Post by: ShyGuy on March 19, 2007, 05:42:15 AM
Doesn't get more mature than that!
If the Wii can successfully revive the adventure genre, it will be the best console ever.
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 19, 2007, 05:53:46 AM
Still, interesting development and I'd like to see more.
Post by: NWR_pap64 on March 19, 2007, 05:54:58 AM
Post by: Strell on March 19, 2007, 05:56:26 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: pap64
Agatha who?
YOU WILL HOLD YOUR FAT TONGUE, BURGERLAD.
Post by: Bill Aurion on March 19, 2007, 06:09:16 AM
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 19, 2007, 06:13:13 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: pap64
Agatha who?
Wrote a bunch of sh*tty mystery novels a while back. She's either dead now or should be because no one reads books anymore.
Post by: Bill Aurion on March 19, 2007, 06:16:53 AM
Post by: IceCold on March 19, 2007, 06:18:09 AM
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 19, 2007, 06:19:02 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion
Well that was a tad uncalled-for... =\
I know it's an unpleasant truth, but internet killed the paperback star.
Post by: The Omen on March 19, 2007, 06:41:47 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_BrotherQuote
Originally posted by: pap64
Agatha who?
Wrote a bunch of sh*tty mystery novels a while back. She's either dead now or should be because no one reads books anymore.
Yeah, your right. A novel that basically started the entire "who done it?" genre of books/films deserves nothing but immature hate from an internet geek..
Post by: NWR_pap64 on March 19, 2007, 06:44:16 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: The OmenQuote
Originally posted by: Smash_BrotherQuote
Originally posted by: pap64
Agatha who?
Wrote a bunch of sh*tty mystery novels a while back. She's either dead now or should be because no one reads books anymore.
Yeah, your right. A novel that basically started the entire "who done it?" genre of books/films deserves nothing but immature hate from an internet geek..
Ignore him. SB can be bitter like that
.
Post by: Blue Plant on March 19, 2007, 06:48:17 AM
Post by: NWR_pap64 on March 19, 2007, 06:51:52 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Blue Plant
Give me Nancy Drew for Wii, please!
Nancy who?
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 19, 2007, 06:52:25 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: The Omen Yeah, your right. A novel that basically started the entire "who done it?" genre of books/films deserves nothing but immature hate from an internet geek..
Sir Arthur Conan Doyle disagrees with you, especially since he "Influenced: Agatha Christie and other detective fiction authors".
However, it should be noted that Doyle was influenced by Edgar Allen Poe, whose "The Murders in the Rue Morgue" debuted in 1841, 49 years before Christie was even born, and is most CERTAINLY a "whodunnit" with quite a twist ending (possibly the first "What a twist!" in history, but I can't verify that).
So let's not be giving Christie credit for ideas when she was already being "influenced" by others, shall we?
Christie's books sold so well because she was the first to introduce "whodunnits" at a 3rd grade reading level. See also RL Stine.
Post by: Blue Plant on March 19, 2007, 06:53:03 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: pap64Quote
Originally posted by: Blue Plant
Give me Nancy Drew for Wii, please!
Nancy who?
DIE!
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 19, 2007, 06:53:18 AM
Post by: Arbok on March 19, 2007, 07:12:55 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother
Christie's books sold so well because she was the first to introduce "whodunnits" at a 3rd grade reading level.
Hurr.... I guess that explains why she is the second best selling writer of all time.
Seriously, though, her family enslave yours in the past? What's up with all of the hate against her?
Post by: NWR_pap64 on March 19, 2007, 07:18:11 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: ArbokQuote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother
Christie's books sold so well because she was the first to introduce "whodunnits" at a 3rd grade reading level.
Hurr.... I guess that explains why she is the second best selling writer of all time.
Seriously, though, her family enslave yours in the past? What's up with all of the hate against her?
Is there such a thing as Italian slaves?
Then again, there were Chinese, Indian, Irish and other races working for the white man. So I wouldn't be surprised if Italians were forced to work as well.
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 19, 2007, 07:20:50 AM
Quote
Seriously, though, her family enslave yours in the past? What's up with all of the hate against her?
People ragged on Pap so I took up the opposing viewpoint. No other reason.
I don't care what she is. I think a number of Shakespeare's plays were erroneous in their assumptions about human emotion and he's considered the #1 writer of all time. Harry Potter books sell insanely well and I believe they're likewise crap.
In the end, popularity = idiots thinking in unison. "Everyone else likes it" has never been a valid argument for anything because many things achieve mass popularity when they certainly don't deserve it.
I'm serious when I say that she took the typically grisly and dark concept of murder and mystery and made it for all ages which is why she sold so well. Doyle and Poe were better writers with ideas which she was "influenced by" (read: lifted) but the difference was that theirs aren't typically read to children (especially not Poe's) whereas hers sell so well even today because her books are a perfect fit for school reading.
