The great debate

The great debate

LotR is shit.

Star Wars is better.

what is there to debate, LOTR is superior to Star Wars in every way

Both are better than Harry potter, one of the dullest franchises in the history of movie franchises.

Seriously each episode following the boy wizard and his pals from Hogwarts Academy as they fight assorted villains has been indistinguishable from the others. Aside from the gloomy imagery, the series’ only consistency has been its lack of excitement and ineffective use of special effects, all to make magic unmagical, to make action seem inert.

Perhaps the die was cast when Rowling vetoed the idea of Spielberg directing the series; she made sure the series would never be mistaken for a work of art that meant anything to anybody?just ridiculously profitable cross-promotion for her books. The Harry Potter series might be anti-Christian (or not), but it’s certainly the anti-James Bond series in its refusal of wonder, beauty and excitement. No one wants to face that fact. Now, thankfully, they no longer have to.

>a-at least the books were good though
"No!"
The writing is dreadful; the book was terrible. As I read, I noticed that every time a character went for a walk, the author wrote instead that the character "stretched his legs."

I began marking on the back of an envelope every time that phrase was repeated. I stopped only after I had marked the envelope several dozen times. I was incredulous. Rowling's mind is so governed by cliches and dead metaphors that she has no other style of writing. Later I read a lavish, loving review of Harry Potter by the same Stephen King. He wrote something to the effect of, "If these kids are reading Harry Potter at 11 or 12, then when they get older they will go on to read Stephen King." And he was quite right. He was not being ironic. When you read "Harry Potter" you are, in fact, trained to read Stephen King.

oh sam

Is this the most versatile pasta of all time?

>movies
Star Wars

>books
Lord Of The Rings

LotR>Harry Potter>Star Wars>Game of Thrones>>>>>> The Walking Dead

Its not a contest
LotR is well made film but is totally artless.

I'm gonna reserve judgment until the Lotr sequel trilogy starts to come out.

>"No!"
Harry potter is one of the dullest franchises in the history of movie franchises.

Seriously each episode following the boy wizard and his pals from Hogwarts Academy as they fight assorted villains has been indistinguishable from the others. Aside from the gloomy imagery, the series’ only consistency has been its lack of excitement and ineffective use of special effects, all to make magic unmagical, to make action seem inert.

Perhaps the die was cast when Rowling vetoed the idea of Spielberg directing the series; she made sure the series would never be mistaken for a work of art that meant anything to anybody?just ridiculously profitable cross-promotion for her books. The Harry Potter series might be anti-Christian (or not), but it’s certainly the anti-James Bond series in its refusal of wonder, beauty and excitement. No one wants to face that fact. Now, thankfully, they no longer have to.

>a-at least the books were good though
"No!"
The writing is dreadful; the book was terrible. As I read, I noticed that every time a character went for a walk, the author wrote instead that the character "stretched his legs."

I began marking on the back of an envelope every time that phrase was repeated. I stopped only after I had marked the envelope several dozen times. I was incredulous. Rowling's mind is so governed by cliches and dead metaphors that she has no other style of writing. Later I read a lavish, loving review of Harry Potter by the same Stephen King. He wrote something to the effect of, "If these kids are reading Harry Potter at 11 or 12, then when they get older they will go on to read Stephen King." And he was quite right. He was not being ironic. When you read "Harry Potter" you are, in fact, trained to read Stephen King.

LOTR is the superior franchise by far

Are you fucking retarded? Why are you shitting up threads that have nothing to do with your beloved franchise you autistic cuntbreather?

>LotR is well made film but is totally artless.

People need to know that Harry potter is one of the dullest franchises in the history of movie franchises.

Seriously each episode following the boy wizard and his pals from Hogwarts Academy as they fight assorted villains has been indistinguishable from the others. Aside from the gloomy imagery, the series’ only consistency has been its lack of excitement and ineffective use of special effects, all to make magic unmagical, to make action seem inert.

Perhaps the die was cast when Rowling vetoed the idea of Spielberg directing the series; she made sure the series would never be mistaken for a work of art that meant anything to anybody?just ridiculously profitable cross-promotion for her books. The Harry Potter series might be anti-Christian (or not), but it’s certainly the anti-James Bond series in its refusal of wonder, beauty and excitement. No one wants to face that fact. Now, thankfully, they no longer have to.

>a-at least the books were good though
"No!"
The writing is dreadful; the book was terrible. As I read, I noticed that every time a character went for a walk, the author wrote instead that the character "stretched his legs."

I began marking on the back of an envelope every time that phrase was repeated. I stopped only after I had marked the envelope several dozen times. I was incredulous. Rowling's mind is so governed by cliches and dead metaphors that she has no other style of writing. Later I read a lavish, loving review of Harry Potter by the same Stephen King. He wrote something to the effect of, "If these kids are reading Harry Potter at 11 or 12, then when they get older they will go on to read Stephen King." And he was quite right. He was not being ironic. When you read "Harry Potter" you are, in fact, trained to read Stephen King.

I don't like "medieval" settings personally.
Why would I want to escape to a universe less sophisticated than my own?
I'd much rather see high-tech, futuristic settings than some shit I could have read in a history book.

I've seen Clerks 2 as well.

They both suck. It's literally nostalgia and nothing else. If I had released the force awakens but called it galactic conflict and changed all the characters names and stuff, you would all hate it just like the pile of trash that was Fury Road.

The pacing of the Fellowship of the ring is literally perfect.

>Catch-22
>Low Tier

Are you retarded?

they are well made although a bit bloated. They have zero artistry about them though.

...

Stop.

>fury road is bad
this meme is staler than the potter pasta

How does this surprise me? It's incredible

>LoTR
One god tier movie, two great movies, one okay movie, two stinkers
>Star Wars
One god tier movie, two great movies, five stinkers

you said it man

>art isn't art just because the visuals and dialogue are based off some words in a book, also disregard the soundtrack entirely

both wrong