Anyone who disses fantasy can fantasise about sucking my cock.
At least Trueblood has some originality. The entire fantasy genre reuses the same character types, situations, monsters, etc.
Skinny blonde elves, muscular dwarfs, dragons, orcs, a rogue, a princess, wizards, and British accents. barf
Skinny blonde elves, muscular dwarfs, dragons, orcs, a rogue, a princess, wizards, and British accents. barf
I find it difficult to take your Hobbit-hate seriously when you're biased against the entire genre.Spearhead wrote:
THANK YOU FOR SAYING THISMacbeth wrote:
Does it matter? Fantasy is terrible genre anyway. Period.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
And black = evil, white = good is a classical portrayal, metaphorical day and night, dark and light. Aussie is being stupid on purpose (go figure).My comment still stands. Daniel Day Lewis shits all over Hollywood. After seeing Lincoln I can't take any other actor seriously, especially the garbage that is LOTR.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
Well guess what I'm going to wait to see on DVD rather than theaters? That's right, Lincoln.Spearhead wrote:
Lincoln was better
vampires are original?Macbeth wrote:
At least Trueblood has some originality. The entire fantasy genre reuses the same character types, situations, monsters, etc.
Skinny blonde elves, muscular dwarfs, dragons, orcs, a rogue, a princess, wizards, and British accents. barf
He also hates historical fiction and yet watches Boardwalk Empire. I think he thinks it makes him edgy to hate on stuff that isn't high lit.DrunkFace wrote:
vampires are original?Macbeth wrote:
At least Trueblood has some originality. The entire fantasy genre reuses the same character types, situations, monsters, etc.
Skinny blonde elves, muscular dwarfs, dragons, orcs, a rogue, a princess, wizards, and British accents. barf
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
Only if they're hipster.DrunkFace wrote:
vampires are original?Macbeth wrote:
At least Trueblood has some originality. The entire fantasy genre reuses the same character types, situations, monsters, etc.
Skinny blonde elves, muscular dwarfs, dragons, orcs, a rogue, a princess, wizards, and British accents. barf
It's all about vampires and zombies. What happened to mummies? I miss mummy movies.
Trueblood is about Vampires that try to openly integrate into society. That is a story line that has never been done before. Compare that to 99% of fantasy that uses the same tired story line of a bunch of the same old character types trying to save the world from some magical evil.
Boardwalk Empire is different from the Mongol historical fiction that FEOS reads in the fact that BE follows the lives of its own fictional characters in a world that happens to be set in and moved by a historical period. Most historical fiction uses the historical events as the story themselves. That is bad.
Boardwalk Empire is different from the Mongol historical fiction that FEOS reads in the fact that BE follows the lives of its own fictional characters in a world that happens to be set in and moved by a historical period. Most historical fiction uses the historical events as the story themselves. That is bad.
Good historical fiction exist. But Gravity's Rainbow and War and Peace don't make up the majority of the genre. Same thing with fantasy. There are some good stuff out there I am sure even though I have not found any.
Last edited by Macbeth (2012-11-29 09:39:44)
Okay, not all fantasy sucks. Harry Potter is okay. Don't consider that fantasy really though. When I hear the word "fantasy", I think of Skinny blonde elves, muscular dwarfs, dragons, orcs, a rogue, a princess, wizards, and British accents.
You don't consider Harry Potter fantasy? Then what the heck is it?
It has elves, goblins, trolls, wizards, witches, spells, dark lords, ghosts, afterlife, magic potions, magic wands, magic swords, curses, hexes, jinxes, spells, magical artifacts, giants, half-giants, pegasi, zombies, prophecy, soul binding, telepathy, soul linking, hippogriffs, centaurs, giant spiders, giant snakes, merfolk, forbidden tomes of magic, dimensional manipulation, teleportation, illusion, flying brooms, flying cars, living candy, living paintings, living painting dimensions, soul eaters, gnomes.
What ABOUT Harry Potter isn't fantasy other than the mundanities of wizard politics?
e: It also has British accents galore.
efinal1: also dragons and anything else that comes to mind after I submit this edit
efinal2:
Boom.
It has elves, goblins, trolls, wizards, witches, spells, dark lords, ghosts, afterlife, magic potions, magic wands, magic swords, curses, hexes, jinxes, spells, magical artifacts, giants, half-giants, pegasi, zombies, prophecy, soul binding, telepathy, soul linking, hippogriffs, centaurs, giant spiders, giant snakes, merfolk, forbidden tomes of magic, dimensional manipulation, teleportation, illusion, flying brooms, flying cars, living candy, living paintings, living painting dimensions, soul eaters, gnomes.
What ABOUT Harry Potter isn't fantasy other than the mundanities of wizard politics?
e: It also has British accents galore.
efinal1: also dragons and anything else that comes to mind after I submit this edit
efinal2:
Spearhead wrote:
Harry Potter isn't really fantasy.
