Reply]

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    You may be right! Yes, my plan is to update Juiced Stars at least annually ;-)

    CTM Reply:

    The problem though, TommyB, is that Mr. Ramsey does not write reviews. He writes ‘rants’ or whatever else you’d like to call ten or so paragraphs of nonsensical references and unfunny jokes (oh, and nonsensical jokes). Your one paragraph tells me more of what you thought of it than Ramsey did. I can understand, though; people make a habit of reading more into what a person says than is actually there all the time.

    One other commenter–TRC–thought the comments section was hilarious. I’m not sure why you would think so. Most of the comments I’ve seen so far have been fairly short–mostly snide remarks about the article. This suggests you find groups of people criticizing the author as a funny thing in and of itself–something I wouldn’t find funny at all unless they were obvious trolls, misspelling every other word and saying things that generally make them look stupider than who they’re trolling. Haven’t seen that, though. Maybe you should take a closer look at what they’re saying about your hero. There hasn’t been many that have elaborated on what they’ve said, true, but there’s a good reason for their views, so allow me.

    For instance:

    The article begins with a jab at Warner Bros. Already covered that in my first comment on how this is misblamed. Not only that, but he continues with a few more jokes on stereotypical studio head behavior…which again, would be a bit more funny if it actually made sense. (Read my first comment on this.) Instead, it just looks stupid. J. K. Rowling maintains rights to the franchise anyway, and the likelihood of the film series going the route he suggested is about the same as the moon crashing into the earth. It reads like a tried, cliched way of making fun of other franchises, so I can’t help but chuckle at seeing it shoehorned in here, like marking off a checklist of all the things a critic should write about. He doesn’t even bother saying why he believes Warner Bros. would try this.

    Didn’t see this before, but he misspelled Voldemort’s name, though it’s a minor thing. Remarking that disguising several people as Harry Potter as dangerous in a snide way isn’t, though–it makes no sense. That was the whole point to the exercise; they were purposely risking their lives to increase his safety. It would have made more sense pointing out how there were probably better options to transport Potter. I’ll admit that the film doesn’t do a very good job portraying this–the music that plays throughout the scene was slightly whimsical and gave it the air of something far less grim and meaningful, which I think would be the only reason anyone watching it would find it annoying and needful of mentioning, instead of obvious considering several characters even point it out (i.e. that it’s dangerous and they’re risking their lives on purpose) when the plan is laid out–which suggests that Mr. Ramsey wasn’t listening.

    Moving on to actually talking about the characters themselves (though he spends little time doing so), there’s a joke leveled at Nighy’s bit role as Scrimgeour. To be honest, his performance was entirely forgettable to me, as like in the book he doesn’t have many scenes and dies less than halfway into the film. Why the author would seize on him in particular has me baffled, frankly. I can think of several other hammy performances more worth mentioning. Just before this are bizarre and pretty much unrelated jokes about the UK’s Prince William–which makes even less sense than bringing up Warner Bros., considering I can’t even tell what the point to it is. Comparing Potter being considered “Undesirable No. One” to getting into the Ministry of Magic’s headquarters (which he confuses with the entire wizard world, for some reason) with a toilet joke is painfully forced and as a result, unfunny, to boot. Oh, and I should mention that both the author’s remarks toward Nighy and the prince are punctuated with an earlier gag he used about the nature of casting spells in the Harry Potter universe, which are just as stale and uninspired (yeah, just add ‘o’ to the end of whatever point you want to make with one word, Mr. Ramsey; it’s a right riot) here as they were there. Other performances criticized include Lynch’s as Lovegood, which again baffle me (That’s it? her and Nighy? No comments on the main characters? Being content with inserting jokes with their roles as placeholders to tell them doesn’t count, Mr. Ramsey.).

