Evil Genius

R.A Salvatore.....I'm sorry but I like D&D, which came from tolkien which he got ideas from mythology and so on. So I don't care where you get your ideas but if it is better then the source I'm very pleased. And hell magic should be the main point I want head shots with magic bullets.

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/

Comparing Tolkien books with HP! That'll be giving too much credit to HP, heh. I rent and watch the movies instead of reading HP and I save days.

RedEyes wrote:I rent and watch the movies instead of reading HP and I save days.

I'm sad for you.

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.

A vs thread here?
that is stupid:
Tolkien HP's ass!!!

LOTR

(note: we REALLY need more emoticons)

Skullkracker wrote:Tolkien HP

I'm glad you agree.

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 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.

Libaax wrote: 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.

Yeah Uncle Tom's Cabin owns you! I still like my R.A. Salvatore, he brought me more Drizzt then I already had.

the salvatore does rock.

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.

Stop talking bull and go to the book thread before you label us people who dont read.....

Libaax wrote:Stop talking bull and go to the book thread before you label us people who dont read.....

If you read you'd have noticed that there isn't a book thread.

*zing*

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....

Libaax wrote:Stop talking bull and go to the book thread before you label us people who dont read.....

Killfile has a point, the two series appeal to different markets.

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.

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.

Libaax wrote:Stop talking bull and go to the book thread before you label us people who dont read.....

I'm not following you, Killfile was making sense..

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.

I'm hit!

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.

well just to argue with the potter vs tolkien things here.... Frank Herbert's Dune 4-EVER

TheDarkness wrote:well just to argue with the potter vs tolkien things here.... Frank Herbert's Dune 4-EVER

I'd take Ender's Game over reading about a couple of sand dunes.

I only saw Dune as a movie (no, I read books too)...seemed like a good concept.

TheDarkness wrote:well just to argue with the potter vs tolkien things here.... Frank Herbert's Dune 4-EVER

Quoted for emphasis.

Skullkracker wrote:I only saw Dune as a movie (no, I read books too)...seemed like a good concept.

Which one did you watch? The 1984 movie or 2000 mini-series?

I don't know. It was on HBO ages ago. I'm not even sure if it was one film, or more parts in a row. But it was good.

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.