[Abyss]

 Maybe Apt, on 27 January 2014 - 03:03 PM, said:

 Baco Xtath, on 27 January 2014 - 01:47 PM, said:

 Maybe Apt, on 27 January 2014 - 01:28 PM, said:

Based on the recent mentions of the Ex-series I have begun reading "Ex-Heroes".

Considering how silly the combination sounds "Super heroes and Zombies", so far the book has been surprisingly interesting and a fast read.

I am not sure I understand why the superheroes don't simply wipe out all the zombies in LA but I am sure it will be explained or maybe it is a "ignore the logic" type of thing.

I use the "ignore the logic" a lot in books like these but I think the reasoning was pure numbers; if you killed one zombie every second and there are roughly six million zombies in LA then that equals roughly 70 days. And that's one per second. But, again, Zap could fry the lot of them so........ignore.

Exactly. Put a generator in a square that makes thump noises, maybe a human volunteer that smells juicy, wait 24 hours as the zombies in the area crowd in. Zap burns them into ash, move to the next area. And that's just assuming Zap hasn't learned to recognize them and could just empty all the streets in a day.

Also I am so annoyed that the super strong guy is using his hands to beat up the zombies. Give him a couple of iron bars instead and he could go through a pack of zombies like a child chopping down weeds with a stick.

Actually the series addresses most of these points... i'll restrict responses to what we know from the first book tho'...

There are a few million exs in LA. Only St George and Zzzap are 'invulnerable' to them.

Zap can't actually see exs, because they have no body heat. He just navigates where he sees other people reacting and fries them with beams. If he touches them it has a negative effect on him. The beams work fine, but he needs to be close to aim, and he doesn't have an infinite amount of energy, certainly not enough to track and fry a million of them.

That leaves St George, and if he did nothing but kill an ex a minute for the next ten years that would only cover downtown LA and ignoring the ones that might walk in from outside and the logistics of finding them, plus when enough of them pile on it slows him down even if they can't hurt him. He's not Superman.

Also, St George uses all kinds of crap to crush exs. Mostly cars.

[Baco Xtath]

 QuickTidal, on 27 January 2014 - 03:52 PM, said:

I will NEVER understand the desire to debunk bits of a story (that is set in stone on the pages of the book) like that. Removing any fun it has. Calling things "unbelievable"...if it's unbelievable, why are you reading it to begin with?

It reminds me of that recent ep of BIG BANG THEORY where Amy points out to Sheldon that RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK doesn't require Indiana Jones for anything, and how superfluous he is the actual events.

Don't ruin my movie with logic. I'm not watching Indy for logic, Amy you jerkface.

I have no problem with hobbits, dragons, orcs, dwarves.........etc. but them battling while a mining platform falls, Legalos - well, everything he does in the movies,.......all that blockbuster bullshit - I can't deal with. I can also believe that a man has his skeleton replaced with admantium complete with retractable claws but I cannot believe that he can leap from a wrecking motorcycle and take down a helicopter.

[Abyss]

 Baco Xtath, on 27 January 2014 - 05:58 PM, said:

... I can also believe that a man has his skeleton replaced with admantium complete with retractable claws but I cannot believe that he can leap from a wrecking motorcycle and take down a helicopter.

Cynic.

[Aptorian]

Just reached the place in Ex-Heroes where the Magician/Cairax is telling his story. Oh boy, I quite like that guy and the nonchalance when he changes into a giant fish monster.

[Abyss]

 Maybe Apt, on 27 January 2014 - 07:33 PM, said:

Just reached the place in Ex-Heroes where the Magician/Cairax is telling his story. Oh boy, I quite like that guy and the nonchalance when he changes into a giant fish monster.

All i'm going to say is you're going to love what's coming.

[Kaamos]

With all the controversy waltzing around Abercrombie, barging in with a positive opinion, at least so far. The Blade Itself had me howling with laughter; I loved the snarky humor and the excellent audio book reader who enlivened the characters. The story elements were quite lightweight, though, something one could follow without significant efforts while drawing. Started the next volume, no matter what I'm insisting on about sleazy Scottish Vampire smut in that other thread.


PS. How much Norse mythology influence does this series sport? Beginning from a character named Fenris the Feared?

This post has been edited by Kaamos: 28 January 2014 - 01:10 PM

[Aptorian]

Half way into Ex-patriots. I love these books. They are extremely simple in the way the plot is designed and relies on the strength of the characters and tropes to create a great build up. This really is like reading a good comic book.

[QuickTidal]

 Baco Xtath, on 27 January 2014 - 05:58 PM, said:

 QuickTidal, on 27 January 2014 - 03:52 PM, said:

I will NEVER understand the desire to debunk bits of a story (that is set in stone on the pages of the book) like that. Removing any fun it has. Calling things "unbelievable"...if it's unbelievable, why are you reading it to begin with?

