Simon. wrote:
1.) I thought the tv series was fantastic, not as special effectsy, but it had the right feel to it.
2.) "I wonder if it'll be friends with me", should be the last thing it says before it splats.
IMO.
1.) Yes, and 2.) yes. There was, and I know this is a pretty weak point, but there was a veneer of too much polish. All of the edges were taken off, and that humor wrought of the british penchant for underreaction fell to the wayside of hollywood production values and a decidedly modern trimming of wry asides. The only thing I really enjoyed*, in that film, oddly enough, was Mos Def. At first he was just oddly irking, just out of place in that way that the new friend you're trying to bring into your circle of acquaintences is. but then you realize that that is absolutely spot-on, and he was absolutely perfect.
*I lied. Zoey Deschanel is really fun to look at.
Hanibalicious wrote:
...There was, and I know this is a pretty weak point, but there was a veneer of too much polish. All of the edges were taken off, and that humor wrought of the british penchant for underreaction fell to the wayside of hollywood production values and a decidedly modern trimming of wry asides...
I have to agree. The loss of subtlety when 'americanising' British movies and TV shows ruins the humour. But sadly, the producers guys put people in seats (sofas, beanbags, toilets, etc.) with overacting and dramatisation. Besides, as transvestite Eddie Izzard mentions, you can't eat popcorn to the originals.
Destructicus wrote:
Alt text:
"I wonder if chemists feel bad that they're always left out of these sorts of jokes."
But seriously, I haven't read or seen the godfather since I was 12, and I remember the book more vividly for 2 reasons.
1.) There was way more penis description than I had previously thought possible. He was very graphic. I don't even remember word one about the female genitalia, but ten years later I remember how Puzo loved his penis adjectives.
2.) I learned that people shit themselves when they die. At my young age, this alone made it better than the film. Although, I suppose I may have to see it again, because at 12, I probably glossed over all it had to offer me while I enjoyed slow motion oranges and exploding cars.
I've read the book, and seen the movie. It's a tough call, but I like the book better. Not to say the movie wasn't bloody brilliant (literally and figuratively), but the book just was so engrossing, I couldn't put it down.
No more white horses ♬ ♫ ♪ ılıll|̲̅̅●̲̅̅|̲̅̅=̲̅̅|̲̅̅●̲̅̅|llılı ♪ ♫ ♬ for you to ride away
Lethal Interjection wrote:
I think Fight Club is probably better as a movie than as a book, but I've mentioned that elsewhere.
[
I think Fight Club was a much better book.
Have you read anything else by Chuck Palahniuk? He's an amazing author. I would highly suggest Choke and Invisible Monsters, but leave his newer stuff alone. His newer stuff isn't anywhere near as good as his old stuff.
I did like the first Jurassic Park. It was an awesome movie.
It is the sequels I have a problem with. Now, if I am correct (I haven't seen the sequels or read the books in years), the only thing about the Lost World that was from the book of the same name was the general plot. Almost everything else (the dinosaurs almost getting to land, or getting there, the opening, and many other points). The third one was mostly it's own beast, except for when they hit the pterodactyl dome.
And I never saw the Hitchhiker's Guide TV show. Just the movie. And it was pretty poor. And I agree with Hannibalicious, Mos Def was the best thing about that movie. The guy is great.
ScienceGal wrote:I think Fight Club was a much better book.
Have you read anything else by Chuck Palahniuk? He's an amazing author. I would highly suggest Choke and Invisible Monsters, but leave his newer stuff alone. His newer stuff isn't anywhere near as good as his old stuff.
See, I disagree.
I've read Survivor, Rant: The Oral Biography of Buster Casey, Lullaby and Fight Club. I think thats it. I have intended on reading more but I don't think there are any others I'm missing.
And personally, I liked Rant best. A really cool story, that you are never quite sure what is happening exactly. A really interesting crop of characters. And a really cool way of telling a story. It was just fantastic. Fight Club is probably second there. I do like the movie better, but the book is still loads of fantastic.
And both Lullabye and Survivor were great as well.
I think the reasons I haven't read the others is that the plots haven't interested me as much as the above listed ones. I'll get to them some day.
[quote I've read Survivor, Rant: The Oral Biography of Buster Casey, Lullaby and Fight Club. I think thats it. I have intended on reading more but I don't think there are any others I'm missing.
And personally, I liked Rant best. A really cool story, that you are never quite sure what is happening exactly. A really interesting crop of characters. And a really cool way of telling a story. It was just fantastic. Fight Club is probably second there. I do like the movie better, but the book is still loads of fantastic. quote]
I thought his earlier books were wonderfully disturbing in a way that really made you think. My friends would get together after reading his earlier books and we could debate what points he was trying to make for hours. Rant, on the other hand, is disturbing in an "excessive use of body fluids kind of way" instead of a "makes you think" kind of way. I agree that the characters are interesting, but I was still disappointed after reading it.
ScienceGal wrote:I thought his earlier books were wonderfully disturbing in a way that really made you think. My friends would get together after reading his earlier books and we could debate what points he was trying to make for hours. Rant, on the other hand, is disturbing in an "excessive use of body fluids kind of way" instead of a "makes you think" kind of way. I agree that the characters are interesting, but I was still disappointed after reading it.
Really? How? I haven't read it since the summer. Mentions of spit and snot, I don't recall terrible amounts of "bodily fluids". Maybe I just didn't focus on them, I don't know.
I really liked it for the fact that it slowly turned into almost distopian literature, which then turned into science fiction, as things were slowly revealed by the characters. And just the way things began to make sense. Just great stuff.
The only Palahniuk book with too much, just, unnecessarily descriptive acts of, well, disgust, was Haunted. Everything else written by him, just enough, and brilliant at that. That isn't to say Haunted was a bad novel, quite the opposite in fact. Great book, good plot, nice twists, etc.
Raptor_Jesus wrote:The only Palahniuk book with too much, just, unnecessarily descriptive acts of, well, disgust, was Haunted. Everything else written by him, just enough, and brilliant at that. That isn't to say Haunted was a bad novel, quite the opposite in fact. Great book, good plot, nice twists, etc.
I've read the portion Guts, and yeah, I don't think I want to read the rest. Apparently over 50 people have fainted during his public readings of that piece.
