|
VagueRant posted:Um, guys. Is Lord Of The Rings actually good? I'm one of those whose interest petered out beginning with Bilbo's bloody birthday and then getting exhausted by Tom Bombadil and all the convoluted worldbuilding and fictional language-ing and singing that totally obscured and overran the actual interesting story ideas even by the end of Fellowship. I feel you. Last year (or maybe it was this year; I forget) I decided I would actually finish the book, or at least the non-appendix parts. It took most of that year to do it, since I took long breaks after every act, but ultimately I think it was a worthwhile endeavor. Sri.Theo posted:Yes Lord of the rings is good. I liked it quite a bit. My favorite part is the twist that the three perspective characters are actually all the same woman, at different times of her life and with different names. Chairchucker posted:I would never reread LotR. There are entire sections of the book, like every time someone sings, and every time Tolkein decides to dedicate several pages to describing scenery, that I could happily tear out and not miss at all. I'm still glad I read it the once, but the once was also enough. I would gladly reread individual chapters of LotR, but I doubt I'll reread the whole thing.
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 09:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 03:48 |
|
|
Solitair posted:I feel you. Last year (or maybe it was this year; I forget) I decided I would actually finish the book, or at least the non-appendix parts. It took most of that year to do it, since I took long breaks after every act, but ultimately I think it was a worthwhile endeavor. anilEhilated fucked around with this message at 11:35 on Nov 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 11:30
|
|
|
Sri.Theo posted:Has "The fifth season" been discussed here? I though it was great, ancient civilisations, secret guilds, falling empires and all the good stuff but with some decent characters and a solid hook. It takes place in the far future on a geologically unstable earth- earthquakes, tidal waves, sulphur eruptions and rapid climate change are all part of the norm causing communities to retreat in on themselves. I plan on starting it tonight. Would you describe it as depressing? I'm kind of torn if I want something bleak right now, and I may just start The Palace Job for something lighthearted instead.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 20:35
|
|
|
Currently on book 2 of the Southern Reach trilogy and a bit underwhelmed but I'm going to stick it out. Does the author keep contradicting himself to piss me off? The inner dialogue of the characters are a mess.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 21:11
|
|
|
Is it the author contradicting himself or the narrators? I liked all three books a lot but it helps to realize all the information isn't reliable and the characters aren't exactly stable, well-adjusted persons.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 21:13
|
|
|
Robot Danger posted:I plan on starting it tonight. Would you describe it as depressing? I'm kind of torn if I want something bleak right now, and I may just start The Palace Job for something lighthearted instead.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 21:15
|
|
|
Kampfy Von Wafflehaus posted:Currently on book 2 of the Southern Reach trilogy and a bit underwhelmed but I'm going to stick it out. Book 2 yes, especially. It's written from Control's perspective for a reason, and part of the point is experiencing the slow warping that Area X is causing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2016 14:18
|
|
|
I've never read anything buy Greg Bear but War Dogs is cheap today. Anyone have a recommendation for/against?
