xorcist Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 Star Wars vs. LOTR. Vote Star Wars. LOTR has a slight lead which is obviously not right. Teach those internet nerds a lesson, and show them the error of their ways! http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/28/star-wars-greatest-movie-franchise_n_1539317.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyersfan Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 Thanks! Voted for Lord of the Rings since I like it much more. I'm also disgusted that The Hunger Games is on there. It's not even a series. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xorcist Posted June 9, 2012 Author Share Posted June 9, 2012 safe to say that most of the votes for LOTR were by not so attractive virgins who don't know what the word Franchise means... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shingara Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 actualy even though i love sw i would say they are about equal. Tolkien was a literary genius. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyersfan Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 safe to say that most of the votes for LOTR were by not so attractive virgins who don't know what the word Franchise means... I'd say that it's incredibly unsafe to say that, especially from personal experience. The people I know that are "hardcore" Star Wars fans are far more geeky (as well as "not so attractive virgins who don't know what the word franchise* means) than Lord of the Rings fans. In my opinion, Lord of the Rings was a better movie series. The production, direction, and acting was much better. Also, the entire series was absolutely excellent whereas the Star Wars series has 2 movies that are borderline awful. At any rate, neither of them are "cool." One is about a fictitious world in which brothers kiss sisters and run around chasing a guy in a suit that can do space magic and obeys the whims of an old guy with a giant cloak. The other is about short people with hairy feet that stumbled upon a magic ring trying to save a world filled with elves and dwarves from a giant eyeball atop a tower. One can insult the other but neither are winning. Both can be boiled down to something that sounds corny and stupid. Just enjoy what you want to enjoy. There's no reason to take shots at others for likely something else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurbere Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 I'm sorry.As much as I love Star Wars, I just have to vote Lord of the Rings. LOTR was fantastic from start to finish, where as Star Wars hit a rough patch(looking at you PT). If you read the LOTR books and watch the movies, you'll see that LOTR has been a steady, epic series that will most likely continue to live on. Star Wars will also live on through books and comics, but as this is a movie review I must vote LOTR because they are much better. The acting and directing were awesome, and the action was top notch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashu-ri Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 safe to say that most of the votes for LOTR were by not so attractive virgins who don't know what the word Franchise means... Lord of the Rings = three movies. True Lord of the Rings nerds know that each book was, in fact, two books. Plus, two Hobbit films will be coming out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurbere Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 Lord of the Rings = three movies. True Lord of the Rings nerds know that each book was, in fact, two books. Plus, two Hobbit films will be coming out. Are you sure LOTR was just two books. Sure you had the Hobbit as one book and then LOTR series all coming out in another book, but I thought LOTR was three books. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashu-ri Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 Are you sure LOTR was just two books. Sure you had the Hobbit as one book and then LOTR series all coming out in another book, but I thought LOTR was three books. The Hobbit (not included in the Trilogy), Fellowship of the Rings, The Two Towers, and Return of the King. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leroyray Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 Are you sure LOTR was just two books. Sure you had the Hobbit as one book and then LOTR series all coming out in another book, but I thought LOTR was three books. Each of the three books in the series were divided into two books. Fellowship Book 1 follows Frodo from Hobbiton to Rivendell Fellowship Book 2 chronicles the group's travels through Moria and ends with the breaking of the Fellowship Two Towers Book 1 is the story of Aragon, Legalos and Gimli tracking Merru and Pippin through Rohan Two Towers Book 2 is Sam and Frodo's journey to Mordor Return Book 1 is the Second War of the Ring Return Book 2 is Frodo's further adventures in Mordor and the conclusion of the series The films are great because they jump back and forth between Frodo's tale and Aragon's tale. The books do not go back and forth between POV characters. Hope that helped clear things up. Now get off the damn computer and read LOTR! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CassusVerda Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 *Turns into Randall Graves* There is only one Return....and it ain't of the King....It's of the Jedi. I mean All LOTR was a bunch of people walking to an f'ing Volcano. Even the Trees Walked in those movies. *Meant in jest* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurbere Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 Each of the three books in the series were divided into two books. Fellowship Book 1 follows Frodo from Hobbiton to Rivendell Fellowship Book 2 chronicles the group's travels through Moria and ends with the breaking of the Fellowship Two Towers Book 1 is the story of Aragon, Legalos and Gimli tracking Merru and Pippin through Rohan Two Towers Book 2 is Sam and Frodo's journey to Mordor Return Book 1 is the Second War of the Ring Return Book 2 is Frodo's further adventures in Mordor and the conclusion of the series The films are great because they jump back and forth between Frodo's tale and Aragon's tale. The books do not go back and forth between POV characters. Hope that helped clear things up. Now get off the damn computer and read LOTR! I have read LOTR several times, just the comment before mine confused me a little. The books are literary pieces of art that will transcend generations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aximand Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 I have read LOTR several times, just the comment before mine confused me a little. The books are literary pieces of art that will transcend generations. We're talking about movies, though. And a surprisingly large number of people don't even know that the Star Wars trilogies had books that came out before the movies. On the front of Movies though, I actually enjoyed the Bourne trilogy more than I did the Lord