Rules: There may be spoilers for all seven books and 8 movies Each match will last for exactly 24 hours. Any votes after that point will not count. Discussion is encouraged but not required. Make sure all of your votes are obvious. I should know who you are voting for, basically don't bury your vote in the middle of a paragraph. No alt-voting. Ties will be replayed the next day with the rest of the matches. No vote-saves or rallying for specific characters. Telling people to vote is encouraged but don't tell them how to vote! Don't complain about the seeds, they were the result of a save-my. Because matches can overlap, results will be in this topic. http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/8-gamefaqs-contests/61327435
Easy choice and I don't even like Luna nearly as much as I used to. Hagrid is never the correct choice for me. Okay, that was a lie. Against Cho he'd be the correct choice.
--
Courtesy of fr0q - http://img.imgcake.com/gensagajpgqe.jpg Punny worked hard on this! - http://img.imgcake.com/Punny/Gennypngas.png
Not even slightly close for me. Luna makes a strong case for being my #1 favourite character from the series. And Hagrid, while he's a great character for a children's novel (the friendly bumbling giant with a magical pink umbrella) he just doesn't transition well as the series becomes teen fiction.
--
Cats land on their feet. Toast lands peanut butter side down. A cat with toast strapped to its back will hover above the ground in a state of quantum indecision
(2)Rubeus Hagrid If I were taking the movies into account, I'd probably vote for Luna. But I try to keep this strictly to the books (since some characters don't even appear in the movie). One of my problems with Luna is that she just... appears in Book 5. No earlier mention (outside of the Lovegoods being mentioned in book 4). Which is odd for Rowling. A mention or appearance in a previous book would've made her, IMO, a much better character.
--
See You In Another Life, Brother. New York Giants - The Patriot Slayers
Cloud and Squall posted... One of my problems with Luna is that she just... appears in Book 5. No earlier mention [..] Which is odd for Rowling.
Err...not really?
Gildroy Lockhart -- apparently quite famous; not mentioned in earlier books. Dobby the house elf -- most relevant, and first appears in book 2 Remus Lupin -- just materializes in book 3 Macnair -- just materializes in book 3 Peter Pettigrew -- Just materializes in book 3 Sybil Trelawney -- Just materializes in book 3 (along with excuses like "I never come down from my tower, that's why you haven't seen me before") Krum, Fleur, Kakaroff, Bagmann, Madamme Maxime, Barty Crouch Sr, Mad-Eye Moody, Barty Crouch Jr -- All appear for the first time in book 4, many of them apparently quite famous (like Krum, Mad-eye, Bagmann, Crouch Sr). Tonks, Kingsley, Luna, Umbridge, Madam Bones, Grawp -- All appear for the first time (and with their biggest appearance) in book 5. (And I think Zacharias Smith might be a first-timer? Not sure about that one. Luna technically isn't if you count the mention of the lovegoods in book 4!!!) Slughorn, Cormac McLaggen, and a whole heap of death eaters in the Astronomy Tower (like the tall blond death eater and the Carrows) just materialize in this book.
It's more the exception rather than the rule that she'll mention a character before they get a much bigger role. (Cho, Cedric, Bellatrix, Sirius, Alberforth, Blaize Zabini, Fudge, Ginnny Weasly, Bathilda Bagshot, Gellert Grindlewald, Scrimgeour, Bill Weasly, Griphook, Greyback...yeah, those are all I can think of right now. And some of those are on the same level as "the lovegoods" mention where it's just a name mentioned briefly).
--
Cats land on their feet. Toast lands peanut butter side down. A cat with toast strapped to its back will hover above the ground in a state of quantum indecision
Yeah, Trelawney (and even Cormac) was way worse then Luna with that.
Also, Luna.
--
When you've got a pretty-boy monkey on your back constantly calling you a puppet, you hardly want to seem like you're happy to be used. - DSakaCharanJ
From: Cloud and Squall | #026 One of my problems with Luna is that she just... appears in Book 5. No earlier mention (outside of the Lovegoods being mentioned in book 4). Which is odd for Rowling. A mention or appearance in a previous book would've made her, IMO, a much better character.
I gotta agree with MC, this complaint just seems weird to me. First because the Lovegoods ARE mentioned in book 4. Second because what reason was there for Harry to have heard of a Ravenclaw girl who's a year below him? Unlike some of the other characters we might have had reason to have heard of like Trelawney, this one doesn't bother me at all.
-- I made a living on time trial blowing myself off to cross the finish line at ludicrous speed. -transience
"And that's Smith of Hufflepuff with the Quaffle," said a dreamy voice, echoing over the grounds. "He did the commentary last time, of course, and Ginny Weasley flew into him, I think probably on purpose, it looked like it. Smith was being quite rude about Gryffindor, I expect he regrets that now he's playing them — oh, look, he's lost the Quaffle, Ginny took it from him, I do like her, she's very nice. ..."
