nealbie
CF Legend
The original Star Wars trilogy and Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings trilogy are two of (if not) the best epic film sagas of all time, but which is best?
I love both sci-fi and fantasy (yes, this can happen) and variations & crossovers thereof, so I rank both highly. Both were vastly enormous and everywhere when they were in the cinema, both are time consuming and both have worse prequel sequels. Star Wars' visual effects for the time were miles ahead, LotR is still visually stunning even in this new age of 3D and HDMI cables. Yes the story is a bit basic in Star Wars, but does Jackson have an unfair advantage in being able to tap 99% of his material from a man with a million times more writing ability than George Lucas? Or does the huge source material penned by Tolkien only stand to make the Lord of the Rings' success as an adaption greater?
__________
Arguably, Star Wars has a better global reach. As a 3/4 year old, Dad produced three dusty VHS tapes from off of the shelf one day and sat down with me to watch one of his favourite films with his son. I was entranced. The spaceships, the scary black robot man with Mufasa's voice and the monsters. All of them were a huge part of my childhood from that point on. Those VHS' ended up on my shelf and as far as I was concerned, even at such a young age, this is what watching the television was for!
I recently rewatched them all (having, shamefully, not done so for about 7/8 years) and they still have the same appeal and wonder, but I'm sort of upset that I did. Because when you're a child, you don't get distracted enough from all of the visual mentalness that is going on to realise that the plot is ropey at best. It's still epic, but somehow not fitting of the perfection I bestowed upon it as an infant. This kind of brings us on to episodes I-III, which I saw aged 8-12 or so (and at the time, enjoyed all the same), but obviously by this point it wasn't ahead of its time for visual effects, so it was just a film, it didn't have the same magic - and, like its predecessors, pretty much devoid of a good and meaningful plot (until the last 20 minutes of III perhaps). Sure they're not as good as the original, to say otherwise would be wrong, but they're not rubbish because the originals certainly aren't rubbish and they suffer from the same problems.
Aged 7, Dad (I really should give him more credit for my upbringing :lol: ) read me what was to become my favourite book instantly: The Hobbit. I loved it, the magic, the dragon (who in my head had the voice of Mufasa) and the monsters. There was another, much larger, book in the house which bore the same name as The Hobbit... The Lord of the Rings. I tried to read this, but struggled
P ), Dad came to the rescue. I would lie down on the bed with my eyes closed and listen to him read the story to me. Wow. A year or so later, I was in the car on my way to go and see Fellowship of the Ring at the cinema. As we all know, it was amazing. Pretty much everything was as I had visualised it in my head lying down on my bed. For the rest of my childhood and into teenage life, Star Wars (including the original ones to a lesser extent) and The Lord of the Rings were the films that took up most of my time and attention. I loved and adored them both in equal measure.
In 2010 I rewatched Jackson's trilogy, and was still blown away. However, thinking perhaps I'd become much more cynical in the last few years. Over the last couple of days I watched it again to achieve a direct comparison with my mindset to Star Wars, I was still blown away. It is so perfectly on point, I refreshed my memory of the books last April/May, with a few (but, probably, necessary) exclusions and alterations. I didn't factor that the visuals are from early 00s compared to the 70s, because in my mind it's cheating (well, an unfair advantage) on the visual front for films set in worlds akin to our past in style. If they could make structures then, it's childsplay in the modern day. It's always, always much more difficult to create a convincing futuristic/spacey environment. That said, Star Wars is possibly as close to perfect as you'll find with a little imagination.
So, to me, they are both BRILLIANT. But I've pushed Star Wars more to a children's film franchise, it doesn't engage me enough as an adult and is in the genre of being a sci-fi Harry Potteresque trilogy. It is still by far and away the best of its kind though, there's no denying that. The Lord of the Rings trilogy can both engage me as a child (but not quite as well as Star Wars) and as a cynical, critical adult. This edges my vote in its favour as the best epic trilogy of all time.
__________
So... which is your favourite? Or is there another epic film trilogy that you think is better than the both of them? The floor is yours!
I love both sci-fi and fantasy (yes, this can happen) and variations & crossovers thereof, so I rank both highly. Both were vastly enormous and everywhere when they were in the cinema, both are time consuming and both have worse prequel sequels. Star Wars' visual effects for the time were miles ahead, LotR is still visually stunning even in this new age of 3D and HDMI cables. Yes the story is a bit basic in Star Wars, but does Jackson have an unfair advantage in being able to tap 99% of his material from a man with a million times more writing ability than George Lucas? Or does the huge source material penned by Tolkien only stand to make the Lord of the Rings' success as an adaption greater?
__________
Arguably, Star Wars has a better global reach. As a 3/4 year old, Dad produced three dusty VHS tapes from off of the shelf one day and sat down with me to watch one of his favourite films with his son. I was entranced. The spaceships, the scary black robot man with Mufasa's voice and the monsters. All of them were a huge part of my childhood from that point on. Those VHS' ended up on my shelf and as far as I was concerned, even at such a young age, this is what watching the television was for!
I recently rewatched them all (having, shamefully, not done so for about 7/8 years) and they still have the same appeal and wonder, but I'm sort of upset that I did. Because when you're a child, you don't get distracted enough from all of the visual mentalness that is going on to realise that the plot is ropey at best. It's still epic, but somehow not fitting of the perfection I bestowed upon it as an infant. This kind of brings us on to episodes I-III, which I saw aged 8-12 or so (and at the time, enjoyed all the same), but obviously by this point it wasn't ahead of its time for visual effects, so it was just a film, it didn't have the same magic - and, like its predecessors, pretty much devoid of a good and meaningful plot (until the last 20 minutes of III perhaps). Sure they're not as good as the original, to say otherwise would be wrong, but they're not rubbish because the originals certainly aren't rubbish and they suffer from the same problems.
Aged 7, Dad (I really should give him more credit for my upbringing :lol: ) read me what was to become my favourite book instantly: The Hobbit. I loved it, the magic, the dragon (who in my head had the voice of Mufasa) and the monsters. There was another, much larger, book in the house which bore the same name as The Hobbit... The Lord of the Rings. I tried to read this, but struggled
P ), Dad came to the rescue. I would lie down on the bed with my eyes closed and listen to him read the story to me. Wow. A year or so later, I was in the car on my way to go and see Fellowship of the Ring at the cinema. As we all know, it was amazing. Pretty much everything was as I had visualised it in my head lying down on my bed. For the rest of my childhood and into teenage life, Star Wars (including the original ones to a lesser extent) and The Lord of the Rings were the films that took up most of my time and attention. I loved and adored them both in equal measure.In 2010 I rewatched Jackson's trilogy, and was still blown away. However, thinking perhaps I'd become much more cynical in the last few years. Over the last couple of days I watched it again to achieve a direct comparison with my mindset to Star Wars, I was still blown away. It is so perfectly on point, I refreshed my memory of the books last April/May, with a few (but, probably, necessary) exclusions and alterations. I didn't factor that the visuals are from early 00s compared to the 70s, because in my mind it's cheating (well, an unfair advantage) on the visual front for films set in worlds akin to our past in style. If they could make structures then, it's childsplay in the modern day. It's always, always much more difficult to create a convincing futuristic/spacey environment. That said, Star Wars is possibly as close to perfect as you'll find with a little imagination.
So, to me, they are both BRILLIANT. But I've pushed Star Wars more to a children's film franchise, it doesn't engage me enough as an adult and is in the genre of being a sci-fi Harry Potteresque trilogy. It is still by far and away the best of its kind though, there's no denying that. The Lord of the Rings trilogy can both engage me as a child (but not quite as well as Star Wars) and as a cynical, critical adult. This edges my vote in its favour as the best epic trilogy of all time.
__________
So... which is your favourite? Or is there another epic film trilogy that you think is better than the both of them? The floor is yours!
