Which order do you prefer? - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

Fingolfin II · 07-03-2004, 05:11 AM

Would you have rather read the books before seeing the movies, or see the movies first and read the books? Why?

I personally would have liked to read the books first (as I did), then watch the movies as imagination is always better than movies to me. However, some of my friends who have read the movies said that when they read the books after the movies seemed much better as the books is too descriptive and slow for their liking.

What factors do you think influences this? Obviously one is which order you've already seen it in; that's got to have a major bias, but what else do you think?

ElentariGreenleaf · 07-03-2004, 05:42 AM

I would have prefered to have read the books first, then seen the movies. I guess it's partly because I had all the movie characters stuck in my head, and I'd rather my imagination had created the images in my head while reading the books, but unfortunatly they were all film based. I sometimes also don't feel like a proper Tolkien fan, more like a movie fan. Luckily, i had started reading The Hobbit before I saw FotR, so at least not everything in my mind is based on the movies. I find it strange how close my idea of what Gandalf looked like was very similar to how he does in the films. A combination of Tolkien's superb discriptive skills and PJ's knowledge of the books I believe. Gollum was very different in my mind though, but I have to say I can no longer remember the way I saw ME in The Hobbit before I saw FotR. The movies have clouded my mind...

*~Tarser~* [neigh]

Firefoot · 07-03-2004, 10:00 AM

I am very glad that I read the books first. In the times when I have seen the movies before I read the book, one of a few things happen: 1. I like both book and movie, but neither as much as I might have, 2. I end up disliking the book and liking the movie less than I did, 3. I already know exactly what will happen so that all the amazing moments in a book are ruined. I don't know if any of these would have happened with LotR but the book is so amazing that I would have hated already knowing what would happen - especially in the parts such as when Gandalf came back, Frodo "died", and Dernhelm/Eowyn. (Yes, I fall for all the plot traps).

ElentariGreenleaf · 07-03-2004, 10:32 AM

I'm lucky that I read TTT and RotK before I saw those two films, so at least the plot wasn't entirely spoiled for me. But there's always those bits in the books not in the movies to make up for the spoilers that are

I think had I have read the books first, I would have re-read them by now, and had a deeper understanding of the plot lines and characters, and maybe even have researched all of that extra ME info in Tolkien's other books. But as it is, I haven't. I blame the movies, not my lazyness! But i've always felt book-first Downers have an advantage when it comes to discussing the more complex aspects of Tolkien's works.

*~Tarser~* [can't think of an animal noise right now...]

The Only Real Estel · 07-03-2004, 09:05 PM

It really goes either way for me.

*Since I had already read the books first (many, many times); I was able to follow the movies a lot better than a lot of poor, unfortunate non-book goers that we're completly left behind. It also helps me to see how utterly stupid some of PJ's chanes & reasons for changes are

.

*If I had gone before reading the books, they would've been a whole lot more suspensful. Sure, they still had me in suspense sometimes, but no matter how much Jackson decided to screw with the script, I still knew that Frodo was going to get stabbed by Shelob, keep the Ring, you know the drill. Sometimes I think it would've been really cool to have seen them with no previous book knowledge (or maybe just having read the Hobbit, that would've been nice) so that I wouldn't be ready for anything.

Gorwingel · 07-03-2004, 11:20 PM

Books first, movie second

If you have that option. If you have seen the film and not read the books because you don't think it's worth it, go out and read them because it is

Though I do have to admit that reading the books first did take some of the suspense out of the films, and of course when you read the books you have your own images of what certain scenes look like, and when the movie images don't meet your personal images you can become somewhat dissapointed. But when you read the books first you get Tolkien's true and complete story, which is the best version, by far, in my opinion. The film is great, but the books are wonderful.

ElentariGreenleaf · 07-04-2004, 05:51 AM

You have a good point there Estel. Having read TTT and RotK before having seen the films, there was less sitting on the edge of my seat, and more dissapointment with PJ's pointless changes or additions. Though, by the time I came to see RotK, I'd forgotten quite a lot of the smaller plot lines. I should really get round to reading the trilogy for the second time. I keep getting throught FotR, then forgetting I was reading it.

