Harry Potter vs The Lord of the Rings
- Konuyu başlatan Cynux
- Başlangıç tarihi
- Durum
Süper Üye
The answer is obviously Lord of the Rings-
- Consistency. The LotR universe is consistent right from the start to the end. Tolkien creates a universe with set rules and goes on to write a story that takes place in that universe. Rowling, on the other hand, makes it up as she goes along. She conveniently introduces plot devices randomly and takes them away randomly. Why can't the Time Turner solve everything? What is the problem with people dying if you can still interact via paintings? What is the limiting extent of magic? It is mentioned that magic cannot make food. But it can make birds. So can you make birds, kill them and eat them? If that world coexists with the normal world, why can't we just nuke Voldemort? In the HP world, some easy tasks need a lot of unnecessary work while some hard tasks are just simply accomplished by a magical plot device.
- Scale. The LotR story takes place across several kingdoms and realms, each with their own rich back-story and all of them interact with each other in different ways. There are wars between legions of armies who also form dynamic alliances for geopolitical motivations. The HP story takes place in a school. A bunch of bad guys take on a bunch of good guys in a school. It's like Osama Bin Laden attacks a high school in America (and inexplicably also takes control of the Pentagon {Ministry of Magic}) and instead of America sending in the troops, the high school kids fight the Taliban on the school grounds with the help of 5 soldiers (some of the guys from the Magic Police did fight).
- Plagiarism. As much as fans deny it, HP is a combined plagiarized work. Most of its inspiration is LotR, a little from Star Wars and some elements from a lot of other stories. Here, identify this book-turned-movie series: There's a wise old, all powerful wizard with long white beard and pointy hat, who, despite being the most powerful magician ever, doesn't do much except loitering around and giving orders and instructions. There are castles and all that. A small, young group is sent on a mission guided by him to find and destroy something that contains the soul of evil, that cannot be destroyed by usual means. The main guy is pretty much selfish and effeminate and spends all his time whimpering, faltering, breathing heavily, sobbing, crying, tripping, screaming, putting others in danger, half-dying and having delusions and visions. The object whispers evil to whoever possesses it and makes him uncomfortable. Then comes along with them a small, ugly, thin creature with large eyes who speaks poor English and considers the main guy as his master. Battles are fought where all exotic creatures show up. An old wizard with a long white beard falls from a tower and dies. The main guy inherits a house and all of some dude's property. There are two mischievous ones who help out by strategic vandalizing. At one point, there is also a cave with a giant spider.
- Literary quality. The HP books are written for children. There's only so much literary technique you can use. The LotR on the other hand are beautifully written and the imagery is vivid. If you read LotR and then watch the movies, you'll think "That's exactly how I imagined it would look like". If you read HP and watch the movies you'll think "Oh, so that's what it looks like." There is simply not enough visual detail in the HP books.
- Character depth. Each character in LotR has a purpose, has motivations, has consequences and we really connect with them. Most characters (except the 3 main people, Dumbledore, Voldemort and Snape) in HP are not really developed at all. Some characters don't even need to exist. What exactly does Cho Chang do except introduce a little racial diversity? Would the story have been any different without McGonagall? The characters in LotR have good and bad qualities and are driven by different personal motivations. In HP, one group is purely and infallibly good and the other side is purely evil, just for the sake of being evil.
Onaylı Üye
Yes, I also prefer The Lord of the Rings, good choice, sir
harry wins
Onaylı Üye
yup you're right.. me too I prefer Lord of the Rings so
- Yasaklandı
- #11
Banlı Üye
lord of the rings for sure!
Üye
iyi
iyi
Post automatically merged:
iyi
Onaylı Üye
The Lord of the Rings trilogy
Onaylı Üye
my personal favourite harry potter
The trilogy delivers true works of effects setting and narrative; narrative that puts the protagonists to travel with the temptation of the ring and the enemies always lurking. It is undeniable to say that she has a more serious and darker air than Harry Potter, which for many is a flaw. Lord of the Rings is better
- Durum
Benzer Konular
- Kilitli
