- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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 11:57 am to McCaigBro69
Posted on 2/18/16 at 11:57 am to McCaigBro69
I read that and loved it. I think it also confirmed some theories that have been floating around about certain parentage.
1
Posted on 2/18/16 at 11:57 am to alajones
quote:
But there is A LOT more crap in GoT than LotR.
You have no idea how much the movies left out of TLotR.
This whole discussion makes no sense. Comparing adaptations without considering the source work is just asinine.
Because,
ASoIaF would not exist if not for LotR.
Tolkien birthed an entire genre, singlehandedly.
GRRM would not even read this thread.
Posted on 2/18/16 at 11:58 am to LucasP
quote:
A well written story finds a way to offer exposition without an accompanying encyclopedia to make it interesting.
I would respond to your inaccurate statement above with Patrick O'Brian and his Aubrey/Maturin historical fiction novels.
Posted on 2/18/16 at 12:01 pm to 19
quote:
This whole discussion makes no sense. Comparing adaptations without considering the source work is just asinine. Because, ASoIaF would not exist if not for LotR. Tolkien birthed an entire genre, singlehandedly. GRRM would not even read this thread.
that's kind of BS. Can I not compare the Rolling stones work to the blues because the blues are their influence?
Posted on 2/18/16 at 12:05 pm to 19
quote:
Tolkien birthed an entire genre, singlehandedly.
huh, what genre is that, and what was Beowulf and Gilgamesh?
Posted on 2/18/16 at 12:08 pm to Kujo
Tolkien birthed the modern fantasy genre. There is no disputing that. He was heavily influenced by the old Scandinavian mythology as well as by William Blake, but he is the father of the modern fantasy. Every single fantasy author would tell you so.
Posted on 2/18/16 at 12:11 pm to LeonPhelps
quote:
LeonPhelps
It's a must read for any book fans. The amount of detail is incredible.
Posted on 2/18/16 at 12:41 pm to xxKylexx
quote:
Though, I would totally be down for a LOTR television show on HBO.
The nude elvish girls would be nice, but I don't know if I could stomach all the gay Hobbit sex.
Posted on 2/18/16 at 7:15 pm to big_C
GOT is more complex and dynamic characters and themes/ plots
Posted on 2/18/16 at 7:37 pm to LucasP
quote:
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 7:38 pm to Boo Krewe
quote:
GOT is more complex and dynamic characters and themes/ plots
Keep going guys. This stuff is hilarious.
Posted on 2/18/16 at 7:41 pm to big_C
It's pretty simple: within a few years after the books and shows are done, people will forget about ASOIAF.
We'll still be reading and studying Tolkien in 100 years.
We'll still be reading and studying Tolkien in 100 years.
Posted on 2/18/16 at 7:58 pm to big_C
they're both great, but I don't really understand why people compare the two so much. There are swords and magic in both, and they are fantasy/adventure, but the stories are completely different from one another.
GoT is my favorite show on right now, maybe ever, but I was at just the right age when LoTR was coming out, and I can't remember the last time I was that excited to see a movie in theaters every christmas.
GoT is my favorite show on right now, maybe ever, but I was at just the right age when LoTR was coming out, and I can't remember the last time I was that excited to see a movie in theaters every christmas.
Posted on 2/18/16 at 8:15 pm to big_C
Lord of the Rings
Posted on 2/18/16 at 8:41 pm to Freauxzen
quote:
We'll still be reading and studying Tolkien in 100 years.
I missed that day in my curriculum. Not sure I could take a whole section on Tom Bombadil.
I've never read the source material of either, so I don't have a dog in that fight. As a fan of both the LotR movies and GoT the show, I'm so much more into GoT. LotR was a lot of fun, very entertaining, very straight forward. GoT is my favorite tv show of all time. It's the show my geeky, younger self totally dreamed of, and I love it.
This post was edited on 2/18/16 at 8:54 pm
Posted on 2/18/16 at 8:44 pm to Freauxzen
quote:
It's pretty simple: within a few years after the books and shows are done, people will forget about ASOIAF.
Depends on how ASOIAF ends, if it's on par with the first 3 books this won't be true at all. Now if it ends on the quality of books 4 and 5, then yeah, pretty much.
You are doing just what the folks that dogging Tolkien are doing in reverse with this comment.
Both are amazing authors in different ways, and really aren't good comparisons to each other.
Posted on 2/18/16 at 9:44 pm to auyushu
quote:
You are doing just what the folks that dogging Tolkien are doing in reverse with this comment.
I disagree. The notion is that something stands that test of time, LOTR is already almost 80 years. And we're still talking about it, still making movies about it.
That, and the idea that 99.999% of books are forgotten over time, very few really last. Even great ones don't make that cut. You have to be REALLY special to be that kind of book. I feel I'm the only one that still talks Gravity's Rainbow or The Fall of the House of Usher in my circles. Poor, forgotten great books.
I would say this about, well, 99.999% of books. Tolkien's books have lasted, and will continue to last. Given their stature in society, that's a safe bet.
Guessing that Martin's books won't last isn't a slight or "dogging," it's just saying they aren't part of that 0.001%. And yeah, most books aren't. Simple as that.
ETA: And much of the popularity, even looking at this thread, for ASOIAF is the show, not the books. The books needed the show to become uber popular. LOTR had history and impact without the movies.
This post was edited on 2/18/16 at 9:54 pm
Page 5 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News