>Lord of The Rings is way better than Harry Potter

>>79674995
k

>>79674995
even a broken clock is right twice a day anon.

>>79674995
>is what basement dwelling NEET fedora tipping virgins think

FTFY

>>79674995
Lord of the rings is objectively better.

Better soundtrack
Better clothing
Better acting
Better story

Prove me wrong.

>>79674995
yes?

Both are garbage actually

Honestly, It's not really an accomplishment. Harry Potter is pure garbage.

>>79679321
What was the tax policy?

The LotR movies are better than the books, which is a rarity. The Potter movies are adequate imitations of the books, but leave out much of the character building and lore.

>>79674995
Who's in the mirror?

File: 1400072669720.gif (377KB, 300x169px) Image search: [Google]

377KB, 300x169px

>>79679392
>The LotR movies are better than the books

>>79679404
His mom.

>>79679392
>The LotR movies are better than the books
elaborate, I'm very interested in your stupid statement

File: 1475637244533.png (206KB, 474x474px) Image search: [Google]

206KB, 474x474px

>>79674995
Is that even a question?

>>79679418
They are. The books are practically unreadable. Tolkien was a good world builder, but he was a shitty novelist.

File: 1475731385649.png (830KB, 792x792px) Image search: [Google]

830KB, 792x792px

>>79679392
>The LotR movies are better than the books

Yup, thats enough /tv/ for today

>>79679444
I've read my share of classics (all of them in fact) and feel I have some authority when i say you are full of shit

P.S silmarillion is better than the iliad/aenead/metamorphosis

>>79679444
>The books are practically unreadable.
such an insight!
if you are an american of course is practically unreadable because your reading comprehension must be at 10% at best, also you can put ads or commercials in books right? so your attention span must be practically non existent.

It's ok man, just go see the moving pictures with voices!!!!

>>79679444
tolkien was a first class novelist and storyteller, my dude, he not only build an amazing world but he wrote about it in such detail...
That part of the book when the ring is finally destroyed, I've never been so thrilled about reading a book in my life I had to stand up of my chair and have a smoke while finishing that part.

>>79679469
agreed, except with metamorphosis, totally different kinds of literature I wouldn't know how to compare both

>>79674995
the wet shit I took this morning is way better than harry potter, and lotr

both of them are reddit meme shit

>>79679348
This.

>>79674995
sure technically the LOTR trilogy is a masterpiece but the movies are boring as shit and I'd rather watch HP

>>79679622
this

My only problem with LOTR is the film fans seem to think it holds some special spot in film history when it doesn't for anyone who is actually into film. To normies, film buffs, scholars, and people in the industry, it's just a decent trilogy.

>>79679622
cool

>>79674995

feh. any teen hp wizard would wipe the floor with any old lotr wizard. all lotr wizards can do is flail around with sword, beg butterflies to pass messages and use staff as flashlights. lotr wizards can't even teleport they run away using rabbits. rabbits! beta mongrels with tail between legs run away with more dignity than lotr wizards.

>>79679881
lotr wizards are literally minor gods, therefore they are superior.

>>79679921
>minor gods
>can't even teleport dependent on eagles and rabbits for transport

lotr gods are literally weaklings

>>79679366
Better than Hogwarts.

Hogwarts could afford all kind of shit - there were no signs of wealth management or desperation in Harry Potter

>>79679622
Get the fuck out

>>79679921

Harry Potter students would be major gods in Middle Earth abracadabraing to bits and pieces those minor gods who will be quivering behind their rabbits.

File: 1453656323224.jpg (1MB, 1588x2862px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1588x2862px

It is not that hard being better than one of the dullest franchises in history. Seriously each episode following the boy wizard and his pals from Hogwarts Academy as they fight assorted villains has been indistinguishable from the others. Aside from the gloomy imagery, the series’ only consistency has been its lack of excitement and ineffective use of special effects, all to make magic unmagical, to make action seem inert.

Perhaps the die was cast when Rowling vetoed the idea of Spielberg directing the series; she made sure the series would never be mistaken for a work of art that meant anything to anybody?just ridiculously profitable cross-promotion for her books. The Harry Potter series might be anti-Christian (or not), but it’s certainly the anti-James Bond series in its refusal of wonder, beauty and excitement. No one wants to face that fact. Now, thankfully, they no longer have to.

>a-at least the books were good though
"No!"
The writing is dreadful; the book was terrible. As I read, I noticed that every time a character went for a walk, the author wrote instead that the character "stretched his legs."

I began marking on the back of an envelope every time that phrase was repeated. I stopped only after I had marked the envelope several dozen times. I was incredulous. Rowling's mind is so governed by cliches and dead metaphors that she has no other style of writing. Later I read a lavish, loving review of Harry Potter by the same Stephen King. He wrote something to the effect of, "If these kids are reading Harry Potter at 11 or 12, then when they get older they will go on to read Stephen King." And he was quite right. He was not being ironic. When you read "Harry Potter" you are, in fact, trained to read Stephen King.

>>79679418
>>79679426
>>79679450
>>79679481

oh right.
>le book must always be better
>le classic books are always good
have you read those books? Its like 7 paragraphs for every step a horse takes.

There is plenty of classic literature while insightful, innovative, meaningful or significant for its time/place or any other reason. Is not actually that enjoyable to read. Any English teacher/professor can tell you.

LOTR is one of those books. For a fantasy novel, They're incredibly boring, even more so than the films. They have a vast beautiful and fulfilled world inside of them but If you want to read a good entertaining story LOTR is not a good choice.

File: IMG_8717.jpg (176KB, 1032x774px) Image search: [Google]

176KB, 1032x774px

>>79679444
>They are. The books are practically unreadable. Tolkien was a good world builder, but he was a shitty novelist.

>>79679392
This might just be the least intelligent post I've seen all week.