This Has Been A Long Time Coming...

Okay, in the past few months there have been several relationship-y articles making the rounds on Facebook. You've seen them. "I didn't marry my soulmate!" and "Marriage isn't for you!" and "[something that goes against the grain so it must be profound]!". Look, we get it, going against the grain makes things more interesting sometimes. This blog is guilty of supporting Ben Affleck and Gal Gadot, as well as defending Miley Cyrus' swiftly deteriorating career. We even hated on JK Rowling one time (sorry about that one, Gelene and Bailey). Those aren't exactly popular decisions, which hopefully is what makes them an interesting read. In a world generally geared towards showing us what we want, we should all strive to see from alternative perspectives from time to time.

"BAH! ALTERNATIVE PERSPECTIVES." -All of you, probably

So here's the thing…

You probably don't want to take relationship advice from Facebook.

Now, we aren't exactly qualified to give out relationship advice. If love was a sport--and let's be real, it is--Mind Grenades writers would be a combined 0-4-1. 

We are the Utah Jazz of relationships.

But there are some things that you just know. You know Facebook isn't a source for any serious information, you know this. Facebook is to remind you that all your friends travel and have more fun than you do, and to supply you with infinite Buzzfeed lists to awaken your inner '90s nostalgia. Links you see on Facebook are not a life manual. In fact, stop believing you're the only one in life who didn't get a life manual- nobody did. Everyone's just trying to figure things out. You think your parents knew what they were doing when they had you? False.

Okay, fine; religious texts are, in a way, a life manual. 

But God still wants you to figure stuff out on your own.

So stop assuming that just because you read somewhere that some other person's dating experience was all like  "I never got butterflies when he kissed me or held my hand. He didn’t sweep me off my feet, and he wasn’t one to compliment me very much. But he was stalwart where it counted… We just made sense together" that your dating experience is gonna be like that. Because you know what? Your relationship probably isn't going to be anything like something you read on freaking Facebook. 

You may actually get the big tremendous "THIS IS IT" feeling. 

Maybe you'll have one of those Anastasia relationships where 90% of the time, you totally hate each other.

Not exactly sure why Fox Animation Studios thought kids would understand 

this particular relationship dynamic.

Maybe your love life will one day resemble your '80s movie of choice.

Or maybe nobody will want you and you'll wind up traveling abroad.

Making you the Allen Iverson of relationships.

The point is, maybe looking at others' relationships and assuming that's what it's going to be like isn't the way to go. The chances are good you're worrying way too much about this. Reading Facebook posts in order to reaffirm the opinions you probably already hold regarding relationships is no way to boost confidence. There will always be something more to read out there about "How to get your guy" or "This one weird trick will get you every girl's number" or whatever the hell Cosmopolitan is talking about.

Freaking Cosmo.

Just learn to be cool with who you are; then you won't need crappy advice from Facebook, or from your most favorite blog. And enjoy the holidays. More posts to follow soon.

With the right pair of aviators, you can be this cool.

-L

P.S. You aren't going to end up alone, we just really wanted to make that Allen Iverson joke. 

But your relationship is never going to be like "Friends With Benefits." Seriously.

P.P.S.

"Freaking Dave forgot to hand out the life manuals. 

Dave must die."

Why Gal Gadot Is Awesome, Or "Stop Hating On My Favorite Actress".

Congratulations, Fanboys of the world- you've managed to draw me out of a two-month break from blogging. Let's get right to it- Mind Grenades readers, this blog post is in defense of Gal Gadot.

That sound you hear is our entire photo department

doing a happy dance.

Regular readers are already aware that the Mind Grenades blog has kind of a soft spot for Gal Gadot, as well as the Fast and the Furious franchise she was best known for until Tuesday's announcement that the actress would be playing the role of Wonder Woman in the upcoming Zach Snyder film "Man of Steel 2 (Batman vs Superman)". The film already endured one round of nerd-rage and is now experiencing another dose. Now, understand that there are about three actresses in all of Hollywood anyone here in the Mind Grenades offices gives a crap about:

1. Jennifer Morrison

2. Kate Beckinsale

3. Gal Gadot

And…that's it. 

