Nah... I think he's just talking about GoT, since he doesn't cover much outside the show, especially when he talks about the timeline, which is way more broad. Not saying he doesn't mention the books, but it seems more focused on the HBO series.
@@Stargeek06that is the purpose, there are many other books but he transitions between middle earth and Lord of the Rings depending on the topic, both are awesome and both only got 2 live action adaptations ( ignore rings of power) in which the prequel came after, I just think the coinscidence is funny
Technology static in LOTR? Did you forget that Isengard, and Saruman represent industrialization. Something Tolkien hated but nonetheless present. There are more advanced weapons and let’s not forget that Saruman creates presumably a bomb, the “blasting fire”
And didnt the dwarves invented like high powered howitzer ballistas? Or those twirling things. LOTR is much more advancing in their tech conpared to GoT
"LOTR themes have a clear distinction between good and evil" The main theme is the weakness of the human heart, its easy corruption and temptation, a metaphor for sin. It's a lot more than a fairytale of good vs evil.
Yeah I like how when Sam carries it for just a few hours to rescue Frodo, even Sam feels the pull when Frodo asks Sam to give it back. Sam is arguable the most noble and loyal of them and even he was tempted.
A clear distinction does not negate that theme. It's still a very black and white definition of what is evil and wrong in the world, vs what is good and virtous. Something which universes like ASOIAF not only lacks but criticises from a relativist and morally grey viewpoint as if it not being a realistic distinction one can make.
That's like arguing that Star Wars doesn't make a clear thematic distinction between good and evil because Jedi occasionally get tempted to the Dark Side. The whole reason people get corrupted by the One Ring is because the ring is _pure evil._ There's nothing morally ambiguous about that.
It's ironic how Tolkien comes from a time of war and his works are the opposite of it and GRRM comes from a time of relative peace and his works are literally the polar opposite of it...
@@kullenmontgomery1210 yes, he also wanted to set an example for others to follow the beacon of hope despite the reality of the human condition and wars being fought
@@reffa2858not really these two novels are largely different from their genres to everything...I agree Lotr will always be more famous nd a classic but asoiaf has surpassed it in story telling, characters etc but that's just my opinion
@@marimo5039when george rr Martin has stated many times he gets a lot of inspiration from Tolkien as do all modern fantasy writers Tolkien is just simply more complex as he studied writing also.
There's a lot, I mean a lot wrong about middle-earth here... in almost every bit. About morality, optimism, and also ignorance about the age of the trees and so on which come before the first age. It seems to focus almost completely on the events in the Lord of the Rings rather than taking the darker and harsher wars with Morgoth into account, which had many tensions among the elves and between elves and dwarves and men as well as the constant threat of the creeping darkness which slowly consumed Beleriand from the north. Many of the men also sided with the darkness rather than the light and the power in the one ring causes corruption in all who look upon it.
Was thinking the same, he forgot the age of trees and the lamps. Like teh first age is when man came to be, there was several thousands of years before that. And more beyond
-There is literally a political struggle in the history of gondor and numenor (especially during its golden age) -Numenor had an almost gender equal dinamics when it comes to rulership. -You simply failed to mention that Haleth was a warrior and ruler of her people being one of the first heroes of the edain (humans) and is accompanied by female bodyguards. -Dwarves possessed great craftsmanship and architecture. But Numenor had a more advanced military and industrial might and artistry. -there was kinstrife within the house of eorl the young. And occupied the ancestral homeland of the Dunlendings whom they perceived as "wild men" -no one in middle earth is safe from natural elements. Catastrophic weather nor bubonic plagues. -Men including the elves are equally capable of atrocities as well as heroic deeds without any allegiance to a higher power. By means of ethnic cleansing, slavery, incest, and usurpation. -I SUGGEST YOU READ THE BOOKS FIRST MATE.
I don’t know but I think this is more based on their live action versions so the movies and the tv show or mainly from the main books so just lotr and got doesn’t seem to go beyond that.
