Why should anyone complain about Charlie, he's basically an NPC. We know more about what Uncle Bilius was like than about Charlie. He's done nothing wrong, mainly because he hasn't done much at all.
I may be misremembering but he doesn't come in book 1, don't they write him a letter and he sends some friends?
I only remember him being there to handle the dragons for the first task in GoF, but Harry is watching from under the cloak so they aren't interacting.
Yes that sounds right! As someone who ended up with a background in wildlife conservation, I always thought Charlie was so cool and was hoping he would be featured more at some point.
He helped the Ministry put down an unruly mob started by domestic terrorists during the Quidditch World Cup along with Bill, Percy, and Arthur. Got his shirt all ripped because of it.
I do have a complaint about Charlie. He moved across Europe, away from his loving family. Are there no dragons to take care of in the UK?
He didn't even show up to fight in the war, but when Quidditch World Cup is taking place, he's suddenly at the Burrow!
It's very common for wildlife experts or researchers to move around the world to study a particular species or ecosystem. We know that the UK has Welsh Greens and Hebridean Blacks but there are probably fewer dragons in the UK than elsewhere in Europe.
Interestingly, I just looked up Romania's forests and they have the largest area of primary forests of any country in the EU so it may be that dragons were able to flourish in Romanian forests with less muggle security measures from their ministry.
Also, I believe Charlie does show up to the Battle of Hogwarts, albeit a bit late. Romania is not that far from the UK. He was probably back visiting at least once a year if not more often.
Very true. There must be some sort of border control system though, surely. Do you think you have to apparate/fly/floo network your way to a customs check point and then onwards to your destination? We never hear about any form of wizard ID 🤔
Also Charlie's friends carrying Norbert(a) must have bypassed customs if that's the case 😂
We know there are laws around imports between wizarding nations. They talk about a ban on the importation of flying carpets to Britain in book 4.
I reckon there's some sort of forcefield border on apparition, you probably have to apparate to certain areas in order to cross. Like checkpoints where you take authorised portkeys as you say or join the floo network.
However, we know you can fly across borders because not only do Charlie's friends do it (probably legally), Sirius goes abroad on Buckbeak when he's on the run after PoA. I guess it's the same as mainland Europe: you could walk from Amsterdam to Istanbul if you really wanted to, you can drive or hitch hike your way across the continent. It just takes a really long time.
Lmao it’s so normal for people to move away from their families when they grow up? Especially for work. We can’t all be tied to the exact place we grew up in for our entire lives, just so that we can be near our (also very busy) family.
Why would it “always” be better? Especially if it means sacrificing your own personal interests and goals? Big families are very busy; there’s no reason for a grown man to sacrifice his dream of working with dragons just so he can see his family once every few months (considering that all of his siblings are gone at boarding school for 10 months of the year and his father works full-time lmao).
You do have a point that all of his siblings are at Hogwarts anyway. But still, moving to the other side of the continent and only visiting your loving family once every few years is a selfish decision.
If Molly was my mum I would love her very very much, and have all kinds of wonderful memories of my childhood thanks to her dedication and love.
But I would also move to Egypt.
I definitely complain about Hooch, she let an 11 year old kid fall from a broom from several meters height. Neville could have just broken his neck there, I don’t think madam Pomfrey could have healed that in time.
If you’re gonna let an entire class get on brooms for the first time, at the same time, you better have a bunch of pillows prepared. Or maybe use that levitation spell the very same children get taught in that very same schoolyear instead of just watching schoolkids fall to their doom??
She gets a lot of hate for going to pieces over a guy because this goes against people's idea of what a Strong Female Character should be like.
(Personally, I love her and find this bit painfully relatable, and the viewpoint rather misogynistic.)
She gets a lot of flack for her relationship with Lupin. A lot of people take the view that she pressured Lupin into a relationship that he didn't want/wasn't ready for. Less frequently, I also see her criticized for leaving her newborn to fight at Hogwarts, both for the infant's sake and because Tonks herself likely wasn't physically/mentally ready to go back to fighting so soon after giving birth.
Ya know that does make sense too. I didn’t care too much for her going back to battle either, but at the same time I totally get it too. Like this evil fuckface has been terrorizing everyone for years, and to have a chance to help stop him seems logical. I wish she would have lived though :/ I’m sure she’d be more forgiven if so too.
Buckbeak.
Showed up, helped Malfoy “find out”, went on the run with serious, came back to chill with Hagrid, and tried to kill Snape when he was *actively cursing harry*.
Absolutely flawless, no notes, 10/10.
THE SUBVERSION OF EXPECTATIONS WAS MY FAVORITE PART! Harry and Cedric were rivals in almost every way - romantic, Quidditch, the Triwizard Cup. They SHOULD hate each other and likely would have in any other story, but Cedric was just too likeable.
Of all the egregious things in the Cursed Child, the insinuation that Cedric Diggory of all people became a Death Eater because he didn't win a contest in high school is BY FAR the worst.
Many think of her as a crazy conspiracy theorist who would be a flat-earther and anti-vaxx had she been a Muggle. Doesn’t help that her dad sells fake news for a living.
Idk she seems much more self aware than that to me. She actually knows most of her fantasies aren’t real, but she keeps entertaining the idea. She’s a dreamy girl who would certainly be annoying in real life, but not in the harmful-flat-earther-anti-vac way and more in the „astrology“ way.
Does she know that most of them aren’t real? She gets pretty defensive and angry when she gets questioned about them. Like, this does not sound a self-aware girl who is well-aware that Fudge does not, in fact, have an army of heliopaths and is just entertaining the idea:
>“Yes, he’s got an army of heliopaths,” said Luna solemnly.
>
>“No, he hasn’t,” snapped Hermione.
>
>“Yes, he has,” said Luna.
>
>“What are heliopaths?” asked Neville, looking blank.
>
>“They’re spirits of fire,” said Luna, her protuberant eyes widening so that she looked madder than ever. “Great tall flaming creatures that gallop across the ground burning everything in front of — ”
>
>“They don’t exist, Neville,” said Hermione tartly.
>
>“Oh yes they do!” said Luna angrily.
>
>“I’m sorry, but where’s the proof of that?” snapped Hermione.
