Fantasy Aficionados discussion
Off Topic
>
Warning! Rant ahead!
date
newest »
newest »
Nobody should have to defend their review rating. As you say, you like what you like, and that's that. And yes, there is no "right" way to rate a book? As long as you're rating the book and not just throwing up stars because you either like or dislike the person.
I'm up front in that I'm pretty stingy with my stars. You have to earn them with good writing, good plot, etc. And if I don't like something, I'm not giving it 5 stars.
So rant away!
Supporting your rant. Amazes me that people don't love/hate the books I do but that's life, lol.
Rant on! Everyone who reads a book is entitled to their opinion and I vehemently defend the right for that opinion to be posted.I do believe that a person needs to, you know, actually read the work before posting - an opinion should be an *informed* opinion, LOL.
I hate the current atmosphere of "fluffy, warm, and fuzzy" reviews. I truly want to know what a person thought of a book. It is the reason I read the reviews from my fellow bibliophiles!
I wasn't going to get specific, but what the heck. It was my review for Glazed, Filled, Sugared & Dipped: Easy Doughnut Recipes to Fry or Bake at Home.Considering the 2.75 average rating, I'd say 3 is rather nice. Of the 3 other ratings, 2 were 2-star and 1 was 4-star. None of them have written a review. I at least stated my reasons, even thought others may disagree with them.
Given that the commenting user has nothing shelved and no reviews, I'm really leaning toward sockpuppet. >sigh<
That is quite hilarious. We're supposed to rate books on intention now, not the content?I liked your review. I'd probably like the book. And with your review, I'd know exactly what I was in for too. So I "like" buttoned it too.
Robert wrote: "Given that the commenting user has nothing shelved and no reviews, I'm really leaning toward sockpuppet. >sigh<..."And joined in November 2013...
But I don't think it's one of the authors--they haven't even joined GR as themselves, and that seems to be the first step for the type of author who engages in sockpuppetry.
I thought your review was very balanced, actually.
I hate when people bash reviewers who don't agree with them or insist there is a "right" way to review. That's why we are ALL allowed to write a review!!! If you don't agree, write your own. Gah! Some people...
I've had people attack me for my reviews. Very annoying. I always tell them to go write their own review if they feel that strongly about it.
Colleen wrote: "I've had people attack me for my reviews. Very annoying. I always tell them to go write their own review if they feel that strongly about it."Isn't that the truth?? Why are the ones trolling never the ones writing reviews?
Carol. [Only Unicorns and Rainbows] wrote: "Colleen wrote: "I've had people attack me for my reviews. Very annoying. I always tell them to go write their own review if they feel that strongly about it."Isn't that the truth?? Why are the ones trolling never the ones writing reviews?"
Because their time is taken up policing the internet...
Look, people just need to impose their viewpoints on other people. It's not like they're giant douchebags or anything. They're doing it for your own good!
I was at work, so I couldn't type as much as I wanted, but I was mostly serious. The last few times I've had negative review comments, I checked back and noticed that not only did the commenter rate the book 5 stars, but they had never written a review. At most, they've had like 6 reviews but far more ratings. So quite seriously, the last few times I suggested they were free to write their own review with whatever perception they wanted.The part that annoys me the most about these negative commenters is that they appear to rarely want a genuine debate. If I take them seriously, they never stop back and discuss interpretation like rational people. They just fling their mud and scamper away up the nearest palm tree.
I almost prefer the sling and scamper kind to the tenacious kinds. I had this guy who was determined to prove me wrong. It went on for days, and only stopped when other people got involved. And you've seen some of the more crazy ones that just keep going and going...
Carol. [Only Unicorns and Rainbows] wrote: "...They just fling their mud and scamper away up the nearest palm tree."
..and here I thought that trolls lived under bridges! No wonder I've never been able to find one! :-)
Seriously though, the review states what the reader thought of the book and what the perceived positive and negative aspects of the books were.
That's what a review should include from my perspective. It's then up to me as a reader of the review to decide if I would agree with the reviewer or not. If the reviewers detractors are something I like, then I'm actually more likely to like the book than the reviewer.
If someone can't make that judgement based on Robert's review then they need to read the book for themselves and form their very own judgement... but that's hard, isn't it?
It's so much easier to complain on someone else's opinion.