So with that understanding, we're going to address these losers who are whining about Snyder's choice to cast Gadot as a character as iconic as Wonder Woman, and do our best to rip their baseless arguments to shreds with the power of common freaking sense.

"But She Doesn't Even Look Like Wonder Woman!"

"Ugh, she's hideous"- Freaking Nobody

You don't think Zach Snyder knows what Wonder Woman looks like? He's a lifelong nerd making a Superman movie, with Batman in it, and he's trying to introduce another character beloved by many in such a way that will appeal to people- and possibly pave the way for a standalone Wonder Woman movie. This is not a decision he'd take lightly. Everyone involved in this movie knows what Wonder Woman looks like in the comics, and her origin as a beastly Amazon warrior (or is it warrioress? We really don't want to anger the feminists…)

BUT- first of all, no human has ever or will ever actually look like Wonder Woman. We're beginning to suspect that these Gadot haters have never actually ventured outside the walls of their mothers'  basements to see what women in the real world look like. Haters- it is a verifiable fact that Gal Gadot is one of the most beautiful people on the planet Earth. So being annoyed she doesn't look like a comic book character makes about as much sense as knocking Henry Cavill for looking like this-

What a weakling.

Instead of this-

Meh. Guess that's a little better. Still think he should hit the gym more.

Comic book heroes have muscles that don't exist, and comic book ladies have disproportionate legs and impossible waist sizes, not to mention chests that laugh in the face of physics. Too much of the criticism aimed at Gal Gadot is related to either her not being tall enough, busty enough, or muscly enough for the part. Apparently fanboys the world over expected Snyder to cast Glamazon, the WWE Diva.

The depth of our WWE knowledge would astound you.

That picture may appear ridiculous, but that's seriously what some people want in a Wonder Woman character, which is why it's a good thing they aren't calling the shots- Snyder is looking to successfully establish an iconic character in a film that already has a lot on the line. This is the make or break film for future Justice League films, and it needs to be a hit. He cast Gal Gadot not for her physical stature, but for her ability to actually BE Wonder Woman, with the inner strength of character and attitude necessary to be believable as a female superhero. 

Let's take a quick look at a few female superheroes Hollywood totally got wrong:

Halle Berry, who won an Oscar in 2002 for Best Actress, played Catwoman in what some consider to be the worst film ever made. Worst. Ever.

Jessica Alba played Sue Storm in the forgettable Fantastic Four movies (yes, there were two). The movies sucked and now the franchise looks like it's going to be rebooted.

Anne Hathaway was the horrifically over-acted Catwoman in Dark Knight Rises, trying desperately to be a badass throughout the film and failing miserably. What does it say that her laughable efforts at being a dangerous criminal were still more successful than any female superhero before her? It says Hollywood has a lot of work to do if they're going to make Wonder Woman work. 

Snyder is making an effort to create a character that will forever be linked with the actress who portrays her. Try to make a Wolverine movie without Hugh Jackman, people will be upset. Tony Stark without Robert Downey Jr? People will be upset. Those actors are connected to those characters, at least for the current generation. Wonder Woman is great character, and she needs an actress who can create that same mental tie for several films to come.

So what did Snyder do? He learned three important lessons from the three flops listed above.

Lesson #1: The wrong role can turn even the best actress into the absolute worst actress.

Lesson #2: Even someone who "looks the part" like Jessica Alba can't make up for bad acting.

Lesson #3: Toughness CAN'T be faked- audiences can sense when the "Bad-girl" act is phony.

The solution to all of these problems? Gal Gadot.

My first time ever viewing this film, I uttered "I think I'm in love" seconds before Han did. 

That's a true story.

