Poll: How many people have actually read The Lord of the Rings?

[Summerstorm]

I read the first two books. But seriously: while the world is well crafted and interesting... they where damn boring (And they traveled on the blahblahblah, where the green blahblahblah). So i didn't read the last one. (But i heard it was the most exciting... so ah well)

 

[gunman127]

I read all the books when the films were first announced.
Rather dull, generic, and could barely finish it.
I watched the first movie just to see if it was any better.. .and it wasn't.
People say Tolkien invented the vast majority of classic high fantasy: Orcs and elves and such.
But just because it was the first doesn't mean it was any good!
Would you rather have a Model T Ford or a Veyron?

 

[Ramin 123]

I just finished The Two Towers this morning oddly enough

 

[Sicram]

I read all three just after the first movie came out. I quickly noticed there were some stuff missing and such, as would be expected from a movie adaptation. Good books really.

 

[Neverhoodian]

I've read The Hobbit three times and Lord of the Rings twice. It was pretty good timing on my part, as I finished the books shortly before Peter Jackson's film adaptations. It was entertaining observing how the audience reacted to events in the story that I already knew about.

On the flip side, it was also entertaining listening to hardcore Tolkien fans complain about every single little change in the films. While I thought some of the alterations were unnecessary, I felt it was an excellent adaptation all things considered.

 

[Speakercone]

I read the first two books. But seriously: while the world is well crafted and interesting... they where damn boring (And they traveled on the blahblahblah, where the green blahblahblah). So i didn't read the last one. (But i heard it was the most exciting... so ah well)

I had a similar experience, but I'd read some Dickens beforehand, so I was already pretty adept at knowing which paragraphs were extra.

LotR appears to suffer from overhype syndrome. If someone tells you a thing is the best thing in the world, it's inevitably going to let you down. So many people rave about Tolkien that no one really gets to discover it themselves anymore.

 

[ColeusRattus]

Rather dull, generic, and could barely finish it.
I watched the first movie just to see if it was any better.. .and it wasn't.
People say Tolkien invented the vast majority of classic high fantasy: Orcs and elves and such.
But just because it was the first doesn't mean it was any good!
Would you rather have a Model T Ford or a Veyron?

Ah, and here we have the good old problem of "being born too late". I always feel sad for people (myself included) that can't enjoy groundbreaking books, films or games, because they are desensitized because of the many knock-offs, clones and derivates that came afterwards.

Lord of the Rings might be dull to you, but it isn't generic. It only seems to you that way because its setting has become the convention.
Just imagine showing someone "The Matrix" that hasn't seen it, but the myriads of other action flicks with "cool" Slow-Mo scenes. Instead of a true masterpiece it once was, that person just sees clicheed action with bad CGI and a slightly confusing story.

 

[Void Droid]

I've read The Hobbit 4 times, quite possibly my favourite book of all time but I just couldn't enjoy LOTR. I got half way through the second book on 2 occasions and stopped from boredom at pretty much the same spot each time, I don't know why it never grabbed me like The Hobbit.

 

[Bobbity]

I did! In grade one actually; I read it with my dad I went back over it again, a few years ago and - actually understanding what was going on - enjoyed it all the more.

It's not my favourite fantasy work, but it's up on the shortlist, and probably the best of all the fantasy literature I've read.

On a somewhat related note, I was talking to two of my friends the other day, and they both hated the hobbit, although for different reasons. Imagine that the next five lines are just me bitching about them.

 

[Sethzard]

I read the first book, but I just couldn't enjoy it.

 

[ntw3001]

I tried, but I absolutely hated them. It was achingly dull, then they met Tom Bombadil and it became annoying as well. Not worth bothering, I says to myself.

 

[StBishop]

I had always intended to read them and finally got around to it once the films were announced. I didn't read the Hobbit first though. I read that in 03 for school and loved it, I'd have read it anyway but it was a good excuse to ignore my parents (was 13) and read because it was homework.

