How did books 4, 5 and 6 drop the forumla? They kept to it as much as the previous ones. It was 7 that Rowling abandoned it.

And 7 only dropped the formula because it was, ya know, the big finale last book?

The series only began to trudge in book 7, and even then it was perfectly good read in my opinion. I thought book 6 was one of the best, personally.

I'll talk about book six, as it is the one I can remember reading best. Rowling's aversion of her own formula is pretty blatant: She starts the story by revealing the villain's plot. It is revealed to the reader exactly what the baddies want in the first chapter: they aim to kill Dumbledore. We are told exactly who is supposed to kill Dumbledore and who is going to help him carry the task out.

This is completely different to all the previous books. Part of the fun of the first few books was that the kids had to work out what the villains were after in the first place, before working out how they were going about getting it, and how the three goodies were going to stop them: Means, Motive and Oppurtunity. The effect of book six is very different: Rowling has already revealed the Motive, and the Means to reaching this goal is nothing like as elaborate as the previous books, simply because the villain is too incompetant to pull anything spectacular off. We already know exactly who the real culprits are, were typically, it would turn out be someone completely out of left-field. The only real mystery is whether they will actually succeed at all - less of a mystery and more about suspense.

The actual mystery Rowling tries to buy us off with is "who is the Half Blood Prince?" This mystery feels more like a side-plot and doesn't seem all that important. Heck, even when the Half-Blood Prince's identitiy is revealed and it is linked into the main plot, it still doesn't seem to matter much. Compare it to the "who is Tom Riddle?" question, which is tied far better to the main plot of the second book. Finding Tom Riddle's true identity comes across as a side-plot but it is actually part of a complex scheme, and only when the identity of Tom Riddle becomes clear does the whole villainous plot come together.

The initial exposition screws up the mid section of book six. This is even more apparent in the film, where the second act really trundles along. I can hardly remember what even went on, despite seeing the film twice only a couple of months ago. I'm impressed teh film managed to do as well as it did with the material it had to work with. (As it happens, I dislike most of the films, though I like the fifth film best and would even go so far as to suggest it surpasses the book in strides).

Other elements that distance book six from the previous ones? The humourous beginnings with the Dursleys. They were great, weren't they? Unfortunately, the silly antics of these characters did not fit with Rowling's plan for the series to grow progressively darker. Their presence decreases as a result. Also, Harry's character shifts from a snarky, modest, decent kind of guy into a whiny, self-centred, hormone riddled wangster. Rowling wants to show how the darkness and bleakness of Harry's situation is slowly getting to him, but really, it just made him insufferable. After a while, I lost count of how many times Harry lost his temper and started shouting at people. I just plain stopped caring after a while.

Book 7 is actually not too horrible. It reveals dumby's past, and offers an interesting lesson about how, while you should respect your idols, putting them on a pedastal is idiot.

You'll get a lot more enjoyment if you quit judging books based on how similar they are to the originals.