You're not wrong about ASOIAF being more inspired by real history, but it's also heavily inspired by norse and celtic mythology. Bran and the magic of the weirwoods borrows heavily from the story of Odin and Yggdrasil. Also you could that the over arching story is inspired by Ragnarok. Not a lot of fantasy authors aren't inspired by some mythology lol
I think that's oversimplifying things a bit. While humans in Middle-earth often deal with moral grey areas, Elves aren't purely good - just look at the whole Fëanor situation. And Orcs, though usually portrayed as evil, were something Tolkien actually struggled with in his later writings. Plus, this view ignores the complex morality of other races like Dwarves or even Hobbits. Tolkien's world is more nuanced than just "Elves good, Orcs bad." There's a lot of moral complexity in Middle-earth, even if it's not as obvious as in some other fantasy worlds.
To say the technology of middle earth is static is wrong. 1. The technology of Mordor and of Isengard reflects industrialization of there resources and land with siege weapons being of a more cruder in design and more menacing. Giving a more phycological warfare aspect to their enemies, this is seen in Return of the King with Grond " The Wolfs head" a massive Siege Ram, siege towers and siege catapults firing the served heads of Gondorian soldiers in the siege of Minas Tirith. As well as the siege of Helms Deep with the bombs created in Isengard, the ballista used to fire the rope for the ladders. 2. The Numenoreans were master shipbuilders and naval navigation congregating in several colonies throughout middle earth with a huge trade routes. The descendants of Numenor, being Gondor and Arnor were able continue their predecessors work with the likes of fortress like Minas Tirith, Minas Morgul, Osgiliath, Pelargir, Fornost, Annuminas. And some of their defenses put in place being that of Trebuchets, Siege towers, quality of arms just to name a few. Were as in GOT we are shown realistic adaptions of Siege Warfare with Trebuchets, Rams, Naval Vessels, and other tactics. Yes medicine is explored a little bit more in GOT then LOTR with the Ingredients. But the Portrayal of these advancements are through the Character's such as when Cersei wants to know if the Mountain can be saved and Pycelle advise that nothing can be done for him. Qyburn steps in and is able to bring the Mountain Back in a zombified state. To clarify I am basing the GOT depiction form the tv show and not the book. As far as Siege Warfare goes it pretty bad I mean the battle of the black water showed and excellent use of wildfire, no use of catapults or trebs throughout that battle. battle of the bastards had no siege weapons, the siege of riverun is the only depiction that shows proper siege warfare when Jamie and Bronn arrive to assist the Freys.
Westeros doesn't have a Morgoth or a Sauron. When (in the TV series) they had to face something similar, although smaller in scale, the world united against it. Sure, Cersei betrayed them, but there were also betrayals in Tolkien's works. And please, Cate Blanchett is Galadriel!
Tolkien defined the fantasy genre however GRRM forever changed its landscape. Gone are the Tolkien idealistic and heroic tales. In a more cynical world, what is relatable are gray characters. Now fantasy can be purely for adults to. Before its was mainly catered for kids and the whole family, LOTR, Narnia, Harry Potter
well i am sure LOTR will remain relevant for another century, while grrm will fall into obscurity somewhat. And one of the reasons for that is what you already mentioned: Tolkien offers idealistic and heroic tales, which people like and desire evermore in these cynical and grey times we live in
@@paulusillyriusiudathaddaio2530 With time, stories like Tolkien's transcend more, those with universal values that inspire us and with rich philosophical and spiritual value, beyond stories where everything is cynicism and moral relativism. I think it's because although these plots are interesting to watch because of the political conflict and surprising betrayals, they are elements that work more for a first visit, but do not give you anything really transcendental beyond a well told story (and that Martin's stories have some flaws), because we can not say that GOT is more realistic in the sense of historical parallelism, because any scholar in history will identify how superficial is the author's understanding of premodern societies on which it was based. As the Dothraki, for example, have more in common with the orcs than with their declared influences (Mongols, Sioux, etc.)
@@nicolasm2001 i guess time will tell. Both books have been there for decades. I will disagree however that heroic tales especially grounded on religion is more transcendent. History has proven that the only constant thing is goodness mixed with cruelty. As GRRM said, the conflict of the human heart. What i can for say for sure is that the current climate yearns more for a more relatable fantasy rather than high fantasy with ultimate heroes.