I don't like getting emails from authors after I review a book. It's usually after I leave a good review, and it just seems unnecessary to me.
I'm thankful that I haven't recieved any backlash from anyone, but if I did I would certainly stick up for myself and my review. I agree with the comments that reviews are merely opinions. Heck, George Martin's GOT book is sitting on my "abandoned" bookshelf. I was one of the very few who didn't like it. Times like that really remind me that it is impossible for a book to be universally adored. And there is nothing wrong with that. Now that I've said it, I might go out and find a low star review and see what that person is reading. More than likely, they would enjoy similar books that I enjoy. And vice versa.I don't know what has happened in the world to make OPINIONS 'wrong'. I checked the dictionary and the definition hasn't changed, so...I'm at a loss.
I've just read The Inheritance. On the book page, not sure if it's all versions or just the one I landed on, Hobb comments on star ratings. Saying that she's pleased with two stars as that means the book was liked, liked is good. Now two stars to me means it was good enough that it held my interest and I finished it, I probably won't reread it but heck, it was alright. (Hobb usually gets five from me.) I love fantasy but don't know any people in the actual flesh who share that passion so I guess they'd rate very differently to me.
L.K. wrote: "I'm thankful that I haven't recieved any backlash from anyone, but if I did I would certainly stick up for myself and my review. I agree with the comments that reviews are merely opinions. Heck, Ge..."How dare you??? Abandoned Martin's GOT??? Burn her, she's a witch!!! Not really.
Actually, I started the series during physical therapy on a stationary bike back in 97 and loved it. I want to slap the lazy toads that rave about the HBO series and refuse to read the books. I, like a lot of others, really have gotten weary of all the hype. I just want Martin to finish the damn series before he dies, unlike Jordan who abandoned WOT for Conan.
I agree. If you like or dislike a book then you should be able to review it without replies filled with angry tirades. I'll give out stars as long as I'm entertained. I've read some reviews that sound like failed writers with an ax to grind, bashing authors for minor errors or frustrated English majors angry the book didn't like up to their expectations. I'm just happy when I can get a bit of escape time from the deep-fryer at work.
Jordan published all his Conan books in the 80's before he even started WoT.
Todd wrote: "L.K. wrote: "I'm thankful that I haven't recieved any backlash from anyone, but if I did I would certainly stick up for myself and my review. I agree with the comments that reviews are merely opini..."I know! I feel like some weird outcast! I love fantasy and have for as long as I can remember. But something about GOT just didn't pull me in. I really think it was all the hype. I was expecting something crazy, but was bored by a dinner. Kinda like the Hobbit movie. Did we really need an hour of singing and drinking?
L.K. wrote: " Kinda like the Hobbit movie. Did we really need an hour of singing and drinking? "That was just about the only part in the film that was faithful to the book. :p
I don't remember it being that long (I read it ages ago), but, then again, I could have skimmed that part. Skimming is a very bad habit I developed.
Hey, drinking and singing sounds good to me!
L.K. wrote: "Kinda like the Hobbit movie. Did we really need an hour of singing and drinking? "Man, I don't know how you went to see it - once I heard the book would be broken into two...I decided it wasn't more than a cable movie night.
Colleen wrote: "Look, people just need to impose their viewpoints on other people. It's not like they're giant douchebags or anything. They're doing it for your own good!"IKR.
"You're wrong! I liked the book so you read it wrong."
*facepalm*
MrsJoseph (taking back my data & giving GR the middle finger) wrote: "L.K. wrote: "Kinda like the Hobbit movie. Did we really need an hour of singing and drinking? "Man, I don't know how you went to see it - once I heard the book would be broken into two...I decide..."
And now it's been broken in three (yes three) movies..lol.
I actually enjoyed the first one just because I love his vision of Middle Earth (and let's face it, he cast Aidan Turner and Dean O'Gorman thereby making dwarves good-looking...I *had* to see that).
Lucinda wrote: "I actually enjoyed the first one just because I love his vision of Middle Earth (and let's face it, he cast Aidan Turner and Dean O'Gorman thereby making dwarves good-looking...I *had* to see that). "Aidan Turner!?!
