[Cuchulain]

OK so here is a question, WHY? exactly what part of FGD needs to be changed and why? The story reads fine as we all have read it and pictured it in our heads, it will be different to each person how we picture it but we picture it just the same. movies are a visual format so picture to movie goes well with this story. I can see changing the pace of certain seens if it gets slow but even that doesn't merit changing it totally.

I did read the script on its own merit and I posted on Mr. Blackmans blog about it.

I can't see why saying this is my adaption of FGD and the story is totally different. change the name and say inspired by FGD but make the changes needed and don't imply in the story of FGD and call it a day

This post has been edited by Cuchulain: 18 December 2009 - 08:50 PM

[PainBrush]

monk, on 18 December 2009 - 01:10 AM, said:

I would love to hear the justification of this practice script, creatively how were the decisions justified. Especially the sword part. It seems gratuitous. Claims which are based on invoking 'art' require some substantial backing up, in my book...so I mean I am just very very curious as to what artistic reason there could be to seriously defang FGD.

It can only be an ego thing , plain & simple . When called to account or questioned he said "well , I'll have to think & get back to ya" -well , guess what ? Still waiting . In case you didn't see it -on that page just below the F.G.D. title he has a link to another page , something along the lines of "About the Script of Frost G./D." where he half-fast replied to all the people who posted with pretty much 'no' sensible reasons for his twisting the story other than "well , I didn't need to flesh out or establish who Conan was , or his motivations - I already know who he is" -or something along those lines
Then he whipped out his shiny brass ones & said " you all think you want a faithful adaptation of REH's story , but you really don't , & here's why...." & called us "purists" as if we absolutely insist nothing be changed whatsoever - something NO-ONE had ever said , but which is a sad sad sophomoric amateurish move akin to saying "I know you are but what am I ? pphhlllpptthhhh " on the playground . I'm no purist , I don't expect a word-for-word exact wooden interpretation of the original material , but dammit I won't accept someone cluelessly f&%^%$ing up the story with no rhyme or reason or remotely plausible explanation for why it was necessary in the first place , and something tells me I'm not the only fan who feels that way . He took a poetic minor masterpiece & trivialized it into an adolescent masturbatory exercise in senseless violence & sociopathic perversion . Sorry if Thoth Amon has missed all that in the translation from English to his native language , but there it is .

Evil Thoth-Amon, on 18 December 2009 - 03:44 AM, said:

Again, you are attacking the wrong man. You want a justification of the changes? he posted it on his own blog. And this four page draft is only about practise for a teaser trailer. Only. That.

Blackman is an interesting fantasy writer, a big fan of Howard and a polite person. "Kick" him from this forums was a terrible mistake. I can´t understand your dog´s attitude, even as a purist.

If you want a justification from the actual screenplay with Conan "the last cimmerian" killing blind archers and shadow scouts in a quest for revenge with his friends Artus and Tamara... you will not find it. So, stop complaining about the only guy that is in our side.

Thoth , if you ever see anything that even remotely resembles a "clue" - PLEASE run & tackle it with all of your might amigo - & don't let go !

I've got more to say , but dammit- the bird is squawking about going shopping - be back later to elaborate .

This post has been edited by PainBrush: 19 December 2009 - 10:48 PM

[monk]

Reaver, on 18 December 2009 - 02:25 PM, said:

So, he boiled it down to the bare essentials...

that's the part....

[monk]

monk, on 18 December 2009 - 05:38 PM, said:

Reaver, on 18 December 2009 - 02:25 PM, said:

So, he boiled it down to the bare essentials...

that's the part....

well...okay...I read the response or defense of the criticism. I mean I'm not trying to say Mr. Blackman is anywhere near as vapid as DOppenheimer (although I'd say he is skirting it with "I...am...Conan" and I'll also readily admit his character descrip for the casting is spot on the money and I applaud that. BUT...I'm still left with the feeling that he missed the major gist of FGD while managing to say mostly the right things about it. A quick example- the battle with Heimdul being removed justified by the fact that there is an upcoming battle with the FGs anyway...that decision really falls flat because, well for a few reasons but a big one is the transition from ordinary reality and magical reality which Howard is continually moving between just got evaporated, and it does seem the choice to swap the sword wound (he freezes the wound shut- come now Mr. Blackman. Having seen someone split their head open snowboarding I'm not really seeing this bit, but let's grant it we're still faced with the problem that besides the 'frozen shut' wound, which is not packed with ice and snow which melts anyway, well plus there's the whole internal bleeding part, coupled with the running which increases heart rate which...you guessed it, would drop him dead pretty quickly) so this decision was indeed gratuitous and swaps out something carefully constructed for something 'cool' because it might make a 'cool' shot as the camera pans...I mean if you want that shot you can easily get it because Conan and Heimdul are on a battlefied. So...just to get a 'cool' shot....pardon the pun, it's not my fault he did use the word cool lol...it doesn't wash because what is lost is not replaced by what is written in it's stead. And now I'm forced to wonder what happened to the warrior who stabbed Conan. Conan is the last man standing, but not now. It's a question. He didn't kill all his enemies and then succumb, he has a sword in him. Maybe he was left for dead. That can be a cool new story, but now there isn't any real need to use any of FGD. I'm also not convinced the play between Atali and Conan is captured or conveyed all that well...if she's tweaking the sword in Conan's wound she is already within his grasp and I can't imagine anyone who could rip a sword out of themselves wouldn't be able to prevent a person from giving it a twirl in the wound.