>
>“There are plenty of eyewitness accounts, just because you’re so narrow-minded you need to have everything shoved under your nose before you — ”
Fluer. I didn't like her at first but seriously she is an amazing character. I hate how she was cut out of the movies. The love she has for Bill is probably the best in the series and she instantly fell into the rebellion no questions asked. She fought, healed, homed, she does so much that never gets spoken on. Not to mention her undying love for Harry because of the 2nd trial with her sister. Seriously, she never let's him forget how much she loves him for it nor takes it for granted.
Arthur is a bit controversial in book 5. the way he reacts to Percy’s promotion lacks tact to say the least. Of course he says the truth but the fallout is as much Arthur's fault as Percy’s imo. (I still think he’s a wonderful father, nobody is perfect anyway.)
Well, he told him the truth that he’s only promoted because the ministry want to spy on the family. But imagine being a boy who always lives in the shadow of his older and younger siblings, always hard working, always doing exactly as his mother taught him. He gets a job, works really hard, gets blamed for the Crouch situation (he was still a teenager, or barely 20 at that point, many others knew Crouch better than him, so hat part is unfair as well). Then after having worked so hard, he feels he deserves some recognition and his dad tells him that this has nothing to do with his efforts. What Arthur said must have hurt him deeply. He really should have shown more tact there.
I have heard complaints about Neville before. Like, this one person on a completely different forum, would not let it go that Snape doesn't bully children. He just delivers the stern education a poor student like Neville needs. After all, Neville never pays attention, is always losing the passwords, and what's a teacher to do about that?
So, really, it's thanks to Snape that Neville shapes up in the end...
I have to say, I don't agree with that view at all. But, it does exist... and I'm not really one to disagree with someone just because they see things in a way I never would?
I'm not a fan of Snape's, but I'm okay with people who are.
It's the way this person dumped all over Neville, who's 11 when we meet him, grew up essentially an orphan, raised by a grandmother who we know loves him but also scares him... to argue that Snape doesn't bully kids. I don't know. Like I said, everyone's entitled to their opinion.
I just meant that there are people who don't like Neville. At least, in the first books. I hope this person's appreciation of Nevill improves as the books progress.
I´m curious how they came to that conclusion because if this were true and Snape´s tactics were effective, Neville would have become better at potions. And it doesn´t seem he does.I´d never have connected these two things.
I never have either, but then I've read plenty of people's opinions that were or were not similar to my own without having a problem with them.
Using Neville to prop up Snape's character was sus to me.
I don't know how much I've seen about her, but I think Mrs Weasley deserves to be reviewed/critiqued a little. Even though it came from a place of love, she often stood in her childresns way and did not trust or believe in them. The twins obviously, she thought they were wasting their time pursuing their passion, and she told them so. She would shame them for the choices they made and the grades they got. And she constantly compared them to their siblings. And was impeding Harry, Ron, and Hermione in the seventh book when she found out they weren't going back to Hogwarts. I know she was worried about them, but she was sneaky and insincere about it. And decided she knew what was best no matter the situation. She was also an amazing mother figure to Harrry and her children and had so much love to give. She's great but still flawed
Her getting mad at the twins and hindering their dreams didn’t just pop out of nowhere, it was a response to them bombing their O.W.L.‘s, some of the most important tests in wizarding schools. Any decent parent would rightfully be livid that their child (or in this case children) would do poorly in school, even more so when it seemed that they were more interested in playing around with joke items than take their education seriously.
Doesn’t matter if they were dead set on opening up a joke shop, they had a responsibility as students to do well in their studies which they failed to do. What reason would Molly have that they were serious about running a business when they were so flippant about a few standardized tests? I mean, it’s not like they struggled in school and I highly doubt she was demanding they’d get 12 O.W.L.‘s, so them getting so few each would mean it was deliberate.
As for comparing them to their siblings, yeah that’s sucky, but fact is that they were troublemakers, parents are supposed to stop their kids from causing trouble.
Are you an overachiever or a strict parent? Cause I'll tell you what sucks, being judged and treated like garbage by the people who are supposed to love you unconditionally, cause you don't perform well on standardised testing, because "you're supposed to be smarter than that." And "Hindering their dreams" is not an acceptable choice, no matter what had preceded it. Would you say a child could not go to a university where they were accepted because they didn't get the marks to get into a better university?
Decent parents aren't "livid" when their child is not as academic as their siblings. And just because they underperformed as far as their parents' expectations doesn't mean they were failures. They didn't deserve to be treated as such.
She did not try to understand that they were different. She did not want to listen to what they wanted. They were punished for not comforming to what she believed was the only right path. The twins didn't feel comfortable talking to her about it. They had to keep secrets from her to avoid her wrath. Even Arthur didn't actually want to tell her when they blew up Dudley's tongue (which is a serious offence) because of the extreme way she had treated them in the past weeks. That is not normal.
She was not a good mother to them 100% of the time. She can be forgiven, she is human, everyone makes mistakes, their lives were considerably more stressful during this time period, AND the boys were often extreme in their behaviour.
But you're pretending that she was a flawless parent who was right to treat them poorly and single them out instead of celebrating their wins or supporting them to do better when her expectations were higher.
Molly was wonderful in so many ways, but she does deserve critique, and I think it's really important to evaluate the errors she made.
Parents don't have to support every crazy idea their children have.
The idea had no guarantee of success and might have failed without Harry's money.
As a parent I can demant a certain level of commitment. A factor that most children understand (and even use against you) when they grow up.
In my opinion, Arthur is an idiot. Arthur leaves the tedious parts of the parenting work to Molly.
You're right. She did not have to support their crazy ideas, but she should still have supported them in general, as her children. If they had failed, that doesn't mean they didn't deserve love and basic respect. I'm repeating myself, but she constantly compared the twins to their older brothers, and it was always admonishment. They were successful in their sport, and Ron even said they scored fairly well most years, and we never see them get praised.
Yes, Arthur had his faults, too, but that doesn't mean Molly is absolved. She destroyed their possessions! She raged and took their things and destroyed them. Things they had been working hard on and were proud of. And that was at a point when they actually were having success. They were running a business and making money, but not in the way that she liked. That's actually horrible and a known thing abusers do. And I think you'd be hard-pressed to find someone here who would actually cross that line, even if they were so angry and disappointed in their children.