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2016 15:40
|
|
|
Ulio posted:LOTR movies are as good as they could have been made. They still look freakin amazing to this day because of minimal cg uses compared to Hobbit which is a hackage job a of movie. I actually prefer the Hobbit novel over LOTR because its a very high paced adventure and very concise but the movies butchered all of that by bloating it into 3 separate movies. LOTR novels are still epic and the prose is better than pretty much any modern writer. You can see why Tolkien was a professor at oxford and part of the Oxford Dictionary. He is a great writer but also a great linguist which is why the etymology of a lot of words of Middle Earth are explained through out the novels. Yeah, I agree with this. When the movies came out I went through a phase where I picked them apart for inaccuracy, but I gladly went and saw them all in theaters and bought the Blu-rays. However as I've gotten older I've moved to the above opinion. Look no further than the atrocious Hobbit movies to see what things could have been like. Even with the big battle scenes like they are (Helm's Deep, Minas Tirith) they are nowhere near as bad as the Battle of the Five Armies in the last Hobbit movie. Not to mention additions/changes like Radagast, shoehorning in Dol Guldur/White Council stuff, etc.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 02:23
|
|
|
Pretty much echoes my own feelings. The Hobbit was my favourite book as a kid, I must've read it a dozen times. I've read LOTR once, and while I liked it I've never felt the urge to read it again. I was as at a bit of a loss why the they'd even want to make a charming children's story into a LOTR style EPIC FANTASY (artistically at least, I know money is the one ring to rule them all). That said I actually liked the first film. They got steadily more ridiculous though, and I didn't care for the last one at all.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 02:44
|
|
|
tooterfish posted:I was as at a bit of a loss why the they'd even want to make a charming children's story into a LOTR style EPIC FANTASY (artistically at least, I know money is the one ring to rule them all). Haha what the hell this is so utterly wrong
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 02:50
|
|
|
I don't know about you guys but I am hype as gently caress to see a trilogy about the original making of the rings and subsequent war between Mordor and Eregion starring Benedict Cumberbatch as Annatar once Christopher Tolkien kicks the bucket.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 03:53
|
|
|
eszett engma posted:I don't know about you guys but I am hype as gently caress to see a trilogy about the original making of the rings and subsequent war between Mordor and Eregion starring Benedict Cumberbatch as Annatar once Christopher Tolkien kicks the bucket. Won't the Tolkien Estate have to sell them the rights? I thought I read somewhere that WB only has the rights to LOTR itself. That said, there are some awesome stories outside LOTR/Hobbit that would make great movies/TV series/whatever if done right. The self-contained mostly-completed stuff from Silmarillion (Tuor, Turin Turambar, Beren/Luthien) and maybe even some sort of longer series going through the history of the First and Second Ages. While we're talking about TV series, maybe in 20 years someone can remake LOTR as a multi-season series like Game of Thrones.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 04:08
|
|
|
eszett engma posted:I don't know about you guys but I am hype as gently caress to see a trilogy about the original making of the rings and subsequent war between Mordor and Eregion starring Benedict Cumberbatch as Annatar once Christopher Tolkien kicks the bucket.  http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/MERP-Rolemaster-Valar-Maiar-damaged-/330588189166 Ridiculous as it sounds, I've never found anything before or since which actually was able to list out all of the Ainu and Maiar and etc, and tell me who they were and what the gently caress they did and how they fit into everything, except for this one niche sourcebook. I would love to hear about a more definitive listing of all that poo poo outside of that book - maybe there's a newer edition? flosofl posted:EDIT: Oh, wait. It's coyo7e. nvm. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 04:09
|
|
|
eszett engma posted:I don't know about you guys but I am hype as gently caress to see a trilogy about the original making of the rings and subsequent war between Mordor and Eregion starring Benedict Cumberbatch as Annatar once Christopher Tolkien kicks the bucket. This is basically one of the dlc's for shadow of mordor. Which is a great game and the worlds best orc-pokemon simulator. E:orckemon.no wait,pokemorc.nailed it. Antifa Poltergeist fucked around with this message at 04:26 on Nov 8, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 04:22
|
|
|
andrew smash posted:Haha what the hell this is so utterly wrong You'd think I'd know, but okay!
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 04:28
|
|
|
WarLocke posted:Read the rest. The last two aren't full of so much torture porn (although it's definitely still there) but they go in some hosed up directions anyway. I also really enjoy the Skolian Empire books and the fact that the bard is the most powerful person in one of the books. They do kind of remind me of Liaden Universe by Sharon Lee and Steve Miller which has magic space turtles who may be one of the most powerful known race. Currently I am ready Michael Anderle Kurtherian Gambit series because it is ungodly prolific and keeps me entertained as strictly popcorn fiction.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 07:29
|
|
|
edit - I can't read.
johnsonrod fucked around with this message at 16:48 on Nov 8, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 07:37
|
|
|
tooterfish posted:That said I actually liked the first film. They got steadily more ridiculous though, and I didn't care for the last one at all. The third Hobbit movie was one of the ugliest blockbusters I've ever seen. A five page fight scene scene from a bedtime story for young children expanded into a two hour death orgy with a four digit body count.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 09:11
|
|
|
andrew smash posted:Haha what the hell this is so utterly wrong He was talking about The Hobbit, what is so wrong with disapproving of the heinously bloated movie adaptations of that wonderful book?