Well-researched analysis. I think it is silly that people are comparing these two series because Lotr is the classic pioneer of the fantasy genre and a brilliant good vs evil story with good storytelling, and characters. In contrast, Got is a more realistic story of wars and betrayals,alliance and human nature. Both are some of the best fantasy genre has to offer.
lotr actually has 4 time periods, the creation of the world and so on until the first defeat of morgoth was marked as the years of the trees. And then when morgoth destroyed the trees began the first age
@@markusbasmadjian6817 The 1st, 2nd, and 3rd ages is the record of the children of Illuvatar (elves, dwarfs, and men). Elves were around before the first age though. I believe they were born during the Age of Trees. But the middle earth we see in 2nd and 3rd age looks alot different from 1st age. And before that it was the age of trees and before that the age of lamps.
@@markusbasmadjian6817 the first age sees the first rising of the Sun, since before the first age the sun does not exist, the true chronology is Valian Years : unnamed years, years of the lamps, Years of the Trees Years of the Sun : first age, second age, third age, fourth age
I like both a lot, and both are my top two favorite worlds in all of fiction. ASOIAF (Not GOT) is more like "We live in that world and only know what the scholars and historians have recorded," and the rest are up to our imaginations. While LOTR is like "Here's who made the world, what everything is, go and have fun," and it's done by an extremely talented and caring man who treated this world how it should be treated, with care and love... (Looking at you Amazon...)
Because it seems to me is tgat yiure fan if lotr and cant stand to got being more grounded and complex and bruh its wrong to compare them both lotr is epic and got is just dark and complex
@@Romatwoknfive i love both worlds (albeit i do favour tolkien's by far) but the uploader of this video got a lot of things wrong/inaccurate, and that's on BOTH "sides". and yea i agree they shouldn't be compared because they are very distinct bodies of work.
Fist of all I want to make this clear awesome vid and can see that you put alot of work into it and I would very much like to see similar content from this channel. But if you're going to talk about the lotr community plz do more research first. There are alot to put out but I'll say the obvious ones. ・The tone of LOTR is much more sad, cruppted hero's (obvious ones being like saruman and Isildur→which I actually still consider a hero), And lots of hopeless situations. The epic and heroic part is true but like most stories there are alot of parts that aren't ・This is not really wrong but death for mortals is kind of unknown and is 100% not to the undying lands ・The influence is Wrong, sorry but as a Tolkien fan I have to say it a like harshly but Tolkien was a Professor of Anglo-Saxon at Oxford University! and had lots of influence from there!!! ・Good or evil is a hard part some evil men aren't really evil and are mere slaves of Sauron and Sauron himself actually believe it or not had some good intentions ・technological advancement is a hard topic some can argue that the rings were a advancement or sarumans bombs and uruk-hai (which can also be said it a forgotten thing) is also an advancement! ・For the maps... I dont't really get what difference you're trying to point out? (Sorry i dont know about GOT that much so I cant really say anything about that part) Non the less great vid and can really see you're love for both worlds!
Thanks for explanation you are a great guy knowing the difference between the differences between culture i believe death in real life feels more similar to me of Lord of the rings world 😅🎉
Idk why you are comparing these two. It’d be more interesting to see you compare Tolkien’s work with the material he based it off of like the Völsunga saga.
@waleed8211 relatively they aren’t comparable your right, they are both very different forms of fantasy, one optimistic and one pessimistic, not necessarily a bad thing but it’s true. But realistically they are comparable, Tolkiens world simply had much more work put into making the world great. The man spent 21 years world building before he published anything, this is just not found in got, so while they both might seem equal on the surface, the deeper you look into both you’ll find that middle earth IS UNDENIABLY richer and more full of quality content. I’m not dissing got but some people here are trying to put it at the same level as Tolkiens world and that’s just not feasible, R R Martin hasn’t been alive long enough to have put in the time that Tolkien did. Please feel free to argue but if you will do so cordially and not like brain dead shithead
9:50 sorry but I have to say it, humans have no afterlife, they die just like in GOT(Tolkien called it true death) and its the humans deep desire for immortality that shapes the second age a lot
You are far from growing enough to comprehend mythos, lil bro. You have no idea what you are talking about, you are only exposing your own narrowmindedness.
