Ashu-ri Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 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. Call me prejudiced, but when I compare the "franchises", I don't even include the prequels. Hayden Christiansen made my teeth grind, and the writing was hokey. As well as it seemed to me that Lucas made the movies (ala Jar Jar) just to show off what he could do special effects wise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayla_Felana Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 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 Disagree entirely, Lucas himself stated he based his very core attitude and style towards Star Wars on Tolkien's books. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayla_Felana Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 Call me prejudiced, but when I compare the "franchises", I don't even include the prequels. Hayden Christiansen made my teeth grind, and the writing was hokey. As well as it seemed to me that Lucas made the movies (ala Jar Jar) just to show off what he could do special effects wise. Well like it or not, the Prequels ARE part of the Star Wars saga, just like the Hobbit will be part of Peter Jackson's Middle-Earth Legendarium film series.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayla_Felana Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 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. I loved the natural feel of the whole setting, it makes it much more alive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ameepa Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 Lotr got one more vote.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurbere Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 I loved the natural feel of the whole setting, it makes it much more alive. I think the LOTR movies definitely showed the most beautiful scenery I have ever seen in a movie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurbere Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 Disagree entirely, Lucas himself stated he based his very core attitude and style towards Star Wars on Tolkien's books. Much of Star Wars is based off of great writings. Even Christopher Lee was given J. R. R. Tolkien's blessing to play Saruman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurbere Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 Call me prejudiced, but when I compare the "franchises", I don't even include the prequels. Hayden Christiansen made my teeth grind, and the writing was hokey. As well as it seemed to me that Lucas made the movies (ala Jar Jar) just to show off what he could do special effects wise. Well the PT is apart of the Star Wars saga. Not matter how much you dislike it, it's there. There are some things in the EU that I don't like, but I am not going to completely disregard its existence. When comparing Star Wars to something, you have to include the PT because they are Star Wars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maaruin 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 Looks like you shot yourself in the foot Just voted for Lord of the Rings like so many others. Too many internet nerds here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaveRun Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 (edited) Vote Star Wars Refresh Page Vote Star Wars Repeat. Write GreaseMonkey script Run GreaseMonkey script ???? Profit Edited June 9, 2012 by WaveRun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liquidacid Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 Disagree entirely, Lucas himself stated he based his very core attitude and style towards Star Wars on Tolkien's books. and that has absolutely nothing to do with what I posted... I said I thought the MOVIES were boring and caring about random internet polls is stupid... never said anything about the books (which I though were well written but still boring) or Lucas' inspirations Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyersfan Posted June 10, 2012 Share Posted June 10, 2012 Call me prejudiced, but when I compare the "franchises", I don't even include the prequels. Hayden Christiansen made my teeth grind, and the writing was hokey. As well as it seemed to me that Lucas made the movies (ala Jar Jar) just to show off what he could do special effects wise. Like 'em or not, they're part of the franchise. That's also part of what makes the LotR movie franchise a better one. Personally, I'd say that the three LotR movies beat the original trilogy anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephenjdoug Posted June 10, 2012 Share Posted June 10, 2012 Read the lord of the rings. (Movies first though) And I have to say I hate the books. It goes something like this Lets walk past shire onto old bride pass the statue that never falls near South Shire past the gate into Mordor! In between that it be safe to add what they had to eat along (in excellent detail) the way and the names of so many characters so many irrelevant characters. Saying that, I loved the movies. And Tolkien does deserve credit for pretty much starting the whole orc/elf/dwarf fantasy. But if you have to go back from day 1 Lord of the Rings and look at alllll the revisions to the books (and there's ALLOT) The author could not make up his mind about allot of stuff. And died before he could make up his mind about most of that. His son still tried to do his best. But it will always remain unfinished as far as im concerned. But Lord of the Rings never pulled me in like Star Wars. Lord of the Rings as a franchise will never be like Star Wars. It