Harry stared down at the commentator's podium. Surely nobody in their right mind would have let Luna Lovegood commentate? But even from above there was no mistaking that long, dirty-blonde hair, nor the necklace of butterbeer corks. . . . Beside Luna, Professor McGonagall was looking slightly uncomfortable, as though she was indeed having second thoughts about this appointment.
". . . but now that big Hufflepuff player's got the Quaffle from , her, I can't remember his name, it's something like Bibble — no, Buggins —"
"It's Cadwallader!" said Professor McGonagall loudly from beside Luna. The crowd laughed.
"...but Luna did not seem to have noticed; she appeared singularly uninterested in such mundane things as the score, and kept attempting to draw the crowd's attention to such things as interestingly shaped clouds and the possibility that Zacharias Smith, who had so far failed to maintain possession of the Quaffle for longer than a minute, was suffering from something called "Loser's Lurgy." "
-- "If he's so good, why isn't he playing in the SEC?" ~McAdamMc "Yeah, that Walter Payton sucked, playing in the SWAC"
Kaxon posted... I gotta agree with MC, this complaint just seems weird to me. First because the Lovegoods ARE mentioned in book 4. Second because what reason was there for Harry to have heard of a Ravenclaw girl who's a year below him? Unlike some of the other characters we might have had reason to have heard of like Trelawney, this one doesn't bother me at all.
Yeah, I'm much more bothered by the students we -don't- hear about in Harry's year.
Blaize Zabini literally goes unmentioned from book 1 to book 6. And there's like...
Mandy Brocklehurst Millicent Bulstrode (OK, so she gets mentioned for a polyjuice potion target) Anthony Goldstein (Literally not mentioned before he joins the DA) Daphne Greengrass (Supposedly she gets mentioned in OoTP? I don't even remember her being mentioned...). Leanne (Yeah, Katie Bell's friend who tries to stop her from carrying the necklace? Apparently she was in Harry's year) Morag MacDougal Lily Moon Theodore Nott (Although sure, he gets mentioned as the son of a death eater) Sally-Anne Perks Lisa Turpin
Not to mention, a long list of students literally never mentioned in the books, but who show up in Rowling's notes: Stephen Cornfoot Tracey Davis Kevin Entwhistle Wayne Hopkins Megan Jones Sue Li Isobel MacDougal Roger Malone Oliver Rivers Sophie Roper ____ Runcorn Sally Smith Spinks
These are all students IN HARRY'S YEAR. He took classes with these people. I believe some of them are even supposed to be freaking Gryffindors (certainly it's weird that there are five gryffindor males, and only three gryffindor females that ever get mentioned). And yet, many of them don't get mentioned outside of the sorting scene (or don't get mentioned ever in the entire series).
If we can go 6 years without any of these students being worthy of notice, we can go 3 years without Harry noticing someone he doesn't share a single class with who doesn't play quidditch and is not in Gryffindor.
--
Cats land on their feet. Toast lands peanut butter side down. A cat with toast strapped to its back will hover above the ground in a state of quantum indecision
From: MUKMASTER2 | #044 Cause if they put everything in, the actors would be 40 years old by the 7th book-movie.
That doesn't explain why they would leave out one of the best scenes. And if I remember correctly they still had a Quidditch game in the 6th movie, they just cut out Luna's commentary!
-- I made a living on time trial blowing myself off to cross the finish line at ludicrous speed. -transience
From: metroid composite | #045 These are all students IN HARRY'S YEAR. He took classes with these people. I believe some of them are even supposed to be freaking Gryffindors (certainly it's weird that there are five gryffindor males, and only three gryffindor females that ever get mentioned). And yet, many of them don't get mentioned outside of the sorting scene (or don't get mentioned ever in the entire series).
Agreed, this is weird. Actually I read somewhere there are supposed to be more than 5 Gryffindor boys in Harry's year, but she never ever mentions the ones who don't share Harry's dorm room.
-- I made a living on time trial blowing myself off to cross the finish line at ludicrous speed. -transience
Ed Bellis posted... Rowling admitted that she's not good with numbers - I think Book 1 mentions that there's around 100 students in Harry's year, but there's pretty much only the five Gryffindor boys and Hermione in their year as far as the books tell us! Logically speaking there should definitely be more than that, but Rowling's admitted that she doesn't have a good grasp on stuff like that. >_>
Pavarati Patil and Lavender Brown make it 3 girls in Harry's year.
But...more to the point, Rowling said she dreamed up 40 kids in Harry's year by name and birth. 5 males and 5 females for each of the four houses. Even if we accept that Rowling is bad with numbers, and that the total number of kids in Harry's year is ACTUALLY 40, not 100, that still means that there's two Gryffindor females who have a bio sheet in Rowling's notes and literally never get mentioned in the books.
--
Cats land on their feet. Toast lands peanut butter side down. A cat with toast strapped to its back will hover above the ground in a state of quantum indecision