*~Tarser~* [click]

wilwarin538 · 07-04-2004, 11:09 AM

I would of much rather read the books before I saw the movies. When I first saw the preview for the movies it was the first time I heard of LOTR and I didnt know it was originally a book so I watch the first movie and then discovered the books and read them but having already a picture of what everything looked like in my head, which wasnt very fun.

Mad Baggins · 07-04-2004, 09:38 PM

I saw FotR before I read it.

But I read TTT and RotK before I saw the movies! And I'm quite glad, because that way I knew how the movies were supposed to be, and I wasn't brainwashed into thinking that they were right. Also, I didn't turn into a Leggybopper. Close call, though. Kinda like Frodo and the splinter of the Morgul blade.

Azaelia of Willowbottom · 07-05-2004, 01:03 PM

I read the books before seeing the movies, and I like it better that way. I have a vision of Middle-Earth in my head that is pretty much untouched by PJ's movies because I let my imagination do the work before I sat down and let PJ's take over. It's not that the movies are bad: they're the best I've ever seen, it's that I love having my own picture of the story. Also, I think it's *easier* to read the books first because your expectations aren't touched by what the movie was, and you won't get bored if things move a bit slow and the battles aren't as nonstop as they are in the movie. I say this because one of my friends tried reading FOTR after seeing the movie, and she couldn't make it past the chapter, The Council of Elrond. I think that the movie is, in part, an action movie. Things move right along and the battles are long and drawn-out. (I'm thinking specifically of Helm's Deep, which took up a huge chunk of TTT that could have been better used) Anyway, what I'm saying is that her expectations were made by the movie. Reading the books before the movie somewhat eliminates that.

There are problems with books before the movie... You may get mad when your favorite book scene is botched, the little differences add up and start to annoy. You know when something's been changed, and not necessarily for the better. I tend not to let this get to me, but my book-loving friend really was made angry by the movies. In general, the people who I've talked to (except for my friend the Council of Elrond quitter) who read the books after the movie seem to have the attitude that "the movie was good and the books were awesome", while some book fans seem to have the attitude, "The books were so much better than the movie!" Maybe that's just my experiance... I certainly don't mean to generalize... I just think it's easier to have the more positive opinion when you read the books second. Of course, I've met many like myself who have read the books before seeing the movie and still think that the movie is excellent while loving the books.

Silmiel of Imladris · 07-06-2004, 09:53 PM

Here is my rule of thumb. If the movie is based on the book I will read the book first. If the book is based on the movie, ie Star Wars novels, I will see the movie first.

Meela · 07-10-2004, 03:16 PM

I read most of the books first, but I prefer reading them after having seen the movies. This happens with most book/movie adaptations: I find the books easier to follow if I already know what happens. The movies are much clearer, and so I can grasp the plot more easily. This was the most clear with The Return of the King, actually. I had no idea what was happening at the end of the book, until I saw the movie. I had no real understanding of the Battle of Pelennor until just after The Two Towers was released, and Return of the King was being publicised. I think I actually just asked someone outright what was going on.

Boromir88 · 07-10-2004, 04:56 PM

My dad handed me the book when I was 17 (about 20 years ago) and I have loved it ever since. For me, probably the book (or atleast part of it). My nephew likes the movies but I suggested him to read the prologue or first couple chapters before seeing the movie, to give him some background. One doesn't have to do this to understand the plot, but I think it would help out if you knew a little bit about the stories before watching the movies (also, I was trying to sway him to get interested into the books). I will say PJ's movies has gotten a lot of people to read, but I've heard so many people who quit reading because it's boring, or Legolas isn't in it. There have been many people who have watched the movies first and then read and enjoyed, also people who have read but prefer the movies just because there aren't so many names or places to remember. I think it just depends upon someone's preference.

Firefoot · 07-10-2004, 05:30 PM

Quote:

who read the books after the movie seem to have the attitude that "the movie was good and the books were awesome", while some book fans seem to have the attitude, "The books were so much better than the movie!" Maybe that's just my experiance...

