Kevin's Watch

King a great author? I would prefer not to use the word "hack"...I reserve that word for the Bill O'Reillys of the world. Instead, I prefer to think of King as a middling artist who when driven to to do so, exceeds his normal range and serves up a "dinger" every few years. The DT series is outstanding, as is the Stand, Black House, Salem's Lot.

He does have some real clunkers though too.

Agreed that SRD is in a different league entirely.

A Gunslinger wrote:King a great author? I would prefer not to use the word "hack"...I reserve that word for the Bill O'Reillys of the world. Instead, I prefer to think of King as a middling artist who when driven to to do so, exceeds his normal range and serves up a "dinger" every few years. The DT series is outstanding, as is the Stand, Black House, Salem's Lot.

Well...I think King has referred to himself as a hack...And I'm not saying he's a terrible writer, but you've got to admit, he's recycled an awful lot of stories.

True hacks: O'Reilly, Michael Moore, Rush Limbaugh, Al Franken, Tucker Carlson, Anne Coulter, James Carvelle, etc.

Indeed. Jon Stewart got it right. On crossfire he accused both side of (actual use of hte word) "Hackery", and called Tucker Carlson a dick. Stewart is no hack.... and is actually a good source for understanding hte hyposcirisy of both sides.

Plus he's smart enough to vote for Kerry.

On Saturday, I wrote out a lengthy review of "Runes", and just as I was about to post it here, my computer crashed. This rather deterred me from writing another one, but I think I will have another go - but this time I will submit it to Amazon. So far, there are about 4 interesting positive reviews there, and one solid negative review, so all of the Kevins Watch people need to do their part to liven the review section up, Id say.

Plus he's smart enough to vote for Kerry.

*sigh*

A Gunslinger wrote: Plus he's smart enough to vote for Kerry.

Am I the only person who sees something wrong with insulting the intelligence of those who disagree with you politically?

I think that would be a terrible thing. But I didn't see it done here?

saying that someone is "smart enough to vote for Kerry" necessarily implies that if you don't vote for Kerry, you're simply not "smart enough"

That's all I'm going to say on the subject in this thread. The rest is going to the Think-Tank.

UrLord wrote:saying that someone is "smart enough to vote for Kerry" necessarily implies that if you don't vote for Kerry, you're simply not "smart enough"

That's all I'm going to say on the subject in this thread. The rest is going to the Think-Tank.

Don't be so dang overly sensitive! I apologize for upsetting anyone who took that the worng way; I was only ribbing. The fact of the matter is that Stewart has more integrity than any of the so-called talking heads (politcal hacks), and had the guts to call them on it from both sides! I was very happy to find out that a fellow of such unbridled integrity was voting for the man I am voting (and hope that you all vote) for!

I sorry for offending anyone who took offense.

Hey, didja hear the one about Cheney, his daughter and the clam bake....?

I appologize for taking your statement the wrong way; lately I've been so surrounded by political hatred in the form of vandalism and graffitti that I tend to take to take these statements more seriously than I should.

UrLord wrote:I appologize for taking your statement the wrong way; lately I've been so surrounded by political hatred in the form of vandalism and graffitti that I tend to take to take these statements more seriously than I should.

Don't worry about it. Like I say, emotions run high at times like these... I am at fault as well.

Ur-Lord..I did make a topic of this in the think tank if you want to weigh in!

Take care buddy!

A Gunslinger wrote: ......

Hey, didja hear the one about Cheney, his daughter and the clam bake....?

Now that's just NASTY!!

I was gleefully pushing the envelope there...hey if we can't laugh at others...who can we laugh at?

Nice Avatar.

Runes gets * 1/2 stars out of **** for me.

Boring, pointless, contrived, one-dimensional characters, little suspense, very little that is new, time mechanics aren't quite logical and are confusing, Stave's conversion to Linden's "side" was laughable and the concept seemed childish, reasons for many characters choices didn't seem convincing, Linden is a moron, writing is inconsistent, no memorable scenes except the very last, unconvincing emotional writing, first in series set up book writing, obvious and blatant "first you have to answer my question" exposition at every turn, did I mention the purely one-dimensional characters?

Only thing I liked about it was the time idea and the very, very last scene, otherwise, I wish I had my ten hours back, and I wish SRD had never written it.

So, if it's as bad as all that, I'm assuming you won't bother wasting your time reading the other three books?

It's a set up book, each of the next will probably be better than the previous, while the last will probably not be as good as the middle two.

Now that I've bothered to read Runes, I will read the rest.