.................................
To leave Commie, hyper to
http://commie.oy.com/commie_leaving.html
.................................
> > Yes I've read it several times and I saw the ending has a happy one
> >("we want no harm" and that bullshit)
>
> (BTW, I've never understood, why it's supposed to be somehow more
> artistic and noble to use sad endings than happy endings...)
>
Well... as in: masses of people who want to walk away from a
terrifying story with a good feeling (so as they can forget more easily and
will not carry the burden of their own thinking, or whatever), and maybe not
coming back the NEXT time this writer/filmmaker/studio makes a movie... So
it is not artistic/noble to NOT end happily, but it can be a commercial ploy
to DO end with a happy end... [but artistic/noble artspeople need money as
well, so for them...]
> I was only frozen because of boredom... I had seen Stalker before. In
> both cases, I had read the book first.
>
Stalker (where did that name come from, it being a russian move, and
all that?) was a terrifying experience, all right. Had me thinking for a
while.
Anybod read Gregory Benford: the Mechwars Quadrology?
Starts out as the remnants of human civilization on ONE specific
planet and their battle against the VASTLY more powerful Mechs, and ends in
absolutely philosophical/physical explorations of mind and space, and the
relation man/machine + different types of evolution and patterns and goals
of every sentient being. All this in a straight-forward, action-packed
package [yeah!].
Cool books, Benford is some theoretical physicist, so his writing is
ehm... well-researched?
diskonext
tiemen