I agree that many times, this is how people will respond (book or movie first), at least at first. I would say though, that book fans can (and do) get to the point where "the movie was good and the books were awesome". It just takes a lot more time. I was incredibly disappointed after seeing FotR the first time - I felt that they got some things right but it just lacked the touch the books had. Now, however, about a year and a half since I first saw FotR, I can say that "the movie was good and the books were awesome".

Nirvana II · 07-12-2004, 09:40 PM

its always better to read the books then see the movies

Legolas · 07-13-2004, 09:07 PM

Books first - nothing like creating your own images.

ninlaith · 07-13-2004, 09:56 PM

I love reading the books before the movies sometimes for the fact that when you create your own images of people and places you start to get engulfed and infatuated with these images. Also when you see it on screen it is one of the most fulfilling feelings ever. But if you read the books before the movie you go in with some expectations which can be a bummer. So I like to wait until after I've seen the movies to read the books, however, LOTR was too good to put down.

elfwishes999 · 07-26-2004, 07:16 PM

i watched the movies first and was glad i did because if it wasn't for them i wouldn't have started reading the books in the first place,

Morsul the Dark · 07-26-2004, 07:25 PM

I myself saw fotr first then read the trilogy then saw the other two movies this was perfect for me because it's hard for me picture charactors and the movie gave me a basis which i could manipulate if i wanted I also read the books because of the movie

Lady Gamgee · 07-27-2004, 09:07 AM

I saw the movies first, then bought the book ... and I'd rather have it that way. Too many people say that some movies are disappointing because of leaving out so much stuff from the books. (I bought & read The Hobbit before LOTR ... I highly recommend doing that...). Personally, I wanted to watch all 3 movies first to see if I'd like them. I LOVED them, so I had to go buy the books. And although there are some differences between the movies & the books, I still find the movies better. With the books, your imagination kicks into overdrive, trying to see in your mind what's happening, what the characters look like, etc.... which is great, gotta have a good imagination. But with the movies, you physically see what your imagination thought of all along. The pictures in your mind become reality.

Encaitare · 07-27-2004, 01:57 PM

I wish I had read the whole trilogy before seeing the movie, but what's done is done.

I tried to read FotR when I was about 12 and the pacing was just too slow-- I got bored and didn't pick it up. Then I saw the movies of FotR and TTT, and thought they were amazing. I didn't have the strength of will to wait another year to find out what happened, so I went and read the whole trilogy.

And thus an obsession and a sudden pasty quality to my skin from sitting around doing dorky LotR-related things (ie: learning Quenya) were born.

Not that there's anything wrong with that sort of thing

But, yeah, book before movie is always better.

One of the Nine · 07-27-2004, 02:04 PM

In my case, I had no choice, except for RotK, to read the books first. My parents wouldn't let me see the movie until I read the book. And with RotK, I had read all of it except for the Scouring of the Shire to the end. And I already had my ticket for the movie theater. And, I'm very glad that I read the books first, because they left out a LOT in the movie. It probably wouldn't have made much sense if I watched the movie first. I'm very glad I read the books first, though. As some of you have said, it would have spoiled the best parts in the book.

Arwen Imladris · 07-30-2004, 01:18 PM

I agree, reading the books first is best. You understand so much more when you read th books first, even if they are hard to read. PJ had to cut out so much from the movies, but without the information the movie wouldn't make much sense. You would still be able to follow the basic story line, yes. But would you fully understand the threat of the ring? I don't think so. Can you keep track of the many characters? I don't think so. With the books you can take your time, go backwards and read a passage again, skip ahead etc. You don't do this in a movie nearly as much, even with a DVD. You also have the opertunity to look at the carefully drawn maps at the back of the book to check where you are in Middle Earth. The movies only provide an interpretation of the books.

Lhunardawen · 07-30-2004, 09:36 PM

Good thing I had the "privilege" of experiencing both.

I saw FotR before reading the book, and I would have to admit that I couldn't follow the story much. I just understood when I have read the book. But I have read TTT and RotK before seeing the movie, and I was able to understand (even criticize) the movies.