It reminds me of that recent ep of BIG BANG THEORY where Amy points out to Sheldon that RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK doesn't require Indiana Jones for anything, and how superfluous he is the actual events.

Don't ruin my movie with logic. I'm not watching Indy for logic, Amy you jerkface.

I have no problem with hobbits, dragons, orcs, dwarves.........etc. but them battling while a mining platform falls, Legalos - well, everything he does in the movies,.......all that blockbuster bullshit - I can't deal with. I can also believe that a man has his skeleton replaced with admantium complete with retractable claws but I cannot believe that he can leap from a wrecking motorcycle and take down a helicopter.

See, I once took Roger Ebert down about something similar. And he kind of capitulated as well. His review of THE MUMMY RETURNS contained an entire paragraph about how it was totally unbelievable that Rick and Co. actually outrun the rising of the sun to get into the temple before it's risen...and he even stated proper facts about how fast the sun rises in relation to speed of individuals...and so I sent an email (which I believe he chose to be published in the talkback section where he defends or capitulates to comments on his reviews) in which I stated fairly simply that he was disparaging a fantastical and fictional element of a film (Rick outrunning the rising sun) in which an ancient mummy has been brought back to life for the SECOND time by a spell in a book. Those talkback things are long gone, but I THINK he kind of backed down a bit from focusing on that in his review. To me the Mummy movies are already REALLY unbelievable, so why does that one fact bug him so?

Basically, for me anyways, unless something goes against all common logic/sense...in a fictional arena, I'll believe pretty much anything. If they tell me that Wolverine jumped from an exploding car and took out a helicopter...I'm buying that. Why? Cause why not? How does it serve me not to? I can either enjoy the movie for what it is, fictional popcorn nonsensery...or I can dislike it for one or two features that stretch real life belief a bit. That's the camp I'm in anyways.

[Serenity]

I finished Cornwell's Sword Song (loved it), then read Gemmell's Morningstar (loved it) and am now reading Steven Saylor's The House of the Vestals. Once that's done I'm considering starting my third read through of Malazan. But then I kind of have a hankering to read some SF, too. And I currently have about 100 books on my TRP. Decisions, decisions.

[stone monkey]

 QuickTidal, on 28 January 2014 - 02:17 PM, said:

 Baco Xtath, on 27 January 2014 - 05:58 PM, said:

 QuickTidal, on 27 January 2014 - 03:52 PM, said:

I will NEVER understand the desire to debunk bits of a story (that is set in stone on the pages of the book) like that. Removing any fun it has. Calling things "unbelievable"...if it's unbelievable, why are you reading it to begin with?

It reminds me of that recent ep of BIG BANG THEORY where Amy points out to Sheldon that RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK doesn't require Indiana Jones for anything, and how superfluous he is the actual events.

Don't ruin my movie with logic. I'm not watching Indy for logic, Amy you jerkface.

I have no problem with hobbits, dragons, orcs, dwarves.........etc. but them battling while a mining platform falls, Legalos - well, everything he does in the movies,.......all that blockbuster bullshit - I can't deal with. I can also believe that a man has his skeleton replaced with admantium complete with retractable claws but I cannot believe that he can leap from a wrecking motorcycle and take down a helicopter.

See, I once took Roger Ebert down about something similar. And he kind of capitulated as well. His review of THE MUMMY RETURNS contained an entire paragraph about how it was totally unbelievable that Rick and Co. actually outrun the rising of the sun to get into the temple before it's risen...and he even stated proper facts about how fast the sun rises in relation to speed of individuals...and so I sent an email (which I believe he chose to be published in the talkback section where he defends or capitulates to comments on his reviews) in which I stated fairly simply that he was disparaging a fantastical and fictional element of a film (Rick outrunning the rising sun) in which an ancient mummy has been brought back to life for the SECOND time by a spell in a book. Those talkback things are long gone, but I THINK he kind of backed down a bit from focusing on that in his review. To me the Mummy movies are already REALLY unbelievable, so why does that one fact bug him so?

Basically, for me anyways, unless something goes against all common logic/sense...in a fictional arena, I'll believe pretty much anything. If they tell me that Wolverine jumped from an exploding car and took out a helicopter...I'm buying that. Why? Cause why not? How does it serve me not to? I can either enjoy the movie for what it is, fictional popcorn nonsensery...or I can dislike it for one or two features that stretch real life belief a bit. That's the camp I'm in anyways.

There's a tension between those tropes you might call (if, say, you were TVTropes [and theres no way on earth I'm going to link]) "Like Reality Unless Otherwise Noted", "Acceptable Breaks From Reality" and "Willing Suspension Of Disbelief". I'd say everyone has different thresholds for each of these things. And how one or more of them rubs you entirely the wrong way (or indeed, whether you even notice a problem) is a pretty personal thing.