I think he's just talking about GoT, since he doesn't cover much outside the show, especially when he talks about the timeline, which is way more broad. Not saying he doesn't mention the books, but it seems more focused on the HBO series.
Thank you for this! You put to words why I dislike and/have very little interest in Tolkien and yet love GoT. I've never been a fan of fantasy bc of its naivety - good vs evil etc.
People have different preferences over things they like, Tolkien's works are meant and catered towards people that want to take a break from reality and immerse themselves in fantasy. Martin's works are for people who love medieval Europe but the addition of dragons and a little bit of magic here and there while also including the harsh realities of the world.
I think your comment mostly based on LOTR story and movies in that case. As a Tolkien fan I worked lots of time on his works and I can say that there is no naive good vs evil in middle-earth (maybe it has in the LOTR story but not on the entirety of the universe). I dont know much about GOT world but as also a history nerd I can say Tolkien's universe is not less complicated ore naive then the actual history. But I also understand that Tolkien's other works then the LOTR story is not visualised and clearly writen on a novel so you have to do lots of researches and be very passionate about his complicated books to understand the world fully.
while some characters are ambiguous in Got/Asoiaf,there is a clear distinction on who is good and who is evil. The Starks/Tullys are good,their antagonists are the Lannister/Crownlands/Greyjoys who are evil (the Others are obviously evil as well). The ambiguity is often related to secondary characters or characters that may seem important but are not meant to play a relevant part in the greater picture. The same applies for Tolkien's works
what's the point if everyone knows the answers to the test? what's the point of putting in the effort to learn from the teacher's teachings if he can just provide all the answers on the day of the test?
GOT? Don't you mean ASOIAF?
Nah... I think he's just talking about GoT, since he doesn't cover much outside the show, especially when he talks about the timeline, which is way more broad. Not saying he doesn't mention the books, but it seems more focused on the HBO series.
@@anamnese3334 That is immensely disappointing, there's so much world building ASOIAF that never got any attention in GOT or HOTD.
@@Stargeek06that is the purpose, there are many other books but he transitions between middle earth and Lord of the Rings depending on the topic, both are awesome and both only got 2 live action adaptations ( ignore rings of power) in which the prequel came after, I just think the coinscidence is funny
@@anamnese3334when he refers to "lord of the rings" he refers only to the peter jackson aswell
Technology static in LOTR? Did you forget that Isengard, and Saruman represent industrialization. Something Tolkien hated but nonetheless present. There are more advanced weapons and let’s not forget that Saruman creates presumably a bomb, the “blasting fire”
He just consider only LOTR not the Legendarium. But against that GOT should be showing only GOT not ASOIAF...
Also Numinor was kinda steampunkish
And didnt the dwarves invented like high powered howitzer ballistas? Or those twirling things. LOTR is much more advancing in their tech conpared to GoT
It's very clear that guy has not read the books of tolkien and george
"LOTR themes have a clear distinction between good and evil" The main theme is the weakness of the human heart, its easy corruption and temptation, a metaphor for sin. It's a lot more than a fairytale of good vs evil.
Yeah I like how when Sam carries it for just a few hours to rescue Frodo, even Sam feels the pull when Frodo asks Sam to give it back. Sam is arguable the most noble and loyal of them and even he was tempted.
A clear distinction does not negate that theme. It's still a very black and white definition of what is evil and wrong in the world, vs what is good and virtous. Something which universes like ASOIAF not only lacks but criticises from a relativist and morally grey viewpoint as if it not being a realistic distinction one can make.
That's like arguing that Star Wars doesn't make a clear thematic distinction between good and evil because Jedi occasionally get tempted to the Dark Side. The whole reason people get corrupted by the One Ring is because the ring is _pure evil._ There's nothing morally ambiguous about that.