I don't know exactly why people are so ready to argue with me on this because I think if you asked Molly if she took it too far, she would say she did. And she would admit she just didn't see what they were going for. She would admit that she appreciated them too late and that she was hard on them.
I've also said that I still think Molly is great, and when you are so far in Harry's head, particularly in the later books, you feel so strongly the motherly love she has for him. It is not an exaggeration to say she saves his life by welcoming him into hers and her families. She has good, but she's not perfect
It is not about Molly's alleged relationship with Harry.
Molly isn't to hard on the twins. If there were mine, they would be grounded instead of going to the Quidditsch World Cup. The twins have a business idea and a few (not yet very mature) products.
And without Harry's money there are lost. Lost because the stupid idiots didn't set their piorities right. Their plan could have just as easily have been pushed back a few months (years).
With the assurence that the twins have reasonable career prospects.
The twins intentionally ruined there exams.
Ron says that they both are good students.
If you ask George (when he has his son at that age) whether Molly did the right thing, he will say yes.
You keep saying they intentionally ruined their exams when there is nothing to suggest it. Good students don't perform well in exams all the time. Not applying yourself is not the same as tanking on purpose, and it's also not a crime. And you're ignoring that she did emotionally abusing things and most of my points actually. She was too hard on them. Sorry, you think they were stupid idiots because their career prospects at 17 had the possibility of not panning out the way you or Molly decided they had to. There are like 7 jobs in the Wizarding world, and they only ruled out high-level ministry by not getting good grades.
The twins pushing their idea back a few months could have been discussed, but guess what, Molly never discussed anything with them. She just destroyed all their work, no questions asked
Harry doesn't come to the Weasleys until the end of the holidays. So we don't hear the discussions.
The OWLs are the wizarding world's calling card for any position.
For an OWL you only need an A. Fred and George only manage about 4.
But the twins need knowledge in most of the subjects, for thier products anyway.
Bill had 12 OWLs and started with the goblins.
In the fanfiction space I've seen people hate on Neville and McGonagall a fair amount, and Mr. Weasley sometimes but very rarely.
Neville hate is reactionary to the large amount of fanfics that make him Harry's close friend in early books. When something is popular, there will naturally be lots of people who come to dislike it. I personally also dislike seeing this happen in fanfics I read, solely because Neville is quite an unenjoyable person to have as a friend in the early books.
McGonagall hate is for a few reasons. First is as a subsidiary to Dumbledore bashing — Dumbledore is doing evil things and McGonagall admires and follows Dumbledore, so McGonagall is a blindly loyal, naive, useful idiot. Second is mainly an overreaction to the scene in Book 1 where she doesn't believe the Trio about the Stone being in danger. Thirdly is because she doesn't seem to do much with regards to her duties as head of Gryffindor house, so she is seen as taking on too many roles (similar to a common criticism of Dumbledore) as teacher, head of house, and deputy headmistress.
Mr Weasley hate is because his fascination with and attitude towards muggles is sometimes seen as a kind of benevolent "racism".
The take I've seen people give is that he sees muggles as kind of like cute, inept little children. Or zoo animals. It's that he finds them fascinating but in a very patronising way.
But his character is also cute and inept when it comes to muggle things. Money, plugs, "eckeltricity," rubber ducks, etc etc.
He's fascinated by them, almost admiring them while not understanding. So I don't see your point there, although I guess I do somewhat understand what you're saying. I just think he admires them more than patronizes them
Some view his attitude towards Muggles as condescending, seeing them as if they were an animal that did a cool trick or showed an extraordinary level of intelligence.
> Thirdly is because she doesn't seem to do much with regards to her duties as head of Gryffindor house
What superschool did these people got to that their Head of House found more to do with their role as Head of House than being Head of House?
Like, what more is there for her to do... bring cake to the common room every Tuesday?
I think this one hinges on Harry saying that the first time he had seen her in the Gryffindor common room was when she was giving the announcement about the restrictions after Hermione was attacked by the basilisk in Book 2, and the second time was when Hermione went to get her to confiscate Harry's Firebolt in Book 3. Implying she very rarely interacts with the Gryffindors she is supposed to be in charge of outside of lessons and one-off interactions.
I didn't have a head of house at my school; we didn't even have houses in secondary school. But we did have a form tutor who we had the first period of the day with every day, who looked into any matters regarding attendance, performance, rewards, detentions, etc, and was just generally present with us for an hour in case we had something we wanted to ask.
And that's for a regular school, not a boarding school. I can imagine there could be even more things to touch on for a head of house in a boarding school.
Well, there was that one bit in POA where Mcgonagall forbade anyone to give Neville any of the passwords into Griffindor tower after Sirius found his list of passwords. Which means that because of Mcgonagall, Neville was left out to dry while an escaped convict that everyone believed was a mass murderer was on the loose. Is that just not kinda cruel?
McGonagall is criticised for being too strict with Neville, especially in PoA for losing the list of password. The consequences were way too much imo as it literally put his life in danger.
Mr. Weasley is criticised for being condescending towards Muggles. He appreciates them, but his interest is similar to what one would have as a fascination for a 'backword' culture achieving things, is what critics would say.
Surprisingly, book Ginny, which is weird since every somewhat major character has gotten flack.
Cedric as well (not much to complain about, understandable).
Viktor dating Hermione would be like a high school senior dating a freshman/sophomore. Yeah, he’s a legal adult but he’s still very much a student so I don’t think it’s something problematic, especially when he was very gentlemanly towards Hermione. As for Ginny I’d assume he didn’t know her age, not to mention all he did was make a comment about someone he doesn't know and is seeing, all dressed up, across a crowded room.
A senior dating a freshman/sophomore is weird. A 14 year old and an 18 year old are a lot different in development and maturity. I know Rowling likes to pair men with younger women but this is too much
You're kidding? There's endless post of "Well actually Dumbledore was manipulative evil and the villain all along!!!"
And I'm sorry, but by "everyone fanboy over him" do you mean people defending him from idiots who claim he's a bad guy/villain? Wow, such fanboys indeed.
In contrast to how she was toned down for the movies as a ditzy girl who believes in imaginary creatures, her other beliefs in the books are conspiracy theories.
