• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 23:51
CEST 05:51
KST 12:51
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
Code S RO8 Preview: herO, Zoun, Bunny, Classic3Code S RO8 Preview: Rogue, GuMiho, Solar, Maru3BGE Stara Zagora 2025: Info & Preview27Code S RO12 Preview: GuMiho, Bunny, SHIN, ByuN3The Memories We Share - Facing the Final(?) GSL47
Community News
BGE Stara Zagora 2025 - Replay Pack2Weekly Cups (June 2-8): herO doubles down1[BSL20] ProLeague: Bracket Stage & Dates9GSL Ro4 and Finals moved to Sunday June 15th13Weekly Cups (May 27-June 1): ByuN goes back-to-back0
StarCraft 2
General
Jim claims he and Firefly were involved in match-fixing Code S RO8 Preview: herO, Zoun, Bunny, Classic The SCII GOAT: A statistical Evaluation DreamHack Dallas 2025 - Official Replay Pack BGE Stara Zagora 2025 - Replay Pack
Tourneys
[GSL 2025] Code S:Season 2 - RO8 - Group A RSL: Revival, a new crowdfunded tournament series SOOPer7s Showmatches 2025 Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament Sea Duckling Open (Global, Bronze-Diamond)
Strategy
[G] Darkgrid Layout Simple Questions Simple Answers [G] PvT Cheese: 13 Gate Proxy Robo
Custom Maps
[UMS] Zillion Zerglings
External Content
Mutation # 477 Slow and Steady Mutation # 476 Charnel House Mutation # 475 Hard Target Mutation # 474 Futile Resistance
Brood War
General
BW General Discussion BGH auto balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ FlaSh Witnesses SCV Pull Off the Impossible vs Shu StarCraft & BroodWar Campaign Speedrun Quest Will foreigners ever be able to challenge Koreans?
Tourneys
NA Team League 6/8/2025 [ASL19] Grand Finals [BSL20] GosuLeague RO16 - Tue & Wed 20:00+CET [Megathread] Daily Proleagues
Strategy
I am doing this better than progamers do. [G] How to get started on ladder as a new Z player
Other Games
General Games
Nintendo Switch Thread Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Beyond All Reason Path of Exile What do you want from future RTS games?
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine UK Politics Mega-thread Russo-Ukrainian War Thread Vape Nation Thread
Fan Clubs
Maru Fan Club Serral Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
Korean Music Discussion [Manga] One Piece
Sports
2024 - 2025 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion NHL Playoffs 2024
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
A Better Routine For Progame…
TrAiDoS
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Heero Yuy & the Tax…
KrillinFromwales
I was completely wrong ab…
jameswatts
Need Your Help/Advice
Glider
Trip to the Zoo
micronesia
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 27286 users

Peter Jackson's The Hobbit - Page 21

Forum Index > Closed
Post a Reply
Prev 1 19 20 21 22 23 24 Next All
Holgerius
Profile Blog Joined January 2009
Sweden16951 Posts
December 12 2011 14:24 GMT
#401
On December 12 2011 21:01 Biff The Understudy wrote:
you can't say that it's very very good literature simply because stylistically it's basically awful (same would be said of Harry Potter, or any super big fantasy bestseller).

I disagree with this so heavily, and I think it's ridiculous to compare Tolkien's work with Harry Potter. >___<
I believe in the almighty Grötslev! -- I am never serious and you should never believe a thing I say. Including the previous sentence.
karpo
Profile Joined October 2010
Sweden1998 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-12-12 14:30:48
December 12 2011 14:26 GMT
#402
On December 12 2011 23:11 Manical wrote:
Show nested quote +
On December 12 2011 21:01 Biff The Understudy wrote:
On December 12 2011 20:47 MilesTeg wrote:
Peter Jackson is to me the greatest contemporary director with del Torro and the Coens, there is no doubt in my mind it will be a masterpiece like many of his other films. I can't even begin to understand how anyone can dislike what he did with LotR and call himself a cinephile.

I understand you like Jackson, but I don't know any real cinephile who liked his LOTR. It may be great entertainment, it has very low artistic value in my opinion. In cinematographic terms it's just a fat ass blockbuster.