It's ironic how Tolkien comes from a time of war and his works are the opposite of it and GRRM comes from a time of relative peace and his works are literally the polar opposite of it...
They are both anti war
makes sense for Tolkien he wanted to create a whimsical fantasy world to get away from the war
@@kullenmontgomery1210 yes, he also wanted to set an example for others to follow the beacon of hope despite the reality of the human condition and wars being fought
"We are all orcs."
@@richmondlandersenfells2238 😭😭
Tolkien walked so Martin could run. I love game of thrones but nothing can be compared to the grandeur that is Middle earth
I think Tolkien ran and won. Everyone else is just playing catch up....
@@reffa2858not really these two novels are largely different from their genres to everything...I agree Lotr will always be more famous nd a classic but asoiaf has surpassed it in story telling, characters etc but that's just my opinion
@@marimo5039when george rr Martin has stated many times he gets a lot of inspiration from Tolkien as do all modern fantasy writers Tolkien is just simply more complex as he studied writing also.
Agreed 💯 percent
@@reffa2858that would be great to see what if game of thrones is a future middle Earth but without elves jk🎉
There's a lot, I mean a lot wrong about middle-earth here... in almost every bit. About morality, optimism, and also ignorance about the age of the trees and so on which come before the first age. It seems to focus almost completely on the events in the Lord of the Rings rather than taking the darker and harsher wars with Morgoth into account, which had many tensions among the elves and between elves and dwarves and men as well as the constant threat of the creeping darkness which slowly consumed Beleriand from the north. Many of the men also sided with the darkness rather than the light and the power in the one ring causes corruption in all who look upon it.
Was thinking the same, he forgot the age of trees and the lamps. Like teh first age is when man came to be, there was several thousands of years before that. And more beyond
I haven’t even been into middle earth for a year and I was screaming throughout most of this
-There is literally a political struggle in the history of gondor and numenor (especially during its golden age)
-Numenor had an almost gender equal dinamics when it comes to rulership.
-You simply failed to mention that Haleth was a warrior and ruler of her people being one of the first heroes of the edain (humans) and is accompanied by female bodyguards.
-Dwarves possessed great craftsmanship and architecture. But Numenor had a more advanced military and industrial might and artistry.
-there was kinstrife within the house of eorl the young. And occupied the ancestral homeland of the Dunlendings whom they perceived as "wild men"
-no one in middle earth is safe from natural elements. Catastrophic weather nor bubonic plagues.
-Men including the elves are equally capable of atrocities as well as heroic deeds without any allegiance to a higher power. By means of ethnic cleansing, slavery, incest, and usurpation.
-I SUGGEST YOU READ THE BOOKS FIRST MATE.
I don’t know but I think this is more based on their live action versions so the movies and the tv show or mainly from the main books so just lotr and got doesn’t seem to go beyond that.
In the Middle Earth nobody knows what happen after death, that's exactly what caused the fall of Numenor
The technology in lotr static? The dwarves technological advancements were impressive. Also didn’t Saruman create bombs.
Don't forget numenorean civilization.
Wasn’t expecting that ubrupt cut off at the end but great vid
Thank you, my Lord
i know you didn’t use that picture of the fake galadriel over cate blanchett..
You're not wrong about ASOIAF being more inspired by real history, but it's also heavily inspired by norse and celtic mythology. Bran and the magic of the weirwoods borrows heavily from the story of Odin and Yggdrasil. Also you could that the over arching story is inspired by Ragnarok. Not a lot of fantasy authors aren't inspired by some mythology lol
I think the Men in middle Earth are generally morally grey. While Elves and Orcs are metaphors for the nature of good and evil.
I think that's oversimplifying things a bit. While humans in Middle-earth often deal with moral grey areas, Elves aren't purely good - just look at the whole Fëanor situation. And Orcs, though usually portrayed as evil, were something Tolkien actually struggled with in his later writings. Plus, this view ignores the complex morality of other races like Dwarves or even Hobbits. Tolkien's world is more nuanced than just "Elves good, Orcs bad." There's a lot of moral complexity in Middle-earth, even if it's not as obvious as in some other fantasy worlds.
the Elves did a lot of morally grey things in Tolkien's universe in reality.
