Popular culture - Harry Potter v Lord of the rings

Bassmansam

Bassmansam

Bassmansam

Soldato
Joined
22 Nov 2007
Posts
4,290
Recently I have been wondering about these two franchises and which one is deemed better and is more popular. A couple of years ago I went to York and there's a street that is either modelled on Diagon Alley or perhaps its the other way round. This street is full of shops selling HP and only 1 or 2 sells LOTR merchandise.

HP also has an area of a theme park themed around it. These are just a couple of examples, where's the love for LOTR? Am I in the minority in thinking that LOTR is much better than HP?

Can we have a poll please mod?
 
LOTR is far better, but HP has been far more commercialised and was released at a time when most of today's adults were kids/teens and so grew up with the books.

But why limit it to just those 2? There are plenty of other fantasy series which are just as good/better! Try reading some Raymond Feist, Stephen Donaldson, Tad Williams, Greg Bear

Edit: Also, a lot of the "modern" exposure of LOTR/The Hobbit has been from the films - these are far inferior to the books (The Hobbit especially), which doesn't help!

Edit 2: I guess Harry P is a lot more relatable than LOTR as well; it's set in the real world (with a little twist), so kids can imagine it "might" be real. LOTR is obviously set in a completely imaginary world.
 
I feel like they are just SO different to compare...but get where you are coming from. But both aimed at different people no?

I have seen all the Harry Potter films but it just annoys me that it is always about him. :o Like, being the favourite with the teachers, all the attention on him etc...he comes across just so dull and up his own bottom. :o And who can blame him...being told he is the special one 4869303 times.

Maybe i am simply jealous. :p

Gonna say LOTRs > HP.
 
Harry Potter is more popular by far. Both are Amazing franchises. However harry Potter is sooooo marketable given the wizardry theme compared to fantasy.

It also appeals to a much younger audience who will spend $$$ on the franchise. It's easy to see why it's done so well and there are Harry Potter theme parks etc.
 
I've tried to read LoTR and failed, I've tried to watch the films and failed. The only version of LoTW I like is the Radio 4 dramatisation which I own in multiple formats.

On the other hand, I really enjoy the Harry Potter franchise, either book, audiobook or film (except for the Jim Dale reading).
 
Read both, LOTR multiple times Hp recently (on a kindle my daughter donated) have both on blu Ray (extended obviously LOTR)

I like the way th Hp films grow up as the kids grow up .
On my own I would choose LOTR when my grown up kids visit from up country tend to do a Hp full box set binge
 
Haggisman said:
LOTR is far better, but HP has been far more commercialised and was released at a time when most of today's adults were kids/teens and so grew up with the books.

But why limit it to just those 2? There are plenty of other fantasy series which are just as good/better! Try reading some Raymond Feist, Stephen Donaldson, Tad Williams, Greg Bear

Edit: Also, a lot of the "modern" exposure of LOTR/The Hobbit has been from the films - these are far inferior to the books (The Hobbit especially), which doesn't help!

Edit 2: I guess Harry P is a lot more relatable than LOTR as well; it's set in the real world (with a little twist), so kids can imagine it "might" be real. LOTR is obviously set in a completely imaginary world.
Click to expand...

HP has been thoroughly commercialised by WB theres even HP world in where? Florida? Also its aimed at kids which is always very bankable whereas LOTR is clearly an adult series of books, the Hobbit less so but even so the films were pretty dark as well as being rather disappointing. WB is a major studio whereas LOTR wasn't. American film studios never miss a trick when it comes to merchandise/marketing and its already becoming americanized, they didn't even want british kids to play the leading parts I remember but JK insisted or it wasn't happening, they caved in in the end but seem to have gotten their way in other things.

Winnie the Pooh, Jungle Book, Mary Poppins et al were all british books/subjects all thoroughly americanized once they got their hands on them so much so that people are barely aware of their origins now.

Feek said:
I've tried to read LoTR and failed, I've tried to watch the films and failed. The only version of LoTW I like is the Radio 4 dramatisation which I own in multiple formats.

On the other hand, I really enjoy the Harry Potter franchise, either book, audiobook or film (except for the Jim Dale reading).
Click to expand...

I've got to admit I found the LoTR books rather... dense but I loved the movies so much its probably fair to say I'm more than a little obsessed by them lol.

Harry Potter was enjoyable escapism but I'm not "into" them in any sense mainly because they have far less complexity/depth to them... at least I think thats the reason.
 
Last edited:
The films are incredible but I couldn’t finish the LOTR books, although I enjoyed the Hobbit. I used to be a right little bookworm at a kid and I think LOTR finished me off. Meanwhile, the Hobbit films were sooo bad.

A friend once said that reading LOTR page for page makes it feel like the worst book ever, but the scope of the big picture actually makes it the best book ever.