Gal Gadot has everything it takes to be a believable Wonder Woman in an age of superhero movies grounded in gritty realism. She learned combat training during her two-year service in the Israeli Defense Forces and spent those two years as a sports trainer. She did all of her own stunts in Fast Five and requested more stunts for her character in Fast Six. "Doing her own stunts" is a phrase that gets passed over entirely too quickly: it's not just a cool way of saying she's hardcore. It's a way of saying "She jumped from a motorcycle onto the side of a vehicle moving at a high rate of speed and then almost got crushed by oncoming traffic." She does her own stunts because she wants to be taken seriously as an action star, and a legit Wonder Woman performance could establish her as a staple actress in future action films.

So she likes the action, and she's legitimately tough and therefore believable in strong roles. Still, if you really need any more convincing, this video should sell it for you. Here's Gadot discussing her character in the Fast and the Furious films, and expressing her feelings regarding strong feminine roles:

"She's very strong. She's very tough. She has no fear. She will always help a friend in need…that's the way it should be. In life, women are strong; it should be the same on film. Because the men we have in this movie are so strong, tough, clever, intelligent, physically really big, I think that it's a good balance to have us girls in this movie."

Wait, see what she did there?

Man of Steel 2 will star Henry Cavill and Ben Affleck as Superman and Batman, some of the strongest male archetypes ever created. If Snyder produces a Wonder Woman who looks weak in comparison to the other two stars, he will get absolutely shredded by critics and fans alike who wanted a stronger female lead. Gadot comes from a franchise full of the biggest, toughest guys around like Vin Diesel and The Rock, and yet held her own in the series as a tough character not to be messed with. And it wasn't forced or laughable- it was entirely believable.

So the decision to cast Gadot was based on her ability to successfully convey independence, power, strength, and also likability which is crucial to a new character's film debut. She may look different than the drawing in the comic books, but anybody who admires Wonder Woman for the right reasons should enjoy what Snyder is trying to do with the character. He wants to do the character justice, not the costume. Despite the criticism Snyder's already received for his casting decisions, let's go ahead and assume he knows what the heck he's doing when it comes to creating great superhero movies.

-L

All The Things You Didn't Know About Pop Music

Required viewing 

The music business is shady. Anyone in it will generally warn you to stay out of it. As previously documented on this blog, the music business is exactly that: a business. Through scientific research, illegal agreements with radio stations, and pop music generators like Bonnie McKee and Max Martin, the sickly sweet melodies of modern music continue to grow more formulaic, predictable, annoying, and worst of all...catchy. We shall explain...

Songwriting Part I

First of all, not all musicians write their own stuff (duh). There are plenty of hit songs that were written by a mystery wordsmith behind the scenes somewhere, which we'll get to in a moment. There are also tons of songs out there written by popular artists and performed by totally different popular artists, which somewhat changes the way you'll think about the song. For instance: Beyonce's "Irreplaceable", a "Girl Power!" song about a ticked off woman who's telling her guy how worthless he is, was actually written by Ne-Yo, and the male version lyrics are even more brutal. Here's just one quick comparison between first the female chorus and then the male equivalent:

You must not know 'bout me, you must not know 'bout me,

I could have another you in a minute, matter fact he'll be here in a minute

You must not know 'bout me, you must not know 'bout me

I could have another you by tomorrow,

So don't you ever for a second get to thinkin' you're irreplaceable.

And Ne-Yo's original version:

You must not know 'bout me, you must think I'm playing

I could have another you in an hour, matter fact she's upstairs in the shower

You must not know 'bout me, you must think I'm playing

I could find another you on the corner,

so don't you ever for a second get to thinkin' you're irreplaceable.

So songwriting credit often isn't given where it's due, and sometimes changes the entire tone, meaning, and overall appeal of a song. Any guesses as to who wrote Kelly Clarkson's hit "Breakaway"?

It was Avril Lavigne. And we're pretty sure Avril wasn't intending 

on it ending up on the soundtrack to "Princess Diaries 2".

