Richard's Animorphs Forum
Animorphs Section => Animorphs Fan Fiction & Art => Topic started by: EscafilDevice on July 07, 2009, 06:29:13 PM
-
It's an "alternate ending." It's VERY short, even if you disagree with it it's funny. I don't think the author is serious:
http://www.karrth.com/animorphs/ff/alternateending.txt
Alternate Ending
By Lin
Contact: n/a
So I let Tom go when Jake said so.
There were two choices for Tom:
A: We would get the blue box and he would live-in the yeerk pool.
B: we would all die.
Of course tom chose to live. which power-hungry yeerk wouldn't? And so Tom the yeerk exited from Toms head. We opened connections with the Andalite force and negotiated with them. the war was over.
Three years later:
-jake: president
-cassie: married to jake, a vet
-rachel: model
-tobias: married to rachel, still lives in the meadow
-marco: billionaire, trying to get a date still
-ax and his family: having fun eating cinnamon buns.
-ellimist: wins over crayak
-crayak and drode: dead
-david: dead
-the chee: alive and making $$$
- yeerks: they all morphed endangered species and stayed that way. Cassie is happy...
-families: billionaires
And so the story ends, happily ever after.
The End
Is that awesome or what?
-
er....ok
-
interesting...and short. haha
-
im still looking for the hilarity lol
-
Lol. I think it's amusing.
-
hey, at least it's not depressing. ;)
-
Yeah, 'cause we wouldn't want war to be depressing.
-
I don't really see the humor...
-
::)
The person isn't serious, the chances of that happening are nonexistant.
Both Crayak and the Drode dead? Everyone a billionaire?
In a way it's sort of a sarcastic take on what a real ridiculous ending would be, but it's still more satisfying than the real ending.
-
They forgot the part where Jake and Cassie name their kid
Albus Severus Elfangor James Aftran.
-
I think the main point of this ending would be to mock the happy-skippy ending that everyone seems to have wanted. The ending didn't satisfy me because it felt rushed, but I do agree wars don't always end happily, and relationships existing under tension don't always work in peace.
-
Jake couldn't be president. Don't you have to be, like, 35 to run?
-
They forgot the part where Jake and Cassie name their kid Albus Severus Elfangor James Aftran.
Haha, true.
And ThinkAgain, you really believed that line? KA didn't care about Animorphs anymore, she rushed through that book just to get it done so she could advertise Remnants.
-
Jake couldn't be president. Don't you have to be, like, 35 to run?
yeah...but there was a big time lapse.
-
There was a three year time lapse. Not that big.
-
And ThinkAgain, you really believed that line? KA didn't care about Animorphs anymore, she rushed through that book just to get it done so she could advertise Remnants.
You're probably right as to her motives. I just mean in general, as far as accurate war stories go (I used to be big on the WWI/II genre) completely happy endings are very rare. Loved ones are just as likely to die as anyone else, and relationships might not exist back home in peace. Happy-skippy endings may satisfy more people, but it just seems pretty shallow to me.
I do think the final Animorphs book was poor, but simply because everything was rushed and happened in one book. Probably because of what you said.
-
And ThinkAgain, you really believed that line? KA didn't care about Animorphs anymore, she rushed through that book just to get it done so she could advertise Remnants.
::) Please, I'm begging, think before you speak.
-
No need to be rude and say she wasn't thinking. Some people have put plenty of thought into the subject and truly believe that KA didn't care about the Animorphs ending, at least not as much as she could have. Just because someone has a different opinion than you is no reason to insult their thoughts.
-
To say Katherine & Michael stopped caring about the series that built their career, that bought them a house and secured their kid's college education, and ran for half a decade, is, sorry to be blunt, worthy of insult.
Come on. Saying something like that is begging for a snappy retort. It's nothing against Escafil personally, just...they cared about the Animorphs story arc. They just did. It's one thing to take issue personally with the way the ending played out, but don't play off your dissatisfaction by making accusations they stopped taking it seriously.
