which will be haled as the best trilogy ever: lord of the ring or the star wars OT?

geezzzz! didn't we go through this when Titanic beat SW as the biggest $ maker of all time. LOTR is badass with out a doubt and i cant wait for the last movie to come out. but to compare it to SW is kinda dumb. it's like asking which is better an apple or an orange. like these 2 movies... they are very different but PACKED full of goodness and good for you. so you should get as much of each of them as you can.

 

I gotta admit, I've been watching the PT far more than the CT these days, and I've been watching LOTR much more than the PT now.

 

I will have to say the Star Wars OT, because lets face even people who have no interest in Star Wars whatsoever know characters like Obi-Wan Kenobi, C3PO, R2D2, Darth Vader etc. Even my dad who claims to have only seen the first 1/2 hour of ANH. Mind you he did describe C3PO and R2D2 and a gold man with his dog!!

And once he was trying to explain to me how good a particular TV was whilst AOTC was on, he told me to look at the "Green Wrinkley Monster" when he came on No prizes for guessing who he meant!!

Anyway a bit off topic, but yeah Star Wars OT, and I feel the PT will become as known as the OT. Oh and LOTR is great

 

The Original Trilogy, because LOTR is boring as all hell.

 

This is a tough choice because I enjoy both the Star Wars original trilogy and The Lord of the Rings trilogy. They both are done so well that can't say one is better over the other.

However, the prequel trilogy right now is 0-2 with a story that is horribly written and acted, as well as completely contradictory to the events and storyline in the original trilogy. The Lord of the Rings trilogy is 2-0 so far and blows the prequels out of the water in terms of story, acting and script.

 

Yanksfan is absolutely correct. LOTR is the most boring movie I have ever seen and therefore shouldn't even be mentioned in the same catagory as SW. I mean the first LOTR movie is 3 hours long and it seems like they spend 2.5 of those hours just walking around. I was even late to the movie and missed the first 15 minutes and it still seemed like the longest movie ever made.

Halfway through the movie, I went to bathroom, and unlike most movies where I try to rush back so I don't miss anything, I stood out in the lobby for a few minutes looking at movie posters. It was the only movie that I have actually contemplated walking out on, but I didn't so that I wouldn't waste my money.

I saw TTT in the theaters and it was slightly better. I will probably see the third one since I've come this far, but LOTR does not even come close to the excitement and thrills of SW. The SW story line and the plot twists and surprises that it gives you are far superior to LOTR.

I know that this might seem like some long rant, but I'm not trying bash LOTR just for the sake of bashing it. I just seriosly can't see why so many people like it. And I'm a fan of fantasy movies. I love wizards, elves, magic and stuff like that, but LOTR just doesn't cut it. I'll watch them once and that's it, but I'll watch SW over and over again.

 

You're going to get more people to side with SW because this is a SW messageboard.
The problem with LotR is it's an adaption. No more. So, someone else could come along and adapt it in a totally different way thirty years later (much like the fact that they already had cartoons out). Much like Les Miserables. So, while LotR is big now, it may not be big in the future (I can't judge yet). SW has already stood the time test, and should continue. Or, people may like another adaption better. Later generations may like a later adaption better and forget Jackson's. LotR has a lot going against it in the long run.
I'll say that I like the OT much more than LotRs. Not because it's stupid, or boring, or that I 'can't appreciate a work of art'. It simply doesn't do it for me as much as the OT does. I can't relate to it or its characters as well. I'm not engrossed into the adventure because of it. However, I'm not going to say they're awful films simply because I don't like them, as is the custom round these parts for anything (I don't like it and my opinion is the end all be all, so it simply must suck. Certainly I would not dislike something that didn't suck?).
The opposite is true for the PT with me. I can relate with many of characters (look past the pretty FX, they're there ) and I'm engrossed in the storyline because of it. I relate to Anakin better than any other fictional character, so the PT is tops for me.
As for people thinking (hoping?) the PT will just magically 'go away', it's not gonna happen. I very highly doubt Lucas would ever sell these things seperately. Plus, future generations will be less critical of them. I see it all the time. So I doubt the PT will just PO because of those reasons

 

I believe starwars....lotr, in my opinion, wont stand the test of time like starwars has and will continue to (not that many wont talk about it). But I think starwars has more memorable moments and elements that more people remember, to what is contained in lotr.

