Forum - View topicNEWS: Gedo Senki #1 Yet Again
Goto page Previous 1, 2 Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
Author | Message | ||
---|---|---|---|
Kickerman28
![]() Posts: 6 |
|
||
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anne_Mccaffrey
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ursula_Le_Guin http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earthsea According to these articles, Anne McCaffrey is 3 years older than Ursula Le Guin. It also seems that their representative works, Weyr Search and A Wizard of Earthsea, were both first published in 1968. Ms. Le Guin's Reactions to the film can be found here: http://www.ursulakleguin.com/GedoSenkiResponse.html |
|||
|
|||
uberfrosch
Posts: 48 |
|
||
Actually, both A Wizard of Earthsea and Dragonflight were first published in 1968, and some of the material in McCaffrey's book was out in 1967, though at that time LeGuin did have much more work published if that's what you mean. But I really can't take Ichido Reichan seriously if he thinks J.K. Rowling = Ursula K. LeGuin = Anne McCaffrey in terms of style or content. ![]() |
|||
|
|||
Cloe
Moderator
![]() Posts: 2728 Location: Los Angeles, CA |
|
||
Not mine. Just because a movie's making a lot of money doesn't mean it's good. There have been a TON of #1 box office blockbusters that were some of the most poorly made films I've ever seen. I'm standing by my previous statements about Gedo Senki; until I see it for myself, I'm going to expect mediocrity. |
|||
|
|||
ichido reichan
|
|
||
Maybe it was H.K Rowling around these books, my mistake, but still the earthsea books are cheap kiddie fantasy to me.
Go Goro!!! |
|||
Samurai-with-glasses
![]() Posts: 628 |
|
||
Earthsea was a product of the Sixties. It came out on an especially bloody year, no less. I think there's more depth to it than just "kiddie fantasy," especially considering the noise Ms. LeGuin made each time her characters aren't sufficiently dark in each adaptation; if you know American history, that is, you'll understand. That and the tone of the series is very different from a usual fantasy, especially if you try to read the later ones. The first was the most accessible anyway; if one actually read the entire series it'll be very clear on why a faithful movie adaptation of the series is not a good idea. It's very slow and deliberate, in a way confusing, with much walking and sailing and gnashing of teeth and all that. |
|||
|
|||
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
||
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group