Sam Downing - Latest Comments

Re: Dumble-war: Michael Gambon vs Richard Harris

Pianoperson — Wed, 04 Jan 2012 22:28:37 -0000

One of the stupidest things I have read in a long time - basically, because it blames an actor for the actions/foibles of a character, or indeed, a script!!! Both Harris and Gambon are fine actors, and EITHER would have been capable of playing Dumbledore from start to finish. Had Harris survived, he'd doubtless have done a great job. As it was, he didn't... and Gambon filled his shoes wonderfully. One can really only speculate (pointlessly) on what would have happened to the role otherwise. Whoever wrote this 'comparison' has WAY too much time on their hands.

Re: Dumble-war: Michael Gambon vs Richard Harris

Sam Downing — Sun, 04 Dec 2011 06:11:41 -0000

Your poor diaphragm.

Re: Dumble-war: Michael Gambon vs Richard Harris

HarrisAlltheWay — Sat, 03 Dec 2011 07:45:23 -0000

Okay, I sighed so many times reading this article that my diaphragm collapsed, so give me a second ...

Alright, here we go. First off, let's go by absolute fact. Michael Gambon, although not entirely his fault, never looked or acted remotely like the book Dumbledore ... EVER. Yeah okay, he wasn't bad in HBP but even in POA (where he, like in HBP, didn't get aggressive) he had no real grasp of Dumbledore's wisdom, his twinkling eyes, his warm smile and he was just too aloof in POA. That isn't Dumbledore. Now, let's talk about something I have read on countless blog pages and websites about Richard Harris being too old for the action scenes in OoP.

No one seems to remember that the poor man was dying of Hodgkin's Lymphoma a.k.a cancer of the lymphatic system. He was sick! Of course he seemed frail in Chamber of Secrets! Watch him in that film and, although he seems to walk around reasonably well, his voice sounds phlegmy and wispish. My strong belief is that it was the disease causing these effects on his body, not the results of being 71-72 years old.

So, if we are to imagine him in future films, picture him at a time when he at least appeared not to be suffering from cancer ... YEP, Philosopher's Stone, guys! Watch him closely in that movie, and you can tell that he was pretty much fine then! That movie was made less than a year before CoS, so you tell me: Would it likely be that aging a year caused him to sound so frail and, forgive me Mr Harris, appear to be breathing through his mouth most of the time? Or does it make more sense that his disease had taken its toll?

Re: Book review: A Storm of Swords, A Feast for Crows, and A Dance with Dragons, George R.R. Martin

Sam Downing — Tue, 01 Nov 2011 18:58:53 -0000

The third paragraph of the review explicitly says it contains spoilers for Dragons. So...

Re: Book review: A Storm of Swords, A Feast for Crows, and A Dance with Dragons, George R.R. Martin

tony — Tue, 01 Nov 2011 18:49:37 -0000

what the fuck ? why did you give away the ending for dragons right at the start of the review is it that hard to give a review without telling everyone what happens at the end of the book ? idiot

Re: Book review: Monsters of Men, Patrick Ness

ljm3001 — Mon, 31 Oct 2011 11:22:04 -0000

This review has been completely spot on. I have read other reviews but no one has come this close to how i felt.
This meaning that i was also completely confused by the Mayor. I wanted to hate him and crush him but what if that"hum" was really good? And as far as characters go, what does Ness see of himself in the Mayor and what scary traits does he have that we see in ourselves? I wont be able to get him out if my head for a very long time. I feel like i could just write a book about the mayor.
I agree that books ended well but i still wanted just a little bit more. And alsi the last plot twist did almost make me hate the book but i think that you are right about the shock value observation. But over all i do think this is one of the best series i have ever read.

Re: Charlie in the White House: Roald Dahl’s unwritten sequel

FALCON PAWNCH — Sun, 09 Oct 2011 10:57:39 -0000

i wish he finished it :(

Re: Book review: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, J.K. Rowling, read by Stephen Fry

Drunkwriter — Sun, 09 Oct 2011 00:31:37 -0000

I also 'read' these as an audiobook. (Stephen Fry, of course) and found these books to be the greatest serial novels I've ever read. And this, after all my (admittedly wrong) 'Harry Potter is for kids' comments. Sometimes, it feels fine to eat crow.

Re: Book review: Monsters of Men, Patrick Ness

Firecyclones — Thu, 06 Oct 2011 19:51:41 -0000

My favorite book series of all time.