 

i think it is pretty unfair to compare the two.....both are incredibly groundbreaking in terms of pure story and cinematography for their time........true the LotR books have been around since world war II but that does not neccessarily elevate their status above star wars.....if you appreciate movies for what they are and actually let yourself get lost in the story you will find yourself liking both equally .....to sum it up you cannot compare them...it is like being asked who you love more......your mom or your dad....its not a fair question....as for me....check out the signature.....i love star wars so much...much more than i could ever put in words but i also love lord of the rings more than i can put into words too

 

It always cracks me up to hear people say "Lord of the Rings will never stand the test of time, but Star Wars will". Considering Lord of the Rings HAS stood the test of time a good thirty years longer than Star Wars has, such a statement is ridiculous at best. Peter Jackson's adaptions has only fueled its popularity, while the PT has, in the long run, only had a bad effect on the OT's integrity and reputation.

I love Star Wars, but, frankly, it just doesn't compare with LOTR. Tolkien spent much of his entire life working on not only LOTR, but Middle Earth's history, and that much is evident in the books. With Star Wars, there are many unexplained incidents, plot points, etc., but they don't exist in LOTR. For a perfect example, just take a stroll through the Ep. III Spoilers forum, and read a few of the utterly ridiculous theories. These kind of odd theories don't exist in Middle Earth, because Tolkien explained virtually all there is to explain. In fact, the only major argument I can remember regarding LOTR was whether or not Balrogs have wings.

The two aren't comparable. One is a work of art, the other is a space opera. As much as I love the OT, George Lucas isn't half the story-teller John Tolkien was.

 

Akwat, I think some people who say LOTR won't stand the test of time are only referring to the movies.


Rick McCallum loves you!

 

Looked at as a trilogy, I think LOTR is better. FOTR and TTT form a seamless whole, and I assume ROTK will fit seamlessly with the other two.

The three movies of the OT, however, don't feel like one story. I don't think any of the OT fit well with any of the others.

That said, here's my ranking:

1. the 1977 SW
2. LOTR
3. ESB
4. ROTJ

 

Akwat, I think some people who say LOTR won't stand the test of time are only referring to the movies.

I know I was, and I explained why. They're merely adaptions. They weren't the first, and they won't be the last. So yes, it is yet to be seen if Jackson's adaption will be the one to stad the test of time.
The books themselves aren't going away anytime soon I'd hope.
And no, the PT has not damaged SW. If anything, it's seeded a whole new generation of fans. I know lot's of people who went to watch the PT just because everybody else was and they were pleasantly suprised.
Sadly, although beneficial to SW, I know a lot of girls who fell in love with SW because they went to see AotC just because of Hayden Christiansen. They got into the story and wanted to know the rest.
They just don't widdle away their time on messageboards is all.
I do feel the 'old generation' of fans is a dying breed. Newcomers are flocking in to take their place.
So no, I don't feel the PT has 'hurt' the saga at all. I do think the effects are not as obvious yet though.
Did it hurt the saga for many people? Yup. But like I said, a whole new generation is coming. SW isn't going anywhere either.

 

Akwat, I think some people who say LOTR won't stand the test of time are only referring to the movies.

And I realise this, of course. However, the fact that it's based on such a famous trilogy can only work for it, not against it. Ralph Bakshi's film could be offered as an example to the contrary, but the lack of quality hurt the movie more than the original story helped.

I know I was, and I explained why. They're merely adaptions. They weren't the first, and they won't be the last. So yes, it is yet to be seen if Jackson's adaption will be the one to stad the test of time.

I think just about everyone can agree, though, that PJ's movies are by far the highest quality adaptions thus far. I will be shocked if they don't live for a long time.

And no, the PT has not damaged SW. If anything, it's seeded a whole new generation of fans. I know lot's of people who went to watch the PT just because everybody else was and they were pleasantly suprised.
Sadly, although beneficial to SW, I know a lot of girls who fell in love with SW because they went to see AotC just because of Hayden Christiansen. They got into the story and wanted to know the rest.
They just don't widdle away their time on messageboards is all.
I do feel the 'old generation' of fans is a dying breed. Newcomers are flocking in to take their place.
So no, I don't feel the PT has 'hurt' the saga at all. I do think the effects are not as obvious yet though.
Did it hurt the saga for many people? Yup. But like I said, a whole new generation is coming. SW isn't going anywhere either.

I agree that it has helped from a numerical perspective, but it has had a very negative effect on long-time fans of the OT. I admit that I'm biased as I loathe TPM. However, overall, it seems most of the long-time fans I talk to feel the same way. Not all, I know, but the majority.

I will say this for LOTR, though. Every single long-time fan of LOTR I've spoken to has absolutely loved PJ's adaptions. In fact, I've run into very few who didn't like them, and most of those were merely overstating what they perceived to be a lack of quality compared to other movies.

 

the ot will always be the greatest. the pt is excellent and will be well remembered, but when forced to decide LOTR will be this generations great trilogy. it's so great that we get them both at the same time.
hers how it goes:
trilogies
1.ot
2.the godfather
3.lotr
4.indy
5.pt

 

Anyone who thinks LOTR is better than star wars needs to be beaten. It's got Rudy in it for pete's sake! Rudy! And that dork with the stupid eyes--they're all pathetic. Oh, and the big feet? That movie sucks! LOTR is Lower than Star Trek...

 

ouch, man. that hurts.

i enjoy both stories, but SW is probably better on an "open for interpretation level." I cant see many windows in LOTR that one can jump into and broaden the topic. Whoever heard of EU for LOTR? its crazy.

we apologize for Rudy, but that was a long time ago, unfortunately, on earth. On the plus side he is a Goonie. GO MIKEY

 

Well, there are some things that could be considered "EU" to LOTR--books like the Silmarillion, which Tolkien wrote as a backstory to the history of the ring, as well as The Hobbit, which has been considered a children's classic for years.

That said, I appreciate both movies for what they are. Both have help shift the way people make and appreciate movies--look at the way effects have changed as a result of both of them. But comparing them is unfair, at least at this point in time. A generation has grown up with the film version of SW in it's consciousness, where LOTR has existed in the public mind only as a novel. For me, the OT exists as a masterpiece of innovation and imagination on screen, while the LOTR trilogy exists as a good adaptation of excellent books.

 

Star Wars OT.

SO much more fun than LOTR.

FAR better characters. Legendary characters who have passed into the folklore of modern culture. I won't list them: you know who they are.

FAR more quotable dialogue. Where's the LOTR equivalent of 'May the Force be with you'? Say that, and everyone knows what you're talking about. They may think you're a sad pathetic little worm, but they'll know what you're talking about.

NO slow motion death scenes for minor characters. Haldir. Whodir?

This is a dangerous time for Star Wars fans, when they will be tempted by the LOTR trilogy.

There is another.

Its called the PT!!!!

 

as well as completely contradictory to the events and storyline in the original trilogy

Could you please explain, here or otherwise, what these contradicatory elements are exactly, as such so far I have not noticed any.

SBC

 

FAR better characters. Legendary characters who have passed into the folklore of modern culture. I won't list them: you know who they are.

I'll disagree with you there. OT's characters are, in all honesty, rather generic. And, sure, they passed into the folklore of modern culture. A good 25-35 years after LOTR's did.

FAR more quotable dialogue. Where's the LOTR equivalent of 'May the Force be with you'? Say that, and everyone knows what you're talking about. They may think you're a sad pathetic little worm, but they'll know what you're talking about.

