Lord of the Rings vs. Harry Potter (merged multiple times)hlg

[Beorn]

We've heard J.R.R. Tolkien be called "the father of fantasy," but what books/authors do you think has he fathered? I personally believe Harry Potter drew a lot on LotR. I think this because there are many similarites, some of which have been pointed out by other members, but:
[list=a]
Old Wise Wizard (Gandalf vs. Dumbledore)
One person to save the world (Frodo vs. Harry)
One guy who always sticks by their One Person's side (Sam vs. Ron)
[/list=a]

That doesn't matter, what books do you believe used ideas, styles, and things from Tolkien's writing? Why?

[Aerin]

Hm, I know my reply will antagonize some people, and for that I apologize.

I truly believe that Robert Jordan drew his story out of LOTR. His characters were very similar to the Fellowship, and the plot followed the story line fairly closely. I realize that I have only read the first book, but I intend to read the complete series.

I can't really think of many fantasy books that have drawn off Tolkien's works, but I know I have come across many of them. We all must remember that LOTR wasn't entirely original. Tolkien drew many things from mythology, especially Norse mythology. I am not critizing Tolkien in anyway, I really enjoy his books! I think that it is amazing that his 'retellings' of old myths are so widely loved, and how successfully did it!

[Beorn]

Well, I thought of yet another similarity between Harry Potter and the Lord of the Rings. I really don't mean to bash Harry, but there are a lot of similarities...

In Harry Potter (and the Prisoner of Azkaban) there are guards from Azkaban (Dementors). These guards are all black, head to toe in black. Their faces have never been seen. The only difference between these and Nazgul is in the very end, the face is seen, and is described as:

Where there should have been eyes, there was only thin, grey scabbed skin, stretched blankly over empty sockets. But there was a mouth . . . a gaping shapeless hole, sucking the air with the shound of a death rattle.

I believe, but I'm not sure because I read The Prisoner about a year ago, that they did "sniff" people going by...maybe I'm just confusing it with Nazgul, but I think they did.

[Aerin]

I thought the same thing about the Dementors, but when I read the book again, there were differences as well as similarities. The Dementors were controlled by men, not by a Dark Lord. I don't recall the Dementors having Rings...;) They were magical creatures in J.K. Rowling's fantasy world. There are a lot of similarities, true, but Rowling did not completely sponge off of LOTR.
I know you're not ragging on the Harry Potter books. I am just saying that even though there are similarities, there are many books whose authors have directly sponged off of LOTR.

[ReadWryt]

Hold on...Anybody ever read the Arthurian Mythologies? There are a HELL of a lot of similarities between those and LotR, probably more then between these Harry Potter books and LotR!

All I have to say on this is that I find it questionable if, had the Hillderbrant Brothers never lost the contract to do illustrate the Tolkien Calendars back in the late 70's, they and Terry Brooks might have never created what allways appeared to me to be the biggest rip off of Tolkien's writings of all time, that "Sword of Shinara" series thing.

There are lots of articles from around that same time comparing Star Wars to LotR as well, Obi Wan/Gandalf, Han Solo/Strider, Leah/Arwen and such, but if you understand that Lucas was a Comparative Mythologies nut like me and studied Joseph Campbell you realize that he actually stole from EVERYWHERE, not just Tolkien.

[Talierin]

Three words: Wheel of Time. It draws on Tolkien, plus a ton of other fantasy books.

[Deathknell]

I am re-reading the Chronicles of Thomas Covenant the Unbeliever again for the first time in many years, and with LOTR very fresh in my mind again I see lots of similarities there. Things like Lord Foul the Despiser (counterpart to Sauron); the Council of Lords at Revelstone (akin to the Council of Elrond at Rivendell); the map of The Land is similar to the map of Middle-earth, with Melenkurion Skyweir being akin to Caradhras (since evil Cavewights live there and have tunneled under, much as the Orcs took over Moria with the help of a Balrog). Also, in the second book, "The Illearth War", a rare figure of power who lives among trees figures prominently in a battle between Foul's minions and the heroes; not unlike Treebeard , the Ents, and the Huorns from Fangorn Forest.

The differences are also significant, although the central theme of the story includes a Ring of Power. Even though Thomas Covenant's white gold wedding ring is a symbol of his wasted life and a painful token of his riven marriage, it's value in The Land is unparalleled, and for Lord Foul to have it would spell doom for all the people of that world. Likewise, the Ring is a symbol of doom and destruction for all who come in contact with it in LOTR, but it was Sauron's to begin with. And of course, Thomas Covenant is a classic anti-hero, one with whom many readers could not identify with readily, whereas Frodo is a hero of the first order, whose destiny is unchangeable and who walks towards death comparatively willingly.

If anyone on this forum hasn't read Donaldson's books, you owe it to yourselves to do so...I think Tolkien's is overall the stronger work, but there is much that is original and good in the Donaldson novels. I have thoroughly enjoyed them since high school. It's also a double trilogy...kind of cool to have a great adventure in such a wonderful place, then go back an do it all over again but with different people in important roles and traveling to far parts of the world (which LOTR doesn't do...i.e. you never get across the Sea, or hear aught but smatterings of information about the lands outside Middle-earth).

[Lord Snotty]

after reading Mike B's post about books ripped from LotR, in which he stated about the vs part, got me an Idea, i could create a website, which is like a game show, when to alike characters from LotR and HP babble the differences beetween themselves. :D, sound good?

and thats just half of it, you can decide who you are surporting!

Thread referred to in this post merged with this thread --<B>--

[rast_lotrlover]

I think hundreds and hundreds of books drew ideas from theGreatLordTolkien, im a fan of the wheel of time, and i dont think it took that much from lotr, but harryP, now that was incredibly copying it, i forgot all of the similarities, but if i ever read potter again, ill see. but i thin, if an author has read lotr, its hard not to copy it cause lotr is so great that the ideas r stuck in your head.

[Deathknell]

Harad...great idea! I do think TC would work better as a miniseries, or perhaps as a continuing series on television; the Chronicles are quite extensive (as of course is LOTR!). Even though I really liked the movie of LOTR it is nearly impossible to communicate Tolkien's full story and depth in the space of a film series, and a Thomas Covenant film series I believe would suffer the same changes and cuts, thus undermining many basic elements of the original story.

For what it's worth...I still think Tolkien is the stronger work, but I agree that TC is more accessible to many due to it's grounding in the "real world" that we all know, and that Covenant hails from.

Let's all root for a Thomas Covenant miniseries/TV show!

[curious_nomad]

You think dementors are bad?

All WoTer's know exactly where the myrdraal came from. Black riders on black horses with blades that taint the soul and never quite completely heal even with the best of magic. The beings also don't have eyes and are the elite of the Darlk Lord's army.

Geeeeee.

[Tar-Palantir]

"All I have to say on this is that I find it questionable if, had the Hillderbrant Brothers never lost the contract to do illustrate the Tolkien Calendars back in the late 70's, they and Terry Brooks might have never created what allways appeared to me to be the biggest rip off of Tolkien's writings of all time, that "Sword of Shinara" series thing" - Readwryt.

I agree Readwryt. Especially the first book "Sword of....". I will admit, however, that since then some of Brooks' books have been fairly entertaining. He does come up with some original ideas now and again. His characters, on the other hand, are unbelievably wooden.

[curious_nomad]

for more books that draw off of Tolkien see my post in The Lord of the Rings under the thread entitled The History behind LoTR.

Also, I offer this counter position. You're searching for this stuff. Meaning, you're picking apart every thing Rowling, Jordan, Lewis, etc., etc., wrote and looking for the ghost of TOlkien in them. You have to remember two things.

1)Imitation is the highest form of flattery.
2)If ideas didn't diffuse we'd still probably be stuck in the Bronze Age, greedy Hittites not sharing their iron working technology....

[JeffF.]

THe Iron Tower Trilogy, The Silver Call Duology, Dragondoom are all obviously drawn from JRR's middle earth. The rest of Mckiernan's books less so but obviously inspired by them (and for me filling a great need for Tolein type stories).

[Eomer Dinmention]

I WONDER WHAT SIDE EVERYONE WILL GO ON

I'm sure everyone will choose LOTR so it will be a unfair match

[WarriorMay]

Well, not exactly. I like Harry Potter. That's the book that got me into reading. If it wasn't for Harry Potter, I would've never been interested in books! And that would mean that I wouldn't have read LotR (most likey).

[WARDNINE]

I will readily admit that I have not read HP, nor have I seen the movie. But I would like to!
HP books are for children, mainly. They are much more childlike, from what I hear, than LOTR.
Not that that's a bad thing. Just different. I salute the Harry Potter series for getting kids to have a Reading Craze again, much like CS Lewis and JRRT did years ago. But I think the comparison is unfair, like comparing "The Grinch" to "Jesus of Nazareth". Both great stories about Good triumping over Evil, both with a wicked villain and an innocent Savior, but the comparison probably stops there, unless you have lots of time. :)
To me, it's just not fair to compare children's literature, no matter how great, to something as weighty and everlasting as LOTR. Any Tolkien buff should politely and tactfully (the mark of intelligence is tact and a will to understand, says I) say to anyone who compares the two, "Yes, I heard Harry Potter is very cute."
End of discussion.
;)

[thoughtful20]

I totally agree WARDNINE. It is unfair to compare the books at all as they are for different purposes, different readers and different ranges of maturaty. I enjoyed HP a lot and think they were a great series of books, but LOTR are totally fantastic and unique from all other books. LOTR and HP should not be compared-
We should settle only that they are both great books with unique types of fantasy.

