Compare the Lotr trilogy to the Ot Star Wars film trilogy

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.



quanchi112
Much more apples to apples comparison since this is comparing two trilogies.

gold slorg
Personally, I prefer OT Star Wars. I find Star Wars setting and universe just more interesting to me; the world is even bigger than in Middle-Earth, and I am just far more pulled to the semi-sci-fi worlds than classical fantasy, just a personal preference. So in terms of the world itself, I just love Star Wars more.

As far as movies go then, LotR is better directed, characters are more unique, and the acting is on a far higher notch. So in terms of usual qualities of a movie, LotR.

BackFire
Lord of the Rings.

It has unrivaled world building included in the films (where as with Star Wars you have to buy a bunch of books and other outside media to get the most out of it).

It is structurally similar but superior with more mature themes and ideas, more unique and varied tones, that despite varying from moment to moment at times, still feels very cohesive (What I mean by this is that there are moments where it is spooky and feels almost like a horror movie, and then there will be a comedic moment, and then a huge war segment and so on, all while still feeling structurally competent and not spastic at all, which speaks to Jackson's immense talent for filmmaking) and imo better characters.

The only thing the OT really has on LotR is probably its villain, since the LotR villain shifts largely from movie to movie, with the one constant overarching villain being off screen throughout.

Also LotR is, on a technical level, much superior. It is better made, has better acting, stronger special effects and still to this day, unrivaled large-scale battle scenes that are just staggering to watch, with an unmatched scope to them. This may be somewhat unfair since it had a larger budget and came out decades later, but much of it is based on the innate talent of the filmmaker, and imo, Peter Jackson is simply a more talented filmmaker than George Lucas or the other directors of the original trilogy.

There are also just individual scenes in LotR that are artistically brilliant. In Star Wars, the one that sticks out in my mind is the scene in the beginning of ANH with the two suns rising, giving an incredibly potent sense of wonder. But that's really the only one that stands out to me, where as with LOTR there are several that I can name off the top of my head.

steverules_2
Originally posted by BackFire
stronger special effects

Of course it has stronger special effects, OT was made was in the 70's/80's

There are many films with stronger special effects than the OT but that in no way makes them better

WolvesofBabylon
LOTR for me. Backfire pretty much sums up my thoughts.

BackFire
Originally posted by steverules_2
Of course it has stronger special effects, OT was made was in the 70's/80's

There are many films with stronger special effects than the OT but that in no way makes them better

Indeed, but even when contained to comparing it to its contemporaries, LotR has it beat imo. LotR has some absolutely incredible special effects that still look better than a lot of CGI of today, those people worked some magic.

That's not to say the Star Wars effects were bad or anything, obviously for their time they were also excellent, but they weren't as good as say 2001 A Space Oddysey or something. Star Wars did a lot with a relatively small budget.

quanchi112
I have to agree about Lotr special effects. I actually brought this up the other day. My point was the later Potter films to me have better special effects than Crimes of Grindelwald to my eye despite being close to a decade prior to. I then said Lotr still looks awesome to this day. Eye test matters so despite massive budgets sometimes the quality is not equal based off the money the company spent.

BackFire
It's the same with LotR. The LotR trilogy has better looking SFX than The Hobbit films despite being like 10 years older. For that, I think a lot of it is the fact that the LotR trilogy had a lot of really good practical effects, like the orcs were people in really good costumes. In The Hobbit it was all pretty much CGI, and practical effects will usually best CGI.

quanchi112
Originally posted by BackFire
It's the same with LotR. The LotR trilogy has better looking SFX than The Hobbit films despite being like 10 years older. For that, I think a lot of it is the fact that the LotR trilogy had a lot of really good practical effects, like the orcs were people in really good costumes. In The Hobbit it was all pretty much CGI, and practical effects will usually best CGI. I agree. Crazy thing for me was how much I loved Lotr after the first one. I saw it four times in the theatre and the big action sequences are still top notch to this day but my point is this. It never got close to the first film for me whereas Harry Potter was nothing overly impressive until I saw Ootp. That duel caused me to fall in love with Voldemort. After that movie I was hooked and both series ended in the complete opposite direction they began. Deathly Hallows 2 was my favorite Potter film and ended on the strongest note. Lotr ended on a weaker note since neither sequel came close to Afotr to me.

