1: If you’re going to try so hard to sound intelligent, please use your punctuation marks correctly.

2: Don’t compare two completely different things. You act like a children’s book series and a famed piece of master literature are the same basic things. And about screen plays… seriously? Screen play writers are the ass holes of the writing community. Write a book. Once you’ve finished a 700+ thousand word series, and once you’ve edited it fully with all new and original ideas, please feel free to bash any real author you wish.

I love what Ghandi’s son said when confronted with what critics were saying about his father:

He said that how Ghandi lived his life was sufficient to stand by itself without needing anyone to defend it — and that his legacy was robust enough to stand up to scrutiny despite what criticisms were launched. I found that to be a pretty good example of someone who did not care about what people thought.

It makes sense to me to pick hero’s that don’t need anyone to defend them.

FT

As for caring what you think I’m not sure where you extrapolated that from. I believe what I did was engage you in some dialog. So you could say I was interested in dialog. I did that because emotional (your word passionate) people are almost guaranteed to respond. You did respond and in a rather predictable fashion I might add.

If the fact that I enjoy dialog seems like I care what you think I guess you are entitled to that interpretation. In a way I suppose showing even a mild interest in what someone else thinks is somewhat similar to caring what they think — but it really doesn’t matter to me how, or even if, you respond. Your response, whatever you say, moves the dialog forward.

As for your opinions I don’t see where I have done anything other than discuss them with you. I didn’t say I either liked or didn’t like them. To me they are something posted here to observe and dialog with if I get the urge.

I’m not sure I’ll ever get your idea of passion and emotion — what you call “straight” — since I tend to direct my passion towards producing results and tend to conduct my discussions in a more relaxed way.

I made the observation that your somewhat dramatic approach to telling people who don’t like the things you do — seemed as though you needed more fresh air and sunshine. I was clearly wrong about that in the literal sense but in a metaphorical sense I wonder if it doesn’t apply.

Nonetheless my observations are not based on any significant sampling of your behavior — only on this brief discussion.

Another question if I may? How could you be soooo tired of people saying “crap” about what you like — if you didn’t care what they thought? When we say “she doesn’t have a care in the world” we don’t normally use that expression to refer to someone who is sooooo tired because of anything that people are saying.

FT

Oh and what baffles me is why you care what I think!

I was personally unaware that someones “right” to complain about a movie was governed either by their credentials or by your opinion about what they say. Probably they were not aware of that either.

What baffles me is how personally you seem to take the idea of someone else voicing their opinion. Does it matter at all (on an emotional level) if you don’t agree with them? Do they need a telling off from you because they don’t like something?

Seems like you could use a little fresh air and sunshine. Fantasy does not appear to be helping you.

Sincerely,
Freak for Fantasy

JK Rowling is a good writer that writes good books. And that’s all. But when it comes to the movies I think the main problem is the first one: Bad acting.

Lord of the Rings was also adapted from a book, a very good one too. Though, it works much better than Harry Potter because the actors know how to express the emotions that, not only the original writter of the book (Tolkin) but also the adapted script, made clear they wanted to be in the movie as a part of it.

That’s probably the reason why when we watch Lord of the Rings we enter in the movie and it’s like we’re there with all the characters.
While watching Harry Potter we don’t feel as conected with the characters nor with the story.

According to IMDB the car was clearly a hardnosed old pro of a method car/actor…

“The Mercedes-Benz S-Class sedan that is blown up in this film was first used in filming of The Devil Wears Prada (2006). For the earlier film it was cut in two for use in process shots featuring Meryl Streep and Anne Hathaway. It was then welded back together and repainted in order to be blown up in ‘Michael Clayton’. The car’s preparation was featured on an episode of “Shooting Cars” (2006).”

Last note different movie. I went to see
Michael Clayton last night with George Clooney
and observed the writer violated some basic
principals. However, the acting was good but
anyone could see where the writing messed up.
IE, George Clooney is being chased by murderers
who have planted a bomb in his car. –He just
happens to stop the car by a field, gets out of the car, sees several horses and gazes at them, and then the car blows up. HELLO?????
(He just happen to get out of the car to gaze at the horses and the car blows up?) The writer
quit doing his job at that moment.
Very dissappointing because I went to learn
from the film. I really make a lousy movie critic but I had to mention this. That was one
of about seven other writing violations.

Mickey Josephson

As for the comments about them being children’s works I have never thought that children should be regarded as less deserving of exposure to great art. To me the Potter thing is a fad that will grow increasingly tasteless with time as all fads (such as pet rocks and mood rings) eventually do.

Fiji