In fact, I bet most everyone here who likes her work was initially introduced to it in a school of some kind.
Post by: Strell on March 19, 2007, 07:43:05 AM
Christie's Poirot character is a f*cking madman, and to dislike him is a travesty, and you should just punch yourself in your beanbag right now.
To pretend that she has not leveled a considerable talent into that genre is just foolishness.
Post by: NWR_pap64 on March 19, 2007, 07:58:08 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_BrotherQuote
I don't care what she is. I think a number of Shakespeare's plays were erroneous in their assumptions about human emotion and he's considered the #1 writer of all time. Harry Potter books sell insanely well and I believe they're likewise crap.
I only read the first HP book, but if the movies are any indication, the books aren't certainly all crap.
I honestly can't talk about the books since I only have the movies to defend myself with (and the general thinking is that books=always better than the movie), but the stories are certainly well told with many aspects that will probably fly over some kids' heads. In my honest opinion, HP at least deserve some of its praise.
Eragon is a far much better example since that took off like crazy, no questions asked.
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 19, 2007, 07:59:07 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Strell Christie's Poirot character is a f*cking madman, and to dislike him is a travesty, and you should just punch yourself in your beanbag right now.
Roffles...
Critics have claimed that Poirot was based on two other fictional detectives of the time: Marie Belloc Lowndes' Hercule Popeau and Frank Howel Evans' Monsieur Poiret, a retired French police officer living in London. A more obvious influence on the early Poirot stories is that of Arthur Conan Doyle. In An Autobiography Christie admits that "I was still writing in the Sherlock Holmes tradition - eccentric detective, stooge assistant, with a Lestrade-type Scotland Yard detective, Inspector Japp."
Quote
To pretend that she has not leveled a considerable talent into that genre is just foolishness.
Of course: she was an excellent author, greatly talented at taking existing concepts and changing their intended audience.
I know that sounds like disrespect, but from what I heard, Shakespeare did largely the same thing. It was once said that it's not the people who come up with the great ideas who profit, it's the people who take those ideas, tweak them a bit and make them better who actually profit. Like I said, not knocking her skills at what she did. I just don't want to see authors like Poe and Doyle overlooked and discredited because Christie is more popular.
Quote
"Dragon Wars: A New Hope" is a far much better example since that took off like crazy, no questions asked.
Fixed.
Post by: ShyGuy on March 19, 2007, 08:17:31 AM
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 19, 2007, 08:23:06 AM
Would you sit idly by while someone gave "Ratchet and Clank" credit for inventing the 3D platforming genre? Hell no. Anyone here would be quick to point out that it was Mario 64 that pioneered the concept.
Why is it such a travesty that I insist that Christie not be credited with inventing the mystery genre and being such a talented pioneer when SHE HERSELF admits that her stories were inspired by the works of other authors who came before her?
Christie isn't in the wrong here: the people shoveling credit onto her are.
Post by: Arbok on March 19, 2007, 08:28:29 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother
Would you sit idly by while someone gave "Ratchet and Clank" credit for inventing the 3D platforming genre? Hell no. Anyone here would be quick to point out that it was Mario 64 that pioneered the concept.
Umm... I think more people are having trouble with the overall sentiment toward Christie. It's one thing to state that Ratchet and Clank did not invent the "3D platforming genre", it's another to simply dive into attack mode by calling the series a "bunch of sh*tty [games]".
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 19, 2007, 08:31:52 AM
I didn't like them, but that doesn't mean others need to share that opinion. Half of the things I like are generally disliked by others (like SR...).
But again, I don't want people having any misconceptions about the origins of her ideas. I'm not here to tell people what to like, only to establish where the credit should lie (or to point out that CHRISTIE has already told us where the credit should lie).
Post by: Arbok on March 19, 2007, 08:37:13 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother
Ergo, people would be attempting to refute my opinion.
Yep, an opinion that Agatha Christie should be dead, if she wasn't already, due to the type of books she writes... man, can't imagine how that directed any attention onto itself.
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 19, 2007, 08:43:59 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok Yep, an opinion that Agatha Christie should be dead, if she wasn't already, due to the type of books she writes... man, can't imagine how that directed any attention onto itself.
Ah, but you misread me:
Quote
She's either dead now or should be because no one reads books anymore.
It has nothing to do with her type of books, just that the internet is slowly killing reading.
Though, it was a joke anyhow made more at the expense of the people who lambasted Pap for his comment (which was innocent enough).
Technically, I can stand by the point that Agatha Christie SHOULD be dead because, if she wasn't, she'd be 117 years old and that's just unnatural.
