books recently, Day 4, your hatred book. It is: zombies, werewolves, vampires - a, well, cultural criticism. If I should swear (I would, if I may, a bit of jumping back and forth, day 3 after I submit)
There is no book that I "hate". It could be to give thoughts that I hate or it could have been written by someone whose death I would not regret much. But hate a book? Is difficult for me. However, there are books that I highly silly, unnecessary - and therefore find it worth mentioning. This includes "Dracula - The Return" by Dacre Stoker and Ian Holt. For this I must, however, in some detail.
is to defend themselves against zombies so simple that I am already wondering how the whole in the docu-soaps (28 Days Later, Shaun of the dead and the rest of them) are constantly on the verge of taking over the world domination. This is totally unrealistic. For a zombie namely a baseball bat and a cool spell rich in spirited slam.
For vampires and werewolves is known to be different.
The werewolf is striking that in today's bears fruit concoctions (as good as they are, Underworld, etc.), the propaganda of a Alexandre Dumas and the story finally prevails in which the poor get Unterschichtler new power. But just as stupid as a werewolf. This time was different. In "American Werewolf" played the social component of a more minor role.
In turn, it was John Sinclair, then overtly but rather to eroticism. Queen of the wolves and such. That was in the 70s. With John Sinclair, however, the vampires were freed of all but Emotionsgetue. And rightly so! as we have learned from Bram Stoker: The vampire is in fact simply antisocial. That can gloss over a thousand times with Monica Belucci, Mr. Copola remains Fact: The vampire is in itself anti-social and concoctions such as "Twilight" I can check off without being seen as the far-fetched social romanticism.
And then comes the great-grandnephew (!) By Bram Stoker (why not the grandson of the concubine by the bartender the publisher?). And writes: Dracula - the return. Blurb: The "official continuation of the immortal classic".
By then my swelling of the chamber. Official sequel? Who decided that? And what does the word "officially" better? The book begins at this very well: a Bram Stoker will bring the history of Harker to the theater, the "Son" is from Jonathan and Mina Harker actors read the play and recognize a lot again.
It ends but as ridiculous as a ridiculous book may end at all - including Star Wars quote (and yes, I mean the Star Wars quote, sorry for the spoiler). It's crap, do not read it.
The worst thing about the book is not history, but the unbearable Genöle by Dacre Stoker, in the epilogue. Since complained seriously of things big things from Bram Stoker about the fact that the family could benefit from any Draculafilm Stoker financially. Well. Wicked, wicked world.
I am, I have written about
, friend, a relative of the copyright. But it is not acceptable that a family member complains about the umpteenth degree, that creative people make use of the motifs that has burned up some day the big thing uncle - without of course they thought of themselves. We still talk of Dracula.
But to "hate" the book to me is too hard. I can not.
Now playing: at least in thought - the title track for the Verserieung from "Little Vampire".
