# Things You're Not Supposed to Say ....



## Geoffrey (Jun 20, 2009)

I'm re-reading *The Lord of the Rings* and just finished _The Two Towers_ last night. Now, like any good fantasy buff, I LOVES me some Tolkien - but the story of Frodo, Sam and Gollum's journey into Mordor is my least favorite part of the trilogy. Its slow and tedious after the fall of Isengard ... I was so happy to get back to the Rohan and journey to Gondor for the epic battle ...

Am I allowed to say that out loud?

So, now that I blasphemed, tell me something you think about a book that's just not part of the conventional opinion....


----------



## Mike D. aka jmiked (Oct 28, 2008)

Sure, you're allowed to say that. With few exceptions in the time I've been around here, the members of this forum are grown-ups and realize that other people have opinions different from ours, but still perfectly valid.

Of course, now I get to say that I found the entire trilogy slow and tedious.   

Mike
who is not much of a fantasy reader


----------



## xandy3 (Jun 13, 2010)

I loved the trilogy! I'm a huge fan, but the part I found dull was the whole chapter in _the Fellowship of the Ring_ that centered around Tom Bombadill. It's the only reason, really, that FOTR is my least favorite book in the series.

Now I respect Tolkien, as well as his reasons for including that particular odd character (for whom the ring had no affect on, whatsoever). But reading about them falling asleep at his house...made me fall asleep.



Geoffrey said:


> but the story of Frodo, Sam and Gollum's journey into Mordor is my least favorite part of the trilogy.


That part of the books didn't bother me at all.
Sean Austin's over-acting in the film's scenes however...


----------



## David &#039;Half-Orc&#039; Dalglish (Feb 1, 2010)

When I was re-reading the series...I skipped that part completely. I wanted more Gondor and Rohan. Just jumped right on into The Return of the King. So no, you're not alone.

I did, however, thoroughly enjoy all the 'boring' scenes in Fellowship of the Ring. Not sure why.

David Dalglish


----------



## Daniel Arenson (Apr 11, 2010)

Really?  I loved that long, arduous journey.  It made the pain and suffering of Middle Earth real to me.  The only part in LOTRs I found boring is the Council of Elrond, which just goes on and on and on and on and on and on.....


----------



## Daniel Arenson (Apr 11, 2010)

xandy3 said:


> I loved the trilogy! I'm a huge fan, but the part I found dull was the whole chapter in _the Fellowship of the Ring_ that centered around Tom Bombadill. It's the only reason, really, that FOTR is my least favorite book in the series.
> 
> Now I respect Tolkien, as well as his reasons for including that particular odd character (for whom the ring had no affect on, whatsoever). But reading about them falling asleep at his house...made me fall asleep.
> 
> ...


I love Tom Bombadil's chapters, personally. They're among my favorite in the entire series. I find the sense of ancient wonder and magic very well done. That's something I was missing in the films.

And I also liked Sean Astin's acting; I think he was a terrific Sam. I thought those scenes (e.g. with Sam carrying Frodo) were very touching and emotional. Just my humble opinion, of course. (And no, I'm not one of those people who believe Frodo and Sam were, you know... ahem... they're not; they're just hobbits, that's how hobbits are.  But as Jerry Seinfeld would say: Not that there's anything wrong with that!)


----------



## xandy3 (Jun 13, 2010)

Daniel Arenson said:


> And I also liked Sean Astin's acting; I think he was a terrific Sam. I thought those scenes (e.g. with Sam carrying Frodo) were very touching and emotional. Just my humble opinion, of course. (And no, I'm not one of those people who believe Frodo and Sam were, you know... ahem... they're not; they're just hobbits, that's how hobbits are. )


Well I confess to being moved to tears with the "but I can carry you..." scene.   
Other than that I thought he was a bit over-the-top.

And I agree that they weren't "...you know..." either  (kinda gets me mad when people say that they were...LOL) You're right, that's just how hobbits are.


----------



## Geoffrey (Jun 20, 2009)

Tom Bombadil doesn't bother me.  His rescue of the hobbits and their initial sleeping danger is like the initial bad and evil thing that happens to them and when they first begin to look at their adventure as more than just a hike out to someone's country house ....


----------



## Carolyn Kephart (Feb 23, 2009)

Geoffrey said:


> I'm re-reading *The Lord of the Rings* and just finished _The Two Towers_ last night. Now, like any good fantasy buff, I LOVES me some Tolkien - but the story of Frodo, Sam and Gollum's journey into Mordor is my least favorite part of the trilogy. Its slow and tedious after the fall of Isengard ... I was so happy to get back to the Rohan and journey to Gondor for the epic battle ...
> 
> Am I allowed to say that out loud?
> 
> So, now that I blasphemed, tell me something you think about a book that's just not part of the conventional opinion....