The same way, people who are hardcore into literature usually have very low opinion of Tolkien. I think he did great because he has incredible imagination, but you can't say that it's very very good literature simply because stylistically it's basically awful (same would be said of Harry Potter, or any super big fantasy bestseller).

I used to looove LOTR, but last time I read a bit of it, I was super disappointed by how monotone and unimaginative Tolkien's writing is.


How can you seriously say the lotr trilogy has low artistic value? Hundreds of people worked on those movies for 6+(?) years, and if you'd seen some of the backstage content you would realize how much artistic work is needed to make a movie based on a book. Plus it was made by a pretty much unknown director, crew and actors (Orlando Bloom for example they picked up straight out of acting school). So to sum it up:
- Unknown crew
- Unknown actors
- World built from scratch based on books
- Unique location
- Revolutionizing technology

Can it get more artistic than that?

I know the cinephile type, and they only praise movies in foreign language with 50 subliminal messages and an upset ending. Movies like Old boy, Jacob's ladder, Let the right one in etc. And dont get me wrong I love those movies as well, but lotr trilogy will always be superior for what it is.


From what i see this whole argument started by someone hailing Jackson as one of the best directors comparing him to the Coen brothers and del Torro. I really don't agree as imo LotR to me was just another big budget blockbuster movie and both the Lonely Bones and King Kong were average/below average at best.

Saying "I can't even begin to understand how anyone can dislike what he did with LotR and call himself a cinephile" is more or less an invite for these kinds of discussions.



On December 12 2011 23:19 MilesTeg wrote:
Show nested quote +
On December 12 2011 21:12 Biff The Understudy wrote:
On December 12 2011 21:07 Psychobabas wrote:
On December 12 2011 21:01 Biff The Understudy wrote:
On December 12 2011 20:47 MilesTeg wrote:
Peter Jackson is to me the greatest contemporary director with del Torro and the Coens, there is no doubt in my mind it will be a masterpiece like many of his other films. I can't even begin to understand how anyone can dislike what he did with LotR and call himself a cinephile.

I understand you like Jackson, but I don't know any real cinephile who liked his LOTR. It may be great entertainment, it has very low artistic value in my opinion. In cinematographic terms it's just a fat ass blockbuster.

The same way, people who are hardcore into literature usually have very low opinion of Tolkien. I think he did great because he has incredible imagination, but you can't say that it's very very good literature simply because stylistically it's basically awful (same would be said of Harry Potter, or any super big fantasy bestseller).

I used to looove LOTR, but last time I read a bit of it, I was super disappointed by how monotone and unimaginative Tolkien's writing is.


No way. Every time a good movie/ music band comes out people always brand it eventually as "too commercial" "too cookiecutter" "not a real masterpiece" etc etc etc.
In my opinion, a film doesn't need to have 50 subliminal messages to be great. And the more special effects a film may have, it doesnt have to mean it's shittier. Just my view anyway.

I'm just saying that the way LOTR is filmed, the purely artistic level of the movie is completely uninteresting and that therefore it's probably not appealing to what one would call a cinephile.

What one can like is the content; for everything that is related to cinema as an art, Jackson goes for speed, efficiency, effect. It has nothing to do with subliminal messages, just of creativity from a director.

Again, that doesn't mean it's bad. It's just a style, very commercial, appealing to global audience of action packed blockbuster. I find that deadly boring and repetitive, but that's just my taste.

I would also add that in order to make a superproduction with thousand of actors, big battles and everything and still do something artistic, you better be a fucking genius (and I really don't think Jackson is a genius at all). The only one that come to my mind is Kurosawa. And although he filmed the most epic and incredible battles that I have ever seen, in comparison on which LOTR looks like a boring and mindless video game (I think of Kagemusha in particular), he has never been super popular among american teenagers and young people, which is the condition to make a movie as expensive as the ones Jackson does.


Everytime I see someone write something like that I can't help but to think that if we were living in other times they'd probably be saying the same thing of Victor Hugo or Shakespeare...

The "commercial" aspect doesn't have anything to do with its quality. Some (a lot of) commercial films are pure shit, tLotR isn't one of them. Honestly if you can't tell the difference between Peter Jackson and Michael Bay I don't think you can call yourself a cinephile...

Also "the purely artistic level of the movie is completely uninteresting" doesn't mean anything...


