|
The Harry books are brilliant and easy for anyone to read but the Lord of the Rings books were so
boring, it just seemed to go on forever and not actually get any where. Movie wise I have an equal
appreciation for the films, I feel the Lord of the Rings is acted out better and never gets boring.
While in Harry Potter I love the characters (not so much some of the acting) and the special effects
keep getting better and better. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I love the harry potter series and i don't even like to read! I tried to red the lord of the rings
series: The hobbit was mildly interesting but i gave up part-way through "fellowship of the ring".
It was horrible. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Definitely! Harry Potter has taken over this world! J.K. Rowling is richer than the queen!! Lord of
the Rings is overall great, but I find Harry Potter's whimsical characters to be much more
interesting and captivating. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Harry Potter seems more complicated... But Lord oF The Rings is equally as complicated!! (books i
mean) MOVIE wise Harry Potter seems more casual!!! |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Ok, i tried reading the lord of the rings books, and couldn't get past the first few chapters. It
was so boring!!!
I'm only on the 1st harry potter book, but it is the bomb!!! |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Yes, Harry Potter books do get slow, but not like Lord of the Rings. (Not that I dislike Lord of the
Rings, I just like Harry better) |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I harry potter is more realistic |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I agree with this one. When I picked up the first Harry Potter book, I couldn't put it down and I
follwed the series right through to the end. When I picked up the first Lord of the Rings book, I
never got round to finishing it as I just found it too difficult to concentrate on pages of
descriptions.
Don't get me wrong, I thought the Lord of the Rings films were fantastic, but the books drag on a
little too much. I was never bored with the Harry Potter books and I always wanted to keep reading.
I love the films too. I hope that JK Rowling decides to write another book, perhaps this time
focusing on the adventures of Harry's children! |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Of course he is look at the sales records plus I LOVE HARRY!!! |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
If i had to choose, Potter, but that's only if i "had" too lol.
I saw the LOTR films, and was bored the entire time, (really - after the first 4hour installment
they walk over a hill - WTF?)
Potter i find more engaging, just I find it a little bit.... Erm.... Irritating after a while,
points this, bludger that....... The last book was the best when they were out of the school. I just
think JK needs to write something else. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I think I'm going to have to go with Harry Potter. It's not that some of the LOTR books weren't
good, but there are plenty set in Middle Earth that were complete crap as well and that brings down
the overall score. Further, I really hate epic fantasy, which makes Harry Potter even better. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Love harry potter |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
Harry Potter is a very god series, and enjoyable to read. But it leaves many loop-holes throughout
the book.
The Lord of the Rings author invented his own language for the books. He put much more effort and
love into his books than J.K.R., and LOTR is a timeless classic. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I have read both books, seen every single movie of LOTR and Harry Potter.
My friends step dad is the director of the Harry Potter films (and I have met him...was star
struck!) And I've met Daniel Radcliffe!
Anyways, I think the Harry Potter books are better than the movies. I've been reading them inside
out since I was 7, and the movies skip some really vital things out!
LOTR movies are amazing. Some scenes too get tiresome but generally I can keep on watching and find
different things I haven't noticed before.
Soooo to cap it all off.
I prefer LOTR...generally.
I mean Harry Potter isn't far behind. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Lord of the rings is far better the storylines are far more complex and events less predictable... I
have to admit though the latest HP books have been better than the first couple |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I disagree. The two of them discuss completely different issues. Harry Potter is the process of
maturity of an individual, and The Lord of the Rings is the detailed description of a fantasy
world's historical event. Also, the characters in The Lord of the Rings are much maturer and even
more deeper than the characters of Harry Potter, although they were quite brilliantly constructed in
the seventh book. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Harry Potter is a series of movie where there are separate stories in each and every film. Lord of
The Rings is a single story movie in which the story is divided into three parts which are shown in
the two sequels of the first movie. Harry Potter is a movie based on magic and magicians of a
different world. Lord of The Rings is a story of a kingdom and its enemies. Though Harry Potter was
mainly based on children and kids really liked it but from a very critical point of view Lord of The
Rings was much a better movie. The way the story has been narrated and portrayed in three separate
movies was just perfect. Maintaining the continuity between the three films so that viewers may not
face any difficulty in understanding the film in any way was a great point to mention. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
The harry potter books were only good for one thing - and that's getting more kids to have an
interest in reading. Fair enough, they are a good read for a child, but to compare it to lord of the
rings is like comparing the hokey cokey to Beethovens 5th symphony. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Personally I hate both, but more so with Harry Potter. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Lord of the rings rule how could you betray frodo |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
In lord of the rings you get excited and that kind of stuff. I just don't like harry potter. That's
just my opinion so don't make it personal (laci) |
| |
|
| |
| | |
03 Mar 2008 00:56
