Harry Potter vs Lord of the Ringls [Archive]

PaulaB

09-11-2001, 13:20

I read an article where John Rhys-Davies (he's playing Gimli)
one of the actors in Lord of the Rings was slagging off the
Harry Potter movie. According to the quote he said that
looked at side by side the HP film looked slight.
Am I the only one who thinks comparing LOR and HP is the
daftest idea in a long time. One book was written for
adults the other is a childs book. It would be like comparing
Charotte's Web with War and Peace!!!!!

:rolleyes: :brickwall :argue:

Bapapapa

09-11-2001, 13:23

Aren't they both really 'childrens books'?

Mr Flibble

09-11-2001, 13:35

After all the hype for Harry Potter - am I the only one hoping that LOTR kicks it's arse at the box-office?

DeadKenny

09-11-2001, 13:37

In content, Lord of the Rings (unlike The Hobbit) is a lot more adult than Harry Potter (far more graphic in violence as well). LotR was aimed more at mid-teens (well they didn't have 'teenagers' when it was written, but certainly would have been frowned upon to be considered as an adult book because of the fantasy/fiction element in those days, but it can safely be seen as an adult suitable book these days).

Harry Potter seems to be going for an ever increasing audience age with each book, probably so that kids can read each new book without going off them as they grow up (so does this mean when he gets to his late teens the books start getting adult themes with drugs and stuff? :D). They are trying to plug it for adult audiences though and it is written in a style that's not too patronising for adults to read, but the subject matter definitely makes it a kids book (that and the fact far more people get killed in LotR compared to HP :D).

All that said, HP will probably do better because the biggest movie going audience are kids and LotR probably isn't such a big thing with kids these days. LotR looks like being a much better film though (or a disasterous overhyped flop), even if it doesn't sell so well.

Bapapapa

09-11-2001, 13:42

In content, Lord of the Rings (unlike The Hobbit) is a lot more adult than Harry Potter (far more graphic in violence as well).

Yeah, I know that, but.. "It would be like comparing
Charotte's Web with War and Peace!!!!!"

http://www.bapapapa.btinternet.co.uk/ambulance.gif

Dear Mr Echo

09-11-2001, 15:11

Wouldn't it be awful if they were both good films that everyone could enjoy - I notice nobody talking about that particular nightmare scenario! Eh!:rolleyes:

Shingster

09-11-2001, 15:18

My mate told me that a newspaper (I think it was The Sun) did a side by side feature on the 2 films & they rated Harry Potter as far far superior??????? They compared special effects & said Harry Potter's FX were superior to LOTR's??????
The question is was the reporter on drugs when he wrote that article????
How the hell can you compare the 2 films when all that's been seen of LOTR was a 30min supplement before the film was even finished. Also just by looking at the trailer LOTR seems like it will raise the bar in movie SFX. The Sun must have thought John Rhys Davies is 4ft in real life!!! :D

PaulaB

09-11-2001, 17:29

Originally posted by Dear Mr Echo
Wouldn't it be awful if they were both good films that everyone could enjoy - I notice nobody talking about that particular nightmare scenario! Eh!:rolleyes:

Personally I have high hopes of enjoying both HP and LOR, and I thought as parking will probably be bad on saturday I would go early to make sure of a parking space. So I will be seeing Legally blonde again!!

:clap:
ps don't you love these new smillies
:nuts:

Alanok

09-11-2001, 18:00

Originally posted by PaulaB
Am I the only one who thinks comparing LOR and HP is the
daftest idea in a long time. One book was written for
adults the other is a childs book. It would be like comparing
Charotte's Web with War and Peace!!!!!

Wasn't Lord of the Rings written J.R. Tolkien for his kids to read or am I talking manure? Anyway I am sure LOTR was intended as a book for children in it's day and can understand why it is being compared with Harry Potter. I guess the main reasons are....

they both deal with magic, sorcery, mythic creatures etc,
their both books,
and their both out at nearly the same time surrounded by huge hype.

