Harry Potter

[SilverBullet94]

Just wondering how many of you are a huge fan of Harry Potter  just like me, im a huge fan of both Harry Potter and Detective Conan.

[Aluecard]

  here one

[Ran94]

Uhm... I don't like it very much!!!

[Sere]

read all the books many times.

[Juansmarts]

I only watched the movies...

Anyways, something that annoyed me was how when HP was being published in America, the title was changed to "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone" Instead of "Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone." Book 1 was the only one I have read, and it struck me as odd as to why not call it the Philosopher's Stone instead of the Sorcerer's Stone.

[vpkenan_8]

i've read all the books and watched all the aired movies:D it's my favorite too!!!!!:D

[Posse]

I read all the books, but I'm not really a fan

LOTR >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Harry Potter =D

[DarkWolfYoukai]

I only watched the movies...

Anyways, something that annoyed me was how when HP was being published in America, the title was changed to "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone" Instead of "Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone." Book 1 was the only one I have read, and it struck me as odd as to why not call it the Philosopher's Stone instead of the Sorcerer's Stone.

Well...  If we can trust Wikipedia enough for one moment:

The book was retitled to Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone for publication in the United States. The main reason for this retitle was that the U.S. publishers thought that a child would not want to read a book that sounded as though it was associated with philosophy.

JK Rowling gives this explanation:

    Arthur Levine, my American editor, and I decided that words should be altered only where we felt they would be incomprehensible, even in context, to an American reader... The title change was Arthur's idea initially, because he felt that the British title gave a misleading idea of the subject matter. In England, we discussed several alternative titles and Sorcerer's Stone was my idea.

However, even though there's truth in this statement, it's slightly insulting that it would be considered incomprehensible to all us only because they're stereotyping.

Here's a pic of the original cover if anyone's interested. 

[xoph]

indeed, it was obviously insulting lol

in spain/latinamerica the title was translated from uk, philosopher's stone!

so... this clearly means that US children cant understand such a difficult word!!! j/k but think the world 10 years ago... cartoons = very children stuff... pokemon giving seizures, goku on holidays, evangelion rocking the world


ps: i'm a hp fan (i read spanish/english versions)
ps2: tolkien > dune > hp (although you cant/mustnt really compare these hehe)

[chubs191]

  I think the idea from changing philosopher's to sorcerer's was right.  The book back then was geared towards younger children.  That title would be quite confusing to a 10 year old, especially an American who wouldn't really know what all philosopher's stone was.
  That being said, I personally enjoyed them all except Chamber of Secrets.  Although was necessary as a setup for the rest of the books. 

[Boxcar Children]

Wach a few of the movies didnt read the books
Not my favet show

[bluekaitou1412]

read the books, watched the movies. not my fave though.

[Callid]

Yes, they're quite interesting. Rowling makes interesting inventions and has a lot of ideas.
The main reason I like the books are not the books itself, but instead the impact in Fantasy literature - in the library you can almost watch this section grow! And because I like Fantasy a lot, the great variety is great for me^^
But indeed, compared to the LotR it's much worse (NO book can be compared to TLotR).

*gets shot because mangas are also books*

[Kor]

(NO book can be compared to TLotR).

Except for my book! 

[Akonyl]

read the first four, but the 5th one didn't come out for a while so I didn't read it

I've seen the movies though. They're pretty sweet imo but nothing magnificent.

On the other hand, my dad's read all of them.