[deleted]


[deleted]


"Single-handedly"...

"Single handilly" doesn't mean anything.

reply

[deleted]

It's always best to write words that actually mean what you wanted to say, instead of words that make you look stupid. When you look stupid, nobody takes what you say seriously...

reply

[deleted]

LOL, you "do not care"? Is that why you respond to my one-sentence remark, posted a day ago, with your seven-sentence whine tonight...

Your analysis of my posts shows your ignorance of English writing even more.

The really funny thing is that any time anyone on an online forum receives a grammar/spelling tip, they almost always get their feelings hurt and resort to sarcasm, so that they won't be given any more tips.

reply

[deleted]

Capitalisation can convey the tone and intent of a written sentence. In this case, its absence denoted the tone of a mute, tacit expression of mild wonder at your comments.

Do you want to continue revealing your humiliation at being corrected? I suspect you do.

reply

[deleted]

So, you do want to keep showing your embarrassment.

It must be very deep.

reply

[deleted]

And your alleged evidence that fantasy films are no more would be, what? We have Maleficent, Mistress of Evil. We have His Dark Materials HBO series. You choose 2 movies, one of them 14 years old, the other 13 years old, and claim they “single-handedly” killed the fantasy movie genre. It’s pretty hard for a duo to do anything single-handedly. Moreover, Wonder Woman is indisputably a fantasy movie; her powers are magical. Hell, comic book movies are are much fantasy as they are science-fiction. I submit that Aquaman is fantasy. The “science” behind them is crap. That jackass Stan Lee went on record as saying that he relied on mutation in his comics because he was too lazy (read: stupid) to concoct a better reason.

Stick with Quentin. There is more to Fantasy and Faerie (look it up) than sword and sorcery, and wands and wizards.

Not for nothing , ABC/Disney had a very successful 7-year series run with Once Upon A Time, which began 2 years before Eragon and ran till 2018. I admit that it really should have ended in 2017.

reply

[deleted]

"I should of clarified"

It's strange that you hate so much to be corrected, yet you keep making mistakes.

It's "should have", not "should of". You wrote "should of" because it sounds a bit like the contraction, "should've", and you weren't taught English usage correctly.

reply

[deleted]

Sad, but true. After this and "Golden Compass," the number of big-budget fantasy films really tapered off for a long time. I was also bothered by the fact that this was yet another case of "huge book squeezed into a crappy 2-hour film" scenario. Unfortunately, at the time this was made, nobody had come up with the idea of "turn gigantic books into tv series' yet." "Eragon" actually wasn't that bad of a book, but again, they had to leave a lot of the story out, simplify it, rush it, and portray the various characters in ways the author probably never envisioned.

reply

I agree with you, my friend, but not with the OP; but you are one hell of a lot deeper than the OP. CUT-RATE fantasy is bad. Mea culpa: I love the English Romantic poets. I believe that Fantasy has always been the most popular genre, including Mozart‘s The Magic Flute, Wagner‘s Twilight of the Gods, The Lyrical Ballads, The Golden Bough, Man Myth and Magic, The Occult: A History, the words of Dion Fortune, Anton le Vey and George Gerdgueff. Science fiction appeals to our intellect: “What if?” Fantasy touches our hearts and souls: “This IS! What do we do with it?”

Fantasy is immortal.

reply

[deleted]

Thank you, and well-said. The source material was written by a chid. Don’t be so quick to assume you could not have done as well, or even better.

As for the forgotten third source of plagiarism, I mean “inspiration,” I suggest Ann McCaferrey’s The Dragonriders of Pern.

One doubts the teen wrote a single word of the book. My guess is that it was ghosted and plagiarized by a seasoned “with” author who was paid more than usual to lose the “with” credit and make the kid and his nepotistic parents look good.

reply

[deleted]