Personally I am not bothered about the Harry Potter film but really looking forward to LOTR. Just refreshing myself with the books before watching the movie. How many others are doing that?

Shingster

09-11-2001, 18:10

He wrote The Hobbit for his kids, people seem to class LOTR as a childrens book because The Hobbit was. I don't think it's a kids book at all, it's just a book that can be enjoyed by all ages.

Nimak

09-11-2001, 18:48

Harry Potter looks boring to me being mid 20's! But as i'ved read LOTR and always like decent Fantasy Films (Conan,Beastmaster,Krull) am definantely looking forward to this film - oh and if the trailer downloads are anything to go buy (double downloads of SW-Ep1 trailer) the film will destroy the box office - notice that there's a 1 week gap between LOTR being released and any new films coming out!

Cinema's will be packed full..

Chief Brody

09-11-2001, 18:55

Er, sorry to bust anyone's bubble but there is a real possibility that LOTR will have it's ass handed to it by HP, at least in box-office terms. I know that many are claiming a 'frenzy' of anticipation for LOTR, but, and it's a big but..... log off. Close that copy of 'Empire'. How much buzz is there out there in the real world for this movie? Zero. Zilch. Nothing. Apart from the (no doubt substantial) core geek audience, who is going to want to watch this movie?
Women? Do you really think the Bridget Jones crowd will be flocking to a 3-hour fantasy involving pixies with pointy ears? Uh-huh.
Kids? They see this as a GCSE syllabus book, about as appealing as Shakespeare. It's hundreds of years old to them. They want cool movies like Toy Story or Shrek. Any kid will be afraid to see this for fear of being laughed at in the playground.
Families? I was shopping for console games in Toys R Us the other day, and this struck me : the Potter display took over an entire aisle, with dozens of people milling about. The pitiful amount of LOTR toys were gathering dust at the back of the store, right behind the marked-down Godzilla leftovers. And when does the movie come out exactly? Christmas week? Great timing for a merchandise-driven blockbuster - AFTER everyone has done their Christmas shopping!!!!

As for the movie itself, here is what i know for a fact it will contain:
Liv Tyler mangling a British accent.
A star turn from the leading man of Flipper.
An 'uplifting' love song by Enya.
At least 90 minutes of exposition.
A cave troll that looks like it was created on a ZX Spectrum.

Before you get your flames ready, think back to a similar incident exactly a decade ago. The biggest names in movies united for a huge-budget adaptation of a much-loved literary classic. Huge swathes of anticipation. Excellent advance buzz. Expectations that it would be the biggest film EVER. No doubt about it, this was going to be a mighty classic. And what did we get? Hook. :)

Gozer

09-11-2001, 18:56

Read both The Hobbit and LOTR recently and in my opinion they aren't kids books. Books of that quality descend all pigeon holing. If the film is half as good as the book it will be the best movie of all time.

Gozer

09-11-2001, 18:59

Hook is a bad example though. This is an established story with a talented group of people working on it. It'll take a disaster of Episode 1 proportions to cock it up.

Cornelius

09-11-2001, 19:30

Originally posted by Chief Brody
.... who is going to want to watch this movie?
Women? Do you really think the Bridget Jones crowd will be flocking to a 3-hour fantasy involving pixies with pointy ears? Uh-huh

That's a little patronising towards women isn't it, do you think their only interested in soppy love stories or accounts of angst ridden secretaries concerned about the size of their bums or whether they'll get a man or not?

