Definitely Lord of the Rings, i mean the movie is simply awesome, HP is just kiddie stuff that my my kid brother can think up but the concept of LOTR is just too dope!
its got the whole range of human emotion and life, its has determination, honour, sacrifice and a whole lot more.
much love for LOTR

No controversy! it's THE LORD OF THE RING!!!
Bravo, Peter JACKSON.

Okay here are my questions
if you know the answers simply give them. If u don't please don't make matters worse.
QUESTIONS
Note: I don't know some of the answers

LORD OF THE RINGS
1. How many people make up the fellowship of the ring?
2. How did Bilbo get the ring?
3. Why was Sam told to follow Frodo?
4. Whatz the name of the other two Hobbits that joined them (sam and frodo)
5. What is the name of the man that Struck SAURON with his sword?
6. Why did Saruman betray Gandalf?
7. Why are the black riders pursuing frodo?
8. What is the name of the Girl that saved frodo from the riders?
9. What is the name of the Beast that fought with Gandalf before he fell?
10. What is Difference between Gondor and Mordor?

1. nine, versus the nine ringwraiths.
2. He stole it from Gollum in the Goblins' cave, this was told in the hobbit. It was my favourote part of the book, save the battle fof the races at the end
3. He eavesdropped on secret matters, and so got himself caught up. However I seem to recall him begging to be allowed to go in the movie? someone pls help
4. merry and pippin (peregrine took and merriam brandybuck)
5. elendil, I think. The heir to anduril. However my mind is muddled up since I dont remember elendil being the guy that was killed in the rivers when the ring fell off his finger,
6. He didn't betray gandalf. He had sold his soul to sauron a long time ago, and had always regarded gandalf as an enemy since then. No trust to betray between the two. Note that saruman and gandalf never fought in the book.
7. The black riders and their Nazgul are the witch-king and the other eight mortal men that were given rings of power, once great kings. They have become sauron's hatchet men, and they aim to recover the one ring for sauron, as it is the source of his power. You probably know about the rings of power:

three rings for the elvenkings under the sky
seven rings for the dwarflords in their halls of stone
nine rings for mortal men doomed to die
one ring for the dark lord on his dark throne

the seven dwarf-rings were lost in the wars of extermination that devastated the dwarven civilizations in ancient times. of the three elf rings, galadriel has one, elrond another and gandalf the third. The nine rings for mortal men created the black riders, and of course the one ring is the lord of the rings (duuuh)

8. My memory is unclear but I would imagine it to be Arwen, daughter of elrond, nonwetheless a friend off mine said it was someone else, thyat event did not happen in the books, so the mythology is not at my fingertips. In the book, Glorfindel rescued him.

9. Balrog
10. Mordor is the dark lord's domain. Gondor is the largest and most powerful city of Mortal Men, ruled by denethor, lord of the west

lord of the ring rocks

nice to see someone corroborating my post!

i forgot about isildur, duh, I need to be hammered on the head.

Bia how una go dey compare these two nah??,  One na for kids (Harry Potter) The other (Lord of the rings)for matured folks,   Return of the king is one of the greatest movies ever made so Harry potter can't come close to this in a billion years

Have watched the trilogy more than 20times

Bros. Khamileon

If you want to argue that Harry potter is for kids, I will have you know that Tolkien eventually began the lord of the rings anthology as a story for his children.

Both stories have many seriously mature elements. Just read (or watch) HP and the Goblet of fire to understand this.

Both movies are aimed at a general audience, in my humble opinion.

Just because LOTR has more blood n' guts doesn't make it more 'mature'. HP has its own share of 'strong' content. Mature tales can feature young children as protagonists. And you will admit, the hobbits are very child-like!




iice, I feel u ooooo! I remember the first time I watched ROTK. I was ready to hate it for 2 reasons

1) The book ROTK was the dryest and worst of the 3
2) People were over-hyping the movie and repeatedly using it to play down the matrix revolutions which, while a rather bad movie, was nowhere near as crap as people made it out to be.

Despite this my jaw was open at the end. It was truly a masterpiece, and superior to the novel version by far. PJ is a true genius!

