Rant number 273
Some people really don't understand when they have been given something - they really can't complain. We are doing a band job for charity tonight - which I very happy to do.
The thing is though, that the evening was due to start at 8 and was then put back to 8.15. It now emerges they want us here till midnight.
In the nicest possibly way - that really is taking the piss. We are doing the job for free - and you are expecting us to be here for twice a usual concert duration.
A similar situation often comes up at work. You try and do someone a favour - to which you become beholden to it and they carry on complaining. It really doesn't always pay to be nice it seems.
I don't understand why people can't understand when they are asking too much of someone. It's not fair or right to be like this.
Rant over.
Showing posts with label going on too long. Show all posts
Showing posts with label going on too long. Show all posts
Saturday, 29 September 2012
Saturday, 22 September 2012
Rant 266 22/9/12 Subject: Things that drag on
Rant number 266
I have just now got back from a concert - for which I left home at 20 past 5 today.
That's quite a lot of bloody time!
Now don't get me wrong, I really enjoyed the concert. The band played well and so did the group we were with. I just feel that the concert itself (which started at around 8pm and went on until nearly 11) was a little overlong.
As much as anything, its given me rather a meagre amount of time to rant in - which means this one is going to be on the shorter side.
It's a general annoyance to me when things just carry on for too long. The 3rd part of the Lord of the Rings for instance - which comes in at a bladder busting 3 hours and 20 minutes (the extended edition goes over 4!) is a great movie - but could be better with some trimming.
There really is such a thing as too much of a good thing - and sometimes it sours things a little!
Bearing in mind the time and the above statement, I think I'll make that it for this evening.
Rant over.
I have just now got back from a concert - for which I left home at 20 past 5 today.
That's quite a lot of bloody time!
Now don't get me wrong, I really enjoyed the concert. The band played well and so did the group we were with. I just feel that the concert itself (which started at around 8pm and went on until nearly 11) was a little overlong.
As much as anything, its given me rather a meagre amount of time to rant in - which means this one is going to be on the shorter side.
It's a general annoyance to me when things just carry on for too long. The 3rd part of the Lord of the Rings for instance - which comes in at a bladder busting 3 hours and 20 minutes (the extended edition goes over 4!) is a great movie - but could be better with some trimming.
There really is such a thing as too much of a good thing - and sometimes it sours things a little!
Bearing in mind the time and the above statement, I think I'll make that it for this evening.
Rant over.
Saturday, 11 August 2012
Rant 224 11/8/12 Subject: Dragging it out
Rant number 224
JRR Tolkien was a pretty groovy guy. He was super clever, super imaginative and created his own world 'Middle' Earth, full of his own mythology.
He wrote a few books in total, but of course famously he wrote The Lord of the Rings & the Hobbit.
Which is kind of what the topic is about today.
Great stories that are well known and well loved are lucrative ground for the Hollywood types. Even the ones from New Zealand.
I am of course referring to Peter Jackson. Slightly short, heavily bearded, he created a very respectable film adaptation of the Lord of the Rings, changing the way that films are released for ever.
In the past you see, films were released as one 'picture'. Rarely of course did they stretch more than around 3 hours, but anything more than that became a sequel. The Godfather for example, is a long film - that had two sequels. It was the status quo then, but it's not the same now.
You see, the Lord of the Rings was released as one story - stretched across 3, 3 hour plus films. Now I know thats how the books are also presented however, as a film goes - its a bit cheeky.
You see, watching even one film these days is expensive. Watching 3 of them in place of one, makes things rather pricy indeed!
The same can be said of the Harry Potter films (although personally, I couldn't care less.) The latter couple were split into 2, doubling revenue without doubling the costs of making the movie.
Good business, but not really fair!
So now, getting back to my previous statement, the crux of things. They've announced that the upcoming move of the Hobbit will be dragged across not just two, but three films. Now, I love the book- but it's not exactly that long a story really. It probably really comes in at around half the length of one of the 6 books that makes up The Lord of the Rings. Is there any need to drag it out as long as all that?
I don't mind if they are doing it to keep the integrity of the story in tact of course, but if it means Peter Jackson is going to be meddling again. I don't fancy paying for 3 movies worth!
Do it properly, don't just make it long!
Rant over.
JRR Tolkien was a pretty groovy guy. He was super clever, super imaginative and created his own world 'Middle' Earth, full of his own mythology.
He wrote a few books in total, but of course famously he wrote The Lord of the Rings & the Hobbit.
Which is kind of what the topic is about today.
Great stories that are well known and well loved are lucrative ground for the Hollywood types. Even the ones from New Zealand.
I am of course referring to Peter Jackson. Slightly short, heavily bearded, he created a very respectable film adaptation of the Lord of the Rings, changing the way that films are released for ever.
In the past you see, films were released as one 'picture'. Rarely of course did they stretch more than around 3 hours, but anything more than that became a sequel. The Godfather for example, is a long film - that had two sequels. It was the status quo then, but it's not the same now.
You see, the Lord of the Rings was released as one story - stretched across 3, 3 hour plus films. Now I know thats how the books are also presented however, as a film goes - its a bit cheeky.
You see, watching even one film these days is expensive. Watching 3 of them in place of one, makes things rather pricy indeed!
The same can be said of the Harry Potter films (although personally, I couldn't care less.) The latter couple were split into 2, doubling revenue without doubling the costs of making the movie.
Good business, but not really fair!
So now, getting back to my previous statement, the crux of things. They've announced that the upcoming move of the Hobbit will be dragged across not just two, but three films. Now, I love the book- but it's not exactly that long a story really. It probably really comes in at around half the length of one of the 6 books that makes up The Lord of the Rings. Is there any need to drag it out as long as all that?
I don't mind if they are doing it to keep the integrity of the story in tact of course, but if it means Peter Jackson is going to be meddling again. I don't fancy paying for 3 movies worth!
Do it properly, don't just make it long!
Rant over.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)