Harry Potter vs. Lord of the Rings

[MSM 194]

Now HP has come to an end, we have two complete series of fantasy films.

Which is your favorite series? (we can do it again after the Hobbit)

[Quintus 6,496]

The Harry Potter movies aren't even in the same league as the LotR movies.

[BloodBoal 8,711]

[MSM 194]

To be honest, I prefer the HP series, the middle films may not be brilliant, but the Potter universe and ultimately the story I like better. The great first few films and the last one do it for me.

[Romão 2,473]

All these movies are severely lackluster (Harry Potter much more so) and I have no interest to revisist any of them in a near future

[Charlie Brigden 7]

The Harry Potter movies aren't even in the same league as the LotR movies.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 12,386]

Lothlorien Forever!

[Brónach 1,330]

The only Potter film at LotR level is the third one.

As for the LotR films, the first is very good. The second is the best, a great adventure film. The third somehow missed the mark with a pair of editing problems and the recreation of the different places wasn't as good as the first two.

[SF1_freeze 138]

LotR just beats the Hell out of Harry Potter. I agree with Chaac, only PoA is close to LotR's quality level.

[Pieter Boelen 1,032]

Books, I definitely prefer Harry Potter. It's just a whole lot more fun and better written; at least that is to say, it's a lot easier to read and enjoy.

Films, the Lord of the Rings ones are seriously well-done while the Harry Potter series is a complete mess.

There's good things about them for sure and I find something to like in each film, but it's difficult to deny that they are not as good as they could and should have been.

LotR just beats the Hell out of Harry Potter. I agree with Chaac, only PoA is close to LotR's quality level.

Not as far as story adaption is concerned. PoA is an internally inconsistent mess as far as that's concerned.

And then there's the most stupid-looking monster I've ever seen in a film with that werewolf. It's even worse than the Scorpion King from The Mummy Returns.

[Luke Skywalker 2,383]

Um, LOTR.

The only redeeming point of the Potter franchise is the 3 first scores, and that's it...

[Score_Fan 37]

Harry Potter.

[Charlie Brigden 7]

If we're going to books at any time, put my name down for A SONG OF ICE AND FIRE.

[Jonesy 55]

Lord Of The Rings, although I'm not fan of Potter saga since fourth film.

[Brónach 1,330]

If we're going to books at any time, put my name down for A SONG OF ICE AND FIRE.

Put mine down to the Geralt of Rivia books then.

[Richard P 5,303]

LotR by far.

The only Potter movie that has truly impressed me is HBP, so it took 6 films to get there.

Fellowship took my breath away from the start.

[mrbellamy 8,244]

The Harry Potter movies aren't even in the same league as the LotR movies.

Agreed. I like the HP movies and I find small flashes of brilliance in all of them, some more than others, but this is not a fair debate.

The books are another matter, though.

[Quintus 6,496]

I read the first Potter book and lost interest after that. I'm not suggesting the following books aren't any good, of course.

There was just something about Tolkien's weighty swagger and deeply earnest style which kept me reading.

[KK 3,313]

Both the books and the films don't even compare to the novels and the cinematic adaptions of The Lord of the Rings. LOTR wins on both levels. The story set the foundation for the next era of fantasy. The intellectual depth of the novels and the extraordinary thematic development in the novels are exemplary. Moreover, the films were brilliant and rank as my faourite films of all time. Few films have ever managed to capture the epicness and greatness of the genre.

Harry Potter failed largely in most of its films (with exceptions like the 3rd film). That and the 3 awesome scores we got from the maestro (yet even those don't compare to Shore's magnum opus).

HP is no contest to LOTR. It doesn't even come close.

- KK

[Jay 46,243]

Added a poll to the main post. Surprised there wasn't one in the first place!

[tannhauser 101]

Definitely LOTR over POTR.

[gkgyver 1,647]

Now HP has come to an end, we have two complete series of fantasy films.

Which is your favorite series? (we can do it again after the Hobbit)

I should correct that and say we SHOULD do it again after the Hobbit because right now, it's 3 vs 8 films.

Also: Jesus Christ, not that discussion again!

[Jeff 10]

I hope the other HP fans who have already posted will vote soon. I feel pretty lonely in that category.

I don't really consider this a fair comparison because the genres are so different. True, you could loosely classify HP as "fantasy," a genre I don't particularly like (which is why I'm not a fan of LotR, the premier fantasy series). I think of HP as more of a whodunit/mystery narrative with elements of several other genres. That's why it has such broad appeal - it's not just a children's book or a fantasy series or a romance, etc.

As far as fantasy films go, there are none IMO that have been produced with as high a quality as LotR. Harry Potter, on the other hand, is an eight-film hodgepodge of styles that only rises to the level of LotR in the eighth installment. However, I think the lack of consistency makes it more interesting.

LotR is as close to one long movie split into three as there has ever been. Each Potter movie is its own adventure, which is why people have such widely varying opinions on which is the best. Some people like the innocence of the first. Others like the story of the third. Others like the quirkiness of the fifth. And some, like me, like them all.

While they are both epic battles between good and evil, coming to essentially the same end in the last film of each series, I prefer the magic and fun of HP over the darkness and drudgery of LotR any day.

[Wojo 2,458]

Definitely LOTR over POTR.

Very clever. It took a few moments.