So now you are comparing Jackson to Shakespeare? What's with your constant "if you don't think X then you can't call yourself a cinephile", it's not like your opinion on movies and cinephiles is some kind of universal truth.
Naphal
Profile Joined December 2010
Germany2099 Posts
December 12 2011 14:31 GMT
#403
On December 12 2011 23:16 karpo wrote:
Show nested quote +
On December 12 2011 23:08 Naphal wrote:
On December 12 2011 22:45 karpo wrote:
On December 12 2011 22:39 Zorkmid wrote:
On December 12 2011 21:01 Biff The Understudy wrote:
I understand you like Jackson, but I don't know any real cinephile who liked his LOTR. It may be great entertainment, it has very low artistic value in my opinion. In cinematographic terms it's just a fat ass blockbuster.


Yea, what does the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences know....



On December 12 2011 21:01 Biff The Understudy wrote:
I used to looove LOTR, but last time I read a bit of it, I was super disappointed by how monotone and unimaginative Tolkien's writing is.


Right, Tolkien was a terrible storyteller. Didn't take me to another universe with its own history, mythology and feel at all. I can understand some film hipster not liking those films, but not the novels.

Just because a few academics don't like LOTR doesn't mean it's worthless.



The Oscars isn't really the best defence as they more or less represent Hollywood and blockbuster cinema.

Also why do people get so defensive just because people speak their mind about Tolkien. I love Arthur C Clarke but i don't demand that everyone has to like his work.


the criticism lacks a proper comparison or standard to judge by.
well worded as it may be, it is nothing more than shitting all over books and movies that i happen to like very much, only because expectations i cannot quite understand were not met, what would one that would be called a cinephile consider to be of artistic value or as artistic value in general?

it feels like "hey i watched the newest stallone movie and he does not even stop once to question himself if violence really is the only answer, and after that, i went to a bar, and the people there drank alcohol, it was horrible!"




You come of as kind of a fanboy.

For example, the guy you quoted said he found Tolkiens writing monotone and unimaginative. Those are valid complaints and i kinda feel the same way, his imagination is awesome but the actual writing is pretty bland and slow paced to me. You retaliate by putting words in the guys mouth AND talk about the history and mythology thereby totally missing the actual point.


i quoted you because you did not understand why me and others disagreed with the criticism, i think my response is perfectly fine as an answer, furthermore the guy that talked about tolkiens writing style was also the same guy that uttered that nonesense about artistic value and cinephiles, apart from that i did not put words in anyones mouth, i simply tried to find a comparison for weird expectations not met, and i really fail to see where i talked about history and mythology.
Duka08
Profile Blog Joined July 2010
3391 Posts
December 12 2011 14:32 GMT
#404
On December 12 2011 21:01 Biff The Understudy wrote:
Show nested quote +
On December 12 2011 20:47 MilesTeg wrote:
Peter Jackson is to me the greatest contemporary director with del Torro and the Coens, there is no doubt in my mind it will be a masterpiece like many of his other films. I can't even begin to understand how anyone can dislike what he did with LotR and call himself a cinephile.

I understand you like Jackson, but I don't know any real cinephile who liked his LOTR. It may be great entertainment, it has very low artistic value in my opinion. In cinematographic terms it's just a fat ass blockbuster.

The same way, people who are hardcore into literature usually have very low opinion of Tolkien. I think he did great because he has incredible imagination, but you can't say that it's very very good literature simply because stylistically it's basically awful (same would be said of Harry Potter, or any super big fantasy bestseller).

I used to looove LOTR, but last time I read a bit of it, I was super disappointed by how monotone and unimaginative Tolkien's writing is.

I couldn't disagree more. What is "artistic value" in your sense???

Also I can see how Tolkien's writing could be considered unusual and such purely from a literary standpoint, but in the end it made little difference because it was simply a story taking place in a world with its own history and dynamic, as you said.

