Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 3 (click to see context) from:
* If John Rowlands was allowed to decide whether or not he would remember what happened, why weren't Bran and the Drews given the same choice?
to:
* If John Rowlands was allowed to decide whether or not he would remember what happened, why weren't Bran and the Drews given the same choice?choice?
* In second book, The Dark Is Rising, Merriman tells Will that he is "one of the Old Ones, the first to have been born for five hundred years, and the last". In the third book, Greenwitch, Captain Toms (who is implied to be an Old One) tells a story about his "distant ancestor", Roger Toms. "Two hundred years ago", this Roger Toms was part of the crew of the Lottery, which exchanged fire with a Revenue ship chasing them - a Revenue man was killed. When Roger Toms turned King's Evidence alleging that his shipmate Tom Potter fired the fatal shot, the folk of a nearby town where the Lottery originated set Roger Toms on a boat bound for the Channel Isles so that he wouldn't be able to testify. He was able to make his way back and give evidence at Tom Potter's trial, but "never dared set foot in Cornwall again". If Captain Toms is at least five hundred years old at the time of Will's birth, was he himself Roger Toms? Later in the book, the ghost of the Lottery comes to Tressiwick looking for Roger Toms, and takes the painter in his place; Captain Toms is unharmed.
* In second book, The Dark Is Rising, Merriman tells Will that he is "one of the Old Ones, the first to have been born for five hundred years, and the last". In the third book, Greenwitch, Captain Toms (who is implied to be an Old One) tells a story about his "distant ancestor", Roger Toms. "Two hundred years ago", this Roger Toms was part of the crew of the Lottery, which exchanged fire with a Revenue ship chasing them - a Revenue man was killed. When Roger Toms turned King's Evidence alleging that his shipmate Tom Potter fired the fatal shot, the folk of a nearby town where the Lottery originated set Roger Toms on a boat bound for the Channel Isles so that he wouldn't be able to testify. He was able to make his way back and give evidence at Tom Potter's trial, but "never dared set foot in Cornwall again". If Captain Toms is at least five hundred years old at the time of Will's birth, was he himself Roger Toms? Later in the book, the ghost of the Lottery comes to Tressiwick looking for Roger Toms, and takes the painter in his place; Captain Toms is unharmed.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 2 (click to see context) from:
** Hoo boy, where to start. First (and possibly worst), the screenwriter didn't even read the book, and the director admitted early on that he hated fantasy films. Why the production company let the project get handled by those two is a mystery for the ages, because it's almost like they made a conscious decision to make the worst movie they possibly could. Certainly it reads like a litany of things tailor-designed to piss off the fanbase. Even a few professional reviewers who had read the book said that since the filmmakers had changed so much, they might as well just call it something else. One said something like (I'm paraphrasing here) "It bears so little resemblance to the source material, they could have put a different name to it and not been sued for copyright infringement".
to:
** Hoo boy, where to start. First (and possibly worst), the screenwriter didn't even read the book, and the director admitted early on that he hated fantasy films. Why the production company let the project get handled by those two is a mystery for the ages, because it's almost like they made a conscious decision to make the worst movie they possibly could. Certainly it reads like a litany of things tailor-designed to piss off the fanbase. Even a few professional reviewers who had read the book said that since the filmmakers had changed so much, they might as well just call it something else. One said something like (I'm paraphrasing here) "It bears so little resemblance to the source material, they could have put a different name to it and not been sued for copyright infringement".infringement".
*If John Rowlands was allowed to decide whether or not he would remember what happened, why weren't Bran and the Drews given the same choice?
*If John Rowlands was allowed to decide whether or not he would remember what happened, why weren't Bran and the Drews given the same choice?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 1 (click to see context) from:
* So why did the FilmOfTheBook went wrong? Did the director have a bad record?
to:
* So why did the FilmOfTheBook went wrong? Did the director have a bad record?record?
** Hoo boy, where to start. First (and possibly worst), the screenwriter didn't even read the book, and the director admitted early on that he hated fantasy films. Why the production company let the project get handled by those two is a mystery for the ages, because it's almost like they made a conscious decision to make the worst movie they possibly could. Certainly it reads like a litany of things tailor-designed to piss off the fanbase. Even a few professional reviewers who had read the book said that since the filmmakers had changed so much, they might as well just call it something else. One said something like (I'm paraphrasing here) "It bears so little resemblance to the source material, they could have put a different name to it and not been sued for copyright infringement".
** Hoo boy, where to start. First (and possibly worst), the screenwriter didn't even read the book, and the director admitted early on that he hated fantasy films. Why the production company let the project get handled by those two is a mystery for the ages, because it's almost like they made a conscious decision to make the worst movie they possibly could. Certainly it reads like a litany of things tailor-designed to piss off the fanbase. Even a few professional reviewers who had read the book said that since the filmmakers had changed so much, they might as well just call it something else. One said something like (I'm paraphrasing here) "It bears so little resemblance to the source material, they could have put a different name to it and not been sued for copyright infringement".
