Comments on: The Thin Red Line (Of Ink)

By: TERRIBLEMINDS: Chuck Wendig, Freelance Penmonkey » Blog Archive » Please To Meet Death, The Thief Of Conflict

Tue, 15 Dec 2009 05:06:05 +0000

[...] I think as a creative person (read: self-important jack-ape) it’s important to know how to think critically about other creative properties, and so I turn my scrutiny toward just about anything that passes [...]

By: Chuck

Chuck — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 10:29:59 +0000

Heather:

Unfortunately, given that my interests (professionally) wander over into film and TV territory, I am unable to easily bliss out.

But I want to.

– c.

By: heather

heather — Sun, 27 Sep 2009 17:13:50 +0000

I have found a weird balance in the tendency to be critical and the desire to be able to simply bliss out. This is, I’m critical with respect to the written word, but I’m blissfully blind when it comes to most TV & movie content. I have done my best to not cure myself of this set of circumstances, as I think it gives me a nice middle ground to enjoy.

By: TERRIBLEMINDS: Chuck Wendig, Freelance Penmonkey » Blog Archive » The Democrats Need Better Cheerleaders

Sun, 27 Sep 2009 12:50:10 +0000

[...] not suggesting that we shouldn’t be critical. But I am suggesting that you go back and read my earlier thoughts about how to be critical. Don’t just pan for lead. Don’t just get your hate on. [...]

By: Chuck

Chuck — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 12:17:32 +0000

John:

I actually think it’s more “poorly done novel with shades of a speculative essay,” and an essay that was already written by Leigh and Baigent, but, yeah.

I didn’t see the movie, so I can’t comment.

I don’t hate Dan Brown. I don’t have strong feelings toward him either way, as I’m not sure he’s really worth strong feelings.

He might not be special, but his books must contain some spark, some element of note. Unless 80 million people responded to some magical combination of herd hysteria and marketing voodoo?

– c.

By: JNewman

JNewman — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 18:49:12 +0000

I thought The Da Vinci Code was a poorly done speculative essay disguised as a novel. The background is what is interesting about the book and (by and large) he didn’t have anything to do with that. His characters were 2D cutouts that danced about in a pretty predictable pattern. The story was interesting, the way he wrote it was not. That probably explains why I liked the movie better than the book (not saying either are amazing, btw). I don’t hate him, I just don’t think he’s anything special.

By: Chuck

Chuck — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 15:03:46 +0000

Wood:

Well, I’m glad we got one valid point out of the nonsense I spew.

– c.

By: David Hill

David Hill — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 14:52:31 +0000

Wood: So what you’re saying is we should launch a barrage of personal attacks at his editor? Brilliant.

By: Wood

Wood — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 14:48:38 +0000

I think the one point you make that’s truly valid here is that Brown’s gibberish got past the editor. Which makes him an institutional problem.

The rest… I’ll keep schtum.

By: Chuck

Chuck — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 14:42:13 +0000

Of course, speaking of things WE ALL LIKE, might I point everybody towards THE HILARIOUSLY ENDLESSLY HILARIOUS Chapter 9: The Grassy Knoll, over at Shadowstories?

http://www.thestoryverse.com/go/2009/09/23/9-the-grassy-knoll/

ahem

*ducks, runs*

– c.