Sunday, October 25, 2009

A Little Mind Game

Here's a little puzzle for all you Harry Potter fans. The Mister and I were wandering about Shopko tonight before going to see The Time Traveler's Wife (Eric Bana: your hair was so bad. You know what I'm talking about.), and we spotted a new "World of Harry Potter" calendar. And then we spotted something else...

Can you see it? Even better, can you explain it??


  1. Hmm... I'm stumped. The best I can think of is that the background seems to be a combination of the Department of Mysteries and the wizard's chess game guarding the Philosopher's Stone, with a couple Dementors thrown in; but this isn't a problem because apparently the calendar is supposed to be collages of images from all six movies. Maybe Harry doesn't have a scar? I can't tell if he does or not; I think I can barely see it obscured by his hair if I go to the higher resolution image on, but I'm not sure. It's my best guess anyway.

  2. Is that not Ginny? Are they getting a new girl? Other than that, I have no guesses.

  3. I already know the answer, since I was one of the ones who spotted it, so I won't post on here, but I will say that I just don't get it.

  4. Ooh... is it the bricks in the background? In one of the arches, they curve to be perpendicular to the arch on the left, but they are all horizontal on the right. I'm not sure I can explain it beyond sloppy artists... but if this is a mishmash of images from the movies manipulated in Photoshop, then that means that the Ministry of Magic building would have to have a mis-matched arch in there somewhere, wouldn't it? I will have to keep an eye out for that next time I watch the movie. If that is the case, the question is, was that deliberate or accidental?

    (Yes, I actually came back to this post because it was bothering me, and stared at the image again. Did I get it right?)

  5. It has nothing whatever to do with the architecture. If it's not obvious to you, you won't figure it out.

    P.S. What American even calls it the "Philosopher's Stone"? Pretentious much?

  6. Crap. Looking at it again, I think I'm wrong about the architecture anyway. It's a trick of perspective.

    To be honest, I didn't even notice I called it "Philosopher's Stone". No, it wasn't to be pretentious, it's actually because I think it's a slight to Americans on the part of the publisher to think we are so dumb over here that we won't read a book with the word "philosopher" in the title. Seriously.

    And I'm totally stumped, then, about the picture.