If they are doing this live action on peacock I am curious what they are going to do about the gore and mature themes in the books. They can get pretty graphic.
If they are doing this live action on peacock I am curious what they are going to do about the gore and mature themes in the books. They can get pretty graphic.
Are they good? because that description is the most nauseating description for a series I think I have ever seen?
Are they good? because that description is the most nauseating description for a series I think I have ever seen?
An alien invasion has wiped out most of humanity and any survivors are forced to fight for their lives on a sadistic intergalactic game show. Sounds bad, right? Now try doing it with bare feet and a stuck-up, self-centered, tiara-wearing talking cat as your partner. Welcome to Dungeon Crawler World: Earth, where the apocalypse will be televised … and Coast Guard vet Carl finds himself stuck with his ex-girlfriend’s award-winning show cat, Princess Donut the Queen Anne Chonk, as they try to survive the end of the world, fighting monsters, aliens, an insane A.I. and even other survivors … all for the sake of good TV. Survival is optional. Entertainment is not.”
LitRPG as a genre isn't exactly winning prestigious literary awards. The Crawler Carl books are best approached as being for what they are: enjoyable pulp novels. The ride is fun, the world...
LitRPG as a genre isn't exactly winning prestigious literary awards. The Crawler Carl books are best approached as being for what they are: enjoyable pulp novels. The ride is fun, the world building is good, and the cringe-y humor of the logline is quickly surpassed by the larger narrative. Characters who should be memes end up having depth, and the books don't overly dwell on aging Millennial internet speak. Mostly.
Carnival funnel cake, not French pastry.
They're part of Kindle Unlimited which has a 30-day trial.
They are good and they are nauseating. Like if the Hunger Games were told by a horny college student who was into South Park and power scaling anime, but also had enough working knowledge of...
Are they good? because that description is the most nauseating description for a series I think I have ever seen?
They are good and they are nauseating. Like if the Hunger Games were told by a horny college student who was into South Park and power scaling anime, but also had enough working knowledge of political systems, war machines and complex trauma to sell you on why it all has to burn.
I mean I wouldn't describe it as that at all. I wonder what the difference between absurd and low-brow is. Without spoiling anything, when I read the series, I saw all the inappropriate...
I mean I wouldn't describe it as that at all.
I wonder what the difference between absurd and low-brow is.
Without spoiling anything, when I read the series, I saw all the inappropriate situations, crude humor, and weird stuff with the AI and the crawl as absurdity that's called for within the narrative that the universe and this space government is just unhinged and non-serious and how that's contrasted with the absolute hell that is the Crawl.
I mean a common theme throughout the book is the mistreatment of the crawlers and the horror of how nobody in the universe sees them as anything other than disposable objects for their entertainment and to make corporations money, and their idea of entertainment is this crude and inappropriate, low brow, absurd and often times disgusting and demeaning. And that's sort of part of the horror the crawlers are subjected to. They aren't just having a fun time here.
Like it's never the human characters that act absurdly. They're all grounded and emotional, dealing with trauma. It's always everything around them that's absurd and them being forced to react to the absurdity in very real ways.
And so I always interpreted it less that the writer was immature and more that the story he is trying to tell uses absurdity as a plot device.
Sort of like how Idiocracy has a lot of absurd and crude humor, but it's intentional for the narrative being told.
I've read, or tried to and threw in the trash, books that are immature and gross for the hell of it, and I thought DCC was the same at first. But after reading it I didn't see it as that at all.
I'm probably biased because I'm kind of obsessed with it right now, but I avoided the series because I thought it was low brow cringe stuff for edgelords. It's not even though that's what it looks...
I'm probably biased because I'm kind of obsessed with it right now, but I avoided the series because I thought it was low brow cringe stuff for edgelords.
It's not even though that's what it looks like at first. It's chaotic, leans hard into absurdity, and doesn't take itself seriously, but it's also got really likable characters, very emotionally hard hitting moments, and arcs that have payoffs.