I've always thought there was too much eating, drinking, and traipsing in the books, and found Tom Bombadil a bit...strange. My interest sparked when Boromir showed up; he, Faramir, Eomer and Eowyn kept me reading.

I loved the way the film version brought Boromir and Faramir together, something that doesn't happen in the books.

CK


----------



## 13893 (Apr 29, 2010)

In _Dune_, the story of the Bene Gesserit is much more interesting than that of Paul and the Fremen.


----------



## miss_fletcher (Oct 25, 2010)

Aw, I loved Frodo and Sam's bromance, but it does touch on boring if you read the books once every couple of years.

I honestly enjoyed all six books. There are many sections I would usually consider tedious in other novel, but Middle Earth is described in such intricate detail, and Tolkien's prose lulls me into such a smooth reading flow, I find I never have to flick pages to get to "better" parts and enjoy the story.


----------



## Geoffrey (Jun 20, 2009)

LKRigel said:


> In _Dune_, the story of the Bene Gesserit is much more interesting than that of Paul and the Fremen.


I'm going to have to climb onto this blasphemy too. The Bene Gesserit are a lot more interesting ....


----------



## Victorine (Apr 23, 2010)

I tried to get into The Hobbit... I really tried.  But just couldn't get into it.  I probably stopped less than half way through.

Never read any of the rest of them.  Blasphemy... I know.

Vicki


----------



## Mercius (Aug 28, 2010)

Good to know I'm not the only one that found the trilogy boring, and I sat through Asimov's Foundation series, which was equally as tedious in some places. 
If I want to get right into the action with just a little description, and a little back story, I pick up L.E. Modesitt, Jr. or Piers Anthony, or, and I apologize
to those that consider him pop-fantasy, David Eddings. Lately, I've been reading R.R. Martin and find it not quite as tedious, but when you finally get there
it's well worth the read.


----------



## tbrookside (Nov 4, 2009)

I find that my "favorite" and "not-favorite" part(s) of LOTR move around a lot.

Basically whatever I skimmed over the last time I read it is the part that really grabs me during my current reading.


----------



## MLPMom (Nov 27, 2009)

I love Nora Roberts and her pseudonym J.D. Robb but I do wish sometimes some of the scenes weren't so descriptive. There I said it.


----------



## Laurensaga (Sep 29, 2010)

Geoffrey said:


> Tom Bombadil doesn't bother me.


That is the one part and character that was absolutly pointless. I like it because it is really the first bit of action, but it could have been cut and I would still have enjoyed it.


----------



## StaceyHH (Sep 13, 2010)

LKRigel said:


> In _Dune_, the story of the Bene Gesserit is much more interesting than that of Paul and the Fremen.


Yes, yes, YES! It's the reason I adore that series. Frank Herbert had a fascination with religion, particularly its fanaticism and abuses, that comes through brilliantly in his treatment of both the Bene Gesserit and the Tleilaxu. I've always regarded the story of Paul Atreides, (and later Leto and even Duncan,) as the vehicle that advanced the real story of science and technology v. faith and religion.


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

Okay, Not Safe For Work, Possibly Offensive To Must Sentient Beings:

You know what? Not going to post it. Youtube. "Clerks 2 LOTR Vs. Star Wars scene"


----------



## history_lover (Aug 9, 2010)

Victorine said:


> I tried to get into The Hobbit... I really tried. But just couldn't get into it. I probably stopped less than half way through.
> 
> Never read any of the rest of them. Blasphemy... I know.
> 
> Vicki


I'm the same - I did finish The Hobbit but I glazed over so many times I barely remember anything from it. Didn't bother to read LOTR. They are good stories, I enjoyed the movies - but the books just get so bogged down in Tolkien's excessively descriptive writing style.


----------



## Dawn McCullough White (Feb 24, 2010)

Victorine said:


> I tried to get into The Hobbit... I really tried. But just couldn't get into it. I probably stopped less than half way through.
> 
> Never read any of the rest of them. Blasphemy... I know.
> 
> Vicki


Yep, me too. I thought I was the only one.

Dawn


----------



## SuzanneTyrpak (Aug 10, 2010)

I read the trilogy a long time ago, when I was in high school (a loooooong time ago). I loved it. But maybe I didn't expect as much action then. I think, in general, stories have become much tighter--and our attention span is shorter.


----------



## JMcGhee (Oct 31, 2010)

I, too, read the Hobbit without reading any of LotR.  The Hobbit was fairly decent, skimmed near the end just to be finished, but I was in fifth grade at the time.  I think my mom made me buy the book.  I tried watching LotR later, but I kept falling asleep or getting bored within the first half hour of the first movie...those movies are long...


----------



## 13893 (Apr 29, 2010)

StaceyHH said:


> Yes, yes, YES! It's the reason I adore that series. Frank Herbert had a fascination with religion, particularly its fanaticism and abuses, that comes through brilliantly in his treatment of both the Bene Gesserit and the Tleilaxu. I've always regarded the story of Paul Atreides, (and later Leto and even Duncan,) as the vehicle that advanced the real story of science and technology v. faith and religion.


Yes!!!!


----------



## terryr (Apr 24, 2010)

Can't. Stand. Dickens.


----------



## Labrynth (Dec 31, 2009)

Laurell K Hamilton is a talentless Mary Sue who needs to get over herself.

Never read any Tolkien... just couldn't get into them.

Never finished The Stand.  after 250 pages the characters were so confused in my head that I gave up.


----------



## Carolyn Kephart (Feb 23, 2009)

Dawn McCullough White said:


> Yep, me too. I thought I was the only one.


_The Hobbit_ should have a big label on the cover that says Warning! Read This Book AFTER LoTR! It's wrecked Tolkien for so many people... 

CK


----------



## dobes (Feb 22, 2010)

Can ANYONE read Faulkner? ANY Faulkner?


----------



## StaceyHH (Sep 13, 2010)

dobes said:


> Can ANYONE read Faulkner? ANY Faulkner?


LOL! we were talking about this last night. I was forced to read _The Sound and the Fury_ in high school. What a terrible and unreadable book. blech.


----------



## Geoffrey (Jun 20, 2009)

StaceyHH said:


> LOL! we were talking about this last night. I was forced to read _The Sound and the Fury_ in high school. What a terrible and unreadable book. blech.


Growing up in the North, Faulkner was my first exposure to Southern Fiction - and _The Sound and the Fury_ almost put me off the entire sub-genre ....


----------



## xandy3 (Jun 13, 2010)

Labrynth said:


> Laurell K Hamilton is a talentless Mary Sue who needs to get over herself.


That's one author whose books I have absolutely no desire to read.


----------



## Dawn McCullough White (Feb 24, 2010)

dobes said:


> Can ANYONE read Faulkner? ANY Faulkner?


Well yes, admittedly I'm a fan of Faulkner, he's so... bizarre. 
Dawn


----------



## kansaskyle (Sep 14, 2010)

In response to the original question about "things you're not supposed to say..."

I remember reading King's Darktower series and I made it to book 3 or 4 (I can't recall which one), where you are first introduced to Vampires, and I was like, "Vampires?!?  You gotta be kidding me!"  I was really enjoying the series up to that point, but the introduction of vampires took it down a notch for me.  I realize King ties the majority of his other books in some way to the Darktower series, but I felt vampires seemed out of place.


----------



## AnelaBelladonna (Apr 8, 2009)

Isn't it amazing that people can read the same books and come away with totally different feelings about it?  I love fantasy and the Lord of the Rings movies but I couldn't get past the first half of the first book.  It was WAY too tedious for me.


----------



## Guest (Nov 1, 2010)

Dawn McCullough White said:


> Well yes, admittedly I'm a fan of Faulkner, he's so... bizarre.
> Dawn


Faulkner is awesome! As I Lay Dying is one of the most brilliant books ever written. I've also read The Sound and the Fury, and I didn't like it nearly as much, but I can see why people appreciate it.



Geoffrey said:


> Growing up in the North, Faulkner was my first exposure to Southern Fiction - and _The Sound and the Fury_ almost put me off the entire sub-genre ....


Have you read much Flannery O'Connor? Wise Blood is an incredible and incredibly grotesque story.


----------



## Andra (Nov 19, 2008)

history_lover said:


> I'm the same - I did finish The Hobbit but I glazed over so many times I barely remember anything from it. Didn't bother to read LOTR. They are good stories, I enjoyed the movies - but the books just get so bogged down in Tolkien's excessively descriptive writing style.


I do enjoy the books, but I have to be in the right frame of mind to read them. What I REALLY enjoyed the last time around was having the unabridged audio versions. For some reason, having someone else read those descriptive phrases was wonderful. I got very clear pictures in my head and I didn't have to work at it very hard.


