Home
Creators
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register Favorites Keys Review DMs Logout
Community
Telegram ThePornDude
Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

Hear Me Out: I Read Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone (Patreon)

Published:
2024-11-21 15:43:08
Imported:
2026-06

Comments

Ava Hormozian

Dude, I have been complaining about them leaving out Hermione's puzzle since I was like 7 hahahaha. Yeah, Harry passes out, and Dumbledore shows up in time to pull Quirrell off of him. Then Voldemort flees and Quirrell dies. Though they don't get into how Quirrel dies, Dumbledore says that Voldemort shows his followers no mercy. In my mind, I always imagined that Quirrel died of his injuries from the fight with Harry, because he is clearly suffering, but Voldemort doesn't let him stop touching him. So he was probably very seriously injured when Voldemort left his body. Plus, he's been doing a whole bunch of stuff to keep Voldemort alive, like drinking Unicorn blood. (Which, come to think if it, makes me wonder how Quirrell died. UNLESS, his body died but his soul didn't, like Voldemort, but unlike Voldemort, he didn't have a horcrux to bring him back so he is cursed to roam the earth forever. Yup, that's my headcanon.)

Maria Stoycheva

Fluffy isn't 'cool', he's equal parts cute and terrifying but definitely not cool :D the more you read, the more you will realise that the books and the movies are *very* different. this is what I find annoying. I love a lot of the actors and how they portray the characters but a lot of times they feel out of character somehow. some changes to the story make sense for keeping the story short enough for a movie but others are just plain a travesty :D your point about Hermione is accurate: she's a boring know-it-all stickler to the rules in the first couple of books but she somehow appears cooler on screen. what is more, I feel like she gets all the best lines and some of those definitely belong to other characters in the book ;) Emma Watson is probably in my top 3 Harry Potter actors but I still would have liked to see more of some of the side characters and a larger selection of the side plots. I think viewers that never read the books were confused many, many times while watching the movies by stuff that is explained in the books (regardless of whether it actually makes sense or not :D) keep us updated, I'd listen to your thoughts on the other books too.

Maria Stoycheva
>>155991359

Have you seen Stargate? My Quirrell headcanon is a bit like the main Stargate villain. either way, I agree on the puzzle. these smaller moments are very underrated and almost never show up in the movies just right, and that annoys me. I read the books when I was young and moments like these have stuck with me. it's sad that we don't have them on screen.

John Sky

every book going forward has so much extra content, you will have a totally different experience with each movie/book pairing the movies are great on their own (the time crunch forced them to cut so so much stuff from an increasingly large series of books), and only Hogwarts Legacy video game brings the Harry Potter universe to life as much as these movies Hogwarts Legacy has a massive explorable Hogwarts castle and surrounding area, you can visit stuff that has never been shown in the movies like Hufflepuff dormitory or Ravenclaw tower for the first time, it is set hundreds of years before Harry Potter and has no real connections to main harry potter series besides maybe seeing some ancestors of certain characters, highly recommend it once you're done with the books! as a kid growing up at the exact same time as the books came out, we were always dissapointed with the movies cutting minor characters or entire chapters, but I have grown to love them as much as the books and forgive their flaws the biggest shock was movie 3, book 3 had a lot of heart to it and so many details I thought were essential to understanding movie plot; for example, chocolate was not just some random food Lupin gave to Harry on the train, it was actually a specific antidote for people affected by Dementor presence; when you will finish reading book 3 you will have learned some incredible stuff about harry's father and why Harry's patronus is a stag, its a major part of the entire book's plot, in the movies you just see Harry's patronus as a stag for no reason, and later on Severus creating a patronus in the shape of a Doe to represent Lily Potter, without the books these are just random visual effects Happy you enjoyed the first of these books that I have re-read as a kid countless times! It only gets better from here

Balazs Foldes

Oh, I'm so happy for some book reactions! Really, very much. For sure, there are many differences and things left out from the movies. And the Philosopher's Stone was the shortest book, all others will have more and more cut from them. I've never been too upset about that, though, or even the changes: films and books are very different media, and need different tools in order to work. There are some movies, though, where I'm upset about some of the decisions on what to leave out, because I believe that the movies just don't work well or consistently because of those. Anyway, the Hermione puzzle being left out is sad, but I get it. They gave the plant trap to Hermione instead, which is probably easier adapted to film than a logic puzzle. Quirrel, yes, I think you are correct. In the book, Harry faints from the exertion and pain of needing to grasp Quirrel, so that Harry can cause him so much pain that the more skilled professor cannot just kill Harry with a curse. Then Dumbledore arrives, saves Harry, and Voldemort flees while Quirrel is dying. Again, I understand the movie version: it's more cinematic for Harry to achieve a win on his own, and not just be saved by Dumbledore's deus ex machina. Never really bothered me that much. Anyway, good luck with your little night readings! Hope you will have many sleepless nights, having to fill up your bedtime with stories. :D

James B.

My first book was Goblet of Fire, because that was the only one my college library had. (The fifth book hadn't even been released yet, and the hype for the series had finally drawn me in). It was a great start. I was hooked almost straight away.

James B.

The books are generally better, and Hermione gets more fleshed out. I have a feeling she was a stand-in for Rowling in the first book--if not the whole series, and maybe Rowling was hesitant to reveal too much about herself?

Skinny_Obelix

Man, I was sour about Harry Potter for the longest time. When I was growing up in the late 80s and early 90s, there was a British author Anthony Horowitz, who didn't have major success in his home country, but was massive in Belgium, The Netherlands and Germany. He had a series called Groosham Grange, where the plot revolves around David Eliot, a teenager mistreated by his parents who receive an unexpected call from an isolated boarding school, Groosham Grange, which reveals itself as a school for wizards and witches. To get to the school they need to take a train where he meets his two friends. When they arrive at school, they're met with a hunchback groundskeeper who leads them around... Oh and yeah they have a teacher werewolf who hides his condition, named Leloup instead of Lupin... So obviously when I read the first Harry Potter it left a very sour taste in my mouth as it was obviously plagiarized, not just inspired by... Anthony Horowitz himself was a lot more gracious about it, as he thanked Rowling for contributing to young adult fiction... So I dropped the book and only years after the success of the movies, I buckled, watched the movies, and then went on to the books. And although I still think she ripped off Anthony Horowitz, I can't deny she took it in a good direction with the later books. Which I really liked, but that first one, nope.

Youtalkingtome
>>156000564

Yikes. That's really unfortunate. I have a real distaste for derivative writing, let alone out-and-out theft like that.

Youtalkingtome
>>155996232

Maybe. It does seem odd that the author, who is a woman, seemed to struggle most with the one female character in the principle ensemble. You might be on to something as to why.

Youtalkingtome
>>155994937

Thanks! Yeah, I wasn't necessarily bothered by the change in Qruirrel's death. However, I do think, if Dumbledore did have to ultimately rescue Harry from Voldemort there, it would have raised the stakes moving forward (demonstrating that 11-year-old Harry is no match for Voldemort, even in a weakened form).

Youtalkingtome
>>155992015

Thanks for sharing that! Yeah, I kind of get the sense that the books (which get WAY longer than Sorcerer's Stone) will undoubtedly have wholesale omissions. I remember being confused by some things in the films (what is that piece of mirror Harry carries? Why does Barty Crouch just disappear between movies?) that people say are answered in the novels, so I am looking forward to a more enriching understanding of the stories in the reading.

Youtalkingtome
>>155991443

Thanks! I will keep reading and sharing! I look forward to the books answering some of the questions I had while watching the films that I feel should have had narrative explanations.

Youtalkingtome
>>155991359

It was really unclear, right? I might go back and re-read it, but I got the sense (and I could be completely wrong) that Quirrel died when Voldemort was separated from him.

Youtalkingtome
>>155991359

Hermione's potion puzzle was one of my favorite parts of the novel: a wizard or witch, even a great one, would have struggled to figure it out (and might have died), but Hermione, the brilliant logician, solves it on her own as an 11-year-old. I would have LOVED to see this in the film.

Aude M
>>156000564

Oooh, I didn't know that Anthony Horowitz thing ! Troubling.

James B.
>>155995076

Not really because there is an expositional bit at the beginning of each book along the lines of "Harry Potter was no ordinary boy, he was a wizard, and has just finished his x year at the famous Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry...." And it usually includes a run down of the antics of the previous year, who He Who Must Not be Named is, and an intro to each character when they first appear: "And there was Ron Weasley, Harry's best friend, who helped..." etc.

Sarah P

I would just advise making sure you always get the used copies, in whatever fashion they’re available.

Roland Cooke

I read the first book, but it wasn't Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone. ;)

Roland Cooke
>>156000564

Anthony Horowitz did okay for himself, he's had two Alex Rider books made into movies.