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

It really depends on how badly the PT will have tainted the OT in the long run. Will the prequels be merely forgotten, or will they forever be associated with the originals? I sincerely hope its the former. It'd be a shame for future generations to miss out on the originals because they hear horror stories about the prequels.

So, to answer the question, I believe it will still be Star Wars. I think the prequels will be forgotten, and not an ever-present storm cloud over the OT.

Personally, I think FOTR is superior to ANH, and ESB is better than TTT. So it all comes down to ROTK. If it's better than ROTJ (which it very likely will be), then I've got my new favorite trilogy.

Lastly, there won't be any more attempts at recreating LOTR in film form. In all the years since the books were written (and before PJ's work), it was only done twice, and neither time was it completed. Bakshi's work was a complete failure, as was ROTK.

They won't be remade because there's no reason to. For the vast majority, PJ has done an incredible job, and done full justice to the classics. His films have been showered with near-universal praise. They are, and will continue to be, the defining film adaptation of LOTR.

 

Neither of these trilogies stand a chance against the prequels.

 

I've got to side with the OT. LOTR will always be a big draw in the future, and might, i think, outdistance the OT money and intrest wise if ever re-released theatrically.

But I dont know. The OT is shorter, less pretentious and therefore more accessible to newcomers and non-fans, and kind of tells the same story that LOTR does, but in a more visually stimulating, and more creative way.

Just my two cents.

 

Insidious, oh, go back to your sanctuary, you. (shakes fist) The prequels have helped to serve as a big publicity stunt for the OT, bringing younger fans to the franchise as SW gets a chance in the public eye again. And I think, deep down, that bothers you.
Better to draw a rush of new blood to the fold than to let it die out. (Which it will anyway, one day loooong in the future, but we can postpone that, right?)


In all the years since the books were written (and before PJ's work), it was only done twice, and neither time was it completed

Actually, it was, sort of.
Rankin-Bass did a "Return of the King" movie that picks up where Bakshi's flick leaves off and finishes the story.

They are, and will continue to be, the defining film adaptation of LOTR.

What, no love for the near-incomprehensible Bakshi screwup?



Rick McCallum loves you!

 

I prefer the visual style of the cartoon. I'm not joking. The hobbits look like hobbits and the elves like elves, the dwarves look like dwarves.

I loathe fresh-faced hobbits and supposedly immortal elves who look like they just stepped out of a boy-band casting session. Aragorn's meant to be ugly 'look foul and feel fair'.

FotR was good. TTT was poor.

The books stand by themselves.