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 12:39
|
|
|
I just finished the audiobook for Dan Simmon's Hyperion. It was pretty good and definitely had its moments (especially Sol Weintraub's story which was really moving); it kind of ends on a cliff-hanger but also kind of not since the the whole Shrike Pilgrimage thing is really just a frame story so that aspect of the ending didn't really bother me. Question is, should I check out the sequels? I'm usually pretty leery of sci-fi series where it seems like maybe the author used all his good ideas in the first book and the rest are decidedly inferior, and I've heard mixed things about Fall of Hyperion and the other sequels. Either way I've got Death's End queued up so I won't be jumping right into it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 15:11
|
|
|
Fall of Hyperion is good, everything else is awful.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 15:52
|
|
|
General advice for reading Hyperion: when you stop liking it, stop reading. The books are a pretty steady downward slope. I think Fall is still fairly solid, although a lot of the answers it gives is really disappointing. coyo7e posted:Honestly the best source I know of to get the entire story is this thing: anilEhilated fucked around with this message at 16:33 on Nov 8, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 16:29
|
|
|
less laughter posted:He was talking about The Hobbit, what is so wrong with disapproving of the heinously bloated movie adaptations of that wonderful book? Ahh I thought he was talking about the LoTR movies not The Hobbit. That's what I get for being a smartass and not really reading his post. In that case, yeah he's right.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 16:49
|
|
|
But it also applies to the LotR movies.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 18:00
|
|
|
To a lesser extent. I'm not sure if even the most ardent fan would describe LOTR as a "charming children's story" though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 18:21
|
|
|
LOTR actually started out as hobbit 2 because Hobbit was a huge novel at the time a complete hit. And you can actually see the early parts of Fellowship are quite light hearted until they finally meet the Ranger it starts to get a lot darker. This is also the reason why Tolkien changed the name of the book because he thought it was too different in tone to be a sequel to the Hobbit. Tolkien wanted to release LOTR as one book but most publishers wanted it in 2 books or 1 book that had parts heavily edited out. The publisher he went with wanted it in 3 novels which is what gave rise to the Trilogy's in Fantasy. Its weird because Tolkien always thought of Lord of the Rings as one book but lots of other writers copied the 3 book format.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 20:42
|
|
|
Um actually you'll find that it was written as 7 books 
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 21:07
|
|
|
I for one like that fantasy genre has become so epic thanks to LOTR compared to more pre tolkien Fantasy which were shorter and self contained. I do feel like some series could be better as one book or two. Like Mistborn's First book has so much filler you could just combine 1+2 and have 2 books. But on the flip side I can't ever see Malazan being shorter than 10 books or w.e it is. Because the whole series is built upon a huge world with many different races all having their own conflicts. You can't explore and develop all those characters in a shorter series. I never buy physical copies of shorter fantasy books anymore because I read them so quickly. I know some people just use kindle for everything but I actually prefer a real book for a longer series even though they are cheaper on kindle.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 19:38
|
|
|
Robot Danger posted:I plan on starting it tonight. Would you describe it as depressing? I'm kind of torn if I want something bleak right now, and I may just start The Palace Job for something lighthearted instead. I don't think it's particularly bleak, even if it has a post apocalyptic vibe.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 20:32
|
|
|
Ulio posted:Like Mistborn's First book has so much filler you could just combine 1+2 and have 2 books. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 23:16
|
|
|
