For years, people have debated if the book is better than the movie or if the movie is better than the book. This series will be focusing on these two questions and answering that million dollar question: which is better?
The book
The Lord of the Rings, one of the most iconic books out there written by J.R.R Tolkien. Filled with mystical creatures and beings, the story takes place in somewhere called Middle Earth. The story starts off, when nineteen Elves from Eregion forge a total of nineteen rings made for a total of nineteen people: three for the the Elves, seven for the Dwarves, and nine for mankind, but not only nineteen rings were made, one forged at the peak of Mount Doom stands out above all. Created by Sauron, The Dark Lord, this ring is filled with malevolent power and corruption. It’s purpose is to rule over all Middle Earth and end the era of mankind. To avoid this, one must destroy the ring. This is the destiny of a Hobbit named Frodo.
The book is filled with descriptions about beautiful landscapes, lifeless war zones and dangerous creatures, such as orcs and giant spiders. The book also shares with us the emotions of the main characters, such as the fright Frodo experiences when he tries to hide the ring from the nine kings, now known as The Nazgûls.
The Movie
In December of 2001, The lord of the rings was released in the theaters and received a total of 91% of rotten tomatoes and a score of 8.8 in IMDb. Throughout the United States, the movie was praised by it’s scenery and the amazing acting of each and every character, such as the acting of Ian McKellen, as the wizard Gandalf. As David Denby from The New Yorker stated,
“Consistently beautiful and often exciting — despite some dead passages here and there, it’s surely the best big-budget fantasy movie in years.”
David’s compliment is also supported by one of the lines from the first book The Fellowship of The Ring.”The braids of her dark hair were touched by no frost; her white arms and clear face were flawless and smooth.”
This was one of the thousands of compliments given to the Lord of the Rings by critics and, well the general public itself. The movie has been watched over and over by the public and fans, although some have called out some flaws that the movie had as well, for example Jonathan Rosenbaum from The Reader had stated,
“It’s full of scenic splendors with a fine sense of scale, but its narrative thrust seems relatively pro forma, and I was bored by the battle scenes.”
This is also supported by the first book and it shows that the battle of Minas Tirith was 3 chapters long!! and has a total of 30 pages.
Therefore, The Lord of the Rings wasn’t perfect, but it did meet the expectations of mostly everyone.
With these results we can conclude that the movie is BETTER than the book, by pure scenery and elaboration towards the script. Well, that concludes all for this second post! See you in the next Movie vs Book.
1 reply on “Movie vs. Book: Lord of the Rings Trilogy”
Couldn’t there be a tie?! JRR Tolkien was a linguist and literally invented an entire language for the elves in his books. The trilogy is accompanied by the prequel, The Hobbit, and The Silmarillion, a mythological collection describing the universe of Lord of the Rings. I agree with you that these movies were phenomenal for their use of special effects, make up, prosthetics, and scenery (you can still visit Hobbiton in New Zealand to peek into the Hobbit holes built for the films and Weta Workshop, the company hired to design and build weaponry, costumes, make up, and prosthetic pieces) but are they more effective at telling Frodo’s story?