So, I watched the entire Lord of the Rings Trilogy over the span of last week (seriously people, for being newly single, my social life is right up there with lepers and Republican church wives). And Emery has been adamant that we watch a Star Wars movie when he comes to crawl in bed at midnight or so (of course, he falls asleep about 5 minutes into it but I'm too much a geek to stop watching). With this recent side by side comparison, I got to thinking about which is the better trilogy. I know there are purists out there who will decry this post as blasphemy, screaming from the rooftops that there is only one, true trilogy. But I'll tread where fanboys fear in this situation. So, which flavor do you prefer? Original Star Wars (I'm sorry, but the prequels are spinoffs in my mind) or Lord of the Rings? And whilst your working on that, I have a few fanboy questions:
1. We all know that Empire is the greatest of the Star Wars movies (and I'll arm wrestle you if you disagree) and that The Two Towers is the best of the LOTR (well, it is in my mind), but which is the better sequel between the two? Personally, I'll go with Empire, because it hits you with the double whammy of Luke losing his hand AND finding out the truth about his father (from the same guy, no less). Dark and edgy, ending on a down note, Empire should be the standard by which sequels are made.
2. Who would you rather have on your side in a fight? (my answers in parentheses)
Luke Skywalker or Aragorn? (Aragorn...he is such a bad ass, he makes dead people afraid of him)
Yoda or Gandalf? (Yoda...Nothing against the White Wizard, but I'll take the Muppet with the effed up syntax any day of the week and twice on Sunday)
3. Who is the better bad guy, the Emperor or Sauron? (The emperor by a nose. He had more screen time and he didn't need no stinkin' orcs to fight his fights)
4. Finally, who would kick more ass in a fight, Darth Vader or the Lord of the Nazgul? (Vader? Nazgul? It could go either way, but my fanboy heart wins out and says Vader)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
3 comments:
Okay, here's my quick answers...
1. As much as I love Star Wars, I think LOTR is better. It's got a lot more levels to it than SW does without being a geek. The dialogue, while classical, is not as stilted as Lucas'. I could go on, but I'm on a time limit here. That said, Empire is a better sequel. Towers only sets up Return of the King.
2. Aragorn, hands down, no argument. Luke, in that trilogy, isn't much of a fighter and certainly couldn't've taken Obi-Wan in his youth.
Based on the original trilogy, Yoda wasn't much of a fighter, and the swordplay was simply swordplay in Empire. I'd have to go with Gandalf on this because we didn't know Yoda was a badass, really KNOW it, until the second trilogy.
3. The Emperor because we get to know a little about him in the trilogy. Of course there's much more about him in the second trilogy, but compared to Sauron, the Emperor is much more terrifying.
4. The Nazgul is more imposing, but slower than Vader, even in the trilogy. However, the Nazgul might have a longer reach and be able to take him down a peg or two, might even win. It's a close fight, but I'll give the edge to Vader.
All in all, an entertaining exercise. In terms of sequels to excellent films, though, Superman 2 might blow them both away. "KNEEL before Zod!" Powerful stuff.
The nerdiness aside, I've always had a huge dislike for Star Wars.(AND Star Trek, for that matter)
While younger I liked Empire more than reasonable, adulthood viewings have removed all love for this series as a whole. My favorite of them all was Phantom Menace. THAT's blasphemy at the highest of nerd levels, but it IS the best one.(arm wrestling will not change this)
That being said:
1. My vote is for LOTR simply because it's better. As a whole I can't say I'm much of a fan of that series either, but it did have great production elements and was just better presented than the old Star Wars was.
2. I have to go with Aragorn because, as Arnett stated, Luke wasn't much of a fighter.
3. I think that Sauron is much creepier. Mostly because he WAS the force in the LOTR land. He was just interconnected evil that fought wars- the emperor just fought Yoda and Luke needed Vader's help (while crying under his helmet) to put him down.
4. In the old movies, the idea imposed of what Vader was supposed to be was way more terrifying- but all that was erased with the prequels. And his grip of fear was throughout a galaxy. However cool the Nazgul were- they were limited to their greed for the rings. Come to think of it- it was Vader's t-shirt that he wore beneath his suit "Vader & Son" that was his failing. Hmm...ok, I'll call this a tie.
As much as I loved both Superman and Superman II, once the third Batman movie comes out (The Caped Crusader?) I'm willing to crown it as the best trilogy- cause so far the two that are out are pretty freakin' wicked, even compared to both Star Wars and LOTR
The Godfather trilogy?
Post a Comment