The Lord of the Rings The Lord of the Rings discussion


36 views
LOTR

Comments Showing 1-25 of 25 (25 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

Carolina :) Say something


Louise J.R.R Tolkien was an intelligent and brilliant writer with a such a vivid imagination that he created a world with fascinating characters and their journey and adventures, even their own languages (Elven language). His portrayal of the little village (the Shire) and the Hobits that lived there was truly astounding and captured my imagination. I really enjoyed this story, was an excellent book which I recommend everyone read.


Samir Majhi This is one of the most overrated books ever. Most of it was description. Very little action. Quite disappointing.


Louise Almost all books are mostly description since there is no visual. Considering this book has so many fight scenes (including an epic war) not sure how there could be less action????


Samir Majhi Books written in this century are more about action than description of the world about them.

LOTR felt more like a painting being described in words than an epic adventure. The fight scenes weren't engaging. This is one of those rare instances where the movie did a better job than the book.


message 6: by Gerd (last edited Feb 28, 2016 04:48AM) (new) - rated it 5 stars

Gerd I'd disagree about the movies being the better in this instance, they did nothing much wrong and I guess they delivered a fairly good adaptation but I fell in love with J.R.R.'s sweeping style, which can go from the hundredth to the thousandth, in a way I never did with the movie versions.

I can see however how this is written in a style that will not resonate with every reader as much.


Carolina I disagree with the fact that LOTR is overrated - I don't think so. If anything, I find that it is underrated. Unlike with Harry Potter, it seems to me that many people have seen the movies and haven't read the book, because it can be so overwhelming. Upon finishing it, I was so happy - it really gives a sense of achievement, like YAY, I FINISHED IT. However, I can see why you might find it very hard to read. It is full of lengthy descriptions that sometimes drag on but once you've gotten past, you realise it was worth it.

The movies were pretty good... okay REALLY good. They did crank up the romance a bit but I guess that was good because in the book, the romantic relationship between Arwen and Strider/Aragorn isn't obvious at all until the end. Sometimes, I didn't like the way it was interpreted (like the way they made Faramir act like Boromir when actually he was drawn to the ring but resisted it and DIDN'T take it back to Gondor). Other than that, I marathon-ed the trilogy and I really enjoyed it.


Louise Carolina wrote: "I disagree with the fact that LOTR is overrated - I don't think so. If anything, I find that it is underrated. Unlike with Harry Potter, it seems to me that many people have seen the movies and hav..."

This is so true. It was a lengthy book with lots of descriptions but I suppose it appeals to a certain type of reader. The movies did lack the romance but were very good none the less. In my experience, when books are made into movies, nine times out of ten the book is better than the movie. With this book I just think it was difficult for the director to fit everything into the films, but I think it was brilliantly done.


Samir Majhi I agree that it appeals to only a certain type of reader.

I had to plow through it thinking this is touted to be such a great book, maybe the greatness comes later on. When I reached the last chapter, I finally did what I should have many pages earlier. I abandoned it.

I tried so hard to like it. But sorry. It was torture for me.


Carolina Sarah wrote: "Carolina wrote: "I disagree with the fact that LOTR is overrated - I don't think so. If anything, I find that it is underrated. Unlike with Harry Potter, it seems to me that many people have seen t..."

You're totally right. The movies were almost as good as the book (I think I just prefer books in general). I thought that the romance was VERY obvious.. I'm not that much of a fan of romance myself...I ship Legolas and Aragorn ahahahaha.

The book was beautiful in its own way - the depth of the background story is facinating and the fictional languages are beyond words... Tolkien put so much work into creating the world of Middle Earth in utmost detail.


Carolina Samir wrote: "I agree that it appeals to only a certain type of reader.

I had to plow through it thinking this is touted to be such a great book, maybe the greatness comes later on. When I reached the last cha..."


