This discussion is closed.
CR3
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#21
Report 16 years ago
#21
about HP being boring at times...it goes the same for LoTR...try reading the first chapter of lotr not knowing that the book will get interesting later..i mean it doesn't get much more boring than that...

CR
0
elan
Badges:
#22
Report 16 years ago
#22
LOTR is better.
I don't think JK rowling will come anywhere near Tolkien. Hp will have its own merits....but its just not the same. These two book aren't on the same level.
As for films, the same goes, though the Hp films were entertaining enough.
0
Unregistered
Badges:
#23
Report 16 years ago
#23
LOTR is better. Tolkien was a class writer with more imagination, creativity and a better grasp of the English language.

Also LOTR is original.
0
Infinity
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#24
Report 16 years ago
#24
(Original post by Mr White)
Which is better Harry Potter or Lord of the Rings (the books, not the films)?

I have to go w/ LOTR's over HP!
0
MattG
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#25
Report 16 years ago
#25
sorry but in my opinion its no contest. Wtihout lord of the rings i doubt that the whole fantasy genre, let alone harry potter would exist as it does today. lord of the rings is just so above harry potter in everything, its depth, scope and hows it written.

for those readers that have expressed how boring lord of the rings can be at the beginning: read the hobbit. it gives you some background to the setting and is an easier read. A good starting point to the whole world of middle earth. and you dont have to bother with the prologue at the beginning of you dont want too. the first time i read it i didnt.
0
Infinity
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#26
Report 16 years ago
#26
(Original post by MattG)
sorry but in my opinion its no contest. Wtihout lord of the rings i doubt that the whole fantasy genre, let alone harry potter would exist as it does today. lord of the rings is just so above harry potter in everything, its depth, scope and hows it written.

for those readers that have expressed how boring lord of the rings can be at the beginning: read the hobbit. it gives you some background to the setting and is an easier read. A good starting point to the whole world of middle earth. and you dont have to bother with the prologue at the beginning of you dont want too. the first time i read it i didnt.
I've read them all, I really can't say I found them at all boring.
Very good point about reading the hobbit first. It is informative!
0
Unregistered11
Badges:
#27
Report 16 years ago
#27
(Original post by Unregistered)
do you think that anyone would have bothered to compare them if the films hadn't come out at the same time?
Yes cos JKR has blatently stolen loads of ideas from LOTR! But the biggest lift of all (which she never even mentions when asked about what books influenced her -I wonder why!!!!) is from a book for young kids called The worst witch. It is a really crappily written book about a girl called mildred who goes to a school for witches, but the basic idea was there, and lots of little things too like badly behaved broomsticks and pet owls!!!!
0
Egan1
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#28
Report 16 years ago
#28
(Original post by Unregistered11)
Yes cos JKR has blatently stolen loads of ideas from LOTR! But the biggest lift of all (which she never even mentions when asked about what books influenced her -I wonder why!!!!) is from a book for young kids called The worst witch. It is a really crappily written book about a girl called mildred who goes to a school for witches, but the basic idea was there, and lots of little things too like badly behaved broomsticks and pet owls!!!!
Hmmm...but you could say the same for so many different books!
There are many tradtional fantasy stereotypes etc that are included in countless fantasy stories and novels etc, and I'm sure you could say the same for many genres.
The story is still, on the whole original. It's an enjoyable (and well written) read.
0
Unregistered
Badges:
#29
Report 16 years ago
#29
(Original post by CR3)
harry potter books rule a**....as for the films...lord of the rings is better but i found the book kind of makes the reader lose interest...

CR
I know the LOTR books start out quite boring and once you stop reading you can find it hard to get back in, but they're reeeeeeeeally good if you are persistant.
0
Dude
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#30
Report 16 years ago
#30
Harry Potter in terms of books. LOTR is terms of movies. The books of LOTR can be hard to get into cos they are so long and the print is so small.
0
ladyblitzer
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#31
Report 16 years ago
#31
(Original post by elan)
LOTR is better.
I don't think JK rowling will come anywhere near Tolkien. Hp will have its own merits....but its just not the same. These two book aren't on the same level.
As for films, the same goes, though the Hp films were entertaining enough.
I agree that the two books are not on the same level. HP is originally for kids (but it doesn't mean that adults couldn't read and enjoy the series, okay?! so at least we know that it appeals to people of all ages). LOTR is not.