Strange Matter posted:I just finished the audiobook for Dan Simmon's Hyperion. It was pretty good and definitely had its moments (especially Sol Weintraub's story which was really moving); it kind of ends on a cliff-hanger but also kind of not since the the whole Shrike Pilgrimage thing is really just a frame story so that aspect of the ending didn't really bother me. Question is, should I check out the sequels? I'm usually pretty leery of sci-fi series where it seems like maybe the author used all his good ideas in the first book and the rest are decidedly inferior, and I've heard mixed things about Fall of Hyperion and the other sequels. Fall is definitely worth reading. It's a direct follow-up, you see all of the Hyperion characters again and get some form of closure on most of their stories. It also introduces a new main character whose chapters are a bit tedious, but it all ties together by the end. How much did you like the Detective's tale in Hyperion? There's a lot more of that in Fall. And a decent amount more Shrike. The main reason I recommend Fall, though? The ending. The implications of what happens are truly apocalyptic. It's fantastic.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 23:38
|
|
|
Hedrigall posted:Fall is definitely worth reading. It's a direct follow-up, you see all of the Hyperion characters again and get some form of closure on most of their stories. It also introduces a new main character whose chapters are a bit tedious, but it all ties together by the end. I liked the Endymion books, although most goons disagree with me. Something about the concept of a militarized galactic Catholic Church really did it for me. The ending was rather stupid, and there were some really creepy vibes in the main storyline, though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 23:42
|
|
|
I didn't find Fall worth reading. I think it will depend greatly on what you liked about Hyperion. I think the Canterbury Tales short story style of Hyperion really clicked for me, so when Fall was just a mediocre scifi story with a robot Keates, I didn't even finish the book.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 23:54
|
|
|
I finished Bridge of Birds the other day. It felt a bit slow to begin, but it eventually picked up steam and I really enjoyed it by the end. I can't help but shake the feeling that the book is unintentionally racist - a white man writing about China in the 80s, dropping casual references to Chinese culture and history doesn't comfort me a lot. Is anybody please able to prove me wrong? I've seen that there's another two books, are they worth reading too?
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 01:00
|
|
|
Captain_Person posted:I finished Bridge of Birds the other day. It felt a bit slow to begin, but it eventually picked up steam and I really enjoyed it by the end. I mean, it's not racist? Can white men only write about white people? I've never felt it was mocking Chinese people. They're good books. Not quite as good as the first, but still pretty fun. 2nd better than the 3rd, and all that. Drifter fucked around with this message at 01:14 on Nov 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 01:11
|
|
|
Captain_Person posted:I finished Bridge of Birds the other day. It felt a bit slow to begin, but it eventually picked up steam and I really enjoyed it by the end. Talking about a subject = racism? And "prove me wrong?" Why is the default assumption "racism"? If you think he's racist, then demonstrate it. It's up to you to make your case, not for every white author writing about anything not-Europe to publish preemptive "not racist" manifestos to convince overly nervous readers. I can't tell if I'm being trolled. Xotl fucked around with this message at 07:34 on Nov 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 03:03
|
|
|
A guy on here had a meltdown about Three Body Problem and how finding the Cultural Revolution stuff interesting was Orientalism I'd never assume posts like that are trolling.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 04:11
|
|
|
Alastair Reynolds copped the same kind of complaints and skepticism for writing about Africans in Blue Remembered Earth. As long as the writing is respectful and demonstrates commitment and research I don't see how anyone could seriously have an issue with white authors going outside their comfort zone. More variety is great, and established authors should be encouraged to branch out just as much as minority authors should be encouraged to contribute their own voices.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 05:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 03:48 |
|
|
Buca di Bepis posted:As long as the writing is respectful and demonstrates commitment and research... It's this, basically. Reading phrases like "Garden of Forty Felicitous Fragrances" and "Terrace of Sixty Serenities" got me partially concerned, because I cannot tell if Hughart did the research, or if they were included because they sound "right". I'm not familiar at all with that cultural style, so I'm unable to tell myself. I should probably have made this clearer in my original post - that'll teach me to quickly phone post while at work.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 06:13
|
|