----------



## jmkwriter (Sep 14, 2009)

Am I allowed to say that I got bored halfway through Two Towers? I made it through The Hobbit, The Fellowship and dropped it in the middle of Two Towers. I'm sorry, but there were just too many words all saying the same thing. I think I may have also fallen asleep during The Fellowship of the Ring movie....


----------



## nmg222 (Sep 14, 2010)

'Catch-22' is a bunch of comic strips thrown together.


----------



## Geemont (Nov 18, 2008)

xandy3 said:


> I'm a huge fan, but the part I found dull was the whole chapter in _the Fellowship of the Ring_ that centered around Tom Bombadill.


Interesting. I read the first two book of the trilogy on a winter break in high school many, many years ago. (1982?) I remember really liking that character. I can't even name all the other characters, so he must have made an impression, though the details of why have been lost to time.

I never got around to reading the third book and probably never will. I have no intention of seeing the movies either.



StaceyHH said:


> I was forced to read _The Sound and the Fury_ in high school. What a terrible and unreadable book. blech.


Faulkner: America's greatest native born author! _The Sound and the Fury_ is truly a great book: I love the way Faulkner's sentences snake across pages and pages. I've got a half dozen Faulkner books I want to read or reread. I'm waiting for the Kindle versions, but may have to settle for DTB.



LKRigel said:


> In _Dune_, the story of the Bene Gesserit is much more interesting than that of Paul and the Fremen.


Overall, while the second and third books aren't as good as the original _Dune_, I think Paul becomes a more interesting character in the second book the status of "hero" built up in book one is brought down a few pegs


----------



## Blodwyn (Oct 13, 2010)

I didn't love _Dune_. I thought the writing was a bit dry.
Jane Austen bores me every time I try to read her work. 

I whispered, because I'm scared.....


----------



## 13893 (Apr 29, 2010)

Blodwyn said:


> I didn't love _Dune_. I thought the writing was a bit dry.
> Jane Austen bores me every time I try to read her work.
> 
> I whispered, because I'm scared.....


tee hee. It's okay. I did love Dune, but I can hear you.


----------



## Blodwyn (Oct 13, 2010)

LKRigel said:


> tee hee. It's okay. I did love Dune, but I can hear you.


Oh no, I didn't whisper quietly enough! 

Also, I find Hemingway boring. I have tried _The Sun Also Rises_ repeatedly and always stop after a chapter or so.


----------



## Blodwyn (Oct 13, 2010)

I hated _Twilight_ with a holy passion.


----------



## Lyndl (Apr 2, 2010)

I'm not a fan of Tolkien's prose. However, I loved the _story_ even if it was like wading through heavy mud. The Hobbit was a little better.

I definitely enjoyed the Bene Gesserit far more than Paul & his Fremen.

I thought I liked the Twilight series, until I actually read some other Vampires series ( Vampire Academy, Sookie Stackhouse etc.) and realised how naff it really is.


----------



## Indy (Jun 7, 2010)

I have to admit that during my reading of the Iliad earlier this year, I thought a few times, if I made it through Tolkien, I can surely read this book.


----------



## JL Bryan (Aug 10, 2010)

jmkwriter said:


> Am I allowed to say that I got bored halfway through Two Towers? I made it through The Hobbit, The Fellowship and dropped it in the middle of Two Towers. I'm sorry, but there were just too many words all saying the same thing. I think I may have also fallen asleep during The Fellowship of the Ring movie....


I DID fall asleep in the theater during Two Towers. Never watched the third one. Liked the books, thought I wish I'd read them earlier in life, like before I'd read countless imitations.


----------



## dnagirl (Oct 21, 2009)

I find 99.9% of the "classics" incredibly boring.  As in painful to read boring.  This includes, but is not limited to:  Austen, Hemingway, Dickens (sorry Ed!), Melville, Bronte(s), Milton, Jakes, Hawthorne, Twain and Tolstoy.

For 33 years of my life I have attempted and failed to read these authors.  I don't know why I keep trying.


----------



## MLPMom (Nov 27, 2009)

Blodwyn said:


> I hated _Twilight_ with a holy passion.


Twilight wasn't for a lot of people, I wouldn't be ashamed of that. You either loved it or hated it. There wasn't a whole lot of in between.


----------



## BTackitt (Dec 15, 2008)

Blodwyn said:


> I hated _Twilight_ with a holy passion.


amen.


----------

