harry potter fans
Moderator: EG Members
- Necromancer
- Dirty Sennin
- Posts: 2213
- Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 5:01 am
- Location: Germany or decrease the Z-Coordinate
Tolkien is true oldschool! *just to get on the vs. topic*
Btw. D&D Dragonshard Multiplayer demo online.
http://www.fileplanet.com/betacenter/dr ... rd/signup/
Btw. D&D Dragonshard Multiplayer demo online.
http://www.fileplanet.com/betacenter/dr ... rd/signup/

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe." - Albert Einstein
-
- Buzkashi wannabe
- Posts: 715
- Joined: Mon May 02, 2005 4:26 pm
- Location: Zulu Land
Actually I'm not(sad for him),atleast wen it comes to the first book and film.The first film is way better then the book,its not even funny.A rare case,when it comes to which one of the two medias' are usually better.
Until the lion learns to speak, the tales of the hunt will be(weak) told by the hunter
- Skullkracker
- Dirty Sennin
- Posts: 2153
- Joined: Thu May 19, 2005 2:10 pm
- Location: outta this world
Man Tolkien is gonna comeback from the dead and hunt you for comparing his LOR to HP....
Why compare a book that have sold more than the bible to HP,there isnt that much kids that can make HP in the same league as LOR.
Why compare a book that have sold more than the bible to HP,there isnt that much kids that can make HP in the same league as LOR.
The ink of a scholar is worth a thousand times more than the blood of the martyr- The Quran
why compare both books??
each 1 is in a different category
HP- in the section... "To damn fuckn easy to read for little kids."
LoTR- "Soooo fuckin boring that it almost beats the bible in boringness" (im not hting religion, so dont bash me there)
Like i said before, the movies do more justice then the books.
each 1 is in a different category
HP- in the section... "To damn fuckn easy to read for little kids."
LoTR- "Soooo fuckin boring that it almost beats the bible in boringness" (im not hting religion, so dont bash me there)
Like i said before, the movies do more justice then the books.