Reading the books first is better for me because I can leave room for my limited imagination to roam freely around, which would have been subdued had I watched the movies first. But I had to be prepared for seeing mistakes in the films--which actually gave me a shock.

Elven Hunter · 07-31-2004, 07:12 AM

I watched the movies first before trying the books. It was because of the movie why I started to like LotR and I don't regret what happened. Although there would be advantages if you read the books first, it might destroy the "image" of the movie for me and I might not appreciate the movie that much. Watching the movies first tempted me to read the books and find out what flaws it had.

07-03-2004, 05:11 AM	#1
Fingolfin II Ghost Prince of Cardolan Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Where you want me to be Posts: 1,036	Which order do you prefer? Would you have rather read the books before seeing the movies, or see the movies first and read the books? Why? I personally would have liked to read the books first (as I did), then watch the movies as imagination is always better than movies to me. However, some of my friends who have read the movies said that when they read the books after the movies seemed much better as the books is too descriptive and slow for their liking. What factors do you think influences this? Obviously one is which order you've already seen it in; that's got to have a major bias, but what else do you think? __________________ Et Eärello Endorenna utúlien. Sinome maruvan ar Hildinyar tenn' Ambar-metta.

07-03-2004, 05:42 AM	#2
ElentariGreenleaf Ghost Prince of Cardolan Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Look, I'm over there! Posts: 496	I would have prefered to have read the books first, then seen the movies. I guess it's partly because I had all the movie characters stuck in my head, and I'd rather my imagination had created the images in my head while reading the books, but unfortunatly they were all film based. I sometimes also don't feel like a proper Tolkien fan, more like a movie fan. Luckily, i had started reading The Hobbit before I saw FotR, so at least not everything in my mind is based on the movies. I find it strange how close my idea of what Gandalf looked like was very similar to how he does in the films. A combination of Tolkien's superb discriptive skills and PJ's knowledge of the books I believe. Gollum was very different in my mind though, but I have to say I can no longer remember the way I saw ME in The Hobbit before I saw FotR. The movies have clouded my mind... ~Tarser~ [neigh] __________________ There is a fine line between fishing and just standing on the shore like an idiot. Website\|Art

07-03-2004, 10:32 AM	#4
ElentariGreenleaf Ghost Prince of Cardolan Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Look, I'm over there! Posts: 496	I'm lucky that I read TTT and RotK before I saw those two films, so at least the plot wasn't entirely spoiled for me. But there's always those bits in the books not in the movies to make up for the spoilers that are I think had I have read the books first, I would have re-read them by now, and had a deeper understanding of the plot lines and characters, and maybe even have researched all of that extra ME info in Tolkien's other books. But as it is, I haven't. I blame the movies, not my lazyness! But i've always felt book-first Downers have an advantage when it comes to discussing the more complex aspects of Tolkien's works. ~Tarser~ [can't think of an animal noise right now...] __________________ There is a fine line between fishing and just standing on the shore like an idiot. Website\|Art

07-03-2004, 11:20 PM	#6
Gorwingel Beholder of the Mists Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Somewhere in the Northwest... for now Posts: 1,419	Books first, movie second If you have that option. If you have seen the film and not read the books because you don't think it's worth it, go out and read them because it is Though I do have to admit that reading the books first did take some of the suspense out of the films, and of course when you read the books you have your own images of what certain scenes look like, and when the movie images don't meet your personal images you can become somewhat dissapointed. But when you read the books first you get Tolkien's true and complete story, which is the best version, by far, in my opinion. The film is great, but the books are wonderful. __________________ Wanted - Wonderfully witty quote that consists of pure brilliance

07-04-2004, 05:51 AM	#7
ElentariGreenleaf Ghost Prince of Cardolan Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Look, I'm over there! Posts: 496	You have a good point there Estel. Having read TTT and RotK before having seen the films, there was less sitting on the edge of my seat, and more dissapointment with PJ's pointless changes or additions. Though, by the time I came to see RotK, I'd forgotten quite a lot of the smaller plot lines. I should really get round to reading the trilogy for the second time. I keep getting throught FotR, then forgetting I was reading it. ~Tarser~ [click] __________________ There is a fine line between fishing and just standing on the shore like an idiot. Website\|Art