[syongstar]

lotr is definatly a better book but I woulds choose to be on the side of Harry Potter because he's so much like me and the energy is almost like being in Rivendell trhoughout the whole book

[elenya]

I got forced into reading HP. It's really not that bad..but LotR was definetly better! No contest. But I really liked LotR more just because I preffer J.R.R to...what's-her-face? Can't remember her name. It's the fact that the fifth book (I think) won't come out till much later just because she wrote all thoes book's about the Rules of Quiditch. Who cares about that?? She's only loosing fans by puting off writing the fifth book.

[Beorn]

Well, I got into a discussion with my English teacher (read "botch") about books drawing on LotR. She had just started reading the HP books a few weeks ago, and I revealed to her some of the things that JRRT had used, along with J. K. Rowling. Anyway, I thought up a new similarity: GIANT SPIDERS!

I mean, really, a giant spider isn't all that common of a thing in any fantasy novel...

[TheDarkElve]

I too can see many similarities between LOTR and HP:
Giant spiders in the forest
A Dark Lord who was defeated but have risen again
I suppose the whole HP world reminds me of Rivendell
Frodo has a ring, Harry has an invisibility cloak

Mistake corrected, underlined. --<B>--

[Khamul]

lotr is much better i admit i havent looked in to harry potter because i thought the story line wasnt that great compared to lotr all hes trying to do is become a wizard while lotr has much more depth

[taylorstaten1]

I like Harry Potter, but Lotr is harder to read and more sophisticated, so younger ones will go for HP and older ones'll probably go for Lotr:o :o :o :D

[Valar]

I think it is folly to compare different books. I think not just lord of the rings but the sil and other of tolkiens work are by far the most amazing peices of writing i have ever read. But in its own right harry potter is very good too, it is very easy to read and immerse you self in, if you feel the need. It is cleverly done and good story and thus i think that they should not be compared.

[WarriorMay]

And the books really depend on what you like to read. If you like books about a different world then LotR is your book. If you like books about magic in our world today, then Harry Potter. I don't think it's fair to compare books with others. Both a wonderful books and I would hate to have to choose which one I liked better.

[Silme]

I have read all the Harry Potter books, and liked them, but can't really compare them with LOTR. The main attraction of HP for me was to know "what happens next" and "how's this going to end" so I can't imagine reading them again.... Whereas with LOTR I know perfectly well what will happen next and how the whole thing ends, and still I enjoy reading it plus find something new each time..... There nothing like LOTR!! :)

[pixieamalthea]

I feel the same way, Silme~
:eek:

[Glory]

lol I’ve made the same topic just that mine it is on I’ve made the same topic on New Line Cinema's 'LOTR' Trilogy in "The Fellowship of the Ring" board.

[Goldberry344]

ok, what about the more obvious things?? The Dark Lord in Harry Potter and The Dark Lord in LOTR?? Voldemort couldnt take human form for a while, too, just like Sauron. And Dumbledore/Gandalf. Snape/Boromir. Ron/Sam (Ok, so sam and Frodo never got in an arguement).
JKRowling I think took a lot of ideas from JRRT, but that doesnt mean its a bad thing, i like Harry Potter, but i just like LOTR and JRRT better.

[Goro Shimura]

Then there's the thing about noone mentioning the Dark Lord's name.... (It gets to be a real bit after a while....)

The real shortcoming of Harry is that it boils down to an in-your-face allegory about racism. Argh.... Not that it's not a good thing to try to teach... it's just kinda tacky that's all.

[Glory]

and who deos the part of aragorn and legolas? I wonder wich character could be...

[pixieamalthea]

Goroshimura, just wondering, but how is Harry Potter an allegory on racism?

:confused:

[Goldberry344]

I'd say that Aragorn was Sirius Black, but Legolas maybe just hasnt shown up in Harry Potter yet. there are 4 more books!

[Úlairi]

Harry Potter vs Sauron!

I'd like to see that!

[Beorn]

If you want to debate problems with Harry Potter, please do it on the other thread. Otherwise, you can continue posting on this thread with replies to the original topic

[Xanaphia]

I am not sure. Harry Potter seems O.K. but it is a little bit like an inmature version of LOTR. I know some people that HATE it because they say it copies LOTR. So, what do you guys think?

[Elu Thingol]

Harry Potter books are fairly descent but compared to Tolkien books they are nothing. Hmmm... I don't really see how they copy LOTR though.

[The Necromancer]

Me either. Me, being 13, have read all four books, and they are great work, and still don't compare to LOTR. Can we have some comparing examples?

[Frodorocks]

Hey Necromancer, you're 13? Sweet! I'm 13 too. I didn't think anybody my age even knew who Tolkien was, let alone cherish them as works of Art. Who's you're favorite character? Frodo all the way. I think Harry Potter did kind of copy lotr. The books were okay though. But the movie was awful. It shouldn't have been nominated for Oscars.

[The Necromancer]

Frodorocks, my favorite character was probably Sam, Gandalf, or Aragorn. Frodo, wasn't ever really that great, in my eyes anyway. Yeah, that movie was an embarrasment to the book! Don't you hate when none of your friends like Tolkien? ARR!!

[Theoden]

**gag, gag, gag**

This is what I think of Harry Potter: When I lived in Russia, we used to use old books as TP when we didn't have anything else. That is the only good thing those books would be good for. I think the quality reaks, the storyline is so lame, and give me a break about the whole "It's written for kids" nonsense. The Hobbit was written for kids and it is a great piece of art. Harry Potter, in my mind, doesn't even qualify as a novel... more like junk. And you know what they say, if trash goes in, trash'll come out.

[Hawkblaze]

I really don't get this whole outcry on Harry Potter. I think the storylines are awesome and keep you enthused the whole time you're reading it. And people who say it copies LOTR are full of it. Don't get me wrong, I agree that LOTR is the "better" series, but really the two series belong to two separate genres.

[Úlairi]

Originally posted by Beorn
If you want to debate problems with Harry Potter, please do it on the other thread. Otherwise, you can continue posting on this thread with replies to the original topic

Seems that someone likes to be in control, not the Beorn I know.

[Beorn]

I'm organizing! You should see what I did to the wires (all 19 of them) behind my computer desk yesterday...

Anyway, it's a pain in the butt to split out a post that belongs on the other thread, then merge that with the other thread...

[Arrhia El.]

I think HP is enjoyable to read but is not as good quality writing as LotR, all that makes it interesting is the plot, whereas LotR has brillant description and realistic characters. It is also more kind of earthshattering, what I mean is that HP just deals with one boy in one school but the events in LotR shake a whole universe.

[Úlairi]

I believe you know my views on HP people. But I will post if necessary.

[Theoden]

please, explain

[Úlairi]

Theoden, there are a few threads on HP, and I have posted my opinion in those threads, and I believe that Beorn may have shifted one of my posts here in this thread, I am unsure.

[Istar]

A big debate over the problems in harry potter is here:
Problems in Harry Potter (http://www.thetolkienforum.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=4214)
The opinons of Ulairi, me, and a few others are there. Understated cliff notes version: Ulairi and I don't like the books.

[Úlairi]

Good! I'm glad! Neither do I!

[Samwise_hero]

LORD OF THE RINGS KICKS HARRY'S BUTT!

[Úlairi]

Couldn't agree more. Samwise, I see you are from Australia, as am I. Would you care to join in on the Guild of Australians?

[Gandalf_White]

Which do you think is better? Personally I am an LotR fanatic. I am obsessed with it. I have never read a single HP book and I've never seen the movie. I never had even the slightest interest in HP. What's your opinion?

[ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!]

Well i've read Harry Potter and seen the movie but its not very good lotr is way better

[i luv hobbits]

HARRY POTTER IS A GAY FREAK BUT LOTR RULES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:eek:

[i luv hobbits]

:confused:Gandalf why do you complain about my spelling all the time

you poop

[Gandalf_White]

YIPPEE!
No votes for Harry Potter.

Sorry I complain about your mistakes. I can't help it. I am good at proof-reading and correcting things. I'll try not to do it anymore.

[Elu Thingol]

The Harry Potter books are good and well written but they are very short and cursory(a quick and easy read). LOTR has depth to it which takes much more thought and much more time. Lotr is the best fantasy book ever written and I'll hold true to that.

[Goldberry344]

I dont mean to be mean or anything, but this is a tolkien website, who's really gonna vote for hp?

[Úlairi]

A very good point Goldberry344. Go the cynicists!!!

[arisen pheonix]

can we at least try for a fair fight lotr has no competition here i mean for what it is hp is a good book unique almost and thats a lot for me to say cause i worship lotr you know the phrase pro deo et patra (for god and country) i change it to pro lotr et patra

[Istar]

A fair fight just won't happen unless you either get some people who think harry's the better book to sign up on this forum, or defend it yourself against the hordes of us who don't like it.
Carpe circulus! (Seize the ring!)

[Darth Saruman]

....if Fellowship was such an obviously superior film, in my not so unbiased opinion!

[Gamil Zirak]

1. Harry Potter is a recent book series.
2. Many Tolkien fans boycotted the movie (or only saw it once) because of all the changes.

That's what I think anyway.

[ReadWryt]

As I recall the Potter Movie, made for a broader audience, was released well before Christmas, and LotR was released just before Christmas and was not for children. Never underestimate

(What happened to the rest of my post I wonder? Hmmmm...)

What I started to say at the end, but which dissapeared mysteriously is Never underestimate the expense of Christmas Sales and their effect on the Movie Going Audience. I've allways thought that they should have released the movies in the end of November instead...sell a heck of a lot more related merchandise over the Christmas Season that way...

[Rangerdave]

Two Words.

Residual Merchandising.