[Taranaich]

Reaver, on 18 December 2009 - 07:25 PM, said:

The thing is, The Bard's writings are already in "script" format, so any adaptation necessary is almost purely visual. Any novel or "prose" adapted to screen is going to need retooling.

Agreed, hence why I brought up authors immediately after.

Quote

However, one thing I wonder is whether anyone read this script as an independent work, judging it on its own merits? Probably not. Everyone here probably read it consciously comparing it to the source material. And in that, there is a lesson.

When something is an adaptation of the source material, it kind of happens that people consciously compare it to the source material.

Quote

ANY adaptation will require changes. And those changes may please some while irritating others. This script took a short story, which would probably make a good 20-30 minute short film, and turned it into the basis for a 3-5 minute short intro, which would invariably lead to a larger story, so it wasn't necessary to have it be complete and self-sufficient. So, he boiled it down to the bare essentials, and worked that into a script. Whether he was successful or not is purely a matter of opinion, as it is only a script, with no visuals to go along beyond the descriptions. I I had the resources, I think it would be neat to film this short as scripted, and see how the impact of a film differs from the script.

Adaptations will require changes, of course. The transition of words on a page to words issuing from someone's lips are change enough as it is. Still, I can easily see TF-GD being adapted into a 5 minute short. And I don't think it's mere opinion to note that Blackman makes changes which aren't necessary, for reasons I still don't really understand.

Quote

Just something to remember, scripts (and plays) are not meant to be read, they're meant to be performed. That's why I always objected to reading Shakespeare in Literature class. I always felt it should be part of Drama class.

Our English teacher had us perform the plays. A fair compromise, I thought.

[monk]

Reaver, on 18 December 2009 - 02:25 PM, said:

However, one thing I wonder is whether anyone read this script as an independent work, judging it on its own merits?

I didn't for reasons succinctly stated by Taranaich, but I can. The sword in the gut bit is lame, and makes no sense. I like the frosty kiss.

I'm sure the visuals would probably ramp it up a bit but from the txt I don't quite see why Conan is so enchanted with Atali that he is going to let her twirl the sword in his gut in the first place, nor the second place, much less rise up and rip it out and then chase after her just because of a frosty smooch. Maybe if he yelled or threatened her when she moves the sword, we would believe he was so infuriated as to set aside the soup wound. I'm not a fan, in general, of ridiculously uber toughness. He doesn't cry out? Not sure where this kind of thing comes from nor why it is a motif that cursedly repeats itself ad nauseum. And she is kneeling right there next to him. So there's not much stopping him from grabbing her, and by rights he would have.

And I am left wondering where is the warrior who vanquished him. It implies that he is not the sole survivor nor did his side win. I like the auditory bit when he does scream, when it deads out weirdly.

Putting back on my comparing hat, I don't like that we are not so much in the know, so to speak, anymore...we know Heimdul as a name...it causes an instant waitaminute, an anchor point from which to diverge, you know something's up...which is no longer there. I wanted to say that before but forgot it.

This post has been edited by monk: 19 December 2009 - 06:46 AM

[PainBrush]

It almost seems a shame to have to elaborate on things that should be pretty obvious .

The 'who' , a battle on a frozen wasteland between the far northern 'nordic' races - Vanaheim and Aasgard , this is established in the dialog between Conan and the last man standing of the enemy army - but NOT if you delete Heimdul from the story . - Read that again - if you lose Heimdall/Heimdul ( however it's spelled ) then you lose the ability to explain who/what/why/where/and when . Man oh man - talk about something being unable to translate from story onto film?!? - WHY would Blackman lose the "1" minute interaction & dialog between the 2 last men standing which establishes the entire 'PREMISE' of the story ?!? That pointless ommission makes no sense and leaves a hole that is NEVER fixed through-out the rest of the story . Deleting it does little to shorten the overall scene because it is so short , and the multiple necessary things lost by deleting it aren't justified by the "1" minute cut off .

Why is/was Conan there ?
Where exactly IS "there" ?
Why is/was he fighting ?
Why is he injured ?
What brought him to this place ?
Who are the people he was fighting with?
Who are the people he was fighting for?
ALL of those questions are solidly answered in just a few short sentences as REH had written it . Short but sweet , & straight to the point . Pick any number of other "cool camera pan shot dude !!" in the following short battle . Hows this for a "cool camera pan dude" -we see things from Conans P.O.View as Heimdal smashes him across his helmet - enough to dent it & rattle his brains , but not kill him outright .Just as REH wrote it , and then use the camera to show Conans p.o.v. with blurry sight & stars across his eyes ( or atually "red sparks & bits of blue fire" as REH described it excellently ) as that sword smacks his helmet -the same instant Conan stabs out & kills Heimdul . A 10 TIMES BETTER "cool camera shot dude !!" than just showing Conan idiotically with a sword sticking up out of his gut .- But what do I know ? ( does Blackman actually pretend that what he does is really difficult ?!? )

Next - Conan , already half-dead from the battle ( & just a 'boy' among dead men also it HAS to be pointed out ! ) - he gets a severe blow to the head , again absolutely vital to the story 'THAT' is the KEY to the meaning of the story . In plain simple English for folks who don't get it - Conan is NOT in a normal rational state of mind , he is quite literally fading in & out of 2 worlds , in & out of consciousness , in & out of 'REALITY' .

Apparently it also needs pointing out 'right here' that the "wait-a-minute' 'deja-vu-ish' pause we should have had at the mention of the oh-so-familiar name of Heimdall ( the GATE-KEEPER to the Bifrost bridge , the one who either lets the brave INTO Valhalla with the Valkyries - or who keeps them OUT & turns them away from the bridge to 'ETERNITY' !! )

Read that all again .
Then 'pause' .
Then realise - Conan is a FOREIGNER IN THESE LANDS ! These are not his people , this not his land , these are not his gods .
He then symbolically KILLS THE GUARDIAN TO THE NORTHMEN'S 'HERE-AFTER' !!! He is the proverbial 'monkey-wrench' thrown into the gears !! So what is the 'normal' understood state of affairs 'here' in the Northlands between 'reality/fantastic' , the 'understood/ and the 'unknown' , it's all turned upside down & made irrelevant . Does that level the playing field now with the mortal man Conan & the 'supernatural' ? The reality of a man with the reality of the gods ? This are questions that 'should' arise vague in the back of our minds as the familiar name of 'Heimdall' was invoked & he was then killed . But it's not in the narrative ! So it remains a vague "what if" question , until & unless supernatural events unfold . ( which they soon do ) Not only should Blackman have kept Heimdall in the story , but one change which would actually do justice to the story as REH wrote it - & would go a long ways to establishing things that are in the story -but won't translate onto film , would be too have added a line to the dialog between Conan & Heimdall . Something along the lines of the :
Heimdal : "Tell me your name boy , so I can tell my brethren in Vanaheim the last to fall beneath Heimdals sword...."
Conan : "Heimdal aye ? - I'll send you across your Bifrost and destroy it afterwards dog ! " Or maybe something along those lines .

SO .next . Battles done , Conans the last man standing , ....falling.....
In the middle of a FROZEN wasteland - what next ?!?- A NAKED woman - STOP ! - read that again - it is the W.T.F. ?!? moment of the story . THIS IS NOT NORMAL ! Beautiful nude women do not usually frequent empty snow-drift covered fields dancing around dead bodies . READ THAT AGAIN !

WHen said nude beautiful women finds & makes her way over to the half-dead man ( who is in between the 2 worlds - the physical world/reality and the spirit world/supernatural ) Conan is UNCLEAR on whether or not she is REAL or if she's NOT REAL . She DOES NOT help him with that question by any physical contact - no 'kiss-kiss' , no twisting a sword in his wound . She is twisting a sword in his mind , so to speak . If she makes physical contact - then she MUST BE a physical entity . If she is ( a real physical person) - then what is the purpose of everything you have already established with the above ?!? We , or Conan cannot be sure 'yet' that she is 'real' -or the entire story is shot to hell !

Conan , being who he is - now has to know if she is real . So he is going to find out ! - he gets up & is going to find out how real she is , or not . She taunts him - at a time when all of his existence and who he is as a man is in question . When he proves to himself she is in fact a 'real woman' - he will show her and prove that he is in fact a 'real man' !
Stop .
Just think about all that , which is implied - but poetically left 'unsaid' in REH's narrative & for the sake of 'good taste/propriety' .

As we are unsure of her nature , Conan will now have to find out , he will chase her until he catches her , or until he drops dead trying to . 'We' get that from the narrative , or if filmed we would get that by the desperate look of determination as he raggedly sucks air chasing her in snow-drifts that are killing him bit-by-bit , but he will not stop - that is not an option now .

Let me draw attention right here to something that Blackman was/is clueless about - Conan does NOT know if she is 'real' . THAT is part of the reason he is chasing her to his own death - if she had made physical contact with him already - would he be half-insane now chasing her impossibly through the snow mile after mile ? That is 'integral' to the story - so NO KISSES ! NO 'TWISTING THE SWORD IN HIS GUTS' !

Blackman claimed he wanted to reduce the story down to it's "basic elements" or whatever his exact words were , but he absolutely missed ALL of the above "basic , or 'essential' elements completely .

So to him , are the "basic elements" - just violence & gore , and then a man half-dead who is determined to rape some woman who is obviously insane & out of her mind ?!? ( because she is walking naked in the snow on a battlefield ?!? ) - Because if you have taken out the question of "is Atali a real physical being/entity , or is she 'supernatural' - then that is exactly what you have . Just a sick & twisted wierd-a$$ed little story that has no "rhyme OR reason" for existing . There is NO redeeming quality in it , there is no thought-provoking questions in it . There is no exercise in 'morality play' . There is just a dry , sad & pointless sociopathic exercise in ugliness for nothing but ugliness's sake .

Okay , I feel like a real boob , not being a writer who does this for a living , yet still feeling compelled to HAVE TO elaborate all of the above - just for the sake of my love of the original material , not for being "paid" to do this for a living like Blackman does . Give THAT a moments thought ! - I's HIS JOB to know all the above , he is PAID to know all the above , and he DOESN'T know all the above .

I.M.H.O.tep !!!

This post has been edited by PainBrush: 20 December 2009 - 07:20 AM

[PainBrush]

Evil Thoth Amon said:

Again, you are attacking the wrong man. You want a justification of the changes? he posted it on his own blog. And this four page draft is only about practise for a teaser trailer. Only. That.

Blackman is an interesting fantasy writer, a big fan of Howard and a polite person. "Kick" him from this forums was a terrible mistake. I can´t understand your dog´s attitude, even as a purist.

If you want a justification from the actual screenplay with Conan "the last cimmerian" killing blind archers and shadow scouts in a quest for revenge with his friends Artus and Tamara... you will not find it. So, stop complaining about the only guy that is in our side.

No Thoth Amon , you are wrong . You might think you like Blackman , but you really don't , and I will tell you why...........

..if I replied to your post that way - would that bother you in the least ? It would be pretty damn arrogant and presumptuous of me to say something like that to someone wouldn't it ? - I'll answer for you , hell yes ! And that is why I have never dared to say something as asinine to anyone , least of all to people who I do not know , have never met , and have not even really talked to even online . Yet THAT is exactly what Blackman had the audacity to say - not just to 'ME' , but to EVERY ONE OF THE REH FANS WHO DID NOT AGREE THAT HIS F.G.D. TREATMENT WAS ANY GOOD .

STOP .
Read that again Thoth , Blackman knows better than YOU DO - what you think , feel or understand , and he will tell you why !!

He asked for the comments and opinions of fans about his 4-page arbitrary destruction and vandalization of REH's Frost Giants Daughter story . Just about EVERYONE said they did not like the changes/ommissions etc. that he made to it . EVERY single person gave honest direct opinions in an intelligent manner , but most did NOT like what he wrote . So he did NOT address ANY of the comments directly , but in a general "well , here's why I changed it - umm , I don't know , but it's cool !!"

He did not try to explain to anyone or elaborate on why he thought his changes/ommissions did work , and definitely didn't take the time to think anything out like for example "I" did in my post right above this one .

Instead he decided that ALL OF US are wrong , AND we're rude/stupid to disagree with him and/or to share the opinions he asked for . And we DO NOT KNOW WHAT WE LIKE OR WANT - BUT HE "DOES" . Those are "HIS" words .
He said " you all think you want a faithful adaptation , but you really don't , and here is why...." THAT is not a "polite" person Thoth , that is the epitome of rudeness and arrogant presumption .

Only a complete idiot would have the audacity to ignore EVERYONE who said differently , & rather than address THAT FACT ( that "HE" may have in fact been off-base )- instead tell them they are wrong and don't know what they think ?
AND only a complete idiot would sit still mutely and accept someone saying something like that to them .

So you go ahead and start a Dirk Blackman fan-club if you like Thoth - but don't dare dream that you will ever convince 'me' to bend over for someone and something like the above okay ? Don't tell me about my "dog attitude" or to "not complain" about Blackman with my "purist" attitude , I'm not a 'purist' and was ASKED for my opinion of Blackmans 'work' .
And I would rather be a dog Thoth , than to be some dull-eyed herd animal who is told what to think & accept it , from some egotistical arrogant pseudo-intellectual wannabe like Blackman , thank you much amigo . If you , him or anyone thinks I'm wrong about Blackman , I welcome 'HIS' attempt to convince me otherwise , not yours .

And as for "kicking him from this forums" , nobody "kicked him" off anything , he turned tail & disappeared all on his own rather than talk to folks like a sensible adult with any intelligence or credibility . I more than welcome any replies from him on ANY of the above stuff , I would like nothing more than to have that discussion . But something tells me he would just say "you think you want to have that discussion , but you really don't !- and here's why:........

This post has been edited by PainBrush: 20 December 2009 - 08:37 AM

[Ironhand]

Quote

No Thoth Amon , you are wrong . You might think you like Blackman , but you really don't , and I will tell you why...........

..if I replied to your post that way - would that bother you in the least ? It would be pretty damn arrogant and presumptuous of me to say something like that to someone wouldn't it ? - I'll answer for you , hell yes ! And that is why I have never dared to say something as asinine to anyone , least of all to people who I do not know , have never met , and have not even really talked to even online . Yet THAT is exactly what Blackman had the audacity to say - not just to 'ME' , but to EVERY ONE OF THE REH FANS WHO DID NOT AGREE THAT HIS F.G.D. TREATMENT WAS ANY GOOD .