It's all based on what you're considering "good". Tolkien's writing may not be "good literature" in the same sense that some cinephiles would say the films aren't good cinema, but I think both arguments are based in similar "monocle logic." LOTR (films) might not have many layers of depth and complexity that gives film tryhards a boner but to call it a cinematographic blockbuster compared to most film of the past 5-10 years is simply arrogant. They are masterpieces.
karpo
Profile Joined October 2010
Sweden1998 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-12-12 14:40:16
December 12 2011 14:39 GMT
#405
On December 12 2011 23:31 Naphal wrote:
Show nested quote +
On December 12 2011 23:16 karpo wrote:
On December 12 2011 23:08 Naphal wrote:
On December 12 2011 22:45 karpo wrote:
On December 12 2011 22:39 Zorkmid wrote:
On December 12 2011 21:01 Biff The Understudy wrote:
I understand you like Jackson, but I don't know any real cinephile who liked his LOTR. It may be great entertainment, it has very low artistic value in my opinion. In cinematographic terms it's just a fat ass blockbuster.


Yea, what does the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences know....



On December 12 2011 21:01 Biff The Understudy wrote:
I used to looove LOTR, but last time I read a bit of it, I was super disappointed by how monotone and unimaginative Tolkien's writing is.


Right, Tolkien was a terrible storyteller. Didn't take me to another universe with its own history, mythology and feel at all. I can understand some film hipster not liking those films, but not the novels.

Just because a few academics don't like LOTR doesn't mean it's worthless.



The Oscars isn't really the best defence as they more or less represent Hollywood and blockbuster cinema.

Also why do people get so defensive just because people speak their mind about Tolkien. I love Arthur C Clarke but i don't demand that everyone has to like his work.


the criticism lacks a proper comparison or standard to judge by.
well worded as it may be, it is nothing more than shitting all over books and movies that i happen to like very much, only because expectations i cannot quite understand were not met, what would one that would be called a cinephile consider to be of artistic value or as artistic value in general?

it feels like "hey i watched the newest stallone movie and he does not even stop once to question himself if violence really is the only answer, and after that, i went to a bar, and the people there drank alcohol, it was horrible!"




You come of as kind of a fanboy.

For example, the guy you quoted said he found Tolkiens writing monotone and unimaginative. Those are valid complaints and i kinda feel the same way, his imagination is awesome but the actual writing is pretty bland and slow paced to me. You retaliate by putting words in the guys mouth AND talk about the history and mythology thereby totally missing the actual point.


i quoted you because you did not understand why me and others disagreed with the criticism, i think my response is perfectly fine as an answer, furthermore the guy that talked about tolkiens writing style was also the same guy that uttered that nonesense about artistic value and cinephiles, apart from that i did not put words in anyones mouth, i simply tried to find a comparison for weird expectations not met, and i really fail to see where i talked about history and mythology.



Show nested quote +
On December 12 2011 21:01 Biff The Understudy wrote:
I used to looove LOTR, but last time I read a bit of it, I was super disappointed by how monotone and unimaginative Tolkien's writing is.


Right, Tolkien was a terrible storyteller. Didn't take me to another universe with its own history, mythology and feel at all. I can understand some film hipster not liking those films, but not the novels.

Just because a few academics don't like LOTR doesn't mean it's worthless.



It's right there. The guy clearly says that he disliked the writing and your counterargument is that Tolkien took you to another universe with it's own history, mythology and feel. What does that have to do with the actual writing? A book can have horrible writing and still have it's own universe with great history, mythology and feel.
Naphal
Profile Joined December 2010
Germany2099 Posts
December 12 2011 14:40 GMT
#406
i am sorry, but that poster is called zorkmid^^
karpo
Profile Joined October 2010
Sweden1998 Posts
December 12 2011 14:41 GMT
#407
On December 12 2011 23:40 Naphal wrote:
i am sorry, but that poster is called zorkmid^^


Ah sorry misquoted then.
Kewlots
Profile Joined September 2010
Australia534 Posts
December 12 2011 17:16 GMT
#408
On December 12 2011 21:01 Biff The Understudy wrote:
Show nested quote +
On December 12 2011 20:47 MilesTeg wrote:
Peter Jackson is to me the greatest contemporary director with del Torro and the Coens, there is no doubt in my mind it will be a masterpiece like many of his other films. I can't even begin to understand how anyone can dislike what he did with LotR and call himself a cinephile.

I understand you like Jackson, but I don't know any real cinephile who liked his LOTR. It may be great entertainment, it has very low artistic value in my opinion. In cinematographic terms it's just a fat ass blockbuster.

The same way, people who are hardcore into literature usually have very low opinion of Tolkien. I think he did great because he has incredible imagination, but you can't say that it's very very good literature simply because stylistically it's basically awful (same would be said of Harry Potter, or any super big fantasy bestseller).

I used to looove LOTR, but last time I read a bit of it, I was super disappointed by how monotone and unimaginative Tolkien's writing is.


lol i disagree first 2 movies were amazing I dont think you know what your talking about
gl hf gg
holzofenbrot
Profile Joined April 2011
Germany52 Posts
December 12 2011 18:24 GMT
#409
On December 12 2011 20:53 frantic.cactus wrote:
I emplore all who are critcising him on his handeling of LotR to watch other movies of his, Heavenly Creatures, The Frighteners, Braindead, Meet the Feebles and The Lovely Bones

You're forgetting his best one: Bad Taste
definitely his most funny and creative
MasterBlasterCaster
Profile Joined October 2011
United States568 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-12-12 18:29:43
December 12 2011 18:29 GMT
#410
I really don't think that ANYONE who writes on these boards needs to be criticizing JRR Tolkien's writing ability.

I mean, really. Come back to me when you've written one of the most influential books of all time, the single most influential fantasy of all time, and countless other books that have been on multiple bestseller lists in multiple languages.

What next?

"I think Tolkien was severely lacking in the linguistics dept. He was a good writer, but his understanding of language is juvenile at best..."
elgringo
Profile Joined March 2011
United States28 Posts
December 12 2011 18:41 GMT
#411
I feel like the people that are criticizing Tolkien's writing ability are the same people that got bored reading because it takes 200+ pages for the hobbits to get to Rivendell.

While the books may not be as action packed right of the bat like the movies are, Tolkien really shows his mastery of language. He has a way of evoking the feel of hobbit culture (and elf, dwarf, etc) merely through syntax. I think its genius.
But what is happiness except the simple harmony between a man and the life he leads? -Albert Camus
Thorakh
Profile Joined April 2011
Netherlands1788 Posts
December 12 2011 18:47 GMT
#412
On December 13 2011 03:29 MasterBlasterCaster wrote:
I really don't think that ANYONE who writes on these boards needs to be criticizing JRR Tolkien's writing ability.

I mean, really. Come back to me when you've written one of the most influential books of all time, the single most influential fantasy of all time, and countless other books that have been on multiple bestseller lists in multiple languages.

What next?

"I think Tolkien was severely lacking in the linguistics dept. He was a good writer, but his understanding of language is juvenile at best..."
Just because no one here is a globally known author doesn't mean we cannot criticize literature -_-
MasterBlasterCaster
Profile Joined October 2011
United States568 Posts
December 12 2011 19:00 GMT
#413
Because no one here comes close to being half the writer that Tolkien was; or has even a fraction of his understanding of the use of language; means that they cannot criticize his skill in writing, or the quality of his books.

Especially not when the criticism is about as well-written as the average forum post.
Thorakh
Profile Joined April 2011
Netherlands1788 Posts
December 12 2011 19:02 GMT
#414
On December 13 2011 04:00 MasterBlasterCaster wrote:
Because no one here comes close to being half the writer that Tolkien was; or has even a fraction of his understanding of the use of language; means that they cannot criticize his skill in writing, or the quality of his books.

Especially not when the criticism is about as well-written as the average forum post.
How do you know that the people criticizing are not well read people?

You do not need to be a world class X to criticize another X.
Krowser
Profile Joined August 2007
Canada788 Posts
December 12 2011 19:02 GMT
#415
I'm reading some good points here but you guys are trying to convince each other that YOUR opinion is the right one. Focus on explaining your view instead of emphasizing its importance. (LOTR sucked BECAUSE, instead of LOTR SUCKED!)

It's like saying Red is better than Blue, and then explaining by saying that Blue sucks.
D3 and Pho, the way to go. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=340709
Hallon
Profile Joined March 2011
64 Posts
December 12 2011 19:16 GMT
#416
Useless source.
Mjolnir
Profile Joined January 2009
912 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-12-12 19:20:18
December 12 2011 19:19 GMT
#417

I don't claim to know much about film or what it is that makes something "good" or "bad" in terms of high-level film-making so I will just come out and ask:

What is it about the LotR movies makes them "bad" or "meh" as people are saying here? I'm not interested in what makes them average because of the book - I mean what as a film makes them seem poorly done to those cinephiles here?

What films would you point me to as something "done right" or "done exceptionally well" for comparison.

Not trying to start a flame war or anything. I just realize I have no idea what makes a movie "great" in terms of execution and wouldn't mind learning a bit about what to look for.

Estel
Profile Joined October 2010
33 Posts
December 12 2011 19:22 GMT
#418
On December 13 2011 03:29 MasterBlasterCaster wrote:
I really don't think that ANYONE who writes on these boards needs to be criticizing JRR Tolkien's writing ability.

I mean, really. Come back to me when you've written one of the most influential books of all time, the single most influential fantasy of all time, and countless other books that have been on multiple bestseller lists in multiple languages.

What next?

"I think Tolkien was severely lacking in the linguistics dept. He was a good writer, but his understanding of language is juvenile at best..."


Fame doesn't make a good book or a good writer. Nor do you need to be an engineer to identify a broken bridge.
lizzard_warish
Profile Joined June 2011
589 Posts
December 12 2011 19:24 GMT
#419
Are people actually saying the LOTR films are bad? I'll agree the later half of helms deep was boring [just endless fighting], but the LOTR trilogy as a whole was amazing, especially fellowship. I'm both shocked and angered by any opinion that differs from mine in that respect.
Kal_rA
Profile Blog Joined July 2010
United States2925 Posts
December 12 2011 19:24 GMT
#420
Been listening to the LOTR audio books while driving to work for the last month. Nearly done with TT. Read the books a while ago and haven't watched the movies in a while. Its been fun listening to the old tale. Looking forward to the hobbit
Jaedong.
Prev 1 19 20 21 22 23 24 Next All
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Replay Cast
02:00
LiuLi 40 / Enki Pro Series 5
Liquipedia
Online Event
00:00
LATAM SC2 League: Semifinals
Liquipedia
GSL
23:00
Replay Cast
Rogue vs GuMiho
Maru vs Solar
LiquipediaDiscussion
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
ROOTCatZ 242
Nina 226
RuFF_SC2 184
StarCraft: Brood War
Rain 2516
Sea 1565
PianO 215
Leta 59
Noble 35
Terrorterran 15
Icarus 6
Dota 2
monkeys_forever212
LuMiX1
League of Legends
JimRising 755
Counter-Strike
Stewie2K560
Heroes of the Storm
Khaldor144
Other Games
summit1g12262
C9.Mang0999
hungrybox562
WinterStarcraft288
ViBE220
ToD169
Maynarde116
Mew2King53
CosmosSc2 24
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick1209
BasetradeTV89
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 16 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Berry_CruncH305
• Hupsaiya 76
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• Azhi_Dahaki11
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
League of Legends
• Doublelift5324
• Lourlo953
• Stunt269
Upcoming Events
GSL Code S
5h 39m
herO vs Zoun
Classic vs Bunny
The PondCast
6h 9m
Replay Cast
20h 9m
WardiTV Invitational
1d 7h
OSC
1d 9h
Korean StarCraft League
1d 23h
SOOP
2 days
sOs vs Percival
CranKy Ducklings
2 days
WardiTV Invitational
2 days
Cheesadelphia
2 days
[ Show More ]
CSO Cup
2 days
GSL Code S
3 days
Sparkling Tuna Cup
3 days
Replay Cast
3 days
Wardi Open
4 days
Replay Cast
4 days
Replay Cast
5 days
RSL Revival
5 days
Cure vs Percival
ByuN vs Spirit
RSL Revival
6 days
herO vs sOs
Zoun vs Clem
Replay Cast
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

CSL Season 17: Qualifier 2
BGE Stara Zagora 2025
Heroes 10 EU

Ongoing

JPL Season 2
BSL 2v2 Season 3
BSL Season 20
KCM Race Survival 2025 Season 2
NPSL S3
Rose Open S1
CSL 17: 2025 SUMMER
2025 GSL S2
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25
BLAST Rivals Spring 2025
MESA Nomadic Masters
CCT Season 2 Global Finals
IEM Melbourne 2025
YaLLa Compass Qatar 2025
PGL Bucharest 2025
BLAST Open Spring 2025

Upcoming

Copa Latinoamericana 4
CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
K-Championship
SEL Season 2 Championship
Esports World Cup 2025
HSC XXVII
Championship of Russia 2025
Murky Cup #2
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.