Viewing Thread:
"LotR related argument"

It's just a simple "Which is better?" argument between me & a equally beardy mate, but help settle it none the less.

Which is better, Fellowship or Towers?

I say Fellowship, he says Towers.

Whitestripes DX wrote:
> And Shelob.

> If they balls that up I will cry.

Yes - that's her name. Thankee kindly.
She ruleth

Practical Magic wrote:
> Isn't it this christmas ? Alongside another Harry Potter ?

I thought the next Harry Potter was out next June (Well that's what they said in The Sun).

Isn't it this christmas ? Alongside another Harry Potter ?

The third one is going to beat both of them put together, though. Anyone got any idea at all when it comes out?

Starlight wrote:
> It was kinda nice actually seeing the Balrog though, I don't think
> there was an explanation saying it was a fire being in the book. I
> could be wrong though I read it ages ago.

Yes, it says it was a being of shadow and flame. Although the fact that they made it a sort of like a giant bull-man is poetic license. And im also sure that the book says a Balrog stands man high.

Fellowship is sooo much better than towers.

Fellowship just felt more "Magical". I think its because it totally blew me away with its awesomeness. I really wasn't expecting much, i hadn't even read LOTR before the film came out, and now im a lotr junkie.

I say Fellowship is better simply because Towers contains what I think is the worst piece of story out of all three books.

The part where Gandalf falls fighting the Balrog then comes back as again. Phft, that's just crap if you ask me.

It was kinda nice actually seeing the Balrog though, I don't think there was an explanation saying it was a fire being in the book. I could be wrong though I read it ages ago.

Stryke wrote:
> Fellowship has Sean Bean, though.

Cyclone wrote:
> The Ents were to quick.
>
> Then again, the US audience might have fallen asleep.
>
> :D

Hehe.

Fellowship.

Towers missed out a HUGE chunk of the book.