I TOTALLY understand what you mean. I began reading it when I got it as a birthday present and it was awful. However, on my second attempt, I was determined to finish it, and I did. I guess it really depends on the reader. I don't think it's the type of book that hooks you straight away, but, as far as I know, when you get into it (if you do at all) you get REALLY into it.

I find that the Harry Potter books were superbly written and (if you haven't read them already) might be more to your taste...... ?


message 12: by Samir (new) - rated it 1 star

Samir Majhi Yeah. I read the Harry Potter books. Absolutely loved them....... Except the first half of the last book.


message 13: by Marc (new) - rated it 5 stars

Marc Childs This story evolved out of Tolkien creating a new language, which became a world, and THEN a story. Harry Potter is great children literature but if you want adult fantasy in a fully developed world you can't beat Tolkien. If you want to get lost in a magical world that leaves room for mystery, read LOTR. If you want to read a story with magical elements that any kid with any sort of reading comprehension can read, go with Harry Potter. And this is not to knock Harry Potter which is one of my favorite series of all time, it just seems people don't understand Tolkien and lack the reading skills necessary to appreciate his work.


message 14: by Samir (new) - rated it 1 star

Samir Majhi Marc wrote: "This story evolved out of Tolkien creating a new language, which became a world, and THEN a story. Harry Potter is great children literature but if you want adult fantasy in a fully developed world..."

I strongly disagree to your claim that those who don't appreciate Tolkien's work lack the reading skills to do so. First of all, the book doesn't need much reading skills to begin with. The language and concepts are pretty simple. And Second, one can have adequate reading skills and still not like a book.

Tolkien's work is like dark chocolate. Those who love it don't understand why others don't like it. And those who don't like it can't seem to understand what the fuss is all about.It's all a matter of taste. There's no need to be elitist about either.

Judging a person by the books one likes is unwise. I have enjoyed Two States as much as I have enjoyed Plato's Republic.


message 15: by Marc (new) - rated it 5 stars

Marc Childs Samir wrote: "Marc wrote: "This story evolved out of Tolkien creating a new language, which became a world, and THEN a story. Harry Potter is great children literature but if you want adult fantasy in a fully de..."

Every complaint above is about boredom and inability to get into the story, probably because they are having a hard time following (characters, places, etc.). If you are not used to reading complex literature such as classic novels, where sometimes you have to get around language to find the meaning, you probably only see LOTR as a catalog of a magical world. I mean people are trying to compare the basis for modern fantasy, a world that arose from a language being created, to a children's book. That leads me to question the reading level. There is a battle for the world and if that isn't an epic battle I don't know what is, it is literally the attempted extinction of mankind! If you're bored by this book you either don't get Tolkien or you can't follow. Neither are wrong.


message 16: by Old-Barbarossa (last edited Mar 01, 2016 11:19AM) (new) - rated it 1 star

Old-Barbarossa One thing I don't understand regarding LOTR is the evangelical levels of enthusiasm folk have for it.
I personally found it very dull, but can certainly understand that others may well love the text.
This is good, the world would be less fun if we all loved the same things.
But...the level of fandom that LOTR creates in some folk bewilders me. The fact that they can write their names in runes or recite the lineage of an obscure character...I suppose that's fair enough.
It's the idea that it's the greatest book ever and no one else's opinion is even entertained...that is sadly dogmatic and dismissive of everyone else's reading tastes.
Here I am merely stating an opinion, feel free to disagree.
However, some posters seem to have the elitist attitude that if you don't like it you lack skills in literacy. On this I feel I have to take issue. It is a ridiculous argument.


Louise The mere fact that Peter Jackson took this 1000 page book and made 3 movies, is in itself, a testament to the book's brilliance and genius. Yes, lots of books are made into films, but not a 1000 page book, that takes 8 years to shoot, and an estimated budget of over $281million....obviously it was something special


Old-Barbarossa Sarah wrote: "The mere fact that Peter Jackson took this 1000 page book and made 3 movies, is in itself, a testament to the book's brilliance and genius. Yes, lots of books are made into films, but not a 1000 pa..."

A 50 page description of walking, striding, running, or riding works really well as a 20 second long shot in film. A 1 page description of a battle is smashing as a 20 minute segment of action.
(The above is tongue in cheek.)
The point I attempt to make here is that book and film are very different ways of telling a story. The films, in this case, benefitting massively from being directed by someone with a passion for the subject matter.
Also, the already existing fan-base (who obviously agree that the book(s) are "something special") made the films a commercially viable option for the studios.
However...even though I enjoyed the film I found LOTR, which I read years before, a bit of a chore. And I think that's OK...the same way that I think it's OK for folk to love it.
I just think it's not OK to say that as I don't like it I must have a sub standard reading level.
Maybe it's one of those books that speak to folk at a certain time of their lives (whatever that may be)...and because of this the emotional attachment they have with it makes it difficult to understand, or tolerate, any criticism of it. I have seen similar thinking with religious beliefs, political view, and sports fans...where they don't tolerate other opinions and dismiss them as simply wrong.
It's just a book. If you like it cool. If you don't, that's cool too.


Louise I think that the posters that said readers who didn't like this book lack reading skills and literacy are wrong. Reading is about personal taste and preference. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion....it's what make discussions interesting. Technicalities aside, LOTR will always be one of my favourites.


message 20: by Old-Barbarossa (last edited Mar 01, 2016 10:31PM) (new) - rated it 1 star

Old-Barbarossa Sarah wrote: "I think that the posters that said readers who didn't like this book lack reading skills and literacy are wrong..."

Sorry, that part of my comment wasn't aimed at you, please don't take it that way...it just spun on from where I started.


Diane Verdi This seems like a love it/hate it book.. I personally loved it but can understand that some people just don't get fantasy and can't relate it to their lives.


Lindsay Tolkien's work is so incredibly moving and beautifully written. Never has a work of fiction captivated me so powerfully. I remember when I first finished the LoTR trilogy I didn't know what to do with myself... It felt like there was a part of me missing or something. My first thought upon completing the trilogy was "Wow. I can never read that for the first time again." But every time I reread part of LoTR I find more to love and become captivated by. There's always something there I never noticed before, whether it's a comment or action from a character, a reference found in Old English literature, cultural references, etc. There's alway something more to love in Tolkien's work (including many of his other writings as well!).


message 23: by Dylan (new) - added it

Dylan I've mentioned this in another post, but LOTR is a lot like Moby Dick or James Joyce's Ulysses:

It's a slog, you might love it or hate, but either way, you'll probably be glad (or at least proud of yourself) if you make it through.

It's a classic, and classics are not always fun, often painful, usually rewarding, but sometimes seem pointless.

Personally I've read it six times and know it like the back of my hand :)


message 24: by Abdul (last edited Apr 13, 2016 03:47PM) (new) - rated it 4 stars

Abdul Saboor Only a fantasy lover can understand this book. This an absolute master class. I mean you just get trapped into a whole new world, I just want to stay in that fantasy world.


brooke1994 I love J.R.R. Tolkien's works. Some people have said that it's too detailed, but that's exactly what you want to do as a writer, readers will never get pulled into your world if you're too simple with your writing. I loved the vast and physical descriptions of middle earth and as much as I like the movies, the books still top them. I also read the first four Harry Potter books by JK Rowling, they stopped being interesting at the fifth book so I decided to drop them. If there are Harry Potter fans out there, then great, that's your choice, but Rowling's writing isn't nearly as good as Tolkien's writing. I loved that Tolkien not only gave readers an amazing piece of literature to read, but he also knows how to pull readers into middle earth completely. Unless a person is really busy where they have little to no time to read, I think people need to stop with the "It's too long, it's too detailed" complaints. I love Sean Astin's performance as Sam in the movies. I feel Elijah Wood is wooden and not as good of an actor as Sean Astin.


back to top