Look at all the toys and other assorted paraphanalia (sp?) that went along with Harry. That little wizard freako is everywhere. Plus there is all the negative publicity that went with the film. A small town about 30 miles from here banned the books from the school library for containing occult themes. If that won't make kids want to see a movie and buy all the associated ****-o-la I don't know what will.

RD

[Ruby Tussle]

Harry Potter made more moola because kids young and old and maybe even some adults liked it.

LOTR on tthe other hand was meant more everyone 13 and up.

There was only one part that was yuck, When the Urak-hai shot boromir with the arrows, and Aragorn cut of his head!!!

[ReadWryt]

Wait...do you mean which was most enjoyable?? That is just a matter of personal taste...or do you mean which was better written, well...let's see...Oxford professor V.S. bored woman in coffee shop in Portugal teaching english as a second language after majoring in French...Hmmmm, who would win? Or do you mean to say that you are willing to compare the "Apples" of Grand Mythology composed by a master of ancient languages with the "Oranges" of contemporary adventure story about a boy who discovers he is a wizard written by a woman who studied french?

Face it, there IS no competition, they cannot be fairly compared to each other. Different Genre, different writing styles...it's like comparing the original movie "Alien" to the sequel "Aliens". No good...can't be done well enough to make a value judgement.

[Lily from Bree]

Agree with you, Ruby. Though NOTHING in LOTR bothered me. Nothing. Still think Harry Potter was dumb, though. I wouldn't want to see it no matter what age I was.

[CyberGhostface]

Well, I loved the books in HP but the movie...blech. I think it got more people because WB marketed it even when the cast wasnt chosen. When the cast WAS chosen, the world knew about it. When the TEASER trailer came out, they asked us 'muggles' to see a movie for the trailer. So youd think it was a big thing. LotR, on the other hand, wasnt hyped up that much.

[CyberGhostface]

I think LotR is way better, it obviously had more research done in it. But I dont think Rowling being not a professor had any thing to do with its quality.

[ReadWryt]

You are correct, I mean...if Tolkien were a Professor of Computer Science it would not effect the difference in quality at all. Tolkien being a professor in the English department at Oxford and specializing in Ancient English, being a Philologist and student of old world mythologies in their original languages...well, I think that would have some bearing on the matter myself...

[ReadWryt]

...that's true. When did you ever see parents standing in line at 11:30pm at a bookstore to purchase a re-issue of The Lord of the Rings that was due on the shelves at Midnight. The Potter books themselves, and all the hoopla surrounding their marketing and sales, promoted the movie and hyped the thing to where it is now.

[CyberGhostface]

Was LotR popular when it first came out, or did it become popular long after Tolkien died?

[ReadWryt]

It took off WAY before the Professor died, which was a source of continual surprise for the all too humble author. In fact, the BBC did a radio adaptation of it and in The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien he wrote in a letter to his son Christopher about how he would have liked to do the voice of Treebeard...

[Aranaug]

Starting off let me just say I have a supreme disliking of Harry Potter.

Ok anyhow there are many reasons.
Harry Potter is a newer craze. HP has tons of little kids reading the books, which I find frightening. HP had more media attention than a PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION! Every time a book came out there was a segment in the news about it. And not a short segment, a very long segment. They had a celebration on Harry Potter's birthday. A CELEBRATION OF A FICTIONAL CHARACTER'S BIRTHDAY! There were segments on the news for the HP movie almost everyday for a month before the movie even came out.
Where Tolkien's works have been out for a while. The movie had news coverage that barely existed.
But at least all three movies were shot at once.
That's the big thing about HP. Four of seven books out, by the time the seventh book and movie both get out, the craze will have died down. So I can be eternally happy with that at least.

[Aerin]

Looks like I'll be playing the Devil's Advocate by being the only one so far who actually liked both the books and the movie....

One reason why HP the movie made more money than FotR was because of the age group is was mainly aimed at. After all, what parent can refuse their sweet, little kids when they beg to go to the movie? It's much easier to tell teens to pay their own way. :rolleyes:

I am a teen, and I am a fan of the books - I think it's wonderful that J.K. Rowling can get children to read a book thicker and more complex than Goosebumps (does anyone else besides me loathe that series?). Most American children (I'm talking about 6 - late teens) don't even read for 15 minutes a day. That has got to be one of the most frightening statistics you can read. Bah, I don't want to go into a rant about the national literacy rate going down....

Is celebrating the birthday of a "fictional character" so much different than sending baby gifts or birthday cards to soap opera figures? I should think it's healthier for kids to spend their time reading and getting wrapped up in a good book than playing video games or hanging out at the mall.

And for Harry Potter excitement... The next book is called Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. :D

[CyberGhostface]

I loathe Goosebumps too. :mad: Stine leaves each chapter at a cliff hanger, and then conviently fixes it in the next sentence.

End of chapter 3:

My mom looked in the mirror...and let out a bonechilling scream.

Beginning of chapter 4:

"What was it?!" I gasped.
"Just a gray hair" She answered.

Luckily I quit reading it in 4th grade.

[Ruby Tussle]

I never have read Goosebumps but it sounds kind of Dumb!I don't know why people like it:confused:

[Aranaug]

Originally posted by Aerin
Looks like I'll be playing the Devil's Advocate by being the only one so far who actually liked both the books and the movie....

One reason why HP the movie made more money than FotR was because of the age group is was mainly aimed at. After all, what parent can refuse their sweet, little kids when they beg to go to the movie? It's much easier to tell teens to pay their own way. :rolleyes:

I am a teen, and I am a fan of the books - I think it's wonderful that J.K. Rowling can get children to read a book thicker and more complex than Goosebumps (does anyone else besides me loathe that series?). Most American children (I'm talking about 6 - late teens) don't even read for 15 minutes a day. That has got to be one of the most frightening statistics you can read. Bah, I don't want to go into a rant about the national literacy rate going down....

Is celebrating the birthday of a "fictional character" so much different than sending baby gifts or birthday cards to soap opera figures? I should think it's healthier for kids to spend their time reading and getting wrapped up in a good book than playing video games or hanging out at the mall.

And for Harry Potter excitement... The next book is called Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. :D


You make some good points. Though I have never read any Goosebumps, but from what I know they are fairly uncomplicated. And yes the literacy rate is very, very scary. And having that birthday hollabaloo is no different than sending gifts to soap figures on their "birthdays". But I don't do that, and I don't watch soaps to begin with. Where your point about parents not being able to resist their kids has some validation, to a degree I'd have to say that some of it goes with the fact that kids are experts at whining, so parents might go to the movie to make their kids stop whining about it, the same goes with getting the book the day it comes out. It's not like they are going to stop printing it the day it comes out. Though I understand their anticipation of it, because if I could drive I'd be like that with some movies, but I can't so I'm not.
I'm not sure that sitting around reading is healthier than walking around/standing in a mall, I'll give you that it would probably be better for them to be reading, in the long run than spending their money on the latest fad or video game, which they'll only like for two seconds becuase a newer game with better graphics and less of an actual point to it comes out.

[Eomer Dinmention]

What I love about LOTR and HP books is that. WHen i read them at night. I couldn't put it down. I would always want to know what happened next, and so i would keep reading on and on, until i fall asleep.

And I think the HP books are a very good series, but not as talented as LOTR, it still is a good book to read

[Aerin]

You make some good points. Though I have never read any Goosebumps, but from what I know they are fairly uncomplicated. And yes the literacy rate is very, very scary. And having that birthday hollabaloo is no different than sending gifts to soap figures on their "birthdays". But I don't do that, and I don't watch soaps to begin with. Where your point about parents not being able to resist their kids has some validation, to a degree I'd have to say that some of it goes with the fact that kids are experts at whining, so parents might go to the movie to make their kids stop whining about it, the same goes with getting the book the day it comes out. It's not like they are going to stop printing it the day it comes out. Though I understand their anticipation of it, because if I could drive I'd be like that with some movies, but I can't so I'm not.

I was extremely bored at one of my little sister's ballet lessons, so I picked up a stray Goosebumps book that was lying around... I was revolted. It was one of the simplest, most disguting books I'd read. *shudders* I don't even want to think about it, heh.

True, little children are experts at whining and getting their way. Then again, what parent could say, "If you want to see that new Harry Potter movie, you can just save up the money and go yourself!"?

I'll be there on the first day to see the second Harry Potter movie; I pray Chris Columbus (the director) will do as well with the others as he did with the first!

I'm not sure that sitting around reading is healthier than walking around/standing in a mall, I'll give you that it would probably be better for them to be reading, in the long run than spending their money on the latest fad or video game, which they'll only like for two seconds becuase a newer game with better graphics and less of an actual point to it comes out.

I'm of the opinion that exercising your mind, i.e., reading, writing, and listening to classical music, is better than standing around at a mall or playing video games. I'd much rather have a well-exercised mind than body. ;)

The way I spend my money: I buy books first, music second, and if there's any left over, I buy food. :D
I have never played video games, and have no wish to. I was raised to read, and have been an avaracious bookworm since I was five years old. Because of that, I might be a bit biased about children reading....;) :D

[Auratus]

Why did Harry Potter make more money?

The answer is simple, I think. As others suggested... Bottom line, Harry Potter is much more established in the minds of folks. The Lord Of The Rings is of the past; it's from my generation (I'm in my 40's), but the movies will re-awaken it in people's minds and stir new interest and then sales will improve greatly as the movies come out.... well that's my prediction. But I doubt it will ever do as well as it would have if the Lord Of The Rings books had just been released, say a few years ago, instead of 20 plus years ago.