[/B][QUOTE]Originally posted by Chief Brody

The pitiful amount of LOTR toys were gathering dust at the back of the store, right behind the marked-down Godzilla leftovers. And when does the movie come out exactly? Christmas week? Great timing for a merchandise-driven blockbuster - AFTER everyone has done their Christmas shopping!!!!
[/B][QUOTE][

I don't think LOTR is any more driven by merchandise than any other film. I think the marketing people are being realistic about this in that the film and therefore the merchandise won't appeal to kids. Releasing the film christmas week won't have an impact on sales of merchandise which will largely be bought by people who already know the books and will buy it in expectation of the film. I think it's a good marketing move because all those LOTR geeks will inevitably find something wrong with the film and therefore the appeal of merchandise will drop amongst that section of the audience once the film is released.

I think this is going to be a massive success, it won't have the broad appeal of HP but there's a hugh adult audience both male and female that will go to watch this. It's a big budget film, with a great story, brilliant cast and made by a real film-maker. A Pearl Harbour it certainly won't be.

Chief Brody

09-11-2001, 20:01

"Hook is a bad example though. This is an established story with a talented group of people working on it. It'll take a disaster of Episode 1 proportions to cock it up."

So Spielberg, Hoffman, etc. weren't "established" or "talented" when Hook was made? And i'm at a loss as to how the second most successful film in worldwide box-office history can EVER be construed as a 'disaster'. Of course, everyone is entitled to their own opinions and tastes, but by the yardstick of popular acceptance by the general public, Episode 1 was an overwhelming success. Despite what you may think, PUBLIC word-of-mouth on the film was very good, as takings did not drop off sharply in the weeks after it's opening. You're excited about LOTR and that's fine. I don't wish a bad moviegoing experience on anyone. I was just trying to point out that truly broad acceptance (on the level of Titanic, Star Wars, or even HP) by the public just ain't gonna happen with LOTR.
Oh, and i didn't mean to patronise women either. But every bloke i know has only ever sat through stuff like Bridget Jones or Sleepless in Seattle with gritted teeth. Does that make me patronising toward men?

Gozer

09-11-2001, 21:00

They're talented people. Just saying that it would be pretty hard to mess up Lord of the Rings. You know the story is gonna be good coz the book is excellent. When I mentionned Ep1 I meant about the over hype. After years of waiting for a new Star Wars film I was very disappointed, it was too soft and cuddly to be Star Wars. I see it as a "disaster" compared to the expectation and reputation of the series. The originals are excellent films that have stood the test of time, somehow I doubt ep1 will have this enduring appeal. In a narrow minded way Titanic didn't have that much broad appeal, whats the point in seeing a movie if you know the end :D. Anyway I quite liked Hook.

Cornelius

09-11-2001, 21:25

Originally posted by Chief Brody

I don't think Titanic has a lasting or a broad appeal, it might be the biggest grossing film ever but it doesn't have the lasting appeal of SW or HP/ LOTR will have. Titanic was a massive flop when it was it was released on DVD don't forget.

Originally posted by Chief Brody
[B
Oh, and i didn't mean to patronise women either.

Good

Spooky_uk

09-11-2001, 21:35

Originally posted by Chief Brody
Er, sorry to bust anyone's bubble but there is a real possibility that LOTR will have it's ass handed to it by HP, at least in box-office terms.

Best feed him to the orc hordes now then and be done with it..

:D

Shingster

09-11-2001, 23:36

I'm expecting HP to be the highest grossing film ever in the U.K, & that it'll tank LOTR over here, due to the kids being whipped into a frenzy by the media. America's a different story though. They're less obssessed by HP than us & more obsessed by LOTR than us so I think LOTR might be more of a match for HP over there.

WiggyWog

10-11-2001, 00:34

Im quite happy to see a bit of banter between films as it gets boring with cast & crew saying they wish other films the best blah blah. At least some actors have the balls to tell the truth and speak up for the fans.

After seeing all the trailers/adverts and reading all the reports of the Cannes footage I can safely say this film will be far superior than Harry Potter. And after hearing the entire soundtrack on the net, (a classic score) I believe no kids movie can withstand this film. I read that sun report too and thought that someone writing about LOTR who had never read it was typical tabloid stuff (and it gave LOTR effects a higher mark than HP, i remember).