Also, I had to put off watching Two Towers with my friends on release night because I'd not finished the book but I'm glad I read them all before seeing the film.

 

[Tizzmarelda]

Ive read the hobbit and iam currently reading The Silmarillion. the lord of the rings is on the to-read list. This comeing from a lad who Never reads. ever. Tolkein converted me

 

[lettucethesallad]

I've read it several times, but I don't think I'd go so far as to say it should be required reading. Tolkien's style is a bit of an acquired taste, and the lengthy descriptions can get pretty tedious for people who don't like it. They're great books all the same though.

 

[5mj7R7yf4Dwr3gdZyyu9PeGNwYjlNrjzuh3iTXQG]

I read The Hobbit as a kid. Tried reading Fellowship, but was discouraged by the chapter after the encounter at Weathertop, a long, miserable journey through Mirkwood as Frodo gets sicker and sicker.[footnote]This isn't really that much of a spoiler. The story gets better, anyway.[/footnote]

I read Fellowship from the beginning as an adult, and realized I had good reason to quit before; that was a miserable chapter. Fortunately, the Counsel of Elrond at Rivendel is to follow.

I'd read The Two Towers from beginning to end once I finished Fellowship, and then got distracted before starting Return of the King.

From what I remember, Tolkien seems all about the long meandering journeys. He'll write on and on about the trees and the mountains and the flora, yet battles and encounters and events are short little stints before more about the trees.[footnote]In the book, the Battle of Helm's Deep was a single chapter. In the Peter Jackson movie, the Helm's Deep was half the film.[/footnote]

238U.

 

[Sonicron]

Read it. I prefer the movies, no doubt about it; the 'Sam and Frodo trudge through Mordor' sections in the books were sheer torture for me.

Tried the Silmarillion once, but it had driven me clinically insane by the time I hit page 100.

 

[NoNameMcgee]

I don't really read books.

I watched one of the movies and found it too dull to me, I don't really enjoy movies that are longer than 2 hours unless I am really gripped into whats happening. With LOTR I just wasn't.

 

[Josdeb]

Nah, I haven't read them. Honestly, I tried and found them boring.
I even pushed all the way through the Hobbit and it was pretty horrible for me. Epic fantasy-type novels aren't really my thing.

I don't even enjoy the movies, they bore me. I've seen the first two, and I didn't even bother with the third. Chances are I'll end up seeing the Hobbit with friends.

 

[Heronblade]

Just so you know, The Silmarilion is wildly dull.

That is fantastic.....wildly dull.
Its such a good image - like the book is really, really excited to just grab you and assault you with a whirlwind of unimaginable boredom.

Not too far from how I would describe it personally. There are so many incredible details to the Middle Earth backstory available in that book that I wanted to know, but it is basically written as a historical piece, not a story.

I'm a bit of a bibliophile personally. started going to bed with one of the Redwall series when I was 8, moved on to adult novels at about 14. Read most of the classics, can't stand some of them. (Pride and prejudice ought to be renamed English Pricks: the worst things about "high society")

 

[IckleMissMayhem]

From what I remember, Tolkien seems all about the long meandering journeys. He'll write on and on about the trees and the mountains and the flora, yet battles and encounters and events are short little stints before more about the trees.

Though, to be fair, wasn't the series written/created/dreamed up when he was in the trenches of WWI? If that's true, as opposed to something my mind may randomly just have created, I'd probably want to spend a fair bit of time thinking about lovely trees and forests and mountains and long journeys, instead of violence and battles, since I'd no doubt be witnessing enough of that on a daily basis...

I ploughed my way through it - I enjoyed the story, but ol' JRR did *not* know the meaning of the word concise ;-)

Glad I'm not the only one who thought so!

Yes, I read the books. Didn't enjoy 'em all that much though. In fact, at some points, it felt a bit like reading something for school/uni english lit class, rather than for my entertainment. Much, MUCH preferred the Dune series.