Go to first unread
Back
to top
Game of Thrones or Lord of the Rings???
Watch
Announcements
Poll: Which is better?
Game of Thrones
(309)
53.18%
Lord of the Rings
(272)
46.82%
(Original post by (づ￣ ³￣)づ)
Thought of adding a poll?
Thought of adding a poll?
0
reply
Report
#4
(Original post by TheDuo)
how??? please help me!
how??? please help me!
0
reply
Report
#5
I love them both: the Lord of the Rings movies are my favourite movies (I enjoyed the books too, but prefer other books) and the Game of Thrones TV show is my favourite TV show (haven't read the books yet).
But IMO Game of Thrones is better because the characters are more realistic and entertaining. LOTR is very good vs evil whereas nearly every GOT character rests somewhere in between and most of them are well fleshed out. That's especially the case when you compare the women in the two series.
But IMO Game of Thrones is better because the characters are more realistic and entertaining. LOTR is very good vs evil whereas nearly every GOT character rests somewhere in between and most of them are well fleshed out. That's especially the case when you compare the women in the two series.
2
reply
Report
#6
Game of Thrones as it is my all time favourite TV series. I watched the first to LotR films when they were new as a kid and they were alright. I was actually planning to give them another shot today before I even saw this thread.
0
reply
Report
#7
This is the most terrible poll I've ever fffrrsregjl
I just betrayed Tolkien
I am unworthy of this life
I just betrayed Tolkien
I am unworthy of this life
0
reply
Report
#8
(Original post by Eunomia)
I love them both: the Lord of the Rings movies are my favourite movies (I enjoyed the books too, but prefer other books) and the Game of Thrones TV show is my favourite TV show (haven't read the books yet).
But IMO Game of Thrones is better because the characters are more realistic and entertaining. LOTR is very good vs evil whereas nearly every GOT character rests somewhere in between and most of them are well fleshed out. That's especially the case when you compare the women in the two series.
I love them both: the Lord of the Rings movies are my favourite movies (I enjoyed the books too, but prefer other books) and the Game of Thrones TV show is my favourite TV show (haven't read the books yet).
But IMO Game of Thrones is better because the characters are more realistic and entertaining. LOTR is very good vs evil whereas nearly every GOT character rests somewhere in between and most of them are well fleshed out. That's especially the case when you compare the women in the two series.
In terms of the fleshing out thing, I suppose you can only do so much in less than ten hours of screen-time.
but yeah, the women thing! Arwen plays an even smaller role in the books than in the movies; there's very little female influence in LotR
1
reply
Report
#9
Lord of the rings would be so good in a TV series form! 
All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to us.
All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to us.
1
reply
Report
#10
Game of Thrones:
- Semi realistic (The good guys actually die)
- Some of the good guys actually have bad sides (Dany who is power mad; Sansa who is going to fall for Littlefinger's plan; Jaime who still has a thing for Cersei even though she's killed a lot of people - Seriously, why haven't Jaime and Brien admitted their love for each other yet?)
- A very well developed story with lots of foreshadowing
- Lots of characters from lots of different perspectives
- Good music (The piano music from episode 10 of season 6 is amazing)
- The ending isn't predictable; we still don't know who's going to end up on the throne but I can imagine it being either Dany or Jon (But then you've got Littlefinger to consider as well...)
LOTR:
- The forefather of modern fantasy writing
- A truly epic story
- Sad ending (Tears of joy though)
- A well developed story universe
But I gotta say LOTR out of the two because of nostalgia and the fact that it was the first successful fantasy series that inspired almost every fantasy book after it. But GoT is also very good but the show's quality has sort of gone down after season 4 but season 6 was much better than 5
- Semi realistic (The good guys actually die)
- Some of the good guys actually have bad sides (Dany who is power mad; Sansa who is going to fall for Littlefinger's plan; Jaime who still has a thing for Cersei even though she's killed a lot of people - Seriously, why haven't Jaime and Brien admitted their love for each other yet?)
- A very well developed story with lots of foreshadowing
- Lots of characters from lots of different perspectives
- Good music (The piano music from episode 10 of season 6 is amazing)
- The ending isn't predictable; we still don't know who's going to end up on the throne but I can imagine it being either Dany or Jon (But then you've got Littlefinger to consider as well...)
LOTR:
- The forefather of modern fantasy writing
- A truly epic story
- Sad ending (Tears of joy though)
- A well developed story universe
But I gotta say LOTR out of the two because of nostalgia and the fact that it was the first successful fantasy series that inspired almost every fantasy book after it. But GoT is also very good but the show's quality has sort of gone down after season 4 but season 6 was much better than 5
1
reply
Report
#12
I would say the LotR, but the one thing I dislike about the films is that they never included Tom Bombadil
0
reply
Report
#19
Lord of the Rings is the classic fantasy series that defined the fantasy genre. It is the greatest fantasy trilogy to ever be written and anyone who says otherwise simply needs to read the books to understand.