I may have to change my mind about waiting for all 3 movies to be released before watching.... hmm
MrsJoseph (taking back my data & giving GR the middle finger) wrote: "L.K. wrote: "Kinda like the Hobbit movie. Did we really need an hour of singing and drinking? "Man, I don't know how you went to see it - once I heard the book would be broken into two...I decide..."
Don't worry, it was just a rental. I wasn't convinced by the previews. The second one though…ugh…I might venture from my home and see it in the theaters. Maybe. UGH! I'm so emotionally scarred by the first one that I'm not sure I can be brave (that might have been a little dramatic).
Nyssa wrote: "Lucinda wrote: "I actually enjoyed the first one just because I love his vision of Middle Earth (and let's face it, he cast Aidan Turner and Dean O'Gorman thereby making dwarves good-looking...I *h..."Aidan and Dean are Kili and Fili. The expanded roles of the individual dwarves made the first movie worth watching (IMHO). I enjoyed the personalities the movie script gave them.
Saw the commercial for part 2 recently.My reaction?
I want to see it even less now. In fact, I would probably see Catching Fire before I see the Hobbit Part Deux, and I really disliked Hunger Games (the movie) and was thoroughly underwhelmed by the book of Catching Fire.
So that should give you an idea of my opinion on the Hobbit "trilogy." Sad, really, because I loved the LOTR movies and hoped Jackson could work similar magic on a book I have become less enamored with as I grow older. I might watch it on DVD to see what they do with Beorn, but that's about it.
I just can't imagine WTF he is using to get THREE 2-3 hour movies from a book less than 500 pages. Dear God, WTF. I'll watch the cartoon again but no to this. And I'd love to see the rendition of Smaug.
I wonder what the movie will do about the ending of the book. The dwarves are assholes at the end of the book - is that gonna change? Probably. The same way Prince Caspian and Susan suddenly had a romance in the movie version of Prince Caspian.
MrsJoseph (taking back my data & giving GR the middle finger) wrote: "I just can't imagine WTF he is using to get THREE 2-3 hour movies from a book less than 500 pages. Dear God, WTF."He is expanding on things that are mentioned off-handedly in the Hobbit but which you don't really see in the book, and supplementing the material with things found in the Silmarillion and the Lost Tales.
Not that I didn't think parts of the first movie were a bit long in the tooth - but it's not just the text of the Hobbit broken into 3 parts. There's a lot added to it.
I also agree with Kevin - random breaking into song is totally in keeping with the books. It was rather a point of irritation for me, especially in LotR where half of them were written in elvish.
From Chapter 1 of The Hobbit:
I think the movie uses 2 of the 10 verses from the book...
I loved the first film and those two dwarves are very fetching.
Colleen wrote: "He is expanding on things that are mentioned off-handedly in the Hobbit but which you don't really see in the book, and supplementing the material with things found in the Silmarillion and the Lost Tales. "Still not interested - the book was fine as it was. Everything can't be a 3 part blockbuster movie. It was fine as it was. :(
And I never could actually get through a full read of the Silmarillion...even though I've taken a class on it.
Sure, it was fine as it was. Now it's better. ;)
Colleen wrote: "Sure, it was fine as it was. Now it's better. ;)"Obviously, I am not a fan of adaptations. *gag*
Kevin wrote: "Jordan published all his Conan books in the 80's before he even started WoT."You're right. I just remember reading an article where Jordan was being interviewed and he mentioned working on Conan between WOT books and wanted to throttle him as the WOT books were losing their focus. I could be misremembering the article but as I was bitter getting sucked into reading his last three books that were boring to the point I would skip chapters to get it done. Sanderson got the job done though and even managed to wrap up every character subplot.
MrsJoseph (taking back my data & giving GR the middle finger) wrote: "I just can't imagine WTF he is using to get THREE 2-3 hour movies from a book less than 500 pages. Dear God, WTF. I'll watch the cartoon again but no to this. And I'd love to see the rendition..."
To me, the changes in the movie Prince Caspian were forgivable. The Voyage of the Dawn Treader, however, was ridiculous. All the worse because it was my favorite book in the series. It should have been called 'Loosely Adapted From Ideas Partially Inspired by Scenes in The Voyage of the Dawn Treader'. I'd love to see C.S. Lewis' reaction to the film.
No idea how my previous post became italicized.