Re: Book review: Boys and Girls, edited by Paul Burston

Vglee — Tue, 20 Sep 2011 06:10:55 -0000

Hello Sam, just to say what a lovely review of Boys and Girls. I'm so pleased you enjoyed Knitting for Beginners. All best wishes,
VGL

Re: Adults reading kids’ books is not, in fact, “bullshit”

cat — Sun, 11 Sep 2011 11:33:06 -0000

one opinion and another opinion
i agree with the author that hungry beast better grew up and maybe then they reailize the world of a kid and an adult are not so different if you're wise enough

Re: Short story: The Midnight Game

Kamillilewis — Thu, 08 Sep 2011 16:38:48 -0000

i think im not gonna play this game

Re: Dumble-war: ranking the Harry Potter films

Miro — Tue, 30 Aug 2011 15:59:50 -0000

your article made me really laugh : D
thank you - you've got some interesting points about the films ...
i think many fans were angry that he stood just there watching dumble being killed off in the halfblood-prince but not many noticed that kid who explained the grim to harry
did you notice in DH part 2 in the best scene of the film (if you ask me) ... when snape stood in the great hall talking about punishing those who help harry ...
there is a girl standing on the left side of the screen who just doesn't look at all as if she were going to hogwarts?
she's got coloured black hair and glasses and while everybody stands still with their head down cause snape's talking and snarling and menacing she steps from one foot to the other one and looks just straight up .... and she's looking so not-hogwarts-like i was angry every time i watched the film (3 times)!

Re: Twitter spam accounts with unusual names

Monica Ys Tan — Mon, 22 Aug 2011 06:43:17 -0000

These could so be used in a "Harry Potter: The Next Generation" series.

Re: Twitter spam accounts with unusual names

Ellen Smith — Wed, 17 Aug 2011 09:30:08 -0000

Not just unusual names and accounts but also using other people's (celebrities) images.. and pretends to be that person.... Pathetic!

Re: Dumble-war: Michael Gambon vs Richard Harris

Britt Dubs — Tue, 16 Aug 2011 15:47:27 -0000

While I think Gambon portrayed the badass side of Dumbledore better, I thought he seriously lacked the thoughtfulness or kindly side of Dumbledore.

Like, when Harry's name comes out of the Goblet of Fire, Dumbledore should be surprised and displeased, but not angry and physical with Harry. He's the voice of reason when everyone else is freaking out, but Gambon just shakes him yelling, "Did you put your name in the Goblet!"Gambon in interviews has even said that he never read the books, but since Dumbledore was a headmaster he assumed he should be kind of scary and intimidating, because who likes talking to their headmaster? I would have liked some weird hybrid of Gambon and Harris, but overall I wasn't too disappointed.

Re: Dumble-war: Michael Gambon vs Richard Harris

James — Thu, 11 Aug 2011 13:51:00 -0000

In the book, Dumbledore seems to battle Voldemort with great ease. And it's all Voldemort can do to parry Dumbledore's attacks. Had the movie portrayed the battle in that way, I think Harris could have pulled off that scene just fine. Because they chose to make the encounter much more even in the movie, I think Gambon's portrayal (in that scene) was adequate.

Re: Short story: The Midnight Game

Sam Downing — Wed, 13 Jul 2011 08:21:04 -0000

Thanks! I have several more short stories online here:
http://www.samdowning.com/shor... Enjoy!

Re: Short story: The Midnight Game

Something_decent — Wed, 13 Jul 2011 03:06:08 -0000

Great job, especially for your first horror story... Do you have any other shorts I could read? I like your style.

Re: Book review: Word of Honour and Time of Trial, Michael Pryor

Sam Downing — Sat, 09 Jul 2011 21:00:47 -0000

Easily the best response to a review I've ever had.

And I haven't reviewed the last two because I haven't read them yet! Though
I do have Moment of Truth in my "to-read" pile.

