First off, my apologies for bumping this thread, I meant to reply sooner, but kinda forgot.
Dias, I am pleasantly surprised that anybody here appreciates Bierce, as his works catered to a mature audience(Not saying that members here cannot handle it, but that they may not have heard of it, have little interest in the subject etc). I must say that The Devil's Dictionary was a piece of cynical brilliance.
Where would we be without Artemis Fowl? An absolutely ingenius book, that combines magic with real life, action, and mystery. I have enjoyed every single one, and I cannot wait for more. It is written by Eoin Colfer, and is a must read.
Agreed. Incredibly sophisticated work, and the sharp, british style humour is apparent no matter which of the four books one reads. Doomed to be compared to the HP series, and while Hp is brilliant in its way with sales proving so, Artemis Fowl is an excellent anti-hero, and the supporting cast is quirky and endearing in their own individual ways. I tip my hat to Colfer, and hope to see Holly and Artemis in action again soon. Hopefully the character balance that anchored the first book will be back once again.
Well, I'm a big Tolkein fan. His books aren't an easy, light read but they're exciting and meaningful, and worth putting time into if you're really looking for something with depth. The way he incorporates symbols and ideas is very good, and past The Fellowship (which is really quite boring, I won't lie, and initially turned me off to the series) the books are exciting. And seeing the movie doesn't count
Well, most people know LOTR through the movies, so that would not be too fair. For me, the most poignant piece of the WOTR(war of the rings) triology was the part Gollum played in the one ring's destruction, and the foreshadowng acheived by Gandalf's quote in FOTR. Yep, that quote!
However, the books which we have NOT seen on the big screen, and will likely never see, are Tolkien's better works. The Hobbit is paced much better, and is succintly light-hearted, with a great chance of making it to the big screen. The same cannot be said of the Sil and the other releases which plugged the plot holes offered by each's companion books. Poetically written, with an endearing sense of grandeur pervading throughout, but also a touch of tragedy, and a sense of helplessness and despair. IMO, the best fantasy war was set in the Sil. Nirnaeth Arnoediad, battle of unnumbered tears, completely owns every WOTR battle. Characters like Turin, Hurin, Beren, Fingolfin, Feanor etc grappled with dragons and balrogs, when one of the latter caused the demise of Gandalf the Grey in FOTR, which should give anyone a sense of the scale involved in those books. The reason why they cannot translate onto the screen is the scale, and fragmented style, and that Hollywood is bound to take liberties with the plot. A certain Tom Bombadil never appeared, while Arwen replaced Glorfindel( the sole link between the Sil and LOTR, save Galadriel) as the one who raised the river at Rivendell, the ghosts never made it to Pelennor Fields, etc.
I've read a couple of Jack London's books like Call of the Wild and White Fang
Both brilliant, esp the latter.
I have are one time books, such as The Life of Pi by Yann Martel,
Completely agree with this.
Dan Brown, guys. Three words. The DaVinci Code. Two Words: Digital Fortress.
I am going out on a limb and state that the DaVinci Code movie is going to be a commercial hit, but likely a critical failure. Reason? A lot of what Brown wrote about is fictional, ie religiously untrue. About the only thing he got right in the DaVinci Code was the placement of the curator's body in terms of the magical sigil. Research and some knowledge about religion proves a lot of his work likely untrue. Most importantly, visual elements are a poorer way to communicate leaps of logic, which the book manages to cover pretty well. Still a bloody good work, and I go out on another limb to recommend.
Deception Point makes a better movie, once you take all the elements into account. However, who else saw the ending from a mile away?
Angels and Demons had a cult which is better illustrated, ie the Illuminati. Tomb raider completely ruined their image, but Brown rescues it. Langdon is also more believable and instinctive in this one, while he plods along a little in the DaVinci. I cant say I know a lot about the Hashish users, apart from the fact that the former is a drug which a medical friend saw fit to describe boringly the other day. Extremely interesting, though.
Other books of a similar genre are "The Assassini" and "The Rule of Four". The former is a lot like Brown's works, but slower in progression, and uses narration.
Arthur Golden Memoirs of a Geisha is truly one of the most moving books I have ever read. I was, of course, a tad young for it when I read it...(Around thirteen,) but I was deeply impacted by the writing, plot, and the characters. An excellent book. I hope the movie can stay true to the artwork that is Memoirs.
Brilliant book, but not so brilliant movie prospect, IMO. Some things can only be captured in print, and vice versa. Can you imagine Sin City as a book (ie not a visual novel)?
C.S. Lewis's Chronicles of Narnia
Unfortunately, the movie was pretty poor and failed to capture the magic, huh? Kong was a much better movie.
Roald Dahl OMG! He writes just whatever. It's an entire world of imagingation but he writes it as if it could really happen.
