Lord of the Rings: Book vs Movie

[Sally_Heart]

I would not lie but when it comes to Lord of the rings the movies are better than the books.

[JodyVamp]

The books were amazing, but sometimes almost felt like there was so much going on that I could get lost in all the detail and various storylines. The movies did an excellent job of streamlining everything while keeping true to the heart of the novels. A lot was left out or else they'd be 9hrs each, but I love em and watch em all the time anyway.

[KRay93]

I saw the movies first, so maybe my opinion is influenced by this, but I think they did a great job of the overall adaptation and selection of material to consider; to remove moments not so important for the central plot; to add elements of other complementary works such as the love story between Aragorn and Arwen or give more prominence to her in the story; to expand the battle of Helm's Deep and end the whole thing right after the Battle of the Black Gate and the fall of Barad-dûr instead of the the Scouring of the Shire. Still, I'd have preferred to see more focus on how the ring poisoned Frodo's mind, or some more context on certain worldbuilding issues such as the nature of the higher powers that handle the fate of Middle Earth.

[Libs_Books]

I would have to say that the books are better for the simple fact that a lot of stuff was taken out of the movie. I know they have time constraints and only so much money to work with.

I agree, but I think one of the most extraordinary things about the films is that I found them to match visually with the way I'd imagined the books - and everybody I've spoken to who knows and loves the books feels the same way. That's pretty rare, I suspect.

[BookInspector300]

Books are always better because the plots are usually much developed and you read scenes that are usually not included in the movies, probably because of budget or something. By the lord of the rings movie was really amazing. The producers deserve two thumbs up(it would be more if I had more than two thumbs)

[nikkyteewhy]

As much as I appreciate the writers and the actors of the movie for a good job well done, the book still surpasses the movie on every level.

[Hannah Mo]

Personally I loved the movies, the books are fantastic don't get me wrong but I do enjoy the movies slightly more then the books.

[Aituaje]

I think the movies did a spectacular job of incorporating as many major plot points as possible with the limited time and budget. I enjoy the books because of the level of detail that they attain over the hundreds of pages, but I enjoy the movies slightly more because they did a good job of selecting the best parts of the books and tying them together quite nicely.

[harps789]

I've read a few pages of LOTR at one point, but since the books are too long, I never got to finish it. I've read The Hobbit though and the book is definitely better than the film adaptation, imo, so perhaps that's the case too on LOTR books vs. movies.

[ADEK-TIMMY]

Yes, in this case, I actually believe the films were better, or more rightly, as good as, the books. They are both amazing, but I love LOTR films to see what I envisioned in my imagination, play out on the screen. It was exactly how I pictured the books while reading. But I will turn on the films for a LOTR marathon before picking the books back up.
“We make choices everyday, some of them good, some of them bad.

[strawberrysab]

Definitely better the books. There was so much that was left out of the movies.

[amale]

I think in terms of pacing- the movies are a lot better than the books. But the movies do lack the richness of the greater universe that Tolkien fleshed out in his works. My problem with his writing is that it often comes across as sounding like a college professor giving a lecture. Which, to be fair, Tolkien was a college professor. Therefore, seeing the adaptation of that given a more "typical" fantasy flavor was fantastic and I love that Peter Jackson used so much of Tolkien's work to flesh out the movies in the little details. Mentioning Lobelia and her stealing of spoons for example, it made the dryer parts of Tolkien's writing really come alive for me. So I guess in answer to the question...both are better in different ways. I cannot choose haha.

That being said, I think the three movies of the Hobbit were a bit unnecessary and not as well done as the Lord of The Rings. While the Hobbit was originally meant to be a child's novel, Jackson often changed the tone of the Hobbit moves from a more serious fantasy to a farcical "oh look the fat hobbit broke the chair while eating too much food haha" moments. It was jarring for me personally. However this topic is about Lord of the Rings specifically, not the Hobbit.

[love_b00ks]

I don't know but the movie just don't appeal to me, I haven't tried the book yet.

[Mely918]

I agree with you on this one. I definitely enjoyed the movies more than the books. Normally I have a much better experience reading the book than I do watching the movie. Something about these movies though made the whole experience in Middle-earth much more fascinating.

[sush_destiny]

Both were really good, but I prefer the books. I read them in high school and one of my favorite fantasy series.