To say the technology of middle earth is static is wrong. 1. The technology of Mordor and of Isengard reflects industrialization of there resources and land with siege weapons being of a more cruder in design and more menacing. Giving a more phycological warfare aspect to their enemies, this is seen in Return of the King with Grond " The Wolfs head" a massive Siege Ram, siege towers and siege catapults firing the served heads of Gondorian soldiers in the siege of Minas Tirith. As well as the siege of Helms Deep with the bombs created in Isengard, the ballista used to fire the rope for the ladders. 2. The Numenoreans were master shipbuilders and naval navigation congregating in several colonies throughout middle earth with a huge trade routes. The descendants of Numenor, being Gondor and Arnor were able continue their predecessors work with the likes of fortress like Minas Tirith, Minas Morgul, Osgiliath, Pelargir, Fornost, Annuminas. And some of their defenses put in place being that of Trebuchets, Siege towers, quality of arms just to name a few.
Were as in GOT we are shown realistic adaptions of Siege Warfare with Trebuchets, Rams, Naval Vessels, and other tactics. Yes medicine is explored a little bit more in GOT then LOTR with the Ingredients. But the Portrayal of these advancements are through the Character's such as when Cersei wants to know if the Mountain can be saved and Pycelle advise that nothing can be done for him. Qyburn steps in and is able to bring the Mountain Back in a zombified state. To clarify I am basing the GOT depiction form the tv show and not the book. As far as Siege Warfare goes it pretty bad I mean the battle of the black water showed and excellent use of wildfire, no use of catapults or trebs throughout that battle. battle of the bastards had no siege weapons, the siege of riverun is the only depiction that shows proper siege warfare when Jamie and Bronn arrive to assist the Freys.
Westeros doesn't have a Morgoth or a Sauron. When (in the TV series) they had to face something similar, although smaller in scale, the world united against it. Sure, Cersei betrayed them, but there were also betrayals in Tolkien's works.
And please, Cate Blanchett is Galadriel!
You forgot the ages before the first age, the age of the trees, the age of the lamps.
Tolkien defined the fantasy genre however GRRM forever changed its landscape. Gone are the Tolkien idealistic and heroic tales. In a more cynical world, what is relatable are gray characters. Now fantasy can be purely for adults to. Before its was mainly catered for kids and the whole family, LOTR, Narnia, Harry Potter
You sound edgy mostly teenagers like dark stuff and think they are grown up, none of these are restricted to age. Lotr is for everyone any age
well i am sure LOTR will remain relevant for another century, while grrm will fall into obscurity somewhat. And one of the reasons for that is what you already mentioned: Tolkien offers idealistic and heroic tales, which people like and desire evermore in these cynical and grey times we live in
@@paulusillyriusiudathaddaio2530 With time, stories like Tolkien's transcend more, those with universal values that inspire us and with rich philosophical and spiritual value, beyond stories where everything is cynicism and moral relativism. I think it's because although these plots are interesting to watch because of the political conflict and surprising betrayals, they are elements that work more for a first visit, but do not give you anything really transcendental beyond a well told story (and that Martin's stories have some flaws), because we can not say that GOT is more realistic in the sense of historical parallelism, because any scholar in history will identify how superficial is the author's understanding of premodern societies on which it was based. As the Dothraki, for example, have more in common with the orcs than with their declared influences (Mongols, Sioux, etc.)
@@nicolasm2001 i guess time will tell. Both books have been there for decades. I will disagree however that heroic tales especially grounded on religion is more transcendent. History has proven that the only constant thing is goodness mixed with cruelty. As GRRM said, the conflict of the human heart. What i can for say for sure is that the current climate yearns more for a more relatable fantasy rather than high fantasy with ultimate heroes.
"LOTR themes have a clear distinction between good and evil" So this is not abut the Legendarium included silmarillion. isn't it?
Technology is not static in LORT..