    This “review” is definitely not all-encompassing; he leaves a lot of stuff to comment on out. I’m assuming this is because it’s a “rant” and so he only wrote what annoyed him. Fair enough. His sense of humor still leaves much to be desired, though. Spending the amount of time he does to things that don’t really apply to the film itself (including unnecessary, pointless references), extended focus on minor or relatively minor things at the expense of others and complaining about things with an explanation already made obvious by the film itself leaves me with the impression that Mr. Ramsey was lazy. And lazily listing what one doesn’t like about a movie is annoying, and smacks of desperation (i.e. wanting to get attention without putting in the effort). Make no mistake: I have issues with the film as well, and am in no way defending it by addressing the problems with his article. Despite it being split in two and making necessary departures adapting the story to film, there were still sequences I thought could have been handled much better in translation (though it’s much better than the sixth film). You’d be hard-pressed finding out just what issues the author has reading this nonsense, though. You get a general vibe of dislike, but nothing concrete to back it up. Coupled with the issues lined out above, and you have a mostly worthless read. It’s not even entertaining (not in the usual sense, anyway). You get a paragraph at the end pointing out how boring most of the film is (by saying not much happens) and is pretty much the only legitimate attempt the author made at addressing how he felt the film was flawed–which is pathetic, to be honest, considering it’s right at the end and is what amounts to his summation.

    The funniest part of the whole thing to me is not the “review” or the comments from others, but how Mr. Ramsey doggedly defends it. Most authors ignore or only respond to pointed criticisms (that is, those that address certain errors in their writing) and compliments. This man would rather respond to everything, it seems! (Although not my last comment–I guess a long post is too much for him, or he decided at that point he was better off ignoring it. A sensible precaution given the manner he’s already tried responding to them, though I’d hope he’d learn from it and write something better in the future.) Oh well, that’s his prerogative. *shrugs*

    [Reply]

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    This comment is too long for me to read. Can somebody please read this and tell me what it says?

    [Reply]

    TommyB Reply:

    It says: “You Mr. Ramsey, not funny! Comments sometimes funny!”.

    My verdict: “Death by snoo snoo!”.

    EvieH Reply:

    Nice display of your ignorance and immaturity there, Mr Ramsey. People read your “review” and take the time to give contructive criticism (not that I would bother, CTM, he’s clearly too childish and set in his ways to listen to advice) and you can’t be bothered to read it.
    That’s not the way forward… but I would have hoped your elementary school teachers had told you that.

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    I think my feelings are hurt but I’m too ignorant and immature to be sure.

    Holly Reply:

    Get over yourself.

    [Reply]

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    Okay. Now can I get over you? :-)

    EvieH Reply:

    CTM- LOVE. You should start a blog… at least it would make more sense than this incoherent attention-seeking.
    Grammar Police all the way ;) xx

    [Reply]

    Stephanie Reply:

    CTM’s rants reminds me of those crazies who flip out about bad television shows. If you don’t like a particular tv show, don’t watch it. Turn the channel. If you don’t like Movie Juice, then don’t come here and read the reviews. If you have so much to say, start your own website and say it there.

    I have to say that the hater comments and snarky replies are nearly as much fun to read as the original posts! Not quite as good, but worth coming back for.

    Not that I’m saying Movie Juice is a bad tv show – you know I love you Mark! I just don’t understand getting so worked up about an movie review website that you would spend the kind of time and energy CTM has in explaining why it’s bad.

    [Reply]

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    Wouldn’t it be great if MovieJuice was a bad TV show? Thanks Stephanie.

    Stephanie Reply:

    I would totally watch that show – nothing better than bad tv!!

  15. TRC says:

    The comments are the best part! Hahaha. My personal favourite -

    ” I’m trying to come up with a childish comment to defend my internet-honor, but all I can think of is “your mother.””

    Mr Ramsey, may I have permission to call you Master?

    [Reply]

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    Great. Raised expectations. That’s all I need.

    Thanks for the note!

    [Reply]

  16. LP62 says:

    Coherency is overrated. Funny stuff, Mark.

    Tip of the hat for the James Bond reference. Though Pussy Galore would have worked as well. Or Xenia Onatopp. Or Plenty O’Toole.

    [Reply]

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    How I miss those Bond names.

    [Reply]

    TommyB Reply:

    And how I miss those Bond Girls in Playboy.

    [Reply]

  17. That Guy says:

    There are a lot of haters on here, so I’m going to comment on why I love reading Moviejuice. First of all, Hollywood sucks. Period. Not the movies, their’s cool, (well, some of them) but the whole way many of the movies are made, the whole “me-me-me” culture of it all, that fact that movie companies are slaves to the almight dollar. This is why Ramsey is great. His reviews are a skewer to all of the pretension that comes out of Hollywood. That’s why he makes snarky comments on the actors, producers, directors, executives, and anyone in between. THAT’S THE WHOLE POINT OF MOVIEJUICE.