Yes I loved the movie and also realize that trying to catch all the aspects of the books is darn near impossible, but I really thought, overall, they did a great job considering the immense size of such an undertaking.

[Dwarf Lord]

the reason why the harry potter books made so much more money is because it has a more universal appeal. litle kids can read it, and older people can read it, where as LOTR is a harder book to read, and hasn't had as much cotraversy trouble as HP.




DWARF LORD

[Auratus]

With respects to the books, yes, I agree. But I'll add that the appeal of the LOTR books did reach vast numbers of people old enough to remember the paper and pen game Dungens and Dragons which went hand-in-hand with LOTRs back then. Yes they were a "harder" read, but the appeal did spread fast and, in my opinion, such appeal put RPGs (paper and pen back then) "on the map." Everybody knew LOTR, every kid did it seemed, lol.

I believe modern marketing methods of today were nothing like that of the late 70's and, no doubt, did contibute much to HP success in addition to HP's universal appeal.

[CloakedShadow]

I myself am a large fan of Harry Potter, all things Tolkien, and Monty Python (and there was much rejoycing...), and I have to say, that I think it's because the HP books are down on intelligencec...I mean, to read it, no matter what age, you get it. It's what my friends and I call a 'Duh-Book.' Buy JRR Tolkien is more educated (in my opinion), and has a more indepth understanding on the constant struggle between good and evil.
But if you take into consideration that LotR is going to be 3 movies...never mind...because HP is going to be 7...
I'm not really too sure why HP made that much though...I mean, how can you compare Daniel Radcliffe to Elijah Wood? And besides, the out of the entire wizarding world, none can compare to Legolas!:D:D:D:D:D

Until December 18th (Release of Two Towers),
The Cloaked Shadow

[Gildor the Elf]

Take a look
- Some kids read Harry Potter, because is so easy to understand, a easy vocabulary, so, they make their parents go with them, and the parents agree, as they'll like to see their son or daughter glad :) and this is some money, and isn't only kids which read Harry Potter, I know, there are teens, and some few adults, making more money.
- Harry Potter is a kid, so, kids like more kids than others, so, even if they didn't read the book, the movie will "persuade" those kids to buy the book, making more money, and there another detail, the friends, telling that the movie is great, and Making more money.
P.S. - I don't have nothing against Harry Potter.
- The Lord of the Rings has a small detail which most people say that's bad: - the movie ends in the half! - my neighbor said that.
- And LOTR was seen only by curious people or fans, and it was a great movie, I like it, but kids don't read LOTR, and so, most parents didn't see LotR.

[Mindy_O_Lluin]

I am afraid I never read any Harry Potter books, and I found the first half of the movie insipid, so I left. I had a twelve year old sit on my sofa one time raving about all the exciting stuff and happenings in the HP movie, but I STILL couldn't get into it. (Chock that up to my old-fogey tastes.)

But, it has been sucessfully marketed.

Probably LOTR would only have made 1/5th as much money if it didn't already have 35+ years of accumulated loyal fans and appreciators. It's been long loved and savored, rather than a fast food item that sells millions.

[Aranaug]

Originally posted by Gildor the Elf
Take a look
- Some kids read Harry Potter, because is so easy to understand, a easy vocabulary, so, they make their parents go with them, and the parents agree, as they'll like to see their son or daughter glad :) and this is some money, and isn't only kids which read Harry Potter, I know, there are teens, and some few adults, making more money.
- Harry Potter is a kid, so, kids like more kids than others, so, even if they didn't read the book, the movie will "persuade" those kids to buy the book, making more money, and there another detail, the friends, telling that the movie is great, and Making more money.
P.S. - I don't have nothing against Harry Potter.
- The Lord of the Rings has a small detail which most people say that's bad: - the movie ends in the half! - my neighbor said that.
- And LOTR was seen only by curious people or fans, and it was a great movie, I like it, but kids don't read LOTR, and so, most parents didn't see LotR.

As a kid, I didn't have to read about another kid to make myself interested. And the reason people complain is because they are impatient. What did they want to sit through a nine hour movie!!! Rarely do Great things come in small packages. Especially not epics. Trying to make an epic into one three hour movie/one book is in my opinion stupid. You wouldn't be able to feel the grand scale that the story is being played upon.

[FREEDOM!]

Harry Potter is anti-american. it should never have been written much less should a movie had been of it. :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: couriernew kiwi green large

[Gamil Zirak]

Originally posted by STrider(Aragorn
Harry Potter is anti-american. it should never have been written much less should a movie had been of it. :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: couriernew kiwi green large
How is Hairy Potter anti-american?

[saruman]

in my opinion the lord of the rings is the best movie of the year:o

[Carantalath]

The reason that I think Harry Potter made more money was because it was supposed to be a movie for the whole family. Don't get me wrong, I actually like the Harry Potter movie and the books a lot. But when my whole family (me, my parents, my 12 year old sister, and my 8 year old sister) went to see it, my youngest sister got scared and had to leave halfway through it. Then I let her watch LOTR with me and she loved it. She watches it with me all the time now.

The reason my 12 year old sister liked it so much (and all her friends, she said) was because it was easy to believe in wizards and stuff than in Middle Earth. I mean, the Harry Potter books are set in England and that's a real place, while Middle Earth is made up.

So, considering that, I think its because it was a family film.

[CloakedShadow]

That's very true, indeed, but the fact that Middle Earth is a made up place makes me want to play in it even MORE!...anyways. I think that if Harry Potter came out twenty some-odd years ago, than people might not make such a big deal about it. But then again, people have never really gone this in-depth on the "wizarding world" on such a low level (as in: kids can understand). LotR takes more thought to understand, which just makes us more intelligent peoples! Yay!:D

Until then,
The Cloaked Shadow

[Ancalagon]

One thing I can not understand is why there is even a comparison between Potter and Rings. Neither are in any way related and both can appeal to distinctly different audiences. I went to Potter because of my son, whereas he went to Rings because I made him:)

[Frodorocks]

There's no way to compare L.o.t.R to Harry Potter. L.o.t.R is in a league of it's own. It's like comparing an Oscar winning movie to a cartoon or a great novel to a comic book. The only reason Harry Potter made more money is because it was so hyped up.

[Aranaug]

Originally posted by Frodorocks
There's no way to compare L.o.t.R to Harry Potter. L.o.t.R is in a league of it's own. It's like comparing an Oscar winning movie to a cartoon or a great novel to a comic book. The only reason Harry Potter made more money is because it was so hyped up.

I'll agree with you on the majority of what you said Frodorocks. There is no way to compare LOTR with HP, because LOTR is in a league of its own. And I'll agree that one reason it made more money was the absurd amount of advertising. There was more advertisement for that than most films (Spider-Man included). But I must disagree with the Oscar winning movie and a cartoon comparison, and the novel comic book comparison.
Personally there are many animated films I'd rather watch than most Oscar winning films. Check out Princess Mononoke or Akira. And depending on the novel, I might rather read a comicbook. Since I read them on a regular basis I can tell you that sure, most of them aren't all that good. But there are some that are quite good. Superhero genre and others. For some great stories check out Watchmen(superhero), Ruse(mystery/detective), Sandman(horror/fantasy), Maus I&II. Maus is a telling of a Polish Jew as he goes through the holocaust, told by the man's son. Sandman and Watchmen are not current series, but are still being printed in collected form (Watchmen in one and Sandman in ten collections). Ruse is a current monthly. And Maus came out in 1986.

[Frodorocks]

I don't really agree with that either. I couldn't think up a good analogy.

[Eledhwen]

I have not bought my children the Harry Potter books; I don't want them to become fascinated with the occult. (I am also reliably informed that the books get 'darker' with each volume). Consequently, they weren't that fussed about going to see the film - there was plenty of other stuff about at the time.

I have looked at Friendsreunited.co.uk, and I haven't found Hogwarts School anywhere, so I don't agree with the argument that Harry Potter's world is like a real English place. I've lived in England most of my life, and the only broomsticks I've seen have been firmly grounded by gravity. In fact, Middle Earth, particularly The Shire, has a very English feel to it (Lower Slaughter in the Cotswolds comes to mind). I think it's the escape from reality - particularly from the consequences of Harry's misdeeds - that attracts. LotR doesn't offer that.

One last word... when Fellowship of the Ring was released, a BBC Radio presenter said "Harry Potter is so last week!"

I liked that.

[HLGStrider]

I think that the age thing has a lot to do with it. A ten year old kid on average isn't going to go to the movies alone. He is going to take his or her parents and maybe a friend. Also, kids of that age are not squeemish about watching a movie twice in a day... If a kid is asked to go to the movies by two different little friends he will go two different times...
Also it is a new thing, a fad.

I didn't like the first book... and it's the only one I've read... I mean, the writing style just didn't strike me as that great. It had an okay story, typical characters, and juvaniel humor... The movie was all right. It was more entertaining than the Princess Diaries or other things I have to watch while babysitting.

[gate7ole]

To some countries Lotr did better than HP in the boxoffice. And i'm proud that my country (Greece) was one of them.

[Eledhwen]

(sorry, no Greek font).

There, you see, I always knew Greeks were discerning (I'm married to one).

[CloakedShadow]

well, I am a huge fan of both LotR and HP...and it is possible! but I understand why HP made more...tons of people...like quite a few people have made know...refused to see it more than once (if once at all) because they think PJ screwed it up so badly! HP the movie was changed too...but HP isn't a living legend right now...Tolkien is! And the fact that it made less (in my eyes) shows that people (who thought the movie was "destroyed") had enough respect to keep the real Tolkien alive...but that is just my somewhat-biased-somewhat-humble-opinion...:rolleyes: :p

[Aranaug]

I have two things to say to those people. One: Look at what PJ did right. He did one Heck of good job. So he changed some stuff. At least (and this is part two) the guy who did Batman&Robin didn't do it.