Yeah, ure right about adaptations.

However I think PJ did the best job possible! by cutting out stuff like the scouring of the shire and tom bombadil, by rearranging the events in TTT and ROTK so the spread of action was even, by giving more (and larger) roles to the women in the story, by including action payoffs to some of the anticlimatic scenes in the books- the man reinvented and revamped LOTR into a superior masterpiece!

I am one of those people who believes the LOTR movies are superior ro the books.

Maybe thats why many people prefer lotr to hp. In hp's case, many times the books are better. And in the case of goblet of fire, the movie is severely shortened. They are still nice though, I think, and definitely not 'for kids'

actually, PJ *expanded* the roles of women in that story

originally the women had such minor roles in the story that they could easily have been omitted. PJ added in the entire romance thing, and the rescue, and so many other large roles for the females in the story. He did more *for* than against women.

And the films benefitted from that! asi said before, pj is a genuis!

i dnt kno wot to say, cos there is toon mucha nd none at the same tin


i saw LOTR first, all three at one sitting, and i couldnt sleep for days. i was still reliving the experience with frodo and sam and it all seemed so real and powerful, i could feelt heir pains,, fears, i could feel everything.
now, thats wot i call a good film, a classic trilogy. but its not exactly for chilldren cos of the war scenes and all. its targeted at the mature-minded people, though i saw it when i was 18. bought the VCDs when i was 20, and i still watch it every chance i get. each time i watch any of the trilogy,i am awed, and i LOVE OLEGOLAS to pieces.


now for harry potter, hmmm, the first day i saw philosopher's stone, i enjoyed it, but the chamber of secrets was like a web, i couldnt quite get it.then came prisoner of Azkaban, i still dint get it, but then i saw the goblet of fire and i twas captivating. now the books are out for parts 5 and 6, namely the order of the phoenix and the half-blood prince.
i read the 5th book, and i just couldnt wait to get me hands on the 6th one.the films arent out yet.
after reading the 5th book, i felt thr strongest urge to watch the films from the beginning so i couldnt understand the story linre better.

thasts my personal review of the two films
now for the ULTIMATE COMPARISON,
THERE IS NONE,


Sorry to disappoint all HP fans, of which i am one, but LOTR is a legend in the Hollywood Hall of Films,

i LOVE the sound track, i still hum it every chance i get.

its like comparing Michael Jackson to Mario, ther is no comparison, and if there i s any, i would consider it an insult to Michael, no offence to Marioo fans though, but im sure you all agree with me.

I imagine that at the moment, mario has more goodwill and makes more money than MJ

Comparing him to the has-been breakdance whacko lunatic nutcase is more an insult to mario, then!

lotr is indeed hollywood hall of fame material, but so is HP. Its writer is the richest common woman in the UK. Its breadth of exposure in such a short time from conception is amazing.

I guess the best way to sum it up is that they are all not on the same topic. Lotr is fantasy/mythology, HP is magic/mysticism. Some elements may overlap but its fundamentally different.

To make it clearer, how about comparing star wars? SW is by far bigger and more influential in hollywood than both, but it comes from such a different angle (space opera/science fantasy) that most lotr and hp fans will go "huh? I don't get it" when they watch it!

Harry Potter for me. Lord of the rings is way too long, but ima give the director of LOTR credit dude got skills!

i dnt kno wot to say, cos there is toon mucha nd none at the same tin


I saw LOTR first, all three at one sitting, and I couldn’t sleep for days. I was still reliving the experience with frodo and Sam and it all seemed so real and powerful, I could feel their pains, fears, I could feel everything.
Now, that’s wot I call a good film, a classic trilogy. But its not exactly for children cos of the war scenes and all. It’s targeted at the mature-minded people, though i saw it when I was 18. Bought the VCDs when I was 20, and I still watch it every chance I get. Each time I watch any of the trilogy, I am awed, and I LOVE LEGOLAS to pieces.


now for Harry Potter, hmmm, the first day I saw philosopher's stone, I enjoyed it, but the chamber of secrets was like a web, I couldn’t quite get it. Then came prisoner of Azkaban, I still dint get it, but then I saw the goblet of fire and it was captivating. Now the books are out for parts 5 and 6, namely the order of the phoenix and the half-blood prince.
I read the 5th book, and I just couldn’t wait to get me hands on the 6th one. The films aren’t out yet.
After reading the 5th book, I felt the strongest urge to watch the films from the beginning so I couldn’t understand the story line better.