BackFire
I know a lot of people feel that way, lot of people think the series went downhill after Fellowship, and I understand why. Fellowship has a wonderful sense of adventure that the later films don't really have, they are for the most part war films set in a fantasy world. Fellowship is my favorite overall, though, particularly the first half. Love the segments in the Shire and Bree, but I really love all three films.

quanchi112
Originally posted by BackFire
I know a lot of people feel that way, lot of people think the series went downhill after Fellowship, and I understand why. Fellowship has a wonderful sense of adventure that the later films don't really have, they are for the most part war films set in a fantasy world. Fellowship is my favorite overall, though, particularly the first half. Love the segments in the Shire and Bree, but I really love all three films. My favorite character of the entire series is Azog. He won me over in the Hobbit trilogy. His commitment to kill Thorin is something I cannot help but admire. Dedication, obsession, the unwillingness to alter his own wants even when Sauron is making demands of the great pale orc. Just as I do not let things go neither did this exquisite orc.



https://media.giphy.com/media/12qLMw1MpFHXeo/source.gif

BackFire
He was a good character, but he's an example of what I'm talking about, the CGI for him was just not very good, he would have been much better if he was as the other orcs in the LotR trilogy were - people in costumes.

quanchi112
Originally posted by BackFire
He was a good character, but he's an example of what I'm talking about, the CGI for him was just not very good, he would have been much better if he was as the other orcs in the LotR trilogy were - people in costumes. Oh I loved how he looked but I understand what you are saying. I felt he looked more impressive as the films progressed but I love that arc. I enjoyed the films but they lacked the magic of Afotr. Thankful we got the hobbit trilogy since I still greatly enjoyed it.


I bet it is human nature to try to cut angles with cgi than that many extras. This is more Star Warsey out of the medieval magical franchises while to me Harry Potter is more Trekian. Star Wars emphasizes the epic battles and magic that just kind of jumbles all around whereas Potter tends to focus on a certain fictional set of rules more clearly defined than Lotr.

Flyattractor
Gotta side with SW OT again. Just a much easier and light hearted Watch the LOTR. You gotta set aside a but load of time and put in some effort to watch those things.

StiltmanFTW
Agreed with BackFire, LotR for the easy win.

Originally posted by BackFire
He was a good character, but he's an example of what I'm talking about, the CGI for him was just not very good, he would have been much better if he was as the other orcs in the LotR trilogy were - people in costumes.

Yeah, CGI-less orcs looked much better, there's no denying that.

Bentley
LotR in a shit stomp. It just has more depth in about any level.

Except incest kissing.

steverules_2
My favourite LOTR couple was Gimli and Legolas

Darth Thor
The OT for me. Better story telling (the Journey of Luke Skywalker from farmboy to Jedi Knight), and superior imagination (not that LOTR didnt have plenty of imagination itself).

Not even close for me, but tbf I was never big on LOTR. Actually prefered the Hobbit series.

LOTR was the biggest thing from December 2001 to December 2003. But its not had the long lasting hype effect the OT had Imo.

And im not even talking about Prequels/Sequels. Im talking about things like the special edition re-release 14 years on from the end of ROTJ and 20 years on from ANH. And the Crazy merchandise sales. Star Wars basically made movie merchandise a thing.

The massive pop culture effect and popularity of the OT has never been replicated by another trilogy.

quanchi112
Originally posted by Flyattractor
Gotta side with SW OT again. Just a much easier and light hearted Watch the LOTR. You gotta set aside a but load of time and put in some effort to watch those things. For someone like you who prefers superficiality and light hearted(you just admitted the films are not dark in this thread.. Concession accepted)I see where your kiddish opinion prefers now. It all makes sense. I think the Lotr trilogy is far better than the Ot films.

Bentley
Originally posted by Darth Thor
The OT for me. Better story telling (the Journey of Luke Skywalker from farmboy to Jedi Knight), and superior imagination (not that LOTR didnt have plenty of imagination itself).

Not even close for me, but tbf I was never big on LOTR. Actually prefered the Hobbit series.

LOTR was the biggest thing from December 2001 to December 2003. But its not had the long lasting hype effect the OT had Imo.

And im not even talking about Prequels/Sequels. Im talking about things like the special edition re-release 14 years on from the end of ROTJ and 20 years on from ANH. And the Crazy merchandise sales. Star Wars basically made movie merchandise a thing.

The massive pop culture effect and popularity of the OT has never been replicated by another trilogy.

So your taste in movies is Quan's taste in videogames, gotcha.








biscuits

John Murdoch
Originally posted by Darth Thor
The massive pop culture effect and popularity of the OT has never been replicated by another trilogy.

