Polls: Entertainment & Arts

1. Harry Potter felt his stomach flip over for Cho Chang the moment he saw her and pretty much every other time ever since (including the final book).

2. Harry always fancied her (finding her both physically and personally appealing). Note who he wanted to ask to the dance, ask out, etc. Quite frankly, in very book since she is introduced (book 3), he likes her.

3. It seems the author suddenly forgot what she had built up and instead opted for someone who made no sense in a hurry, having focused on the main plot that the romance subplot was forgotten till the last moment. Ginny is family, not fancy material (Harry displayed no interest in her whatsoever at any point, then randomly likes her, no way). People fall for people, but they still have to be physically into them initially which he wasn't.

4. With Cho there was always and immediately instant rapport between them.

5. If not Cho, then the author did give room for Hermione being a potential sexual mate. After all, she suddenly kisses him on the cheeks "for the first time" at the end of book 4.

6. Hermione actually would have been a nice touch if Cho had fallen through. She had been absolutely loyal to him unlike other so called friends (aka Ron who was nothing more than a disloyal moody leech who often abandoned Harry at moments of trouble e. g. book 4).

7. In terms of Cho, Cho always stood by Harry in book 4, and came back to support him in book 5 and 7.

8. In defence of Hermione, pretty sure Harry would have had a fantasy about her now and again. I mean, as in must have spent some time with a few of her FB photos right?

9. Harry might have simply met a brand new hottie at a coffee shop or a Quidditch match and hit it off.

10. Finally, with Hermione, there was the rapport of friendship, and with Cho the rapport of interests, the physical attraction immediate, and the spark between them.

YOU MUST CHOOSE, vote now between what is right and what is easy...

Believe it or not, Nintendo actually did make the female Link/Linkle character in Hyrule Warriors, lol.

I'm just wondering since that's how I feel about many modern day movies of the past 20 years. With Mad Max: Fury Road and the upcoming Ghostbusters movie being the perfect examples of what I'm talking about, that's just how I feel. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for movies having strong female protagonists but not at the expense of the long-time, beloved protagonists of these legendary film series (*cough cough* Mad Max). It's great to have powerful female characters as long as the intention of it isn't political and forcing feminist views on their audiences. That's what I believe. That's what movies like Alien is such a great movie because the Ellen Ripley character didn't feel forced onto the audience because of her gender. She's just a naturally very lovable sci-fi horror movie heroine among both male and female fans of the Alien franchise.

What I mean is, do you think that superhero films will fall from relevance the way westerns once did? From the 40's to late 70's early 80's westerns were all over the place in American cinema, with many actors such as John Wayne and Clint Eastwood making names from themselves. There were movies such as High Noon, The Good, The Bad and The Ugly, the Searchers as well as TV series' such as Gunsmoke, which ran for 20 years and Bonanza. Ultimately sci fi films and tv series aroused the publics interest more and eventually Westerns faded in relevance. The genre briefly resurfaced in the 90's with Unforgiven, Dances With Wolves and Tombstone earning critical and commercial praise. So currently superheroes are extremely profitable but for how long? Let me know what you think.

Do you think it the deserves the beat down and execution killing critics are giving it or is it a glorious nostalgia trip that takes you back regardless of whether you watched it in its' original run or grew up watching its' reruns?