A.) LOTR's dialogue is vastly superior to SW's. B.) Try "A Wizard is Never Later", "All you have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to you", and "I did not pass through fire and death to bandy crooked words with a witless worm." Not only are those three lines much better than SW's dialogue, but I garuentee that 90% of the people will know exactly what you're talking about if you randomly start quoting them in public.

NO slow motion death scenes for minor characters. Haldir. Whodir?

I wasn't aware the quality of a movie is based upon whether or not a minor character has a slow motion death scene.

This is a dangerous time for Star Wars fans, when they will be tempted by the LOTR trilogy.

Considering the LOTR trilogy is vastly superior to SW, I wouldn't doubt it.

There is another. Its called the PT!!!!

What, you mean those ridiculous little kids' movies who's dialogue is worse than "Dungeon & Dragon"'s at times? The one where main characters sound like uneducated fools, and maybe three actors total can actually act decently? You're tring to compare this to Lord of the Rings?! That's like comparing "Barney" to "Die Hard". At least comparing the OT to LOTR is semi-reasonable, the gap in quality between LOTR and the PT is like that between The Empire Strikes Back and Star Trek: Insurrection.

 

Episode 3 holds everything in the balance, if ep3's is better or equal to ep2 that would mean (for me) that the PT > OT which also might mean PT > LOTR > OT but it really depends on EP3 and ROTK

 

Star Wars.

 

I'll disagree with you there. OT's characters are, in all honesty, rather generic. And, sure, they passed into the folklore of modern culture. A good 25-35 years after LOTR's did.

More people know the name Darth Vader than have heard of Sauron or Saruman, and he's a better character than either. Luke Skywalker is more interesting than that dullest of all hobbits, Frodo Baggins. Even in the novels he's not very interesting. Han Solo's got ten times the charisma of the generic Aragorn, and Yoda is funnier, wiser and more quotable than Gandalf.

A.) LOTR's dialogue is vastly superior to SW's. B.) Try "A Wizard is Never Later", "All you have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to you", and "I did not pass through fire and death to bandy crooked words with a witless worm." Not only are those three lines much better than SW's dialogue, but I garuentee that 90% of the people will know exactly what you're talking about if you randomly start quoting them in public.

A: PPOR. And we're discussing quotability here, not quality.

B: 'A wizard is never later.' Yeah. Brilliant. I'm afraid that it is you who are mistaken. About a great many things...

'Luminous beings are we, not this crude matter..'

'Try not. Do, or do not. There is no try...'

'The Emperor is not as forgiving as I am...'

'Curse my metal body...'

'... a more wretched hive of scum and villainy...'

All R2's dialogue.

This is great FILM dialogue. It's fun. It's quotable. It's a source of constant amusement to millions of people.

'90% of the people'

90% of the people who've seen the LOTR films more than once perhaps. But that's still only 5% of the number of people who've seen Star Wars 3 times or more.

I wasn't aware the quality of a movie is based upon whether or not a minor character has a slow motion death scene.

Well now you know. Glad to clear it up.

Considering the LOTR trilogy is vastly superior to SW, I wouldn't doubt it.

When 25 years old LOTR reaches, be as popular as the OT, it will not.

What, you mean those ridiculous little kids' movies who's dialogue is worse than "Dungeon & Dragon"'s at times? The one where main characters sound like uneducated fools, and maybe three actors total can actually act decently?

Yup. It's called Star Wars, baby. Always has been and always will be more enjoyable, more popular, and in the end much much much more FUN than the LOTR trilogy.

By the way, I freakin' love the books.

 

Stop with the LOTR bashing my honest answer is had I not grown up with Star Wars it would be Lord of the Rings for me like alot of people before they are both good for diffrent reasons they both make you feel young and take you away from reality. Also Star Wars is no longer a trilogy there is 6 movies possibly 9 if Lucas changes his mind