07-03-2004, 10:00 AM	#3
Firefoot Illusionary Holbytla Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 7,547	I am very glad that I read the books first. In the times when I have seen the movies before I read the book, one of a few things happen: 1. I like both book and movie, but neither as much as I might have, 2. I end up disliking the book and liking the movie less than I did, 3. I already know exactly what will happen so that all the amazing moments in a book are ruined. I don't know if any of these would have happened with LotR but the book is so amazing that I would have hated already knowing what would happen - especially in the parts such as when Gandalf came back, Frodo "died", and Dernhelm/Eowyn. (Yes, I fall for all the plot traps).

07-03-2004, 09:05 PM	#5
The Only Real Estel Raffish Rapscallion Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Far from the 'Downs, it seems :-( Posts: 2,835	It really goes either way for me. Since I had already read the books first (many, many times); I was able to follow the movies a lot better than a lot of poor, unfortunate non-book goers that we're completly left behind. It also helps me to see how utterly stupid some* of PJ's chanes & reasons for changes are . If I had gone before reading the books, they would've been a whole lot more suspensful. Sure, they still had me in suspense sometimes, but no matter how much Jackson decided to screw with the script, I still knew that Frodo was going to get stabbed by Shelob, keep the Ring, you know the drill. Sometimes I think it would've been really cool to have seen them with no previous book knowledge (or maybe just having read the Hobbit, that would've been nice) so that I wouldn't be ready for anything*.

07-04-2004, 11:09 AM	#8
wilwarin538 Fluttering Enchantment Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Canada Posts: 2,508	I would of much rather read the books before I saw the movies. When I first saw the preview for the movies it was the first time I heard of LOTR and I didnt know it was originally a book so I watch the first movie and then discovered the books and read them but having already a picture of what everything looked like in my head, which wasnt very fun. __________________ Comme une étoile amarante Comme un papillon de nuit C'est la lumière qui m'attire La flamme qui m'éblouit Fenris Muffin

07-04-2004, 09:38 PM	#9
Mad Baggins Shade of Carn Dûm Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: A place where after thunder golden showers come falling like a rain of flowers. Posts: 371	I saw FotR before I read it. But I read TTT and RotK before I saw the movies! And I'm quite glad, because that way I knew how the movies were supposed to be, and I wasn't brainwashed into thinking that they were right. Also, I didn't turn into a Leggybopper. Close call, though. Kinda like Frodo and the splinter of the Morgul blade. __________________ I like buying snacks from a vending machine because food is better when it falls. Sometimes at the grocery, I'll drop a candy bar so that it will achieve its maximum flavor potential.

07-05-2004, 01:03 PM	#10
Azaelia of Willowbottom Shade of Carn Dûm Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: By the Sea Posts: 446	I read the books before seeing the movies, and I like it better that way. I have a vision of Middle-Earth in my head that is pretty much untouched by PJ's movies because I let my imagination do the work before I sat down and let PJ's take over. It's not that the movies are bad: they're the best I've ever seen, it's that I love having my own picture of the story. Also, I think it's easier to read the books first because your expectations aren't touched by what the movie was, and you won't get bored if things move a bit slow and the battles aren't as nonstop as they are in the movie. I say this because one of my friends tried reading FOTR after seeing the movie, and she couldn't make it past the chapter, The Council of Elrond. I think that the movie is, in part, an action movie. Things move right along and the battles are long and drawn-out. (I'm thinking specifically of Helm's Deep, which took up a huge chunk of TTT that could have been better used) Anyway, what I'm saying is that her expectations were made by the movie. Reading the books before the movie somewhat eliminates that. There are problems with books before the movie... You may get mad when your favorite book scene is botched, the little differences add up and start to annoy. You know when something's been changed, and not necessarily for the better. I tend not to let this get to me, but my book-loving friend really was made angry by the movies. In general, the people who I've talked to (except for my friend the Council of Elrond quitter) who read the books after the movie seem to have the attitude that "the movie was good and the books were awesome", while some book fans seem to have the attitude, "The books were so much better than the movie!" Maybe that's just my experiance... I certainly don't mean to generalize... I just think it's easier to have the more positive opinion when you read the books second. Of course, I've met many like myself who have read the books before seeing the movie and still think that the movie is excellent while loving the books. __________________ "Wherever I have been, I am back."