    I get that a lot of commenters float in here from Rotten Tomatoes expecting the typical boring overly analytical review. Well, sorry if you guys are disappointed… that’s not what this site is about. Ebert is on another site. This is Mark Ramsey and he’s all about the snark. And I, for one, enjoy it.

    [Reply]

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    Thanks for the kind words. I don’t take all this stuff seriously, of course.

    Yes, lots of folks come here from Rotten Tomatoes thinking that every reviewer is A. O. Scott. Ya want a review of the movie? Go ask yer friends, pals.

    [Reply]

  18. Henry Potter says:

    This was quite possible the WORST review I’ve heard in my entire existence on planet earth. You obviously dont know diddly-squat about the Harry Potter world, and I hope one day that you wake up and see the light. LUMOS! ……..Mark Ramsey Reply:
    December 1st, 2010 at 7:13 am

    Yes, editorializing about Harry Potter movies inspires many an enemy!

    ….that doesn’t even make sense. Plus i looked at your pic on rottentomatoes and you look like a blast ended skrewt!!!

    [Reply]

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    “The worst review I’ve heard in my entire existence on planet earth.”

    That’s just about the most awesome blurb I’ve ever seen! Thanks!

    [Reply]

    TommyB Reply:

    “The worst review I’ve heard in my entire existence on planet earth.”

    By that you mean 11 years?

    [Reply]

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    Good one! Wish I had thought of that.

    [Reply]

  19. Jordan says:

    Judging by the comment replies and the review itself, the author writes and acts like a five year old. This review is just horribly laughable.

    [Reply]

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    Hey, at least it’s laughable!

    [Reply]

  20. Lalala says:

    What I liked about the movie was that you see that they are still teenagers and despite being a part of a bigger plot now, suffer minor teenage problems (“I get it you. You choose him.” Ron to Hermoine.) That quote was pulled from the book though not the movie. But close to the movie.

    J. K. Rowling used to work for Amnesty International in her twenties and became interested in human rights issues; therefore, we see a lot of parallels between societal oppression and prejudice (Pure Blood is like Ethnic Cleansing or the belief that there is better races…however, in The Tales of Beedle the Bard, Dumbledore’s notes explains that all wizards have some trace of muggle blood in their history which is a good argument for the futility of it, though those engaging would not be considered logical.)

    Yet she says that teenagers can still act. Even Harry Potter, at the thought of Dumbledoor being his age when talking about muggle oppression, says that the age doesn’t matter because look at what HE is fighting for. This to me reminded me of Sophie Scholl, the young adult and college student who was an activist of the White Rose, an Anti-Nazi movement in Germany.

    However, good versus evil is not so simple in this installment. Harry Potter gets tempted by the hallows, Ron walks out on his friends (though he comes back), Luna’s father decides to trade in Harry and his friends to get his daughter back and Malfoy hesitated when looking at Harry to identify him. Another note is that in the book Wormtail starts choking Harry Potter and when Harry Potter mentions that he saved Wormtail’s life once, Wormtail loosens his grip and backs away. Then, the curse on his silver hand given by Voldemort is activated. Wormtail begins to choke himself and Harry Potter gets away. This part is not in the movie…however, it is another illustration that although this movie seems more for the action, the “boring” parts as labeled by other critics are really moral questions that should dig the audience and make them think.

    In a speech to Harvard, J.K. Rowling, however, stated that you do not need magic to change the world or to do good. I think despite everything, her work with Amnesty and her moral subplots engage the audience in a less direct way, but one worth looking at.

    Hope you didn’t mind me leaving a comment as a review. I COME IN PEACE (besides the haters above who come with no sense of humor. I will suprise them by having an analysis of the film to enjoy is they read all your post and comments.) And I did it for me because I felt comfortable expressing my opinion on here.

    Basically, you don’t seem stuck up. : )

    [Reply]

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    Your opinions are safe and welcome here!

    Which is more than I can say for my own. :-)

    [Reply]

    TommyB Reply:

    “Harry Potter gets tempted by the hallows…”.

    I haven’t seen it, so just asking: Is hallows another word for female breasts?

    [Reply]

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    Let me watch the DVD frame by frame and I’ll let you know!

    [Reply]

  21. CTM2 says:

    And mine, apparently, since it looks my latest comment was deleted in addition to my username being blocked. I have to say I’m surprised. I guess the only comments Ramsey wants are either compliments–mindless or otherwise–or short, snide remarks he can easily dismiss.

    [Reply]

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    No, I can dismiss your long, snide ones too.