Post by: ShyGuy on March 19, 2007, 08:44:27 AM
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 19, 2007, 08:50:14 AM
ing.
Post by: Arbok on March 19, 2007, 08:54:09 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother
It has nothing to do with her type of books, just that the internet is slowly killing reading.
Oh, okay, perfectly accetable reason to wish death upon an author...
Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother
Nah, Arbok and I do this a lot: he plays devil's advocate while I playfully refute his claims with more silliness, hence all the
Post by: ShyGuy on March 19, 2007, 08:58:57 AM
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 19, 2007, 09:00:21 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok Oh, okay, perfectly accetable reason to wish death upon an author...
I'd be all like, "GET YOUR 117 YEAR-OLD ASS THE HELL OFF THIS MORTAL COIL, B*TCH!!!!"
But to be fair, I'm not wishing death upon her so much as suggesting it would be a kinder alternative, given the internet's gradual destruction of the paperback industry.
Unless eBooks catch on, I don't see it going so well, which is a shame because I'm an aspiring writer myself.
For the record, I don't actually have any ill-will towards Christie. I just wanted to ruffle the feathers of the folks who lashed at Pap, but I do consider it important to trace the flow of ideas back to their origin, and since Christie herself has done this, I can't fault her, now can I?
And I've always thought of myself as the White Spy...
Quote
Originally posted by: ShyGuy
I just take either of you guy's posts seriously anymore
Don't fret, man. The dance of wits is older than time itself.
Post by: Arbok on March 19, 2007, 09:09:40 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother
But to be fair, I'm not wishing death upon her so much as suggesting it would be a kinder alternative, given the internet's gradual destruction of the paperback industry.
Introducing the assited suicide program for authors by Smash_Brother....?
Quote
Originally posted by: ShyGuy
I just take either of you guy's posts seriously anymore
Just be thankful this wasn't about a digital medium taking over a traditional one.
Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother
Unless eBooks catch on...
Uh oh...
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 19, 2007, 09:12:58 AM
Someone ELSE can be the first rat to the trap, thanks.
Post by: UncleBob on March 19, 2007, 09:54:18 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_BrotherQuote
I'm serious when I say that she took the typically grisly and dark concept of murder and mystery and made it for all ages which is why she sold so well. Doyle and Poe were better writers with ideas which she was "influenced by" (read: lifted) but the difference was that theirs aren't typically read to children (especially not Poe's) whereas hers sell so well even today because her books are a perfect fit for school reading.
In fact, I bet most everyone here who likes her work was initially introduced to it in a school of some kind.
I don't want to get into this entire issue with Ms. Christie, but if you really believe this crap, you're full of it.
Who here *didn't* read anything by both Poe and Sir Doyle in school? Anyone? (of course, the requirement that you've went to school is a part of that previous question. Also, if you were assigned to read it, but choose not to for whatever reason, then it still counts).
I had so much Poe shoved down my throat in school... I think we only read one Sir Doyle story though...
Post by: UltimatePartyBear on March 19, 2007, 09:59:35 AM
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 19, 2007, 10:03:09 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: UncleBob I had so much Poe shoved down my throat in school... I think we only read one Sir Doyle story though...
But how old were you when you read Poe? And I don't even count "The Raven" because it's probably the very tamest of all his works and is the most child-friendly, unlike Rue Morgue and some of his other stories dealing with demons.
We never touched Doyle and only read one Poe in high school.
Meanwhile, Christie was on the approved reading list for us for 6th grade and "And Then There Were None" was read to us in class.
Post by: ShyGuy on March 19, 2007, 10:08:48 AM
Which Poe story are you referring to with demons?
edit - on the subject: waggle waggle.
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 19, 2007, 10:13:34 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: ShyGuy
I read works by Doyle and Stevenson when I was ten. Guess they are kiddie.
This is going to vary from district to district, but I grew up in a conservative waspy district where they were stricter about the content children were allowed to read.
Quote
Which Poe story are you referring to with demons?
It's been years and I can't even remember the title. In the story, a demon was giving the lead character a vision by placing his hand upon his forehead and that's really the only detail I remember.
I didn't read that in school, but in the Poe book I bought for myself after school. My point was that any remotely religious school district probably wouldn't allow any of his works if they deal with demons.
Post by: ShyGuy on March 19, 2007, 10:29:36 AM
Post by: Strell on March 19, 2007, 10:42:03 AM
I have no clue if Christie copied or not, and like you said, Shakespeare did largely the same thing.
I'm just not taking that into consideration. I said one clear thing - Piorot kicks ass, and he does.
If AC is some shameless schmuck who got all the attention despite some plagiarism, well ok. I'm not discussing that at all.
Post by: UncleBob on March 19, 2007, 10:48:19 AM
Post by: The Omen on March 19, 2007, 10:58:09 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_BrotherQuote
Originally posted by: The Omen Yeah, your right. A novel that basically started the entire "who done it?" genre of books/films deserves nothing but immature hate from an internet geek..
Sir Arthur Conan Doyle disagrees with you, especially since he "Influenced: Agatha Christie and other detective fiction authors".
However, it should be noted that Doyle was influenced by Edgar Allen Poe, whose "The Murders in the Rue Morgue" debuted in 1841, 49 years before Christie was even born, and is most CERTAINLY a "whodunnit" with quite a twist ending (possibly the first "What a twist!" in history, but I can't verify that).
So let's not be giving Christie credit for ideas when she was already being "influenced" by others, shall we?
Christie's books sold so well because she was the first to introduce "whodunnits" at a 3rd grade reading level. See also RL Stine.
I wasn't arguing about her skills as a writer, my dear child(I'm not even a Christie fan). And I'll give respect to Sir Doyle, but I don't know why I have to as I never soiled his name in the first place. I'd assumed you were the one to insult him, if by only saying that no one reads books anymore. And with that, you show your idiocy. I merely wanted to point this idiocy out to your peers. I have a feeling they already know, however.
Post by: Hostile Creation on March 19, 2007, 11:39:53 AM
(Seriously though, I've never read Christie but I've seen them staged, and they're great)
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 19, 2007, 12:29:12 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: ShyGuy
District? Is that some public school thing? I was home schooled and we had no television, so I read a lot on my own. I've read the entire works of Poe, but it's been awhile, I don't remember literal demons.
District is public school yes, and as for the story, I'm sorry but I can't remember and I can't find my copy of the book anymore.
Quote
Originally posted by: Strell I have no clue if Christie copied or not, and like you said, Shakespeare did largely the same thing.
I'm just not taking that into consideration. I said one clear thing - Piorot kicks ass, and he does.
If AC is some shameless schmuck who got all the attention despite some plagiarism, well ok. I'm not discussing that at all.
Fair enough.
Quote
Overly Religious school districts won't allow Harry Potter in their schools... guess Harry Potter is teh mature?
No, and you answered your own question.
Quote
I wasn't arguing about her skills as a writer, my dear child(I'm not even a Christie fan). And I'll give respect to Sir Doyle, but I don't know why I have to as I never soiled his name in the first place. I'd assumed you were the one to insult him, if by only saying that no one reads books anymore. And with that, you show your idiocy. I merely wanted to point this idiocy out to your peers. I have a feeling they already know, however.
Did you read the part where I said that was a joke aimed at ruffling some feathers? Clearly, you were too busy having your feathers ruffled to notice.
Quote
It seems like Smash Brother has adopted the Hermit Crabbing habit.
Wrong side of the argument. I'd need to be defending an obscure author whom no one has heard of and personally insulting everyone who thinks they're anything short of awesome.
Post by: ShyGuy on March 19, 2007, 12:35:09 PM
Post by: KDR_11k on March 19, 2007, 07:24:35 PM
Anyone here would be quick to point out that it was Mario 64 that pioneered the concept.
There were 3d jump and runs before Mario 64, M64 was just the first one to "do it right" by using the analog stick. So Mario 64 is the Agatha Christie of 3d jump and runs.
Who here *didn't* read anything by both Poe and Sir Doyle in school?
We had one short story by Poe (The Treacherous Heart) and that's about it. Also was he the one that wrote the horrible, horrible short story "The Duc d'Omelette" and generally had a penchant for writing every third word in French?
Post by: Hostile Creation on March 19, 2007, 08:34:43 PM
Post by: Kairon on March 20, 2007, 04:54:01 AM
~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Kairon on March 20, 2007, 05:01:51 AM
Oh, and for the record, Harry Potter Books are, at least, not drivel. Eragon is.
~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: NWR_pap64 on March 20, 2007, 05:09:35 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
Just caught up with the entire thread now and oh boy... when you guys get off topic you really go all the way!
Oh, and for the record, Harry Potter Books are, at least, not drivel. Eragon is.
~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Yep, this is the NWR at its finest. Credit goes to SB, though, since he was the one that ruffled feathers and started the discussion
.And I agree about the HP books. Again, if the movies are any indication, the stories are creative and rock solid. Eragon...I mean, Dragon wars is a MUCH better example since it took off for the sole fact that the author was 16 years old.
If I am not mistaken, it took HP YEARS before it reached popularity. It wasn't like "OMG good book" and everyone bought it. It had to build its popularity.
Post by: Arbok on March 20, 2007, 06:04:43 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
Oh, and for the record, Harry Potter Books are, at least, not drivel. Eragon is.
