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

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.

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

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

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.

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 ]