Songwriting Part II: Some People Have It Figured Out

Meet Bonnie Mckee-

Winner of this decade's Gwen Stefani Award for consistently keeping her hair 

the same fake color for years at a time.

You've likely never heard of Bonnie Mckee before. In fact, if we were to ask who you thought had more number one singles between Bonnie up there and Katy Perry, you'd probably pick Katy if not for the obvious build-up we're giving you right now. Actually it's a bit of a trick question, because all five of Katy Perry's #1 hits are Bonnie Mckee songs. Bonnie has notched a song on the top of the charts eight freaking times, writing basically every Katy Perry song you've ever heard along with Taio Cruz's "Dynamite", Britney Spears' "Hold It Against Me", and Rita Ora's "How We Do (Party)". 

And those are just her #1 hits. She's written for basically every relevant female pop-star in this decade, and everything in the following video is her making:

Bonnie Mckee: hit song writer, talented singer, plays piano in utterly ridiculous shoes.

Is it just us, or does it seem like it would be much more entertaining to see Bonnie in concert than Katy Perry? Not really the issue at hand, just something to ponder.

Could just be that Hayley Williams has made us all suckers for orange hair.

And you know what? There's a worse offender out there; his name is Max Martin, and every stupid song that never should have become a hit that totally did anyway is his doing. How can this be? How can just a few people be behind so many of the most bafflingly popular songs ever penned? The answer lies in something else you might have noticed from that video...

Every Pop Song Is The Same Song

Go ahead and try to count how many songs Bonnie covers in that mashup video up there. Sorta difficult to tell when one ends and the next begins, no? That's Because Ms. Mckee knows the formula to a successful pop song, and whether or not she's aware of the psychology behind it, her songs are basically audible crack. No, seriously. Follow that link and you'll read about how listening to "catchy" pop songs sends your brain its most favorite drug, Dopamine. About fifteen seconds before a song's chorus begins, you subconsciously sense the build-up and your brain gets all excited about how hard it's about to be rocked, releasing a dose of the feel-good Dopamine and providing an actual biological link to the other two things typically linked with teenagers and bad music- Dopamine's the same thing that makes sex and drugs so popular with your brain.

Yeah, right. Like we would know. 

We spend all our time writing.

Your mind takes a second hit of Dopamine when the chorus you were so eagerly anticipating actually plays, which is why you'll notice that right this second you can't think of the verses to "I Kissed A Girl" or "California Girls", even though the chorus to both of those songs will come to mind almost immediately. 

The secret formula for creating an instant hit without fail would be an extremely profitable one to discover, and since the music business really likes money it's totally already been discovered. The human brain likes a very particular set of tones and beats, and songwriters have that particular Pop music "sound" mastered. Since this same successful pop pattern is just copied and pasted over and over again to sell records, the variety of sounds in today's most popular music have been watered down to the point where there is almost no distinction between one hit song and the next, as illustrated by this science-y looking graph:

That little teeny cluster we're currently in represents a total lack of diversity in today's pop songs, (if you want more fun charts, click here for science).

Not only are the audible sounds becoming recyclable, but the message of each pop song is almost non-existant. What statement is being made in "Teenage Dream"? What story is "I Gotta Feelin" trying to tell us? That song literally sings the days of the week. Pop songwriting is the complete antithesis of everything a truly great song should be. John Lennon's "Imagine" doesn't have just a teensy bit more substance to it than modern pop; the two are entirely different art forms. But people don't want to think about changing the world in the car on the drive home from work, they want to be woo girls.

The take-home message here is that the labels and songwriters have this down to a science. Hits are destined to be hits before they're even released, and the talent and musical ability previously necessary to create a massively popular song are no longer required. All the winners are already decided, regardless of skill or public opinion. What we're saying is if music were the olympics, pop music would be the WWE.

Pop Music.

Real music takes skill in order to be noticed and appreciated, and often it isn't even appreciated then. Pop music is pumped into your life at all hours of the day by people who have all the right connections to put it in just the right context. Hear a song on the radio, and you'll almost subconsciously assume the musician you're hearing has obviously done something to get to where they are, else why would they be on your car radio?

Because The Radio Is Kind Of Evil

Look, we can't go into the delicate intricacies of licensing deals and royalties and where all the money comes from and where it goes, so we're going to have to summarize and just hit the big stuff here:

Major labels have radio in their pocket. They pay radio stations to play their songs a set number of times per week in order to generate first more perceived popularity ("I hear this song all the time, it must be IN") followed by actual (yet still inexplicable and baseless) popularity. The song gets heard, records are sold, the label makes more money, and then has more money to keep up the scheme for the next hit. The guys with the money make even more money.

That's a trend we're all pretty much sick of hearing about, isn't it? 

You know this happens though- remember that time you couldn't listen to the radio for thirty minutes without hearing Black Eyed Peas' "I Gotta Feelin"? The airwaves were over-saturated with that song to the point where most people were sick of it, but that didn't stop it from staying #1 in the country for seventeen weeks.

Songwriters with a hit formula, biological responses to catchy tunes, radio in the hands of the people who make the music, what do we make of all this? This all ultimately results in a musical landscape dominated by wealthy attention whores rather than talented musicians, and that's just sad.

Oh look it's Hayley! Yeah, we're not sad anymore.

So seriously, what do we do about this? Easy: we all stick it to the man by listening to good music. There's plenty out there. Ask a friend you know that you trust with this sort of thing. Finding new music to listen to is every bit as satisfying as finding a new favorite book, and just like literature, sometimes you have to go back a little bit to find the really good stuff. Don't give up on discovering awesome music just because the radio has nothing good to offer.



-L

4 Things We Can All Agree On!

Loyal readers, you may have recently heard somewhat concerning the U.S. Government's inability to agree on [who knows what] and now NASA employees are bored at home and you can no longer tour the Statue of Liberty. Lots of clever photoshopped images are flying around your Facebook news feed, the majority having to do with the fact that when the rest of us don't do our jobs it's us that gets fired, not everybody else. Some people are calling doomsday, but most are just calling for the states to all get together and pass a "If congress can't do their job, elect a new freaking congress" law. Neither of those are likely to happen. In short, nobody seems to be able to agree on anything anymore. We dedicated this morning to searching for anything and everything that absolutely 100% of everyone everywhere should be able to agree on. We came up with this short list:

#1 Jalepenos Are Not, Nor Will They Ever Be, The "New Bacon"

Could this happen with Jalepenos? Freaking no it couldn't.

This blasphemous article from the inexplicably popular time-wasting site Buzzfeed has been bouncing around Facebook recently, titled "13 Reasons Why Jalapeno Is The New Bacon". If you actually check that link out, you'll notice the list includes exactly zero legitimate reasons explaining why that is the case--probably because there aren't any reasons why that's the case. The article suggests that "Bacon's time is over", when in reality the only thing that's "over" is that punk's internet writing career.

Leave the list-based writing to the professionals.

Bacon's time is not over, because bacon is awesome. We're pretty confident we don't even like bacon nearly as much as most people, and we still think it's delicious. In fact, let's just all agree right now that food in general is awesome.

Taco Pizza exists.

#2 Tom Hardy Is Awesome And Should Be In More Movies

This one really doesn't take much more explanation, at least for anyone who's ever seen any of his major films. The guy kicks butt in everything he's in, and still manages to avoid the overhype that so often accompanies big names in movies.

Oh, hey, speaking of Leo Dicaprio, here's a shot of him starring in "The Wolf of Wallstreet"....or...wait, maybe this picture is from "Gatsby". Or maybe he's just being himself at some awards show. Does it count as acting if every role you play is "rich white man who throws parties", and in your spare time you're that same exact guy? We totally do not need two movies about a guy who throws lavish parties until they reach their tragic end, and typecasting Dicaprio as the universal go-to irresponsible rich man is about as creative as casting Bruce Greenwood as a really really important person.

Bruce Greenwood: National Security Advisor, Head of USR, Two U.S. Presidents, 

and Captain of the Starship Enterprise.

Anyway, back to where we started this whole thing- Tom Hardy is generally only in movies you'd consider to be of the "Top 20 movies I'd keep if I could only keep 20 movies the rest of my life" caliber. Most of you saw 'Inception':

Hardy seen here on the left alongside Joseph Gordon Leavitt, who looks uncomfortable with being

only the second best looking gentleman on camera.

And basically everyone saw 'The Dark Knight Rises', where Hardy was tasked with giving us all a villain good enough that we could almost forget the Joker isn't in the movie.

"Acting is hard when you can't show your face, right?"

"Yeah, plus we have to speak in these ridiculous voices. How are people even taking us seriously?"

And then there was the movie 'Warrior', which somehow everybody missed, where [No major spoilers] Hardy plays a troubled fighter who enters a UFC tournament for deeply emotional reasons we can't express here without spoilers. That's a totally pathetic excuse of a summary for one of the most emotional movies you'll ever watch....and it's a fighting movie. Seriously, Top 20.

Are you the type that never really gets choked up at movies? 

This scene will make you cry manly tears.

Seriously this is on Netflix, go watch it right now. Avoid reading the plot synopsis if you can, it's better to not know.

#3 Mister Rogers Was An Incredible Human Being

Mister Rogers was a rare type of individual. A full summary is on a wikipedia page here, but instead of paraphrasing his life story, here are a few videos that will give you an idea of what this guy was really like. First of all, here's Rogers going to bat for all of us back at the start of his career:

Things get real at 3:44 if you aren't patient enough to watch the whole thing

You earn a Platinum Man Card when you can sit in a senate hearing and, in six minutes of testimony, completely win over everyone in the room through sheer sincerity. Here he is earning perhaps the most deserved lifetime achievement award ever:



Holy crap, Mister Rogers just made an auditorium full of A-list celebrities cry. If the tears aren't rolling yet, don't worry- we've got one more for you. Here he is, saying what he would say to you if he were ever to meet you in person:



#4 Ohio State Football Has Class

We're nearing the end of this post, but we saved this one for last because it's extra incredible. The man in the following video is Dom Tiberi, who's been a part of the local sports family in Athens, Ohio for two solid decades. His daughter Maria was a student at Ohio State, but was killed in a car wreck about a week before this video was taken. This is after the team's win over Wisconsin:

Say what you want about college athletes, if they know one thing it's how to treat family. 

That's it for our list today, but we'll continue to brainstorm and bring you all more things we can all agree on in order to promote hope in the idea that at some point the country will get its act together.


-L

Author Beat-down: J.K. Rowling

So it's been like three straight articles we've posted without really any hating involved, which we're sure is disappointing to most of you because let's be honest- that's what we do best. But the mounting heat of rant-provoking inner rage can only sit idle for so long before erupting in the form of an extremely opinionated article by an amateur writer criticizing the merits of immeasurably more successful authors. But if us inexperienced people weren't allowed to criticize those far more qualified than us, how would we deal with our deep-seated jealousy of the rich and famous? If we can't take shots at those uber-successful individuals we watch on TV and find joy in yelling at them for totally sucking (despite their professional status), would anyone even know who Tony Romo is?

Makes 11.5 Million this year; considered "really not very good" 

by 83% of the country [citation needed].

Here is the first of what will almost definitely become a regular feature here on Mind Grenades, "Author Beat-downs", which means pretty much exactly what you're thinking it means.

J.K. Rowling Sucks.

This is what your face looks like right now.

Yeah, we went there. There's one popular criticism of Rowling's Harry Potter series that we aren't going to make- "It's too childish". You know what? It is childish, because it was written for children. 

The first book in the series was published in 1997, when the generation that would one day push the series to record-breaking popularity wasn't allowed to hear mom read them a chapter until they brushed their teeth and got into jammies.

Picture of "Kid in Jammies" unavailable due to our photo department's unwillingness

to be tagged by every NSA watch list in existence.

First of all, kids don't really need character development. They open up a book and read about Emily Elizabeth and her really big dog and don't really question what Emily Elizabeth's hopes and dreams are, her aspirations, her faults, none of that. For a more mature crowd, character development is like, really important. That's the basic principle that forces movie studios to make every first superhero movie in a trilogy an origin story. It's why Iron Man came before Iron Man 2; nobody would've liked Iron Man 2 without the origin story that got our attention in the first Iron Man. Actually, bad example, because Iron Man 2 really wasn't that great. Let's start over: Batman Begins came first to show everyone what a real superhero looks like, then came Dark Knight to capitalize on all the goodwill Batman Begins earned the franchise. You have to be invested in a character to care about the story.

Character development is what George RR Martin uses to lure you into his trap 

before he makes you cry bitter tears. 

Let's examine the Harry Potter franchise for a moment. There isn't any interesting character development in these books; Harry's success as a protagonist is baffling, because in addition to being dull, passive, and a bit troubled, he's also completely unlikable. Maybe he's so universally popular with our generation because he gets to go to a magical school in Europe where he has a vault of infinite money and everything is handed to him for free because he's so special, since that's basically every high school girl's dream anyway.

It's especially painful to observe Rowling's female characters, of which there are like five. Quick, describe Cho Chang in five words. Um...pretty? Probably? And Asian! Definitely Asian. Despite literally every other person in the whole Potter universe being from the UK. I guess we're looking past that. How about Luna? Odd? Docile? Quiet? Unimportant for 97% of the series?

The entire Harry Potter franchise has less female eye-candy in it than Nolan's Batman trilogy.

We didn't even think that was possible.

And Harry Potter, the future savior of all wizard kind, what's he have going for him exactly? His personality is not one of humility and grit and hard work as his harsh upbringing mistakenly denotes, instead he's pretentious and completely lacks the inner fighting spirit it would take to conquer a truly formidable foe.

Seriously, summon that little spirit-deer of yours again, Harry. That was friggin' adorable.

Even as Harry ages he just becomes more hot-headed, irrational, self-centered, and kind of a douche in books 5-7. Sure character flaws are important, but they have to be balanced out by something good; his only positive character trait is that he's destined to save the world. So what? That doesn't automatically make him awesome, he's still a little snotty teenager. Even if your central character is going to save the world, you have to give people a reason to actually cheer for them.

You either know why this image is here, or you don't. If you don't, you have homework to do.

His sidekick Ron is even more dull and is basically Harry's adopted family, so we're treated to like 10,000 pages of boring unimportant stuff that happens at Ron's house throughout the series. Hermione is a stand-in for J.K. Rowling herself. She just is. Fred and George are your standard Merry and Pippin knockoffs. Ginny is mentioned like twice per book and is void of any personality whatsoever until Harry notices she has girl-parts around book 6, at which point Ginny...still has no personality but is now accidentally a main character. We can't list all the dry generic characters in Potter's universe here because it'd just take too long and we'd lose your attention, so just know that you're not missing anything. Let's move on...

Neville, the most celebrated accidental main character in the series. 

The books really should've been about him.

