agreed, I'm probably biased because i havent seen lotr but the second when i saw the plots of the lotr movies, i disliked themOriginally Posted by Rocket Edge
Harry Potter
Lord of the Rings
agreed, I'm probably biased because i havent seen lotr but the second when i saw the plots of the lotr movies, i disliked them
HARRY POTTER!
LoTR is infinitely better in both the creativity and writing departments. The movies were better, too.
i think both r cool...but harry potter is more of a family or kids series..u kno...lotr has all the fantasy action...wars and magic and swords all that good stuff...o ya who could forget the bow and arrows...lol
:shoot:yo im new to this sig thing so id appreciate comments and suggestions to my pm box k thanx
Oh please, a no brainer this. Rings all the way. HP on the page is pretty good. On the screen 1 and 2 were AWFUL. 3 and 4 were very good and the latest one was OK.
Lord of the Rings on both page and screen delivers on a much deeper level than little Harry and is therefore much more satisfying. Add to that the fact that HP borrows heavily from LOTR and there really is only one winner.
I will never be a memory.
Even though I'm supposed to feel obliged to like LotR better because everyone else does and it's such a famous piece of literature blah blah yawn, I read the first one and it was so heavy going and boring that I skipped The Council of Elrond because it was so endless and irrelevant. Therefore I prefer HP, which was the original question.
there was a picture here
'nuff said.
I will never be a memory.
I think if you read the Silmarillion, the Council of Elrond scene would seem a little less boring and a lot more fascinating. Yes, it's very full of exposi<b></b>tion and tons of obscure references to Arnor, Doriath, Gondolin, Númenor, Eärendil, Hurin, Turin, and Beren. People and places that would mean very little to someone who hasn't read the Silmarillion. But if you have read it, it gives such a tremendous amount of depth to the whole Council of Elrond chapter. When you understand just how much history is behind the story of LotR that's when you see what kind of genius Tolkien really was.
The accesibility of Harry Potter makes it infinitely better. Lord of the Rings was great in defining the genre of fantasy, but it wasn't written for everyone. That being said, my opinion matters for about nothing, as I've read The Hobbit and none of Harry Potter.
I got Silmarillion, but simply couldn't finish reading it. The writing was pretty awful in my opinion, it read like a boring history book.
I thought the writing was beautifully poetic. There are some passages in the book that just gives you shivers it's so eloquent. I'm not saying it's an easy read, but it certainly is a beautiful one.
Never liked poetry much, so I guess thats why I didn't like it.
The writing style just isn't my thing, I had the same complains about the Children of Hurin.
That's why you read the Histories of ME. Tevildo is like cat macros, without the macro and all of the awesome.
I find Harry Potter to be nicer light reading, but I think that technically Lord of the Rings is quite superior. I'd consider myself more of a HP fan than a LotR fan really, but on the whole I prefer LotR I'm just not as knowledgeable about it as I am with the Harry Potter series. Both fantastic books by fantastic storytellers.
Not my words Carol, the words of Top Gear magazine.
I think Harry Potter has the potential to become as iconic in the future as LoTR is now, and people scoff at it because it isn't as "epic" as LoTR. That being said, LoTR is a much more beautiful piece of writing, but I literally fell in love with the Harry Potter characters (Bella, Voldie, Neville, Snape, Luna, Tonks, Lup...yeah, you get my point.)
And I could not be bothered to read all of Aragorn's ballads.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