However, I'm realizing now that I consider a lot of the inappropriateness and crude humor as absurdity necessary to the story being told and some people didn't.
Like my interpretation of the narrative was that the goal of the author was to write about an alien civilization comprised of immature edgelords, as opposed to the author being an immature edgelord writing about an alien civilization.
And it's really a not-very-subtle metaphor for not-so-great parts of our own culture. I recognize that the first book sort of crash lands you into the premise and that can be tough if you aren't...
Like my interpretation of the narrative was that the goal of the author was to write about an alien civilization comprised of immature edgelords, as opposed to the author being an immature edgelord writing about an alien civilization.
And it's really a not-very-subtle metaphor for not-so-great parts of our own culture. I recognize that the first book sort of crash lands you into the premise and that can be tough if you aren't already primed with some of the vocabulary. I can see how and why people take literally scenes and characters that make them think the book is sexist or gaze-y, but I think they're very wrong.
I mean, good is such a subjective thing, lol. They're not going to win any literary rewards, but they're a lot better than they sound based on that description, IMO. The name/cover design/blurbs...
I mean, good is such a subjective thing, lol. They're not going to win any literary rewards, but they're a lot better than they sound based on that description, IMO. The name/cover design/blurbs haven't really been doing the series any favors over the years. And they books definitely have some things to say, they're not just mindless entertainment.
I've read through the available books twice now. There is an element of parody/satire plus adventure /survival that i really got into in this series. But I played dungeons and dragons many years...
I've read through the available books twice now.
There is an element of parody/satire plus adventure /survival that i really got into in this series. But I played dungeons and dragons many years ago and didn't mind the rpg content.
I got a glowing recommendation for the books from a friend that has given me very good recommendations in the past. I made it through the first book for the sake of my friend, but I will not be...
I got a glowing recommendation for the books from a friend that has given me very good recommendations in the past. I made it through the first book for the sake of my friend, but I will not be reading any more. If that description is nauseating to you, just give it a pass. The big turn off for me was the unfettered misogyny and sexualization of women. At one point the main character spends multiple minutes (audiobook) describing in detail someone's gigantic breasts. Just not for me.
I respect you not liking the book, but I don't think this is a fair assessment. I think the book is an absurd commentary on a lot of things, like capitalism, fascism, unmitigated consumerism, and...
I respect you not liking the book, but I don't think this is a fair assessment.
I think the book is an absurd commentary on a lot of things, like capitalism, fascism, unmitigated consumerism, and yes misogyny, not a celebration of it any of it. I said it in another comment, but I gauge that opinion from the fact that the victims of the crawl aren't ever depicted as the ones being immature, they're dealing with trauma and reacting in real ways, always criticizing what's happening around them without celebrating it. At no point in the book is any of that celebrated as good by anyone other than this alien civilization subjecting Earth to the Crawl, it is always criticized. The immaturity, absurdity, inappropriateness, and yes the misogyny of the universe outside of Earth is used as a plot device that is constantly criticized.
Like Carl, at multiple points, loses his temper at everything happening and how unserious and inappropriate it all is.
And to directly address the part about gigantic breasts, spoilers for the first book to whom it matters, but that is extremely out of context and misrepresents what happened.
First, the breasts aren't real, it's part of the costume that Odette wore when she was in the crawl. It's part of the absurd and innapropriateness that these people have been subjected to. The moment the cameras are off she takes them off.
Second, Carl's not describing them in immature sexual lust, or even admiration, there's not a single positive inclination he has while describing them, he's describing how completely absurd and out of place and inappropriate they are.
By the end, I could tell it was trying to criticize, but it felt like I as the reader was doing more to make it critical than the author did. When I was part way through, I honestly could not tell...
By the end, I could tell it was trying to criticize, but it felt like I as the reader was doing more to make it critical than the author did. When I was part way through, I honestly could not tell if the authors goal was for it to be critical or in earnest. After the end of the first book, I was pretty sure it was critical, but it shouldn't take the reader that long.
