people liked that book unironically?
[QUOTE=CWalkthroughs;45485986]I think if more of you read the books, you'd realize it's not just about sex and there's a little drama every so often.[/QUOTE]
Imagine unironically saying this
[QUOTE=doctordarken;45486568]How does a re-purposed Twilight fanfic get a movie?[/QUOTE]
Book hype and marketing.
[QUOTE=Pelican;45486566]well if you'd have said that to begin then I wouldn't have (much of) a problem with it. it's what I've been saying all along:
O P I N I O N S[/QUOTE]
Well, that was one of my original arguments.
[quote]The book is written horribly from a [U]literary[/U] standpoint. It really is nothing better than you'd expect from a fanfiction.[/quote]
[QUOTE=CWalkthroughs;45486502]If I had a Wikipedia page and it said that I was, would you believe it?[/QUOTE]
You don't have one though, therefore wikiepdia has gotten nothing wrong. Trying to use a hypothetical scenario of wikipedia being wrong to prove that real life wikipedia is wrong is fucking retard tier logic.
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;45486621]You don't have one though, therefore wikiepdia has gotten nothing wrong. Trying to use a hypothetical scenario of wikipedia being wrong to prove that real life wikipedia is wrong is fucking retard tier logic.[/QUOTE]
Hypothetical scenario...man, I just asked a question of what-if and I got told to stop, so I did. I accept the fact I deny opinions and rumours, but you don't have to judge what I do as retarded just because I questioned what he would do.
[QUOTE=CWalkthroughs;45486653]Hypothetical scenario...man, I just asked a question of what-if and I got told to stop, so I did. I accept the fact I deny opinions and rumours, but you don't have to judge what I do as retarded.[/QUOTE]
It was a retarded what if, it's like me saying if all tesco food contained poison would you eat it and then using that hypothetical scenario to say that you shouldn't buy from real life tesco.
So, is this what happens when yo try to give a porno a plot?
[QUOTE=Seibitsu;45486693]So, is this what happens when yo try to give a porno a plot?[/QUOTE]
It'll only be good if Christian Grey turns out to be Skeletor
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;45486705]It'll only be good if Christian Grey turns out to be Skeletor[/QUOTE]
spoilers??
[QUOTE=CWalkthroughs;45486502]If I had a Wikipedia page and it said that I was, would you believe it?[/QUOTE]
Nope, because I'd just fix it for you because at this point I know you're not.
[QUOTE=gk99;45486728]Nope, because I'd just fix it for you because at this point I know you're not.[/QUOTE]
Well, looks like you are a kind and humble person. Thank you for fixing my imaginary Wikipedia page.
[QUOTE=CWalkthroughs;45486739]Well, looks like you are a kind and humble person. Thank you for fixing my imaginary Wikipedia page.[/QUOTE]
I love how you create shitty hypothetical shit examples
instead of[B] actually showing us why wikipedia is bad[/B]
like you know
anyone who has a valid argument
[QUOTE=J!NX;45486845]I love how you create shitty hypothetical shit examples
instead of[B] actually showing us why wikipedia is bad[/B]
like you know
anyone who has a valid argument[/QUOTE]
Well considering the fact that Wikipedia can be edited by just about anyone, I thought that'd be justifiable enough?
Also, sarcasm.
[QUOTE=CWalkthroughs;45486853]Well considering the fact that Wikipedia can be edited by just about anyone, I thought that'd be justifiable enough?
Also, sarcasm.[/QUOTE]
I'd still trust it more than you
you're making a statement but didn't even back it up
[QUOTE=CWalkthroughs;45486853]Well considering the fact that Wikipedia can be edited by just about anyone, I thought that'd be justifiable enough?
Also, sarcasm.[/QUOTE]
Except that the information is sourced. And if it's not sourced it will say that it's not sourced. And vandalism is quickly removed. And controversial or particularly targeted pages are extra protected against vandalism. And it's about as accurate as Encyclopedia Britannica.
[QUOTE=CWalkthroughs;45486853]Well considering the fact that Wikipedia can be edited by just about anyone, I thought that'd be justifiable enough?
Also, sarcasm.[/QUOTE]
Holy fuck you're a terrible poster, learn when to fucking stop.
Maybe if you actually read up about Wikipedia and how it works, then you'd realise that not 'everybody' can edit an article and have it remain.
I'd suggest reading about it on Wikipedia - but how can you trust what they're saying?????
[editline]24th July 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;45486887]Except that the information is sourced. And if it's not sourced it will say that it's not sourced. And vandalism is quickly removed. And controversial or particularly targeted pages are extra protected against vandalism. And it's more accurate than Encyclopedia Britannica.[/QUOTE]
There are also article backups going back for every time it is edited, so any errors can be corrected within minutes.
-nvm-
[QUOTE=CWalkthroughs;45486909]That'd be like me saying you didn't give a reason as to why you'd trust it more than me.
Sure, I wouldn't blame you if you did, since more is merrier. Why trust one man when you can trust a community? A community who can edit or say ANYTHING?[/QUOTE]
Wow you literally just did exactly the same thing yet again
make a statement against something without even backing it up
yet again
I'm not saying I trust wikipedia
I'm saying back up that statement
[QUOTE=J!NX;45486922]Wow you literally just did exactly the same thing yet again
make a statement against something without even backing it up
yet again[/QUOTE]
And you ignored my point too. I'm gonna stop now.
[QUOTE=Mio Akiyama;45485224]still wondering how a shitty twilight fanfic got a movies[/QUOTE]
So many girls have been sharing this trailer already on facebook... Its like twillight and I Gotta Feeling all over again.
[QUOTE=CWalkthroughs;45486932]And you ignored my point too. I'm gonna stop now.[/QUOTE]
Sir, Wikipedia articles are usually full of references. If you think something there isn't true, you should read the references the author(s) used to write the article. More than that, search for even more information.
[QUOTE=CWalkthroughs;45486301]You'd trust Wikipedia?[/QUOTE]
Whoa
It's like I can tell who just started high school.
[QUOTE=Joem1k;45485193]
oh boy here we go[/QUOTE]
At 1:57, after he opens the door this should fade in from black.
"You wouldn't understand" *Opens door to reveal*
[video=youtube;iTQ8YtCiMoI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iTQ8YtCiMoI[/video]
50 shades of hard cock and bad writing
About as erotic as a papercut.
God dammit I need to edit this trailer to replace Grey with this guy.
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/TJLpS1i.png[/IMG]
Decent trailer. I'll take solace knowing that this movie upsets Stephenie Meyers.
A movie for the whole family to enjoy
At least Dakota Johnson is hot (damn that even sounds like a pornstar name).
[QUOTE=J!NX;45486583]people liked that book unironically?
Imagine unironically saying this[/QUOTE]
It's erotica with somewhat of a story built around it. Because it has a story built around it and is long enough, it counts enough as an actual novel. A novel that is still, chiefly, erotica, but still a novel. Thus, it's socially acceptable to read it and be expressive about reading it. However, the fact that it's still erotica gives the feeling of sexual liberation. "I'm reading erotica and I can be open about it!"
Thus how it boomed in popularity. It was less about the quality, and more about just what it was.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.