- Killfile
- Flexing spam muscles
- Posts: 587
- Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 8:54 pm
- Location: St. Petersburg - 1917
- Contact:
LOTR, while a masterwork by any definition of the word - fails to appeal to the mass market audiences of today's literary world. Most of you on this form can't be bothered to read an issue of Maxim, let alone a thousand page opus like The Lord of the Rings. My wife taught in public schools for a few years and now my cousin is basically failing English because he hates to read -- it's not fast paced enough for him.
ANYTHING that gets kids to read gets props from me. The Potter books aren't the high literature that Tolkien, Lewis, or even Clarke have created in the world of Science Fiction/Fantasy, but they are coherent, complex, and engaging plot lines. The use fairly challenging vocabulary and develop complex notions of right and wrong, good and evil.
To compare these two series as equals, however, demonstrates a total lack of understanding, both of literature and of the works themselves. Compare the Hobbit and Potter if you must, but LOTR was never intended for a children's audience.
I weep for those that say "I just watch the movies." The complexity and depth of some of the greatest stories ever told in a generation is lost upon you. The rich history of characters and the vivid details that only the written word can bring to life will elude you. Your understanding of what will come to be considered some of the defining literature of your time will be anemic at best.
Western culture has become too fixed upon the idea of the next quick high - informational or otherwise - to draw any meaningful gain from its great minds and thinkers. Most of us are too wrapped up in ourselves to notice.
ANYTHING that gets kids to read gets props from me. The Potter books aren't the high literature that Tolkien, Lewis, or even Clarke have created in the world of Science Fiction/Fantasy, but they are coherent, complex, and engaging plot lines. The use fairly challenging vocabulary and develop complex notions of right and wrong, good and evil.
To compare these two series as equals, however, demonstrates a total lack of understanding, both of literature and of the works themselves. Compare the Hobbit and Potter if you must, but LOTR was never intended for a children's audience.
I weep for those that say "I just watch the movies." The complexity and depth of some of the greatest stories ever told in a generation is lost upon you. The rich history of characters and the vivid details that only the written word can bring to life will elude you. Your understanding of what will come to be considered some of the defining literature of your time will be anemic at best.
Western culture has become too fixed upon the idea of the next quick high - informational or otherwise - to draw any meaningful gain from its great minds and thinkers. Most of us are too wrapped up in ourselves to notice.
If you knew how to search you would have found this.....
http://www.evil-genius.us/forums/viewto ... light=read
Next time get your facts straights before you talk about people you dont know anything about....
http://www.evil-genius.us/forums/viewto ... light=read
Next time get your facts straights before you talk about people you dont know anything about....
Killfile has a point, the two series appeal to different markets.Libaax wrote:Stop talking bull and go to the book thread before you label us people who dont read.....
He also makes a point in that people miss out when they just watch the movie. This is always true, why else make a movie out of literature if it wasn't any good. Now, 'good' may be subjective of course depending on your likes and dislikes.
Libaax: you just have a bad day?
Anywho, I personally look down on those who talk about a movie as if they know everything and yet have never read the books. I can't come down on Harry Potter because 1) I've never read the books and 2) the movies didn't appeal to me. However, I can't make any comments about the works unless they are equal footing like movie comparisons. I've only read LOTR, so I can't compare it to HP in those terms.
Last edited by psi29a on Wed Jul 20, 2005 5:37 pm, edited 2 times in total.
- Killfile
- Flexing spam muscles
- Posts: 587
- Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 8:54 pm
- Location: St. Petersburg - 1917
- Contact:
I'm not seeing a lot f the names in this thread repeated there, but whatever.
Please - if you've read one or more of these works, make some meaningful, substantive comments. I don't recall seeing the word pwned in any well regarded literary journals - but it could be I'm not reading carefully enough.
My only point is that, if you want do debate the merits of these works, please do so. What I've read on here consists of complaints about length or the difficulty of language - hardly the kind of commentary that would inspire a meaningful discussion.
I may have been hasty in my assumptions -- but the comments I've read don't look like those of individuals who took the time to sit down and actually read something as complex and rich a Lord of the Rings. Maybe that's an unfair judgment - but words are all we have to go on here.
Please - if you've read one or more of these works, make some meaningful, substantive comments. I don't recall seeing the word pwned in any well regarded literary journals - but it could be I'm not reading carefully enough.
My only point is that, if you want do debate the merits of these works, please do so. What I've read on here consists of complaints about length or the difficulty of language - hardly the kind of commentary that would inspire a meaningful discussion.
I may have been hasty in my assumptions -- but the comments I've read don't look like those of individuals who took the time to sit down and actually read something as complex and rich a Lord of the Rings. Maybe that's an unfair judgment - but words are all we have to go on here.
- Skullkracker
- Dirty Sennin
- Posts: 2153
- Joined: Thu May 19, 2005 2:10 pm
- Location: outta this world
Killfile wrote:I don't recall seeing the word pwned in any well regarded literary journals - but it could be I'm not reading carefully enough.




but I agree with you in almost every aspect.
I have read LOTR after seeing the first two movies and it WAS WORTH IT!!!
HP is not really my fav, and the first two books seem enough. I'm going to watch the movies though, and I don't feel that I am to miss much becouse the first two parts were 99% the same as the book. Call me lazy...call me an ass, but HP is not worth my time.

- TheDarkness
- Buzkashi wannabe
- Posts: 796
- Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 11:46 am
- Location: In the Shadows
- Skullkracker
- Dirty Sennin
- Posts: 2153
- Joined: Thu May 19, 2005 2:10 pm
- Location: outta this world
- Skullkracker
- Dirty Sennin
- Posts: 2153
- Joined: Thu May 19, 2005 2:10 pm
- Location: outta this world
Killfile wrote: Most of you on this form can't be bothered to read an issue of Maxim, let alone a thousand page opus like The Lord of the Rings.
This quote is what annoyed me. Like he knows something about what kind of books we read. I'm a big lover of books,so i cant take that quote easily.
I cant believe it doesn't annoy anyone else.....
My posts about comparing LOTR and HP wasnt serious if you had seen my line about Tolkien coming back from the dead you would have understand that.
Last edited by Libaax on Thu Jul 21, 2005 11:20 am, edited 1 time in total.