They rushed Everworld's final arc. They finished Animorphs with the caring and finesse it deserves.
-
He's right, you can be nice about it.
-
And others can be a little more respectful of a writer's hard work, too.
-
They forgot the part where Jake and Cassie name their kid Albus Severus Elfangor James Aftran.
lol. I just read that.
-
I'm with Escafil. I believe that KA and Michael stopped caring about the Animorphs toward the end. Nothing against THEM personally. I just think they rushed it to get it done and that they hadn't been actually writing the books in so long that they kind of lost touch.
Which is again, nothing personal against them.
There's a difference between telling someone to 'be respectful' and telling someone not to have a negative opinion. You're trying to tell Escafil (and me) that we're not allowed to believe differently than you. We believe that they didn't put as much care or thought into the ending as we would have liked. You can't rightfully berate us for that, because it's our opinion.
Sorry to lump you in with me, Escafil, feel free to punch me and run off on your own line of thought.
-
Katherine's explained why the ending was written the way it was. What do you people want? She's delved into this in pretty extensive detail, the way it ended without every loose end tied up, quite abruptly.
Is it still laziness when one reinforces that they did it a certain way intentionally?
Stuff to think about.
I mean, I guess over the years I've just come to see that K.A. sounded a little grumpy and snide with her final letter-to-the-fans with good reason. She expected more of her audience, and was disappointed.
-
What do 'we people' want? That's kinda rude right there. I'm allowed to dislike the ending and believe she got lazy when writing it. And a good writer, which she is, can explain anything after the fact.
You seem to be saying that anyone who likes the ending is good and anyone who dislikes it is insulting KA and should be... I dunno, shunned or something? Seriously, stop acting like people who don't like the ending are terrible people.
-
They're not terrible people. They just never understood the point of this series of books.
-
So... I never understood the point of this series of books just because I disagree with the author on the ending? Wow, so I wasted all my time reading them?
-
If your reasons for disliking the ending are the same as the other multitudes of people "dissatisfied", then, yeah, pretty much. Everything played out exactly the way it should have, when you think about the themes and context, going right back to book #1.
-
lol, that's really... wow.
Luckily, you can't affect how I feel about the books in any way. You can have your opinion, and I can have mine. I'm just sorry that you seem incapable of accepting anyone else's opinion or thoughts as legitimate.
I disagree. I think the THEME of the first books was more 'out numbered and over powered guerrilla fighters continue to fight against all odds' whereas in the very end it became 'war is bad and bad and bad and BAD and only the pacifist ever survives'
That is MY OPINION and it doesn't matter how many times you try to tell me that it makes me a bad person or disrespectful to have it, I still have it. It's my RIGHT to have that opinion, and it doesn't make me a bad person any more than YOUR opinion does. We just think differently. I don't fault you for having a different opinion, I fault you for being rude to others for theirs.
-
Look, I'm not debating your right to have an opinion here. And I don't want to argue the point until we both start throwing retarded hissyfits and typing in caps at each other like a bunch of monkeys.
You're entitled to your opinion. You have a right to have it. It's just unsubstantiated, and defying absolutely basic rationality.
You're still allowed to be irrational, though. It's no skin off my back, y'know?
-
I admit that the end of the series originally annoyed me, but I've grown since then. I now think that it would have been almost impossible to write a better ending for the last book, even though it was a bit sad to see most of our beloved characters resigned to certain doom.
Yes everyone is entitled to their own opinion Aloth, and you are entitled to disagree with it. However, you do not have the right to belittle a person's beliefs. That was out of line. -1
-
I never belittled anyone. Just said that, factually, they're wrong. But they're allowed to be wrong.
That's not belittling. That's called tolerance. You disapprove of something because an absolutely air-tight argument can be made against it, but you're willing to live and let live. Tolerance. Dictionary.com will have the definition.
Please don't make false accusations, friend. It's not your place without substantive & reasonable moral high-ground.
-
Saying you don't agree with their beliefs but are willing to accept that they have a different opinion is tolerance; saying you're right and they're wrong isn't.
Anyway, let's just forget about that and try to get back on topic.
-
Actually, no. You can profess someone's argument as baseless and still be absolutely tolerant of their standpoint.
-
You're not being tolerant. Calling someone's viewpoint baseless is not tolerance. You have a viewpoint. Someone else has a viewpoint. You're basically calling the other person's viewpoint stupid. That's INtolerance.
Just because you try to claim that the opinion is baseless doesn't make it so. That's INSULTING, and I personally have no idea why I would try to debate with you, because you dismiss everything that isn't your opinion.
You might think that you're being tolerant just by saying you are. But you're not. You're not accepting my viewpoint as a valid opinion and therefore you're being intolerant.
-
You're not being tolerant. Calling someone's viewpoint baseless is not tolerance.
Actually, technically, it is. I'm pointing out the evidential impracticality of what you're saying, while still tolerating that you have a right to the opinion.
You have a viewpoint. Someone else has a viewpoint. You're basically calling the other person's viewpoint stupid. That's INtolerance.
Not at all. I called you out on it for being wrong, while acknowledging that arguing about it is stupid. You're certainly not alone in your summation of the story's final arc. I suppose there's credibility in numbers. If you've been reading my posts, you'd see I'm simply offering the insight that consensus isn't a fact-based exercise. The evidence supports the finale fitting absolutely to a tee with the rest of the series, but if you want to believe otherwise, that's within your rights. It'd just be nice to see some substantial worthwhile basis for why you and your (quite numerous) similarly-minded detractors think the way you do.
Like it or not, my own volatile personality aside, I do make a rational by-the-numbers point. All I'm saying is, as of right now, I'm a point ahead in terms of substantiating myself.
Just because you try to claim that the opinion is baseless doesn't make it so. That's INSULTING, and I personally have no idea why I would try to debate with you, because you dismiss everything that isn't your opinion.
See, no. I don't dismiss. I don't belittle. I provide the reasons it's not a practical, sane view to have. Everything else is personal taste, and that's fine, if you don't like something you don't like it. But don't ride my ass for telling you your view doesn't really hold any rational weight, because going by the facts we have, the books, it doesn't.
You might think that you're being tolerant just by saying you are. But you're not. You're not accepting my viewpoint as a valid opinion and therefore you're being intolerant.
Yeah, see, the English dictionary has a certain differing definition of "tolerance" from your esteemed self. Perhaps that's where the conflict lies.
As I mentioned, I never said you don't have the right to be incorrect on the matter. You do. I simply think it needs to be verbalized and challenged. Forums are designed for such.
I may be arrogant. Guilty as charged. Maybe being right a lot of the time develops said personality quirks.
-
The only thing right about that last post is that you're arrogant.
You're also impossible to debate with, because you're so arrogant that nothing I say could get through. You have proven absolutely nothing. You have given NO facts. All you've done is give your opinion and declare it as right. That's ALL you've done.
I could spend an hour writing out a thoroughly researched reply and cite sources, putting a lot of effort into it, or I could stare at a wall for an hour. Judging by your intolerance, staring at the wall would be more productive.
I'm going to try not to respond again, because it won't change anything. You're intolerant and can't accept anyone else's opinion, and no matter how much you try to say otherwise, you have not proven anything, nor have you given any real evidence of your OPINION.
Telling someone their opinion is wrong just because you say so is INTOLERANT. It's also rude.
ALL you're saying is that you're right, and other people are wrong. You're arrogant, and I'm not going to have this discussion anymore, because I have better things to do than argue with someone who is going to belittle and dismiss everything I say.
Again, I don't dislike your opinion. I dislike your way of dismissing other people's and the fact that you are being incredibly, irrevocably rude.
-
We gotta stop fighting here.
Im gonna lock this for a while so everyone can calm down.