Re: Book review: Word of Honour and Time of Trial, Michael Pryor

Dora — Sat, 09 Jul 2011 09:04:24 -0000

You know what I love? I love Googling the name "Aubrey Fitzwilliam". I do it about once a month and it nearly always turfs up a gold nugget. In this instance it's your blog.
So, to start with, YOU HAVE A WHOLE TAG FOR AUBREY FITZWILLIAM. RESPECT.
Also... no, wait. Context. Hah. Yeah.
I am a devotee of the Laws of Magic series, to the extent that I run a fansite for it, hence the above-mentioned Googling and so forth. (It's over at votefitzwilliam.tumblr.com, and currently bears a link to this page what with its awesomeness, of which I intend to sing the praises shortly.) Hi.
Oh-kay, and back to praise-singing.
What with my being a LoM fan, etc, as above, I read reviews of the LoM books, as many as I can find. And these here are in my view the best of the bunch. (Before you wonder, I do not say this on the comments section of all the reviews simply because they are for LoM. In fact, sometimes my dislike for certain specimens of reviewhood - and these are positive reviews, mind - descend to the level of my condemning them to various of my friends. On one particularly gratifying occasion the spirited response of a friend to this condemnation was "What?! Who is this person, I need to STAB THEM IN THE FACE WITH MY FEMINIST KNIFE!" So I'm not spraying praise around for kicks here, although I am rampaging and ranting a little. Pardon me, I'm sure.)
Best of the bunch. Yes. Because for a start you very obligingly HAVE NOT SPOILED THE WHOLE PLOT. This is always a nice change. Particularly when the non-spoilage extends to not divulging the nemesis' name (a skill I rather spectacularly lack). And then there is the sheer inventiveness of the ways in which you point out how LoM rocks the world. Lots of reviews are so yawnworthy, one wonders why they even bothered to put finger to keyboard. This, on the other hand, deserves to be displayed in the "What You're Meant To Do" exhibition for reviewers.
And then the bit where you sort-of-actually-criticise the books. With the bad-guy critique here, for instance. I mean, that stings, because I have trouble when people point out the little tiny (possible) holes. (To the extent that I maintain that the rather appalling typo "Miss Fitzwilliam" in the final pages of Heart of Gold is Duval's move to get Aubrey and Caroline together. This is legit, because he is Gallian. My logic is irrefutable. Right? Right?) It's hard to read that particular paragraph of this review but I'm glad I did because it means I can appreciate that this is a three-dimensional review. A full-on, proper review. It is a beautiful thing and completely resonates with my fandom. Thank you for writing it. May your camels be plentiful and the oasis always be at your side, and so forth. REALLY. THANK YOU. I AM REDUCED TO CAPSLOCKAGE.
Yrs,
Dora.

(P.S. One question, though. Moment of Truth being what it is, I presume you aren't dead, or at least not of UST-related causes. So why do the final two books lack reviews?)

Re: Cat Friends

Sam Downing — Wed, 22 Jun 2011 19:15:26 -0000

Astutely noted!

Re: Cat Friends

anthonymai — Wed, 22 Jun 2011 08:04:48 -0000

Brilliant post! Though to stuffed up the iconic order of the credits! Should be Aniston, Cox, Kudrow, Le Blanc, Perry then Schwimmer!!!

Re: Losing the V-plates

Kira — Tue, 21 Jun 2011 22:38:11 -0000

Thanks for that. It's really nice to be told that because you've not based your life around hush-hushing sex (shush! Oh! Such a taboo! Aren't I naughty, being a woman and talking about SEX! Oh, my!) and ZOMG had ess-ee-ecks out of perfect, wonderful, 1-in-3-divorce-rate marriage that you have no self respect. Thanks for that. Thanks for pushing your views on others and losing the respect of thousands by stating that you will 'give yourself' to a man. Lovely! According to you, your body now belongs to someone else. Sorry, darling, but that's not how it works. Humans are not lobsters. They do not typically mate for life. It's a biological fact. In fact, it's more than that. It's the fact that people are allowed to do what they want with their bodies and therefore sleep with who they want to. It's the fact that we do not live in the fifties any more, and are not expected to follow backward, pointless social rules that closet those who are not afraid of their sexuality.
Hey, I could talk to you about this all night, but really, there are things I'd rather be doing, like watching paint dry. Let me just say that your argument reminds me of an informative video I once watched called "Men like tight vaginas." I would love to read your thoughts on both homosexuality and divorce. Tell me; if two virginal men are in true, deep love with each other, should they stay virgins forever? Considering that the western world is pretty much still as bigoted as it always was, and certain people who are in love are not allowed to be married, how are they supposed to express the ULTIMATE act of love and self-respect if they cannot enter wedlock? How do these people fit in to your cut-and-dry view of sex and virginity? Tell me that!Or, you know, maybe you're just as ignorant in that area as you are in this one. What a waste.All of this, ergo: Your argument is invalid.

Re: Short story: The Angel Hunter

Sam Downing — Wed, 15 Jun 2011 19:40:04 -0000

Anywhere in the world! Thanks for the comment, pleased you enjoyed it.