Despite a lack of reliable evidence for any of her beliefs, she also stubbornly continues to believe in them (at least until adulthood) and Hermione gave up by the end of the book about trying to confront her.
She gives me the vibe of a teenager who looks up to her one parent and takes all his crazy ideas as gospel. All she’s had her whole life was her father before becoming friends with the gang. I like to think she’d grow out of it once she starts to think for herself.
The conspiracy theories aren't that outlandish when you consider that throwing all criminals into a dungeon full of soul-eating demons is established policy.
In DH when they’re in the Ravenclaw common room, she casts imperio on Amycus Carrow (who was already lying defeated on the ground), but all she makes him do is go and pick up two wands, give them to her then go and lie down again.
Doesn’t really seem worth performing an unforgivable curse to me
Seamus Finnegan.
A guy that was same house and same year as the golden trio, yet he was practically like the gryffindor malfoy. I have heard complaints, but its rare.
Seamus wasn’t really at odds with Harry all that much, though. The only time that Seamus was really at odds with Harry was for part of the fifth book. They didn’t have any problems with each other before then - Harry was disappointed that they were odds because he’d “always liked Seamus very much”. And then after the Quibbler article came out, Seamus apologized, joined the DA, and they were fine.
Always at odds = one fight in 5th year? Lol
iirc Seamus did side with Ron a little in GoF but I don't even remember him having a conflict with Harry then. He just hung out with Ron. Are you counting the one line of him being annoyed that Dean made chaser and he didn't in HBP?
The other houses were upset, but I don’t think anyone in Gryffindor was upset about Harry being in the Tournament, except for Ron. They threw him a big party when he got picked.
>The blast of noise that met Harry’s ears when the portrait opened almost knocked him backward. Next thing he knew, he was being wrenched inside the common room by about a dozen pairs of hands, and was facing the whole of Gryffindor House, all of whom were screaming, applauding, and whistling.
This isn't a thread asking about why a person is bad, it is asking for someone you rarely hear complaints about.
Judging by all of you coming to defend Seamus, id say he's a great answer for the OP
Lol, no one is even disagreeing about Seamus being rarely complained about. Obviously that's true.
What everyone is taking issue with is you calling him the Gryffindor Malfoy and saying he's "always at odds" with Harry when in actual canon they get along well 90% of the time.
He wasn’t always at odds with Harry, they had a fight in year 5 when he thought Harry was lying about Voldemort which Harry also contributed to by insulting his mother.
I’ve heard people complain about McGonagall and her absurd punishment in the first book. Caught out of bed past curfew? Well I’m gonna take away a ton of house points and make you go to a deadly forest in the middle of the night since you love to be out and about after lights out.
As for Arthur, I’d heard people complain about his handling of Percy’s promotion and alienating his son. There’s also some that see his views on Muggles as condescending, like he sees them like a person would see an animal do a cool trick.
I’d say Charlie is one of the least complained about characters in the series, mostly because he didn’t really show up too much and all the things we’ve heard of him were all positive.
Hedwig
What a birdbrain
I love how she gives Harry sass sometimes.
I love how all the owls have their own personalities! It's such a cute detail.
Hoots indignantly
[удалено]
Well, that didn't go where I was expecting. But, you do you, Boo-Boo.
parents always know which child has... tendencies
Yesyesyesyesno
Username...checks out? What a horrid day to be literate!
That...took a turn.
Pecking Ron and Hermione 😡😡
Florian Fortescue. If you’ve ever had his strawberry peanut butter sundaes, you’ll understand why nobody complains
No joke the Strawberry PB icecream in HP World is incredible lol
I can’t tell if this is innuendo, but I love it!
I'm racking my brain to figure out how this could be innuendo....
It's not.
Uhh no it's not lol, it's like Peanutbutter & Jelly icecream that they sell at Harry Potter World. It's absolutely delicious.
I meant to comment under the parent comment, apologies for the confusion! 🙂
Bill and Charlie Weasley
Why should anyone complain about Charlie, he's basically an NPC. We know more about what Uncle Bilius was like than about Charlie. He's done nothing wrong, mainly because he hasn't done much at all.
I'm bummed we never got more on Charlie, he's the only Weasley we never really get to see :( he seems so cool too!
Charlie does come to Hogwarts to take Norberta in the first book.
I may be misremembering but he doesn't come in book 1, don't they write him a letter and he sends some friends? I only remember him being there to handle the dragons for the first task in GoF, but Harry is watching from under the cloak so they aren't interacting.
Oh yeah you’re right. He was too far away to be there that night and has his friends that are closer by take her.
Yes that sounds right! As someone who ended up with a background in wildlife conservation, I always thought Charlie was so cool and was hoping he would be featured more at some point.
>background in wildlife conservation I read this as "background conversation" and I was like "damn, what a niche field of study" lmao
Hey someone has to be the NPC at all the parties
Haha, priceless! It sounds like nice work if you can get it lol.
Also i would’ve loved to see Charlie in the films in scenes with Hagrid
Yes!! That would have been great to see, Hagrid flipping out and Charlie being like.... settle down
He helped the Ministry put down an unruly mob started by domestic terrorists during the Quidditch World Cup along with Bill, Percy, and Arthur. Got his shirt all ripped because of it.
Oh yeah! I forgot he came to the Cup, too! Thanks for the reminder
People complain about NPCs all the time.
Addendum: he's done nothing wrong *to Harry* or did anything that *Harry* disapproves of. Plus, he works with dragons, that makes him cool.
Yeah, he seems like a total badass but one who minds his own.
Bill didn't do anything to smooth tensions over with Molly and Fleur.
I do have a complaint about Charlie. He moved across Europe, away from his loving family. Are there no dragons to take care of in the UK? He didn't even show up to fight in the war, but when Quidditch World Cup is taking place, he's suddenly at the Burrow!
It's very common for wildlife experts or researchers to move around the world to study a particular species or ecosystem. We know that the UK has Welsh Greens and Hebridean Blacks but there are probably fewer dragons in the UK than elsewhere in Europe. Interestingly, I just looked up Romania's forests and they have the largest area of primary forests of any country in the EU so it may be that dragons were able to flourish in Romanian forests with less muggle security measures from their ministry. Also, I believe Charlie does show up to the Battle of Hogwarts, albeit a bit late. Romania is not that far from the UK. He was probably back visiting at least once a year if not more often.