of the Rings trilogy, simply because they left out so much from the books that it was almost painful for me to watch. And I'm glad that Harry Potter lost, those movies are freaking terrible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eillack Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 The Hobbit (not included in the Trilogy), Fellowship of the Rings, The Two Towers, and Return of the King. Are there a few books about the Elves and the Second Age ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leroyray Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 *Turns into Randall Graves* There is only one Return....and it ain't of the King....It's of the Jedi. I mean All LOTR was a bunch of people walking to an f'ing Volcano. Even the Trees Walked in those movies. *Meant in jest* I am a HUGE LOTR fan and this scene had me rolling on the floor. The first Clerks movie made me realize I wasn't alone in obsessing over the minutiae of Star Wars. I was born in '81 so Star Wars was a staple of my early childhood whereas I discovered LOTR in late middle school/early high school and the two had profoundly different effects on me. Star Wars kick started my life long love affair with Sci-fi and even though Space Opera is not my preferred sci-fi subset (Cyperpunk - William Gibson FTW) I still buy an inordinate amount of sci-fi games, films and novels. LOTR kin of ruined fantasy for me. Nothing ever stacks up to the high bar it set and most the stuff in the fantasy section of your local book store is horribly derivative. Besides a few exceptions (Brent Weeks, George Martin and Joe Abercrombie whose most recent novel Heroes is fantastic) I skip most fantasy stuff unless it comes super highly recommended. Where do Bond and Indy rate in people's favorite franchises? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashu-ri Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 Are there a few books about the Elves and the Second Age ? Oh dear, we don't want to go into Tolkein's other published words - Children of Hurin, Silmarillion, etc. But the Hobbit and the trilogy were the books he sold the rights to in order to meet a tax bill, from what I know - which is why there is such a plethora of stuff out there on them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurbere Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 We're talking about movies, though. And a surprisingly large number of people don't even know that the Star Wars trilogies had books that came out before the movies. On the front of Movies though, I actually enjoyed the Bourne trilogy more than I did the Lord of the Rings trilogy, simply because they left out so much from the books that it was almost painful for me to watch. And I'm glad that Harry Potter lost, those movies are freaking terrible. The reason so much was left out of the LOTR movies was because a majority of people who watched them would get confused really quickly. Like showing Tom Bombadil. Only J.R.R Tolkien knows who Bombadil is and I don't know if he has said anything indicating his true identity. I agree that the Potter movies were not very good. Especially close to the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurbere Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 Oh dear, we don't want to go into Tolkein's other published words - Children of Hurin, Silmarillion, etc. But the Hobbit and the trilogy were the books he sold the rights to in order to meet a tax bill, from what I know - which is why there is such a plethora of stuff out there on them. Now the pre-hobbit setting books were more philosophical because Tolkien decided to go in that direction later on in life instead of a story-telling perspective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisleaptrott Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 Star Wars vs. LOTR. Vote Star Wars. LOTR has a slight lead which is obviously not right. Teach those internet nerds a lesson, and show them the error of their ways! http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/28/star-wars-greatest-movie-franchise_n_1539317.html SW man, SW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain_Zone Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 My vote for Best Movie Franchise Of All Time goes to the Christopher Nolan Batman Saga. Batman Begins The Dark Knight The Dark Knight Rises Neither Lord of the Walking or Star Wars can hold a candle to the sheer intensity in the writing, acting, and direction of the latest Batman movies. Just my view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rahak Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 "There are thousands of warriors out here. You are only one man!" "I am only one Jedi." "You're insane!" "No. I am Ganner. This threshold is mine. I claim it for my own. Bring on your thousands, one at a time or all in a rush. I don't give a damn. None shall pass." - Nom Anor & Ganner Rhysode Yeah, I thought that was more intense than that one LOTR scene. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayla_Felana Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 Films vs films? easily Lord of the RIngs, better acting, better writing, better atmosphere and overall better pictures, and even better none of them were **** on by their directors in future versions, I am sure the Hobbit will follow the same path. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurbere Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 "There are thousands of warriors out here. You are only one man!" "I am only one Jedi." "You're insane!" "No. I am Ganner. This threshold is mine. I claim it for my own. Bring on your thousands, one at a time or all in a rush. I don't give a damn. None shall pass." - Nom Anor & Ganner Rhysode Yeah, I thought that was more intense than that one LOTR scene. That was a book though. We're talking about the movies here. And tell me you didn't get chills when Theoden lead 6,000 men into a horde of over 30,000 orcs. That is one of the most epic scenes in film of all time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurbere Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 Films vs films? easily Lord of the RIngs, better acting, better writing, better atmosphere and overall better pictures, and even better none of them were **** on by their directors in future versions, I am sure the Hobbit will follow the same path. So true. Viggo Mortensen beats Hayden any day. And all of the sets they used were in New Zealand. They even built the Hobbit homes into the hills for realism. Nothing in LOTR is simulated, except for the magic and stuff like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liquidacid Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 (edited) god I couldn't stand the Lotro movies... 9 hours of people walking to a *********** mountain... ZZZZzzzZZZZzzz caring about an internet poll which has absolutely no impact on anything, is based on opinion and isn't even close to being an accurate metric is silly Edited June 9, 2012 by Liquidacid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts