I absolutely loathed the Lord of the Rings movies, should I still read the books?

[HBMK]

I thought that the movies were boring and tedious and trite, but I don't know whether it's a Harry Potter situation where the movies hardly do the books any justice, but I can't be bothered to start reading a book that size if it's going to be more of the same.

So are the books better or are they pretty much the same?

Thanks for your time.

 

[Thaluikhain]

If you think the movies are boring...yeah, give the books a go, but be prepared to give up on them. The movies trimmed out loads of really, really boring stuff.

OTOH, some of the best bits in the books didn't come across in the movies well at all.

 

[Ubiquitous Duck]

I think it would depend on whether you can pin down 'why' you didn't like the films.

If it was anything to do with the overarching themes, setting and style, you may be in with a problem.

I never really understood the idea of comparing books and films though; seems very difficult and almost nonsensical to me.

 

[bartholen_v1legacy]

It's kind of hard to say. The books aren't exactly fantasy books in the modern sense. IMO they're more in the realm of made up stuff presented as folklore and myth. They're quite different from the movies, but I would say in a not good way. So no, I don't recommend reading the books if you hated the films.

Why did you hate the films? They're awesome.

 

[SmallHatLogan]

If you think the movies are boring, tedious and trite then you'll find the books even more so. As far as movie adaptations go Lord of the Rings is pretty faithful to the source material. The hard core fans may disagree, and it's true a fair bit of content was left out, but compared to other movie adaptations it does a fine job.

Re: the books, I read The Hobbit when I was a kid and loved it, but it took me three attempts to slog through Lord of the Rings. My advice: read The Hobbit and leave it at that.

 

[raeior]

Wow I'm really surprised by the posts here. Expected more "read the books they are teh awesome" posts. I read them 2 times but in retrospective the writing style is really tedious to get through. I liked them but still I don't think I'm gonna touch them ever again. You have some faster paced parts interlaced with "And they came into the land of xy who is the son of xy the lord of xyz who was also the brother of....", they also saw the river "xy that runs from the lands of ..." and so on. Tolkien really really likes his landscape descriptions and also his family trees. It is an awesome world for sure and he put a huge amount of work into working it all out but it really gets out of hand in places. This was even worse in "The children of Húrin".

So just give it a try and see if you like it. Still quite a bit of the story makes more sense in the books than it does in the movies. If you want to read something from Tolkien but find LotR too tedious to read there is always the Hobbit which is easier to get into by far.

 

[madwarper]

but I don't know whether it's a Harry Potter situation where the movies hardly do the books any justice,

While I haven't read the Potter series, so I can't critique its movies as adaptions...
However, Peter Jackson's "interpretation" of Tolkien's work were mediocre as independent works, and travesties as adaptions. The movies skewered events, assassinated characters and utterly failed to capture any sense of lore of the world of Arda.

So are the books better or are they pretty much the same?

As someone who has read Tolkien's work, before seeing Jackson's failed attempt, yes. The books are far superior.
Though, your mileage may vary.

 

[Woiminkle]

If you found the films boring then I kind of doubt that you'll enjoy the books. They're written in an odd style and until you get used to it, it feels like a bit of a slog. There is however a lot going on under the surface and it's themes are still relevant to a modern reader.

As for finding it trite, you have to remember that a lot of the cliches of high fantasy began in these books and if you're tired of them it's because of all the other works that have borrowed heavily from Tolkien's epic while not approaching the same level of quality.

 

[lacktheknack]

There's a section in the books where they meet a poem-singing god-creature that lasts for pages and pages.

If you thought the MOVIES were boring, then the books have nothing for you.

 

[Thaluikhain]

There's a section in the books where they meet a poem-singing god-creature that lasts for pages and pages.

I'm guessing you mean Tom Bombadil, but that could be a description of one or two other bits. Take out the word "god" and it could be dozens.

 

[lacktheknack]

There's a section in the books where they meet a poem-singing god-creature that lasts for pages and pages.

I'm guessing you mean Tom Bombadil, but that could be a description of one or two other bits. Take out the word "god" and it could be dozens.

Yep.

I never managed to finish the books. I was more of a Narnia/Anthropos kid. I just remember that there was so... much... poetry...

 

[smithy_2045]

I thought that the movies were boring and tedious and trite, but I don't know whether it's a Harry Potter situation where the movies hardly do the books any justice, but I can't be bothered to start reading a book that size if it's going to be more of the same.

So are the books better or are they pretty much the same?

Thanks for your time.

The books are more boring than the movies. And the movies were very boring.

 

[Daniel Ferguson]

I loved the movies but couldn't stand the books. I am your polar opposite. We are now mortal enemies and shall duel on the plains of death. Or something.

 

[Comocat]

The books are better in the sense they create a richer sense of the world Tolkein created. The books and movies are reasonably similar, just the movies had studio edits to try and appeal to a broader class of movie goers.

 

[Verlander]

Depends on why you found them boring, but they're not the easiest books to read. If it's an attention span thing, don't bother. LOTR makes the Game of Thrones books look like Dr Seuss.

 

[Khymerion]

Depends on why you found them boring, but they're not the easiest books to read. If it's an attention span thing, don't bother. LOTR makes the Game of Thrones books look like Dr Seuss.

The sad thing is... you can fit the three books of Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit into a single volume of one of the later the GoT series books. They are actually rather short books to be honest. It isn't till you start adding in the ancillary volumes like the Silmarillion, Unfinished Tales, Lost Tales, Son of Hurin... that you start to reach page counts that get a bit bewildering. Though still a light read compared to trying to get through all of Wheel of Time.

 

[Hawkeye21]

I thought that the movies were boring and tedious and trite, but I don't know whether it's a Harry Potter situation where the movies hardly do the books any justice, but I can't be bothered to start reading a book that size if it's going to be more of the same.

So are the books better or are they pretty much the same?

Thanks for your time.

As a person who generally prefers books to movies, no, no you should not. LoTR books tend to get very offtopic. I remember giving up on them after reading a near 30 page description of a forest protagonists happened to be walking through, otherwise completely unrelated to the plot. And this wasn't a singular occasion. And no, I don't have ADD, I've read through "Atlas shrugged".

 

[DrOswald]

The lord of the rings books are really good. The movies are of questionable quality. The action was good but they were very boring and they hardly do the books justice. The biggest difference is that the books much more effectively establish the characters so the drama has much more impact. The movies are only really good taken on a scene by scene basis. Basically, it was really cool to see Gandalf destroy the bridge to stop the Balrog, but there just isn't enough context to make that moment meaningful in the movie itself. You can only gain the context needed to really like that scene by reading the books.

But at the same time the books are not easy reads. They are very slow moving books and they are not for everyone. I would say give them a try and drop them if you get too bored.

 

[Verlander]

Depends on why you found them boring, but they're not the easiest books to read. If it's an attention span thing, don't bother. LOTR makes the Game of Thrones books look like Dr Seuss.

The sad thing is... you can fit the three books of Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit into a single volume of one of the later the GoT series books. They are actually rather short books to be honest. It isn't till you start adding in the ancillary volumes like the Silmarillion, Unfinished Tales, Lost Tales, Son of Hurin... that you start to reach page counts that get a bit bewildering. Though still a light read compared to trying to get through all of Wheel of Time.

Agreed, but the language isn't all that difficult - it's written in modern English. Tolkein set out to imitate the great eddas and all that stuff. I love both series, but I can appreciate why a casual reader might be put off LOTR