LOTR vs Star Wars, now with polling fun!

Yojimbo · 12-19-2002, 07:43 AM

This is the thread to discuss what is your favorite movie series. I'm thinking in terms of what is the better movie, rather than what is the better "world" or canon...but whatever.

Well, am going to see "Two Towers" tonight. Tried re-watching the first one last night, but fell asleep...I've never done that before when watching the original SW trilogy...

Frodo · 12-19-2002, 08:18 AM

That's hard to say. I'd vote Lord of the Rings. Gosh, you shoulda made a poll, goodness. lol. I hate the original Star Wars, and so it's kinda a battle between FOTR and Ep. 2. But I like 'em both. and I'm seeing Two Towers tonight, and I know it's gonna rock!!!

Yojimbo · 12-19-2002, 08:35 AM

By Frodo's request

Kori · 12-19-2002, 08:58 AM

LOTR kicks SW's sorry behind.
As much as Ep.2 was drawn out, I thought it could have been done way better. Actually, I think it stunk. The only Starwars Eps that I like are 4, 5 & 6. So LOTR all the way!

Yojimbo · 12-19-2002, 10:19 AM

IT's funny...me and Frodo are at polar opposites

I dislike the new trilogy of SW intensely. And I'm starting to dislike LOTR for similar reasons...mostly because both movies have replaced good dialogue and characterizations with computer generated landscapes and monsters. It's impressive, but it's boring. I think it's sad that the original SW trilogy had maybe two decent actors (Alec Guiness and Harrison Ford) and yet the SW cast is more memorable than anyone in the LOTR cast. I mean, there is almost no dialogue or scenes in even the special edition LOTR that isn't there just to drive the plot along. This is just one of my objections...oh I have many many more, but not enough time right now

Zooropa · 12-19-2002, 10:51 AM

LOTR gets my vote. I've never liked Star Wars.

Jeremiah · 12-19-2002, 10:58 AM

LoTR gets my vote. Sure, it may be boring at times, but Peter Jackson did a great job of sticking to the book (at least for FoTR) when you consider the book isn't exactly movie friendly.

Frodo · 12-19-2002, 01:47 PM

there's things I like about both. And Goodness, I don't think we agree on too much

lol, but we can still be friends!

Reuben · 12-19-2002, 02:11 PM

Well... this is a tough one me. I love both LotR and Star Wars. So I'd say they're pretty equal in my mind. However, I'm becoming rather disapointed in the job Peter Jackson is doing with making Lord of the Rings into movies (in terms of what he has done to the story; I'm pleased with how it has been brought to life, but what happened to the story

.... ugh!!) But anyway... back to the subject... like I said, I like them both a lot and I don't think I could pick a favorite.

~Reuben

Laura · 12-19-2002, 07:56 PM

Lord of the Rings got my vote. Cinematographically (wow, that's a lengthy word), I really like the concept of Middle-Earth better than outer-space themes. I'm not a "spacey" person, I guess. It is obvious that both are timeless classics and will be for ages to come, but personal preference is LOTR.

*Edit: 700!*

Lyle · 12-19-2002, 08:35 PM

Lord of the Rings is the best. It has more of a plot as Star wars and not any holes in the plot at all.....Star Wars is so corny!!!!I Hate Star Wars!!!!!!!I hate it, I hate it, I hate it!!!!!

"Luke, trust your emotions" Give me a break

Yojimbo · 12-19-2002, 09:49 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Iliv2serv
Lord of the Rings is the best. It has more of a plot as Star wars and not any holes in the plot at all.....Star Wars is so corny!!!!I Hate Star Wars!!!!!!!I hate it, I hate it, I hate it!!!!!

"Luke, trust your emotions" Give me a break

OH come on...what about, "I believe there is good in this world, and that it's worth fighting for" or any of the dumb cliched phrases in the LOTR movies? I can excuse Star Wars of bad dialogue because the source material is pulp science fiction, but the LOTR movies manages to screw up one of the greatest English writers ever. And Han Solo trumps all. None of the LOTR characters have any distinctive personality, except Gimili, who's only distinguishing characteristic is that he's the butt of countless stupid short jokes. I'll bet good money we'll hear a dwarf-tossing reference in the third movie.

**Sean** · 12-20-2002, 03:49 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by JSmith
LoTR gets my vote. Sure, it may be boring at times, but Peter Jackson did a great job of sticking to the book (at least for FoTR) when you consider the book isn't exactly movie friendly.

Admitting that it is boring would essentially be saying it isn't a very good movie. No matter how well it was transfered, we're discussing which is a better film.

With that said.....

Star Wars:

Episodes 4-6 are excellent films. There is a reason they are so popular with so many people. Each film by itself is very good and they all fit together to form an excellent trilogy. The storytelling, pacing, and direction are very good for the style of film.

Episodes 1-2 and most likely 3 are very poor films. The story telling is cringe worthy. The direction is bad and the dialogue is even worse. George seemed much more interested in showing off what he could do rather than telling a good story well. Neither episode 1 or 2 had difficult stories to understand, but the way the story was displayed was difficult to follow. It took 2 viewings to really understand what was going on. Neither film has a very interesting story as a single film or as part of a trilogy. The movies feel like exposition for episodes 4-6 with a bunch of filler to "fill" the rest of the movies. Very disappointing.

LOTR:

FOTR was incredilbe visually. They visualized the world of Middle-Earth very well. As a film, however, I thought some of the storytelling wasn't the best. The movie felt like a bunch of mini-episodes put together without a clear objective. It didn't feel like there was a begining, middle and end or a clear climax. Since the plot didnt' have much focus, a lot of scenes seemed completely unnecesary. This also made the film drag at parts. By cutting 30 minutes, FOTR as a movie would have been much better.

TTT story wise flowed much better than FOTR, but the movie as a whole was much weaker. The ents felt completely out of place. I thought the effects were bad and those parts just felt different from the rest of the movie. Some of the characters seemed different from FOTR. The plot flowed much smoother than FOTR. You could tell where the movie was going. The movie had a very clear climax. It felt like a single story. However, the flaws in the film greatly detracted form its over all quality.

Jeremiah · 12-20-2002, 08:09 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by AtlasShrugs
Admitting that it is boring would essentially be saying it isn't a very good movie. No matter how well it was transfered, we're discussing which is a better film.

In your opinion admitting that would be. But I think it's a great movie, and Star Wars can't really be compared to it since they have nothing in common.

Yojimbo · 12-20-2002, 09:02 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by JSmith
In your opinion admitting that would be. But I think it's a great movie, and Star Wars can't really be compared to it since they have nothing in common.

Yes they do. They are both films, and so they can both be judged on whatever criteria you use to judge films. We're not debating whether Aragorn could beat Luke Skywalker in a swordfight.

[quote]Originally posted by AtlasShrugs

TTT story wise flowed much better than FOTR, but the movie as a whole was much weaker. The ents felt completely out of place. I thought the effects were bad and those parts just felt different from the rest of the movie. Some of the characters seemed different from FOTR. The plot flowed much smoother than FOTR. You could tell where the movie was going. The movie had a very clear climax. It felt like a single story. However, the flaws in the film greatly detracted form its over all quality.

I don't see how TTT flowed better than FOTR. There were three subplots going on, and the Treant subplot felt completely tacked on, like "Oh gee, we'd better throw in a scene to remind the viewers these two hobbits exist!".