What caught me about this part of your comment, Darth, is the far-reaching effects that the Star Wars OT had on media itself: so much influencing on how to do a shared universe amongst several different forms of media, implementing marketing and merchandising, effects on - for lack of a better term, forgive me - nerd and fanboy culture. Shoot, there's lots of stuff that wouldn't have been written, filmed, or even invented had Star Wars not influenced people to make something in media and IRL similar to what they watched on the silver screen. Buddies Spielberg and Lucas practically started the summer blockbuster trend (Spielberg with Jaws, yes, but Star Wars is the prototypical tentpole film series).

However, I'm with Backfire on why I prefer LotR in about every way. Star Wars unquestionably has a better primary antagonist in Vader, who is one of the strongest characters of fiction for all the times vs some really good minor villains and a good big bad in Sauron, and the film scores can be argued, but besides that, LotR is the better trilogy in storytelling, cinematography, visuals and audio effects, acting, etc. by a Shire-country mile. And yes, it's because Peter Jackson is a far better filmmaker than George Lucas and his crew had almost 30 years on the OT.

Again, though, think about the innovation that Lucas and crew made through the Star Wars films and then Skywalker Sound and Industrial Light and Magic. How much did that influence Weta Digital?

Bentley
The OT has a King Kong kind of merit in the sense that it changed all film making going forward. You cannot fully ignore it but you cannot define its artistic value solely in that regard.

Eon Blue

Darth Thor
Originally posted by John Murdoch

Again, though, think about the innovation that Lucas and crew made through the Star Wars films and then Skywalker Sound and Industrial Light and Magic. How much did that influence Weta Digital?

Whats funny is Jackson has gone on record saying the LOTR trilogy would not have been possible if not for TPM. Lucas was the first to sinful on digital characters and backgrounds.

Darth Thor
Originally posted by Bentley
The OT has a King Kong kind of merit in the sense that it changed all film making going forward. You cannot fully ignore it but you cannot define its artistic value solely in that regard.


It changed all film for a reason though. It was the story telling. Perfect Heroes journey. Most epic villain in film history, ground breaking special effects, blew audiences mind with Lucas imagination and creativity. A Great Love story, unforgettable characters, the way it mixed up so many different genres so fluidly.

Robtard
Love both, but have to go with LoTR for several points already mentioned in BF's initial post.

The SW:OT is great, but it's also incredibly cheesy at times, from Luke's bad acting to Ewoks. LoTR to me is more of an adult orientated franchise, than anyone can enjoy, while SW is a children's franchise, that anyone can enjoy. Tolkein's also a better writer than Lucas, so that probably has a lot to do with it as well.

quanchi112
Originally posted by StiltmanFTW
Agreed with BackFire, LotR for the easy win.



Yeah, CGI-less orcs looked much better, there's no denying that. Lotr won pretty easily.

Bentley
Originally posted by Darth Thor
It changed all film for a reason though. It was the story telling. Perfect Heroes journey. Most epic villain in film history, ground breaking special effects, blew audiences mind with Lucas imagination and creativity. A Great Love story, unforgettable characters, the way it mixed up so many different genres so fluidly.

I actually agree it's a charming film, even the iffy acting makes it a bit more candid and bright. The storytelling is also arguably superior to LotR -thanks for bringing that up-.


But it's not as if LotR was not very creative itself (the books did change the lore of modern fantasy), that it did not mixed several genres seamlessly and that it didn't have epic characters. People are handing bjs to Vader's villainhood, but Gollum is a pretty awesome character that got crafted for the silverscreen.

Darth Thor
Originally posted by Bentley

But it's not as if LotR was not very creative itself (the books did change the lore of modern fantasy), that it did not mixed several genres seamlessly and that it didn't have epic characters. People are handing bjs to Vader's villainhood, but Gollum is a pretty awesome character that got crafted for the silverscreen.


I already made it clear LOTR is of course a massively creative franchise in itself. Of course that's a combination of Tolkien's immense imagination combined with Jackson visualising it for the big screen.

Now don't get me wrong, Jackson puts the likes of JJ Abrams to shame in that department.

But the point is the OT brought all it's imagination to audiences and readers everywhere all on it's own, i.e. straight from the OT. Lucas was basically a combination of a Tolkien and a Jackson in what he did.

Oh Gollum is iconic now doubt. But when it comes to comparing iconic characters and villains, there's really no competition. Pretty much EVERY Lead Hero and Villain from the OT become iconic right away.

Bentley
That's fair.

However the biggest cultural break the OT achieved was to create the Boba Fett archethype: looks good in toys but goes down like a chump. Heck, SW keeps recycling the same idea of cool characters that live only through secondary canon, it's truly their brand.

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.