Page 2 of 4
Posted: Sat Feb 26, 2005 2:19 pm
[quote]10) WHEN THEY ARE RELATED!!!! That’s just gross! Need I say more? It’s worse then the age thing. Again, I know that it is supposed to be keeping with the historicalness of the book, but come on, who wants to read about incest?[/quote]
OMG, did u actually read a book like that???Ewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww.
I liked the first one, time travel. I read a series of books very similar to that (both sides of time, prisoner of time etc.) It hasn't finished yet, but in each one she goes back to her love, and then leaves again. EVERY SINGLE TIME! And she just met the hero's ancestor in the most recent book, and she felt a 'connection'. I just hope it doesn't work out that way.
Posted: Sat Feb 26, 2005 3:50 pm
That's different. (Even though I hate it when tha happens) What is the name of the series?
Posted: Sun Feb 27, 2005 11:22 am
There are authors in all genres that do this. Without listing the genre or time period, try this plot twist on for size (bear in mind this was an ensemble story of the purest sort, and these were just two more characters). A man and wife are seperated by war. He spends the entire book (the time elapsed from start to finish is about one year) being a hero and fighting to get back to her. Meanwhile she's given him up for dead and taken up with someone else. The *day* before he finally reaches her, she marries the new guy because she's pregnant by him.
Our hero is rejected by his friends, and told "tough-shit" by his boss (who's also the boss of his wife's new hubby). They put an armed guard on him to keep him doing his job and to keep him from pleading with his wife to come back to him. He ends up going squirrely in a big way, kills his guard, and runs off....getting killed just before joining the enemy.
Meanwhile, the faithless wife and her lover live happily ever after...until the husband gives secrets to the enemy that bring terrible retribution on his country.
Oh...it's a mess. Ruined the whole damn book for me. It was a series, and I kept buying the books in hopes of seeing the SOB get killed. He never did.
Fic writers understand their audience better than the pros do.
Posted: Sun Feb 27, 2005 12:03 pm
Wow Rick that really sucked... I would have been pissed too, and to make it worse that SOB never got pay back.. I give that a big fat F. lol
Posted: Sun Feb 27, 2005 12:13 pm
LovinGuerin2much wrote:Wow Rick that really sucked... I would have been pissed too, and to make it worse that SOB never got pay back.. I give that a big fat F. lol
Oh it gets worse. In my book the asshole should have been executed for treason since his actions killed several million of his countrymen, but the enemy had the upper hand and leaned on the asshole's government to hush it up and leave him alone to live in peace with his stolen wife. Oh it made my blood boil.
I think the author was trying to rub our nose in the idea that the meek may inherit the earth...but usually only in plots of about four feet by six feet. It's the sons-of-bitches that really get things done and live long to reap the rewards, no matter how little they deserve them. Nice guys finish last, and deserve to.
Some authors today (and yes film and TV people too) just love to wallow in the concept of moral relativism. That being that it's okay for someone that you would regard as a bad person to get a happy ending, as long as it keeps a *worse* person from getting a happy ending.
What can you expect in a world where something like "Fear Factor" pulls high televison ratings?
Posted: Mon Feb 28, 2005 2:37 am
I'd like to point out a connection to the things that you guys have said. I've read this thread and I noticed something.
Most of these things are connected to Roswell in one way or another if you think about it.
They killed off a secondary character. - They did this with both Alex and Tess.
The hero had a kid to another person.- Max and Tess?
When the hero or heroin sleeps with somebody else in the book. There is only one time that this is acceptable, and that is at the beginning of the book before they meet- Once again: Max and Tess
4.When the heroin makes the hero think that she betrayed him for someone else OOH.- Liz 'betraying' Max for Kyle
So I leave you with this question:
Are the things that you hate in books, the things that you like about Television Programmes?
Posted: Mon Feb 28, 2005 5:22 pm
I would have to say no... none of the things that I hate about books do I like in TV shows or movies...
I didnt like when Alex was killed on the show or when Max slept with someone that wasnt Liz... a good example would be Titanic when Jack dies at the end..... that made me really upset and it made me like the movie less..... anyways thats my 2 cents.....
Posted: Mon Feb 28, 2005 7:57 pm
I don't know about the rest of you, but I find it hard to miss the fact that real life isn't fair to most people...and is downright cruel to some. If I want a miserable ending to a story, I'll watch the nightly news.
When I watch/read fiction I'm trying to escape reality. I want to reinforce the belief that good can triumph over evil. I want to see true love conquer all. And I want the hero and heroine to stay true to each other, no matter what. I can handle some pain, death, and angst on the way to a happy ending. But if you screw me out of that happy ending by killing the hero/heroine, or with ambiguity (as with Tom Hanks at the end of "Castaway"), then I'm going to be pretty ticked off..
Books are the same way for me. I spent my money and invested my time, so it's up to the author to deliver on my expectations.
Posted: Mon Feb 28, 2005 8:10 pm
Rick I sooo agree with what you just wrote, and Castaway was a perfect example too.....
Posted: Sat Mar 12, 2005 9:32 pm
Amber Eyes wrote:
Wow, what a list! lol
The thing that annoys me is typos. I'm reading this book at the moment called Trust no one, and there's sooo much typos in it! and it seems to be the same word all the time. Isn't the editors suppose to notice these things before they publish?
I saw that and had to laugh. There's a series about the Jaran by Kate Elliot. It was mainly set within a group of horse nomads bringing the Prince of Jeds sister to Jeds after she discovered that there were some Chapali who were traveling though there illegally and she had decided to follow them. I am a horse person myself so it annoyed me to no end that they couldn't get some of the easiest horse terms right or the past, present, or future tenses like "the horse was blown" (the correct present tense terminology would be "the horse was blowing" as in the process of a horse breathing really hard through the nostrils due to exertion.) or they did a stupid like say she couldn't get off because someone was leading her horse and they were trotting. I'm sorry but I had to learn how to jump off even at a full gallop (run) and stay on my feet while keeping hold of the horse and trotting is far slower. (I was a trail guide for many years.) If you're writing a story that has 85% written about a horse nomad tribe and riding, at least learn the terminology. She had carried the wrong tense, etc. stuff through all 4 books in the series. Unfortunately about 2 years ago or so, the publishers (DAW) republished the books for a 10 year anniversary because it was a popular book. To my shock they didn't correct any of it. I really like the story but to have consistant obvious wrong grammer really hurt the story in my eyes.
I had brought up a point on a "a small rant on crossovers" thread and Kzinti suggested to post it on this one:
This is sort of off topic but some of Kzinti's comments touched on this in a way and it impacts both Roswell, Dark Angel, Alias, BTVS, etc. TV formats. For some reason Hollywood TV producers have this idiotic idea that if the favorite couples should not be allowed to stay together so they try to keep them apart in order to keep their audiance's attention. Unfortunately they weren't giving the audiance what they want in order to carry out what I consider a misguided idea and it lost them a lot of viewers. I can understand having the preferred couples together can get boring in the long run but having bumps in the road that cause issues is preferrable to their method of mangling the character's respectability, ideals, or the premise of the show. These shows aren't soap operas that have been running for 10 or 20+ years (which is where the rules came from) and they are running out of ideas for who's hopping into bed with whom and who's having who's illigitimate child, etc. Basically to me soaps are just a toned down version of the XXX/porno industry that is playable during the day. I can see using that method for shows whose characters are so run into the ground their running out of things for them to do but not shows in which it goes against the show's main idea for being created. Roswell was about an alien who was in love with a human and what they would do for each other. It was about right and wrong. That's what sold the show to so many people. Max sleeping with Tess killed the show. It took the whole thing and turned it into a soap opera episode in which characters had no morals. A similar thing happened to DA with the virus (can you say 'LAME?') except they never did get together. With fan fic, fortunately we are not restricted by the Hollywood's directions. It just annoys me that they can match up characters in a few minutes for a movie (it's just about mandatory) but they can't leave be for TV.
I don't read a lot of romance novels because I don't like the romance formula way of writing. (Yes, romance novel publishers have a list of do's and don'ts and directions the authors must follow.) I agree with some of the issues brought up but I have read books that handle some of those things very well. I've gotten tired of the "always a happy ending" phenomona. The story gets too predictable. Life's not always like that. That's why I like Glen Cook's Black Company series, Robin Hobb's Farseer Trilogy and Tery Adam's book Sentience.