How

[Ben]

Sorry Spif but I have to side with Dennis on this one.

I will agree that they (LOTR) start a little slow but after you get past the "Cousel of Elrond" I had trouble putting the books down.

I have read the three books of the Trilogy 14, 15, and 16 times and still love em.

There is just no comparing the two.

Ben

[Ben]

And one more point...

Shakespear( sp?) is packed full of sex and violence. How is he boaring?

Ben

[spaceman_spif]

Hmmm....seems my tongue-in-cheek "Star Wars vs. LOTR debate" comment got the hackles raised!!!

Well, here's my useless opinion on it all.  The original Star Wars movies are aimed at kids, and I saw them in theaters as a young 'un and they blew me away and I loved them.  The last three SW movies were moy sucky, so I won't even regard them!  But now my kids are approaching the age I was when I first saw them, and I see in their eyes the same captivation and magic I felt when I saw them.

LOTR blew me away as an adult.  So I think comparing the two is somewhat unfair because the target audiences are different.  LOTR is meant for pre-teens to adults, while Star Wars is more for younger kids...and grotesquely immature adults like me.

On a technical scale, yes LOTR were superior films in terms of acting, script, story, etc.  No argument there.  But I think both film series were fantastic at grabbing a hold of their target audience and "taking them away" to new worlds.

Maybe I should try the books again.  I was about 10-12 when I tried reading them and I just had a hard time getting through the long dry spells.

[Ben]

"Maybe I should try the books again."

That is worth five stars in my book!

Ben

[tst]

Spif, if you want the fun version of LOTR, go for The Hobbit, which I personally liked more (and I'm really sorry Peter Jackson didn't make a film out of that one as well). The Hobbit was the original tale of middle earth, told by Tolkein to his children as a multi-part bed time story, which tells the story of Bilbo (where the ring plays a fairly small part). As such, it is much less "heavier" than LOTR and more fun.

As for SW vs. LOTR, I would definitely go for Tolkein as the story and characters are more evolved and I liked the movies better (especially the first LOTR).

[spaceman_spif]

I think that was part of my problem.   I did read The Hobbit and really enjoyed it when I was that age.  Then I got to Fellowship and just had a hard time getting through it.  It seemed the pace of The Hobbit was quicker which appealed more to me.  If the "build up" in a story goes on too long, I tend to lose interest.

Like I said, I'm gonna try the books again when I get a chance.  Add it to my list of things "to do".  Right behind remodeling the bathroom, putting flooring in the dining room, reading Thomas The Tank Engine to my kids for the umpteenth time....

[chilly_charly]

"Star Wars vs. LOTR debate"

That's the kind of debate that leave no winner, just exhausted opponents, since it's just a matter of passion, without any objective arguments.

I'll add my two cents anyway: I think it's unfair to compare SW, a pure commercial creation, with LOTR, a master piece of litterature. I think that if a competition between science-fiction and fantasy was to be held, there are much better examples of "real" SF than SW. A trilogy that could better compete with LOTR is F. Herbert's Dune. Unfortunately, the story has been deeply spoiled by the first film (D. Lynch 1985). The TV mini series, although closer to FH spirit, is still incredibly far from the quality of the LOTR film. Who will be Herbert's Peter Jackson ?

[Ben]

tst wrote

"Spif, if you want the fun version of LOTR, go for The Hobbit, ..."

do not forget the Silmarilian (sp?). where there were armies of Balrogs and dragons and we learn that Sauron was just a lutenant, what Gandalf was, and how all of creation was sung into existence.

The battles in that book shaped the landscape of the others.

It turns out Gladriel was the oldest characters.

RE: The Hobbit

I have been told that an effort was made to for Jackson to do that movie as well but the rights to the Hobbit are not held by the same people as the Trilogy.

Ben

[shoneill]

Spif,

I can understand your dilemma.  I too bought my first LOTR copy when I was a young teenager, and couldn't read it.  Since I heard the book was being filmed, I tried it again and suddenly was gripped.  I've had to pay a few fines on  the trains here in switzerland because I was so catpured by the book, I forgot to buy a ticket, and didn't even notice the conductors coming 😞

I also think learning German in the meantime helped a bit since the language used is tinged with "old english" which is evolved from German.

Read it again, it's probably the most engrossing read you'll find among modern literature.

While I'm at it, I haven't read it yet this year 😄 I still have a few weeks left, so I might make it yet.......

Shane.

[tst]

---

@Ben wrote:

tst wrote

"Spif, if you want the fun version of LOTR, go for The Hobbit, ..."

do not forget the Silmarilian (sp?).

---

I hope you don't consider the Silmarillion fun. It's probably one of the most boring books I ever (tried to) read. For those who don't know it, it's suppose to cover the vast history of Tolkein's middle earth, but it doesn't do it by telling a story. Instead, it's like a collection of songs, battle descriptions and other things like that. If I remember correctly, it was actually collected by Tolkein's son, along with another expert, from various things Tolkein wrote and did not use. The events of the Hobbit and LOTR are only briefly mentioned very near to the end of the book.

It is unfortunate about the movie. I hope they do get to make it. I would like to see Bilbo, Gandalf, Elrond and Gollum on the screen once again. In the mean time, I guess I will have to do with the upcoming Narnia movie.