mohandasgandhi:

joemccarthyblues:

lestranges:

So apparently the make up in The Iron Lady was better than the make up in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2…

Hey, Harry Potter turned people into fanciful creatures from story book land

The Iron Lady turned a regular person into our most accurate depiction of pure evil and satan herself. 

Makes sense to me. 

I’m sorry, but Mike’s commentary….

makes sense to me tbh

yeah he kind of was imo

buenonacho:

I’m going to start crying in class

lmao @ how all of these relationships were mutual and reciprocated except snape and his creepy ass obsession with lily

withoutrestraint:

imatwit:

 #Harry should have married Luna instead of Ginny #i’m serious 

#okay #but they can only get married after like ten years of living together #also he visibly GULPS here whaaaaat. otp.

harry + luna »»»»»»»»»»»»»»»» harry/ginny, harry/hermione, etc

“Draco has been a good hate-figure. But we start to see he’s a victim of circumstances. He almost has a glimpse of redemption – then very quickly throws it away.”
- Tom Felton for London Evening Standard

“It just helps with the whole image of Neville.” says Lewis. “He’s not supposed to look like Brad Pitt, the character is described in the book as being very round-faced. But from the third film onwards they started sticking the fat suit on because I just grew up. I simply grew taller and thinned out. As for the teeth, it was something I’d always wanted to do but it would have meant me wearing a brace for two years, which I just couldn’t do. In fact Warner Brothers said if I put it off until we’d finished filming they’d pay for it – and they did. But they were always keen for me to look less than perfect.”
- Matt Lewis for Yorkshire Evening Post

who would’ve thought that neville would be the best looking actor from the HP series

emma is the only one who got better looking. all the guys just look BUSTED as hell.

godricslytherin:

-duerre:

michelinamarie / hopesichord / itsinthetrees / hopesichord

It was the meeting of two kinds of - if you call what Bellatrix feels for Voldemort love, I guess we’ll call it love, she has a kind of obsession with him, it’s a very sick obsession … and I wanted to match that kind of obsession with maternal love… the power that you give someone by loving them. So Molly was really an amazing exemplar of maternal love. … There was something very satisfying about putting those two women together. - J.K. Rowling

paging @itsinthetrees.

please tell the class your feelings on this business.

THIS FUCKING QUOTE.

This quote gives me all the fucking feelings.

Because no, JKR.  No. Let me break this down for you.

Bellatrix Lestrange is evil because she is a racist genocidal lunatic.

Bellatrix Lestrange is evil because she likes to torture people, sometimes to irreparable states of insanity.

Bellatrix Lestrange is evil because she is the most loyal zealot of a fascist egomaniac with no moral compass who wants to take over the world and crush the weak under his heel.

Bellatrix Lestrange is not evil because she has a sexual desire for that fascist.

Bellatrix Lestrange is not evil because she doesn’t love her husband.

Bellatrix Lestrange is not evil because she is the only pureblood witch who never had kids and doesn’t give a shit about kids.  (It’s of particular interest to me that the fertility issues among the Black Sisters — alluded to by Sirius — is linked explicitly in the text with their being ‘inbred’ and with their various mental illnesses.)

This is a complex woman with complex motivations — family loyalty, ingrained bigotry, a devotion to nostalgic history, a straight up psychotic desire to cause pain — utterly distinct from her love for Lord Voldemort.  To toss all that aside in some effort to make a point about motherhood is bizarre.

I shouldn’t have to do this.  I shouldn’t have to defend Bellatrix Lestrange for the sake of feminism, for god’s sake, because let’s be real: she’s certainly not a character who prides herself on progressive politics.  But to step out of the text and look at this critically, it’s utterly grotesque to turn Voldemort’s right hand into a stock Bad Woman, a wretched Medea that some ‘exemplar of maternal love’ can snuff out for the sake of uteruses everywhere.

These two women have no connection to one another.  There is literally no narrative reason to have Molly kill Bellatrix except to make a qualitative statement about maternity.  Molly could have just as easily ‘had [her] moment’ by killing Dolohov, or Yaxley, or one of the Carrows.  More importantly, this choice is an utter disservice to the narrative, because depriving Neville Longbottom of his final confrontation with the woman who tore apart his family is just fucking bizarre.

Moreover, it’s ridiculous: Bellatrix Lestrange is the most accomplished duellist we ever meet in these books bar Voldemort and Dumbledore.  The text goes on and on about this.  Harry is fucking terrified of her, and with good reason.  The only people portrayed as intimidating her whatsoever are Voldemort and her sister Narcissa.  So unless she was drunk at the Battle of Hogwarts, the idea that Molly Weasley of all people could kill her with a single hex is beyond ridiculous.  If Molly Weasley is that big a badass, why the hell has she been folding laundry and planning weddings while there’s a war on?  This all makes entirely no sense, and this whole choice is one of the biggest cock-ups in the books.

Apparently making a point about Bad Women and their disgusting sexuality was that important to JKR.  The mind boggles.

This is J. K. Rowling’s character, not yours. Let her say what she wants to. After all, she is the one who created them. So I’m sure she knows more about these characters then you do.

mte. if harry’s mother could stop THE GREATEST DARK WIZARD OF ALL TIME with the power of her own love and sacrifice, then i’m pretty sure molly weasley could’ve done something similar to bellatrix lestrange.

HP3: PoA in condensed cartoon form