The Vampire Count of Monte Cristo

[C.T. Phipps]

Arthmail,

If it's a cut and paste job it's simply lazy. That's my primary objection. A rewritten satire or reexamination is a different animal.

To explain what it is, fully, it's about 5% the original text (the Count up to becoming a vampire). 20% "totally new" material (The Count's feeding habits, him dealing with his condition, and so on). 75% "These scenes happened in the novel but have been rewritten with the Count as a vampire and other characters reacting to it."

I think it's probably a little more faithful than the GOT adaptation to the book series but not by much. Most scenes go similarly, then a few swerve left.

The C&P is minimal and only in the intro.

It's not really a satire, though, which may disappoint someone. It's more like the author seriously thought "What if the Count of Monte Cristo were a vampire" was a good idea to write a novel around then didn't change the names.

[Fragile Bird]

Only time will tell. :)

My prediction is, check the remainder bins in a few months..

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Mr. Phippes,

He may have been better served if he had changed the names and title.

[TerraPrime]

[mod hat]

Let's keep the discussion to the material, and keep offf the personal stuff.

Thanks.

[/mod hat]

[jurble]

There's a Vampire Count of Monte Cristo? But Japan did that years ago (and IN SPACE) with Gankutsuo.

[C.T. Phipps]

There's a Vampire Count of Monte Cristo? But Japan did that years ago (and IN SPACE) with Gankutsuo.

Sadly, there's no mecha in this one.

:cool4:

[Arthmail]

I can see your point, Ser Scot. I don't know enough about these things. I smile when I see them and feel no compulsion to pick them up at all.

[C.T. Phipps]

Well, I hope someone picks it up and reads it so it can be discussed here with someone other than me.

[Anatúrinbor]

Your best bet is to tell us what happens and we'll discuss it with you. I mean I don't think anyone here wants to read this book.

[C.T. Phipps]

Your best bet is to tell us what happens and we'll discuss it with you. I mean I don't think anyone here wants to read this book.

I posted the thread to share something I liked and hoped to connect with other people who liked it.

Your loss.

[Anatúrinbor]

Your loss.

That is what happens in the book? :P

[C.T. Phipps]

Why in the world would I ruin a book by explaining it?

IMHO, that's ME s****** on both the original Dumas and Baugh's rewrite.

[Zorral]

I'm a reader who never buys or reads these cynically extruded products that industrially exploit real writers with actual imaginations and writing ability, and their great books. Nor shall I ever.

[C.T. Phipps]

I'm a reader who never buys or reads these cynically extruded products that industrially exploit real writers with actual imaginations and writing ability, and their great books. Nor shall I ever.

Given you've not read the book and it's a loving tribute to the Count of Monte Cristo, I'll just keep my response to you and anyone else who holds this opinion simple.

You're wrong about the book.

You're wrong in general.

I'd say worse but the moderators would ban me.

[Anatúrinbor]

Why in the world would I ruin a book by explaining it?

IMHO, that's ME s****** on both the original Dumas and Baugh's rewrite.

I was only joking.

[Zorral]

I know the original works that are the favorites of these ripoffs, from Austen's novels to even historical figures such as Abraham Lincoln, very very well. Just a description such you provide tells me how much I will hate such a work -- they are NOT entertaining or worth my time. One person's silly idea that "Ooooo this is cool (and easy bux) does not make for worthwhile reading time, particularly in light of the fact there are so many wonderful books available.

So many books so little time -- it's your loss, kiddo, not mine.

:cheers:.

As well, my classical sensibility finds mashing-up just -- stupid. That some like it, fine. But pushing this taste upon those who don't, and insist it's great stuff, and condemn them into the bargain, that's not how to play the game.

[C.T. Phipps]

I know the original works that are the favorites of these ripoffs, from Austen's novels to even historical figures such as Abraham Lincoln, very very well. Just a description such you provide tells me how much I will hate such a work -- they are NOT entertaining or worth my time. One person's silly idea that "Ooooo this is cool (and easy bux) does not make for worthwhile reading time, particularly in light of the fact there are so many wonderful books available.

So many books so little time -- it's your loss, kiddo, not mine.

:cheers:.

As well, my classical sensibility finds mashing-up just -- stupid. That some like it, fine. But pushing this taste upon those who don't, and insist it's great stuff, and condemn them into the bargain, that's not how to play the game.

I'm saying you're welcome to say that about books you've read. That's a position I support and respect.

It's not when it's something different. To me, you're saying, essentially, "I don't like Tolkien so I wouldn't like A Song of Ice and Fire because all fantasy is the same." No, TCOMC isn't as good as either of that. Not even close. That doesn't mean that one can make a blanket statement about another book by a different author out of hand and expect someone who has read the book and enjoyed it to agree.

You may think I'm wrong but it's hard to take your opinion seriously when you make it with a disclaimer at the front you have no knowledge of the book. Only what you think it's about.

So from my perspective, if you want to talk about how it's a horrible-horrible idea you should either read the book and say WHY or stay out of the thread.

[C.T. Phipps]

I apologize if I was getting grouchy. It's just a book after all.

[sologdin]

scot, you're such naysayer and doubting thomas. you know that the following titles would be awesome:

gravity's rainbow's end

war and peace of the worlds

heart of darkness that comes before

a doll's slaughterhouse five

brokeback magic fountain

(okay, that last one isn't speculative, but i think a proulx/mann/rand mashup is substantially overdue.)

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Sologdin,

As I said if the author actually writes a new work based upon the original exploring new ideas I have less of a problem. It is cut and paste stories where the public domain text of the orginal author is largely unchanged that I find objectionable. It's lazy.