Harry Potter is a great series. It has ample amounts of what every popular kids book needs: death. The first thing you know is that your parents are dead. Super.

The only thing that I find a little clumsy about HP is how the books become more adult as Harry grows but amongst all the doom you get stuck with all the duff childish twee-isms. Diagon Alley. Get it?! Diagonally!!! Hurrr!

Oh another thing that bothered even when I read it as a child when it came out... which seems to bother nobody else. Harry only has one flying lesson ever. Just the one lesson with Hooch and then flying lessons are never ever mentioned again. Always found that a weird anomaly! :p
 
Love them both but as a complete package I'd say HP is "better" simply due to the books being far more readable. Tolkien really wasn't the best of writers despite having such a great story to tell.
 
I would legit watch a film where it was LOTR characters versus Harry Potter characters but separately they both do little for me. The LOTR books were fun when I was a child but as an adult the films were painful. The Harry Potter books never grabbed me, the films were passable, but the audio books my then 7 year old listened to were actually pretty good.
 
Hobbit book is excellent. LOTR, got halfway and then gave in to the films. LOTR films are very good whilst the Hobbit films are poor.

Potter, I read the books as a kid and watched a couple of films. I could never go back now as I don't feel I'd enjoy any of it.
 
I do get bogged down with the council of elrond, but get through it OK (book) I have the hobbit blu Ray extended also and enjoy it tbh, maybe the last one is more battles than content, an annoying issue though is that my blu Ray player won't remember where the hobbit stppped on last play, no others just this set, Havnt done firmware in years though
 
Only watched the movies but gave up on about the third HP movie, felt dull, predictable and derivative. That said, the Hobbit movies weren't anything special. I'd probably rather finish watching the HP series of movies than ever watch the Hobbit trilogy again.
 
I thoroughly enjoyed the films of both the HP and LOTR. Never read the HP books, but I did attempt to read The Hobbit once for about an hour before I gave up. Far too much like hard work.
 
Harry Potter is much more exploitable, there is so much that can be turned into cheap tat Official Movie Merchandise - wands, the sweets, hats, cloaks - hell, anything you stick a house logo on. You can use all the locations to build somewhere like Harry Potter studio tour, full of recognisable sets and props. Everything in these movies can be replicated and sold as something identifiable.

LOTR has got what? The Ring and maybe a handful of cheap (or very expensive) swords or character models. Every set bar Hobbiton (which has a tour i think) was a field/hill/mountain or a nondescript old castle or CGI. Nobody is going to buy an official replica 'dirty robe that Frodo wore for half the film that looks like a dirty robe'. There is no 'good guys logo' you can slap on a mug or a mousemat, nor is there a 'bad guys logo' to do this with.
 
I only ever watched the first HP film and found it far too childish for my tastes and just not that good really, I assumed it wasn't being aimed at my demographic.

LOTR I've read more than once and have watched the films multiple times, fantastic fantasy fiction.
 
SideWinder said:
I feel like they are just SO different to compare...but get where you are coming from. But both aimed at different people no?

I have seen all the Harry Potter films but it just annoys me that it is always about him. :o Like, being the favourite with the teachers, all the attention on him etc...he comes across just so dull and up his own bottom. :o And who can blame him...being told he is the special one 4869303 times.

Maybe i am simply jealous. :p

Gonna say LOTRs > HP.
Click to expand...

Agreed. They're incomparable. One is a series of books for children and the other is a series of books for adults. Having read the HP books endlessly, and now being on the last book of LOTR, one thing massively stands out - Harry Potter is dramatically easier to read and understand. It's no wonder it's more popular - it's accessible no matter what your age.

I love Harry Potter and I love LOTR, but no one is better than the other.

The commercialisation of HP is purely down to Warner Bros. As someone who loves the HP universe, I think it's fantastic. It's a way to bring the magical into real life. I'm not a huge fan of the films - the books are far better - but that doesn't mean they aren't enjoyable.
 
SixTwoSix said:
Only watched the movies but gave up on about the third HP movie, felt dull, predictable and derivative. That said, the Hobbit movies weren't anything special. I'd probably rather finish watching the HP series of movies than ever watch the Hobbit trilogy again.
Click to expand...

As a massive fan of the Hobbit book, and never really got into HP... I can only agree!

I have very fond memories of the first HP film... (although nothing to do with the film and all to do with some teenage fumblings in the back row of the cinema :p), but the Hobbit was just terrible. The story was butchered to drag it out into 3 films (the almost 3 hours of the last film covers about 15 pages of the book!), the whole stupid white orc story which was pulled out of some writer's (bad) imagination and had nothing to do with the original book, and all of the stupid gags and slapstick "comedy" just ruined it. I know it's a kid's book so isn't supposed to be too dark, but the majority of the book is still quite serious with none of the cheap laughs they shoehorned into the films.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom