Is the ROTS novelisation any good?

[robthehand 3]

link

Is it worth reading?

[Damo 0]

I have it!

Its good, it has more things that its not really in the movie..although i havent finished reading it yet. 8O

[JoeinAR 1,759]

no, its a total piece of crap, terrible, garbage.

[Luke Skywalker 1,284]

NOTE: Joe doesnt usually like science fiction novels (if i remember well)

[JoeinAR 1,759]

no, Joe doesn't read many science fiction novels, sadly most of those he does read are bad, but ROTS was beyond bad. Fortunately the movie was much better.

[John Crichton 4]

It's alright, very inconsistent. Good at some points, bad in others. The key point of the movie, the birth of Vader on, is only the last third or so of the book. The opening space battle and antics on the Invisible Hand go on forever. However, it does expand on plot lines that didn't make it into the movie pretty well, especially the Senate and the start of the Rebellion.

[deleted account 108]

Just to counter JoeinAR's vitriolic dismissal of everything Lucasfilm post May25, 1977, I will offer a rebuttal to his review of the SITH novel by saying I think it's really really good - I think it's the best of the film adaptions by far and actually reads like a book rather than a reformatted screenplay. I would argue that character's motivations and decisions make more sense in the book than in the film since we are privy to their inner thoughts in the novel while the movie can only show us their actions, especially in the case of Anakin.

It's true that by page-count, the actions on the Invisible Hand are more heavily weighted in the book, but the result is that Anakin's murder of Dooku actually plays more like a step toward the Dark Side than a precursor to his first step. The movie makes it feel much more like he switches to the Dark Side immediately upon killing Mace while the book the transformation feels more "spread-out".

[JoeinAR 1,759]

Just to counter JoeinAR's vitriolic dismissal of everything Lucasfilm post May25, 1977, I will offer a rebuttal to his review of the SITH novel

weak, weak.

[robthehand 3]

Well, I've got an 8 hour ferry trip tomorrow evening, and I just want some advice as to whether I should buy it or not - I want a long book (last year I finished Fellowship of the Ring on that one crossing).

[Kendal_Ozzel 32]

This is how Matthew Stover writes a book.

Stover doesn't write like most authors. In his writing, he repeats many phrases and words for emphasis. Words that describe. Words that convey. Words that flow from the dark, juicy depths of his brain to the cold, black ink on the pages of the book. He uses these words like a Jedi uses the Force. He does not just use the words; he is the words.

This is how Matthew Stover writes a book.

[JoeinAR 1,759]

This is how Matthew Stover writes a book.

Stover doesn't write like most authors. In his writing, he repeats many phrases and words for emphasis. Words that describe. Words that convey. Words that flow from the dark, juicy depths of his brain to the cold, black ink on the pages of the book. He uses these words like a Jedi uses the Force. He does not just use the words; he is the words.

This is how Matthew Stover writes a book.

aaaahhhhhhh

flashback

flashback

[deleted account 108]

Just to counter JoeinAR's vitriolic dismissal of everything Lucasfilm post May25, 1977, I will offer a rebuttal to his review of the SITH novel

weak, weak.

hey man don't dish it out if you can't take it. if you're gonna slam things at least own it that your slamming them.

[ChrisAfonso 159]

LOL

Well, I found that passage very nicely written. At least for me, it was an unusual, never-before-seen way of writing a "set piece" scene, so to say. It did convey Anakin's inner thoughts and fellings of terror much better than the film.

[JoeinAR 1,759]

Just to counter JoeinAR's vitriolic dismissal of everything Lucasfilm post May25, 1977, I will offer a rebuttal to his review of the SITH novel

weak, weak.

hey man don't dish it out if you can't take it. if you're gonna slam things at least own it that your slamming them.

if your going to accuse me of something then get it right ej, your intial statement is flawed, you'd get a big fat F if this were a term paper, I'd say nice try but it would be a lie,

so I stand by my original statement to you, weak, weak.

[ridan 0]

I liked it. There was so much more happening that wasn't shown in the movie, character actions are more realistic, and in the repetition of phrases, images stick with you throughout the book.

The best parts, IMO, are the parts with Palpatine seducing Anakin. In the movie, it felt like Palpatine was just talking. In the book, I actually felt chilled by his stories and just him in general.

[deleted account 108]

All right, let's be more specific - what is "weak, weak" about my initial statement? the term "vitriolic"? the term "dismissal"? the date "May 25, 1977"?

Your review of the SITH novel was thus: "no, its a total piece of crap, terrible, garbage." I would say that it could be argued that that's a "vitriolic dismissal". So the weak part of my statement must be the date "May 25, 1977". FIne, I'll take an F for having the wrong date.

And when did you lose your sense of humor? I think it's a pretty obvious fact to the regulars on this board that you fall on the less-than-positive side when it comes to recent Lucasfilm endeavors, while I tend to say they get a bum rap. And yet you seem offended that I would take just that stance in my post. I figured it was pretty obvious that I was exercising some humorous hyperbole. Hence my use of the term rebuttal, as if we were in a court of law.

And finally, the fact that your posts include a quoted line from Episode III kind of indicates to everyone that you don't actually dismiss EVERY single Lucasfilm thing since 1977 anyways.

by the way, i did edit this post thrice to clarify 2 points i wanted to make and fix some spelling after rereading it. i hope that isn't considered "cheating"

FOURTH EDIT - ok I also said "everything Lucasfilm". Perhaps that's a weak statement? So saying "everything" and maybe having the wrong date is 2 weak things, hence "weak, weak". 2 out of 4 weak statements is 50% weak, 50% strong, arguably that could be graded an F, although maybe not a BIG FAT F, and I don't think it would be a lie to say that I did in fact, make a "nice try".