But hey, they're not serious adult fantasy books, they shouldn't be taken too seriously. There's not a lot of character development for Sam I am other than the fact that he's a picky eater, and everyone's okay with that. But, since the whole world has decided to put the Harry Potter series up on the fantasy genre-defining pedestal and effectively making the Harry Potter brand worth over 15 Billion dollars, we probably need to look at these books with something of a critical eye, which will cause any major Harry Potter fans to throw a fit because the very implication that they read thousands of pages of cliche, entry-level fantasy writing insults their intelligence. Which is funny, because everything about the following list insults the intelligence of anyone who's read any fictional novel above a 7th grade reading level:

Harry's constant need to be rescued by others, Ginny, Quiddich, Rowling's gender stereotypes that set feminism and whatever the dude version of feminism back 200 years, the absolutely awful attempts at romance including Harry's "relationships" with Cho and Ginny as well as Lupin/Tonks, Hagrid/giant woman, Alan Rickman/Harry's Mom, and the entire Dumbledore needlessly being gay thing. The blatant ripoffs of every major Lord of the Rings character, Rowling's unoriginal use of latin for magical spells and stupid made-up nonsense names for all proper nouns ("Diagon alley"......seriously?), the fact that Rowling dragged the series on for seven books instead of like four, Rowling's refusal to explore her most interesting ideas in favor of examining the lives of her bland main characters and their seven years of magical high school angst, 

Also, Ginny.

...Hermione's stupid time-machine plot device that everyone forgets about, a main villain Darth Vader would have backhanded for being really not all that threatening ever, pointless made-up creatures that padded an extra 4,000 pages onto the finished series, the fact that Hermione is obviously a placeholder for Rowling, the very nature of magic being completely understood and controlled by stupid teenage kids which renders it wholly uninteresting, the laziest suckiest most boring wizard duels ever, Harry being completely unlikable, irrational, possessive, and only a fraction as cool as Percy Jackson, Ron's stupid face, the deaths of characters far more interesting than the entire rest of the series by unexplained means at random places in the plot which renders the potential emotional power of such a character death completely pointless,

Well I suppose I'm dead now. 

Yeah me too, and I won't be coming back as Dumbledore The White because Rowling

likes to keep her borrowed material subtle.

Why is everything in the wizarding world a bluish green tint?

...the almost-deaths of super boring characters nobody cares about at times when the plot really does call for some action, the lack of Chris Columbus' influence in movies 3-8, the fact that there was 8 movies, the fact that Harry just all of a sudden has that stupid stone in his pocket at the end of book 1 because "magic", the fact that 100,000 wizards attend a stupid Quiddich tournament and can't overpower a dozen or so amateur wizard-terrorists and their leader who's only at about 10% health for like six straight books, the very idea of a Quiddich tournament, people who refer to non-fans of the books as "muggles" despite their own complete lack of magical capabilities, and the fact that the first book in this series wasn't called "Sirius Black and The Escape From Azkaban".

The recent news of Rowling's interest in further exploring the Harry Potter universe should surprise absolutely nobody, since last year she branched out and tried to write another book, "The Casual Vacancy", and nobody freaking cared. Reviews ranged from kind of almost positive because columnists who criticize J.K. Rowling know they'll lose readers, to truthful:

"More than 500 pages of relentless socialist manifesto masquerading as literature"-Jan Moir, Daily Mail

And then there were those critics who included in their review some crack about how the book lacked the "magic" of her previous writings. Har-har, idiotic book critics, we hope somebody goes all Joker on you with your own freaking pen.

J.K. Rowling is not a bad person. In fact, her rags-to-riches story is inspiring and she's the only person we've ever heard of to go from a Billionaire to "just" a still-several-millionaire because of charitable giving. All we're saying is if you can only write one thing, and even that one thing is actually not that great, there's a chance you might not be the best author around. Highest-earning? Sure. Record-shattering. Phenomenon-sparking. Good for her. But squeezing your only success for all it's worth years past its expiration date isn't cool, not when it's Harry Potter, not when it's Pixar, not ever.

For shame, Pixar. For shame.

If there's one thing that signifies a brilliant writer, it's the rare ability to take your readers in and out of different worlds and make them believe they were there with nothing more than just the ink on the page. You've proven you can tell us about your kiddish magical fantasy land, J.K. Rowling, now be an author and take us somewhere we haven't been seven times already, before Louis CK makes fun of you.




-L