A series of books based on the characters from a popular movie are consistently best sellers in local bookstores. Seeking to capitalize on the books’ success, Vista Studios is planning to produce a movie sequel based on the books. Due to the success of the books and the original movie, the sequel will undoubtedly be profitable. While I agree with the conclusion, I disagree with the author’s line of reasoning. The author assumes that sequels always sell better than the originals. This assumption is simply not true, and one need only look at the success of the Harry Potter series for proof. While the movie in 2001 was popular, the books were far more successful. In fact, the first book in the series sold more copies than the movie, and by the final book in the series, the movie had outsold the books

HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS, created by J. K. Rowling, was the first book in a seven-book series set in England at the turn of the century. It started in July 1997 and by February 1998, it had sold over three million copies. The first book in the series, Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone, was the number one bestseller of 1998. The movie was released in 2001 and quickly became one of the most-watched movies in history. However, by 2005, the Harry Potter books had reached the fifty million mark in sales. The books were selling faster than the movie, and by the time the seventh book was released, the movie sales had fallen below those of the book sales. However, the seventh book, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, was the best-selling book in 2007, with over ten million copies sold. The books were also translated into forty different languages. The success of these two books inspired the creation of other franchises, including the Twilight series, The Hunger Games, and The Mortal Instruments. While these franchises did not initially sell as well as Harry Potter, they have continued to sell more copies than the original movie. While the Harry Potter movies were popular, the movie series was not the reason for the books’ success

The author of this article assumes that the Harry Potter series was financially successful solely because of the movie. However, the Harry Potter series was wildly popular well before the movie was released. The author assumes that anyone who bought the first book must have also bought the movie. However, this assumption is far from true. Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone was released in July 1997 and the movie was released in November 2001. However, the first book had already sold over three million copies. While the movie was popular, it was not responsible for the huge popularity of the Harry Potter books. In fact, the movie’s gross domestic product was only 50% that of the first book in the series. The movie only made up for a fraction of the first book’s sales, and this alone did not account for the huge success of the books. The Harry Potter series was a phenomenon, and its success was not dependent on the movie, but rather on the characters and the storylines

The author also assumes that sequels are always better than the originals. This assumption is also false. There have been many successful movies that were based on poorly written books. The Godfather, for example, was based on a poorly written book. The movie was huge, winning four Oscars. However, the book was poorly written and filled with grammatical errors. When the movie was released, the book was out of print. Many people who had read the book thought the movie was terrible. Other movies that were based on poorly written books, such as Castaway, The Sixth Sense, and The Da Vinci Code, all failed at the box office. While an author’s skill in writing is important, a good movie can also be based on a bad book

While the author’s conclusion is partially correct, there are many flaws in the reasoning. The author assumes that most readers who buy the book also buy the movie. This is not necessarily true. Many people do not watch the movie and read the book instead, or the other way around. In addition, the Harry Potter series was not based on the movie, but on seven novels that were wildly popular. While a movie might generate more revenue than a book, a novel can change authors lives. The writer of the Harry Potter series was able to quit her day job and write full time. She probably would not have this opportunity if her writing career did not begin with the Harry Potter series. The author also assumes that sequels are always better than the originals. While this may be true for many movies, there are exceptions, such as the Lord of the Rings trilogy, which was only a success because of the success of the first movie. This trilogy of movies was a favorite of many movie goers, and it may be that many of them did not read the books, or did not read them because the books were not as popular as the movies

The author also assumes that certain characters or story lines will always sell better than others. This can be true, but there are also many exceptions. The Twilight series, based on the popular novels by Stephenie Meyer, was very popular, and many people read all three books in the series. However, the movies were not as popular, and the books were not as successful as the first two Harry Potter books. The Twilight series was so successful that other film studios, such as Summit Entertainment, created their own franchises, such as The Hunger Games, based on the novel. While the author’s assumption might be true for some films and book series, it is not for all films or books. In other words, the author of this book assumes that movies based on books are always more successful,