    [Reply]

  22. Greg says:

    Hey! I enjoyed reading it and found it funny. Well written. Well done!

    [Reply]

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    Bless you, Greg. Or as I occasionally refer to you….Mom.

    [Reply]

  23. Tom says:

    Interesting review.

    [Reply]

    CaptainObvious Reply:

    Or not.

    [Reply]

  24. dave says:

    it’s funny how not funny you are

    [Reply]

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    Well at least it’s funny.

    [Reply]

  25. Rick says:

    This isn’t a review. If anything, it’s satire. A pretty bad satire of the film.

    [Reply]

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

    [Reply]

  26. conserned says:

    Mr. Ramsey, if you want people to respect your comments, you should have respect for ours. These insulting replies to our comments are childish. You are making yourself unpopular and the rate is increasing exponentially. Please consider changing your tone for your own sake.

    You may delete my post as I take no interest in publicly addressing you.

    [Reply]

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    Well, posting to a blog is never a good idea if you have no interest in publicly addressing somebody. I’m glad to be getting exponentially unpopular. It sure beats exponentially boring!

    [Reply]

    TommyB Reply:

    Mark wants to us to respect his comments? Is that in the manual to this site?
    I missed that one…
    Well, I’ll add a spoonful of it in my future comments.

    But it’s great that you’re introducing higher (i.e. non-linear) mathematics in this blog. Respect!
    Adding a graph and the corresponding function will be appreciated!

    [Reply]

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    In this case, anything with a function would be an improvement!

    [Reply]

  27. CaptainObvious says:

    Upon my second visit to your site, I feel comfortable stating I’m just not dumb enough to “get” your childish attempt at humor, Mr. Ramsey. I read through a few of your remarks, and your level of creativity rivals that of the “class clowns” in high school.

    Congrats, Mr. Ramsey, this will be the last time I ever visit your uninteresting website. Best of luck to you in your failing career as a comedian.

    [Reply]

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    Feel free to come back when you get dumber.

    [Reply]

  28. Jamie says:

    I liked the review/rant. Although I did find myself skimming to the bottom after a moment or two.

    Were you trying to make me feel the way you did when you saw the movie? That’s the impression I got.

    Well, it worked… but I thought it was funny, too.

    [Reply]

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    That’s almost fan mail! Thanks!

    [Reply]

    TommyB Reply:

    “…Were you trying to make me feel the way you did when you saw the movie?”

    Whoa, that’s so deep, dude!

    [Reply]

  29. AspreyJ says:

    Wait…this is bad. How in the world did this rank on Rotten Tomatoes? I had respect for that site before this. I mean, Lord knows I enjoy flippancy and foolishness, but this isn’t a review at all. It’s fun but…bad. So lame.

    [Reply]

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    If I can’t please fans of flippancy of foolishness, then I’ll settle for fans of inanity and hopelessness.

    [Reply]

  30. Harry Potter says:

    Dude, don’t take the piss out of my movie with your lame-ass jokes.

    You suck.

    [Reply]

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    Wow, a fictional character just posted a comment to my rant. That’s almost like having Gary Busey posting a comment to my rant!

    [Reply]

    Gary Busey Reply:

    Leave me out of this.

    [Reply]

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    There’s no way he real Gary Busey would be so pithy!

  31. Ashel says:

    Yes, editorializing about Harry Potter movies inspires many an enemy!

    It’s sad it does!

    “Fan out across the romantic cliffs!” commanded the Dark Lord to his tribe. ”They are catnip to cinematographers and wizards, alike!”

    That’s so true. Ahaha. Too bad people take the whole thing too seriously. Their comments are just as enternaining as your short fic though!

    [Reply]

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    That’s why I keep irritating and getting irritated! Thanks for the note.

    [Reply]

  32. Google rocks says:

    [...]Wonderful story, reckoned we could combine several unrelated information, nonetheless truly really worth taking a look, whoa did one learn about Mid East has got a lot more problerms also [...]

    [Reply]

  33. That is really interesting, You’re an excessively professional blogger. I have joined your feed and sit up for in the hunt for more of your wonderful post. Additionally, I have shared your website in my social networks

    [Reply]

    Mark Ramsey Reply:

    Okay, it’s spam, but it’s such kind spam that I have to allow it.

    [Reply]

Leave a Reply

Enter your own funny caption

caption this

“This is where we would kiss if I was attracted to girls”