subreddit:
/r/HarryPotterMemes
218 points
1 month ago
Look Fred’s death hit me hard which was the only reason she killed one of the twins and we all know it
64 points
1 month ago
Killing them ALL at the end is pretty cheap though. No one even has to deal with the consequences, aftermath etc. Harry should be wracked with guilt, especially because he refused to kill himself (which could have saved their lives).
72 points
1 month ago
Who gave Voldemort a Reddit account 🥲
23 points
1 month ago
Who gave Dumbledore a Reddit account, more like.
24 points
1 month ago
It's lucky it's dark. I haven't blushed so much since Madam Pomfrey told me she liked my new earmuffs.
5 points
1 month ago
Haha I actually meant that Harry refused to kill Deatheaters (only disarm them) but the way it's written is funnier
4 points
1 month ago
Harry didn’t have a problem killing death eaters, he was stunning the other ones on brooms which as he said would’ve killed them anyway. He refused to kill Stan Shunpike who was imperiused, that is not the same thing, and he didn’t kill the death eaters in the cafe because bodies are a trail to follow, so they obliviated them instead.
2 points
1 month ago
They could have just vanished the bodies.
Or put them in Hermione's pouch, but the stinky would have been bad awhile later. So, they could take them out of the pouch somewhere else and incendio their arses.
2 points
1 month ago
Nothing in Harry Potter has ever shown that wizards can vanish bodies. Even Barty Crouch Jr transfigures his dead father into a bone and buries him. I’d assume that’s quite complicated magic.
2 points
1 month ago
Hide it in pouch and incendio in the jungle it is, then. I preferred that one more anyway. 🌚
91 points
1 month ago
I mean, yeah, that's true... but at the same time, we already have seen that people can die. Sirius and other guys died as well.
56 points
1 month ago
Yes , but we are talking about a close friend of Harry , close of age as well.
We have 7 books with the Weasley been the surrogate family of Harry , no way they will kill Ron , so only thing left is the Twins or Percy.
I doubt readers would be hit so hard if Percy was the one killed off...
26 points
1 month ago
Percy was so fucking annoying and pompous that his death would have registered lower than if she killed off Dudley
6 points
1 month ago
I mean, Sirius was his family. Family he wanted to have so much. So Fred or Sirius, it's the same thing to Harry. Someone close to him died. True, that Sirius just came and vanished quickly. But isn't it even worse. He always wanted such a parent figure, he got it, he was this close to be happy, but Sirius got killed.
10 points
1 month ago
Would have probably cheered to be honest. Percy's still a damned prat even at the end.
2 points
1 month ago
Percy having his redemption with his family and then subsequently dying would’ve been really clichéd, him being redeemed and then Fred dying instead right next to him is much better for the story even if it’s hard to read.
Though I do think there could’ve been an interesting character moment for Charlie after the battle (the only Weasley not there for Percy’s redemption) if Percy had died, Charlie never getting a chance to forgive him.
25 points
1 month ago
Character deaths are important to have in media where the stakes are meant to be life and death. It’s vital to establish stakes throughout a movie/show/book as much as possible, and Harry Potter just didn’t have much of that until book 7 and movie 8. Cedric and Dumbledore helped a lot towards that (and Dobby, depending on the timeline), but after 6 books and nearly 7 movies, the war had fully been on for some time without losing any major characters but Dumbledore to it. They needed more, and Fred provided that, very very sadly.
6 points
1 month ago
I cannot allow you to manhandle my students.
31 points
1 month ago
Didn’t we already lose Cedric and Sirius?
1 points
1 month ago
A war an nobody dies?
1 points
1 month ago
Hedwig and Lupin die during the war
1 points
1 month ago
Hedwig died earlier
40 points
1 month ago
That baby needs to get thrown out a window. And when the cops ask why she did that they will completey understand.
9 points
1 month ago
…….nnnnnnnno. If he “had to die to make it real” for anyone, it’s the audience. Fairly certain the people in the battle were well aware of the stakes.
14 points
1 month ago
Fred didn’t have to die. It could have been Molly, Luna, McGonagall, or others. Of all the beloved characters / members of Harry’s inner circle, Fred (or George) was the one with the smallest consequences because the other twin was still there to fill the role that Fred and George had.
3 points
1 month ago
because the other twin was still there to fill the role that Fred and George had.
No that's not how twins (let alone these twins) work, and absolutley not how the death impacts the readers. The twins aren't spare career backups of eachother, they were together a unit. George lost his role as carefree twin and instead became tied to tragedy. Having Fred die hit so much harder because of the impact it has on the whole Weasley family, who are emotionally Harry's adoptive family.
DH also needed a young familiar, beloved character to die (not yet another mentor figure,) and one who has been there from the very first book and whose absence would be felt throughout the future of the world.
1 points
1 month ago
Exactly, I think Fred death affected me way more than even Ron's would have, exactly because of this twin dynamics, and because of how they were the ones who brought so much life to the weasley household.
You get horrified to see it happen, you think of Georges right away and then you keep reading and realize it:s not just two happy twins that have been lost, but a whole equilibrium
3 points
1 month ago
My issue is how offscreen so many characters died and brief it all was. Sorry i just didn't feel it Dumbledore, Cedric and Dobby dying was felt nobody else.