07-06-2004, 09:53 PM	#11
Silmiel of Imladris Shade of Carn Dûm Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Looking into a crystal ball- still see nothing Posts: 395	Here is my rule of thumb. If the movie is based on the book I will read the book first. If the book is based on the movie, ie Star Wars novels, I will see the movie first. __________________ Legolas 20 ales later: I feel something, a slight tingling in my fingers. I think it's affecting me. Figwit on his name: Are you suggesting that I have the wit of a fig?

07-10-2004, 03:16 PM	#12
Meela Denethor's True Love Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Mirkwood. With Thranduil... swoon Posts: 2,049	I read most of the books first, but I prefer reading them after having seen the movies. This happens with most book/movie adaptations: I find the books easier to follow if I already know what happens. The movies are much clearer, and so I can grasp the plot more easily. This was the most clear with The Return of the King, actually. I had no idea what was happening at the end of the book, until I saw the movie. I had no real understanding of the Battle of Pelennor until just after The Two Towers was released, and Return of the King was being publicised. I think I actually just asked someone outright what was going on. __________________ 'The Hobbit' 1st impressions: 1. Thorin is hot... Oh god, I fancy a dwarf. 2. Thranduil is hotter. 3. Is that... Figwit! 4. Does Elijah Wood never age? 2nd: It's all about Fili & Kili, really. 3rd: BARD! OMG, Bard.

07-10-2004, 04:56 PM	#13
Boromir88 Laconic Loreman Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: USA Posts: 7,518	Book My dad handed me the book when I was 17 (about 20 years ago) and I have loved it ever since. For me, probably the book (or atleast part of it). My nephew likes the movies but I suggested him to read the prologue or first couple chapters before seeing the movie, to give him some background. One doesn't have to do this to understand the plot, but I think it would help out if you knew a little bit about the stories before watching the movies (also, I was trying to sway him to get interested into the books). I will say PJ's movies has gotten a lot of people to read, but I've heard so many people who quit reading because it's boring, or Legolas isn't in it. There have been many people who have watched the movies first and then read and enjoyed, also people who have read but prefer the movies just because there aren't so many names or places to remember. I think it just depends upon someone's preference.

07-12-2004, 09:40 PM	#15
Nirvana II Wight Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: The Yellow Submarine....sandwich Posts: 207	its always better to read the books then see the movies __________________ Это - российская вещь, Вы не поняли бы. Вы - пончик желе! Я оказался снова. Частное сообщение меня, если Вы понимаете.

07-13-2004, 09:07 PM	#16
Legolas A Northern Soul Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Valinor Posts: 1,847	Books first - nothing like creating your own images. __________________ ...take counsel with thyself, and remember who and what thou art.

07-13-2004, 09:56 PM	#17
ninlaith Wight Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: in my hobbit hole Posts: 204	I love reading the books before the movies sometimes for the fact that when you create your own images of people and places you start to get engulfed and infatuated with these images. Also when you see it on screen it is one of the most fulfilling feelings ever. But if you read the books before the movie you go in with some expectations which can be a bummer. So I like to wait until after I've seen the movies to read the books, however, LOTR was too good to put down.