Boom.
now youre just nitpicking, basically every fantasy story has some small aspect that makes it unique. and i dont know anyone other than the girliest of girls that watches true blood. and even they think it sucks. so... yeah i have a high opinion of your critiquesMacbeth wrote:
Trueblood is about Vampires that try to openly integrate into society. That is a story line that has never been done before. Compare that to 99% of fantasy that uses the same tired story line of a bunch of the same old character types trying to save the world from some magical evil.
Boardwalk Empire is different from the Mongol historical fiction that FEOS reads in the fact that BE follows the lives of its own fictional characters in a world that happens to be set in and moved by a historical period. Most historical fiction uses the historical events as the story themselves. That is bad.
okay, okay you got me. Jeez. I was just trying to troll you guys. Don't have to be all mean about it.
Peter Jackson is still one of the most overrated directors of all time. Maybe this movie will be different.
Peter Jackson is still one of the most overrated directors of all time. Maybe this movie will be different.
Fantasy and sci fi are generally just used as a vehicle to tell a story. No one is asked to rwinvent the wheel. Philip K Dick, for example, wrote books that used the sci fi platform but his stories were never about technology. They were about emotion, depression, what it means to be human etc. It's no different from setting a novel in the present and using a more realistic setting. Does that really make a story better? I don't think so, personally.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
Overrated? Maybe. Successful? Definitely. Over-credited? Sure. He may be director, but the sheer workforce behind the Lord of the Rings and the Hobbit is spectacular. He could direct an abstract Koyaanisqatsi tour of Middle Earth with that crew and I'd still go see it.Spearhead wrote:
okay, okay you got me. Jeez. I was just trying to troll you guys. Don't have to be all mean about it.
Peter Jackson is still one of the most overrated directors of all time. Maybe this movie will be different.
Uh, the Hobbit and LOTR pretty much defined the original D&D Fantasy genre. How can it be a tired theme when it pretty much birthed it.Macbeth wrote:
Trueblood is about Vampires that try to openly integrate into society. That is a story line that has never been done before. Compare that to 99% of fantasy that uses the same tired story line of a bunch of the same old character types trying to save the world from some magical evil.
Boardwalk Empire is different from the Mongol historical fiction that FEOS reads in the fact that BE follows the lives of its own fictional characters in a world that happens to be set in and moved by a historical period. Most historical fiction uses the historical events as the story themselves. That is bad.
As for your so called originality of vampires integrating into society, what about the Munsters and the Addams Family?
They're creepy and they're kookie, mysterious and spooky.They're altogether loopy.
The Addams family.
The Addams family.
[clap clap]
Vampires are for gaybos. like ponies. and werewolves.
nerds.
nerds.
You're confusing it with Twi-Dicksucklight. Nothing wrong with True Blood. Lots of tits, good characters and it's pretty well written. The show I mean. Never read them books. Only vampire book I've read is Salems Lot.Winston_Churchill wrote:
and i dont know anyone other than the girliest of girls that watches true blood. and even they think it sucks.
Just because it originated the suck doesn't make it okayIlocano wrote:
Uh, the Hobbit and LOTR pretty much defined the original D&D Fantasy genre. How can it be a tired theme when it pretty much birthed it.Macbeth wrote:
Trueblood is about Vampires that try to openly integrate into society. That is a story line that has never been done before. Compare that to 99% of fantasy that uses the same tired story line of a bunch of the same old character types trying to save the world from some magical evil.
Boardwalk Empire is different from the Mongol historical fiction that FEOS reads in the fact that BE follows the lives of its own fictional characters in a world that happens to be set in and moved by a historical period. Most historical fiction uses the historical events as the story themselves. That is bad.
Try the book. I wasn't keen on fantasy books before, but that thing was something awsum.
Meh, he can keep his mediocre opinion.Ultrafunkula wrote:
Try the book. I wasn't keen on fantasy books before, but that thing was something awsum.
Nope.Jay wrote:
Fantasy and sci fi are generally just used as a vehicle to tell a story. No one is asked to rwinvent the wheel. Philip K Dick, for example, wrote books that used the sci fi platform but his stories were never about technology. They were about emotion, depression, what it means to be human etc. It's no different from setting a novel in the present and using a more realistic setting. Does that really make a story better? I don't think so, personally.
Crap fantasy and sci-fi is just a story with a few spaceships or dragons thrown in to liven things up and pull in a different target audience, one which is unaware of 'The Hidden Fortress' for example, or to disguise the fact the author has no original thoughts.
Good sci-fi is a 'what-if' discussion of the effect of a technological change on society or the environment or both.
Good fantasy is an exercise in creating a convincing alternate reality.
Uzique would be able to explain it, not necessarily better but with a lot more words - if he hadn't rage quit (again) and gone off all crying and butthurt (again).
Fuck Israel