R.A. wrote: "To me, the changes in the movie Prince Caspian were forgivable. The Voyage of the Dawn Treader, however, was ridiculous. All the worse because it was my favorite book in the series. It should have been called 'Loosely Adapted From Ideas Partially Inspired by Scenes in The Voyage of the Dawn Treader'. I'd love to see C.S. Lewis' reaction to the film."I know how you feel! I saw movie 1 and I was...rather upset.
I can't even...
R.A. wrote: "No idea how my previous post became italicized."I'm kind of loving your possessed keyboard.
But the 'M' is working! But seriously, is there even a way to make the text in these boxes italicized? I've wanted to do it plenty of times. I noticed that people usually ** around words they want to emphasize.While we're ranting, we caught up almost to present on SHIELD. For a while I thought it might be getting better, and then I saw the episode with the broken staff. Everything felt so forced! Still, I'm not ready to quit on it yet. I'm still living for the dream.
Click on the link, above the comment box, that says '(some html is ok)'. It'll show you italics, bold, and a few other things.
R.A. wrote: "While we're ranting, we caught up almost to present on SHIELD. For a while I thought it might be getting better, and then I saw the episode with the broken staff. Everything felt so forced! Still, I'm not ready to quit on it yet. I'm still living for the dream. "My husband can't understand why I was so disappointed in the series. He's not a fan but he only watched it with me. I'm wailing "But it's JOSS!!" *sigh*
We stopped 2 episodes in.
Thank you, Colleen. I'll try to remember that.MrsJoseph, I know what you mean. My husband and I have watched Firefly through 3ish times, and I have no idea how many times we've seen Serenity. Although I'm not much of a superhero fan, I couldn't wait for Avengers, and it totally lived up to my expectations. My husband says Joss Whedon needs to take a break from Avengers 2 and give SHIELD a little (or lot of) attention. Wouldn't blame anyone for giving up on it.
R.A. wrote: "Thank you, Colleen. I'll try to remember that.MrsJoseph, I know what you mean. My husband and I have watched Firefly through 3ish times, and I have no idea how many times we've seen Serenity. Alt..."
That makes a lot of sense. Before the shield gets retired. There are articles out about how disappointing it is...
Yeah, it's probably not going to be around much longer. Although honestly, I think Grimm is in it's third season, and it didn't stop being completely shallow until somewhere in the middle of season two, if I remember right. And teh season finale left me rolling my eyes. Or maybe I've just become less tolerant over the years. I can't seem to help comparing everything new to shows I loved and somehow managed to get cancelled. Someone needs to take over FOX.
R.A. wrote: "Yeah, it's probably not going to be around much longer. Although honestly, I think Grimm is in it's third season, and it didn't stop being completely shallow until somewhere in the middle of season..."lol!
I'd like a new and fresh concept.
I know, I know
"You may say that I'm a dreamer...
...but I'm not the only one..."
The problem is that (and yes, I know everything:)) networks, publishing houses and the like don't want to try anything really new and fresh because there's not an established market. They mostly take successful ideas, put a spin on them (if we're lucky) and package it as all new. Even in music, you see things advertized with 'if you like so-and-so, you'll love ____. And I guess I can't blame them. It's about making money, afterall, and branding and building a market following is very time consuming and expensive. It makes sense to sell more of the same to established groups of people.
Fantasy Aficionados
Books mentioned in this topic
The Inheritance (other topics)Glazed, Filled, Sugared & Dipped: Easy Doughnut Recipes to Fry or Bake at Home (other topics)
< rant > Someone felt the need to comment on one of my reviews and why I rated it the way I did -- "only" 3 starts -- when I thought I was pretty clear on why that was. Totally dissed me and said I shouldn't have rated it down for that.
I rated it what I rated it because I can. Your 3-stars don't have to jibe with my 3-stars. What you love, I don't have to. That's why any user can review. My review is not the official review of the book, but only one of many. OK, the only one so far, with others only rating it. But still, in principle.
Why do people get so worked up over the friggin' "right" way to rate & review a book.
I suspect they are a sockpuppet troll, but I'm not flagging or blocking them. Let them put on their big girl/boy pants; I'm wearing mine.
< /rant >
Thus endeth the rant. Thanks for being a place to go shout and get it off my chest.