Why didn’t Voldemort just take a bite out of Harry and eat him?

>sticking your dick in crazy

>implying he didn't

Why didn't JK Rowling just write a better story?

Why am I reading this shit thread?

Why didn't he just grab him by the little baby legs, and smash him against the wall? Lily probably didn't have any protective spells for that.

Noooooooooo! You bitch! You bitch!

why didn't he just take a gun with him?

Why didn't Voldemort just use a knife and slash Harry's throat?

In universe explanation: Because voldemort is an incel magical purist and the idea of using a mundane, "muggle" method of execution disgusted him

Actual explanation:
Rowling is a hack. Voldemort could have filled his lungs with water via magic. Pretty sure the protective magic wouldn't save him from drowning. Imagine being a seld proclaimed master of magic and not knowing incredibly fucking basic protective magic. Were wizards in HO beta pussies? In the real world there would have been thousands of such instances because people sacrifice themselves for others all the time

The better question is, why didn't the Queen just end social services to prevent the creation of the dullest franchise in the history of movie franchises. Seriously each episode following the boy wizard and his pals from Hogwarts Academy as they fight assorted villains has been indistinguishable from the others. Aside from the gloomy imagery, the series’ only consistency has been its lack of excitement and ineffective use of special effects, all to make magic unmagical, to make action seem inert.

Perhaps the die was cast when Rowling vetoed the idea of Spielberg directing the series; she made sure the series would never be mistaken for a work of art that meant anything to anybody?just ridiculously profitable cross-promotion for her books. The Harry Potter series might be anti-Christian (or not), but it’s certainly the anti-James Bond series in its refusal of wonder, beauty and excitement. No one wants to face that fact. Now, thankfully, they no longer have to.

>a-at least the books were good though
"No!"
The writing is dreadful; the book was terrible. As I read, I noticed that every time a character went for a walk, the author wrote instead that the character "stretched his legs."

I began marking on the back of an envelope every time that phrase was repeated. I stopped only after I had marked the envelope several dozen times. I was incredulous. Rowling's mind is so governed by cliches and dead metaphors that she has no other style of writing. Later I read a lavish, loving review of Harry Potter by the same Stephen King. He wrote something to the effect of, "If these kids are reading Harry Potter at 11 or 12, then when they get older they will go on to read Stephen King." And he was quite right. He was not being ironic. When you read "Harry Potter" you are, in fact, trained to read Stephen King.

Attached: 1488840314885.jpg (1594x2857, 578K)

Has anyone got the gun copypasta?

Cannibal Holocaust and about 50 near identical movies, Green Inferno being the latest

Why didnt voldemort shoot harry

Hope so

Presumably Voldemort and his followers killed dozens of families before the Potters. And it's a certainty dark lords of the past slaughtered families as well. Yet Lily Potter was the only mother who loved her kid so much her death activated a magic force field? Why are wizarding families such weird assholes?

Attached: 300px-Francisco_de_Goya,_Saturno_devorando_a_su_hijo_(1819-1823).jpg (300x536, 36K)