may be the best of the Fantasy Genre and Star Wars IMO is the best in the SciFI department. I can go back and rewatch the Star Wars movies over and over again. My vote easily goes to Star Wars Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurbere Posted June 10, 2012 Share Posted June 10, 2012 (edited) Read the lord of the rings. (Movies first though) And I have to say I hate the books. It goes something like this Lets walk past shire onto old bride pass the statue that never falls near South Shire past the gate into Mordor! In between that it be safe to add what they had to eat along (in excellent detail) the way and the names of so many characters so many irrelevant characters. The books were written during WWII. You kinda have to expect the writing to be like that. And Tolkien was fairly old at the time. That's probably the way he writes. Unfortunately I haven't read any of his other books. Edited June 10, 2012 by Aurbere Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salabadon Posted June 10, 2012 Share Posted June 10, 2012 (edited) The books were written during WWII. You kinda have to expect the writing to be like that. And Tolkien was fairly old at the time. That's probably the way he writes. Unfortunately I haven't read any of his other books. Tolkien was a linguist.. Hence why his descriptions were long and his words were.. Fancy for a lack of better term.. I love both franchises, but I am going to give my vote to LOTR.. I love the books to death and the movies just as much.. Edited June 10, 2012 by Salabadon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurbere Posted June 10, 2012 Share Posted June 10, 2012 Tolkien was a linguist.. Hence why his descriptions were long and his words were.. Fancy for a lack of better term.. I love both franchises, but I am going to give my vote to LOTR.. I love the books to death and the movies just as much.. Yeah. Tolkien's writing can be confusing to those who don't know how he writes. When I first started the LOTR books, I was like 'man this is confusing!' but then I began to appreciate the writing for what it was: pure liguistic art! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain_Zone Posted June 10, 2012 Share Posted June 10, 2012 Yeah. Tolkien's writing can be confusing to those who don't know how he writes. When I first started the LOTR books, I was like 'man this is confusing!' but then I began to appreciate the writing for what it was: pure liguistic art! Tolkien was a wordsmith that could write rings around George while falling on his face drunk. On writing talent alone, I have to go with LotR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayla_Felana Posted June 10, 2012 Share Posted June 10, 2012 Do people seriously find Lord of the Rings hard to read? tell you what, go and pick up The Silmarillion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurbere Posted June 10, 2012 Share Posted June 10, 2012 Tolkien was a wordsmith that could write rings around George while falling on his face drunk. On writing talent alone, I have to go with LotR. So true. Nothing could be closer to the truth. George can't write, Tolkien is a master compared to him. LOTR wins this scenario, hands down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyersfan Posted June 11, 2012 Share Posted June 11, 2012 Do people seriously find Lord of the Rings hard to read? tell you what, go and pick up The Silmarillion. Yes, because in today's age people just want the facts and nothing else. The incredible amount of detail that Tolkien put into the Lord of the Rings world, characters, and lore is virtually unacceptable these days. For those that like to read, it's great, but for the vast majority it's not. Here's an example: Read the lord of the rings. (Movies first though) And I have to say I hate the books. It goes something like this Lets walk past shire onto old bride pass the statue that never falls near South Shire past the gate into Mordor! In between that it be safe to add what they had to eat along (in excellent detail) the way and the names of so many characters so many irrelevant characters. On the contrary, I would say something like "Tolkien took a great deal of time describing the setting and the characters, which helps the reader's imagination see what he is seeing." Using description is essential to a book where things need to be described in order of the reader to truly see what the writer sees, especially in an original world with little to nothing comparable in our world. Without that in-depth description, we don't all have the same image (which has its ups and downs) and I consider that to lead to subpar writing. Another example is popular books series in modern times. For example, I really enjoy the Harry Potter series, but there is little description on quite a few things. I'll admit that special attention is paid to important subjects (characters, places, objects, et cetera), but I like a good deal of description of setting. On a more relevant note, this is also why I don't find Drew Karpyshyn's novels (Revan, Mass Effect: Revelations, et cetera) to be of very high quality. The story arcs and dialogue are good, but there could be more emphasis on describing a setting and objects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eillack Posted June 11, 2012 Share Posted June 11, 2012 I'm still for SW in the end. Overall the "magic" turns me off in Lotr. Along with how the Hobbit alone annoyed me as a kid...so much pointless details....even then I understood how the books had so much filler detail in it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts