Originally Posted by Psychotic
Harry Potter
Lord of the Rings
A kid's book series compared to the trilogy that basically established fantasy as a valid genre in the 20th century and influenced literature for decades to come? Kind of a sad comparison. Lord of the Rings all the way.
QFT
THE JACKEL
add me, PSN: ljkkjlcm9
It's like comparing apples and oranges. I love them both equally, but for different reasons.
Lord of the Rings. I'm more interested in it than Harry Potter. I read The Sorcerer's Stone, and I wasn't amazed with it like I was with LotR.
Are you serious? JK Rowling almost single handedly brought reading back into a generation at a time when it was been seriously overshadowed by Video Games & other such things. Tolken influencened literature for decades to come, sure, but so will Rowling. Theres no comparison to the impact that Rowling made with the release of 'Harry Potter', than Tolken did with the release of 'Lord of the Rings'. Also, you automatically make it sound a little pathetic when you call it a kids book series, when the books are open to every kind of audience (hence the adult and normal book versions).
Str8 Pimpin'
I give my biscuit to LotR.
~I am the Aeon of will and strength, I protect my beloved and that's all I wish to be needed to do~
LoTR the movies and HP can hardly be compared. The magic in HP was so much better. The fact that HP could destroy Gandalf is hilarious, imo. However, I would say the LOTR was given more money, more time, and the didn't have to worry about the affects of puberty on any of the actors, Except legalos.
Naturally, LOTR was better. HP does put up a good fight, but just not well enough.
Books: Harry wins, LotR had too many boring passages, and the story didn't flow that well.
Movies: LotR is one of the best films ever made, while the Harry Potter ones never impressed me much.
Harry Potter wins hands down in books, LoTR drones on and on without grasping the reader (i got halfway into Fellowship and stopped out of bordem)
LoTR wins with films because the Harry Potter ones are terrible!
[q]JK Rowling almost single handedly brought reading back into a generation at a time when it was been seriously overshadowed by Video Games & other such things.[/q]
Doesn't say much for the generation in question. And HP would never exist without LoTR. Not much would. LoTR is the ultimate root of all things <3
Harry Potter is much better when it comes to intensity. LotR is a little too slow-paced for me. Then again, it's much older. I'm no fan of wizard-boys though, so I guess that puts me on the Tolkien's side.
LoTR. I find it a bit bizarre that people are comparing Harry Potter with LoTR.
Uhu... they're slightly different.
This thread made me find out why (SPOILER)Cho Chang and Harry broke up (it's not revealed in the movie which I didn't read the book for, and I don't remember what happened in the 6th book).
I like Harry Potter because both the book and the movies are enjoyable, and while LOTR was a good series of movies, the books were typically excessive narratives about scenario, politics, and running around, with fights taking up maybe a page or two. The movie was the opposite.
But mostly, I like HP because it is more easily related to, and so I have taken a liking to the characters and want to know what happens to them.
HP being an unfinished symphony is also a factor.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