Reasons why Lord of the Ríngs kicks Game of Thrones butt
1. Characters have way more development than Game of Throne characters. Tolkien put more thought into the way he wrote characters than Martin does. I found myself caring about what happened to Gandalf, Merry and Pippin, and Aragorn. With Game of Thrones Martin did not give me much of their personality before he killed them. I was not sad when Ned Stark died because Martin did not make me care enough about him beforehand.
2. World building is much more creative and detailed than Martin's. Martin simply took the War of the Roses and threw in some dragons. Tolkien was a philologist and actually used a combination of Old English and other ancient languages to create an entirely new language for his own world. It made the world much more believable. Martin's world does not seem as engrossing as Tolkien's.
3. Lord of the Rings is actually fantasy. The whole point of fantasy is being able to escape realism and become immersed in a world that we could never imagine living in the real world. That is why I don't understand why saying Game of Thrones is realistic is meant to be praise. If Game of Thrones is realistic, surely that means it has failed as a fantasy story? If I wanted realism why would I bother reading Game of Thrones when I can just pick up a history book on the War of the Roses?
4. There is no pointless violence in Lord of the Rings. All the violence that Lord of the Rings features serves as a crucial element to the plot of the story. The death of King Theoden allowed other characters to develop emotionally. The violence in Game of Thrones is often gratuitous. What was the point of having Daeneryis raped by Drogo if she was only going to end up developing Stockholm Syndrome and falling in love with him? Her rape did not develop her as a character. I mean you would expect a 12 year old to feel some trauma from being rape by some 30 year old man (yes guys. She was 12 in the book).
5. Lord of the Rings wrote better female characters than Game of Thrones. In Game of Thrones, most women are either whores, angry ugly females, damsels in distress, or they are just rape victims. In Lord of the Rings we have characters like Galadriel and Eowyn who actually played important roles in the plot.
6. Lord of the Rings had the underdogs as the main characters of the story. Frodo and Sam were just two little hobbits who no one expected would achieve fame. They were not typical main heroes of a story. They had no angst but were just normal happy hobbits. That is why Lord of the Rings is such a charming story. In Game of Thrones all the main characters are good at sword fighting and all seem to have some tragic past. There is nothing wrong with having your main character not have a horrendous past.
In the end it comes down to personal tastes. I will always see Game of Thrones as being mediocre to LOTR and I don't see it ever having the same impact on the fantasy genre that LOTR did.
Reasons why Lord of the Ríngs kicks Game of Thrones butt
1. Characters have way more development than Game of Throne characters. Tolkien put more thought into the way he wrote characters than Martin does. I found myself caring about what happened to Gandalf, Merry and Pippin, and Aragorn. With Game of Thrones Martin did not give me much of their personality before he killed them. I was not sad when Ned Stark died because Martin did not make me care enough about him beforehand.
2. World building is much more creative and detailed than Martin's. Martin simply took the War of the Roses and threw in some dragons. Tolkien was a philologist and actually used a combination of Old English and other ancient languages to create an entirely new language for his own world. It made the world much more believable. Martin's world does not seem as engrossing as Tolkien's.
3. Lord of the Rings is actually fantasy. The whole point of fantasy is being able to escape realism and become immersed in a world that we could never imagine living in the real world. That is why I don't understand why saying Game of Thrones is realistic is meant to be praise. If Game of Thrones is realistic, surely that means it has failed as a fantasy story? If I wanted realism why would I bother reading Game of Thrones when I can just pick up a history book on the War of the Roses?
4. There is no pointless violence in Lord of the Rings. All the violence that Lord of the Rings features serves as a crucial element to the plot of the story. The death of King Theoden allowed other characters to develop emotionally. The violence in Game of Thrones is often gratuitous. What was the point of having Daeneryis raped by Drogo if she was only going to end up developing Stockholm Syndrome and falling in love with him? Her rape did not develop her as a character. I mean you would expect a 12 year old to feel some trauma from being rape by some 30 year old man (yes guys. She was 12 in the book).
5. Lord of the Rings wrote better female characters than Game of Thrones. In Game of Thrones, most women are either whores, angry ugly females, damsels in distress, or they are just rape victims. In Lord of the Rings we have characters like Galadriel and Eowyn who actually played important roles in the plot.
6. Lord of the Rings had the underdogs as the main characters of the story. Frodo and Sam were just two little hobbits who no one expected would achieve fame. They were not typical main heroes of a story. They had no angst but were just normal happy hobbits. That is why Lord of the Rings is such a charming story. In Game of Thrones all the main characters are good at sword fighting and all seem to have some tragic past. There is nothing wrong with having your main character not have a horrendous past.
In the end it comes down to personal tastes. I will always see Game of Thrones as being mediocre to LOTR and I don't see it ever having the same impact on the fantasy genre that LOTR did.
7
reply
X
Quick Reply
Today on TSR
-
Have your say on 2021 assessmentOfqual and DfE want students' thoughts
- Applying to uni? Chat to others here
- Struggling with lockdown uni work
- Win a year of Headspace
- US election - Biden inauguration today