• This is a reminder of 3 IMPORTANT RULES:

    1- External self-promotion websites or apps are NOT allowed here, like Discord/Twitter/Patreon/etc.

    2- Do NOT post in other languages. English-only.

    3- Crack/Warez/Piracy talk is NOT allowed.

    Breaking any of the above rules will result in your messages being deleted and you will be banned upon repetition.

    Please, stop by this thread SoccerGaming Forum Rules And Guidelines and make sure you read and understand our policies.

    Thank you!

harry potter Vs LOTR

P

Pferd

Reserve Team
Books? neither. both are too longwinded. LotR, the guy was ****in insane. he was more interested in his fake little language, and the history behind the story, that he never got around to telling the story. and when he finally did, it was a long-ass story, that i couldnt be bothered to finish.

HP? just too damn long, and filled with silly ****, like Harry Potter going through puberty. If i wanted to read a "coming-of-age" book, i could do that without the 700 million pages in 5 books.

movies? LotR defintly.

the thing is, is not that i can't read a long book, its just that story telling is about flow, and for the most part, LotR and HP lack flow. Harry Potter is better written, and I did manage to read all 5 books, whereas, i kept losing my page in the LotR, because i couldnt keep the events of the book straight.

the hobbit was better written then all of the harry potter books though.
 
W

wat3rf0x

Senior Squad
You're wrong about lord of the rings. The fact that the story resides in a totally ficticious world is totally intriguing, and it is this that makes it such a popular novel. It is all that history and languages that gives you the sense of being a part of middle earth.

Personally I have read the lotr book and I must admit it is really good, even for a story written 50 years ago. The story is really long, but truth to say I wished It had been longer. A lot of the stuff had been changed for the movie, but that was quite ok.

If you could bother to read through all 5 books of harry potter, why don't you give lord of the rings a try.

PS. I'm subject to my own opinions and so are you. And this was my lengthiest post in SG ever :ewan:
 
I

INFESTA

Official
Originally posted by Pferd
Books? neither. both are too longwinded. LotR, the guy was ****in insane. he was more interested in his fake little language, and the history behind the story, that he never got around to telling the story. and when he finally did, it was a long-ass story, that i couldnt be bothered to finish.

HP? just too damn long, and filled with silly ****, like Harry Potter going through puberty. If i wanted to read a "coming-of-age" book, i could do that without the 700 million pages in 5 books.

movies? LotR defintly.

the thing is, is not that i can't read a long book, its just that story telling is about flow, and for the most part, LotR and HP lack flow. Harry Potter is better written, and I did manage to read all 5 books, whereas, i kept losing my page in the LotR, because i couldnt keep the events of the book straight.

the hobbit was better written then all of the harry potter books though.
Click to expand...

Couldnt keep the events of the book straight? You're what? 10 years old?
 
L

LaBrujita

Senior Squad
Originally posted by Pferd
Books? neither. both are too longwinded. LotR, the guy was ****in insane. he was more interested in his fake little language, and the history behind the story, that he never got around to telling the story. and when he finally did, it was a long-ass story, that i couldnt be bothered to finish.

HP? just too damn long, and filled with silly ****, like Harry Potter going through puberty. If i wanted to read a "coming-of-age" book, i could do that without the 700 million pages in 5 books.

movies? LotR defintly.

the thing is, is not that i can't read a long book, its just that story telling is about flow, and for the most part, LotR and HP lack flow. Harry Potter is better written, and I did manage to read all 5 books, whereas, i kept losing my page in the LotR, because i couldnt keep the events of the book straight.

the hobbit was better written then all of the harry potter books though.
Click to expand...

Put down the remote and pick up a book.
 
A

AhmedK

Min
both books are great...the LOTR films are better though...the first book was way too long winded....so i saw the film instead...but i read the two towers and return of the king...so its all good.
 
R

rhizome17

Fan Favourite
Originally posted by LaBrujita
Put down the remote and pick up a book.
Click to expand...

(Y)

Anyway, I still can't see how or why the two should be compared. Sure they both contain elements of fantasy but then Hogans Heroes and Saving Private Ryan are both about WW2. But then they can't really be compared because ther target audiences are different etc. etc.
 
Alex

Alex

sKIp_E
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
I agree 100% with the good doctor...

LOTR and Harry Potter shouldnt be compared...

They both contain magic, and were both firstly books, and then movies, but apart from that, they are almost entirely different....

I will say this: I enjoyed reading the Harry Potter books more, BUT enjoyed watching the LOTR movies more...

I could go on forever about hw the HP books arent written for children, but there are too many teenagers here, who are much too concerned with personal image to even contemplate reading the HP books, so of course theyre passed off as gay, or childish...

LOTR tho is part of pop culture, and as a book that is written PURELY for older readers (as opposed to HP which is written for all ages) it isnt seen as childish by the "oh so cool" teeny bopper group that I spoke of above...

Thats all...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


Top