# LOTR Books vs movies



## Androxine Vortex (Mar 27, 2013)

I vote for the movies. Yes I know there was a lot that was changed but every time I hear the Shire theme... it gets to me *begins crying

I didn't really like the way that the books were written (ducks from computer monitor to avoid being stoned to death) I don't like how Sam kept calling Frodo his master. There was just a lot of things that I didn't like and I really can't put a finger on why. Some parts just read funny to me and I'm not surprised since Mr. Tolkien was such a linguistic person.

So what say you?


----------



## Devor (Mar 27, 2013)

I enjoyed the books, but I don't find myself wanting to reread them.  The movies, on the other hand, I want to "tril up" every three years or so.  So based on that alone, I voted movies.


----------



## Androxine Vortex (Mar 27, 2013)

I end up watching the movies like twice a month XD that might be unhealthy...nah.


----------



## Ireth (Mar 27, 2013)

What, no option for both? XD


----------



## Phietadix (Mar 27, 2013)

I happen to like J.R.R. Tolkien's (and C.S. Lewis's) style of writing. I may be the only one voting books. I really hate it when movie makers change anything. Despite the fact that I can see why they do. I do enjoy the films too. But the books are better.


----------



## Alexandra (Mar 28, 2013)

Phietadix said:


> I happen to like J.R.R. Tolkien's (and C.S. Lewis's) style of writing. I may be the only one voting books.



No, you're not. I loved the Rings movie trilogy but still think the books were better. Likewise, I'm wired to HBO's _Game of Thrones_ but George Martin's books are better. Movies show me places, books take me to places.


----------



## Phietadix (Mar 28, 2013)

Wow! That poll changed quickly.


----------



## Graylorne (Mar 28, 2013)

The books, undoubtly. The films are great, but they're not Tolkien. They're someone else's interpretation and I prefer my own.


----------



## Meyer (Mar 28, 2013)

I was very displeased with The Hobbit and upon reflection found a great deal in Jackson's vision of The Lord of the Rings that failed to mesh properly with Tolkien's creation.  It will probably be the best translation of LotR to the screen that we will ever witness outside of perhaps a television series, but that does not mean I have a great love for it.  The visuals were impressive, but the tone felt very off at times.


----------



## Chilari (Mar 28, 2013)

I found the books difficult to read; some bits were downright dull and I skipped pages at a time. Admittedly I was reading them ages 12 to 13, but the fact I've not actually read them since - though I still own them, even after 3 bookshelf purges that got rid of several hundred books in total - is a testament to how daunting the prospect of reading them again is. I will read them again, that's for certain - I've got a project I want to work on next year involving LoTR - but the time investment, and the knowledge that some of it is so slow, have stopped me from reading them a second time before now.

To be honest, though, I think LOTR hype is a bit over the top. Yes, it's an important work that really launched fantasy as a genre, alongside the works of Tolkien's contemporaries, but I don't think the books are actually as accomplished as everyone seems to assume. Important to the genre isn't the same as high quality. That's what my project next year is going to look at in greater detail.


----------



## Nihal (Mar 28, 2013)

I liked the movies, but I felt they were too rushed. I just couldn't get as immersed in them as I did with the books. (I was eleven when I devoured did read them xD)

Yeah, some things bother me too, like the excessive "Master" thing, but the descriptions aren't one of these things. It's not even near the description of a rock in the top of a mountain in Silmarillion.

I liked The Hobbit movie precisely because it takes its time. I guess my expectations were _so low_ that I got pleasantly surprised by this one.

Truth to be told, I'm rereading LOTR now, hehe.


----------



## teacup (Mar 28, 2013)

I've not read lotr yet (it's on my list) but I'm currently reading The Hobbit. I don't know if anyone else feels this way but I just find it hard to "get into." I don't have that feeling of wanting to read it all the time, instead I'm pretty much forcing myself to pick it up. I will finish it, I'll just set some time out to power through it at some point.

So based off of The Hobbit I'd definitely say the movies right now. (But I don't know, the lotr books could be amazing.)


----------



## Steerpike (Mar 28, 2013)

I can't think of many examples where I found a movie version to be better than the books, and this is no exception. I like the movies a lot, but they're not even in the same league as the books.


----------



## CupofJoe (Mar 28, 2013)

The books have Tom Bombadil and the films don't, so the books win hands down...


----------



## Mindfire (Mar 28, 2013)

I'm gonna go against the grain and say I like the movies more. 

To clarify: I think Tolkien's works are classics of the genre and some of the greatest works of fantasy to date. Definitely in my top 3 authors. But just because he's _good_ doesn't mean his works quite match up with my tastes. Tolkien may be the best, my personal _favorite_ work of fantasy is Jim Butcher's Codex Alera. Not quite as high-brow, but it's packed full of awesomeness. Which is why I like the movies more. I can't think of anything cut from the books that I actually missed in the films. And because they cut out a lot of the extraneous details and slow bits, it's a bit closer to what my personal tastes are. The plot moves along better, they packed in more action, and the big thing: *it has a higher awesomeness/time ratio*. They took everything I loved about the books and distilled it into its pure essence. The Hobbit films look equally awesome, though Erebor was a little surreal compared to everything seen in the LOTR films up to this point. After the Hobbit films are done, I can't wait to see what they do with the Silmarillion.

EDIT: In reflection, it seems that the reason I prefer the films is the same reason why others don't.


----------



## Mindfire (Mar 28, 2013)

CupofJoe said:


> The books have Tom Bombadil and the films don't, so the books win hands down...



That's actually one of the things I'm glad they cut. Tom Bombadil's existence...








Not to mention his annoying song.


----------



## CupofJoe (Mar 28, 2013)

Mindfire said:


> That's actually one of the things I'm glad they cut. Tom Bombadil's existence...
> 
> Not to mention his annoying song.


I'll give you the song was not to everyone's taste [but I kind of like it]... but I liked the questions the existence of TB raised... Middle earth was a far more fantastical place with TB and a little less with him excised...


----------



## Steerpike (Mar 28, 2013)

Yeah, definitely better with Bombadil.


----------



## Mindfire (Mar 28, 2013)

CupofJoe said:


> I'll give you the song was not to everyone's taste [but I kind of like it]... but I liked the questions the existence of TB raised... Middle earth was a far more fantastical place with TB and a little less with him excised...



I can understand that. The problem is that he just doesn't _fit_ anywhere within the scope of Tolkien's mythos. Fans have been trying to figure out just what exactly he is for decades now. If he felt like he belonged with the rest of the legendarium it wouldn't be a problem. But since he doesn't... The best answer I've seen is that he's the personification of the spirit Middle Earth itself. But even that answer is unsatisfactory.

I guess I'm just the kind of person who likes to have all the loose ends tied up.


----------



## Nihal (Mar 28, 2013)

Mindfire said:


> I can understand that. The problem is that he just doesn't _fit_ anywhere within the scope of Tolkien's mythos. Fans have been trying to figure out just what exactly he is for decades now. If he felt like he belonged with the rest of the legendarium it wouldn't be a problem. But since he doesn't... The best answer I've seen is that he's the personification of the spirit Middle Earth itself. But even that answer is unsatisfactory.
> 
> I guess I'm just the kind of person who likes to have all the loose ends tied up.



I think that was exactly what Tolkien intended to do. You can't, you _shouldn't_ understand Bombadil, he's his unsolved mystery.


----------



## Steerpike (Mar 28, 2013)

Nihal said:


> I think that was exactly what Tolkien intended to do. You can't, you _shouldn't_ understand Bombadil, he's his unsolved mystery.



Yeah, Tolkien himself said something to that effect. He also said he wouldn't have left the character in the book if he didn't serve a purpose. Some people just don't like him, I suppose. It's not for everyone.


----------



## peteks (Mar 29, 2013)

I enjoyed the movies immensely, and still watch them like once a year at least, in one marathon of extended edition goodness.

Still, I voted for the books, because I absolutely love them. I read the trilogy + the Hobbit at least once a year, and they will forever hold a soft spot in my heart, being the first real books not intended for small children that I read.


----------



## PlotHolio (Apr 1, 2013)

I liked the first two books, but I lost interest in Return of the King when Pippin became a Citadel Guard and had that guy showing him around. I just couldn't shake the voice in my head that said "**** it! I don't give a **** what the passwords are! Get to the battle!"


----------



## The Last Shard (Jun 3, 2019)

Definitely, but on the original topic the books are way better!


----------



## pmmg (Jun 4, 2019)

To each their own. I though the books were boring and hard to read through.


----------



## Demesnedenoir (Jun 7, 2019)

Books. The movies are already aging for me, the books are still the books.I “get” Jackson’s changes to the story, screenwriting demands it, but I didn’t love all the acting and dialogue and whatnot. And I must admit, the Hobbit movies damaged my psyche, I try to blank them from my memory. LoTR suffers for it, I suspect.

I’ll add, I’ve only read two books more than once: The Lord of the Rings and Umberto Eco’s The Name of the Rose. And the latter was because I stumbled into a monastic history course that required me to read Name of the Rose again... not that I minded.


----------



## Insolent Lad (Jun 8, 2019)

I can admit I actually liked Bakshi's one Rings movie better than the Jackson ones. The music too. But the books are far superior to any attempt to dramatize them. There is just so much depth in them while the movies just played in the shallows.


----------



## Demesnedenoir (Jun 8, 2019)

Bakshi’s LoTR was excellent, but never finishing kind of damages it. The Soundtrack was stellar.

I have a signed animation cell where Boromir is full of arrows with Pippin and Merry standing there with daggers.


----------



## Insolent Lad (Jun 9, 2019)

I had the soundtrack recording on vinyl—a picture disc, no less. Alas, lost to flood back in '93.


----------



## Jez (Jul 8, 2019)

I voted books.

I remember reading them when I was a lot younger, they were my first foray into the world of fantasy. The movies, and this will be an unpopular opinion, I found to be hard to watch more than once. I can read the books over and over, but watching the movies feels really laborious.


----------



## Mythopoet (Jul 8, 2019)

11 people here are filthy heretics.


----------



## Hir i-Chorvath (Jul 8, 2019)

Books, definitely books. I love the movie don't get me wrong. I watch at least one disc a week. But I can't stand it that they changed Faramir and Aragorn's personalities! Especially Faramir. Also Tolkien is an amazing writer and if anyone hasn't read Silmarillion they need to do so because so many things make so much more sense in the books if you do. The Fingolfin vs Morgoth scene is the best scene that Tolkien has ever written btw.


----------



## MauEvig (Aug 8, 2019)

I'm going to have to vote movies. I enjoy Tolkien's storytelling, but it's so description heavy I tend to get bored reading it.
The films on the other hand have exciting musical scores, plots and effects, the characters look realistic and believeable. I enjoy watching the movies and on occasion doing a marathon.


----------