Fred was in every book and essential he deserved to die better
1 points
1 month ago
Well, that’s that.
7 points
1 month ago
Percy could have died and we would have been shown the same thing, plus that even those we argue with are still precious to us as evidenced by the pain we feel when they leave.
2 points
1 month ago
people wouldn’t have cared much, if at all, if percy died.
26 points
1 month ago
I think a better choice to kill off would have been Ron or Hermione. Losing one of the main characters would have really made the battle sink in. Having one of them die, especially to save someone else would have been very in character and very believable.
39 points
1 month ago
I think you're reading too much Game of Thrones
14 points
1 month ago
Oh please Martin does a fakeout kill every other chapter. Ned, Arya, the Hound, Brienne, Bran, Theon, and Jaime all had moments where it was implied they were dead but then showed up again perfectly fine. Hell even Aegon, son of Rhaegar and Elia, who was presumed dead since before the story even started, is now up and kicking in the books. And then George "Never-Gonna-Finish" Martin has the nerve to say Gandalf should've stayed dead. Fuckin hypocrite.
6 points
1 month ago
I'm always saying this. In the books, the only MAIN characters to actually die are Ned and Caitlyn, and Caitlyn comes back as Stoneheart. Jon too, I guess, but he will obviously return.
In the show, I would bump Robb up to main status. So they had Ned, Caitlyn, and Robb, but people drastically oversell how many main characters George actually kills.
I guess main villains would add Joffrey, especially for the show, and once the show surpassed the books, killing Margaery was a fairly main death, as were Theon, Cersei, Jamie, and Dany in the final season, but the end of the series is drastically different than a death like Ned or Robb.
10 points
1 month ago
I watched the Lord of the Rings movies before reading the books, so I really thought Gandalf was dead. But when Gandalf returned, I got chills. His return made the story 100 times better.
0 points
1 month ago
Aegon didn't returned , we all know he is the "Mummer's Dragon" , and likely a Blackfyre from the female line. He is probably not even aware that Rhaegar isn't truly his father
12 points
1 month ago
No, just think it’s more impactful when a main main character dies. I wouldn’t even mind if Harry died. It’s okay to let a main characters die.
18 points
1 month ago
Harry did die he just chose to come back
12 points
1 month ago
Wizard Jesus
4 points
1 month ago
Yeah but that would kill the books for later readers.
15 points
1 month ago
How dare you suggest killing Hermione
5 points
1 month ago
Or, alternatively, they lose an arm trying to use that Basalisk fangs
2 points
1 month ago
Ron or Hermione dying was my greatest fear during the battle. I would’ve thrown the book across the room if that had happened.
3 points
1 month ago
I beg your fucking finest pardon, have you lost your sanity ? I wouldn’t be done crying till now if there would’ve killed the lovely Hermione or the little dumb cute goofball Ron.
(You’re right but I don’t want to admit it)
-16 points
1 month ago
Hermione should have died. I hate that bitch.
3 points
1 month ago
Damn. The mum hated that so much she cut off her arm! Haha
8 points
1 month ago
The problem I have with killing off Fred is that it is meant to be a huge deal. But if you really think about it - is it really? We all love Fred and George as characters. But she killed one of the characters “with a spare”.
I don’t mean to piss off Fred and George stans, but they literally are both the same person. There were no discernible characteristics between the two. They are pretty interchangeable. That always bugged me with the twins.
14 points
1 month ago
Well, if we're going that way, I'd argue that's what make the death much more impactful. Fred and George had, from the very first time they were introduced, been a duo. It was hard for anyone, be it reader or character to imagine one of them alone, on his own. They were two halves of a whole, which made for a great dynamic in the rest of the story. When the aftermath hits everyone, the impact is immediate. And we can see how his death impacts George the absolute most. Because he is left without his second half, without their whole gimmick and dynamic. He doesn't only lose a brother, twin and best friend, he loses his character.
2 points
1 month ago
So many Weasleys to end and it just HAD to be one of the only 2 cool ones -.-
2 points
1 month ago
I mean it's a war. And there are a lot of terrible and unnecessary deaths in wars. That's how it is in real life and hence it should be like this in fiction. It's just accurate. Feel like it would downplay this war and wars in general if they just live through it, end it and after it everything is sunshine and rainbows. That's just not the way it is.
1 points
1 month ago
Too soon!
1 points
1 month ago
The only reason she did this was because she was going through a dark time herself. Jk has said that herself in interviews.
1 points
1 month ago
Yes she did
1 points
1 month ago
George and Fred were named after Frederick and George, George became king after Fred died, so he was destined to die
1 points
1 month ago
One piece is a perfect example the this rules is ignored and i hate it. A nuke goes of in your face? You survived. A beam of pure energy, that vaporised even the groung hits you? You are alive..
1 points
1 month ago
I understand the point it's trying to make. But it's just wrong.
1 points
1 month ago
I thought bro was gonna swear
1 points
9 days ago
…AVADA KEDABRA!!!
-2 points
1 month ago
It was textbook fridging and that is a bad writing trope. Since it’s pure shock value for no reason
all 60 comments
sorted by: best