131
submitted 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) by tetris11@lemmy.ml to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

I've started reading Jumper by NameDoesNotMatter. I would like to formally apologise about all the harsh things I've ever spoken about that film.

Fine, the cast is unlikeable and the action scenes are just fisticuffs in the air, but my god, in comparison to the teenage dreck that is the book, it's a masterpiece. At least they tried to build a credible back story for the main character.

In the book, he literally thinks everyone is out to sexually assault him (and somehow they seem to), he solves his problems by throwing money at it, instead of any actual creativity, and the author desperately tries to portray him as a mature-for-his-age adult, despite the fact that his first reaction to anything is crying followed by petty revenge.

I'm just flicking through the pages, pausing at any plot bits, and then flicking on.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] TeryVeneno@lemmy.ml 19 points 7 months ago

Harry Potter, the movies are at least wizards do wizard stuff even if the world is pretty boring to me. The books on the other hand, are just straight up strange and mean. Reading them as kid they just sucked, I have no clue why they are so popular outside of the movies.

[-] ryathal@sh.itjust.works 32 points 7 months ago

Harry Potter has some issues, but for children's fiction it's better than a lot of series.

[-] TeryVeneno@lemmy.ml 2 points 7 months ago

I’d have to disagree with that, one of the main reasons I didn’t read Harry Potter as kid was because there was simply better fiction. That and also easy access to manga in the west had started becoming bigger.

[-] Kacarott@feddit.de 13 points 7 months ago

What do you mean by strange and mean?

[-] TeryVeneno@lemmy.ml 6 points 7 months ago

There’s a lot of moments where the characters will laugh at or make fun of someone for something to a degree I would never do irl, or the slave bit with hermione. The characters also just don’t evolve at all. Reading Harry Potter just gave me a fish out of water feeling, there were better magic books with characters that actually grew and changed.

[-] Omegamint@hexbear.net 7 points 7 months ago

An absurd amount of marketing, mainly. Very easy to shove YA/childrens books down kids throats, they don't have a lot of natural exposure to literature. Fuck, eragorn was the best example of the YA industry pushing a bad series (they even tried a movie series), I remember loaning it from my school library and being legitimately confused as to why it was becoming popular. I ended up finding a weird romance+fantasy series at the time that I largely consider as not being actually good, but remember finding it way more engaging. Maybe it's better now that kids are largely terminally online.

It's really my biggest gripe with it. There's better fantasy, better wizard centric fantasy, and better YA books out there. It's not great by any means, and I'm not surprised that I dropped the series without finishing it as a kid because I was reading much better stuff by the time the last few books came out.

[-] Scrath@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 7 months ago

Honestly I kind of liked the eragon books though if asked I couldn't say why.

The attempted movie adaptation was horrible though

[-] Cysioland@lemmygrad.ml 5 points 7 months ago

Eragon was good for a YA book, which is damning by faint praise

[-] bleepbloopbop@hexbear.net 4 points 7 months ago

same. It was long enough ago that I have no real recollection of why but I thought they were good. I even saw the movies. I guess kids aren't very picky

[-] Scrath@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 7 months ago

There was more than one movie? I thought they gave up after the first

[-] bleepbloopbop@hexbear.net 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Guess you're right. I remember seeing one in theater, which I thought was the second one, but looking it up now that was 2006 (god how was that 18 years ago lmao) and they never made the second one. 100 million budget, made 250 million at the box office, I guess that's considered a flop. (Edit: yeah I guess it was a flop in the US box office, the majority of that was worldwide)

[-] booty@hexbear.net 3 points 7 months ago

Eragon is likeable despite not being very good. Probably its greatest strength is just how sincere and inoffensive it is. You can really feel that the author was just a kid writing some fantasy stories. I think there's value in that.

[-] FanonFan@hexbear.net 5 points 7 months ago

I'd guess it's because it captured the demand for english-language isekai at a mid reading level, and snowballed with hype around new releases, which quickly got rolled into the movie franchise as well. For 15 years there was a new release almost every year, between the books and the movies, so you couldn't really avoid hearing buzz about it. If it was just one book without regular injections of hype into the public consciousness, it'd probably be largely forgotten.

Kids don't care so much about prose and they're usually too naive to pick up on political subtexts, at least consciously. As a kid I liked them for the escapist fantasy and the simple narrative.

[-] TeryVeneno@lemmy.ml 1 points 7 months ago

Totally agree, I guess just had better fiction when I was kid, I’m gen z and easier access to manga started becoming a thing as I grew up, webtoon also happened.

[-] daltotron@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

I dunno, I'm sure there's a more complicated and interconnected series of events which lead to them truly being popular, not least of which was the movies, but in terms of how they're structured, it kind of makes sense to me why they were a successful fiction. The various different houses, even though they're mostly indistinguishable from one another internal to the books, give kids something to identify with and self-categorize into, which is something that teenagers kind of love doing in a struggle for identity. They're also part of the hidden world subgenre, which means it's even easier for tweens to self-insert into.

Then, I think it also helps that they're kind of poorly written, weirdly enough. Every character isn't usually a real, fleshed out individual, they're just an archetype, and a shorthand, a common trope. I think this is probably desirable for a tween audience, and I think probably also a simple to follow plot and set of plot elements is also more desirable. There's no lore to keep up with, it's just like you've taken a bunch of other tropes from other, better works and compressed them into an easily digestible series of books full of melodrama. It's not super hard to understand. Those other books, they're like the various PDAs and shit you'd see floating around in the 90's, they're explicit works of art constructed for a singular purpose. Harry potter is like an ipod touch, or an iphone, or something, it's just engineered to have more mass appeal at the expense of complexity and possibly quality.

this post was submitted on 11 Apr 2024
131 points (97.8% liked)

Asklemmy

43942 readers
533 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS