Golden Deer Pub Community Forums

also tom bombadil

Alright, I'm kind of offended. Maybe my post wasn't the kindest it could have been, and I apologize for that. It's been a long day, I have a partially finished English paper that's due in twelve hours, and I'm already exhausted. I'm not in the greatest frame of mind, so your replies to my post probably shouldn't have rubbed me the wrong way as much as they did. But here is my attempt at a level-headed response.

In the first place, the reason I am uninterested in reading the Lord of the Rings books is that, simply put, I am not into fantasy books. There are, obviously, some exceptions to that statement, such as Harry Potter, but what fantasy stuff I do like is considerably lighter than Lord of the Rings. I probably shouldn't have written the next two sentences; they were really meant as a joke, but obviously weren't taken that way. I'm sorry.

Both of your responses to me just felt really rude. Saying "sucks to be you" was kind of uncalled for. I love reading, and I often read the book before, or at least as well as, watching the movie. Sometimes, however, I just don't even enjoy the concept, plot, characters, genre, etc. of a movie to warrant spending the time it takes to read the book or series. A movie is just a quick couple of hours, spent watching something, often induced by friends, and if I'm not overly interested, why would I invest more of my time reading the book? I also really take offense to being called obviously and willingly stupid, as well as mull-headedly stubborn. That wasn't necessary.

I respect your opinions most of the time, but a lot of what you said tonight was hurtful and rude. My post was meant to be humorous and to convey my opinion, and I obviously wasn't successful in that, but I don't think I deserved to be treated like I was.

I'm probably just blowing this all out of proportion because of how tired and stressed I am. My apologies if so.

*sigh* Sorry, Nessy. Maybe I was a little harsher than I should have been. :\ I dunno. I just get really annoyed when someone treats the things I really love like that. I was excited to be rereading LotR and when I read the next two posts immediately after it instead of a "good luck on that" I got a "meh, it's too descriptive" from one person and another who was like "I don't care. Watched the movies, didn't like." Which is always a touchy subject with me in the first place. I HATE HATE HATE movies-from-books so your post was the very worst to me because it's exactly that attitude that I think these movies foster (scy can say whatever he wants about the subject, but I just hate these movies). I think it was particularly worse since I was like "Wait... this is Nessy who, like me, already hates the Hunger Game movie."

Maybe what I said was uncalled for and I do apologize for the harshness. -_-; Sorry.

Just seems silly to hate the movie because it is an adaptation of a work rather than hating the movie because of the flaws of the movie itself. Terrible direction, pacing, and so-on. But I won't waste my precious air to bother correcting such obvious, and willing, stupidity that would be tempered with an equally strong dose of mull-headed stubbornness. Sucks to be you.



In other news, since I recently finished Future Babble, I found this aptly timed:

Also, have you seen the Hunger Games trailer? It actually looks kind of amazing and I'm really excited for it. I was apprehensive about the casting, but after seeing the trailer, I think it's actually going to be really good. So there's that.

And thanks, scy, nice to know I'm not going overreacting.

SO. BOOKS. I like them. I'm hoping to have time to actually start the book club book today; the last couple weeks have been crazy and I feel so bad for not reading it yet! I can't wait for Christmas break, when I'll actually have time to read!

And good luck with the Lord of the Rings books, Max. Hope you enjoy them just as much this time around!

Well, you seemed to have worked it out. I don't want to stir up trouble, but the moderator within me wants to point out that Maxine, you attacked Nessy and insinuated she was stupid. I'd be absolutely fucking furious in Nessy's place, so kudos to her for taking it in stride.

I've read the Lord of the Rings books, and they're rather dull. Tolkien was a linguist, for crying out loud. I respect the hell out of the man and fully acknowledge he's the father of all high fantasy, and I like his story, but the actual writing is entirely meh. I liked the Hobbit, I liked it a lot but I can't say the same for LotR. And guess what? That's my opinion, and I'm not attacking you with it, and you need to respect that. Not everyone's going to like the same stuff as you.

And, yes, I like the movies. I saw them in theaters and I own them on DVD. I thought they were exceptionally well-made, even though I do have some nitpicky little complaints. I've seen the Rankin-Bass animated movies as well, and the Jackson trilogy is understandably superior.

Are books always better than movies?

No.

Absolutely not. Why the hell would you ever think that?

Movies that are better than the book (or at least equal to/arguably better):

The Shawshank Redemption, Shrek, Psycho, The Bourne Identity, Jurassic Park, Forrest Gump, Jaws, Who Framed Rodger Rabbit?, Die Hard, Fight Club, The Silence of the Lambs, One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, The Shining, Carrie, A Clockwork Orange, 2001: A Space Odyssey, Blade Runner/Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep, The Godfather, The Prestige, Gone with the Wind, To Kill a Mockingbird, Stand by Me/The Body, Children of Men, Watchmen, V for Vendetta, Howl's Moving Castle, Pelican Brief, Dr Strangelove, The Social Network...

And those just off the top of my head.

I read the LOtR books two years ago and honestly found the story and ideas behind it amazing, but the writing too slow. Haven't seen the movies. Don't really want to. I'll be over there reading some Terry Brooks if you need me.

Just like in most cases, everything Scy and Kino have said pretty much matches my opinion.

Diatribe ahead!



Also, Kino, good call on that list. I agree. Its funny that so many Stephen King stories (Shawshank, The Shining, Carrie) end up better on screen than on paper. Hell, Shawshank is one of the best American films ever made in my opinion, and The Shining is certainly one of the greatest horror/thrillers made.

I wanted to add more but I really can't without going in circles so ... yup.

Anyway, read a bit of The Poisoned Chocolates Case and ... well ... hm. The book is wordy, I'll give it that. The characters speak at great lengths for the sake of speaking at great lengths, much times rounding about their own words themselves in circles until you're back where you started 318 words later with nary a clue as to why.

Though, the book takes pleasure in making mockery of one such character doing just that (and in six words, no less) so at least it has a sense of humor about it's own lack of brevity. And is brief in doing so. British wit, I suppose.

I'm one full solution in so just some thoughts on that. It's rather brief on spoilers, though anything major will be hidden just in case someone does read it, if anyone is curious. I'm more going to attack the methodology than anything else as well as offer up my own thoughts on the matter from the factoids we're given at the start.

Hey. Everyone in Book Club.

Bitches, we got ourselves a meeting to attend. GTFO.

I just posted! I'm sippin' coffee whilst I reminisce over that lovely, awesome, wonderful book club selection.

A bit more progress into The Poisoned Chocolates Case. Issues from before more or less quelled and it may seem that .

Surprisingly, I'm apparently somehow halfway through the book. Perhaps I need to sit down and actually just dedicate reading time to it and plow through the rest. Gives me the time to break out the headphones and relax if nothing else.

Finished with A Dance with Dragons.

For the love of Talos, when are things actually going to go RIGHT in these books?