QFT, PB. I was so apoplectic when I read that from Blackman that I was incapable of replying directly to it. Or at least, I was incapable of replying politely to it. That was why I illegally posted my transcription of FGD. It was sort of a sublimation of my rage.

This post has been edited by Ironhand: 20 December 2009 - 08:42 AM

[Waldgeist]

Guys don't kill yourself over that sentence. He was just not wise enough to explain the background of a sentence like this, before firing it out in a good way. The real thing he wanted to say is: "You have to know your job and sometimes that involves doing things, that non-professionals will not understand, but what is ultimately what they wanna see in the cinema as a movie". He is actually quite right with that assumption, because most of us haven't ever written a screenplay for a blockbuster movie. We are by definition non-knowledgeable people and can only judge a script with "book-reader" eyes.

So at least THAT sentence sounds a lot harsher than it was actually meant to be. It's the same sentence you sometimes have to use as any creative person. A graphic designer, sometimes has to convince his customer that blue on a yellow background is NOT what he wants, a game designer has to convince, that a REAL sandbox game with landscapes that are as large as the real world (ergo going somewhere would really take DAYS to walk) is not what they want to PLAY. It's not meant in an arrogant way, more in an analytical sense.

There is an inherent problem with the human mind. Everything we don't know well or in depth, we think is VERY EASY. We can't help it. The more we learn or get experience about any topic, we start to realize how deep and complicated it really is.

Ok so much for the defense of that sentence. Everything else I said on this thread still stands true. He had to cut down and capture the essense. That much is true, but in my opinion he didn't. That is an uninformed opinion of course, but the lone fact that Conan has gone from a well spoken, angry barbarian, enchanted by a godess of lust, lured into the snow to die, ripping himself free of her curse only so much that he was able to survive a fight, missing to get a grasp of her and being left in the snow completely dizzy, to a one liner grunting brute, that lets himself be tortured, shows no sign of being enchanted, just seems to want to violate her for being naked (no dialogue, no expression explanation, nothing in the screenplay shows the viewer that he is actually enchanted, just sexually roused and angry), wordless butchers two enemies and finally is confused that shes gone standing in the snow, shows me that his "nailing down" misses all the nails.

Cutting of original dialogue is ok. Even cutting of scenes no problem. But introducing new ones, that screw with the character and purpose and direction of the story, while completely missing the point of the whole story... my uninformed opinion, my non-screenwriter sense is tingling this is NOT a good work of screenwriting art, because the essence of FGD is not the scenery, but the way the characters behave in it and he only used the scenery and forgot the characters. Looks do not go before purpose. That holds true for any form of writing or creative story telling, even cinema.

About the him being rude. Well I have to say: How you yell in the forest you will hear the echo on that one We started being rude first. Of course a grown up person could restrain himself, but we all know how we sometimes burst a bubble and loose ourselves in a forum post, so i will not point any fingers here or criticize him on that one. He was standing in front of a wall, with guns pointed at him, of course he reacted like a trapped tiger defending himself with growls

Cheers,
Waldgeist

This post has been edited by Waldgeist: 20 December 2009 - 12:15 PM

[duaneshadow]

the big balls up here, for me, is that if this bloke is involved in the creative process either for a rewrite, or a sequel, by acting like a bunch of autistic comic book guy churls, the board members pissed him off so much that he buggered off never to return, so ANY chance of having a positive influence on the process was lost. Donkeys.

[crossplain pilgrim]

It is possible to have a spirited debate without getting personal. Ratchet it down a few clicks, guys. We are in the season of peace, after all. Happy holidays.

[PainBrush]

Waldgeist said:

Guys don't kill yourself over that sentence. He was just not wise enough to explain the background of a sentence like this, before firing it out in a good way. The real thing he wanted to say is: "You have to know your job and sometimes that involves doing things, that non-professionals will not understand, but what is ultimately what they wanna see in the cinema as a movie". He is actually quite right with that assumption, because most of us haven't ever written a screenplay for a blockbuster movie. We are by definition non-knowledgeable people and can only judge a script with "book-reader" eyes.

All I can say is "wow" . For what it's worth , I give you much more credit for your intelligence than it seems you give yourself & everyone else Jo . Not only do you imagine "what he really meant to say" , but then you go on to say he is "quite right" about those things he didn't say ! And as far as being "non-knowlegeable" and so only having "book-readers" eyes , well - I don't know much about how an atomic bomb is actually assembled , but I know with my "book-readers eyes" that I don't want one to explode in my face .

And I think you saying "What he REALLY meant to say was this:...." - well I do like you Johanne , so I won't comment on that with my 'first reaction & gut instinct' . I.M.opinion - that is NOT what he said , that is not what he "meant to say" , & if he was a mature and/or intelligent adult he wouldn't have just called us "dumb" and "rude" for giving the opinions he asked for before disappearing like an angry clueless teenager , and then he might be able to tell us himself if he really meant something other than what he DID say. .

