Can someone explain to me the Harry Potter Phenom?

[Mondain]

And it's not an exploitation of Rowling's character and situation that turned it into a monstrous success? Geez, they were reporting every move she made in the early pages of the newspaper and of TV news shows at some point in time. Who wouldn't gather acclaim and sales in such conditions?

[TVC15]

She had sales and popularity before there was media acclaim.

[Saint Cornelius]

And it's not an exploitation of Rowling's character and situation that turned it into a monstrous success?

omfg Mondain, seek help.

[Mandark]

What happened with Harry Potter is that childrens shows and movies were becoming overly safe, overly PC and sterile.  Growing up I had lots of cartoons, there were fantastical Henson productions, there was darker stuff like Labyrinth or Return to Oz.

I think you're mythologizing your own childhood a bit, et.  There has always been safe and saccharine entertainment for kids, especially young ones, and there's been plenty of violent or adventure-oriented children's stuff in the last decade.

[Mondain]

Urgh, I never said or meant (even with "in its beginnings") that the popularity of HP was only due to mainstream media hype. But it's what IMO took the fad to the next level.

[Van Cruncheon]

yeah, she would've been a monster success regardless of the rags-to-riches story. in fact, i'll bet very few of her less hardcore fans even know her personal history. my wife's a huge fan, and she knows fuckall about rowling's history. she loves the books because she loves high school dramas, fantasy, and british authors, in that order.

[TVC15]

Urgh, I never said or meant (even with "in its beginnings") that the popularity of HP was only due to mainstream media hype. But it's what IMO took the fad to the next level.

Harry Potter got hyped so much by the medias in its beginnings, which allowed it to escalate to the tragic levels of popularity that we've all witnessed for a few years.

How could you have possibly meant that while stating "in its beginnings?"

[Fresh Prince]

After watching all the hype about Harry Potter, people must of felt this way about Star Wars. Though Star Wars did I think have original elements while J.K did mash up a lot of fantasy together. As well as the fact George Lucas did actual bring something new into film making.

I think the biggest thing is that J.K has endeared herself to female fans (despite having a male protagonist), which most fantasy writers have not capitalised upon. In a sense she, in the public perception stopped making teenage fantasy the domain for desperate, pimply boys.

[Saint Cornelius]

As well as the fact George Lucas did actual bring something new into film making.

While subtly ripping off the Seven Samurai.

[Fresh Prince]

As well as the fact George Lucas did actual bring something new into film making.

While subtly ripping off the Seven Samurai.

Wasn't it another movie? Anyway he did bring new technical aspects to film making.

[Mondain]

How could you have possibly meant that while stating "in its beginnings?"

When it began to be popularized in the mainstream medias.

[TVC15]

So, what you are saying is that when the media began covering the series is when the media began covering the series?

[Van Cruncheon]

tvc, mondain is socially dysfunctional and probably unaware of the "watercooler" or "playground" effect, whereby certain books, games, shows or what-have-you are catapulted into the cultural stratosphere by dint of being WHAT EVERYONE IS TALKING ABOUT. many, many semi-popular things start this way, only to never strike the balance between accessibility and relative originality necessary to be a subject of regular real-world conversation. harry potter became successful due to word of mouth, and suggesting that the author's personal history is even remotely responsible for it is a total non-sequitur. mondain, are you going to suggest that american idol hit it big because simon cowell used to live with his mom, or that lost is big because j.j. abrams schtupped jennifer garner?

[Mr. Gundam]

As well as the fact George Lucas did actual bring something new into film making.

While subtly ripping off the Seven Samurai.

Wasn't it another movie? Anyway he did bring new technical aspects to film making.

Hidden Fortress, not Seven Samurai.

[The Fake Shemp]

Why does Mondain harbor some deep resentment against the media, which he know blames or cries conspiracy against anything that nudges against his socially awkward sensibilities?

[Human Snorenado]

Why does Mondain harbor some deep resentment against the media, which he know blames or cries conspiracy against anything that nudges against his socially awkward sensibilities?

Who knows.  Dude is fucked up.  I mean, he supposedly likes everywhere else on the interwebs so much better than GAF but whenever he gets a chance to get a dig in on it he does. 

[etiolate]

What happened with Harry Potter is that childrens shows and movies were becoming overly safe, overly PC and sterile.  Growing up I had lots of cartoons, there were fantastical Henson productions, there was darker stuff like Labyrinth or Return to Oz.

I think you're mythologizing your own childhood a bit, et.  There has always been safe and saccharine entertainment for kids, especially young ones, and there's been plenty of violent or adventure-oriented children's stuff in the last decade.

There was safe stuff in my childhood(Mr Rogers) but there were darker things.  At a certain point, those darker, more fantastical things dropped off.  I can't think of a single late 90s movie aimed at youngens as dark as Neverending Story or a Return to Oz can be(not that Return to Oz was reallya imed at kids, but people thought it was jsut due to Oz). Nickelodeon and Disney were dominating youth media for awhile and I found them to be much lighter on fantasy or dark themes than the 80s era television and movies. 

So to me, kids were starved of what Harry Potter provided.

[Candyflip]

What happened with Harry Potter is that childrens shows and movies were becoming overly safe, overly PC and sterile.  Growing up I had lots of cartoons, there were fantastical Henson productions, there was darker stuff like Labyrinth or Return to Oz.

I think you're mythologizing your own childhood a bit, et.  There has always been safe and saccharine entertainment for kids, especially young ones, and there's been plenty of violent or adventure-oriented children's stuff in the last decade.

There was safe stuff in my childhood(Mr Rogers) but there were darker things.  At a certain point, those darker, more fantastical things dropped off.  I can't think of a single late 90s movie aimed at youngens as dark as Neverending Story or a Return to Oz can be(not that Return to Oz was reallya imed at kids, but people thought it was jsut due to Oz). Nickelodeon and Disney were dominating youth media for awhile and I found them to be much lighter on fantasy or dark themes than the 80s era television and movies. 

So to me, kids were starved of what Harry Potter provided.

The 90s needed a Goonies.