Poll: Whats better; Lord of the Rings, or Harry Potter?

[krashash]

Not really a fair comparison... you have fantasy vs. high fantasy.

As far as sheer epic-ness, influence, scope, and pure creativity the award must go to LotR.

I vote for HP however, because (to me at least) it was more entertaining and enjoyable. Furthermore, I give a lot of credit to Rowling for making a series that has such a wide range of appeal... I mean they are children's books, but I couldn't put the things down.

 

[Mechsoap]

harry potter has a more....special fanbase, with people who spend all their time rereading the books, while lotr is better in my opinion in evry way possible, and without it there would be no space marines (how can we survive without space marines?!)

 

[RoyalWelsh]

For me, Lord of the Rings, no doubt about it.

 

[JaredXE]

Well, I actually can read through Harry Potter....
Tolkien bores me. Too many pages devoted to scenery, slow-assed pacing.

If we are talking movies though, LoTR wins hands down. I can't stand the Harry Potter movies. I feel that I need to have the book in front of me to fill in all the plot-holes.

 

[Actual]

_____ ______ is to Lord of the Rings,

as Twilight is to Bram Stoker's Dracula.

Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the HP books and can tolerate some of the films, but there really is no contest here.

Interestingly if you took this survey elsewhere you'd get very different results. Even the younger members of the Escapist are quite open minded so will appreciate LotR over HP. If you put this in a teen magazine you'd find overwhelming support for HP as LotR is too difficult, both the books and movies are not designed to be easy to enjoy. And as enjoyment is the point of them you can't fault those people for enjoying HP more.

If I'm in a lazy mood I play Call of Duty over Dragon Age, it's just about how willing we are to engage our brains.

 

[Gaskell]

Harry Potter is amazing, don't get me wrong, but LoTR is supreme

 

[Eagle Est1986]

A literary classic and a trilogy of very good movies. Or. 7 books of varying quality and films that generally fall short of the source material?
Hmmmm....

 

[Regiment]

Lord of the Rings was instrumental in creation of the modern fantasy genre, but I couldn't get through the books. I think it was in Return of the King, when I realized that I needed to know all of the history for about 60 characters and an entire fantasy world, that I stopped. Lord of the Rings gets too bogged down in its own mythology.

This isn't an easy direct comparison, though. LoTR is mostly high fantasy (concerned with worldly affairs); Harry Potter is mostly heroic fantasy (concerned with the protagonist's affairs).

The Hobbit was great, though.

 

[Hlain]

Books, Harry Potter.
Movies, Lord of the Rings.

 

[escapistrules]

never read the lotr books so ill go with hp

 

[Reverend Del]

Rowling deserves praise for making books cool with kids. That counts for an awful lot, it really does. She also deserves praise for shamelessly stealing all those little ideas and weaving them into a cohesive story. Which she does very well. But Tolkien, well the man quite, literally, wrote the book on High Fantasy. Okay so there's a wee bit too much information devoted to trees and such, but the bad guy was suitably malevolent, the good guys suitably bright. Plus it had shades of grey you simply don't get in HP. Boromir wasn't wholely good, and neither was Galdriel (who openly admits she'd be a tyrant if she got her hands on the One Ring). It set new ground, and paved the way for the slew of stuff that came after it.

 

[Eldritch Warlord]

If you go by the box office, Harry Potter (Harry Potter is the highest grossing film series worldwide as of June 2010. Lord of the Rings is 4th).

That may be the case. However, Harry Potter has far more films than The Lord of the Rings. No Harry Potter film has grossed more than a billion USD (granted only one of the LotR films did).

But this a thread about opinions, not facts. LotR has better novels, better films, and a better universe in my opinion. However, just because I find LotR to be better does not mean I don't enjoy HP (a common misconception on the Interwebz).

 

[Lt.Snuffles]

I think the reason Harry Potter has done so well is that it is easy to read for simple minded fools, but has enough depth to it to make it entertaining for those more literate in the English language.
Lord of the Rings is not written to be friendly to those who are not good readers; I remember when I was little I used to struggle to read it. However to those who understand and appreciate it, Lord of the Rings has far greater depth and characterisation then Harry Potter.

In my opinion, I feel that Lord of the rings is better because of the way it presents it's characters. I liked how, Frodo, dispite being the hero, can still be affected by the power of the ring (in the third book), and how the main enemy is not the same style as the classic "evil villan", but is a faceless entity whos voice comes in the form of darkness and an invading army.

 

[spartan231490]

If you go by the box office, Harry Potter (Harry Potter is the highest grossing film series worldwide as of June 2010. Lord of the Rings is 4th).

My personal opinion? Lord of the Rings. Sauron > Voldemort

The hp series did better because it has more movies. there arent any other 8 movie series out that i can think of. but how is this even a fucking contest, hp is slightly childish, and has a number of plot holes, small ones i admit, and LOTR defined the f-ing genre. his world was incredibly complex, there is a reason that almost every fantasy series in the world has similarities to LOTR and why elves shoot bows and commune with trees, and dwarfs have braided beards and use battle axes. without tolkein elves would be equely qualified to sell cookies and dwarves would be hired by lucas films.
cookie for the reference?

 

[Macgyvercas]

If you go by the box office, Harry Potter (Harry Potter is the highest grossing film series worldwide as of June 2010. Lord of the Rings is 4th).

That may be the case. However, Harry Potter has far more films than The Lord of the Rings. No Harry Potter film has grossed more than a billion USD (granted only one of the LotR films did).

But this a thread about opinions, not facts. LotR has better novels, better films, and a better universe in my opinion. However, just because I find LotR to be better does not mean I don't enjoy HP (a common misconception on the Interwebz).

Very true. I do enjoy both. I like Lord of the Rings more, but do feel the need to bring numbers into everything I do.

(Incidently, Harry Potter beat James Bond at the box office as well, and he has 22 films)

 

[Enigmers]

Harry Potter is written with more modern language, so it's easier to understand, especially for young children. Lord of the Rings, I think, is better, but only if you've reached the age wherein you can comfortably read the books.

Lord of the Rings pretty much shaped the "Fantasy" genre as we know it; that counts for a hell of a lot.

 

[gjendemsjo]

Enjoy both series alot, but LOTR is way better in my opinion.

Should have had a poll with LoTR vs Star wars instead.

 

[sammi43055]

LotR hands down

 

[A BigCup of Tea]

I prefer the LOTR books but i enjoy the HP films more than the LOTR ones, im split

 

[GameGoddess101]

I've read all the books to both and, while Lord of the Rings is a far superior novel by far (I mean, the part in Mordor in Fellowship... I got chills it was so well written) but it tends to be slow, wordy, and drag. For god's sake, just the meeting in Rivendell took TWO FUCKING CHAPTERS! It's a tough read, but if your comprehension level is high enough, it's a far superior novel. Harry Potter, however, while vastly inferior in execution, villains, and overall scope, it was easier to read and the characters were more relatable. They both have their appeals.

The movies, though... Lord of the Rings hands down. It was better made, had a better story, better look, better feel. It was just superior all around, while Harry Potter has gone through 6 movies (soon to be 8 RRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!! >:|) and 4 directors. They don't feel coherent, plot holes up the wazoo, and tone and focus is all over the place. Very teenagery. Plus, every movie SINCE LoTR has tried to BE LoTR, even when it's not appropriate. (*cough Eragon! *cough* NARNIA! *cough* ) But whatever, that's just my opinion.

Books: Either one, but LoTR is better
Movies: LoTR hands down