HP vs. LotR round 3

[saintbacchus]

Naama writes:

<<
Well, I suppose this is another instance of difference
in taste. I didn't find the movie entertaining, I'm
afraid. I suppose that if I  didn't love the books so
much, I wouldn't mind it being so mediocre. As it is,
I'm positively furious at Columbus for "desecrating"
my beloved book. :-)
>>

I suppose it's about time for me to add my blood to
the battlefield. I saw both HP and LotR without having
read the books. The reason I never read LotR is that I
found it overbearingly dull (although I loved The
Hobbit). I had simply not bothered to read HP, figuring
if the movie was interesting, I could read the books.

LotR was a fantastic movie, but I'm still afraid of the
reams of text that await me should I try to crack the
books again. HP was a mediocre movie (and I hate it for
that), but it did inspire me to read the books, which I
now love.

I will say that, despite the poor directing job by
Columbus, the acting was spectacular in HP. Well, that
and the casting was inspired. Anyway, the acting redeems
the cartoony feel and choppy editing to the point where
I'll be in line for the DVD on May 28th. I can't wait to
see the deleted scenes! *bounces*

--Anna