Topic: Literary Mcdonalds (Read 13656 times)

axerton · « **on:** 19 Sep 2008, 02:12 »

The 3rd (but apparently not final) book in the Inheritance series, by Christopher Paulini will be released shortly, and while I would like to make some form of cutting remark like "I'd read it but I've got other things I'd prefer to do with my time, like draw pretty pictures on my wrists with razorblades" I have to admit I feel a sort of morbid fascination to read it. Say what you will about eragon and eldest but while I'm reading them I actually really enjoy it, even when I know that once I've finished I will realise what a load of crap it was. So anyone else planning on giving the kid a third chance?

Surgoshan · « **Reply #1 on:** 19 Sep 2008, 20:12 »

Are you talking about the Eragon trilogy, by Paolini? I admit, I want to read the final book, if only to see how utterly derivative it is. I certainly won't buy it. I'll wait for my school library to pick it up.

Dimmukane · « **Reply #2 on:** 19 Sep 2008, 21:40 »

I read Eragon, then I read a story my little brother wrote in middle school a few years after it came out, and they were pretty much the same except my brother's was over in 8 pages.

Nodaisho · « **Reply #3 on:** 19 Sep 2008, 21:49 »

I think I have both of the books so far. Not buying the third one, both of the previous two were bought for me.

ashashash · « **Reply #4 on:** 20 Sep 2008, 11:37 »

I read Eragon once, hated it the whole way through, and haven't given the rest of Paolini's books a second thought. I might watch more of the movies, if they come out.

Surgoshan · « **Reply #5 on:** 20 Sep 2008, 11:38 »

Why would you do that? The movie was worse than the book.

KharBevNor · « **Reply #6 on:** 20 Sep 2008, 14:24 »

I was going to say I doubt they will make any more movies, but then I looked it up and it actually made $149 million in profit, so you never know. Given how shite the reviews were though a second one would probably be a very dicey investment.

Surgoshan · « **Reply #7 on:** 20 Sep 2008, 14:31 »

Quote from: wikipedia

Eragon grossed approximately $75 million in the US and $173.9 million elsewhere, totalling $249 million worldwide.[20] Films need to gross roughly twice their production and distribution costs to break even:[21] Eragon, which had a production budget of $100 million and distribution costs of an estimated $30 million,[22] did not reach this threshold. Director Stefan Fangmeier believes that Fox were "modestly happy with the worldwide box office."[23]

Will they make a second? ... maybe.

KharBevNor · « **Reply #8 on:** 20 Sep 2008, 16:45 »

Why do they need to make their money back twice to break even?

imagist42 · « **Reply #9 on:** 20 Sep 2008, 17:01 »

Because the theaters and such take their cut? (I don't actually know, I am just venturing a guess.)

Also, I keep telling myself that this dude never would have had a shot at getting published if his parents weren't the publishers, but I wonder if that's having too much faith in humanity.

KharBevNor · « **Reply #10 on:** 20 Sep 2008, 17:20 »

This is a genuine question and it is intriguing me.

allison · « **Reply #11 on:** 20 Sep 2008, 17:46 »

Quote from: imagist42 on 20 Sep 2008, 17:01

Because the theaters and such take their cut? (I don't actually know, I am just venturing a guess.)

Actually, according to Film Art by Bordwell and Thompson, it is the distributor that takes most of the profit. The distributor rents out the movie to different theatres. In the opening weeks of the movie, the theatre only retains 10% of the gross earnings of a particular film. Generally, that is. It's called the "house nut" or something. Basically it covers the costs of running the movie house. That's why the cost of snacks and such at the movies are so exorbitant.

The distributor then cuts the gross profit again, taking 35% of that sum as their fee (called "rentals") and if the distributor had a share in helping produce the film, they take more from the gross profit. Also deducted from the remaining profits are fees for prints and ads, etc. It is then that the "profit participants" (directors, actors, exec, investors, etc) are paid out. The producer usually doesn't receive all that much money, until they start getting profit from the video market. Most often, powerful celebrity-types demand "first money", the first of the profit that the producer receives.

So basically - they need to make double the production cost to break even after everyone who has their hand in the pot gets paid.

I hope that was enlightening! If you're really interested in the film business, check out the new edition of Film Art. It's very very interesting.

KharBevNor · « **Reply #12 on:** 20 Sep 2008, 17:54 »

But according to the above quote Eragons distribution costs were $30 million. The budget was $100 million. Therefore aren't they in profit the moment they make $130,000,001?

