By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Kennyheart on 02 December 2010
Edit Thread
Boutros said:
rocketpig said:
Boutros said:
rocketpig said:
Boutros said:
rocketpig said:
Boutros said:
rocketpig said:
Boutros said:

And btw yes, it is possible for a "rational human being" to prefer Harry Potter over the LotR.


Sure, it's possible to prefer Potter to LotR.

However, it is not possible for a rational human being to actually think Potter is BETTER than LotR. By any standard of art, writing, performance, direction (talking about both the novels and films), Tolkien/Jackson's work is just flat-out superior in every regard.

lol The LotR books are sooo boring. And I am rational.

Whether you think they're boring or not, they're brilliant pieces of literature that completely redefined the way we think of fantasy settings, epic stories, and British literature.

Uhm not really...

The books weren't all that well received when they came out.

Then it proceeded to become the second-best selling book of the 20th century in the western world behind... The Bible.

You're going to have to do better than that.

Doing better than what? Just make some research. The books received mixed reviews and that's a fact.

And I don't see what's the point of talking about sales.

Sales matter when it's the best selling piece of fiction of the past century.

EVERYTHING receives mixed reviews in literature. Hell, even Citizen Kane was trampled by segments of the press when it released and it's widely considered a top five film of all time, if not the greatest of all time. Saying something received "mixed reviews" in the world of literature is usually a compliment. Books that change how people think about the medium tend to get a fair amount of backlash. If that book is still being read 50 or 75 years down the road by students, scholars, and casuals, then you know it really impacted the world.

I think Harry Potter outsells the LotR, though.

In flim gross yeah.