• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Star Wars vs Lord of the Rings

blü 2

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Ahh but Tolkien created a world unlike any other. And it spanned thousands of years. Harry Potter takes place basically in a whimsical England.
Of course there’s more humour in HP, it’s written in a whimsical style reminiscent of Roald Dahl. And as much as I love Rowling, her constant need to rewrite the characters on Twitter is a bit disappointing.
Both achieved their respective goals, but Tolkien seems to have a bit of a firmer grasp of his world than Rowling does. (Though I’m still a huge Potterhead.)
Let us, in the interests of World Peace, agree that we may respectfully differ on the point.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
Ahh but where would Game of Thrones be without Lord of the Rings for a layout? As much as I do like GOT, I mean come on. The first time I encountered it I was like
"Oh a More politically charged LotR. Interesting."
Game of Thrones borrows heavily from real life stuff, and is a "fantasy light." Lord of the Rings draws more heavily from Norse tales and mythology for it's creatures races, and also other mythologies here and there, and is a proper high fantasy story.
Game of Thrones would likely still be Game of Thrones without Lord of the Rings.
 

SomeRandom

Still learning to be wise
Staff member
Premium Member
Game of Thrones borrows heavily from real life stuff, and is a "fantasy light." Lord of the Rings draws more heavily from Norse tales and mythology for it's creatures races, and also other mythologies here and there, and is a proper high fantasy story.
Game of Thrones would likely still be Game of Thrones without Lord of the Rings.
I know. I was just joking around.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
Star Wars is basically cowboys and ninjas in space.
Lord of the Rings is elves and wizards and dwarves and goblins and trolls and is really really really really long and drawn out but at least the movies are very pretty.
I'd prefer Lord of the Rings
But Star Trek and Game of Thrones over them both.
 

ADigitalArtist

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
True, but compare that to the terrible prequel and sequel trilogies of SW, and I've lost track of all of the side movies.

At least the Tolkien estate won't let them turn The Silmarillion into a movie.
Parts of the Silmarillion were jammed into The Hobbit movies as well but really I think nobody wants to try and turn it into a movie because it reads like a cross between a textbook and a furniture assembly manual. To say it's dry is to say the Sahara is dry. You'd have to basically do the dirty that was done to World War Z. Make it barely related to the book just to give it some pacing. And a narrative arch.
 

ADigitalArtist

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
I watched it on TV (or online just using my TV, can’t remember.)
It’s pretty good. Though after hearing the people’s complaints I have avoided the last season like the plague
I'm hoping it gets revisited by someone after the books are done. The directors clearly didn't know what to do with the story once they departed from the book material.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
it reads like a cross between a textbook and a furniture assembly manual.
That I think about sums it up. Even the Lord of the Rings required great creative liberties to make them not so dry, not so drawn out, not so much poking about and rambling, and cut enough to make it into three 3 hour movies instead of 30 hour movies. The Silmarillion, I don't doubt it could ever be done, it would just take an exceptionally talented story teller to do so.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
It’s pretty good. Though after hearing the people’s complaints I have avoided the last season like the plague
It's good. However, most people predicted it wrong and it turned out everyone's would be hero is actually mad, crazy, and blood thirsty and everyone was told straight up they lusted for vengence when they cheered on what they thought was justice.
 

ADigitalArtist

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
It's good. However, most people predicted it wrong and it turned out everyone's would be hero is actually mad, crazy, and blood thirsty and everyone was told straight up they lusted for vengence when they cheered on what they thought was justice.
*Spoilers*

That wasn't my issue. The setup for that payoff could have used more time to feel earned (from never took any innocent life to Embodiment of Hitler-Satan in one episode), but it wasn't unexpected. It was the rest of the characters acting really out of character that bugged me (Tyrion took stupid pills all season, as did varys (let me, the spymaster, just write my treason down here in my room)
The night king was killed too soon and in a cliche manner that had no consequence. Bran becoming king had no setup and took an arsepull speech to jam in there.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
I'm hoping it gets revisited by someone after the books are done. The directors clearly didn't know what to do with the story once they departed from the book material.
They ended it about as Martin told them he was ending the books.
 

ADigitalArtist

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
They ended it about as Martin told them he was ending the books.
I doubt the setup is going to be the same, or even the same characters made it where they would go. He was vague in details but did specify the ending would be got to very differently.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
Bran becoming king
had no setup
That was the conclusion of him being the Three Eyed Raven and seeing and knowing all. The perfect ruler, basically. I agree things moved a long very quickly, but it was basically seven seasons all building up to one chaotic battle against the dead on one front with the final battles against the living also happening on the other front. Winter and the dead crept along, but when they showed up they hit hard and fast.
(let me, the spymaster, just write my treason down here in my room)
He's had such communications before, such as his back-and-forths with Jorah Mormont.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

lewisnotmiller

Grand Hat
Staff member
Premium Member
Oof that's sacrilege in the circles I run in :D
In saying that, I haven't dabbled in High Fantasy since Brent Weeks. It's all hoity toity snooty classics and non fiction at the moment for me. But I'm having a rather nostalgic pull as of late. I want some Star Wars and I wants some Tolkien. I thought it'd be fun to see the two golden boys duke it out, as it were ;)

See, I like Brent Weeks. Though all I know is the Night Angel Trilogy.
 

lewisnotmiller

Grand Hat
Staff member
Premium Member
But if we are going to do 'nothing new under the sun' then LotR is basically a lititurized version of Wagner's Ring cycle. And that is just a 3 part epic, operatic version of mythological tale.

But on it's own two feet I vastly prefer GoT because LotR is a beautiful world with nothing in it, characters with personality archetypes that couldn't fill a thimble with depth. GoT is a character piece, and who lives in it is every bit as important as the world construction itself. For all of the work out into the language and landscape of Rivendale, it never felt like any real people lived there.

GoT also isn't a simple good vs evil story, of which I never appreciate that much because that is more egrigiously fantastic than all the dragons and spells.
Ditto why I'm not a huge Star Wars fan. I would have said Dune instead.

Moral ambiguity for the win!
 

lewisnotmiller

Grand Hat
Staff member
Premium Member
Game of Thrones borrows heavily from real life stuff, and is a "fantasy light." Lord of the Rings draws more heavily from Norse tales and mythology for it's creatures races, and also other mythologies here and there, and is a proper high fantasy story.
Game of Thrones would likely still be Game of Thrones without Lord of the Rings.

Booo...'fantasy light'...'proper fantasy'...

What talk is this??
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
Booo...'fantasy light'...'proper fantasy'...
Game of Thrones has very little magic, all the humanoids are human, and it largely and mostly lacks the things that turn non-nerds off and away from a more proper high fantasy, such as the Forgotten Realms.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
See, you sound like a low fantasy dude. A high fantasy guy would have said...

*Sheathes Dragonsbane, his mighty broadsword +2*
No, no, no! Nein, iea, no, non, nihil, όχι, 没有, ghobe!
The proper high fantasy chick spends two hours doing make up to play a high fantasy character race, has all sorts of glowing props around her to represent magic buffs and shields, and holds a latex foam sword in one hand that is said to be blazing with fire, cloth spell packet that is said to be lightning arcs emitting from her bands in the other, and demands your quest be one to preserve order and the natural balance or face the wrath of the god of magic and the high god of balance themselves through their chosen champion who stands before you. She's also wearing prosthetic elf ears, has memorized her entire spell book, and has roughed out all sorts of weather to do it.
 
Top