Fully agree. The Harry Potter books won people over based on characters and story; it didn't just randomly become a phenomenon. A lot of Eragon's hype, though, was based around "Oh my god, look at how young this author is!" rather then the story; something that became painfully obvious when Eldest came out and suddenly everyone was kind of indifferent about it, as the author didn't really mature in his craft with age as many people assumed he would.
Post by: NWR_pap64 on March 20, 2007, 06:32:15 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: ArbokQuote
Originally posted by: Kairon
Oh, and for the record, Harry Potter Books are, at least, not drivel. Eragon is.
Fully agree. The Harry Potter books won people over based on characters and story; it didn't just randomly become a phenomenon. A lot of Eragon's hype, though, was based around "Oh my god, look at how young this author is!" rather then the story; something that became painfully obvious when Eldest came out and suddenly everyone was kind of indifferent about it, as the author didn't really mature in his craft with age as many people assumed he would.
Hence why the movie flopped while the HP movies get better with each installment. I know that sometimes movie directors alter the content of a book to the point where it isn't like the original one, but if the story is great the movie will also be solid and fun. Like I said, the HP movies have gotten better and better and its because the books themselves have gotten better with time.
Since we are talking about it, SB, why did you say that the HP books were crap? Did you read them, dislike the movies or simply looked at the popularity of the books and came to the conclusion that since it was popular it sucked?
I agree that sometimes popularity doesn't always equal quality, but sometimes you have to give credit where credit its due, despite popularity.
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 20, 2007, 07:11:21 AM
I've never read the books so I can't really say, about them, but the Eragon craze seemed to be entirely built upon the "OMG THE AUTHOR IS SO YOUNG!!!" hype and I'm immensely glad the movie did so poorly.
Post by: Hostile Creation on March 20, 2007, 07:41:05 AM
We should have a literature thread in the general chat for this sort of discussion
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 20, 2007, 08:10:32 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k So Mario 64 is the Agatha Christie of 3d jump and runs.
Except that Shigeru Miyamoto designed the first games upon which all subsequent 3d jump and runs were based, since he was the first one to introduce the moving screen and platorming concepts.
And which games do you mean that came before Mario 64?
Post by: ShyGuy on March 20, 2007, 08:24:41 AM
Post by: IceCold on March 20, 2007, 08:29:57 AM
Agatha Christie was a good writer. Not an exceptional one, but her books certainly aren't "sh*tty". Shakespeare was a horrible plagiarist - for example, apart from a few plot and character embellishments, he basically copied the entire story of "Othello" from another source. Still, that doesn't make him a bad writer. Good prose distinguishes itself, and Smash, you can't pull out the "opinion card" here. First, you make the "3rd grade reading level" comment, then afterwards to defend your dislike by saying that it's your opinion. It can't be your opinion that she writes at that level. It's either true or not, and in this case, it's definitely false. You may disagree with the style, or the themes, or the viewpoints expressed in the book, but you can't say that something is bad writing when it isn't.
Smash's arguments in this thread are his typical, hyperbolic ones, with a few phrases italicised for emphasis, and a swear or two tossed in, all just to prove a point
If you want someone that deserves every ounce of criticism he gets, it's Dan Brown. I think I've mentioned it here before, but The Da Vinci Code is beyond awful. Even as simple, escapist fiction, the novel fails on all fronts. It honestly reads like something which came straight out of the "C" pile of a high school English class. Not only that, but it's as if the student plagiarised from a history text and inserted the very same words into the dialogue.
Yes, the irony was intentional
QuoteI made one about books a while back.. I'll go look for it.
We should have a literature thread in the general chat for this sort of discussion
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 20, 2007, 08:30:36 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: ShyGuy
Sega Bugs! Crash Bandicoot maybe?
I was thinking he meant Sonic 3D Blast on the Saturn, which wasn't a full 3D game at all but was a fixed camera ordeal.
Mario was, to my knowledge, the first 3D engine which granted the player the ability to move the camera freely to any direction.
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 20, 2007, 08:47:32 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold It can't be your opinion that she writes at that level. It's either true or not, and in this case, it's definitely false.
And why not? When I see her books as appropriate reading material for children of that age, then it's perfectly within reason that this is my opinion, just as it is your opinion that she does not write at that level. I read the Hobbit in 3rd grade. I'm sure I could have also handled And Then There Were None, which I read three years later.
Quote
Smash's arguments in this thread are his typical, hyperbolic ones, with a few phrases italicised for emphasis, and a swear or two tossed in, all just to prove a point
Incorrect. As I stated multiple times, my intention was to troll the Christie lovers while simultaneously defending Pap.
Though, I do admit that the one merit to my argument was pointing out that Christie didn't invent the mystery genre or anything else of the sort but rather that she herself admits she was inspired by previous writers to whom she gave ample credit.
But I give you credit for being able to discern my serious arguments from my non-serious ones (even though trolling should be pretty obvious when I do it so bluntly).
Quote
If you want someone that deserves every ounce of criticism he gets, it's Dan Brown. I think I've mentioned it here before, but The Da Vinci Code is beyond awful. Even as simple, escapist fiction, the novel fails on all fronts. It honestly reads like something which came straight out of the "C" pile of a high school English class. Not only that, but it's as if the student plagiarised from a history text and inserted the very same words into the dialogue.
And this is your opinion, which is subject to the same criticisms which you so heavily lay on DB.
I've not read his books, but the DaVinci Code movie was rather good (though I think we have Tom Hanks' mullet to thank for that).
Quote
Yes, the irony was intentional
Shame, because you make a more convincing argument with the italicization.
Post by: UltimatePartyBear on March 20, 2007, 10:10:15 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_BrotherQuote
Originally posted by: IceCold It can't be your opinion that she writes at that level. It's either true or not, and in this case, it's definitely false.
And why not? When I see her books as appropriate reading material for children of that age, then it's perfectly within reason that this is my opinion, just as it is your opinion that she does not write at that level. I read the Hobbit in 3rd grade. I'm sure I could have also handled And Then There Were None, which I read three years later.
Because "third grade reading level" is quantifiable.
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 20, 2007, 11:09:28 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: PartyBear Because "third grade reading level" is quantifiable.
That would explain why they file her under children's books.
In fact, "The Murder at the Vicarage" and "Murder on the Orient Express" are both listed as being appropriate for ages 4-8.
I admit I was partially mistaken, since children are typically enrolled in 3rd grade at 8-9, Christie's books are, in fact, aimed at a YOUNGER than 3rd grade audience.
So for the record, yes, Agatha Christie is considered suitable for kindergartners.
Post by: Strell on March 20, 2007, 02:30:28 PM
-Mitch Hedberg
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 20, 2007, 03:06:26 PM
But until then, I feel that the recommended ages Amazon and other literature retailers use qualify as not only a guideline for reading difficulty but also for content.
Mitch also has a few other choice quotes for anyone who might have believed he was actually championing literacy.
Post by: Strell on March 20, 2007, 04:37:28 PM
I can't tell if you are being sarcastic or not, but that was totally meant as a joke. Any conversation I can insert a Lewis Black or Mitch Hedberg joke is a conversation where such divine will will be done.
Plus, Mitch is dead. May he rest in peace, man among men that he was.
Post by: Hostile Creation on March 20, 2007, 04:58:13 PM
Post by: ShyGuy on March 20, 2007, 05:06:16 PM
Post by: KDR_11k on March 20, 2007, 10:59:04 PM
Post by: UltimatePartyBear on March 21, 2007, 03:54:13 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother
That would explain why they file her under children's books.
In fact, "The Murder at the Vicarage" and "Murder on the Orient Express" are both listed as being appropriate for ages 4-8.
I admit I was partially mistaken, since children are typically enrolled in 3rd grade at 8-9, Christie's books are, in fact, aimed at a YOUNGER than 3rd grade audience.
So for the record, yes, Agatha Christie is considered suitable for kindergartners.
Her books are for kids in the same way Nintendo's games are, i.e. they're for everyone. Popular writing -- that is, writing intended to be enjoyed by most people -- is usually written at no higher than a third grade level. Even if we assume that most adults read at a higher level than that, and I wouldn't be surprised if that were false, why limit your audience to people cognizant of unorthodox locutions?
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 21, 2007, 10:24:15 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Strell I can't tell if you are being sarcastic or not, but that was totally meant as a joke. Any conversation I can insert a Lewis Black or Mitch Hedberg joke is a conversation where such divine will will be done.
Show some Eddie Izzard love and we'll talk.
Quote
Originally posted by: Hostile Creation
I like how Smash Brother is using factual evidence to assert an opinion.
I honestly didn't intend to, but if someone is going to refute my opinions with facts, I am inclined to do the same.
Quote
Originally posted by: ShyGuy
If Majesco sees the length of this thread they are going to think the title is already generating huge buzz. Million seller for sure!
Hey, I aim to please.
Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
Jumping Flash came before Mario 64.
That would matter, except Mario 64 was in development long before Jumping Flash ever hit the market:
The development of Super Mario 64 took less than two years, but producer/director Shigeru Miyamoto had conceived of a 3D Mario game over five years before, while working on Star Fox. Miyamoto developed most of the concepts during the era of the SNES and considered making it an SNES game (making use of the Super FX chip), but decided to develop it for the Nintendo 64 due to the earlier system's technical limitations.