In my opinion your "defense"/explanation" of what Blackman 'really meant to say ' -but DIDN'T is way off base . He asked for "comments/opinions" - which he quickly recieved . And i will not sit back silently as I am labelled "dumb" or "rude" for answering truthfully & honestly . My comments were well thought out , right on target & straight to the point . Okay , for the record - the only part of "MY" replies that he considered rude was where I stated that Blackman apparently doesn't have the intelligence and/or the talent to "ADD" to , or apparently "subtract from" REH's story in any "intelligent/sensible/practical way" . That's not the exact words I used - but it's the exact meaning & intent & nobody was confused as to 'my' meaning .
HOWEVER Blackman chose to take that personally & apparently wrote me ( & everyone else )off as just "RUDE" and dumb in his opinion . Well - don't ask folks for their opinions if you can't handle them like an adult & instead just lash-out like a little child .

Quote

A graphic designer, sometimes has to convince his customer that blue on a yellow background is NOT what he wants, a game designer has to convince, that a REAL sandbox game with landscapes that are as large as the real world (ergo going somewhere would really take DAYS to walk) is not what they want to PLAY. It's not meant in an arrogant way, more in an analytical sense.

- well that's 'your' opinion Jo . And imaginative tho your explanation is - it doesn't change the fact that Blackman not only didn't try to "convince" anybody of anything about his "sandbox" - he acted like an overly sensitive schoolgirl who imagined much more damage than was intended or given .

Quote

There is an inherent problem with the human mind. Everything we don't know well or in depth, we think is VERY EASY.

Really Jo ?!? from the intelligent & well thought out replies & explanations given to Blackman & his attempt at F.G.D. , now we are somehow "mentally deficient" apparently ?!? Are you sure you wouldn't re-phrase that given a 2nd thought Jo ? Question something & then *poof* you're suddenly a retard !

duaneshadow said:

by acting like a bunch of autistic comic book guy churls, the board members pissed him off so much that he buggered off never to return, so ANY chance of having a positive influence on the process was lost. Donkeys.

Well , okay I'll take your word for it Duane - what exactly did you say that was like an "autistic
comic-book churl" ? Because I don't recall anything like that - but if you insist you sounded autistic , then can you give us even '1' quote PLEASE ? I honestly missed it the first time around . And I want to say right here that 'my' comments weren't even made on these forums , they were made on BLACKMANS blog-page . The conversation then 'later' carried over to here , so if you feel responsible for "scaring him away" ( really?!? ) - well then you go ahead & claim that responsibility . & if you want to address what I may have said on another site , please go over to that other site & address it all you want , and not here , address the things I have said here . Thank you .

And , I have to tell you Duane , it's really great that you have the confidence to believe you are actually involved in some collaborative process with Blackman . Such confidence is admirable , I wish I could convince myself of my own self-worth as deeply , and convince myself that Blackman is so intelligent/kind/receptive to any of "us" helping him out with his work .

Wow

.p.s. it's really bizarre to me that nobody wants to discuss the F.G.D. mess that Blackman wrote , or address the well-thought out & elaborated comments I took more than just a few minutes to write , all anybody is worried about is if we hurt Blackmans feelings ?!?
Are you guys serious ?

This post has been edited by PainBrush: 20 December 2009 - 10:55 PM

[PainBrush]

Ironhand said:

Quote

No Thoth Amon , you are wrong . You might think you like Blackman , but you really don't , and I will tell you why...........

..if I replied to your post that way - would that bother you in the least ? It would be pretty damn arrogant and presumptuous of me to say something like that to someone wouldn't it ? - I'll answer for you , hell yes ! And that is why I have never dared to say something as asinine to anyone , least of all to people who I do not know , have never met , and have not even really talked to even online . Yet THAT is exactly what Blackman had the audacity to say - not just to 'ME' , but to EVERY ONE OF THE REH FANS WHO DID NOT AGREE THAT HIS F.G.D. TREATMENT WAS ANY GOOD .

QFT, PB. I was so apoplectic when I read that from Blackman that I was incapable of replying directly to it. Or at least, I was incapable of replying politely to it. That was why I illegally posted my transcription of FGD. It was sort of a sublimation of my rage.

And I assure you that fact wasn't lost on me ! I/we can sit & detail and elaborate all that I or anyone else think is wrong , but it's 10 times more effective to just quietly pull the rug out from under , & show how it should have been written in the first place . But I have to tell ya Ironhand , I'm surprised that you haven't called the forums & all of us dumb & rude & then disappear without any discussion . I mean , that's how the big-shots do it isn't it ?!?

[duaneshadow]

autistic as in lacking social awareness or the capacity to understand the implications of one's behaviour on the people around you. In general terms. You can have a hissy fit and take it as personally as you like PB, but you decided to refer my statement to yourself.

[Waldgeist]

PainBrush, on 20 December 2009 - 10:05 PM, said:

... lots' of Painbrush specially formatted power language...

