It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Edit: As I listen to this Scott is completely missing the fact that he read it before and the jokes influenced so much of the media that he consumes that the work that originated the humor is not resonating with him. Many of Robert Heinlein works seem contrived at this point until you realize those stories were some of the first of that type... WARRRRGBUIRGHHHHHGHGHHAHHH....
What the fuck Scott.. What the fuck.You didn't find Hitchhiker's guide funny?Edit: As I listen to this Scott is completely missing the fact that he read it before and the jokes influenced so much of the media that he consumes that the work that originated the humor is not resonating with him. Many of Robert Heinlein works seem contrived at this point until you realize those stories were some of the first of that type... WARRRRGBUIRGHHHHHGHGHHAHHH....
Big deal. Stan Lee was incredibly revolutionary and influential, but his writing sucks balls. Just because something has historical value doesn't mean it's good or worth reading now.
That's not the point, it's like watching an awesome stand up 3 times, the 3rd time your not going to laugh out loud to it but you still are going to find it enjoyable. Same goes with Hitchhiker, it's not going to be witty after you already know the observations and jokes. Also to answer you above point, your not going to say Asimov is not worth reading because other people have put out robot stories after him that take his orginal ideas and expand on them.
I haven't listened to this episode yet, but I can tell you reading The Hitchhiker's Guide now feels childish for the same reason listening to MC Hammer feels childish.
Well, having more ideas and expanding doesn't necessarily equal better.If something really is better and redundant, you probably should ignore the inferior one, except for historical purposes. The only reason to read an old Superman or Spider-Man comic is for reasons of history. If you are looking for quality, Stan Lee is not your friend.Also, even if I'm listening to a stand-up comedian tell the same joke for the fifth time, I may not laugh out loud, but I laugh on the inside. Like if I watch a Bugs Bunny Cartoon, I probably won't laugh at all. But if you ask me if it's funny, I'll probably say yes.On top of that, things that are actually really funny are funny every time. Silly Walks is funny every single time. I can watch it 100 times a day, and I'll lol all 100 times every day.It may be true that I would have laughed at HHG2G if it was all 100% completely fresh and new to me. However, the fact that I do not laugh now, inside or outside, shows that even if it is funny, it's not very funny. It's about the same level of funny as Portal. It's funny only the first time, and not ever again.
I think this is again falling into the Scott Rubin "If people tell me it's good the more I don't want to like it" area.
Yeah, Cowboy Bebop, Prince of Nothing, they suck.
Silly Walks is funny every single time.
I haven't listened to the episode yet, so I'll just ask my one question: did you just find it to be unfunny, or did you find it to not be worthwhile overall? There's a difference.
Overall it is better than good, but not great. The level to which it is beloved, revered, hyped, and the height of the pedestal upon which it is raised are far greater than the quality of the book on its own deserves.
I think the quote that annoyed me was (parapharse) "Eh, I'd probably tell some people it was worth reading" where as I have found that any person I've recommended it to has enjoyed it (if they are geeky). Sorta like how everyone I've shown Firefly to as really enjoyed it EXCEPT SCOTT RUBIN.
If you ask me if people will like it, the answer is yes. That has nothing to do with whether or not the thing is good or not. People like crappy reality shows more than anything, but I'm not going to tell someone to watch them, or review them kindly.
Fortunately you are not the arbiter of what is good or not... Ugh, I know I shouldn't be arguing opinions.
Yeah, sorry. Just renewed my official quality arbiter certificate last week.
Sorry it was denied, guess you didn't realize I became the head of that organization. (prerequisite is you have to like Firefly) :-p
The level to which it is beloved, revered, hyped, and the height of the pedestal upon which it is raised are far greater than the quality of the book on its own deserves.
Right now, there are musicians and musical groups who are far more talented and refined than the Beatles, Led Zeppelin, or Jimi Hendrix. Yet those precursors are so important that they continued to be revered today. The influence of a body of work can give it relevance and importance far past its impact on an individual consumer.
Those are pretty bad examples, because they are still good, and new music has not made them redundant.
Scott, HHG2G is Citizen Kane. Same arguments apply. You're just one of those people that doesn't like Citizen Kane.