If your not to sure about the cave troll this recent Ad will show you how better it looks since the last trailer, plus theres the Balrog to come.

http://images.www1.tolkienonline.com/gallery/archive/11-7-lotr01.mov

I am not sure whether LOTR will win the box office rankings as HP`s hype is far OTT to say the least, but it should kill all competition in the oscars in most catergories. I live in the certainty that all the critics will be eating their words come December 19th, plus theres The Two Towers and The Return Of The King to come too. Everything about this film is classic, from the cast, such as Ian Mckellen and Christopher Lee who have from what ive seen and heard, become the characters themselves, to the crew who have put a tremendous amount of effort and detail into the making of this.

Oh, and the only let down for me too, is Liv tyler, some of the lines are quite cheesy, but there has to be one flaw :)

But Middle earth has come to life. BTW Im no big fan of polls anyway, I think Titanic as No. 1 speaks volumes.

Shingster

10-11-2001, 00:37

I've been looking forward to it all year. Peter Jackson hasn't let me down before, so I'm expecting big things from this trilogy.

Vinyl-Pants

10-11-2001, 17:28

Vinyl-Pants

10-11-2001, 17:32

Originally posted by Cornelius
That's a little patronising towards women isn't it, do you think their only interested in soppy love stories or accounts of angst ridden secretaries concerned about the size of their bums or whether they'll get a man or not?

er....YES of course they bloody are. Just like your average male cinema goer is more likely to relate to heroic bloodshed, pop corn action no brainers and sci-fi - star trek or star wars anyone?

Michael Mackenzie

10-11-2001, 17:53

Originally posted by Bapapapa
Aren't they both really 'childrens books'? I personally find it hard to imagine anyone classing LOTR as a kids' book. I think it is most definitely an adult novel that older children can perhaps enjoy, whereas Harry Potter is a children's novel that adults can enjoy.

DVDWotcha

10-11-2001, 20:19

Originally posted by Shingster
My mate told me that a newspaper (I think it was The Sun) did a side by side feature on the 2 films & they rated Harry Potter as far far superior??????? They compared special effects & said Harry Potter's FX were superior to LOTR's??????
The question is was the reporter on drugs when he wrote that article????

I remember reading or watching something that said that the best special effects are the ones that you don't notice. Now obviously with both HP and LOTR some things are going to obviously be CGI (you seen any 3 headed dogs IRL? :D ) but I expect LOTR will have a lot of special effects stuff that isn't obviously CGI.

01keith

10-11-2001, 21:35

Clear and decicive answer-
The Lord Of The Rings
is the surperor of the two and since Harry Potter was only written a few years ago and LOTR was written over 50 years ago, you know that JK Roeling must of read it and copyied it in some way.

Screw Harry Potter, Lord Of The Rings forever! :clap:

Hex

10-11-2001, 21:46

Originally posted by Mr Flibble
After all the hype for Harry Potter - am I the only one hoping that LOTR kicks it's arse at the box-office?

Nope, you're not alone.
But the sad fact is that there are millions of kids out there who are obsessed with HP so the box office will probably reflect this. I wouldn't go if you paid me though.
LOTR keeps wining (or coming high up in) all these 'Best book ever' polls though, so you would hope that there is a significant audience out there waiting with some anticipation for it's release, there's me anyway..

WiggyWog

10-11-2001, 22:02

Yeh, its a guaranteed success, been the most downloaded trailer ever (1.5 mill in its first day i think) plus all the tens of thousands of people on LOTR messageboards who im sure will see it dozens of times to say the least :D, but Im not sure if it will outdo HP in this country anyway. My Mate saw it today and gave it 9 and 3 quaters out of 10, but hes a diehard Hp fan and wont give anything else a chance :D

Looking foward to the DVD already though, that should be one mega treat, its supposedley to be the biggest DVD extra wise to date, so that should sell well with many here :D

DVDWotcha

12-11-2001, 13:51

Originally posted by 01keith
Clear and decicive answer-
The Lord Of The Rings
is the surperor of the two and since Harry Potter was only written a few years ago and LOTR was written over 50 years ago, you know that JK Roeling must of read it and copyied it in some way.