[Popqueen62]

well some people i know didn't want to see fotr, because they thought it wouldn't match the books greatness (as they never do, but close). Also, my aunt saw it and won't let her family see it, because she's a wimp and got too scared. And finally, Harry Potter's recent series have grabbed a hold of the younger childrens minds, so their parents see it with them, and then see it a number of times, and adults and teenagers liked the books, so they see it with their friends, or alone, and they see it numerous times

[Aranaug]

Don't recall if this has been mentioned yet but I know I can think of one reason why it didn't do as well. Think about it, Harry Potter is less than two and a half hours long (I believe) and then you have a movie like LOTR which is three hours long. Its a lot harder for teens (and adults) to sit still for three hours or as they'd put it, "Three whole Hours!!!!!" as they cross their legs as they wait for the trailers to stop and the movie to start.
If only people had longer attention spans (overall, since obviously some of us do have long attention spans).

[Popqueen62]

I got really upset when it ended, i totally wanted to watch more! But My friend was like "This movie is way too long and way too predictable" which, of course, it wasn't.

[Anamatar IV]

I was having a discussion with my sister after dinner just now. We are both HP fantics and im a LOTR. So we were talking about how freaky voldemort was. My sister said someting along the lines of in the last 3 books voldemorts spirit takes form. And I was in the middle of saying that is gonna be so freaky... and then it struck me. That is the exact same thing as in LOTR. Sauron, the dark lord, gets overthrown and takes spirit form. Voldemort, the dark lord, gets overthrown and takes spirit form. They both were very powerful wizards. They both took spirit form when they were defeated. They both took/would take physical form just as they start their campaigne for world domination. Comments?

[Phenix]

You're abslolutley right

[Naurwen]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Ruby Tussle
Harry Potter made more moola because kids young and old and maybe even some adults liked it.

LOTR on tthe other hand was meant more everyone 13 and up.

There was only one part that was yuck, When the Urak-hai shot boromir with the arrows, and Aragorn cut of his head!!! [/QUOTE
Actually I was nine, nearly ten when I read.
I post this purly for the sake of argument.

[Popqueen62]

i think that harry potter does attract more of a younger crowd than lotr. before you get mad, or disagree, think of it this way, in school if your around grade 4-10 your more likely to read hp than lotr because nobody has the patience. hp may seem longer, but it's double spaced and bigger print than lotr, also it is easier to follow, and it has less confusing names. it was also very well written, in my opinion. but i like lotr because it challenges my reading skills, and i like hp cuz if i want an easy read, i can just pick it up. so each has it's good and bad sides.

[Anamatar IV]

oh HP is the greatest series in the last 30 years. But lotr came 1st so its the greatest in the century :p Harry potter has amazing ideas and concepts and is very great. If you havent read it read it NOW. Even if youre in the guild of Ost In Edhil! Its a great read. Just a bit on the heavy side...

[Carantalath]

Like I said earlier in this thread (I think:confused: )) my youngest sister is eight years old and she wasn't scared of the Fellowship of the Ring. She was scared, though, of the Harry Potter movie. I think that shows that there may have been a few exceptions to that thing that the Fellowship of the Ring was made for an older age group. I think that it just depends on what the person has seen before and how brave, in a sense, they are.

[Anamatar IV]

ya know only 1 thing in LOTR scared me. That was the time when the cave troll popped out of knowhere. But in harry potter I was scared (entirely and completely) during the entire time where Voldemort was there (the one towards the end). I was never scared with the chess board, the pig thing, the owls, the 1st voldemort, or anything but the last scene with the quill (i really cant remember his name) and the face.

[HLGStrider]

The first voldemort gave me a shock when I watched it... just that weird capey thingy... that was about it.

[Carantalath]

I've read the Harry Potter books so I knew what was coming but both Voldemorts scared me right when they came on screen.

[Lembas]

i feel as with many people potter appealed to a more wider audience especially children

[Princess Vi]

I read LotR like 5 monthes before HP, and I noticed many copies. but Istill love HP! and I read LotR for the first imte at theage of 13, and understood it fine, thank you very much :D

[*Lady Arwen*]

I like Hp too. I really can't decide which I like more...
Well, I like them both

[*Lady Arwen*]

The LOTR movie was PG-13!
The little children couldn't see it! If it was PG I thing that there would be more people!

[Celebthôl]

i dont care if either this has been ssaid already or if no one likes it but
HARRY POTTER SUX MORE THAN THAT CARTOON VERSION OF LOTR SO THEY HAD TO CHARGE EXTORTIONATE PRICES TO MAKE UP FOR LOST MONEY!!! thats wot i think if you don't like it bite me!!!

Celeb

[Princess Vi]

I defenitely like LotR the best, and Chronicles of Narnia and HP tie for 2nd fav. hey, was Tolkien British? I wanna know cuz if he was, then all three of my fave series are British and I think that is so cool!

[Celebthôl]

Its a damned travasty (Harry Potter) i dont care if the subject has changed i hate it i hate it i hate it sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooobadly!

Celeb

[Princess Vi]

why do you hate it? :confused: please explain

[*Lady Arwen*]

Yeah, why do you hate it?:confused: :confused:

[Celebthôl]

I hate the idea of some little nipper who every1 likes (excpet me) running round beating the bad guy who is like almighty, and have you seen the goblins in the film i mean wot the hell are they old men who live in librarys it just gets right up my a$$, plus the kid they chose to play H/P is like the most annoying chump i have ever seen in my life Grrr! Now im wound up thanx a lot GRRR!!! It's also c****ed on my image of all the things like Goblins and wizards except that almighty wizard ermmm Hogwart or wotever, ps did u know that that Richard Harris who plays Hogwart died on like friday or somthing

an annoyed Celeb

[*Lady Arwen*]

What is so wrong with HP?

HP2 and LOTR2 are going to come out close to each other, lets see if LOTR2 beats HP2

[Celebthôl]

erm LOTR2 will duh!
Have u seen the most recent trailer for it it looks sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooo amazing i cant stop watching it if you want to know were to down load it from send either me or quickbeam a pm asking where! you will want to see it

Celeb

[Princess Vi]

yes I do know Richard Harris died

~*~a mad Princess

[Celebthôl]

im sorry i don't get a mad princess outta thatlittle pic thing ~*~

[*Lady Arwen*]

I've seen the LOTR2 second movie trailer and I agree it sooooo good. I can't wait for it to come out!
Sorry I went off topic...

[Princess Vi]

it has to do with my RPG character. I'm an Elvish Princess, and not just for RPG. on the SCC boards I'm Princess Elfie :D I just now decided to start doing that

~*~Princess Vi

[*Lady Arwen*]

Originally posted by Celebthôl
ps did u know that that Richard Harris who plays Hogwart died on like friday or somthing

an annoyed Celeb

he was the guy who played dumbledore, right?

[Thomas Baggins]

Hey I thought of something it might not be a book but it shure rips me off, have any of you ever played the Dungeons Dragons game I mean that draws on Tolkien and LOTR so much it's not even funny. Well I can't say anything about HP cause I've never read the books.
An Annoyed Tolkien Fan :mad: :( :mad:

[Lonna]

http://www.lonnawilliams.com/image 2121.gif

Hey, all you literary critics out there,

How would you compare "The Lord of the Rings" to the "Harry Potter" books?

Frankly, I think that "The Lord of the Rings" is far superior in many ways:

--it's real literature (Tolkien was an Oxford Professor, after all)
--it's an epic story (Tolkien read much of the great literature of our world and took time in telling his own tale),
--it has a humble, reluctant, unexpected hero in Frodo (for even a small person can change the course of the world)
--you don't have to be born special to be important (Samwise, for example)
--the "good guys" show noble character traits (such as faithfulness and self sacrifice, not the petty need for revenge, name-calling, or hatred)
--Middle Earth is beautifully described and has a rich history and various fascinating cultures (Tolkien did his research)
--it has poetry
--it has its own Elvish language (which Tolkien, master of languages, invented)
--the violence exists when necessary and to show how brutal evil really is
--it's written more for young adults and adults than children (therefore, the violence is more acceptable)
--it doesn't compromise with evil. You can't study too deeply the art of the Enemy, for good or ill. You must throw the Ring into the fire from which it was made--not wear it or use it

Well, I'd like to know your opinions. I wrote an essay comparing the two (I spent months on it when I broke my ankle and couldn't do much more than read and watch videos). You can read it on my website at http://www.lonnawilliams.com
:cool:

[HLGStrider]

Well, I don't find Harry Potter to be particularly well written (I've read one and two). In general they have an okay story but the characters strike you as shallow stereotypes or just shallow. The bad guy is too typical, the guy who killed the parents with a personal vendetta, and the characters aren't really that bright. The story is okay,however.

[*Lady Arwen*]

Ok, so when I first read Harry Potter I loved it. Then I decided to read LOTR and noe I also find HP not well writen. Tolkien is so much better a writing then J K Rowling.

[Eledhwen]

I have discouraged my children (age 6, 8, and 10) from reading HP until they are older, so I haven't read it either. If the reviews are correct, the Harry Potter series gets darker and darker with each book, so after (seven?) books I would expect children to have been led, by degrees, into a very dark story indeed. I'd rather they stuck to Narnia for now, but if the time comes that I am under pressure to relent (their cousin is into HP wholesale!), then I shall read the books myself before deciding whether to let Rowling's imagination loose on my kids.

I appreciate the opinions of TTF members posted here, and will take them on board when making my decision. I am heartened to note that Tolkien is more favourably viewed. The poll is interesting, but I suspect that on a Tolkien site it might be somewhat biased!

[HLGStrider]

Definately a little biased... like the one we had on JRRT verses R. Jordan, I was with Tolkien all the way, but it did seem a little... lopsided, about ten to one in Tolkien's favor. There are probably literary/fantasy sites that the polls would be more fair on...

Clears throat... first off...

I didn't feel like reading Harry Potter when it first started to make a stir. "Great, another book about a kid with magic powers doing ridiculous stunts..."
I babysit for kids who like it, however, so I watched the movie with them. I wasn't worried about morality because I'm old enough to run it through my carefully prepared filter of right wrong and just plain stupid :rolleyes:. I did have some doubts as to whether the eight-year-old should be watching this, but she'd already seen it in theaters... It was creepy, but I think it was okay for kids over eleven.

Then I was loaned the book after talking over Tolkien with a very intelligent ten or so year old I babysit. Read it... ok... Not really well written, a little bit typical, stereotype characters, kids running wild... Worth the twelve hours it took to finish, I suppose... it's summer and I have nothing better to do.

I read the Chamber of Secrets a week ago, loaned by the same family, and Prisoner of Azkaban last night... same family again...

CoS, better than the first but nothing special. Ok story, but nothing in it.

PoA, depressing, dark, and boarder line on the over doing the magic stuff... confusing near the end, and again not very well written... worse than the other two.

So... so far that is my take.

[Aragorns_girl00]

LOTR IS MUCH BETTER!!!!!!! I used to read and enjoy HP. but i have just lost much interest for it.

[Valdarmyr]

Robbie Coltrane's Hagrid=John Rhys Davies' Gimli, son of Gloin?

[Maeglin]

I am going to bash J.K. Rowling for a minute here by saying that (while I do enjoy reading her Harry Potter books) they are completely unoriginal, almost everything was taken from Tolkien:

1. I will start with the ringwraiths/nazgul/black riders(take your pick). "I had an ugly dream, which I can't remember. I went to pieces. I don't know what came over me." "I do," said Strider. "The Black Breath." This is almost exactly what the Dementors do in the Harry Potter books, whenever they come near someone the person feels a great fear and cold and have a bad dream (usually a bad memory) and can pass out. Thats just like the Black Breath, the only difference is the Black Breath is more deadly. Another similarity is the Black Cloaks obviously, and the evil. And one more similarity is the Black hoods, no one can see underneath them, and, just like the Nazgul(the chief nazgul at least) they have no head underneath the hood.

2. Spiders. In 2 of the Harry Potter stories spiders come up, and they are always big, ugly, mean, and evil, and try to kill Harry. Likewise, in Tolkien's stories, spiders are giant and evil and try to kill the hero(s).

3. The whole story in general. A good wizard vs. a bad wizard, always the same one, and a traitor in each book that goes to help the bad wizard. Does Gandalf vs. Sauron ring a bell? Gandalf and Sauron are not exactly wizards I know, but they are viewed as wizards by people reading the story for the first time, and then you have Saruman as the traitor to go against and stack the odds against the good guy.

4. Ents. In Ms. Rowling's works she has a tree that is alive and has the ability to attack people and pound people and what not, similar to the ents who can walk and talk and beat people down, or the old man willow and the trees in the old forest. This one may just be a coincidence though.

Anyway the list could go on and on but I'll stop there. It is clear to me now that J.K. Rowling's works were completely unoriginal. Now I understand that many would just say that "she was inspired" by Tolkien, but for some reason I doubt it, does this annoy anyone else?:rolleyes:

[Wulf of Dunland]

When I saw Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets in the cinemas, I was "shocked"...

They had gotten Shelob in the movie and the LotR (movie-)fans didnt get to see her. (only difference was that the spider in HP was a he)

[Aglarthalion]

After reading all four Potter books I must say I somewhat dislike the series, mainly due to the fact that many elements of Rowling's works are both direct and indirectly taken from those of Tolkien. I would list many, many examples, but I'm rather tired right now. ;D

[L.O.T.R. Gal]

I love the Lord of the Rings and I love Harry Potter. One reason I enjoy them both so much is the similarities. But I do not think J.K. Rowling copied at all. In almost every magical story ever written there are good wizards and bad wizards. Since so many people are afraid of spiders(the bigger the more scary), they have been used in stories and movies for a long time. That doesn't have anything to do with the Lord of the Rings. As for the nazgul/demantors, Tolkien was not the first righter to use a black cloaked figure to represent evil and fear, or even one that seemed to "breath death". This was used before his books even came out....the grim reaper is a lot like that actually. I don't think any creative work is copied from another. What makes it "creative" is that so many writers can take the same magical elements that have been in folk lore for as long as mankind can remember and make it their own. That's just my opinion.

[Valdarmyr]

I just saw HP and the COS. In a fight, who do you think would win?!

Grima Wormtongue vs. Professor Snape

Treebeard vs. Whomping Willow tree

Gimli Son of Gloin vs. Hagrid the Giant


I say--Gimli and Treebeard win. But Snape might be a bit too much for Grima.

[33Peregrin]

Ok. Harry Potter. I hate myself for this, but before I read LOTR I read HP five times. It was the first fantasy I enjoyed. When my dad told me we would see LOTR the next day I didn't know anything about it. I asked him if maybe see HP instead. Don't hate me. I am, you don't know how much, soooooooooooooo happy that I saw LOTR. I had heard of Tolkien and had read most of the Hobbit. Thank everything (and PJ) for that movie. Well, reading LOTR I found a lot of similarities. Some day I will have to come back with my long list of them. Just wait. I know Rowling has read LOTR before and she definetely got a lot of inspiration from it. It so copies it. I kind of think Harry Potter is pathetic compared to it now. The most important things that stuck out in my mind were the wizards, D and Gandalf. Giant spiders. Dobby Gollum. Wormtongue Wormtail. DEMENTORS. DARK LORD. Also, Harry lets Wormtail live and he is in Harry's debt. It is exactly like Frodo and Saruman. The whole thing copies LOTR. The more HP is compared to LOTR, the more I ha- dislike it.
Pippin Took (Ms.):mad: :p :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

[Lossen Vana]

I was looking over the Harry Potter LOTRs poll and began to laugh about my experence with how Icame to like LOTR. I was th maor Harry Potter fan. OMG major (not that I had crush on any of hem) just thought the books were gods creation to the world. So I went out and saw Harry Potter 1 like 6 times cuse I was obsessed with it. One day my dad is like do you want to see LOTR? I'm like no it is stupid and will never be as good as Potter (Which I'm still kicking myself for not seeing the first one on the big screen and saying that). Well as time went on we bought the DVD (the 2 disk set) and my dad is like you should watch this you will like it. I'm still like naw it will be stupid. So he puts it on, and from the opening sean to the end I was totaly into it. I got the books, (I'm curently learning elfish), have all the figuriens. And I'm still kicking myself for missing out on it for such along time. As you can see now by the fact that I'm on this site, I have no hatered to it. And now that I have read the books, I'm like Harry Potter is really lame. Most of her stuff sounds like J.R.R. Tolkiens writeings anyway LOL. Wow the things we look back on and laugh about!

[*Lady Arwen*]

What happened to me was exactly like 333Peregrin, I read HP first. "HP is the best book, I loved it!", sure now I think "HP is such a simple book! The wizards don't even have their own laugage! LOTR is soooooo much beter!" I guess I still like HP( I just want to read all the books) but my intrest has dropped a long way, and intrest for LOTR went way up. :D

[MrFrodo]

Nice to here...from you ......have fun on the forum


I fell in love with LOTR after seeing the first movie... reading the Silmarillion at the moment

hope to see more post from you

[faila]

their hasnt been an fantasy novel since tolkien that wast a copy of tolkiens work, or an rpg video game for that matter...........

[33Peregrin]

Yeah, I agree with Faila. Every fantasy that have read since LoTR has a lot of "similarities" with LOTR. :(

[smeagol444]

well i am a HUGE fan of both--and yes i can see where rowling gets some of her ideas but she has created an absolutely incredible world you can't deny that. It's very complex and a totally different environment to middle earth . I think she's a very wise women, and very witty too.

[Lossen Vana]

Hope to see more of you too...

Just finished The Hobbit and reading the Felowship and studing...Tolkins guide to the Languages of Middle Earth.

[smeagol444]

harry potter is not lame.

[smeagol444]

you annoy me

[smeagol444]

Did you know that Jk Rowling actually created dementors from her own experiences with depression? I want you to think about that.

[Lossen Vana]

I annoy alot of people....:D

[33Peregrin]

I agree Rowling does have a great amount of imagination and wit... but I still hold to everything I said before. She.... (I hate saying she completely copied it) I don't think I'll finish this sentence. But she did.

My new English teacher continously compares Gollum and Dobby. "They must be related". That does not, somehow, help me think more highly of HP.

[33Peregrin]

I read HP five or six times... I liked it a lot and thought it was really good. I wanted to see the movie really bad, but I wasn't obsessed. The day before Christmas Eve my dad told me we might go see LOTR the next day. I was excited, but i asked my dad if LOTR was sold out then could we go see HP? He said maybe. I saw it the next day. I was ringstruck. I read LOTR over and over again. I totally think that Rowling must have been "inspired" by LOTR. There are so many "similarities". I don't like Harry Potter very much now....I tried to reread the books but cannot get into them anymore. LOTR is far better. HP is nothing compared to it.

[Lossen Vana]

I agree.

[???]

I like both. But LOTR is much, much better.

