- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: lord of the Rings or Game of Thrones
Posted on 2/18/16 at 8:31 am to big_C
Posted on 2/18/16 at 8:31 am to big_C
Of the two R.R. boys:
J.R.R. Tolkien >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> George R.R. Martin
Tolkien created one story for children (The Hobbit) and another for adults (LotR) that had beautifully defined plotting, interesting characters, and creativity.
Martin created an interesting, yet fun, read with lots of sex and violence. Perfect for the immature, yet buddingly pubescent, adolescent hiding within all of us.
J.R.R. Tolkien >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> George R.R. Martin
Tolkien created one story for children (The Hobbit) and another for adults (LotR) that had beautifully defined plotting, interesting characters, and creativity.
Martin created an interesting, yet fun, read with lots of sex and violence. Perfect for the immature, yet buddingly pubescent, adolescent hiding within all of us.
1
Posted on 2/18/16 at 8:50 am to beatbammer
This question is generation specific, to begin with. I was a college grad before LotR was released, and i read the books as a kid. shite, all we had was the cheesey Bilbo cartoon. 
(Same guys who did Rikki Tikki Tavi...member him?)
So, my generation will mostly see it this way:
Tolkien > Martin as far as storytelling goes, as well as scope and full-world immursion skills.
Martin holds the distinction of the closest anyone has ever come to matching TLotR with ASoIaF.
-so far.
When both works are complete, and have been compared/contrasted by readers much smarter than me (us) over, say, a 10-year period...then this will be a potential discussion.
Movies...Jackson had a huge (like, enormous) budget to work with, so the comparison is unfair for that reason alone, not to mention a TV series with epsode time restraints, etc. can't be fairly compared to a block-buster series of motion pictures.
(Same guys who did Rikki Tikki Tavi...member him?)
So, my generation will mostly see it this way:
Tolkien > Martin as far as storytelling goes, as well as scope and full-world immursion skills.
Martin holds the distinction of the closest anyone has ever come to matching TLotR with ASoIaF.
-so far.
When both works are complete, and have been compared/contrasted by readers much smarter than me (us) over, say, a 10-year period...then this will be a potential discussion.
Movies...Jackson had a huge (like, enormous) budget to work with, so the comparison is unfair for that reason alone, not to mention a TV series with epsode time restraints, etc. can't be fairly compared to a block-buster series of motion pictures.
Posted on 2/18/16 at 8:52 am to Captain Fantasy
quote:
J. R. R. Tolkien > George R. R. Martin and it's not really a debate
Which is irrelevant to the discussion. We're not disgusting the books.
That being said, The Two Towers might be my favorite movie of all time
Posted on 2/18/16 at 8:56 am to big_C
Tolkien was a shitty writer with a great imagination. Martin has writing skills and knows where to borrow idea from. I'd say Martin is a better read because he's not just listing shite that is happening, he's a word smith.
Posted on 2/18/16 at 9:00 am to Breesus
quote:
Tolkien is infinitely better in every way.
So I'm guessing you never read either story. Tolkien's writing is painful, very creative but painful to read.
Also, the very complex theme of good>evil doesn't really get the reader thinking to deeply about anything.
Posted on 2/18/16 at 9:06 am to StrongBackWeakMind
quote:
LOTR- dude walks a ring to a lava pit over 3 movies, with just some fighting scenes with weird looking creatures mixed in
Movies must suck for you if you boil them down to such simple statements.
Godfather - dude takes over family business after dad dies, with some murder and family bickering mixed in
GOT - noble families struggle for control of the kingdom, with some white zombies and foreigners mixed in
and your examples are more interesting than walking a ring to lava
Posted on 2/18/16 at 9:11 am to big_C
I don't like Game of Thrones at all, so give me Lord of the Rings.
Posted on 2/18/16 at 9:17 am to LeonPhelps
OK I was only asking about the movie/TV show. I've read the hobbit, but have never read either asoiaf or lotr. And for the toolbags that are just saying OMFG TOLKIEN IS SOOOOOO GREAT!!! Let me suck him off! Have you even watched GoT? Imo the story is just so much more intriguing in GoT and it's not even close and I love lotr, but that plot is actually very simple and basic. Good vs. Evil. Not that there is anything wrong with that, it's just it's hard to find something in a movie or television show that truly captivates me and keeps me on the edge. I mean was there ever a time past about the middle of the fellowship to wear you didn't think frodo would succeed and aragorn would become king? There is nothing straight forward on GoT that's what makes it so great in my eyes.
Posted on 2/18/16 at 9:26 am to Kujo
quote:Want me to boil it down even further?
and your examples are more interesting than walking a ring to lava
Godfather - son takes over family business
GOT - families fight each other
What's interesting about those ideas?
This post was edited on 2/18/16 at 9:36 am
Posted on 2/18/16 at 9:37 am to big_C
More captivated and on the edge of my seat for Game of Thrones, but the story and characters in Lord of the Rings are better.
