people listen!
i don't think u can compare the two!!!!!
harry potter is a tale about modern england, LOTR is about ancient england,there is nnnoo way they have similarities....harry potter is about studen'ts and school life mainly, LOTR is about a quest, an adventure...the ONLY resemblance is that both have magic in it....
Seriously which franchise is better HP or LOTR
Well i am pretty sure that there are thousands of threads like this in either harry potter forums and Lord of the Rings forums, and of course in the forum its in is the movie that will win thats why it must be here that we ask which franchise is better The Lord of the Rings or Harry Potter?
LOTR has better story, better conflict, better action, better emotions, just better everything. Now talking about the way it was filmed, lotr has better sets, special effects, better actors, better dialogue, better metaphors, and better everything else.
However , like drifter said, there is no way you can compare the two, even though they are both fantasy, they are two different types of movies. If you are going to compare them though, lord of the rings wins
admittedly, both are tremendously imaginative fantasies from brilliant books, but i think LOTR just shades it. Apart from the sheer scale and depth of character in Middle Earth, there is the tremendous direction of Peter Jackson and, a rare thing in modern action cinema, decent acting from the likes of Mortensen, McKellan, Wood Jnr and especially Austin as poor samwise Gangee. H potter is just as entertaining, but the action is confined just to Hogwarts and the characters, although many and varied, just dont have the depth that Tolkien's characters have. Basically, if DVD copies of Prisoner of Azkaban and ROTK Extended DVD came out on the same day, and i only had the money to buy one of them, i would buy the final part of LOTR....then save for the harry Potter! lol
lotr - 10/10
Star Wars 9/10 (minus 1 point for the boring prequels)
Hp - 9/10
X-men - 8/ 10
The Matrix - 4/10 (and that's being generous!)
Originally posted by Lord Soth
Kay, here it is, the breakdown....Who likes it
1. Harry Potter is liked by young children and teenage girls w/crushes on Daniel Radcliffe/Tom Felton/etc, etc.2. Lord of the Rings is liked by pretty much everybody, except small children, fantasy-haters, and the dead. And I bet even the dead like it.
Why they're good
1. Harry Potter(HP) is based on a brilliant book series which has made the author richer than the Queen of England. It has heart, compelling characters, and witty British dialogue.2. Lord of the Rings(LotR) is also based on a single book broken into three parts; a story that has captured the hearts of millions of Americans and more besides. The movies carry A-List actors, brilliant action sequences, a moving score, genius renderings of landscapes, flawless visual effects [WETA Workshop wrote two entirely new programs for the movies:MASSIVE(Multiple Agent SimulationS In Virtual Environment) and GRUNT(Guaranteed Rendering of Unlimited Numbers of Things)], and so much more unmentioned.
Why they're bad
much out from the books, the acting is wooden, the visual effects unspectacular and quite obvious at times.
1. HP, while they're good on their own, are rather pathetic and meager compared to the books. One can not help but compare the two (book and movie), and feel disappointed. They leave [B]too2. LotR has far too many characters to keep track of (and more are added in RotK), and the dialogue is sluggish, even soporific, at times. The book to movie content is often so different that core fans are disappointed.
My feelings
1. LotR is far superior to HP. LotR is directed at a far larger audience, while HP only tries to attract young children who have not yet read the books, and therefore won't hate the movie, and teenage girls who don't really care b/c the guys are so d**n cute.2. W/ some luck, HP will be better with Alfonso Cuaron helming The Prisoner of Azkaban. We can only hope [/B]
Ya OK your cons about lotr are stupid!
too many characters??? I and most people like the fact that the are so many characters because most have back stories which makes it fun and easy to pick a favorite. for instance... my fav character is faramir and he has a big backstory.
if faramir where in written by jk rowling then he would have a tiny backstory if any at all! thats why jrr toilkens books and peter jacksons movie are the BEST
Originally posted by jjdude00
Ya OK your cons about lotr are stupid!
too many characters??? I and most people like the fact that the are so many characters because most have back stories which makes it fun and easy to pick a favorite. for instance... my fav character is faramir and he has a big backstory.
if faramir where in written by jk rowling then he would have a tiny backstory if any at all! thats why jrr toilkens books and peter jacksons movie are the BEST
He praised LOTR for most of it.Give him a break! It's not like LoTR has no negative points on it at all.
Originally posted by jjdude00
Ya OK your cons about lotr are stupid!
too many characters??? I and most people like the fact that the are so many characters because most have back stories which makes it fun and easy to pick a favorite. for instance... my fav character is faramir and he has a big backstory.
if faramir where in written by jk rowling then he would have a tiny backstory if any at all! thats why jrr toilkens books and peter jacksons movie are the BEST