# Harry Potter or Narnia?



## FireEel (Jan 10, 2006)

While reading a magazine, I came across a 3 pages article highlighting Narnia, as well as suggesting it might just be the movie to surpass Lord of The Rings.

However though, what really caught my eye was the rather amusing box comparing Narnia and Harry Potter Goblet of Fire to Lord of The Rings, and searching for a suitable candidate to surpass LOTR.

Needless to say, that article was highly biased to Narnia, and the points compared were rather...one-sided.

Here's just a few I do remember.

----------------Narnia---Harry Potter
Grand Battle------Yes-------No
Love-------------Yes-------No(?!)
Spells------------Yes-------No(What the hell are those people smoking?!)
Magicak World----Yes-------No(Oh good heavens...)

Personally, I think the movie of the year was number 1, Harry Potter Goblet of Fire, then King Kong, and finally Narnia.

Not that Narnia isn't good, but that scene of Cedric dying and Harry clutching his corspe and weeping and screaming in agony really moved me to tears(first movie ever). Narnia's "death" didn't even make me feel much, other than goosebumps.

What are your opinions?


----------



## Hazu (Jan 10, 2006)

HP FTW!!!!


----------



## narutorulez (Jan 10, 2006)

i saw neither of them,i dont like either of them,narnia is just a LOTR version for little kids and harry potter just plain suck


----------



## kame-hame-ha (Jan 10, 2006)

i liked HP best..
but narnia werent that great
frikin beaver running and yelling, he was cinda cool when i found out that he used to go out drinking with his friend


----------



## Keyser S?ze (Jan 10, 2006)

i'll go with harry potter on this one.


----------



## TGC (Jan 10, 2006)

:::HP FTW:::


----------



## Anthriel (Jan 10, 2006)

Well, I really don't think a comparison to Harry Potter is viable, because both are rather different. Obviously, Harry Potter is better, but that really doesn't come as a suprise.

Narnia is a lot more like Lord of the Rings. Not because the books were alike, but because the creators of the movie to Narnia tried to turn the book into LotR 2, by extending the final battle, among other things. Needless to say, it pales in comparison.

Narnia is a good book and a good film, but it just isn't in the same league as Lord of the Rings, or even Harry Potter.


----------



## ~ Masamune ~ (Jan 10, 2006)

Harry............Potter,..yeah


----------



## Seany (Jan 10, 2006)

Narnia for originality.


----------



## Ruri (Jan 10, 2006)

I think Harry Potter was the better movie, simply because it held my interest longer.  I liked Narnia, and I loved the books, but the movie does suffer from being in LOTR's shadow.


----------



## Core (Jan 10, 2006)

I like the Narnia books and story better than Harry Potter, but the Goblet of Fire was so much better than the Narnia movie.


----------



## Sasori_Echizen (Jan 11, 2006)

Well first of all, Harry Potter was quite poor compared to what the directors COULD have made it. A big thing was they skipped teh quiditch world cup, and quidditch overall! Huge dissapointment, and just some of the things could definetly have been improved compared to the book at least. Also, Narnia was kinda fast and wasn't very exciting....but I like the screen setting and the characters adn costumes. But overall, both movies weren't bad but could have been better


----------



## Sawako (Jan 11, 2006)

I watched both Narnia and HP, and I can say that I liked Harry Potter much better.


----------



## mUcHo LoCo (Jan 11, 2006)

Narnia was good but harry potters storyline was much better


----------



## AssFace (Jan 12, 2006)

go see harry potter.  Both were below average.  But I like HP series alot better than narnia's.

No offense, but narnia is highly predictable, not intense, and does a bad job of portaying the bible.  The only scene I liked was the battle scene where the senatar was whooping ass.


----------



## Prendergast (Jan 12, 2006)

both weren't golden movie standards.  but...they're just kids' novel adaptation so what can we expect?

i chose narnia just because i didn't have to see that awful ending of hp4.


----------



## MartialHorror (Jan 12, 2006)

Goblet of Fire: 7.5/10
Narnia: 7/10

I liked GoF more. Plus, Narnia was a slight disapointment while GoF surprised me.


----------



## uncle jafuncle (Jan 12, 2006)

Simple really.

Which movie had minotaurs?  Narnia.  There's your fucking answer.

