Time. Travel. Ending. Sure, it's used to great dramatic effect (the whole thing seems to be ending poorly, then everything turns around), but COME ON! Couldn't they have just time-traveled to fight wee child Voldemort and ended the series right there?
Don't get me wrong, I love those books, but that one plot point bugs the crap out of me.
Not to mention that you can't live through something, then go back in time and become the reason you lived through it. You never would've gotten to the later point to originate the loop.
Unless you believe in retrocausality, which is basically just a theory saying that cause and effect can be reversed in order.
As for the worst thing a book or series of books did. I would have to say that for me it was "Hannibal Rising". That book turned a perfectly likable cannibal into a character I just couldn't identify with or like. Not that I really identify with cannibalism, but I liked the character prior to that book.
Well, there are 5 books in the Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy "Trilogy"
1) The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy
2) The Restaurant at the End of the Universe
3) Life, the Universe and Everything
4) So long, and thanks for all the Fish
5) Mostly Harmless
"Normal trilogys have three parts, but this one is more substantial"
Although Douglas Adams is forgiven, because he writes awesome books.
Its either going to be brilliant like LOTR or incredibily naf like King Kong, i thought that film was a let down. I can't imagine it as a film :S, even as a book its pretty odd.
Oh and you're prediction of certain sparkly characters being mentioned was indubitably correct haha
I Am Legend became three really bad movies... (The Last Man on Earth 1964, The Omega Man 1971 and I Am Legend 2007, I'm not sure which one is the worst)
I was entertained by 2007's. It wasn't the greatest, but it was good, though it raped the source, but hell, we expect that nowadays with book/movie adaptations.
You could say that about the Earth... and... well, the chances against *cough* re-appearing are two to the power of two-hundred-and-sixty-seven-thousand, seven-hundred-and-nine to one against.
Well, there are 5 books in the Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy "Trilogy"
1) The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy
2) The Restaurant at the End of the Universe
3) Life, the Universe and Everything
4) So long, and thanks for all the Fish
5) Mostly Harmless
Well, there are 5 books in the Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy "Trilogy"
1) The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy
2) The Restaurant at the End of the Universe
3) Life, the Universe and Everything
4) So long, and thanks for all the Fish
5) Mostly Harmless
In the last book of The Dreamers series by David Eddings, they go back in time and change the past so nothing in the four books happens. The worst part is that they could have done that from the very beginning making the story completely pointless.
Alright, sure. I'll play. The stupidest thing an author has ever done with their story is write it and not make it good. When you think about it, that is pretty much the worst thing you could possibly do in a book. Because when it's just entirely bad bad bad, there is no point in even reading it.
Ya, it was good at the beginning and end (but not the very end, goddamn epilogue...), but the middle was horrible. Plus the book added about 50 different plotholes, such as why the wand ownership thing wasn't described sooner.
What do you think the stupidest thing that an author has done in their book or story?
Spoiler alert: Mine would be when James Patterson made his 4th book in the Maximum Ride series. For those of you who don't know, the series was about a group of kids who were genetic experiments from a research facility. They escaped and worked to bring down the facility that created them. The 3rd book ended the series and tied up just about all the loose ends.
And then...
There was a 4th book. Not only did it untie some of the loose ends, it completely went offtopic and was nothing like the other books. There was a main antagonist, but they weren't shown that often. For the most part, the characters ran around and learned about global warming. The main antagonist? Well, the climax took place in a secure building where a hurricane was hitting. However, the hurricane was stronger than normal due to global warming, and it broke through the building and killed the main antagonist. To sum it up, they took a good series and made it into a story where they just preached about the horrors of global warming.
In your defence you only gave spoilers for what was arguably the worst book in the series.
I think this is a good case for a trope I call "Sequel? What sequel?" where if a book, film or game is absolutely amazing but followed by a bad sequel then I will quite simply ignore it and consider it non-canon.
See as far as I am concerned there was no official sequels to The Matrix, same with Metal Gear Solid, when Solid Snake rode off into the Alaskan sunrise with Meryl (or Otacon if your were a pussy) then that is where the saga ended. And you can fit Metal Gear Solid 3 into that because not only was it good but it was a prequel too.
MGS4 and especially MGS2 just did not exists as far as I am concerned, they were just so bad.
If anyone was crazy enough to let me make a Metal Gear Solid game I'd make one from the "alternate time-line" or "Bad ending" where if you submitted to torture and Ocelot killed Meryl (in MGS4 it is clear it followed the "good" ending). Then you would have a personal story of Snake vs Ocelot, with none of this bullshit about *SPOILERS* Ocelot thinking he is Liquid Snake *SPOILERS-OVER* but rather a proper personal revenge story.
If you want my opinion on the worst thing a book series has ever done. Well how about Stephanie Meyer's writing Twilight at all - ZING!
[spoiler/]This pissed me off no end too. Personally, I think "So Long and Thanks for all the Fish" was the best Hitch Hickers Book in the series, partially because of the relationship between Fenchurch and Arther. To just end it like that so abruptly without ever even witnessing it was frankly either bad or lazy writing. [/spoiler]
I love the Hitch Hickers Guide trilogy, but the last book certainly wasn't the greatest, though it had it's moments.
I agree with a lot of people on the final Harry Potter books many plot holes. Even that which were explained were done so badly. But, I will say that Harry Potter is no stranger to loop holes before then.
[spoiler/] main plot twist in the Goblet of Fire was incredibley flawed. Why couldn't Barty Crouch have turned Harrys broom into a port key, or his socks, or his issue of Witch Whores Monthly. Why did he instead choose to lead him though some life threatening taskes that he had no garantee of winning in order to touch the cup. The fact that he almost didn't touch it shows just how flawed a plan it was. You could reason that Harry was under Dumbledore's protection, but there where many, MANY moments where Mad Eye and Harry where completely alone, where Harry was defenceless. It was a dumb end to the dumbest book in the series. [/spoiler]
I still love Potter, though as the books became bigger and more connected they started to calapse under a bunch of loop holes. I think JK wasn't a talented enough writer to pull it off singe free. The Prisoner of Azkbam was the best book in the series, and if they had remained more self contained storys I think they would have got even better.
Oh yeah, and making the fourth Harry Potter book longer than the freaking bible.
I mean Jesus Christ, Rowling, less is more.
She hit a home run with Azkaban which had me completely hooked then the next book she waffles on for twice the page number yet half as much actually happens. And by the fourth book the formula desperately needed a complete change and replacing the Quiddich with another tournament is not enough. It's my understanding even the 7th book starts with the same formula of 'Harry at his ridiculously evil uncle's house then leaves for magic of Hogwarts'.
Rowling had the potential to become the next Roald Dahl only she has tied herself into this ridiculously over-long and too predictable saga with punishing release schedule. I bet she can't wait to be free from it. I'm honestly surprised she did so rigidly stick to the same predictable formula for so many books, hell she made Legend of Zelda games seem as unpredictable as the ending of an M Night Shyamalan movie.
I switched from Harry Potter to the Darren Shan Saga around the mid 2000s, starting with Cirque Du Freak.
It has similar 'young boy on magical adventure' narrative only mixes it up a lot by not having a regular setting (no Hogwarts equivalent) and by having the boy be turned into a vampire and every book is fresh, un-formulaic and incredibly inventive. It's pretty bloody dark though only in comparison to the Potter series, that honestly failed to grow up with me.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