[QuickTidal]

 stone monkey, on 28 January 2014 - 08:53 PM, said:

There's a tension between those tropes you might call (if, say, you were TVTropes [and theres no way on earth I'm going to link]) "Like Reality Unless Otherwise Noted", "Acceptable Breaks From Reality" and "Willing Suspension Of Disbelief". I'd say everyone has different thresholds for each of these things. And how one or more of them rubs you entirely the wrong way (or indeed, whether you even notice a problem) is a pretty personal thing.

Indeed. That's likely 100% right.

[JPK]

Empire in Black and Gold.

[Aptorian]

 Briar King, on 29 January 2014 - 07:16 AM, said:

 The Incredible Kitsu, on 29 January 2014 - 07:14 AM, said:

Empire in Black and Gold.

EN-FUCKING-JOY IT!!

... because the series only gets worse and worse.

[Morgoth]

 Maybe Apt, on 29 January 2014 - 07:37 AM, said:

 Briar King, on 29 January 2014 - 07:16 AM, said:

 The Incredible Kitsu, on 29 January 2014 - 07:14 AM, said:

Empire in Black and Gold.

EN-FUCKING-JOY IT!!

... because the series only gets worse and worse.

I thought the first two were bad, so that's hardly promising.

[QuickTidal]

You gotta get through the first 4 book arc...all of which SLOWLY get better, but not mind-blowing (book 3 was my fave of those)....but I hear tell that the 5th book takes things in a new direction.

[End of Disc One]

 Maybe Apt, on 29 January 2014 - 07:37 AM, said:

 Briar King, on 29 January 2014 - 07:16 AM, said:

 The Incredible Kitsu, on 29 January 2014 - 07:14 AM, said:

Empire in Black and Gold.

EN-FUCKING-JOY IT!!

... because the series only gets worse and worse.

I've never seen ANYONE say this

Personally I'd say 2>>3>1 so far but just about everyone on the internet says it gets better from 4 onwards.

This post has been edited by Sussex Months: 29 January 2014 - 01:10 PM

[QuickTidal]

Update on LOST TO THE WEST by Lars Brownworth.

About 150 pages in and I continue to be so 100% enthralled with this one that I'm tempted to pick up a more complex book about the Byzantine Empire.

The only issue so far is the incorrect notion that the "House of Islam" and "House of War" (divisions) existed immediately upon Islam's inception in the 7th century...and during Muhammad's time...when those terms only came to light the first time a century after his death. The book kind of rushes through the initial sweep of Islam from Mecca to Medina and throughout ancient Persia, and implies (incorrectly) in that vaguery that the Islam that initially threatened the Eastern Roman Empire did so at the end of a Holy sword, and I don't THINK that was the case (though I could be totally wrong) at first. Other than that, a splendid introduction to Byzantium.

Oh and the section about Justinian and Theodora, and Belisarius...Dude, GGK's the Sarantine Mosaic makes SO much more sense now. He cribbed that whole thing right down to the Hagia Sophia being built and the whole domed ceiling mosaic thing! LOL (not in a bad way)

This post has been edited by QuickTidal: 29 January 2014 - 01:57 PM

[Aptorian]

 Sussex Months, on 29 January 2014 - 01:09 PM, said:

 Maybe Apt, on 29 January 2014 - 07:37 AM, said:

 Briar King, on 29 January 2014 - 07:16 AM, said:

 The Incredible Kitsu, on 29 January 2014 - 07:14 AM, said:

Empire in Black and Gold.

EN-FUCKING-JOY IT!!

... because the series only gets worse and worse.

I've never seen ANYONE say this

Personally I'd say 2>>3>1 so far but just about everyone on the internet says it gets better from 4 onwards.

We’ve had discussions on the series before. Supposedly the series picks up at some point and becomes good. However I’ve read up to book 3 and the books were bad. I had no intention on continuing at that point.

The world building is interesting and I love the Nazi Bees, but the characters were awful, the stories boring and each book suffered from the dreaded endless travelling from point A to B syndrome that some fantasy books are afflicted with. I blame The Lord of the Rings.

I was especially annoyed with the incompetent master spy and the awful female beetle.

[Salt-Man Z]

Just finished The One Tree last night. Man, I don't know why I wasn't absolutely in love with these books the first time through. I mean, I really liked them, but now they're just blowing me away. Halfway through the Complete Chronicles now...

[worry]

 Salt-Man Z, on 29 January 2014 - 04:39 PM, said:

Just finished The One Tree last night. Man, I don't know why I wasn't absolutely in love with these books the first time through. I mean, I really liked them, but now they're just blowing me away. Halfway through the Complete Chronicles now...

If we've already seen every episode of One Tree Hill, should we bother with these books or are they all spoiled by the show?