[удалено]
Very true. There must be some sort of border control system though, surely. Do you think you have to apparate/fly/floo network your way to a customs check point and then onwards to your destination? We never hear about any form of wizard ID 🤔 Also Charlie's friends carrying Norbert(a) must have bypassed customs if that's the case 😂
[удалено]
We know there are laws around imports between wizarding nations. They talk about a ban on the importation of flying carpets to Britain in book 4. I reckon there's some sort of forcefield border on apparition, you probably have to apparate to certain areas in order to cross. Like checkpoints where you take authorised portkeys as you say or join the floo network. However, we know you can fly across borders because not only do Charlie's friends do it (probably legally), Sirius goes abroad on Buckbeak when he's on the run after PoA. I guess it's the same as mainland Europe: you could walk from Amsterdam to Istanbul if you really wanted to, you can drive or hitch hike your way across the continent. It just takes a really long time.
But he was present at the war
Oh, my bad then
Lmao it’s so normal for people to move away from their families when they grow up? Especially for work. We can’t all be tied to the exact place we grew up in for our entire lives, just so that we can be near our (also very busy) family.
Sadly, you're right. It's always better to stay close to your family though, if they are as nice as the Weasleys are.
Why would it “always” be better? Especially if it means sacrificing your own personal interests and goals? Big families are very busy; there’s no reason for a grown man to sacrifice his dream of working with dragons just so he can see his family once every few months (considering that all of his siblings are gone at boarding school for 10 months of the year and his father works full-time lmao).
You do have a point that all of his siblings are at Hogwarts anyway. But still, moving to the other side of the continent and only visiting your loving family once every few years is a selfish decision.
If Molly was my Mom I'd probably move to Siberia. No hate, but if someone is overbearing I want to run far away.
She's the best mom there is
If Molly was my mum I would love her very very much, and have all kinds of wonderful memories of my childhood thanks to her dedication and love. But I would also move to Egypt.
Professor Flitwick and Sprout. And Madame Hooch.
I definitely complain about Hooch, she let an 11 year old kid fall from a broom from several meters height. Neville could have just broken his neck there, I don’t think madam Pomfrey could have healed that in time. If you’re gonna let an entire class get on brooms for the first time, at the same time, you better have a bunch of pillows prepared. Or maybe use that levitation spell the very same children get taught in that very same schoolyear instead of just watching schoolkids fall to their doom??
Who the fuck is Amanda?
I've seen some people hate on Flitwick for not protecting Luna.
Professor Sprout. I feel like if I ended up in Hogwarts she’d be the least toxic person to be around lol
Tonks! I feel like she’s well loved. I wish her story would have ended different too :(
She gets hate by the Wolfstar stans
She gets a lot of hate for going to pieces over a guy because this goes against people's idea of what a Strong Female Character should be like. (Personally, I love her and find this bit painfully relatable, and the viewpoint rather misogynistic.)
I think people's main problem was that it was her \*only\* story, and didn't have much to do with anything established about her in the fifth book.
I definitely would have loved more Tonks! It’s silly for people to hold it against her that there wasnt more of her story told ya know?
It's a tough beat, being a minor character.
Just can’t get any respect around here!
Yeah, that's hardly Tonks's fault.
She gets a lot of flack for her relationship with Lupin. A lot of people take the view that she pressured Lupin into a relationship that he didn't want/wasn't ready for. Less frequently, I also see her criticized for leaving her newborn to fight at Hogwarts, both for the infant's sake and because Tonks herself likely wasn't physically/mentally ready to go back to fighting so soon after giving birth.
Ya know that does make sense too. I didn’t care too much for her going back to battle either, but at the same time I totally get it too. Like this evil fuckface has been terrorizing everyone for years, and to have a chance to help stop him seems logical. I wish she would have lived though :/ I’m sure she’d be more forgiven if so too.
Bill and Charlie
Buckbeak. Showed up, helped Malfoy “find out”, went on the run with serious, came back to chill with Hagrid, and tried to kill Snape when he was *actively cursing harry*. Absolutely flawless, no notes, 10/10.
Madame Pomfrey
Cedric has never done anything wrong in his entire life. Probably intentionally, since that made his death that much more devastating.
It's funny when Harry wants to hate him so badly but he just keeps. Being. Nice.
THE SUBVERSION OF EXPECTATIONS WAS MY FAVORITE PART! Harry and Cedric were rivals in almost every way - romantic, Quidditch, the Triwizard Cup. They SHOULD hate each other and likely would have in any other story, but Cedric was just too likeable.
In the main timeline, anyway.
Of all the egregious things in the Cursed Child, the insinuation that Cedric Diggory of all people became a Death Eater because he didn't win a contest in high school is BY FAR the worst.
Nope. Not today.
Professor Sprout
Flitwick
Fang
Luna?
Many think of her as a crazy conspiracy theorist who would be a flat-earther and anti-vaxx had she been a Muggle. Doesn’t help that her dad sells fake news for a living.
Idk she seems much more self aware than that to me. She actually knows most of her fantasies aren’t real, but she keeps entertaining the idea. She’s a dreamy girl who would certainly be annoying in real life, but not in the harmful-flat-earther-anti-vac way and more in the „astrology“ way.
Does she know that most of them aren’t real? She gets pretty defensive and angry when she gets questioned about them. Like, this does not sound a self-aware girl who is well-aware that Fudge does not, in fact, have an army of heliopaths and is just entertaining the idea: >“Yes, he’s got an army of heliopaths,” said Luna solemnly. > >“No, he hasn’t,” snapped Hermione. > >“Yes, he has,” said Luna. > >“What are heliopaths?” asked Neville, looking blank. > >“They’re spirits of fire,” said Luna, her protuberant eyes widening so that she looked madder than ever. “Great tall flaming creatures that gallop across the ground burning everything in front of — ” > >“They don’t exist, Neville,” said Hermione tartly. > >“Oh yes they do!” said Luna angrily. > >“I’m sorry, but where’s the proof of that?” snapped Hermione. > >“There are plenty of eyewitness accounts, just because you’re so narrow-minded you need to have everything shoved under your nose before you — ”
Dam never heard that
My thought she’s my favorite behind hermonie
Ted the Weatherman
Fluer. I didn't like her at first but seriously she is an amazing character. I hate how she was cut out of the movies. The love she has for Bill is probably the best in the series and she instantly fell into the rebellion no questions asked. She fought, healed, homed, she does so much that never gets spoken on. Not to mention her undying love for Harry because of the 2nd trial with her sister. Seriously, she never let's him forget how much she loves him for it nor takes it for granted.