Screw Harry Potter, Lord Of The Rings forever! :clap:

Has anyone seen todays Daily Mail ? There is an article detailing striking similarites between Harry Potter and works by a number of other authors (including JRR Tolkien, CS.Lewis and others). While the article doesn't make any claim that JK Rawling has lifted ideas from these other books, there are some amazing similarities. Whether these are pure coincidence or just very common fantasy plot devices as opposed to plagarism is another question.

McMikey

12-11-2001, 17:34

Ok first of all I hate the way if a book seems to be fantasy based then it's a kid's book. I.E something like Hannibal is an adult book but somethings like LOTR or Dune are classed as childrens books. This said I read similar books to what I was reading 6 years ago when I was 15 (with the exception of James Ellroy books). Anyway I tried reading Harry Potter about 6 months ago but did feel like I was reading a kids book (the Narnia books felt more mature) whereas I read LOTR about 2 years ago which I really rate as one of my favourite books. I may try and read HP again at some point but I'm trying to read H.P. Lovecraft at the moment :eek:

Sencondly I really don't care if LOTR doesn't beat HP as long as LOTR are good films and aren't toned down too much. In fact I think HP will beat LOTR as it appeals more to younger kids and that is where the money lies as they won't go on their own, the parents havbe to go to. Besides the boxoffice doesn't determine what I like, it's not like I won't appreciate Withnail because it didn't beat titanic at the cinema.

Thirdly I'd be interested to see if HP stands the test of time and whether or not the books will be read in 50 years like Narnia books or whether they're a fad like the famous five which I wouldn't say are classics.

Finally if I enjoy the LOTR films as much as the BBC radio production then I'll be happy as I thought that was great.

WiggyWog

12-11-2001, 18:06

Yes I hope so. The writer for the BBC series Brian Sibley, had a part in the making of the films, and he gave it his thumbs up, and said their were many similarities between the radio and film versions. Plus Iam Holm who plays Frodo in the radio series plays Bilbo in the film, should be interesting to see how that comes out.

DeadKenny

12-11-2001, 20:52

Yeah, the Radio series is excellent (though a bit stuffy Radio 4 in style, but that's okay once you get used to the long periods of silence and silly music). I think the main thing is they had enough time to cover a lot of the story (13 hours and still doesn't cover it all). Thankfully the films are going to be fairly long each so should get a good 7 to 9 hours worth to tell the whole lot, and of course... "a picture tells a thousand words", so shouldn't need quite so long ;)

Davester

13-11-2001, 00:41

I liked Hook

GarethR

13-11-2001, 11:08

In fact I think HP will beat LOTR as it appeals more to younger kids and that is where the money lies as they won't go on their own, the parents havbe to go to

I think it's almost certain that HP will hammer LOTR at the box office, and not just because of the huge child audience...

It's cool to like HP, and I mean that in a good way - the books really are enjoyable. You can see adults reading HP books in public all over the place, which indicates that they are something really remarkable in children's literature. There will be many parents who will be just as excited (if not more so) about seeing the movie as their kids.

By contrast, Tolkein is seen as a bit geeky and sad, the preserve of 45-year-old virgins who still live with their mothers and play AD&D with other 45-year-old virgins when they're not out spotting trains. Before you flame, I'm exaggerating wildly for the sake of making a point! ;)

That's not to say that there isn't a large fanbase for LOTR, but it can't hope to compare to the Potter hordes. Additionally, Rowling's books are obviously written for modern readers, whereas Tolkein's prose style is inevitably old-fashioned to the point of being about as entertaining as Shakespeare to the average 11-year-old Potter nut... and, yes, even modern adults.

Clearly, none of that is to suggest for a moment that HP will of necessity be an intrinsically better film than LOTR, but in sheer box office terms it's pretty inevitable who the winner will be.

babylon

13-11-2001, 11:31

Originally posted by GarethR
[B][b]By contrast, Tolkein is seen as a bit geeky and sad, the preserve of 45-year-old virgins who still live with their mothers and play AD&D with other 45-year-old virgins when they're not out spotting trains. Before you flame, I'm exaggerating wildly for the sake of making a point! ;)

That's not to say that there isn't a large fanbase for LOTR, but it can't hope to compare to the Potter hordes. Additionally, Rowling's books are obviously written for modern readers, whereas Tolkein's prose style is inevitably old-fashioned to the point of being about as entertaining as Shakespeare to the average 11-year-old Potter nut... and, yes, even modern adults.

Just had to point out; it's Tolkien not Tolkein:rolleyes:
It's amazing just how often his name gets misspelt;) ;)

nashie

13-11-2001, 11:44

they are both completely different films, and i hope they both rake in the cash.

potter looks good, LOTR looks amazing as well

GarethR

13-11-2001, 12:15

Just had to point out; it's Tolkien not Tolkein
It's amazing just how often his name gets misspelt

My apologies. Give my regards to your mother! ;) ;) ;)

SPB

13-11-2001, 15:55

I saw HP at one of the previews over the weekend. I have not read the books and have avoided almost all the hype.

My opinion - not bad, not bad at all. I went with the girlfriend expecting it to be a bit, well, rubbish, and was pleasently suprised. Robbie Coltrane as Hagrid (?) was excellent. If you hated the books or even the idea of the books don't go and see it. If you are open minded and/or liked trhe books go (the g/f ahas read the books and liked the film!). OK it is aimed primarily at Children (no gore, no blood N guts, etc) , but it kept me entertained throughout.

Not a spoiler but I thought the ending was a bit dissapointing, but this is a series of books rather than a stand alone movie. In fact IMHO it sort of had a bit of a star wars saga feel to it Not as good (obviously), but I want to see the next installment (and it was better than the PTM, which I thought was OK but all in all a bit of a let down).

If LOTR is as made as well as HP then I will be a very happy bunny!

McMikey

13-11-2001, 17:01

Originally posted by GarethR
Just had to point out; it's Tolkien not Tolkein
It's amazing just how often his name gets misspelt

My apologies. Give my regards to your mother! ;) ;) ;)

:D :clap:

anyway as to your original point yes I'd agree that LOTR is considered pretty geeky still, although I'd say because of this reason they may get away with charging a lot more for the merchandise.

I wouldn't exactly consider it trendy to read a Harry Potter book though but this may just be in my circle where most of my friends only appreciate gangster/crime books. I'm probably not aware of how big Harry Potter is throughout the world though, I mean has it sold more than Roald Dahl's books?

GarethR

13-11-2001, 17:29

I'm probably not aware of how big Harry Potter is throughout the world though, I mean has it sold more than Roald Dahl's books?

As I understand it, Potter is pretty huge in America (Warner wouldn't have been gagging to make the movie otherwise) - don't know about elsewhere, but it's probably fair to say that it's big in most English-speaking countries.

As to selling more than Roald Dahl's books... wouldn't surprise me if Rowling's well on her way to a feat like that, despite the fact that Dahl had a 40-year head start on her!

Andy_C

13-11-2001, 20:09

It's amazing how many people have an opinion on either LOTR or HP without actually having read the book they're comparing it to.

And HP is pretty bloody violent at the end of the 4th book - and I mean bloody in the sense that there is a lot of blood!!! It came as a bit of a shock to me...

And according to reports, Warner are being stingy with the toy licensing this year!!! To drive up demand for even more HP toys next year...:rolleyes:

WiggyWog

13-11-2001, 21:20

Where I am there is probably more LOTR talk than HP talk. Ive heard people mention about how it looks good who are not the book reading/geeksih type from the geeks who play Warhammer :D It seems to have a pretty OK reputation whereas anyone (like my mate whos obsessed with HP) mention Harry Potter it is seen as very "uncool" and laughable if someone whos 16/17 enjoys it.

Plus Ive seen more people reading LOTR on buses etc. than HP. Theres a great chance it could do better than the boy wizard I must admit.

Andy_C

13-11-2001, 22:41

But LoTR is soooo listen to Led Zep and sit in your bedroom and play Magic the Gathering with your sad mates and talk about how attractive that girl that works in the shop down the road is (and secretly think to yourself how it would be nice to lose it to her) and also talk about how cool it would be to actually smoke pot but your mum would smell it on your jacket when you got home and talk about how they shouldn't have done all that special effects work on Red Dwarf because it really ruined it (very much like Lucas and Star Wars SE actually) and how Harry Potter is so sad because it is a kids book.

Flame away. ;)

SithLordSi

14-11-2001, 07:25

Altenatively, couldn't it just be a really good book? Like Harry Potter?

Andy_C

14-11-2001, 08:33

I think the coolest thing about both books coming out as films soon is that it will (or should) stimulate people who haven't read the whole series to pick up the books.

Harry Potter is excellent in that it has made reading pretty cool (for kids at least). Kids are going for eye tests in the hope that they'll be able to get a pair of Harry Potter glasses! And the whole premise of the books is based on being a good and decent person.

It's a pretty positive thing for our kids to be reading...

DVDWotcha

14-11-2001, 11:45

Look at it like this, x% of the population thinking LOTR is geeky and uncool didn't stop the book being voted book of the Century. Similarly, I doubt x% of the population thinking the book is geeky and uncool will have much effect on it's box office. Infact I'd say that that x% are more likely to want to watch the movie than read the book. Certainly those who see this kind of thing as geeky and sad are more likely to watch LOTR than HP.

GarethR

14-11-2001, 16:10

Certainly those who see this kind of thing as geeky and sad are more likely to watch LOTR than HP

What makes you think that?

I typically see at least one adult reading an HP book every single day on my commute to and from London. I can't remember the last time I saw anyone reading any Tolkien in public.

Potter is currently far more mainstream than LOTR, and that will almost inevitably translate into higher box office takings.

Andy_C

14-11-2001, 19:58

Originally posted by GarethR

I typically see at least one adult reading an HP book every single day on my commute to and from London. I can't remember the last time I saw anyone reading any Tolkien in public.

I saw a guy reading the Hobbit on the underground this evening. He was a bit spotty and was wearing a long black trenchcoat... ;)

rehe

09-12-2003, 19:31

Originally posted by Chief Brody
Er, sorry to bust anyone's bubble but there is a real possibility that LOTR will have it's ass handed to it by HP, at least in box-office terms. I know that many are claiming a 'frenzy' of anticipation for LOTR, but, and it's a big but..... log off. Close that copy of 'Empire'. How much buzz is there out there in the real world for this movie? Zero. Zilch. Nothing. Apart from the (no doubt substantial) core geek audience, who is going to want to watch this movie?
Women? Do you really think the Bridget Jones crowd will be flocking to a 3-hour fantasy involving pixies with pointy ears? Uh-huh.
Kids? They see this as a GCSE syllabus book, about as appealing as Shakespeare. It's hundreds of years old to them. They want cool movies like Toy Story or Shrek. Any kid will be afraid to see this for fear of being laughed at in the playground.
Families? I was shopping for console games in Toys R Us the other day, and this struck me : the Potter display took over an entire aisle, with dozens of people milling about. The pitiful amount of LOTR toys were gathering dust at the back of the store, right behind the marked-down Godzilla leftovers. And when does the movie come out exactly? Christmas week? Great timing for a merchandise-driven blockbuster - AFTER everyone has done their Christmas shopping!!!!

As for the movie itself, here is what i know for a fact it will contain:
Liv Tyler mangling a British accent.
A star turn from the leading man of Flipper.
An 'uplifting' love song by Enya.
At least 90 minutes of exposition.
A cave troll that looks like it was created on a ZX Spectrum.

Before you get your flames ready, think back to a similar incident exactly a decade ago. The biggest names in movies united for a huge-budget adaptation of a much-loved literary classic. Huge swathes of anticipation. Excellent advance buzz. Expectations that it would be the biggest film EVER. No doubt about it, this was going to be a mighty classic. And what did we get? Hook. :)

Just stumbled across the above post and it made me grin :)

Mr Pin

09-12-2003, 19:48

I believe LOTR will stand the test of time far better than HP. The HP adaptations so far are dire. I'm not saying the books are bad, I've never read them but the filmed versions are needlessly long. I saw HPCOS and couldn't help wondering why the film was 2 and a half hours. It seemed to have plot enough for 90mins and the structure was virtually the same as HP1. Big showdown at end in some underground tunnels. Only this time the villain was GCI. And we all know haw satisfying that is.

Plus characters introduced for no real reason. (Screeching things in plant pots. Why? I was waiting for a pay off but it never came. And what did Robbie Coltrane do for most of the film. Where was he?

HP films are a plodding mess.

LOTR are fresh and told with an obvious love for the subject matter.

Nimak

09-12-2003, 19:48

LOL how wrong he was..

jayok

09-12-2003, 19:55

I have not read any Harry Potter book or any Lord of the Rings book. I got caught up in the hysteria of these two films. I saw both films and was very impressed with LOTR and very un-impressed with Harry Potter. So impressed with LOTR, I bought the extended editions of the FOTR and TTT. I am really looking forward to ROTK and I will buy the extended edition next year. IMO (as someone who was not a fan of fantasy), LOTR is a far far better film.

My wife really enjoyed LOTR as well and she has Titanic, Bridget Jones Diary and Ghost on DVD!!

zantarous

09-12-2003, 20:03

Man it was not till the third page that I realised the thread was from 2001

jayok

09-12-2003, 20:43

Originally posted by zantarous
Man it was not till the third page that I realised the thread was from 2001

I only just realised that now :eek:

babylon

10-12-2003, 13:01

Took me a few minutes ;) and I posted in the original thread
:lol:

Wendelius

10-12-2003, 13:31

Originally posted by rehe
Just stumbled across the above post and it made me grin :)

That one made me laugh out loud. It's the post that prompted me to check the date when this thread was started. :lol:

Nice one!

Wendelius

Goblin

10-12-2003, 13:38

Harry Potter is for kids, its like Teletubbies Ive past the stage of understanding its appeal.

Wendelius

10-12-2003, 13:48

Originally posted by Goblin
Harry Potter is for kids, its like Teletubbies Ive past the stage of understanding its appeal.

Reading a lot (even Harry Potter books) is good to enhance one's spelling, vocabulary and grammar. < grinning, ducking and running very fast > ;)

At 32, I still read LOTR on a regular basis (every other year or so) and have already been through the HP books twice. I personally think HP compares rather favourably to the Teletubbies. But that's just me. :)

Anyway, read the early posts in the thread and you will see why it was bumped. There were some funny pre-FOTR/Philosopher's Stone release comments in there.

Wendelius

Spam

10-12-2003, 14:30

The HP adaptations so far are dire. I'm not saying the books are bad, I've never read them

Then how the hell can you say the adpations are dire when youve never read the books their adapted from? For all you know they could either be perfect mirrors of the book or totally different films ala Blade Runner.

Just for your information they did a damn fine job of adapting the HP books to the silver screen and certainly didnt screw about with the story/characters as much as PJ did with LOTR.

Both are a very fine series of films. Im a fanboy of them all :D