Still confused! Or are distribution costs something different entirely?

ashashash · « **Reply #13 on:** 20 Sep 2008, 19:31 »

Quote from: Surgoshan on 20 Sep 2008, 11:38

Why would you do that? The movie was worse than the book.

It's easier to laugh at bad movies with friends than at bad books when I'm alone.

allison · « **Reply #14 on:** 21 Sep 2008, 05:28 »

The budget of $100 million is for the production of the actual film, I believe. So from the gross box-office earnings, as I said, the "profit participants" (directors, actors, exec, investors, etc) are paid out.

So subtract the distribution costs, and then the stakes that the profit participants have...

Nodaisho · « **Reply #15 on:** 23 Sep 2008, 21:17 »

Quote from: imagist42 on 20 Sep 2008, 17:01

Because the theaters and such take their cut? (I don't actually know, I am just venturing a guess.)

Also, I keep telling myself that this dude never would have had a shot at getting published if his parents weren't the publishers, but I wonder if that's having too much faith in humanity.

Stephanie. Meyers. Where is your faith in humanity now?

imagist42 · « **Reply #16 on:** 23 Sep 2008, 22:16 »

She is writing in a genre propagated by Anne Rice, but at a level that excites 12 year-old girls. It is understandable.

Then again, Paolini is writing in a genre most recently propagated by Terry Brooks and others who rewrite Tolkien over and over again, so I guess it was silly of me to question in the first place..

RobbieOC · « **Reply #17 on:** 24 Sep 2008, 13:33 »

(Don't forget George Lucas!)

I haven't read these books. And I'm not real interested in them. I did watch the movie, and liked some of the special effects. However, there just isn't anything there. Maybe I should read a summary on wikipedia of the second book? Would that be better than reading the actual book? I don't know.

KharBevNor · « **Reply #18 on:** 24 Sep 2008, 19:28 »

Quote from: imagist42 on 23 Sep 2008, 22:16

She is writing in a genre propagated by Anne Rice, but at a level that excites 12 year-old girls. It is understandable.

You're talking like Anne Rice doesn't excite 12 year old girls.

Boro_Bandito · « **Reply #19 on:** 24 Sep 2008, 20:02 »

The first book in the series truly was terrible, but for some reason I gave the second and chance, and it definitely improved over the first. I still wouldn't say it was a great book, but if he's still working on a learning curve as steep as the difference between the first and second book the third book might be okay enough to give a chance and eventually he might become a competent writer.

Surgoshan · « **Reply #20 on:** 25 Sep 2008, 04:23 »

The flaws in Paolini's books are legion, but the main criticisms I level at them are all based on his youth. He's a kid, he doesn't know shit about shit.

His plot, his characters, their dialog, the world they populate, the systems of magic... it's all wholly derivative. He might as well have written a story about the youngest son of a king who sets out on a task that killed his elder brothers, or a young thief who finds a magic device that lets him win the love of a princess, or two brats who wander into the woods and eat a woman's house. He stole, as I recall, equal parts Star Wars and Lord of the Rings, with a bit of Ursula K Leguin. The book is the equivalent of an old twinkie. It's not good, it's not good for you, but if you eat it you know you'll at least enjoy it, while hating yourself.

Everything that happens betrays his ignorance of, gosh, everything. To pick an example, I always laugh when I think of his portrayal of swordplay. Just retarded. "I learned some new moves!" :snerk:

The book is ably executed, it's just not very good. It's a high school creative writing project that blew out of control. Give him a college education and a publisher that demands actual material, rather than recycled stuff from the 30s/70s, and maybe he'll become a writer.

imagist42 · « **Reply #21 on:** 25 Sep 2008, 08:00 »

See, and that's part of why I'm wondering whether his parents being publishers had anything to do with his unfortunate fame and "success." It's not that his writing is bad, technically, but there's no real substance. But things with little more meat on their bones have gotten by, so maybe this thing still would have seen the light of day without the convenience of parental "oh, isn't that sweet honey, let's get him published!"

KharBevNor · « **Reply #22 on:** 25 Sep 2008, 08:48 »

Man, given how successful Sword of Shannara was (that book being quite literally an exact carbon rip off of Lord of the Rings) I'm not surprised they would publish stuff like this, to be honest.