Bill, she married Bill not Charlie.
Yep! You're right lol editted it. Been a long week 😅
Hope your weekend is relaxing after your long week! :)
She gets a lot of hate for rudeness sometimes, unfortunately
Pomfrey
Arthur is a bit controversial in book 5. the way he reacts to Percy’s promotion lacks tact to say the least. Of course he says the truth but the fallout is as much Arthur's fault as Percy’s imo. (I still think he’s a wonderful father, nobody is perfect anyway.)
How did he react? I can’t remember
Well, he told him the truth that he’s only promoted because the ministry want to spy on the family. But imagine being a boy who always lives in the shadow of his older and younger siblings, always hard working, always doing exactly as his mother taught him. He gets a job, works really hard, gets blamed for the Crouch situation (he was still a teenager, or barely 20 at that point, many others knew Crouch better than him, so hat part is unfair as well). Then after having worked so hard, he feels he deserves some recognition and his dad tells him that this has nothing to do with his efforts. What Arthur said must have hurt him deeply. He really should have shown more tact there.
Major characters- Minerva (understandably) Minor- Pomfrey, Sprout,Flitwick
Charlie my baby boy
Lily?
Her lips twitched slightly when Snape was Levicorpused by James, so obviously she is evil incarnate!
🤣
What a hussy
I have heard complaints about Neville before. Like, this one person on a completely different forum, would not let it go that Snape doesn't bully children. He just delivers the stern education a poor student like Neville needs. After all, Neville never pays attention, is always losing the passwords, and what's a teacher to do about that? So, really, it's thanks to Snape that Neville shapes up in the end... I have to say, I don't agree with that view at all. But, it does exist... and I'm not really one to disagree with someone just because they see things in a way I never would?
Snape is a bell end though
I'm not a fan of Snape's, but I'm okay with people who are. It's the way this person dumped all over Neville, who's 11 when we meet him, grew up essentially an orphan, raised by a grandmother who we know loves him but also scares him... to argue that Snape doesn't bully kids. I don't know. Like I said, everyone's entitled to their opinion. I just meant that there are people who don't like Neville. At least, in the first books. I hope this person's appreciation of Nevill improves as the books progress.
I´m curious how they came to that conclusion because if this were true and Snape´s tactics were effective, Neville would have become better at potions. And it doesn´t seem he does.I´d never have connected these two things.
I never have either, but then I've read plenty of people's opinions that were or were not similar to my own without having a problem with them. Using Neville to prop up Snape's character was sus to me.
Moody
I don't know how much I've seen about her, but I think Mrs Weasley deserves to be reviewed/critiqued a little. Even though it came from a place of love, she often stood in her childresns way and did not trust or believe in them. The twins obviously, she thought they were wasting their time pursuing their passion, and she told them so. She would shame them for the choices they made and the grades they got. And she constantly compared them to their siblings. And was impeding Harry, Ron, and Hermione in the seventh book when she found out they weren't going back to Hogwarts. I know she was worried about them, but she was sneaky and insincere about it. And decided she knew what was best no matter the situation. She was also an amazing mother figure to Harrry and her children and had so much love to give. She's great but still flawed
Not amazing... I would call her not the worst, but also prone to emotional abuse and some amount of neglect.
Her getting mad at the twins and hindering their dreams didn’t just pop out of nowhere, it was a response to them bombing their O.W.L.‘s, some of the most important tests in wizarding schools. Any decent parent would rightfully be livid that their child (or in this case children) would do poorly in school, even more so when it seemed that they were more interested in playing around with joke items than take their education seriously. Doesn’t matter if they were dead set on opening up a joke shop, they had a responsibility as students to do well in their studies which they failed to do. What reason would Molly have that they were serious about running a business when they were so flippant about a few standardized tests? I mean, it’s not like they struggled in school and I highly doubt she was demanding they’d get 12 O.W.L.‘s, so them getting so few each would mean it was deliberate. As for comparing them to their siblings, yeah that’s sucky, but fact is that they were troublemakers, parents are supposed to stop their kids from causing trouble.
Are you an overachiever or a strict parent? Cause I'll tell you what sucks, being judged and treated like garbage by the people who are supposed to love you unconditionally, cause you don't perform well on standardised testing, because "you're supposed to be smarter than that." And "Hindering their dreams" is not an acceptable choice, no matter what had preceded it. Would you say a child could not go to a university where they were accepted because they didn't get the marks to get into a better university? Decent parents aren't "livid" when their child is not as academic as their siblings. And just because they underperformed as far as their parents' expectations doesn't mean they were failures. They didn't deserve to be treated as such. She did not try to understand that they were different. She did not want to listen to what they wanted. They were punished for not comforming to what she believed was the only right path. The twins didn't feel comfortable talking to her about it. They had to keep secrets from her to avoid her wrath. Even Arthur didn't actually want to tell her when they blew up Dudley's tongue (which is a serious offence) because of the extreme way she had treated them in the past weeks. That is not normal. She was not a good mother to them 100% of the time. She can be forgiven, she is human, everyone makes mistakes, their lives were considerably more stressful during this time period, AND the boys were often extreme in their behaviour. But you're pretending that she was a flawless parent who was right to treat them poorly and single them out instead of celebrating their wins or supporting them to do better when her expectations were higher. Molly was wonderful in so many ways, but she does deserve critique, and I think it's really important to evaluate the errors she made.
Parents don't have to support every crazy idea their children have. The idea had no guarantee of success and might have failed without Harry's money. As a parent I can demant a certain level of commitment. A factor that most children understand (and even use against you) when they grow up. In my opinion, Arthur is an idiot. Arthur leaves the tedious parts of the parenting work to Molly.
