Top 10 Reasons LOTR will never be as good as Star Wars

ah, i use to like star trek a little, but lately it seems lame.

 

I'm not a fan of Star Trek, but I've hardly seen any of it's various forms, so I can't judge it and will not bash it. And please please please don't turn this into an anti-Star Trek thread, cuz that's just boring.

 

WOW I just was able to watch it in stream WINDOWS MEDIA PLAYER! for once the sound worked alright! that trailer was just...GREAT

**shock**

 

Told you so.

 

Get of the road!



although this time pippin lobs in a skeleton rather then a stone lol and the frodo jump part was not in the book either...but the bridge scene was just fantastic!

 

I'm not I was saying if anyone likes ST.Anyway,I know this a SW and LotR thread..but does anyone write their own stories?

 

Yeah, there are a few changes, but I think it will work out well. As for Star Trek, yeah, I am not much of a fan. I liked TNG when I was little, and I have always kinda liked the original movies, but other than that, they are kinda lame. However, I am looking forward to Enterprise. That show looks like it has potential. I haven't seen it yet, but I am trying to get a taped copy.

 

Not stories as such. I have written a few short stories and a couple of plays for high school english classes, and I gamemastered a lot back when real life didn't demand so much of my time. GMing amounts to a lot of the same thing, but they aren't actually written down anywhere.

 

GAP, I noticed the changes too. Small ones though, and they look to work fine, so I don't mind them. Plus, the small details in the trailer were wonderful. Sam's voice was dead on, Gandalf's stand against the Balrog was awesome, the huge army shots looked, well, like huge army shots. The nazgul were nice, and there's a short bit where you see the birds/spies fly by Sam at a weird angle, that I found to be really neat. What else can one say? I was impressed.

 

i am starting to write my own script for a movie. i want to become a writer/director. i hope it works out. i have my own fantasy type movie in mind.

 

Mine is a space fantasy.My characters are inspired by furry art.Guess what the space fantasy part is inspired from? Yep, you guessed it Star Wars!

 

There's nothing wrong with changes I'm not some wacky purist hehe

The changes aren't gonna be a problem I think..besides it gives something new to teh story =D

 

I don't think my stories would make it either.They are very good and all but it's rare.I'm just going to go ahead and graduate from high school and Medical school and try to do my stories.

 

Well,I gotta go!

 

jedichick r u still on?Im not mad at u

 

"And another thought just came to mind. Special effects do not make a great movie. I offer up Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon as my ultimate evidence"
I'm confused. Is that having a go at TPM, or Crouching Tigger?
Anyway, here's my take on the debate:

Star Wars is a cinematic phenomenon, LOTR is a literature phenomenon. LOTR will never match Star Wars's impact as a movie, no matter how good it is. Just as the Star Wars EU books aren't gonna replace Tolkien

LOTR is a tough book for many people to get into. There's not much action early on (which makes me wonder about these people saying "Fellowship will be action-packed") and it takes time to get into the characters and the story. They should have made The Hobbit first, to introduce filmgoers to that world. I've no doubt the LOTR movies will please the fans, but whether it will win over mainstream audiences remains to be seen.

 

Well, FOTR will be more action packed than the book was. Tom Bombadill is being totally left out, and that will save untold amounts of time. Also, it isn't like there will be pages and pages of travel time. That can be condensced pretty easily. There will be a ton of action in Moria, what with all the orcs, the troll, and the balrog. There will also be quite a bit at the end, when the fellowship splits, and Pippen and Mary are carried off, and Boromir dies. All of that battle/event will be at the end of the first movie. When they leave the Shire, and get to Bree, they will be hunted by the black riders, so I think we will have enough action there.

And once they are on the road, it will be a situation of tenseness. They are no longer in the Shire, and anything can happen. Lorien probably will be condensed, and then you have traveling in boats down the river. They get attacked by orcs there. The other action element will be Caradhras. You don't think of snow being an action element, but in this case it will be. I think events in and leading up to Moria (watcher in the water, etc) will take quite a bit of time, perhaps as much as an hour.

 

Okay...all of you LotR fans let's get something straight! LotR is boring and well...dumb.It's about a ring for God's sakes and you are going to waste your money on this! You know what Star Wars is about????? A young kid named Anakin who wants to be warrior and ends being evil and his son tries to turn him back to the good side and succeeds!!!! Not to mention it is futuristic and people in this day are really into that stuff,not medieval fantasies! All LotR has are Hobbits,wizards,and Orcs WOW! People are kind of sick of that stuff. Also sorcery is something that Christians don't like! So, don't expect LotR to be as big as you think it will be! By the way SW will always remain the King of Trilogies!

