Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

It's... over...

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    OctavarIan
    Registered Users Posts: 2,736 ✭✭✭OctavarIan


    Sleepy wrote:
    Because LOTR is one of the worst written books of all time?

    Care to expand on that?


  • Options
    #33
    Corruptedmorals
    Registered Users Posts: 4,194 ✭✭✭Corruptedmorals


    LOTR drags at times and trails off into boring detail at times, but it's still great.

    Yes, it is His Dark Materials trilogy by Philip Pullman. Northern Lights, The Subtle Knife, The Amber Spyglass.


  • Options
    #34
    Sleepy
    Registered Users Posts: 24,253 ✭✭✭✭Sleepy


    OctavarIan wrote:
    Care to expand on that?
    Tolkien was *badly* in need of a decent editor to reign in his three page descriptions of things completely unnecessary to the plot. I got about a hundred pages into the book before giving up on it. A junior cert student would exercise more self-discipline in curtailing their waffling. It's a personal opinion that I'm well aware most others don't agree with but for me, LOTR was a good story poorly told.


  • Options
    #35
    The Bollox
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,372 ✭✭✭The Bollox


    gubbie wrote:
    Its the last Harry Potter mystery.
    I always assumed that it was Dumbledore because as you said that it has the same pose. I just googled it too and it says that its an early Dumbledore... but does a young Dumbledore ever appear in it? All I can think of is when Harry's young and he helps out there but that was only 10 years previous and the man at the back is about max 40, but considering he was teaching in Hogwarts back in Voldemorts time... maybe we can retire off it?
    it makes no sense to put a young, unrecognisable Dumbledore on the back cover. I still say there's a good chance it's Flamel, althought you are never told what he looks like


  • Options
    #36
    JC 2K3
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,794 ✭✭✭JC 2K3


    It's just a random wizard.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    Steve01
    Closed Accounts Posts: 482 ✭✭Steve01


    I can now be added to the list of those who've crossed to the other side and finished the Deathly Hallows (its an extensive list!). And I must say I'm hugely impressed. Fair play to Rowling for doing an incredible job! Anyone with that much imagination and the ability to harness it into 7 fantastic books deserves all the credit they can get.


  • Options
    #38
    leninbenjamin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,983 ✭✭✭leninbenjamin


    The Bollox wrote:
    it makes no sense to put a young, unrecognisable Dumbledore on the back cover. I still say there's a good chance it's Flamel, althought you are never told what he looks like

    hink i have tha one too somewhere. It's definitly Dumbledore, who else could it be really? i always thought it was a f*ck up by the publishers, tha what ever artist they hired didn't pay attention to the details of he characters he was supposed to be painting, and publishers weren't arsed to change it til it started getting a hardcore following.


  • Options
    #39
    gubbie
    Registered Users Posts: 2,134 ✭✭✭gubbie


    Sleepy wrote:
    Tolkien was *badly* in need of a decent editor to reign in his three page descriptions of things completely unnecessary to the plot. I got about a hundred pages into the book before giving up on it. A junior cert student would exercise more self-discipline in curtailing their waffling. It's a personal opinion that I'm well aware most others don't agree with but for me, LOTR was a good story poorly told.
    Although this ain't the forum to discuss it, I agree with you. JRRT had great ideas but at the end of the day, the first book was just description after description. I quit on numerous occasions and it took me a year and a half to just read the first book. The Hobbit is a much better book. It moves along nicely with an airy grace
    It's just a random wizard.
    What would be the sense in that? The illustrations on the books always had something to do with the book, they were never just random

    I've heard too that the illustrator on the second-seventh books were a different one to the one who did the first


  • Options
    #40
    JC 2K3
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,794 ✭✭✭JC 2K3


    gubbie wrote:
    What would be the sense in that? The illustrations on the books always had something to do with the book, they were never just random
    It was the first one though, there were no defined rules of what could be on the cover. Why not just a random wizard to give the book a "magical" look?


  • Options
    #41
    gubbie
    Registered Users Posts: 2,134 ✭✭✭gubbie


    JC 2K3 wrote:
    It was the first one though, there were no defined rules of what could be on the cover. Why not just a random wizard to give the book a "magical" look?
    But it was on the back cover. Surely if they wanted something eye catching they would have put it on the front instead of just a random dude with a scar and a sign saying 9 3/4's. I think it was just a giant glitch


  • Advertisement
Advertisement