Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
If you have an email ending in @hotmail.com, @live.com or @outlook.com (or any other Microsoft-related domain), please consider changing it to another email provider; Microsoft decided to instantly block the server's IP, so emails can't be sent to these addresses.
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
Comments
I remember liking the ending.
I had the same reaction to Ghost World. I remember loving Enid's character in both the film and the comic. Watching it now, i think to myself "Get on our level!"
^ A bit, yeah.
Have I mentioned how cool it is that the Ten Essences from Way of Kings borrows from traditional Chinese medicine?
And that's immensely relevant to my interests?
So apparently the translation of Crime and Punishment that I own only referred to Sonia's prostitution as "[ownership of] a yellow ticket," which is why I missed it during my read-through. Granting that I should have looked that up, and that it's an older translation, I feel a little silly now.
So has anyone else read R. Scott Bakker's The Second Apocalypse saga?
Because if you have, please tell me whether it is misogynistic so can start being embarrassed about liking it or not, I just want escape from the uncertainty/
Reading the Dexter novels. I'm surprised people say that the TV show is superior especially since the entire second season was stupid enough to make me drop it. Dexter is a lot better characterized in the books and his interactions are a lot more interesting. Here he feels more inhuman, rather than just a killer with a heart of gold. And the interesting thing is finding the humanity in his inhumanity.
I'm not familiar with either version, but I think I heard somewhere that the books start to go in a really weird direction later on.
The third book introduces supernatural elements but it doesn't actually change the novels in any important regard, and I can deal with that a hell of a lot easier than I can with a supposed perfect serial killer making boneheaded mistake after boneheaded mistake while indulging in a bullshit moral crisis that's going to go nowhere because it's the central concept of the show.
It has the Dark Passenger, which is... pretty significantly bad.
The Dark Passenger begins with the first book.
Yes, but it becomes more and more explicitly supernatural, as opposed to something a mental disorder might bring on.
Yes, it does. It still doesn't change the fundamental aspect of how Dexter operates or the structure of the books. It's just a new dynamic.
A really, really stupid dynamic, which takes away much of the intrigue of Dexter's character in favour of saying "No, it's really this supernatural entity making him kill, really!".
The TV series has its problems, but at least its Dexter is entirely self-contained.
I disagree that it takes away the intrigue. It's still an aspect of him that he has to live with and war with, even if it's an outside aspect.
TV Dexter might be self-contained, but he's terribly inconsistent and honestly really bad at what he does.
Really, my takeaway from this conversation is that I probably shouldn't check either one out.
I would recommend against checking either out, yes.
I'd recommend the books, if only because the prose has a lyrical quality to it, and Dexter himself is quite enjoyable to read.
Pretty good so far, the setting is interesting and the characters are pretty cool. (Mostly Lightsong.)
Nyktos - tell me, did you start mentally assigning the members of the bridge crew voices from TF2 characters too?
Well I don't know what most of the TF2 characters sound like anyway.
Oh bluh. You said Warbreaker and I thought of Way of Kings.
As for voices http://www.teamfortress.com/movies.php
Damn you.
Damn your eyes.
Oh wow this guy at the coffee shop is the tooliest of tools. "Oh I don't read books that are under 30 years old. Only the ones that have withstood the test of time are worth reading"
Must not slap. Like, does the fucker not realize how much amazing shit he is keeping out of his reach for stupid reasons?
So, anything after 1983 is irrelevant to him? No Salman Rushdie for him, then.
Or about half of the stuff I read, really, although I'm sure that a delightful fellow like him would dismiss most of it out of hand anyway even if it weren't so recent.
People like that are a pain and a blight.
Not sure how old he is but he looked somewhere in his twenties. And collegy. So I guess so lack of self awareness is to be expected.
He does have a point that the test of time is a great way to filter works of genuine quality from overly hyped, yet popular ones. There are lots of writers whose works were ridiculously popular back in their time, but are nowadays completely forgotten because later critics would look at them from a more detached, objective standpoint.
But dismissing anything written after 1983 on principle is just ridiculous.
I'unno. There are plenty of crap books that have passed the test of time.