To me, it was just a tiny handful of actual critiques littered among a vast ocean of misogyny and sexualization that it wasn't worth it for me to continue. There are plenty of other books that give better criticism without me having to suffer so much.
My take was the first book was meh as it was just a lot of "but what if gross" with some okay storytelling. I stuck with it because the "what if gross" is less common (although still there) and...
My take was the first book was meh as it was just a lot of "but what if gross" with some okay storytelling.
I stuck with it because the "what if gross" is less common (although still there) and they've done a very good job of real storytelling/world/character building.
So in short this has all the usual redflags of "oh this is going to just be shock humor" but in fact bothers to still tell a very interesting story rather than just ride that, and that's why it has been so successful (unlike, i hear, their other works which are more on the shock humor train).
After the audiobook, and then the audio immersion tunnel version, I am excited to see what is made of this. Also worried it will get butchered of course.
After the audiobook, and then the audio immersion tunnel version, I am excited to see what is made of this. Also worried it will get butchered of course.
Dinnaman has been writing about a book a year and there's only two books to go, so I think we're good. Even at his peak, Martin was writing like... a book every couple of years(?).
Dinnaman has been writing about a book a year and there's only two books to go, so I think we're good. Even at his peak, Martin was writing like... a book every couple of years(?).
If they are doing this live action on peacock I am curious what they are going to do about the gore and mature themes in the books. They can get pretty graphic.
Are they good? because that description is the most nauseating description for a series I think I have ever seen?
LitRPG as a genre isn't exactly winning prestigious literary awards. The Crawler Carl books are best approached as being for what they are: enjoyable pulp novels. The ride is fun, the world building is good, and the cringe-y humor of the logline is quickly surpassed by the larger narrative. Characters who should be memes end up having depth, and the books don't overly dwell on aging Millennial internet speak. Mostly.
Carnival funnel cake, not French pastry.
They're part of Kindle Unlimited which has a 30-day trial.
They are good and they are nauseating. Like if the Hunger Games were told by a horny college student who was into South Park and power scaling anime, but also had enough working knowledge of political systems, war machines and complex trauma to sell you on why it all has to burn.
I mean I wouldn't describe it as that at all.
I wonder what the difference between absurd and low-brow is.
Without spoiling anything, when I read the series, I saw all the inappropriate situations, crude humor, and weird stuff with the AI and the crawl as absurdity that's called for within the narrative that the universe and this space government is just unhinged and non-serious and how that's contrasted with the absolute hell that is the Crawl.
I mean a common theme throughout the book is the mistreatment of the crawlers and the horror of how nobody in the universe sees them as anything other than disposable objects for their entertainment and to make corporations money, and their idea of entertainment is this crude and inappropriate, low brow, absurd and often times disgusting and demeaning. And that's sort of part of the horror the crawlers are subjected to. They aren't just having a fun time here.
Like it's never the human characters that act absurdly. They're all grounded and emotional, dealing with trauma. It's always everything around them that's absurd and them being forced to react to the absurdity in very real ways.
And so I always interpreted it less that the writer was immature and more that the story he is trying to tell uses absurdity as a plot device.
Sort of like how Idiocracy has a lot of absurd and crude humor, but it's intentional for the narrative being told.
I've read, or tried to and threw in the trash, books that are immature and gross for the hell of it, and I thought DCC was the same at first. But after reading it I didn't see it as that at all.
I'm probably biased because I'm kind of obsessed with it right now, but I avoided the series because I thought it was low brow cringe stuff for edgelords.
It's not even though that's what it looks like at first. It's chaotic, leans hard into absurdity, and doesn't take itself seriously, but it's also got really likable characters, very emotionally hard hitting moments, and arcs that have payoffs.
However, I'm realizing now that I consider a lot of the inappropriateness and crude humor as absurdity necessary to the story being told and some people didn't.