Neskah · « **Reply #23 on:** 25 Sep 2008, 18:26 »

I'll read anything I can get my hands on. Even the phone book when I get desperate.

And yet Eragon has sat on my bookshelf for the past 4 and a half years...... taunting me. It's the only book I've been unable to finish reading. I can't get past the first 30 pages.....

And yet people love it!

This is the first place I've seen people who agree with me. I was starting to think it was me.

Thank God!

Surgoshan · « **Reply #24 on:** 25 Sep 2008, 18:42 »

Like I said; Twinkie.

axerton · « **Reply #25 on:** 28 Sep 2008, 22:27 »

Oh yeah, forgot I made this thread.

Quote from: Surgoshan on 19 Sep 2008, 20:12

I admit, I want to read the final book, if only to see how utterly derivative it is.

you might have to wait a while for that, there are aparently going to be four books in the series because he planned them so badly that he can't fit everything in three books.

Quote from: Neskah on 25 Sep 2008, 18:26

This is the first place I've seen people who agree with me. I was starting to think it was me.

Thank God!

If you really wont to find some true Paolini hate, just mention him on the NaNoWriMo forums. Everyone there is so pissed off that that a talentless 15 was published and it wasn't them.

Phaedra · « **Reply #26 on:** 01 Oct 2008, 18:41 »

I think the reason he's so popular is that a lot of people (particularly younger people) are unadventurous in their tastes and would rather read something they know they'll enjoy (because they've read it before, in another form) than take a risk on something they might not enjoy. I know this because I was one of those people up until a couple of years ago. You couldn't get me to read anything but Anne McCaffrey for love nor money. But it was okay, because she kept pumping out books.

Boro_Bandito · « **Reply #27 on:** 01 Oct 2008, 21:23 »

Well, I mean, I read a lot of the Shannara books back in junior high as well as a literal FUCKTON of bad fiction because I read everything in junior high/high school that I could get my hands on, and that included a lot of crap. And I mean, a lot of authors that are prolific in their crap I read every single book of, if simply because its a lot of pages. Seriously, back then, the longer the series the better. Shannara series, Piers Anthony's XANTH series(which looking back is semi-dirty and wondering why they were in the school library), Animorphs , Everworld *shudder*. Jeez, especially in those last two the series weren't worth the paper they were printed on, but before I had video games I was reading a couple thousand pages a week.

I read the entire fiction section of my elementary school library, and I'm not kidding, I won a special award the teachers and librarians thought up for me when I finished that program, the one where you read books, take these computer tests and get "points" that you can use at the end of the year. By the end of sixth grade I had taken more of the tests than anyone in the district, and the only reason I didn't win by number of points the last year was because the only books left were like 1s and 2s (first and second grade level, also the number of points they give) and it just wasn't worth reading them anymore. I read The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings in the 3rd grade for the first time.

Now obviously I'm not attributing the popularity of Paolini's books to the idea that there's a lotta kids (as nerdy as) me around, but after you've finished your Harry Potter and your Artemis Fowl and Lord of the Rings(which is a hard trilogy for elementary kids to get into for the most part), you look around and see if there's anything else, or parents try to find new stuff to force on their kids, and lo and behold, there's this friendly looking book with a friendly looking dragon on the cover.

RobbieOC · « **Reply #28 on:** 01 Oct 2008, 21:32 »

Also, these days, they get the crap advertised out of them. I cannot go into a bookstore anymore without seeing an ad for the newest one, Brisingler or whatever it's called. Which, is probably not the initial reason they were popular, but a byproduct of their popularity.

I'm going to write a book about an orphaned witch who has to go to a hidden school and learn to ride dragons where she falls in love with a vampire (but a GOOD vampire) before the hobo she met on the way to school who taught her all kinds of wacky things dies at the hand of her apparently-not-as-dead-as-we-thought father. I will call it Childrens Fantasy Novel. It will be fantastic.

David_Dovey · « **Reply #29 on:** 03 Oct 2008, 02:07 »

Almost as fantastic as Disaster Movie

Neskah · « **Reply #30 on:** 09 Oct 2008, 17:17 »

Haha I would actually read that if it was a well written parody, not a half arsed ripp off. =D

KharBevNor · « **Reply #31 on:** 09 Oct 2008, 18:18 »

I don't see why anyone would need any other source of trash fantasy and sci-fi when The Black Library churns out like, four books a month.

Be My Head · « **Reply #32 on:** 09 Oct 2008, 18:24 »

I think, that if I wanted to read a light fantasy novel I would read a Dragonlance or Forgotten Realms novel. I also think that stuff like Twilight and Eragon is the equivalent of awful pop music played on the radio. It makes me go insane with rage.

KharBevNor · « **Reply #33 on:** 10 Oct 2008, 12:25 »

You saying you wouldn't rather read this

or this

or even this?

I haven't played Warhammer in years but the books are a staple of my 'trash' reading. The collected volumes are thick as tombstones, cheap and generally have a good mix of cheap dark humour and incredible hyperviolence. Sometimes the plots are even quite good. One of the Genevieve short stories is Cthulhu mythos worthy.

RobbieOC · « **Reply #34 on:** 10 Oct 2008, 13:26 »

OK, but Blood Bowl?

Football. And Orcs? I have a hard time believing someone was sitting around and just thought to himself "Yes! Orcs playing football would be perfect! The types of people who love orcs are also the exact same people who love football!"

That's amazing. No one ever told Matt Forbeck that he's a terrible writer with even more terrible ideas?

Tom · « **Reply #35 on:** 10 Oct 2008, 13:54 »

The very idea is almost Pratchettical.

imagist42 · « **Reply #36 on:** 10 Oct 2008, 14:45 »

It's not football. It's footsoldier's head!

RobbieOC · « **Reply #37 on:** 10 Oct 2008, 14:49 »

Dang. You're right. Sorry. That's real gross.

Surgoshan · « **Reply #38 on:** 10 Oct 2008, 15:48 »

Man, a human head would make for terrible passes.

It'd punt real good, though.

MadassAlex · « **Reply #39 on:** 10 Oct 2008, 20:41 »

The entire concept of Bloodbowl is nothing short of fantastic.

And the Black Library churns out some really entertaining stuff, even if it often condones grave misuses of the settings.

KharBevNor · « **Reply #40 on:** 10 Oct 2008, 22:01 »

Quote from: RobbieOC on 10 Oct 2008, 13:26

OK, but Blood Bowl?

Dude wasn't sitting around anywhere. It's a board game:

Back from the time when Games Workshop was actually awesome.

There's not really much settings abuse at all in The Black Library. Remember there are basically three seperate continuities for the Warhammer World (Warhammer Fantasy Battle, Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay and Blood Bowl).

RobbieOC · « **Reply #41 on:** 10 Oct 2008, 23:27 »

Well, OK. I stand corrected.

And I'll even admit that I would write a book about it if I thought there was a chance that I could get a real writing career out of it. So, I can forgive him for it, I suppose.

Is the game any good?

imagist42 · « **Reply #42 on:** 10 Oct 2008, 23:28 »

Man, that game has continuity? Not to mention three of them?

We live in a terrible world.

MadassAlex · « **Reply #43 on:** 10 Oct 2008, 23:38 »

I was referring to their misuse of the 40k setting more than anything. It's very, very ripe for some kind of ideological exploration because of the way it mirrors the mentality of the medieval Christian church and its reactions to more progressive ideas, except it has massive explosions and aliens as well.

Inquisitor and Necromunda, incidentally, are two other GW games that are highly worth pirating since they're no longer supported. Space Hulk, too.

KvP · « **Reply #44 on:** 11 Oct 2008, 01:11 »

Man, Space Hulk. I got the video game at Sam's Club when I was 7. I was completely out of my league.

KharBevNor · « **Reply #45 on:** 11 Oct 2008, 01:48 »

Man, they stopped supporting Inquisitor? That is lame as all hell.

Imagist: what's so appalling? It's a fictional setting, of course it has backstory.

MadassAlex · « **Reply #46 on:** 11 Oct 2008, 02:26 »

Quote from: KharBevNor on 11 Oct 2008, 01:48

Man, they stopped supporting Inquisitor? That is lame as all hell.

All they really support anymore is WHFB, 40k and the LotR range.

That said, they allow free downloads of specialist games rules now, IIRC.

ImRonBurgundy? · « **Reply #47 on:** 11 Oct 2008, 03:35 »

Quote from: MadassAlex on 10 Oct 2008, 20:41

The entire concept of Bloodbowl is nothing short of fantastic.

How about...

MadassAlex · « **Reply #48 on:** 12 Oct 2008, 00:32 »

Approved.

THESE FORUMS NOW CLOSED (read only)

Author Topic: Literary Mcdonalds (Read 13656 times)