Mario 64 was released just a year and a month after Jumping Flash, which didn't feature the dynamic camera or the full 3D world like Mario 64.
This is not comparable to Christie's works, as she had over 20 years between her influence by Doyle and the creation of her novels.
Quote
Originally posted by: PartyBear Her books are for kids in the same way Nintendo's games are, i.e. they're for everyone. Popular writing -- that is, writing intended to be enjoyed by most people -- is usually written at no higher than a third grade level. Even if we assume that most adults read at a higher level than that, and I wouldn't be surprised if that were false, why limit your audience to people cognizant of unorthodox locutions?
Then we agree that the 3rd grade reading level recommendation is, in fact, subjective, which is what I've been saying the whole time.
It HAS to be subjective because I've seen 3rd graders who read at an 8th grade reading level and I've seen other 3rd graders who read at a 1st grade level. There are certain 3rd graders to whom I'd hand a Poe book to without concern while others would be scarred for life by it.
Post by: UltimatePartyBear on March 22, 2007, 02:31:37 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother
Then we agree that the 3rd grade reading level recommendation is, in fact, subjective, which is what I've been saying the whole time.
It HAS to be subjective because I've seen 3rd graders who read at an 8th grade reading level and I've seen other 3rd graders who read at a 1st grade level. There are certain 3rd graders to whom I'd hand a Poe book to without concern while others would be scarred for life by it.
To some extent, it's subjective. It isn't like it's a hard scientific fact that third graders can't read sentences with five-syllable words. On the other hand, the rating is derived from statistical analysis of the reading abilities of different age groups, so when something is said to be written at a third grade level, it's reasonable to claim that the majority of people with at least a third grade education can read it without difficulty. That's all it means.
I was reading at an 8th grade level in third grade, and at college level in 8th grade, but the fact that they could measure that suggests that it has some basis in fact. It's also good to know that if I had been lagging behind instead of excelling, they could have found out about it and helped me, which is probably the best use of reading level ratings there is.
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 22, 2007, 04:24:53 AM
I started my assault in this thread with the intention of striking back at a few of the folks who had jumped all over Pap for not knowing who Christie was. If someone doesn't know, it's immensely easy to post a link to Wikipedia with her page rather than verbally assail the person (and attacking someone because they are unknowing of something is a basic form of hermit crabbing).
Christie is appropriate by scientific and content standards for children age 4+. However, that's not to say she can ONLY be enjoyed by people of that age (I was wrong to say that she was "aimed" at that audience).
In fact, the reason why Christie has sold so many books is because of her broad age appeal. That's why her books have sold so much more heavily than her predecessors from whom she claims inspiration.
The subjective nature of reading levels will always be the case, however. It depends entirely upon the child in question, not only for difficulty but content. Some kids can handle concepts and ideas that others cannot yet. Some with an overactive imagination shouldn't be allowed to read an author like, say, Poe because some of the imagery may scar them for life.
Post by: UltimatePartyBear on March 22, 2007, 04:46:18 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother
I started my assault in this thread with the intention of striking back at a few of the folks who had jumped all over Pap for not knowing who Christie was. If someone doesn't know, it's immensely easy to post a link to Wikipedia with her page rather than verbally assail the person
True, but on the other hand, it's easy enough to google things for yourself if you don't know instead of sidetracking entire threads by asking a simple question.
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 22, 2007, 04:54:04 AM
In this case, Pap got enraged sources who preferred to do a bit of crabbin' than give a straight answer.
Post by: UltimatePartyBear on March 22, 2007, 05:06:46 AM
pap64: Agatha who?
Strell: YOU WILL HOLD YOUR FAT TONGUE, BURGERLAD.
Bill: Laugho, pap fails at mysteries...I'm not a *huge* fan of the Christie novels (I'm personally a Conan Doyle fanatic), but I'm all over more adventures for Wii...More...MORE!
Smash_Brother: Wrote a bunch of sh*tty mystery novels a while back. She's either dead now or should be because no one reads books anymore.
So pap asked a simple question, Strell mistakenly took its wording to be a put down and responded in kind, Bill chuckled a bit before moving on, almost parenthetically answering the question, and then some guy named Smash_Brother (Smash who?) lit a bonfire. That was "striking back at a few of the folks who had jumped all over Pap," huh? There had been only two responses, only one of which could be called enraged, and I'd say that one looked like a misunderstanding.
I'm just glad you had fun.
Post by: NWR_pap64 on March 22, 2007, 05:22:11 AM
It's true that I should have just Wikipedia it, but like S_B said, I wanted to get the info from you guys.
But whatever, the damage's done already. I am just happy that I was the inspiration behind this whole train wreck of a thread
(unless S_B's using me as an excuse to start an AC flame and hate campaign).