About my interpretation: Everyone interprets every information they process through their own given filter of language and you know that. When I read ALL he wrote, I could not interpret it any different than how I presented it in my former post. Maybe I give him too much credit, for just choosing the wrong words, but the reason why I interpret stuff like his in different words automatically is from my experience as a Community Manager. I've learned over the many years of managing thousands of players, that about 99% of all flamewars do not start because of a disagreement on facts, but just because of a misunderstanding due to the wrong application of words. Very often I could disarm an explosive thread, by simply explaining the SAME thing to both sides in different words. It doesn't mean I am "smarter" or they are too dumb to use their own language, but that an outsider can process information differently, than people involved in a heated discussion. That's what moderators are for.

Not everyone tries to insult you if you think he tries to insult you. I merely stated scientific facts about how humans process information and the shortcomings of ALL our brains (and there are so many it's not even funny anymore... we give ourselves way more credit for our wits, than we should)

As I said in my post (the part you left out in your selective quoting), he did not start out barking and growling. He switched into that mode when we switched from simple criticism, to which he replied explaining, open and in some points understanding way, to personal attacks and a way of discussion, HE was not used to. We know each other, we show tolerance and understanding, because we learn how people on this forum communicate, but he was not used to that. As I said, his reply was not grown-up or correct, but I think the same tolerance we request from others, we have to show ourselves. No one paid him to communicate with us, so we are not in a "business-customer" relationship, we have no right to demand to be treated better than we treat. If you growl, you get barked at. Simple rule. I thought you of all people would understand that.

Cheers,
Waldgeist

This post has been edited by Waldgeist: 21 December 2009 - 01:04 AM

[PainBrush]

Waldgeist said:

No one paid him to communicate with us, so we are not in a "business-customer" relationship, we have no right to demand to be treated better than we treat. If you growl, you get barked at. Simple rule. I thought you of all people would understand that.

Absolutely I understand that , and that is the exact reason every one of my posts has had long detailed explanations of what in my opinion doesn't work and why in Blackmans lousy job of adapting F.G.D. - something everyone just ignores in their rush to comfort wounded 'lil Blackman as if we're just all sitting aroound waiting for people to flame . Then you get cartoon characters like Evil-Thoth and Duane up there in the peanut gallery who takes every space in between posts to jab-jab & make silly criticisms instead of ANY meaningful discussion on the actual topic and/or the person the topic is about . I wish everyone would listen to Crossplain Pilgrim - & quit reviewing the reviewewrs & stay on topic . But dollars to donuts we'll hear from Duane or Thoth again & it won't be about Blackmans "practice script" .

And as far as us not being in any "agreement" with Blackman where we can expect to be treated this way or that , the simple difference IS Jo , that Blackman ASKED FOR OUR OPINIONS . WHEN WE GAVE THEM HE DIDN'T TALK ABOUT IT - HE SAID WE WERE STUPID , WRONG AND RUDE . - Please read that all again before continuing .


p.s. - the "CAPITAL" letters aren't any sort of "heated discussion" whatsoever , or as the cartoon character mumbled a "hissy-fit" ( there's that great over-exaggerated sense of self-worth with him again !! gotta love that ! ) , the capital letters are because it is something nobody has acknowledged yet , and don't seem inclined to , yet apparently needs repeating over and over again - he ASKED FOR MY COMMENTS , he was ANSWERED . Plain . Simple . End of THAT . And there is your "business-customer relationship" where talking to people a certain way is expected .

If anyone is interested , there is a topic of discussion here ( which doesn't involve "the 'proper way' to talk to Dirk Blackman " )- it would be kind of cool if anybody wanted to discuss in an intelligent and adult manner any of the numerous detailed reasons & breakdowns I took the time to explain in nice civil language a few posts back ( # 107) about the topic at hand .

This post has been edited by PainBrush: 21 December 2009 - 04:18 AM

[monk]

Waldgeist, on 20 December 2009 - 06:09 AM, said:

Guys don't kill yourself over that sentence. He was just not wise enough to explain the background of a sentence like this, before firing it out in a good way. The real thing he wanted to say is: "You have to know your job and sometimes that involves doing things, that non-professionals will not understand, but what is ultimately what they wanna see in the cinema as a movie". He is actually quite right with that assumption, because most of us haven't ever written a screenplay for a blockbuster movie. We are by definition non-knowledgeable people and can only judge a script with "book-reader" eyes.

