Scratch

i recently read a collection of phillip k. dick
if i can find it i'll give you the listings

soupoftomato wrote:

ImagineIt wrote:

soupoftomato wrote:

I disagree.
There are waaaay too many sentence fragments. It's like she needed to create a false sense of suspense so she fragmented. Everything. 
At one point it said something along the lines of "I checked the contents of the bag. Apples, bananas, pears." when it's JUST AS SUSPENSEFUL to say "The bag had apples, bananas, and pears." I did hate that.

Also, the plot was hyper-predictable. I would have been MORE surprised if Peeta didn't live, even though the rules of the game technically dictate I should have expected him to. I liked that.

And Peeta has like zero redeeming qualities. HE GAVE ME THE LOAF OF BREAD I AM INDEBTED TO BE HIS LOVER is basically the only justification for the relationship. No, that said that she saw him as a nice boy, not her soulmate.Otherwise, the guy sits there on his butt injured as a liability while Katniss has to hunt and fight for them both. It would have been easier for her to let him die, but it's "in the interest of love" or something. She would have let him die if the rules didn't say that she could let him live.In the interest of an entirely unrealistic love, to be specific. Katniss provides everything while Peeta does nothing. Even though they were obviously attracted by personality, Katniss would likely get fed up at some point. (And did Peeta have personality beyond "loverboy" and Katniss beyond "bravery/loyalty"?)

You liked it being predictable?

The way I see it, I just wasted my time if I knew how it was going to end.

I didn't see it as that predictable. But it made me feel like I could actually predict things. 

banana500 wrote:

ImagineIt wrote:

soupoftomato wrote:

You liked it being predictable?

The way I see it, I just wasted my time if I knew how it was going to end.

I didn't see it as that predictable. But it made me feel like I could actually predict things. 

Why would you want to predict things? It completely ruins the fun of reading the story in the first place. Also, I think predictions aren't the same thing as inferences--correct me if I'm wrong?

Inferring is to make a logical assumption based on previous knowledge.

banana500 wrote:

NeilWest wrote:

The Veldt was the only Ray Bradbury book I've read, but it's enchanting and chilling.

I love The Veldt!    One of my favorite Ray Bradbury stories.

Also, have you read Fahrenheit 451?

Nope.

Animal Farm anyone?

I'm a big fan of sci-fi books and movies.

Some of my favorite books are:

The Illustrated Man by Ray Bradbury - His books read more like poetry than prose.  He has a wonderful way with words.  He doesn't bury the reader with techno jargon.  He just tells an interesting story that happens to be set in space.

The Foundation Series by Issac Asimov - (I've only read the first three book so far, Foundation, Foundation and Empire, and Second Foundation) These are increibly well done and well planned out.  The size of the story is huge.  It is interesting that the individual scenes are not important, only the overall arc of the story.

Battlefield Earth by L. Ron Hubbard - This HUGE book (over 1000 pages) flies by.  It is very interesting and full of action on every page.  Just don't watch the movie by the same name--It was awful.

I, Robot by Isaac Asimov - This is nothing like the movie. (I found the movie to be good but it doesn't really relate to the book much at all.) It is a book of loosely related sci-fi short stories. These are stories to make you think logically.

Ender's Game by Orson Scott Card - Great book.  A good followup book to this one is called Ender's Shadow.

The Hitchhikker's Guide to the Galaxy by Douglas Adams - Funny, funny book.  This is the first of a series and they are all really good and funny.  You can watch the BBC tv series of this which is good.  It follows the book very well.  Just ignore the movie of the same name.  It was pretty bad.

The Gunslinger Series by Stephen King - This was pretty good as well.

The Moon is a Harsh Mistress and Orphans of the Sky by Robert A. Heinlein

The Chronicles of Narnia and Out of the Silent Planet by C.S. Lewis

Tunnel in the Sky by Robert Heinlein - I really like Heinlein, he tells some great sci-fi stories.  This book is an easy read and kind of reminds me of a cross between Stargate and The Hunger Games.  Which reminds me...

The Hunger Games - I liked it.  And, I liked the second book.  By the third book in the series, it was getting pretty bad.  I wouldn't bother reading that one.

Last edited by BoltBait (2012-10-13 15:40:03)

BoltBait wrote:

I'm a big fan of sci-fi books and movies.

Some of my favorite books are:

The Illustrated Man by Ray Bradbury - His books read more like poetry than prose.  He has a wonderful way with words.  He doesn't bury the reader with techno jargon.  He just tells an interesting story that happens to be set in space.

The Foundation Series by Issac Asimov - (I've only read the first three book so far, Foundation, Foundation and Empire, and Second Foundation) These are increibly well done and well planned out.  The size of the story is huge.  It is interesting that the individual scenes are not important, only the overall arc of the story.

Battlefield Earth by L. Ron Hubbard - This HUGE book (over 1000 pages) flies by.  It is very interesting and full of action on every page.  Just don't watch the movie by the same name--It was awful.