Like my interpretation of the narrative was that the goal of the author was to write about an alien civilization comprised of immature edgelords, as opposed to the author being an immature edgelord writing about an alien civilization.
And it's really a not-very-subtle metaphor for not-so-great parts of our own culture. I recognize that the first book sort of crash lands you into the premise and that can be tough if you aren't already primed with some of the vocabulary. I can see how and why people take literally scenes and characters that make them think the book is sexist or gaze-y, but I think they're very wrong.
Re gaze-y there is equal opportunity content happening. However I respect people who just don't want to read or think about anything like that.
I mean, good is such a subjective thing, lol. They're not going to win any literary rewards, but they're a lot better than they sound based on that description, IMO. The name/cover design/blurbs haven't really been doing the series any favors over the years. And they books definitely have some things to say, they're not just mindless entertainment.
I've read through the available books twice now.
There is an element of parody/satire plus adventure /survival that i really got into in this series. But I played dungeons and dragons many years ago and didn't mind the rpg content.
I got a glowing recommendation for the books from a friend that has given me very good recommendations in the past. I made it through the first book for the sake of my friend, but I will not be reading any more. If that description is nauseating to you, just give it a pass. The big turn off for me was the unfettered misogyny and sexualization of women. At one point the main character spends multiple minutes (audiobook) describing in detail someone's gigantic breasts. Just not for me.
I respect you not liking the book, but I don't think this is a fair assessment.
I think the book is an absurd commentary on a lot of things, like capitalism, fascism, unmitigated consumerism, and yes misogyny, not a celebration of it any of it. I said it in another comment, but I gauge that opinion from the fact that the victims of the crawl aren't ever depicted as the ones being immature, they're dealing with trauma and reacting in real ways, always criticizing what's happening around them without celebrating it. At no point in the book is any of that celebrated as good by anyone other than this alien civilization subjecting Earth to the Crawl, it is always criticized. The immaturity, absurdity, inappropriateness, and yes the misogyny of the universe outside of Earth is used as a plot device that is constantly criticized.
Like Carl, at multiple points, loses his temper at everything happening and how unserious and inappropriate it all is.
And to directly address the part about gigantic breasts, spoilers for the first book to whom it matters, but that is extremely out of context and misrepresents what happened.
First, the breasts aren't real, it's part of the costume that Odette wore when she was in the crawl. It's part of the absurd and innapropriateness that these people have been subjected to. The moment the cameras are off she takes them off.
Second, Carl's not describing them in immature sexual lust, or even admiration, there's not a single positive inclination he has while describing them, he's describing how completely absurd and out of place and inappropriate they are.
By the end, I could tell it was trying to criticize, but it felt like I as the reader was doing more to make it critical than the author did. When I was part way through, I honestly could not tell if the authors goal was for it to be critical or in earnest. After the end of the first book, I was pretty sure it was critical, but it shouldn't take the reader that long.
To me, it was just a tiny handful of actual critiques littered among a vast ocean of misogyny and sexualization that it wasn't worth it for me to continue. There are plenty of other books that give better criticism without me having to suffer so much.
My take was the first book was meh as it was just a lot of "but what if gross" with some okay storytelling.
I stuck with it because the "what if gross" is less common (although still there) and they've done a very good job of real storytelling/world/character building.
So in short this has all the usual redflags of "oh this is going to just be shock humor" but in fact bothers to still tell a very interesting story rather than just ride that, and that's why it has been so successful (unlike, i hear, their other works which are more on the shock humor train).
Personally I think they’re fantastic, particularly the audiobooks. The narrator (Jeff Hays) is on another level.
After the audiobook, and then the audio immersion tunnel version, I am excited to see what is made of this. Also worried it will get butchered of course.
i hope the series gets finished before they film anything and we don't end up with a game of thrones shitshow at the end
Dinnaman has been writing about a book a year and there's only two books to go, so I think we're good. Even at his peak, Martin was writing like... a book every couple of years(?).