but hold on waldgeist- I mean it may be that mr. blackman was writing that post to people from the forum, but to me it assumes quite a bit. It assumes that the criticisms were lodged because of ignorance. and well, I think this assumes a bit about your readers which may not be a fair assessment- I mean his readers. You know what I mean. To me, and a lot of other people I've pointed to his piece, he was basically covering a few mistakes he made in practice- which is no big deal- by drawing the mantle of art, rather than just clanking his iron balls together and accepting the criticisms. The invocation to his script being derived from the practice and application of his 'art', I mean...wow...when I had my design students in crit and one of them would trot that out it was generally open season. You have to really, I mean, really, defend that kind of statement. And the thing is, on this occasion, it falls pretty flat as a defense. And when that is so obviously a cliche'd defense, well it is generally pretty much critically frowned on, it's an excuse. And was shown to be, in the many valid criticisms lodged and I am in accord with many of them cited here, recognized them as well, and I see so are you. So, if you've actually done art with something, that's great and your work can stand on it's own merits to the critical eye. There isn't really a thing Blackman did with FGD that is defensible by laying claim to the process of creating art, and his initial summation of FGD shows he didn't quite get the story. Again, no problem, it was practice. But what wasn't practice was the looking down the nose response and defense. If what you've done has advanced the original piece while retaining the essence, I really don't think there would be much problem. Scrapping major elements for a cool shot defense, is not Art with a capital A. Maybe it's art, but then again... You can indeed create Art in a professional setting, it is more than possible to do in a professional medium. HE should be the one telling THEM how they have gutted the character, but then... so did he gut the character in a way in his reduction...I hope that emphasis doesn't get any panties twisted. I mean if there is a dog eat dog world out there it is in hollywood alive and well, this exchange honestly seemed relatively tame lol. I really didn't read anything that should have made someone experienced with that world to pull up their stakes. If you are creating Art for the masses consumption then you sure as hell can't take criticism personally. I'm sure it is actually that he is just busy and that by no means was he 'driven' from the forum, lmao.

waldgeist said:

Cutting of original dialogue is ok. Even cutting of scenes no problem. But introducing new ones, that screw with the character and purpose and direction of the story, while completely missing the point of the whole story... my uninformed opinion, my non-screenwriter sense is tingling this is NOT a good work of screenwriting art, because the essence of FGD is not the scenery, but the way the characters behave in it and he only used the scenery and forgot the characters. Looks do not go before purpose. That holds true for any form of writing or creative story telling, even cinema.

About the him being rude. Well I have to say: How you yell in the forest you will hear the echo on that one We started being rude first. Of course a grown up person could restrain himself, but we all know how we sometimes burst a bubble and loose ourselves in a forum post, so i will not point any fingers here or criticize him on that one. He was standing in front of a wall, with guns pointed at him, of course he reacted like a trapped tiger defending himself with growls

Cheers,
Waldgeist

I think a certain level of understanding must be developed from his perspective if he really was driven from the forum...this is just a forum and one full of opinions, perhaps some with more weight than others! perhaps some more visceral than others! but if anyone should be the lone voice in the wilderness it's fans who commit to forming a community and people uber concerned with the legacy and sensitive to the existing mangling Conan and REH got in CtB and CtD. How is it that someone charged with delivering the next iteration doesn't know they are on eggshells, all things considered. Someone's idea of "Art" got us CtB and CtD.

[Ironhand]

PainBrush, on 20 December 2009 - 04:03 PM, said:

Ironhand said:

Quote

No Thoth Amon , you are wrong . You might think you like Blackman , but you really don't , and I will tell you why...........

..if I replied to your post that way - would that bother you in the least ? It would be pretty damn arrogant and presumptuous of me to say something like that to someone wouldn't it ? - I'll answer for you , hell yes ! And that is why I have never dared to say something as asinine to anyone , least of all to people who I do not know , have never met , and have not even really talked to even online . Yet THAT is exactly what Blackman had the audacity to say - not just to 'ME' , but to EVERY ONE OF THE REH FANS WHO DID NOT AGREE THAT HIS F.G.D. TREATMENT WAS ANY GOOD .

QFT, PB. I was so apoplectic when I read that from Blackman that I was incapable of replying directly to it. Or at least, I was incapable of replying politely to it. That was why I illegally posted my transcription of FGD. It was sort of a sublimation of my rage.

And I assure you that fact wasn't lost on me ! I/we can sit & detail and elaborate all that I or anyone else think is wrong , but it's 10 times more effective to just quietly pull the rug out from under , & show how it should have been written in the first place . But I have to tell ya Ironhand , I'm surprised that you haven't called the forums & all of us dumb & rude & then disappear without any discussion . I mean , that's how the big-shots do it isn't it ?!?

If you ever piss me off, I'll write a screenplay about you.

[duaneshadow]

Quote

Then you get cartoon characters like Evil-Thoth and Duane up there in the peanut gallery who takes every space in between posts to jab-jab & make silly criticisms

I posted my feelings about his script on his blog. read them there if you like. I have no problem with people criticising somebody's work, especially if it is put out on a public forum. My issue is not about WHAT was said, but HOW it was said. Shouting louder than other people is not indicative of a more robust argument. It doesn't help communication, and the response only served to make him leave the forum. Not because of sensible conversation, but because of perceived rudeness and aggression (not just by him)

Quote

And , I have to tell you Duane , it's really great that you have the confidence to believe you are actually involved in some collaborative process with Blackman . Such confidence is admirable , I wish I could convince myself of my own self-worth as deeply , and convince myself that Blackman is so intelligent/kind/receptive to any of "us" helping him out with his work .

Wow

i really don't get the impression that self worth is a problem for you.

There is absolutely no point in having a 'debate' with you, because you give every impression of not wanting a debate, but to hammer people into agreeing with you.

This post has been edited by duaneshadow: 21 December 2009 - 07:25 PM