07-26-2004, 07:16 PM	#18
elfwishes999 Animated Skeleton Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 37	i watched the movies first and was glad i did because if it wasn't for them i wouldn't have started reading the books in the first place,

07-26-2004, 07:25 PM	#19
Morsul the Dark Ghost Prince of Cardolan Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 3,448	I myself saw fotr first then read the trilogy then saw the other two movies this was perfect for me because it's hard for me picture charactors and the movie gave me a basis which i could manipulate if i wanted I also read the books because of the movie __________________ Morsul the Resurrected

07-27-2004, 09:07 AM	#20
Lady Gamgee Animated Skeleton Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: The Shire Posts: 30	I saw the movies first, then bought the book ... and I'd rather have it that way. Too many people say that some movies are disappointing because of leaving out so much stuff from the books. (I bought & read The Hobbit before LOTR ... I highly recommend doing that...). Personally, I wanted to watch all 3 movies first to see if I'd like them. I LOVED them, so I had to go buy the books. And although there are some differences between the movies & the books, I still find the movies better. With the books, your imagination kicks into overdrive, trying to see in your mind what's happening, what the characters look like, etc.... which is great, gotta have a good imagination. But with the movies, you physically see what your imagination thought of all along. The pictures in your mind become reality. __________________ "....though in all lands love is now mingled with grief, it grows perhaps the greater." ~~ Haldir

07-27-2004, 01:57 PM	#21
Encaitare Bittersweet Symphony Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: On the jolly starship Enterprise Posts: 1,814	I wish I had read the whole trilogy before seeing the movie, but what's done is done. I tried to read FotR when I was about 12 and the pacing was just too slow-- I got bored and didn't pick it up. Then I saw the movies of FotR and TTT, and thought they were amazing. I didn't have the strength of will to wait another year to find out what happened, so I went and read the whole trilogy. And thus an obsession and a sudden pasty quality to my skin from sitting around doing dorky LotR-related things (ie: learning Quenya) were born. Not that there's anything wrong with that sort of thing But, yeah, book before movie is always better.

07-27-2004, 02:04 PM	#22
One of the Nine Haunting Spirit Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: In my mind. What? Why are you looking at me like that? Posts: 84	In my case, I had no choice, except for RotK, to read the books first. My parents wouldn't let me see the movie until I read the book. And with RotK, I had read all of it except for the Scouring of the Shire to the end. And I already had my ticket for the movie theater. And, I'm very glad that I read the books first, because they left out a LOT in the movie. It probably wouldn't have made much sense if I watched the movie first. I'm very glad I read the books first, though. As some of you have said, it would have spoiled the best parts in the book. __________________ I have a very short attention span, and it sometimes affects me when I'm, ooo a squirrel....

07-30-2004, 01:18 PM	#23
Arwen Imladris Ghost Prince of Cardolan Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: In a box with a fox Posts: 1,347	I agree, reading the books first is best. You understand so much more when you read th books first, even if they are hard to read. PJ had to cut out so much from the movies, but without the information the movie wouldn't make much sense. You would still be able to follow the basic story line, yes. But would you fully understand the threat of the ring? I don't think so. Can you keep track of the many characters? I don't think so. With the books you can take your time, go backwards and read a passage again, skip ahead etc. You don't do this in a movie nearly as much, even with a DVD. You also have the opertunity to look at the carefully drawn maps at the back of the book to check where you are in Middle Earth. The movies only provide an interpretation of the books. __________________ "Wake up! Wake up! Wake up, sleepies, we must go, yes, we must go at once."

07-30-2004, 09:36 PM	#24
Lhunardawen Hauntress of the Havens Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: IN it, but not OF it Posts: 2,538	Good thing I had the "privilege" of experiencing both. I saw FotR before reading the book, and I would have to admit that I couldn't follow the story much. I just understood when I have read the book. But I have read TTT and RotK before seeing the movie, and I was able to understand (even criticize) the movies. Reading the books first is better for me because I can leave room for my limited imagination to roam freely around, which would have been subdued had I watched the movies first. But I had to be prepared for seeing mistakes in the films--which actually gave me a shock.

07-31-2004, 07:12 AM	#25
Elven Hunter Animated Skeleton Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 28	I watched the movies first before trying the books. It was because of the movie why I started to like LotR and I don't regret what happened. Although there would be advantages if you read the books first, it might destroy the "image" of the movie for me and I might not appreciate the movie that much. Watching the movies first tempted me to read the books and find out what flaws it had.