That’s my personal review of the two films
Now for the ULTIMATE COMPARISON,
THERE IS NONE,


Sorry to disappoint all HP fans, of which I am one, but LOTR is a legend in the Hollywood Hall of Films,

I LOVE the sound track, I still hum it every chance I get.

its like comparing Michael Jackson to Mario, there is no comparison, and if there is any, I would consider it an insult to Michael, no offence to Mario fans though, but I’m sure you all agree with me.

No long thing, I prefer Lord of the Rings,

spicy007:

i dnt kno wot to say, because there is toon mucha nd none at the same tin


I saw LOTR first, all three at one sitting, and I couldn’t sleep for days. I was still reliving the experience with frodo and Sam and it all seemed so real and powerful, I could feel their pains, fears, I could feel everything.
Now, that’s wot I call a good film, a classic trilogy. But its not exactly for children because of the war scenes and all. It’s targeted at the mature-minded people, though i saw it when I was 18. Bought the VCDs when I was 20, and I still watch it every chance I get. Each time I watch any of the trilogy, I am awed, and I LOVE LEGOLAS to pieces.


now for Harry Potter, hmmm, the first day I saw philosopher's stone, I enjoyed it, but the chamber of secrets was like a web, I couldn’t quite get it. Then came prisoner of Azkaban, I still dint get it, but then I saw the goblet of fire and it was captivating. Now the books are out for parts 5 and 6, namely the order of the phoenix and the half-blood prince.
I read the 5th book, and I just couldn’t wait to get me hands on the 6th one. The films aren’t out yet.
After reading the 5th book, I felt the strongest urge to watch the films from the beginning so I couldn’t understand the story line better.

That’s my personal review of the two films
Now for the ULTIMATE COMPARISON,
THERE IS NONE,


Sorry to disappoint all HP fans, of which I am one, but LOTR is a legend in the Hollywood Hall of Films,

I LOVE the sound track, I still hum it every chance I get.

its like comparing Michael Jackson to Mario, there is no comparison, and if there is any, I would consider it an insult to Michael, no offence to Mario fans though, but I’m sure you all agree with me.

I imagine that at the moment, mario has more goodwill and makes more money than MJ !

Comparing him to the has-been breakdance whacko lunatic nutcase is more an insult to mario, then!

lotr is indeed hollywood hall of fame material, but so is HP. Its writer is the richest common woman in the UK. Its breadth of exposure in such a short time from conception is amazing.

I guess the best way to sum it up is that they are all not on the same topic. Lotr is fantasy/mythology, HP is magic/mysticism. Some elements may overlap but its fundamentally different.

To make it clearer, how about comparing star wars? SW is by far bigger and more influential in hollywood than both, but it comes from such a different angle (space opera/science fantasy) that most lotr and hp fans will go "huh? I don't get it" when they watch it!

Harry Potter book is better than that of Lord of the rings.
but Lord of the rings mivie is better than Harry Potters.
luv them both!!<3<3<3<3<3=)=)=)=)

i prefer the two, but cos i havent seen harry to the last i prefer harry to lord

Don't know which i prefer.

lord of the rings is 2 much!

I am always staggered at the amount of love people show LOTR.

Thought is was average at best.

Okay here are the questions for HARRY POTTER

FROM HARRY POTTER AND THE SOCERER'S STONE
1: what is hermione's surname?
2:where did harry meet Ron?
3:where did harry and Ron meet hermione?
4:why was harry potter a famous boy?
5:who was assigned the duty of caring for harry potter?
6:what were the names of harry's parents?
7:where was the socerer's stone hidden?
8:what is the name of harry potter's house in school?
9:what is the name of harry's cousin that fell into the snake's pit?
10:why did Hagrid have to go and get harry?

lord of d rings is better dan harry potter

Two movies I can't stand