[Wonko The Sane]

Those three things you listed Beorn are common in MANY books and don't necessarily mean a parallel between the two novels.

I LIKE Harry Potter!
It brings back the bedtime story...like Chronicles of Narnia and stuff.

My dad used to read to me a lot.

I wish I wasn't too old for that anymore. :(

[Arrhia El.]

All authors get inspiration from each other. If you read 'Beowulf' its easy to accuse Tolkien of copying some areas of it, but LotR is actually a totally different story. I think its the same with LotR and HP, some bits are similar but HP is also a story in its own right as its atmosphere and storyline are completely different.

[smeagol444]

i agree. every author has inspiration--and i also agree that they have many similarities but harry it still unique i think ....It's not fair to tear hp to shreds cos it has so many qualities that other books dont have. I love lotr more now, but I could never stop respecting hp as one of the greatest CHILDREN'S series ever written


oh chronicles of narnia is smashing!! you legend. it's the best bed time story (well one of them)

[Elf Goddess]

It's So-So, but LOTR is A LOT better. A LOT BETTER!:D

[Thomas Baggins]

Not to be mean but............................................... .......................... LOTR is definitly way over HP!!!!!!!!

[Wonko The Sane]

Depends on who you are.
As that is your opinion you certainly can't claim it to be definitively true as an opinion, by definition is not fact.

Some people, especially younger people, find Harry Potter more enoyable than LotR because it's much lighter and less complicated.

Though my brother is getting older and learning to appreciate LotR more he still loves Harry Potter first and foremost. It appeals to the young 'uns I think more than LotR does in most cases.

[Thomas Baggins]

ok ok so I forgot to state that, that was my opinion.
that's my opinion. By the way,I find what you say to be very true, most younger kids I know like HP way better. As they get older though perhaps they'll become wiser too, you know liking LOTR best and all that.:D ;) :p

[Galadrielgirl]

Who do you think is better Harry Potter or LOTR?:confused:
I like both but what do you think?

[legolasismine]

That was really very hard for me,cause I like both books alot even go to both websites(except im a moderator on Hp site)but I pick LOTR,cause its more my speed the movie is better and so are the books,and I read alot of books,but I would put Tolkien and Rowling right up there with my fave's but I favor Tolkien over Rowling though I don't really know why I just do,and I have never been to see hp in theater but I have seen it on dvd,but anywho all in all Tolkien is much better!:D

[YayGollum]

Ick. The evil hp has hypnotized way too many people! LOTR is nowhere near as evil as that evil thing! Anyone who reads one of the books can't help watching the movies and reading the other bookses! Anyone who watches the movies has to read the bookses! Way too scary! *hides*

[legolasismine]

ooookkkkaaaaayyy....lol

[Nefmariel]

LOTR definatly!

[33Peregrin]

Before LOTR, I liked Harry Potter a lot, but not half as much as I now like LOTR. I read all of the HP books five times, then my dad told me he was going to take me to see LOTR. I even asked him if perhaps we could see HP instead, but fortuneately we saw LOTR. I think LOTR is much much better than HP, it is just so much better. I was never obsessed with HP, I never liked it at all compared to LOTR.

[*Lady Arwen*]

1- There is no way HP would win in a LOTR forum

2- LOTR is beter

3- After LOTR, in the best book list, comes His Dark Materials:p

[Celebthôl]

um LOTR is like totally way better, that smelly rotter!!! :mad: :mad:

[Saucy]

sorry to all harry potter fans but LOTR'S ROX HARRY POTTER SUCKS...NAH NAH
*takes a bow* thank u for ur time! this has been a public service announcement from concered chidren advitisers!

[reem]

HP doesn't suck!! it's as good a book as any!!...LOTR is just fuller and more intricate...and has more characters and more coplex plots and blah blah blah...but still HP is pretty good. the thing is one shouldn't compare the apprentice to the master! Though I have to admit, the HP movies sucked bigtime. very boring. but the books are great....at least Rowling never over-describes landscapes and stuff!!
reem

[munchkin]

That was NO BRAINER!!!!LOTR all the way! I hate Gary Pothead!!!!!!

[Elendil3119]

Originally posted by YayGollum
Ick. The evil hp has hypnotized way too many people! LOTR is nowhere near as evil as that evil thing! Anyone who reads one of the books can't help watching the movies and reading the other bookses! Anyone who watches the movies has to read the bookses! Way too scary! *hides*
Go Yay! I agree competely. :D

[FoolOfATook]

I really don't understand the depths of the proffessed dislike for Ms. Rowling's delightful series, nor why people feel the need to constantly compare them to LOTR. If I see one more of these ridiculous "LOTR vs. Harry Potter" threads, I'll...I'll...I'll post another message similar to this one, but perhaps longer and a bit more irritated.

That'll learn them. ;)

[Aulë]

Harry Potter isn't a bad book, but it pales in comparison with Lord of the Rings. Rowling just isn't in the same league as Tolkien. The depth that Tolkien goes in to, and the detail he puts into his descriptions is just amazing.

[FoolOfATook]

Harry Potter isn't a bad book, but it pales in comparison with Lord of the Rings

But why is there a need to compare it to LOTR? I understand that some degree of comparison is probably inevitable, but I don't believe there is the need to consistently do it, and to judge Harry Potter solely on this comparison.

[Ledreanne313]

I HATE HARRY POTTER!!! I HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE HIM AND ALL HIS FUIT CAKE FRIENDS. Sorry to all the HP lovers out there, this is just my *very strong* opionon

Anne:p

[FoolOfATook]

I HATE HARRY POTTER!!! I HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE HIM AND ALL HIS FUIT CAKE FRIENDS

Come on, was there anything in this rant that couldn't have been expressed in one, civil sentence? Not to pick on you specifically, but I really don't see how this lends itself to civilized literary debate.

[Lantarion]

I think reem put it well.
The Harry Potter series is very entertaining and interesting IMO. It has a strain of humour and light-heartedness that Tolkien has not expressed in the LotR, and rarely expresses (although he certainly does so in Farmer Giles of Ham and Smith of Wootton Major); its story is more relatable than that of the LotR because it happens in the 'modern day' world to quite ordinary people to whom extraordinary things happen. It is skillfully written, and personally I could never badmouth it and be serious.
But the fact of the matter is that as a work of literature it, and few other fantastical literary works, comes only relatively close. The LotR is based on an intricate, immense, complicated and almost inconcievable reality. It is not a seperate world, but it is a seperate place. Mythical things have happened in its past, and their impact is plainly seen throughout the 'future' that we are shown in the LotR. Really, the antics of Harry Potter and his wand-wielding wizard-chums, though impressive, relatively interesting and entertaining, are mere child's tricks when contrasted with Manwë's, Olórin's and the (supposedly) last Valarauko's energies and powers; Tolkien concentrates not on the actual product of Magic but on the passive, potential power that it can assume: and that power is inconcievably immense.

FoolOfATook also makes a valid point: why should we compare and contrast so fanatically? SHouldn't we just admire and enjoy the books as they are on their own, or at least experience them that way?

[Beleg]

Hmm, I am an Avid HP Romantic, (point to his avatar) But on the whole if i were to be given the option of reading OOF and HOME series, i would choose Home, and that basically sums it for me..
Oh and i am lover of Harry Potter fanfiction too and i would love to hear from anyone who is also deeply interested in HP fanfiction.

[Lifeling]

I'd like to just proudly say, that I've never seen a harry potter movie in full! And I've never read the books! Yay for me!
(I hate harry pothead);)

[Ol'gaffer]

Well...Rowling has said that she got major inspirations from Tolkien, but you can't say that everything originates back to tolkien. I mean, Tolkien got inspirations from Kalevala and the Finnish language but we're not saying that Tolkien copied them although there are similarities (väinämöinen=Gandalf)

And to say that Potter is a disgrace to Tolkien is rubbish since it is a book series made for younger readers which surprisingly even adults like since they cherish things like friendship and fighting for good. And they're well written also, Tolkien may be too hard or "boring" for some and so they have either Harry Potter or Dragonlance type books.

[Idril]

I enjoyed reading the Harry Potter books - I couldn't understand what all the fuss over the books was about so I read the first one and then had to read the others. They're quite entertaining with a good storyline.

LotRs is in a different league - it is an indepth literary piece of work and only a small part of a huge project.

The comparison is unfortunate , but not really such a big deal. I think it has only happened because the respective movie versions have been released within days of each other worldwide.

Where's the HP forum - my son may be interested.

[Samwise_hero]

Harry Potter and the Lord of the Rings do have some things in common, they're both about fantasy, they tease your imagination and they're both written by awesome authors. at the moment i'm at school typing on the next and reading harry potter. weird i know, i should be doing school work. i only icked up the harry potter books about a month ago after i saw the second movie. i love 'em! They're awesome but nothing will ever fill the spot that Tolkien has filled in my life. his writings are amazing. gotta run. lunch time.

[Lantarion]

To elaborate on Olgee's point: Tolkien did actually 'copy' a certain figure in the Kalevala (called Kullervo) to the extent that Túrin Turambar's life and fate are almost identical to his.
It's a slightly Oedipal tale. Now I haven't actually read that part of the Kalevala (althuogh I'll read it from cover to cover in the summer holidays) but I know for sure that Kullervo's life is very unlucky, and he has to fight to live through all the bad things that try him. He also marries his sister, without knowing who she is, just like Túrin.
As for the Väinämöinen = Gandalf idea, you may be right in the sense that they are both 'wizards' in an unconventional way (Väinämöinen sings and thus unleashes his powers over things; Gandalf is a Maia with little real cliché-magical powers), but in the end Väinämöinen is the most powerful human in the world, and also the first; whereas Gandalf was just sent by the gods to free a nation.

