[The Saint]

Most of the women I've been involved with have been at least a couple inches taller than I am and between 10 and 60 pounds heavier, all varying between athletic and muscular. I'm 5'8" and weigh about 145, very lean but solid and defined, I guess they call it a "swimmer's build."

When you're with a girl who is literally a foot taller than you are and has 60 pounds of muscle on you, yes, there's some intimidation going on — at first.

[The Saint]

One of the reviews that I read basically stated that she would be good as Connor without either the muscle or the acting, but, being without both she was unconvincing – much as you hav stated, top-notch acting can make us forgive physical shortcomings, but, when both are lacking, then it's a flop.  I can't see why they can't leave the character alone.  For almost everyone, Hamilton WAS Connor, so let her be for all time the image we think of. 8)

Oddly enough, Summer Glau's portrayal of a Terminatrix (ostensibly an earlier model than the T-X seen in Rise of the Machines) is more convincing than Headey's portrayal of Connor, although her character seems far more similar to Lt. Commander Data from Star Trek than the aforementioned T-X.

But to be fair, the show hasn't truly jumped the shark yet. The retcon wherein we discover that there are perhaps hundreds of Terminators and Resistance fighters in the current time can be explained away by positing that Reese's line from the original film — "It's just him… and me." came from the first Resistance fighter to come back, and that plans changed when the Resistance in 2029 discovered that Skynet had sent a few hundred Terminators through. The storyline changes from the films to the series are actually remarkably well-handled.

Where the show is going to well and truly jump the shark — and mark my words, the moment the writers pull this card, even my tolerance will be exceeded — will be when it's revealed that Summer Glau's Terminatrix has fallen in love with John. lol

[The Saint]

I noticed Linda Hamilton's muscularity for the role, but that's not what made the character. What made the character was Hamilton's convincing portrayal of a haunted survivor, one whom you can't be certain, from moment to moment, hasn't been genuinely unhinged by what she's been through. I think that, if anything, is where Lena Headey will stand or fall in her portrayal.

The pilot was great, but her delivery of someone standing on the edge of genuine delusion paranoia is nowhere near as powerful as Hamilton's was.

[The Saint]

Ah, be careful, expressing such opinions can be dangerous.  😮
  Heck you might even be accused of being a reader of
Jonah Goldberg's Liberal Fascism.  😉  8)

Haven't read that book, but I doubt there's much in it that would surprise me or that I'd disagree with.

[The Saint]

I use smoking in characters to show a multitude of different things. The shorthand personality indicator is very useful — it marks a character as anything from self-destructive to a free thinker. Yep, that's right, a free thinker. In a society which is rapidly moving away from celebration of individualism (agree, don't agree, I don't care) to a form of collective nanny-ism at best and fanatical biofascism at worst, a character who smokes essentially defies all that, and smoking is an excellent piece of shorthand for showing that rebellious nature.

[The Saint]

We agree that readers will judge and even that some will go to the trouble of saying hurtful or cruel things.  That's really not the issue- if a writer is so insecure that he can't handle that, it's a shame, but not one I'm likely to lose sleep over.  I think where we fundamentally disagree is in the right of a competent, skilled writer to express not only the opinion that something "sucks," but also the reason "why it sucks."  The implication is that you know what the author was attempting and how to achieve it better than he does.  While you may, in fact, have correctly discerned what the author was trying to do, it's also possible that you haven't or that you're way off base in your attempted remedy.  Once again, I think it comes down to a matter of approach.

Also, people publish things on the internet for a variety of reasons.  I suspect the most common reason is self-gratification.  If that is the case, then telling such a person that their story is terrible, even if you then go on to tell them how to, in your opinion, fix it, is not something that will be well received.  In fact, it is more probable that you will accomplish nothing productive and may start what amounts to a flame war.

I think what it comes down to is this: I feel that if you are going to give your opinion about someone else's work, you should (1) be certain that your opinion is desired and (2) state explicitly that it is your opinion.

What it really boils down to, in my eyes, is this: we both agree that when you put your work out there for an audience, you have to expect your audience to respond to it, both negatively and positively. Fellow writers, in that context, are simply (hopefully) more educated readers, and even their reactions (both positive and negative) should reflect that.

[The Saint]

I have to disagree with you, I'm afraid.  Unless an author has <i>asked</i> you to critique them, you really <i>don't</i> have the right to say anything.  I would also argue that merely placing something on a forum is not the same as asking for criticism- if the request isn't explicit, then the request doesn't exist.

Ah, but readers will judge. Not only will readers judge, they will critique, and rarely will it be constructive. In other words, if Joe Writer puts forth a story that sucks, he's generally going to be told that it sucks. Telling him why it sucks, so that his next one won't, is a kindness to him. And a writer invites that criticism with every submission.

That said, you <i>do</i> have the right to make judgements- indeed, you can hardly stop yourself from doing so- just not the right to inflict them on anyone else.

Well, that's where criticism is a two-way street. After all, everybody and his dog can tell the Emperor he's nekkid, but if they Emperor don't wanna hear it… *laughs*

An interesting point.  Let me throw this question back at you; how <i>foolish</i> is it to critique someone- even constructively, as you say- if your criticism is so harsh that it stifles productivity?

Good criticism doesn't. And yes, criticism can also be evaluated critically. "Yer story sux0rz!" shouldn't hold an ounce of weight in a writer's evaluation of his work. Might influence his evaluations of the media he's submitting to, but as criticism that kind of vague, mean-spirited junk ranks somewhere below the opinions of New York roaches.

While I would agree that some, even most, authors on the internet share an appalling disregard for grammar, punctuation and spelling, sometimes it isn't their fault (such as when they've chosen to share something in English when it isn't their native language) and attacking their mechanical skills is not only cruel, but counterproductive.

A honed ear can usually detect second-language English in writing.

Several of your assertions in this thread have left me feeling moderately offended, I'm afraid.  Basically, your tendency to state things as black-and-white, as inarguable truths which people must accept or be labelled wrong (spelling, writing-as-science, characters vs. caricatures) irritates me not because you don't raise valid points, but because you present them as absolutes.

Absolutely. I'll level with you here — absolutely nothing is absolute. (See? I do have a sense of humor!) Just as no one can reach perfection (the all-encompassing absolute) that doesn't mean we should all give up trying.

Certainly you are entitled to your opinion, but try to acknowledge that it is just that- your opinion- and that everyone else is also entitled to their own views as well.

I've never said — and would never dream of saying — otherwise.

[The Saint]

I will also say that I have read very few stories concerning this genre i.e.: fmg, that I would harshly critique (were I prone to judging, something I've no business doing) other than in basic writing skills.

Let me get this out of the way — yes, you do have every right to critique — in fact, as a fellow writer, you have a duty to judge, and harshly (but still constructively, bear in mind.)

Writing is a science, bare minimum. Done well, writing is an art. If you have a technique that will enable your fellow craftsman to improve his product, how selfish is it to spare his feelings at the expense of his art?

[The Saint]

Wonderful flawless lunacy, more like… ::)  Actually, I wonder if that might be not so far from the real picture as you might think.

All joking aside, I think that dynamic (or something very much like it) is exactly what's at work. How many people don't know the stereotypical scenario of the little kid who doesn't want to drag his little sister around with him for that reason, that she can't keep up?  And what are kids but a reflection of adults' more primal selves? Men want women who can keep up with them — some of us want women we're challenged to keep up with. No big mystery involved.

[The Saint]

lol I figured "Lanfer Christensen's" work looked familiar. Yes, your skins/shapes are without a doubt the best out there, but like all skins (at the moment) they're going to lose a lot of detail when WindLight comes out of First Look and becomes the standard viewer. Again, not your fault, WL does that with all skins.

btw, do you do custom skins/shapes? I hadn't noticed last time I was in your store. I've got a third-party skin ("Mr. Perfect" from Made Men) and tried one of your skins… too much muscle definition and I ended up with noobface. lol

[Author]

Posts