King Arthur - HP Rip-Off???

First Previous

Page

Frequent Posters

cyberqueen84

@cyberqueen84

Inactive

Posted: 20 years ago

#11

i agree with mystica, i have read all the books of HP & LOTR & also watched the movies, both have their own charm & HP is nowhere a copy of LOTR, i personally like HP more, but i wud agree with sakhita that the movies of LOTR have been better than those of HP, as in they were more detailed & exactly like the books.

Quote

Rukul

@daniel_4ever

Rocker

Posted: 20 years ago

#12

i know that hp has a lot of main scene's cut but u can c the scene in the dvd of hp movies

Quote

Looks like you are new here. Register for free, learn and contribute.

cyberqueen84

@cyberqueen84

Inactive

Posted: 20 years ago

#13

i didn't know that, i'm yet to watch the dvd version, thanks.

Quote

Morgoth

@Morgoth

Rocker

+ 5

Posted: 20 years ago

#14

Both LOTR and HP have some scenes cut - its fairly impossible to show everything in a 3 hour movie.

And even the LOTR movies are not completely true to the books

For eg: In the Fellowship of the Ring (Book), Arwen never rides with Frodo to safety from the Nazgul - it was another elf named Glorfindel.

Moreover, the character of Tom Bombadil was completely cut out of the series.

But, I do agree that LOTR movies were shot in a better way compared to the HP movies.

Edited by MysticaMagic - 20 years ago

Quote

Rukul

@daniel_4ever

Rocker

Posted: 20 years ago

#15

i think LOTR is shoted preety good and has every possible thing in the movie that is in the book.. though only my sister has read the book... hp has a loads of important scenes cut specially in the 3rd movie [ but u can c them in the dvd ]

Quote

1 2

King Arthur - HP Rip-Off??? - Page 2

Related Topics

Explore Topics