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 22, 2007, 05:34:29 AM
But yeah, I had fun anyway. This was one of the luckiest arguments I've ever accidentally engaged in: every time I needed to refute something, it was a google/wiki away.
Post by: Zach on March 22, 2007, 12:43:09 PM
I was thinking that after you beat the game you could unlock a bonus version where you play the killer, Judge Wargrave. I think that would be really cool, you could go around the house committing the murders, and skillfully planting traps for everyone else to fall into.
Post by: Kairon on March 22, 2007, 01:06:47 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: pap64
I personally didn't feel offended or anything. I didn't do it to start a flame thread, though. I was born in a whole different country and only learned about Latin American authors, so people like Agatha Christie was not in our school curriculum.
It's true that I should have just Wikipedia it, but like S_B said, I wanted to get the info from you guys.
But whatever, the damage's done already. I am just happy that I was the inspiration behind this whole train wreck of a thread
... I didn't know who Agatha Christie was before this thread ...
... in fact ... in my head I had her mixed up with Nancy Drew ...
/flame shield up
~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: ShyGuy on March 22, 2007, 01:18:18 PM
On the subject, what kind of name is Agatha? Ain't no hot chicks named Agatha.
Post by: wandering on March 22, 2007, 01:26:09 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother
I think a number of Shakespeare's plays were erroneous in their assumptions about human emotion and he's considered the #1 writer of all time.
Personally, I think he understood human emotion better than your average psychiatrist.
...But then, maybe that says more about psychiatrists than Shakespeare.
Quote
It has nothing to do with her type of books, just that the internet is slowly killing reading.
But the internet is made up mostly of text! If anything, I'd say it's defending reading from being killed off by movies and television.
Post by: Strell on March 22, 2007, 03:55:37 PM
Partybear, you took that comment way too seriously.
Post by: Khushrenada on March 22, 2007, 04:09:43 PM
Post by: UltimatePartyBear on March 23, 2007, 02:35:29 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Strell
Whoa.
Partybear, you took that comment way too seriously.
I don't take anything seriously, but I am too sarcastic for my own good sometimes.
Post by: Hostile Creation on March 23, 2007, 05:44:27 AM
I don't have the time to say right now, cuz I have class in a few minutes, but I'll post something later on.
Post by: vudu on March 23, 2007, 06:22:23 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: ShyGuy
On the subject, what kind of name is Agatha? Ain't no hot chicks named Agatha.
Princess Agitha says hi.
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 23, 2007, 07:50:41 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Zach I was thinking that after you beat the game you could unlock a bonus version where you play the killer, Judge Wargrave. I think that would be really cool, you could go around the house committing the murders, and skillfully planting traps for everyone else to fall into.
That raises a question: how the hell ARE they going to do this game?
There was no detective who was unraveling the case like in Sherlock Holmes' adventures. How exactly does one "play" this book?
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 23, 2007, 07:53:50 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: wandering
Personally, I think he understood human emotion better than your average psychiatrist.
...But then, maybe that says more about psychiatrists than Shakespeare.
Don't get me wrong: I find many of his works to be spot-on in their interpretation, just that some aged better than others.
Quote
But the internet is made up mostly of text! If anything, I'd say it's defending reading from being killed off by movies and television.
Well, I meant book sales, but you get the idea.
I see fewer and fewer people curling up with a book anymore and I largely suspect the internet is replacing that.
And I was waiting for Princess Agitha to show up...
Post by: ShyGuy on March 23, 2007, 09:47:15 AM
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 23, 2007, 05:20:35 PM
Post by: Kairon on March 23, 2007, 09:06:04 PM
~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Ceric on March 24, 2007, 02:38:47 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: ShyGuy
Princess Agatha is a dog. Look at those giant ears, look at those zits/mole covering her face!
Quote
Princess Agathta: If I wanted to be pandered to, I would've bought FFX-II
~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Dem both fighting words. :P
Post by: Bill Aurion on March 24, 2007, 04:41:19 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother
In all seriousness, Agitha has the worst case of lolitis I've ever seen, right down to the way she bobs her head as she talks in order to sound "matter of factly" and points her feet inward.
That's what makes her so awesome...That and her fantastically quirky behavior... =D
Post by: UncleBob on March 24, 2007, 05:01:56 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_BrotherQuote
Originally posted by: Zach I was thinking that after you beat the game you could unlock a bonus version where you play the killer, Judge Wargrave. I think that would be really cool, you could go around the house committing the murders, and skillfully planting traps for everyone else to fall into.
That raises a question: how the hell ARE they going to do this game?
There was no detective who was unraveling the case like in Sherlock Holmes' adventures. How exactly does one "play" this book?
You could always buy the $10 PC version at Wal*Mart and find out.
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 24, 2007, 09:42:15 AM