Haha, a childhood fav of mine, too. "The wonderful world of Henry Sugar" is great.
ok, this will make me sound uncultured...but stephen king.
No way are you uncultured. Anyone who reads horror should at least respect the man. Some of his psychology is simply breathtaking, no matter whether he deals with weight loss in "Thinner", or firestarters in "Carrie" or simply shows his brilliance in "Pet Semetary". "skeleton crew" rounds off the highlight reel.
"The eyes of the dragon" is not really horror, but is a medieval, fantastical thriller. Shows King's flexibility. Did I miss the Stand? Sorry, throw that in as well.
The other title I have to go on about a little is "It", IMO King's best novel. I will never forget big Bill screaming "Hi-yo Silver!", or Beverly defeating the werewolf thing. Or Pennywise's "down here, everybody floats" quote. God, the way King wrote about the malleabilities of a child's mind, and the ramifications of imagination, the differentials between adulthood and childhood, and the group finally returning to defeat "IT" really left an indelible mark on my mind.
Many authors like Paolini, Snickets, Rowling, Pratchet etc have already been named, and I will not touch too much on them. Salinger's "Catcher in the Rye" makes one laugh and tear at the same time. Lovecraft, my personal inspiration and the convoluted reason why I write the way I do, was the one who invented horror, together with Poe. Me salutes him. Milton's and Dante's poetry on the christian religion have also had a huge impact on me, even though I am not a christian, and I recommend them.
My last recommendation is an ode of sorts to the horror genre. To any who like King's writing and the horror genre in general MUST give Richard Laymon a try. I understand that he was always more popular in the UK than the US, but his novels are always taut, page-flipping splatterings of gore and violence. I believe that I have never turned pages so quickly, and the urge to flip to the back page never seems stronger than when I read this guy's work. He takes the horror envelope and pushes it further than even King dares. Laymon's streak of violence headlines his books, but the single strongest driving force of any Laymon novel is his superb charcterisations. Some of his characters stick so firmly in one's mind that I can probably write dossiers on them. He utilised both third person and narration, and his female characters always seem a lot more driven and faceted than their male counterparts.
His supernatural novels are generally more violent than his mundane novels. the best of said lot is IMO "The traveling vampire show", a novel about three friends who want to catch a traveling group that supposedly has a female vampire in captivity. The only thing which disturbed me was the rushed ending, but the feel was extremely taut, and characterisation was superb. Slim, a female from the novel, is particularly memorable, and Dwight, the narrator, is very decent as well.
Anyone who loved 28 days later should catch "One rainy night", about a downpour which converts anyone touched into a bloodthirsty psycho. One scene outside a cinema is worth the book price. You can also catch several odes to NOTLD and other horror flicks from the 1970s. "In the dark" is another psychological thriller that shows Laymon's range and skill, as a young woman unravels clues in a game she is involved in with MOG(master of games), with cash incentives increasing with each clue unravelled and mission accomplished. As the cash incentive increases, the physical danger to the female protaganist increases during the actual undertakings of the missions, as well as the moral sacrifices she has to make. Of course, there is no way of backing out, as the reader would quickly find.
Oh and "Dreadful Tales", a compilation of horror shorts, is addictively page-turning, more so than King's compilations. Some of the stories are downright bloody and sick, but Laymon turns those pages faster than most other authors, and "Dreadful Tales" never relents on the pace. There is a superior ode to "The cannibal holocaust", THAT particular film which screwed its director twice over in the movie industry, and is one of the most disturbing social commentaries ever.
On a further note, Laymon's novels mostly contain graphic images of gore, and he pulls no punches, and spares no tact at all. There is always a sexual connotation, usually in a pretty sick manner in his novels. What Laymon does exceedlingly better than any other writer is his ability to portray sick, demented characters such that the reader actually buys his logic, no matter how far-fetched. No one is fully informed how one of his villains becomes invisible in "beware", but he does his characters so well that they could spout butterfly wings and sing Pavarotti without anyone batting an eyelid. NO MAIN CHARACTER is guaranteed survival, and twists always abound in the last quarter of every book. Unhappy endings lurk everywhere, and as a certain reviewer once said, "for Laymon, blood is never spilt but insteads explodes and splatters", and amen to that. When Dean Koontz and King both voice out about a horror writer's abilities, you get a pretty good picture. Do be forgiving on the sexual undertone and certain leaps of logic, though.
Why the heck am I rambling about Laymon? Call it last respects. To anyone who has read Laymon before, you know what I mean when I speak of his quality. He may not be a better writer overall, compared to some of the abovementioned names, but really really delivers haymaker after haymaker to the reader. And he passed away in 2001, meaning a void in my own horror fix. Sad.