Well-researched analysis. I think it is silly that people are comparing these two series because Lotr is the classic pioneer of the fantasy genre and a brilliant good vs evil story with good storytelling, and characters. In contrast, Got is a more realistic story of wars and betrayals,alliance and human nature. Both are some of the best fantasy genre has to offer.
lotr actually has 4 time periods, the creation of the world and so on until the first defeat of morgoth was marked as the years of the trees. And then when morgoth destroyed the trees began the first age
How about continents of Middle Earth and Westeros-Essos are made to exist opposite side of a globe?
Am I thinking what you are thinking?
@@EverythingExplained101 I hope so!
There was two ages before the first age. In the lord of ring world
Then why is it called the “first” age 😂
@@markusbasmadjian6817 The 1st, 2nd, and 3rd ages is the record of the children of Illuvatar (elves, dwarfs, and men). Elves were around before the first age though. I believe they were born during the Age of Trees. But the middle earth we see in 2nd and 3rd age looks alot different from 1st age. And before that it was the age of trees and before that the age of lamps.
@@markusbasmadjian6817 no offense but your face looks like the pot of greed XD
@@markusbasmadjian6817 the first age sees the first rising of the Sun, since before the first age the sun does not exist, the true chronology is
Valian Years : unnamed years, years of the lamps, Years of the Trees
Years of the Sun : first age, second age, third age, fourth age
6:35 of all the Galadriel photos you chose rings of power Galadriel 😂😂
I like both a lot, and both are my top two favorite worlds in all of fiction. ASOIAF (Not GOT) is more like "We live in that world and only know what the scholars and historians have recorded," and the rest are up to our imaginations. While LOTR is like "Here's who made the world, what everything is, go and have fun," and it's done by an extremely talented and caring man who treated this world how it should be treated, with care and love... (Looking at you Amazon...)
there are so many things wrong/inaccurate with this video smh
For instance
Because it seems to me is tgat yiure fan if lotr and cant stand to got being more grounded and complex and bruh its wrong to compare them both lotr is epic and got is just dark and complex
@@Romatwoknfive i love both worlds (albeit i do favour tolkien's by far) but the uploader of this video got a lot of things wrong/inaccurate, and that's on BOTH "sides". and yea i agree they shouldn't be compared because they are very distinct bodies of work.
This video easily deserves a million views, your explanation was very captivating. Good work 👍🏻
Thank you so much 😀
UA-cam algorithm is slow to catch up^^
Currently I'm more interested into something complex like GOT, but High Fantasy really appeals to me. I'd like to see a new saga with a mix of both 🔥🔥
Asoiaf is just so clear it's unbelievable
bro just ask chatgpt if u have no clue from lotr, so much wrong in ur vid
Fist of all I want to make this clear awesome vid and can see that you put alot of work into it and I would very much like to see similar content from this channel.
But if you're going to talk about the lotr community plz do more research first.
There are alot to put out but I'll say the obvious ones.
・The tone of LOTR is much more sad, cruppted hero's (obvious ones being like saruman and Isildur→which I actually still consider a hero), And lots of hopeless situations. The epic and heroic part is true but like most stories there are alot of parts that aren't
・This is not really wrong but death for mortals is kind of unknown and is 100% not to the undying lands
・The influence is Wrong, sorry but as a Tolkien fan I have to say it a like harshly but Tolkien was a Professor of Anglo-Saxon at Oxford University! and had lots of influence from there!!!
・Good or evil is a hard part some evil men aren't really evil and are mere slaves of Sauron and Sauron himself actually believe it or not had some good intentions
・technological advancement is a hard topic some can argue that the rings were a advancement or sarumans bombs and uruk-hai (which can also be said it a forgotten thing) is also an advancement!
・For the maps... I dont't really get what difference you're trying to point out?
(Sorry i dont know about GOT that much so I cant really say anything about that part)
Non the less great vid and can really see you're love for both worlds!
So it's very clear that this guy has not read ASOIAF
I prefer GOT because it just seems more real that evil can win and does
Sorry, Martin will never beat Tolkien in any way that matters.
Westeros is so clear in terms of wordbuilding, and asoiaf is so clear in every conceivable level of storytelling
@@NRTHK-wv9sb Nah, and you smell bad.