Well, if LotR is about a Ring, then SW is about a farmboy. And it's futuristic in that it takes place "a long time ago," right? LotR is not a medieval fantasy, it takes place long before medieval times and is really nothing like them. And if people today aren't into Sword and Sorcery, then why are there so many huge bestsellers in that category? Why did Gladiator do so well, and why are they finally making a third Conan? Because fantasy is on an upswing. Not to mention which, SW is fantasy itself. Personally I like SW better, but LotR will be an awesome movie.

 

Here are my ten reasons:

Star Wars has the Jedi Knights as the heroes. Lord of the Rings has little people singing songs.

Sword and sorcery is only for nerds.

Star Wars has about 40 books in its universe. LOTR has 4 books in its universe.

George Lucas has two films on the AFI top 100 list. Peter Jackson is the director of Brain Dead

Star Wars appeals to both kids and their parents as well as real people. LOTR appeals only to lonely fanboy nerds who spend all day posting insults on Aint It Cool News.

Star Wars has awesome spaceships and lightsabers. LOTR has horses and swords made with metal.

In LOTR, the ultimate destructive power is a physical ring. In Star Wars, it is something way better.....the FORCE.

Natalie Portman is way hotter than Liv Tyler

Star Wars has special effect by ILM. LOTR has effects by some "Ozzie" company

Star Wars has music by John Williams. LOTR . . . doesn't.

 

those reasons have already been rebuked in other threads

 

I think when jedichick says "gifted" she means "I ride the short bus and the nice people tell me I'm gifted." And am I the only one to notice that "she" is totally trolling this thread by changing the subject to Star Wars VS. Star Trek? Sweet Jesus, is that chick ever stupid. But I mean that in the nicest possible way.


Now, getting back to the original subject, I really couldn't care less whether LotR does better than AotC. I'm going to enjoy them both, and box office statistics won't affect that.

 

"Here are my ten reasons:

Star Wars has the Jedi Knights as the heroes. Lord of the Rings has little people singing songs.

Sword and sorcery is only for nerds.

Star Wars has about 40 books in its universe. LOTR has 4 books in its universe.

George Lucas has two films on the AFI top 100 list. Peter Jackson is the director of Brain Dead

Star Wars appeals to both kids and their parents as well as real people. LOTR appeals only to lonely fanboy nerds who spend all day posting insults on Aint It Cool News.

Star Wars has awesome spaceships and lightsabers. LOTR has horses and swords made with metal.

In LOTR, the ultimate destructive power is a physical ring. In Star Wars, it is something way better.....the FORCE.

Natalie Portman is way hotter than Liv Tyler

Star Wars has special effect by ILM. LOTR has effects by some "Ozzie" company

Star Wars has music by John Williams. LOTR . . . doesn't."


What the hell is this? You just reposted the original stupid 10 reasons and made like two minor changes. Not only that, but your changes are even STUPIDER. The ring is basically the force, brainiac. It's not like the ring shoots fireballs and kills everyone, it's a representation of power. Jeez, read the book.

Oh, then you mention LOTR has 4 books in it's universe, SW has 40. God is that a mistatement. Middle Earth has, in actuality, Lord of the Rings, the Hobbit, and the Silmarillion. I think there may be some other ones, I heard of a Tom Bombadil book or something of that sort, but I'll leave that to the tolkien experts in this forum to correct me on. Anywho, the Middle Earth books are all wonderful pieces of literature, with an unsurpassed breadth and scope, and extreme attention to detail. The "Star Wars expanded universe" books, well, they suck. I've read a few, and they suck. No offense to you if you're a fan, but those books have little literary merit whatsoever. They're on a similar respect level as the Berenstein Bears, really.

One last bit, you mentioned that LOTR having "horses and metal swords" is detrimental to it in comparison to SW. Hmmm, you must really think the world's history sucks then, huh? Cuz until recently it's a whole lotta horses and metal swords, not a lightsaber in sight. But hey, that's your prerogative. I'm out.

Fellowship will be action-packed, just go watch the trailers. Thanks.

 

LOTR books

wait lemme thing

LOTR is divided in six books

so you have 6 there
the hobbit
unfinished tales
the silmarillion
12 volumes of history of middle earth
Tolkiens Biography
several guids to middle earth

and I'm quite sure I forgot a few

 

Hmm... I don't think this argument has been proven wrong enough yet. Uppers...

 

BYOB_Kenobi, are you looking for another fight? With jedichick81986, perhaps?

No, really, it seems to me the argument's been proven wrong for six pages.