I hate you for making me choose.
I hate you for making me choose.
Posted on 2/18/16 at 9:40 am to big_C
I love LOTR and GOT, but I'd have to give a slight edge to GOT due to the drama associated with it
Posted on 2/18/16 at 9:45 am to ForeverLSU02
For whatever reason, I just couldn't get into the GOT books. The first book was pretty good. Gave up on the second book.
Posted on 2/18/16 at 9:47 am to gorillacoco
quote:
LoTR is more beautiful and idealistic but GoT is dirtier and far more true to life.
This is the way I see it and why I prefer Game of Thrones.
quote:
I find Game of Thrones infinitely more intriguing, complex, and entertaining.
And this.
This post was edited on 2/18/16 at 9:53 am
Posted on 2/18/16 at 9:53 am to ohiovol
Lord of the Rings is like the history that's taught to you in elementary school: these are the bad guys and here's how the good guys won.
Game of Thrones is like the history you learn when you're older and you realize that there were real people on both sides who had to make real decisions due to real circumstances.
Game of Thrones is like the history you learn when you're older and you realize that there were real people on both sides who had to make real decisions due to real circumstances.
Posted on 2/18/16 at 9:54 am to LucasP
I agree with almost all you're saying, but I actually think Martin is also better at story telling and world building than writing.
Posted on 2/18/16 at 10:00 am to LucasP
Completely agree.
Posted on 2/18/16 at 10:03 am to LucasP
quote:
these are the bad guys and here's how the good guys won.
Meh, there were a shitload of characters in LOTR that were "good" but were corrupted to serve evil. There were also a lot of characters that were "good" who were indifferent to the suffering of the human world. Then there was gollum/smeagol and his greed and evil ended up being what saved the world. GOT is grittier but LOTR has plenty of muddling.
Posted on 2/18/16 at 10:29 am to nes2010
This is extremely tough as I am a huge fan of both. From a technical and imaginative standpoint, I'd go with The Lord of the Rings. Tokien was what every fantasy writer should aspire to be. From an entertainment point of view, I'd go A Song of Icen and Fire. GRRM, slow as he may be, can completely mess with your mind and to this day remains the only writer to ever have caused me to throw a book across a room. He doesn't shock you just to shock you either, it all fits into the character's arcs and overall storyline. I've read Song 4 times and The LotR series (very small pieces of the Silmarillion) once and the Hobbit twice. But I've seen the LotR movies too many times to count while only watching GoT series twice. Both are brilliant works of fantasy literature no matter which you favor.
This post was edited on 2/18/16 at 10:38 am
Posted on 2/18/16 at 10:35 am to StrongBackWeakMind
Lord of the Rings is 3 movies of people walking.. There's only one return, and it's of the Jedi.
Posted on 2/18/16 at 10:36 am to big_C
quote:
I love lotr, but that plot is actually very simple and basic.
I have the benefit of having read the Silmarillion a few times as well as the Unfinished Tales, The Lord of the Rings book (which fleshes out Aragorn's character more than in the book), and of course the Hobbit.
To say the story is very simple and basic is to betray your ignorance of the subject matter. Tolkien spent 50 years writing the mythology of his world. The book Lord of the Rings is a culmination of 10,000 years of backstory not touched on in the movies. The movies don't tell you the significance of being Isildur's Heir adequately enough, or of the legacy of the men of Beleriand. Isildur is a direct descendant of Elros, twin brother of Elrond. Elros and Elrond's parents were the only offspring of the pairing of man and elf, and were the grandchildren of a Maya, a lesser angel that married the king of one of the first three elven tribes. Being half human and half elf, Elros and Elrond got to choose between human and elf. Elrond chose elf and is, therefore, immortal. Elros chose human and lived 500 years - the first of the Dunedain. Many generations later came Aragorn, direct descendant of Elros, brother of Elrond (Elrond is over 6,000 years old). Elrond's daughter, Arwen, also got to choose between human and elf, which was an entire plotline in the movies that most casual fans probably didn't understand.
Elrond is also the son-in-law to Galadriel, the oldest and most powerful elf on Middle-Earth. She was a princess of the Nolder elves and the niece of Feanor, the creator of the Silmarils (and the palantir used in the moves) and who led the Noldor out of the Undying Lands back to Middle-Earth to get back the stolen Silmarils from Morgoth, boss of Sauron. All those who left the Undying Lands were punished by the Vala (greater angels that helped create the earth and who resided in the Undying Lands). Those elves were banished from ever coming back until Earendil, Elrond's father, found his way back using a Silmaril and begged for mercy, which was granted. However, Galadriel was given the test of being offered the ring. By passing that test, she was allowed back into the Undying Lands.
There is a ton of backstory that makes the Lord of the Rings so much richer as a movie. I have only touched on a small portion of it. So to say Lord of the Rings is simple and basic is just crazy.
Page 3 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News