Thanks for explanation you are a great guy knowing the difference between the differences between culture i believe death in real life feels more similar to me of Lord of the rings world 😅🎉
this video is… literally ai-generated 🤦♂️ please try harder with your content
please tell me bro didn't just use amazon's rings of power galadriel when portraying her... jfc
Idk why you are comparing these two. It’d be more interesting to see you compare Tolkien’s work with the material he based it off of like the Völsunga saga.
cuz they are both popular?
Yeah ASOIAF is INCOMPARABLE
@@mr.slimeyt at this point I just see the fan base of both of these authors as cults.
They can, but there won’t be a big audience for it. The video may not even reach you:p
@waleed8211 relatively they aren’t comparable your right, they are both very different forms of fantasy, one optimistic and one pessimistic, not necessarily a bad thing but it’s true. But realistically they are comparable, Tolkiens world simply had much more work put into making the world great. The man spent 21 years world building before he published anything, this is just not found in got, so while they both might seem equal on the surface, the deeper you look into both you’ll find that middle earth IS UNDENIABLY richer and more full of quality content. I’m not dissing got but some people here are trying to put it at the same level as Tolkiens world and that’s just not feasible, R R Martin hasn’t been alive long enough to have put in the time that Tolkien did. Please feel free to argue but if you will do so cordially and not like brain dead shithead
I would say that lord of the rings is a perfect allegory and even the best war story/movie, mainly seen through orcs.
Dune vs The Wheel of time please 🙏
Would definitely love to have a relationship with an elf though for sure 😅
9:50 sorry but I have to say it, humans have no afterlife, they die just like in GOT(Tolkien called it true death) and its the humans deep desire for immortality that shapes the second age a lot
Butchered explanations for Lord of the Rings
Just admit asoiaf is clear
good video! keep it up
Thanks, will do!
Damm, this video spreads so much miss information
You are far from growing enough to comprehend mythos, lil bro. You have no idea what you are talking about, you are only exposing your own narrowmindedness.
Kratos should kill the GOT gods
GOT gods are formless, they very similarly mimic the outer gods of Elden ring, both written by GRRM no coincidence
I prefer ASOIAF/GOT
I think he's just talking about GoT, since he doesn't cover much outside the show, especially when he talks about the timeline, which is way more broad. Not saying he doesn't mention the books, but it seems more focused on the HBO series.
Thank you for this! You put to words why I dislike and/have very little interest in Tolkien and yet love GoT. I've never been a fan of fantasy bc of its naivety - good vs evil etc.
People have different preferences over things they like, Tolkien's works are meant and catered towards people that want to take a break from reality and immerse themselves in fantasy.
Martin's works are for people who love medieval Europe but the addition of dragons and a little bit of magic here and there while also including the harsh realities of the world.
@@onesidedunpure109
He didn’t criticized people who like LOTR.
I think your comment mostly based on LOTR story and movies in that case. As a Tolkien fan I worked lots of time on his works and I can say that there is no naive good vs evil in middle-earth (maybe it has in the LOTR story but not on the entirety of the universe). I dont know much about GOT world but as also a history nerd I can say Tolkien's universe is not less complicated ore naive then the actual history. But I also understand that Tolkien's other works then the LOTR story is not visualised and clearly writen on a novel so you have to do lots of researches and be very passionate about his complicated books to understand the world fully.
while some characters are ambiguous in Got/Asoiaf,there is a clear distinction on who is good and who is evil. The Starks/Tullys are good,their antagonists are the Lannister/Crownlands/Greyjoys who are evil (the Others are obviously evil as well). The ambiguity is often related to secondary characters or characters that may seem important but are not meant to play a relevant part in the greater picture. The same applies for Tolkien's works
@@niccologregorutti disagree
Got > LOTR
cap
LOTR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>GOT
J.R.R. Tolkien>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>George R.R. Martin
@@Melkorsolostheverseage?
2:14 my man just roasted every religion
haha
what's the point if everyone knows the answers to the test? what's the point of putting in the effort to learn from the teacher's teachings if he can just provide all the answers on the day of the test?