I, Robot by Isaac Asimov - This is nothing like the movie. (I found the movie to be good but it doesn't really relate to the book much at all.) It is a book of loosely related sci-fi short stories. These are stories to make you think logically.

Ender's Game by Orson Scott Card - Great book.  A good followup book to this one is called Ender's Shadow.

The Hitchhikker's Guide to the Galaxy by Douglas Adams - Funny, funny book.  This is the first of a series and they are all really good and funny.  You can watch the BBC tv series of this which is good.  It follows the book very well.  Just ignore the movie of the same name.  It was pretty bad.

The Gunslinger Series by Stephen King - This was pretty good as well.

The Moon is a Harsh Mistress and Orphans of the Sky by Robert A. Heinlein

The Chronicles of Narnia and Out of the Silent Planet by C.S. Lewis

Tunnel in the Sky by Robert Heinlein - I really like Heinlein, he tells some great sci-fi stories.  This book is an easy read and kind of reminds me of a cross between Stargate and The Hunger Games.  Which reminds me...

The Hunger Games - I liked it.  And, I liked the second book.  By the third book in the series, it was getting pretty bad.  I wouldn't bother reading that one.

I'm pretty sure Chronicles of Narnia and the Gunslinger are fantasy
I'm not sure about the Gunslinger but CoN is definitely fantasy

Molybdenum wrote:

jukyter wrote:

BoltBait wrote:

The Foundation Series by Issac Asimov - (I've only read the first three book so far, Foundation, Foundation and Empire, and Second Foundation) These are increibly well done and well planned out.  The size of the story is huge.  It is interesting that the individual scenes are not important, only the overall arc of the story.

I, Robot by Isaac Asimov - This is nothing like the movie. (I found the movie to be good but it doesn't really relate to the book much at all.) It is a book of loosely related sci-fi short stories. These are stories to make you think logically.

The Hitchhikker's Guide to the Galaxy by Douglas Adams - Funny, funny book.  This is the first of a series and they are all really good and funny.  You can watch the BBC tv series of this which is good.  It follows the book very well.  Just ignore the movie of the same name.  It was pretty bad.

I'm pretty sure Chronicles of Narnia and the Gunslinger are fantasy
I'm not sure about the Gunslinger but CoN is definitely fantasy

I really should read more Asimov.

And although my username, avatar, and encoder-decoder is based on H2G2, I haven't read it.

You haven't read Hitchhiker's?? :0

Molybdenum wrote:

777w wrote:

Molybdenum wrote:

2001: A Space Odyssey.

OPEN THE POD BAY DOORS HAL.

i have come to the conclusion that a number was divided by zero in that movie
a number divided by zero would end up with an answer that increases the value of zero
an answer so high its
beyond the infinite

The alien race that created the monolith divided by zero to create the stargate, which is how it works.

Actually, that's just how you think it works.
You can't really accept anything as the actual only explanation, it's all intentionally open to interpretation.

soupoftomato wrote:

Molybdenum wrote:

777w wrote:

i have come to the conclusion that a number was divided by zero in that movie
a number divided by zero would end up with an answer that increases the value of zero
an answer so high its
beyond the infinite

The alien race that created the monolith divided by zero to create the stargate, which is how it works.

Actually, that's just how you think it works.
You can't really accept anything as the actual only explanation, it's all intentionally open to interpretation.

It was a joke... Ex. "If you divide by zero, the universe explodes!" only with a more 2001 theme.

ImagineIt wrote:

soupoftomato wrote:

ImagineIt wrote:

The Hunger Games is the best.

I disagree.
There are waaaay too many sentence fragments. It's like she needed to create a false sense of suspense so she fragmented. Everything. 
At one point it said something along the lines of "I checked the contents of the bag. Apples, bananas, pears." when it's JUST AS SUSPENSEFUL to say "The bag had apples, bananas, and pears." I did hate that.

Also, the plot was hyper-predictable. I would have been MORE surprised if Peeta didn't live, even though the rules of the game technically dictate I should have expected him to. I liked that.

And Peeta has like zero redeeming qualities. HE GAVE ME THE LOAF OF BREAD I AM INDEBTED TO BE HIS LOVER is basically the only justification for the relationship. No, that said that she saw him as a nice boy, not her soulmate.Otherwise, the guy sits there on his butt injured as a liability while Katniss has to hunt and fight for them both. It would have been easier for her to let him die, but it's "in the interest of love" or something. She would have let him die if the rules didn't say that she could let him live.Also, it was the best way to entertain the audience and get sponsors so she could live (though this isn't really shown in the film, just the book).In the interest of an entirely unrealistic love, to be specific. Katniss provides everything while Peeta does nothing. Even though they were obviously attracted by personality, Katniss would likely get fed up at some point. (And did Peeta have personality beyond "loverboy" and Katniss beyond "bravery/loyalty"?)