[Quintus 6,496]

Jesus Christ, not that discussion again!

Indeed. I too wondered why Jason felt the need to create yet another poll for this old question.

[Pieter Boelen 1,032]

On the poll, are we voting for the books, the films or the scores?

[Quintus 6,496]

Films. I think.

[Jeff 10]

Now HP has come to an end, we have two complete series of fantasy films.

Which is your favorite series? (we can do it again after the Hobbit)

I think from the original post I'd say we're talking films here.

[JoeinAR 1,957]

Harry Potter way over lotr movies.

ttt is awful.

as for the books the tolkien stuff is really dull and boring as hell

[Wojo 2,458]

Now that you've crawled out from under your rock, would you like to tell us how much you hate JJ Abrams' Star Trek some more? Then you can go way again thanks k buh bye.

[KK 3,313]

Comparing Harry Potter to The Lord Of The Rings is like comparing Piranha 3D to Jaws.

Or fast food from McDonalds and gourmet food from some top chef like Gordon Ramsay or something...

[Jill Sandwich 11,166]

I spent the weekend watching the entire Harry Potter series. Despite the highs and lows the series suffered like a rollercoaster, it was far more enjoyable than my last LOTR marathon.

[Incanus 5,890]

Lord of the Rings is for me much more enjoyable series. I stopped watching Potter films much as I did stop reading the novels around the 5th film/book.

[gkgyver 1,647]

I really don't see the point in comparing 3 films to 8 films.

You might as well make a poll Bourne series vs Bond series. It's a lot more films with a lot more (necessary) variety and therefor harder to keep continuity.

It's not like the Potter producers made a great deal of effort to maintain continuity, though.

[Jay 46,243]

Jesus Christ, not that discussion again!

Indeed. I too wondered why Jason felt the need to create yet another poll for this old question.

I didn't start the thread!!!

[Jeff 10]

I really don't see the point in comparing 3 films to 8 films.

You might as well make a poll Bourne series vs Bond series. It's a lot more films with a lot more (necessary) variety and therefor harder to keep continuity.

It's not like the Potter producers made a great deal of effort to maintain continuity, though.

It's not quite as extreme as Bourne vs. Bond. At least Potter had the same producer throughout, with almost no major cast changes. Bond has been rebooted multiple times. I think you could do a fair comparison of Bourne vs. Daniel Craig as Bond, for example.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 12,386]

Bond has been rebooted multiple times.

Really?

[Jeff 10]

Just building my case, fact by fact.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 12,386]

As far as I know the Bond series has been rebooted...once.

[BLUMENKOHL 1,110]

This is sort of like pitting Stephen King against William Faulkner.

Except in film form.

[MSM 194]

Added a poll to the main post. Surprised there wasn't one in the first place!

I messaged Mark to make it a poll since something went wrong in creating the thread, but the message didn't get through I think. Thanks anyway.

Now HP has come to an end, we have two complete series of fantasy films.

Which is your favorite series? (we can do it again after the Hobbit)

I should correct that and say we SHOULD do it again after the Hobbit because right now, it's 3 vs 8 films.

Also: Jesus Christ, not that discussion again!

I posted it because I think Potter 8 really added some weight to the Potter series and might give a different judgement as to the series as a whole.

[Jay 46,243]

Mark?

Olivarez?

[Quintus 6,496]

Who?

[BLUMENKOHL 1,110]

Who's that?

Sounds Mexican.

¡Hola Señor Olivarez!

[Datameister 2,586]

Potter, easily.

I understand that the LOTR books have been far more influential. I understand that J. R. R. Tolkien went to the trouble of truly creating an entire fictional universe, complete with realistically conceived conlangs and extensive backstories and whatnot. I understand that colossal effort was put into creating film adaptations that were both respectful to the source material and a viable standalone franchise.

But the fact still remains that the Potter books are vastly more enjoyable for me than LOTR. LOTR reads like a dull history book that was written a long time ago and occasionally sprinkled with bits of actual plot. The Potter books may not have the most extraordinary prose ever written, but all seven books work together to tell a very accessible and compelling story. I've been re-reading them recently, and it's striking me how intelligently the entire story is put together, with each book laying the foundation for what is to come.

As for the films...well, I won't claim the Potter films are any sort of masterpieces. SS has a certain childlike wonder to it, POA boasts some artistic touches that make it interesting, and the last few films are surprisingly satisfying adaptations of the source material, especially after such a lackluster GOF and OOTP. On the whole, they're nowhere near the books in terms of quality, and the 2.1 Williams scores we got out of them are really the best thing about them. You won't hear me trying to claim that these are cinematic masterpieces, not by a long shot.

But the LOTR films are frequently terrible. The levels of cheesiness here are staggering, particularly in the second two films. (I actually rather like FOTR, at least in some parts.) I literally feel embarrassed watching these films.

[BloodBoal 8,711]

[Jay 46,243]

Saying "your mother's love protected you" was simply the way Dumbledore explained to 11year old Harry what happened. In later books he explains to an older Harry that what really happened was it was ancient magic, a very strong protective spell his mother cast, that saved him

[Quintus 6,496]

LotR can be very cheesy in parts, and I do roll my eyes from time to time, but it's all part of the charm.

[BloodBoal 8,711]

[Charlie Brigden 7]

So which parts of LOTR are frequently terrible?