And what if JK got some of her ideas somewhere else? How would you know if Tolkien's works were 100% original? I'm sure he could've gotten some of them somewhere else as well.
0
Unregistered
Badges:
#32
Report 16 years ago
#32
(Original post by ladyblitzer)
I agree that the two books are not on the same level. HP is originally for kids (but it doesn't mean that adults couldn't read and enjoy the series, okay?! so at least we know that it appeals to people of all ages). LOTR is not.

And what if JK got some of her ideas somewhere else? How would you know if Tolkien's works were 100% original? I'm sure he could've gotten some of them somewhere else as well.
LOTR - Giant spider, HP - Giant spider
LOTR - Mirror that lets you see past, present and future, HP - Mirror that lets you see past present and future
LOTR - Vertically challenged hero with similar sidekicks, HP - Vertically challenged hero with similar sidekicks
LOTR - Trees that can move, HP - Trees that can move
LOTR - Charatcer called Wormtongue, HP - Character called Wormtail
LOTR - Charachter called Aragorn, HP - Character called Aragog
LOTR - Wise old wizard wo helps main character, HP - Wize old wizard who helps main character

.........and seeing as LOTR was published in 1954, way before HP, there is no question as to what the original masterpiece is. Maybe the Tolkien estate should sue JK Rowling for plagarism?
0
kikzen
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#33
Report 16 years ago
#33
Actually I think LOTR was actually meant for children.
0
++Hex++
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#34
Report 16 years ago
#34
(Original post by kikzen)
Actually I think LOTR was actually meant for children.
FotR was originally meant as a sequel to 'The Hobbit', but rapidly got much more complex: the writing style in the first couple of chapters or so is much closer to The Hobbit than to the rest of LotR.
I'm not sure whether The Hobbit was originally planned to be set in Middle Earth or not - maybe Iluvatar knows.
0
-Sharp-
Badges: 0
#35
Report 16 years ago
#35
(Original post by CR3)
when i read LoTR..i always thought it was hard to picture what was going on...my assumptions were way off in the movie...oh yea and no doubt LoTR beats HP in the MOVIES..but not books in my opinion

CR
Thats ya problem dude- Lotr was to hard 4 u 2 read admit it lol!
Harry Potter is a lot more **** erm....i mean basic than lotr! so only a c
certain audience can manage it! but by far LOTR is betta!
0
-Sharp-
Badges: 0
#36
Report 16 years ago
#36
(Original post by Unregistered)
LOTR - Giant spider, HP - Giant spider
LOTR - Mirror that lets you see past, present and future, HP - Mirror that lets you see past present and future
LOTR - Vertically challenged hero with similar sidekicks, HP - Vertically challenged hero with similar sidekicks
LOTR - Trees that can move, HP - Trees that can move
LOTR - Charatcer called Wormtongue, HP - Character called Wormtail
LOTR - Charachter called Aragorn, HP - Character called Aragog
LOTR - Wise old wizard wo helps main character, HP - Wize old wizard who helps main character

.........and seeing as LOTR was published in 1954, way before HP, there is no question as to what the original masterpiece is. Maybe the Tolkien estate should sue JK Rowling for plagarism?
Lol thats clever i never saw it in that way! and y didn't the dude that made this thread make a POLL! Do it agen with a poll!
0
Dude
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#37
Report 16 years ago
#37
so what. there are simplerlaties. i still think that harry potter is better than LOTR.
0
++Hex++
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#38
Report 16 years ago
#38
(Original post by Dude)
so what. there are simplerlaties

Eh? :confused:
0
LPK
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#39
Report 16 years ago
#39
(Original post by Mr White)
Which is better Harry Potter or Lord of the Rings (the books, not the films)?
lotr books are boring but the films are good.hp books are good and so are the films.
0
savy_frodo
Badges: 0
#40
Report 16 years ago
#40
(Original post by CR3)
when i read LoTR..i always thought it was hard to picture what was going on...my assumptions were way off in the movie...oh yea and no doubt LoTR beats HP in the MOVIES..but not books in my opinion

CR
I agree that when you first start reading LOTR it is very hard to picture Middle Earth. It's this way becuse Tolkien is an INCREDIBLE writer and includes such in depth details. I must admit that I didn't start reading LOTR until I had seen the Fellowship, and would not have tried unless I had. I believe with everything in me that is no "way off" way to picture any world and that everyone sees the world DIFFERENTLY.
0
X
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Regarding Ofqual's most recent update, do you think you will be given a fair grade this summer?

Yes (295)
34.26%
No (566)
65.74%

Watched Threads

View All