What is the worse Harry Potter book?

Answer 1

Just about all of them, frankly.

Answer 2

Why answer a Harry Potter question if you've never read the books? Come on Harry haters! All the books are phenomenal! Otherwise why would the books be second only to the bible in numbers printed. I really love this series; Harry is my homie! However, the book I liked least is The Half Blood Prince. There were a number of moving chapters; namely the last four. It just seemed a bit drawn out at first. J.K. Rowling is a genius and I am reading book six again now to get ready for book seven. Anyone who hasn't read the books and wants to, don't let the harry haters keep you from the first page......you won't be able to stop after you start. You're never too old! Don't just watch the movies. For the most part they are not representative of our Harry Potter.

Answer 3

1

Answer 4

People will stone me to death for saying that, for me, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban is the worse book. I didn't like it, I never felt it was exciting nor interesting, all the time travelling felt somewhat cheap although it was done well... If not, I'd say Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix is pretty confusing and boring too. But in the last chapters it spices itself up a lot, and even with a character with Umbridge there all along, I still prefer book five than book three.

Answer 5

To me, the fourth book was the worst book because it was the longest one and the one that I found the most difficult to get into. The beginning is just way too slow and spends too much time on the Quidditch World Cupworld tournament. I actually put the book away for a year and almost gave up on the whole series. But I tried again and when I finally got past that boring beginning, into some wonderful action, mystery, and suspense, I ended up really loving the book. I am glad I didn't give up because the fifth was great and the sixth was the very best yet. I can't wait for the seventh. Whoo hoo!

Answer 6

I would think the fifth one. In order from best to worst so far, it's 3rd, 1st, 4th, 2nd, 6th, and 5th although I think that 3, 1, and 4 deserve 1st place, 2 and 6 deserve 2nd, and 5 deserves 3rd. I guess they're special in their own ways, but I thought the 5th and 6th went a bit slow, with 5 being a bit more slow than the rest. Always wondered why she spent 100 out of some 600 pages describing Harry's summer "adventures" in the last few books.

Answer 7

I enjoyed the fifth book the least of all. Not because it confused me - it didn't. But because she felt she had to show us how Harry was angry and frustrated about all the stuff going on around him and the secrets being kept from him. I understand it may have been necessary to the plot, or to the reality of a boy being that age, or even how anyone would react in that same situation - but it's no fun to read. Especially when it just goes on and on and on. It left a bad taste in my mouth, and when I read through the series again, which I do with favorites on occasion, I only read that one because its necessary for continuity. Not because I like the book. Kinda sad, really.

Answer 8

None, Harry Potter rules.

Answer 9

They were all quite good, but I probably liked book 5 the least, mostly because Harry was just a little too full of teenage angst. Still I enjoyed it.

I still think Prisoner of Azkaban (3) was the best.

Answer 10

the WORST Harry Potter book is the most recent, 6th. Because Dumbledore dies! AND harry breaks up with Ginny. :(

Answer 11

There are no bad Harry Potter books. They are very great in their own way. You have to read them all because they're building blocks and give you certain information in each book.

I love them!