[33Peregrin]

I think both Harry Potter and LOTR are very good books, but LOTR is much better.

I was at first very disappointed in all of the similarities I found in HP to LOTR.... but I think if you have read LOTR, you can't help but going back to it when you write.

I read all of the HP books five times before I ever even really thought about LOTR. Then I found LOTR, and read it four times.

That was when I began to be a little disgusted with HP....whenever I heard it mentioned.

Now my friends have gotten me very excited about the fifth book. I decided to read the books again, and am now. It is the first time I have read it since LOTR.....

It is still good, no matter the similarities.

[spirit]

there is a 5th book comming out on 21 June! Is anyone going to read it? Its called HP & the order of the pheonix (or something like that...anyone knows what happens?)

[smeagol444]

Yes! I can't wait. I'm so excited!!! That's the good thing about hp, there are more books to look forward to. I'm getting old and weary from defending hp on this page, so it's good to know someone else doesn't think its a disgrace to literature.\
And yes I have heard snippets from various sources on what it's about, but not really. apparently Dumbledore sits harry down and tells him something "he should have told him 5 years ago.." I'm personally fond of the idea of Ron and Hermione getting together..they are 15 now ...

[spirit]

The books are childish but intresting. I prefer them more than the movie but i prefer the LOTR movies more than the books!

[smeagol444]

Childish yess..but i think that adds to the book in a way. You dont have to think too much when you're reading, just get sucked right in and can't put it down. Also it was initially intended for children so you're right. Bloody brilliant though.They made alternative covers for some of the books, so adults wouldn't be ashamed reading them in public.ITs like a blank cover. I find that quite amusing.

[Ol'gaffer]

PLEASE!! PUT SPOILER WARNINGS!!

I'm a big fan of the Potter books and I utterly hate it when people spill the beans (no matter how small) on the new book!

[smeagol444]

Sorry! I didn't mean to be careless~but i'm most suprised you haven't heard that one yet, because i've read it everywhere! If it's any consolation, it probably isn't true.

[spirit]

I know. Well i get the bus every morning, and there is a man about 40 years old. He was reading HP and the goblet of fire. I was pleased and kind of amused. And it also had the proper cover on it. Brave chap...lol. DO you know how big the 5th book is going to be? Some say its more than the 4th book

[smeagol444]

well i've heard it's like a 3rd longer than the fourth, so i'll have to by a music stand to read it.
'

[Ol'gaffer]

The confirmed lenght is 895 pages.

[spirit]

Ol'gaffer : i thought you dint know about the book? HOw did you know this?

[Ol'gaffer]

I don't know anything about the plot, but I heard about the lenght in the news. Wiseguy...:rolleyes:

[spirit]

I dont know about the plot either...and i dont wany to know. i want to reat the book without being told the plot thank you very much!!!!:rolleyes:

[Thomas Baggins]

EEKKKK:eek: :eek: :eek: What's happening? There's nobody in here who doesn't like HP!!! Nooooooooooo this can't be true!?!



I can not stand Harry Potter, and don't anyone try and list it's good qualities! I wont persuaded! I have no legitimate complaint, I'm just prejudist.

[Idril]

I've pre-ordered my copy - the problem will be, who gets to read it first - my 9yr old or me:)

I don't see the problem with them except maybe over-publicity. I've enjoyed the previous 4 books and keen to see where the story goes.

[laurelindorenan]

Hey HP rocks man! (the book, not the sauce...) Don't knock it till youve tried it. If you have, well, try it again.
I cant wait for the next book. Seriously, my life is so boring the book coming out will be the high point of my year... Anyway, well done to anyone over 20 to be reading HP in public. It should be on TV.

[Vixen Evenstar]

Thats what i have to say too. Don't knock it till you try it. Or you end up looking stupid...like me.:rolleyes: Who went around knocking it till i finally read up. you CAN'T tell me it's not well written. But as for the claim that JK Rowling copied, hmp, i dunno, everyone is influnced by Tolkien, i myself write fantasy, and find my stories are always the slightest bit influenced that way. But thats good. Tolkien inspires. But Rowlings plot has NOTHING to do with Tolkien. And her characters where not stolen either. Who can say, honestly, having actually READ the books, that Harry is anything REMOTLY like Frodo? You can't. I don't see what the big deal is, with all these wackos that rip HP to peices without bothering to think WHY...:rolleyes:

[spirit]

Originally posted by Idril
I've pre-ordered my copy - the problem will be, who gets to read it first - my 9yr old or me:)


well you have competition with only 1 kid! i have competition with 4 others brothers!! God!! MUST WIN WAR...!!!

[Arrhia El.]

I enjoyed HP, but it is not well written because the characters have little depth (except maybe Hagrid) and it is hard to imagine Hogwarts because it is not really descibed well, if at all. The plot, however, is brilliant and in terms of enjoyment makes up for the rather rubbishy writing.

[Aiwendil2]

I enjoyed HP, but it is not well written because the characters have little depth (except maybe Hagrid) and it is hard to imagine Hogwarts because it is not really descibed well, if at all. The plot, however, is brilliant and in terms of enjoyment makes up for the rather rubbishy writing.

Interesting. I had almost exactly the opposite reaction. I thought the plots were rather pedestrian, as it were - not terribly innovative and not impeccably constructed (with the possible exception of the first book). But the writing is in general quite good; the style and tone are perfectly suited to the kind of novels they are. Also, the characters, while perhaps not given detailed character studies, are realistic and act believably.

[Luthien Tunivel]

Oooh, I just HATE that copy-cat rowling. She copied almost every single character from LOTR!!!! I have a whole list somewhere of characters in LOTR and their hp copy. *stabs harry potter book*

[Idril]

Originally posted by Luthien Tunivel
I have a whole list somewhere of characters in LOTR and their hp copy.
Is this a list you compiled or that someone else has done and you're just following the bandwagon in HP bashing.

Tolkien himself drew inspiration from various European myths, legends/history and languages to create his Middle Earth - do I hear you calling him a copycat too?

Spirit - 4 brothers - wow - granted Amazon UK are taking the pre-orders at half price - maybe you can get 2 copies instead;).

[Gandalf White]

Before I can post here I'll have to read them myself. This could be hard to do with an unbiased mind, though. I have been constantly barraged with people telling me it's evil. Would my parents have a fit if I read (or wanted to read) the books? Could be very likely.

However, I don't think just because my parents, pastor, etc. are telling me they are evil makes them so. I need to judge it based on the books themselves, not what is written about them. I suggest others try the same.

[spirit]

Originally posted by Idril
Spirit - 4 brothers - wow - granted Amazon UK are taking the pre-orders at half price - maybe you can get 2 copies instead;). [/B]

well actually one brother! But our familly is all weird! i live with my aunt and another on my cousin does too! sha has a 2 sons! we all like reading the HP books! so yea...we could do that! i am going to be the first one to read the books as i started the little HP fan club at home! lol

[Beleg]

Oooh, I just HATE that copy-cat rowling. She copied almost every single character from LOTR!!!! I have a whole list somewhere of characters in LOTR and their hp copy. *stabs harry potter book*

Mind telling us who was the character Rowling copied as Harry, and Ron, and Hermione...and who was the Seducer that in HP is called Fleur Delacour, and a Severus Snape is so Tolkien style?

[Samwise_hero]

There are some characters with similar qualities in both movies like Ron with his loyalty to Harry and Sam with his loyalty to Frodo. but just think in a lot of books the hero doesn't make it to the end unless there's someone there to aid them and help them continue. it's just basically friendship. it doesn't mean it's copied.

[spirit]

they are SIMILAR! not the SAME!!!
not everything can be totally unique!

[Beleg]

There are some characters with similar qualities in both movies like Ron with his loyalty to Harry and Sam with his loyalty to Frodo.

With all due respect, more then once it has been shown that Ron IS jelaous of Harry, he quarrel's with him and forsakes him. He is nothing like Sam, who is the best servant a master can dream off.

[Samwise_hero]

Similar in some aspects, different in others.

[Helcaraxë]

I agree that it is to an extent an unfair comparison. LotR is infinately deeper, more complex, and more thought-provoking than HP (or any any other book I have read). However, I think that HP is different and deserves some credit, even if it did borrow heavily from LotR and is really more children's tales than a true literary masterpiece.;)

[Wonko The Sane]

THEY ARE NOT THE SAME!!!!!

[Helcaraxë]

um..........correct me if I'm wrong Wonko, but isn't that what I just said?

[Wonko The Sane]

Yes...It is.

But I just had to say it again...because this topic frustrates me.

(And you might consider PMing Webmaster and asking him to change your user name to Morgoth's Bane....just because...you know.)

[Helcaraxë]

(And you might consider PMing Webmaster and asking him to change your user name to Morgoth's Bane....just because...you know.) [/B][/QUOTE]

No...I don't know. And what's PMing?

[33Peregrin]

When I am reading HP, I get so frustrated sometimes with the simalarities. How I get through HP is by pretending that LOTR is a book a great book, you know, and HP people could read it. Wait.... that's not good all of a sudden, really saying it........

[BlackCaptain]

Morgoth''sBane... PMing is a tool used call private messaging. You can send specific members a private message. You might want to change the number of apostrophies in-between Morgoth and sBane;)

[Captain]

Does anyone else think dementors are very much like Nazgul? There's the Dementor's kiss and the Black Breath, they both wear black cloaks so their figure is invisible(although Nazgul have no figure).
Plus, there's the issue of Wormtail and Wormtounge. They are both unfaithful traiters.

[Captain]

Invisibility cloak = One Ring