ravana said:As a former high schooler who listens to heavy metal, I just don't like these books. They're mainstream fantasy to me. It's pop, not metal.🙂
Very detailed, but it lacks depth and "mysticism." If you take out the trolls and orcs, Zola could have written this too.😛
The movies are actually better—I suppose seeing those special effects is interesting. Back in my high school days, though, I preferred other books in the genre. Most of all, I was moved by Dune (well, that's sci-fi, after all). That book has "something" about it, whereas Tolkien reads like a newspaper article in terms of style and spirit.
Besides, even the movie version of Dune (that Italian production) is better than the Rings, even if it didn't seem that way on first watch.
Both the book and the film are interesting, but they aren't the kind of things that leave a deep impression or something you'd want to rewatch multiple times.
Mainstream fantasy, huh? You say that as if there's some sort of underground or alternative fantasy. After Tolkien, everyone took a little inspiration from him, and some copied him shamelessly (Jordan). Before Tolkien, there was Howard and his Conan in those Golden Axe-style stories where Conan wanders around and screws people over.
And compared to Dune and Herbert's cold writing style, it’s certainly better. No mysticism? Yeah, right. No depth? The man wrote the entire history of Middle-earth! It doesn't get any deeper than that.