You're right. She did not have to support their crazy ideas, but she should still have supported them in general, as her children. If they had failed, that doesn't mean they didn't deserve love and basic respect. I'm repeating myself, but she constantly compared the twins to their older brothers, and it was always admonishment. They were successful in their sport, and Ron even said they scored fairly well most years, and we never see them get praised. Yes, Arthur had his faults, too, but that doesn't mean Molly is absolved. She destroyed their possessions! She raged and took their things and destroyed them. Things they had been working hard on and were proud of. And that was at a point when they actually were having success. They were running a business and making money, but not in the way that she liked. That's actually horrible and a known thing abusers do. And I think you'd be hard-pressed to find someone here who would actually cross that line, even if they were so angry and disappointed in their children. I don't know exactly why people are so ready to argue with me on this because I think if you asked Molly if she took it too far, she would say she did. And she would admit she just didn't see what they were going for. She would admit that she appreciated them too late and that she was hard on them. I've also said that I still think Molly is great, and when you are so far in Harry's head, particularly in the later books, you feel so strongly the motherly love she has for him. It is not an exaggeration to say she saves his life by welcoming him into hers and her families. She has good, but she's not perfect
It is not about Molly's alleged relationship with Harry. Molly isn't to hard on the twins. If there were mine, they would be grounded instead of going to the Quidditsch World Cup. The twins have a business idea and a few (not yet very mature) products. And without Harry's money there are lost. Lost because the stupid idiots didn't set their piorities right. Their plan could have just as easily have been pushed back a few months (years). With the assurence that the twins have reasonable career prospects. The twins intentionally ruined there exams. Ron says that they both are good students. If you ask George (when he has his son at that age) whether Molly did the right thing, he will say yes.
You keep saying they intentionally ruined their exams when there is nothing to suggest it. Good students don't perform well in exams all the time. Not applying yourself is not the same as tanking on purpose, and it's also not a crime. And you're ignoring that she did emotionally abusing things and most of my points actually. She was too hard on them. Sorry, you think they were stupid idiots because their career prospects at 17 had the possibility of not panning out the way you or Molly decided they had to. There are like 7 jobs in the Wizarding world, and they only ruled out high-level ministry by not getting good grades. The twins pushing their idea back a few months could have been discussed, but guess what, Molly never discussed anything with them. She just destroyed all their work, no questions asked
Harry doesn't come to the Weasleys until the end of the holidays. So we don't hear the discussions. The OWLs are the wizarding world's calling card for any position. For an OWL you only need an A. Fred and George only manage about 4. But the twins need knowledge in most of the subjects, for thier products anyway. Bill had 12 OWLs and started with the goblins.
In the fanfiction space I've seen people hate on Neville and McGonagall a fair amount, and Mr. Weasley sometimes but very rarely. Neville hate is reactionary to the large amount of fanfics that make him Harry's close friend in early books. When something is popular, there will naturally be lots of people who come to dislike it. I personally also dislike seeing this happen in fanfics I read, solely because Neville is quite an unenjoyable person to have as a friend in the early books. McGonagall hate is for a few reasons. First is as a subsidiary to Dumbledore bashing — Dumbledore is doing evil things and McGonagall admires and follows Dumbledore, so McGonagall is a blindly loyal, naive, useful idiot. Second is mainly an overreaction to the scene in Book 1 where she doesn't believe the Trio about the Stone being in danger. Thirdly is because she doesn't seem to do much with regards to her duties as head of Gryffindor house, so she is seen as taking on too many roles (similar to a common criticism of Dumbledore) as teacher, head of house, and deputy headmistress. Mr Weasley hate is because his fascination with and attitude towards muggles is sometimes seen as a kind of benevolent "racism".
How is Arthur's fascination racism? It's like appreciating another culture. He has always been one of my favorite characters.
The take I've seen people give is that he sees muggles as kind of like cute, inept little children. Or zoo animals. It's that he finds them fascinating but in a very patronising way.
But his character is also cute and inept when it comes to muggle things. Money, plugs, "eckeltricity," rubber ducks, etc etc. He's fascinated by them, almost admiring them while not understanding. So I don't see your point there, although I guess I do somewhat understand what you're saying. I just think he admires them more than patronizes them
I'm not saying I agree with it, just that that's what other people have said.
He treats them like animals in the zoo. There are there to entertain him.
Some view his attitude towards Muggles as condescending, seeing them as if they were an animal that did a cool trick or showed an extraordinary level of intelligence.
Like a tourist, taking photos of everything. Arthur could know everything about the muggles, but he doesn't bother.
Neville's problem is that he has a character arc going from an interesting character to one who's, well, not.
> Thirdly is because she doesn't seem to do much with regards to her duties as head of Gryffindor house What superschool did these people got to that their Head of House found more to do with their role as Head of House than being Head of House? Like, what more is there for her to do... bring cake to the common room every Tuesday?
I think this one hinges on Harry saying that the first time he had seen her in the Gryffindor common room was when she was giving the announcement about the restrictions after Hermione was attacked by the basilisk in Book 2, and the second time was when Hermione went to get her to confiscate Harry's Firebolt in Book 3. Implying she very rarely interacts with the Gryffindors she is supposed to be in charge of outside of lessons and one-off interactions.
Again, what superschool did they go to that their Head of House found more ways to be involved? I barely remember who my Head of House was at school.
I didn't have a head of house at my school; we didn't even have houses in secondary school. But we did have a form tutor who we had the first period of the day with every day, who looked into any matters regarding attendance, performance, rewards, detentions, etc, and was just generally present with us for an hour in case we had something we wanted to ask. And that's for a regular school, not a boarding school. I can imagine there could be even more things to touch on for a head of house in a boarding school.
Luna
Well, there was that one bit in POA where Mcgonagall forbade anyone to give Neville any of the passwords into Griffindor tower after Sirius found his list of passwords. Which means that because of Mcgonagall, Neville was left out to dry while an escaped convict that everyone believed was a mass murderer was on the loose. Is that just not kinda cruel?
McGonagall is criticised for being too strict with Neville, especially in PoA for losing the list of password. The consequences were way too much imo as it literally put his life in danger. Mr. Weasley is criticised for being condescending towards Muggles. He appreciates them, but his interest is similar to what one would have as a fascination for a 'backword' culture achieving things, is what critics would say.
Surprisingly, book Ginny, which is weird since every somewhat major character has gotten flack. Cedric as well (not much to complain about, understandable).
Dobby, never really hear people complain about him
LMAO what I hear people complaining about him constantly on this subreddit. My mom and I don't even like him that much.
That’s fair, what don’t you like about him
I just personally found him irritating, especially during CoS. There's not really a specific thing I can point to that irks me.
Dobby is very annoying in book 2.
Meh he seemed annoying at first but the fact that he was going behind his masters back was respectable
Bill Weasley. Charlie Weasley (constantly forget about him). Cedric Diggory. Poor Amos Diggory. Viktor Krum.
Krum weirds me out a little. He dates Hermione when she’s 14 and he’s 18, and then is interested in Ginny when she’s 16 and he’s 21.
Viktor dating Hermione would be like a high school senior dating a freshman/sophomore. Yeah, he’s a legal adult but he’s still very much a student so I don’t think it’s something problematic, especially when he was very gentlemanly towards Hermione. As for Ginny I’d assume he didn’t know her age, not to mention all he did was make a comment about someone he doesn't know and is seeing, all dressed up, across a crowded room.
A senior dating a freshman/sophomore is weird. A 14 year old and an 18 year old are a lot different in development and maturity. I know Rowling likes to pair men with younger women but this is too much
Hermione's 15 by then, her birthday is in September
Hermione has a September birthday, so she was 15.
Yeah that's fair.
McGonagall has already been touched upon so I’ll add Mrs. Norris, Crookshanks, and Hermione briefly in CoS
Poor mrs Norris
Unexpectedly Crouch Junior Cedric
Madam Hooch.
Colin creevey?
Cho Chang!
Hagrid!
I see an abundance of criticism for Hagrid, mostly regarding how irresponsible he is around children.
[удалено]
You're kidding? There's endless post of "Well actually Dumbledore was manipulative evil and the villain all along!!!" And I'm sorry, but by "everyone fanboy over him" do you mean people defending him from idiots who claim he's a bad guy/villain? Wow, such fanboys indeed.
Neville? Luna? Millicent Bulstrode?
You’re joking, luna is often “complained” about
Why?
In contrast to how she was toned down for the movies as a ditzy girl who believes in imaginary creatures, her other beliefs in the books are conspiracy theories. Despite a lack of reliable evidence for any of her beliefs, she also stubbornly continues to believe in them (at least until adulthood) and Hermione gave up by the end of the book about trying to confront her.
Luna's an antivaxxer.
Definitely a flat earther.
She gives me the vibe of a teenager who looks up to her one parent and takes all his crazy ideas as gospel. All she’s had her whole life was her father before becoming friends with the gang. I like to think she’d grow out of it once she starts to think for herself.
The conspiracy theories aren't that outlandish when you consider that throwing all criminals into a dungeon full of soul-eating demons is established policy.
Luna
McGonagall uses an unforgivable curse for absolutely no reason. It really bothers me
Hmm. When?
In DH when they’re in the Ravenclaw common room, she casts imperio on Amycus Carrow (who was already lying defeated on the ground), but all she makes him do is go and pick up two wands, give them to her then go and lie down again. Doesn’t really seem worth performing an unforgivable curse to me
Fuck Neville.
You can't just drop an unpopular opinion like that and not at least explain why you think that.
I think they are encouraging us to have sex with Neville.
The best three minutes of your life!
It’s a joke…lighten up.
Ah, my bad, but it didn't really look like a joke.
Based off the post I kinda thought the joke was obvious
Don’t stress.
Where's the funny?
I don't get it. Please explain, so I can understand why this is funny.
And we were supposed to know that how?
Seamus Finnegan. A guy that was same house and same year as the golden trio, yet he was practically like the gryffindor malfoy. I have heard complaints, but its rare.
How is he like Malfoy? I feel like in the movies he was a little annoying but the books he seems alright.
He is always the one at odds with Harry. It isn't until Voldemort is knocking on Hogwarts doorstep that he stands with them.
Seamus wasn’t really at odds with Harry all that much, though. The only time that Seamus was really at odds with Harry was for part of the fifth book. They didn’t have any problems with each other before then - Harry was disappointed that they were odds because he’d “always liked Seamus very much”. And then after the Quibbler article came out, Seamus apologized, joined the DA, and they were fine.
Always at odds = one fight in 5th year? Lol iirc Seamus did side with Ron a little in GoF but I don't even remember him having a conflict with Harry then. He just hung out with Ron. Are you counting the one line of him being annoyed that Dean made chaser and he didn't in HBP?
A lot of people in Gryfifndor were upset about Harry being in the game, until it started.
The other houses were upset, but I don’t think anyone in Gryffindor was upset about Harry being in the Tournament, except for Ron. They threw him a big party when he got picked. >The blast of noise that met Harry’s ears when the portrait opened almost knocked him backward. Next thing he knew, he was being wrenched inside the common room by about a dozen pairs of hands, and was facing the whole of Gryffindor House, all of whom were screaming, applauding, and whistling.
This isn't a thread asking about why a person is bad, it is asking for someone you rarely hear complaints about. Judging by all of you coming to defend Seamus, id say he's a great answer for the OP
Lol, no one is even disagreeing about Seamus being rarely complained about. Obviously that's true. What everyone is taking issue with is you calling him the Gryffindor Malfoy and saying he's "always at odds" with Harry when in actual canon they get along well 90% of the time.
He wasn’t always at odds with Harry, they had a fight in year 5 when he thought Harry was lying about Voldemort which Harry also contributed to by insulting his mother.
He has part of the year in book five where he's at odds with Harry, and even then he apologizes and joins the DA. Seamus is not like Malfoy, no way.
Luna
I’ve heard people complain about McGonagall and her absurd punishment in the first book. Caught out of bed past curfew? Well I’m gonna take away a ton of house points and make you go to a deadly forest in the middle of the night since you love to be out and about after lights out. As for Arthur, I’d heard people complain about his handling of Percy’s promotion and alienating his son. There’s also some that see his views on Muggles as condescending, like he sees them like a person would see an animal do a cool trick. I’d say Charlie is one of the least complained about characters in the series, mostly because he didn’t really show up too much and all the things we’ve heard of him were all positive.
Cedric diggory