What the hell JK Rowling?  You put a labyrinth into the story but no minotaur to guard it? Well, at least there isn't a pedo fawn in HP though...

Conclusion:  Watch _Dr. Strangelove or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb_ instead of either of these movies.  Then go read the Dragonlance Chronicles and Dragonlance Legends.


----------



## cooiecooie (Jan 13, 2006)

i only liked the first harry potter movie after that the other ones just went down hill like come on the thrid one didn't even have a main fight at the end! the forth movie looks really good though so i'm looking forward to watching it. Naria i thought it looks boring from the trailers but all the movies that i think aren't so good turns out to be not that bad. i haven't seen either one so ya i think there both goin to be good!


----------



## shikamaru_13 (Jan 13, 2006)

*I just watched Narnia last night and it definitely surpassed Harry Potter for me... But don't get me wrong... I love Harry Potter... it's just that their movie adaptations are... hmm... how do i say this??? off??? i know we believe that they have creative license and stuff, but they somehow took the essence of the story out of it... i dunno... with narnia, it was a completely different experience... sure, they might've have taken parts out, tweaked them here and there, but over-all you get the whole story... whereas in Harry Potter, you get a different story altogether... the only thing i enjoyed watching with the Harry Potter movies were quidditch (yeah... first and second movie) and the graveyard scene in the latest (that almost came out the way i imagined it... really...) but in narnia, the whole movie came together... what i meant by that is that the sequences were so amazing... and i super liked the way they slow the action down only to bring it back in real time... it's so cool!!! and the way the music accompanied the movie??? it was great!!! oh yeah... another reason why i could say narnia was better is the way they cut the scenes... harry potter wanted to put everything in a certain time limit, so you feel a certain abruptness to it... but in narnia, it just flowed smoothly and everything... it was just ... great!!!

and i could also say that narnia can even be comparable to the greatness pete jackson gave lord of the rings... they might have even surpassed lotr in one way or another... ^_^*


----------



## RealaMoreno (Jan 13, 2006)

Anthriel said:
			
		

> *Well, I really don't think a comparison to Harry Potter is viable, because both are rather different. Obviously, Harry Potter is better, but that really doesn't come as a suprise.
> *
> Narnia is a lot more like Lord of the Rings. Not because the books were alike, but because the creators of the movie to Narnia tried to turn the book into LotR 2, by extending the final battle, among other things. Needless to say, it pales in comparison.
> 
> Narnia is a good book and a good film, but it just isn't in the same league as Lord of the Rings, or even Harry Potter.



uh...what?  contradiction...?

Anywho, I haven't seen Narnia, don't really to either. HP was okay, LotR pwns them both anyway.


----------



## shikamaru_13 (Jan 13, 2006)

*I just watched Narnia last night and it definitely surpassed Harry Potter for me... But don't get me wrong... I love Harry Potter... it's just that their movie adaptations are... hmm... how do i say this??? off??? i know we believe that they have creative license and stuff, but they somehow took the essence of the story out of it... i dunno... with narnia, it was a completely different experience... sure, they might've have taken parts out, tweaked them here and there, but over-all you get the whole story... whereas in Harry Potter, you get a different story altogether... the only thing i enjoyed watching with the Harry Potter movies were quidditch (yeah... first and second movie) and the graveyard scene in the latest (that almost came out the way i imagined it... really...) but in narnia, the whole movie came together... what i meant by that is that the sequences were so amazing... and i super liked the way they slow the action down only to bring it back in real time... it's so cool!!! and the way the music accompanied the movie??? it was great!!! oh yeah... another reason why i could say narnia was better is the way they cut the scenes... harry potter wanted to put everything in a certain time limit, so you feel a certain abruptness to it... but in narnia, it just flowed smoothly and everything... it was just ... great!!!

and i could also say that narnia can even be comparable to the greatness pete jackson gave lord of the rings... they might have even surpassed lotr in one way or another... ^_^*


----------



## TheVileOne (Jan 13, 2006)

Narnia is great and I loved it.  I thought it was better than the first two Potter films.

However I think Azkaban and Goblet of Fire put it over the top.


----------



## danthegenin (Jan 14, 2006)

i didnt see narnia(thought it was too corny)


----------



## TheVileOne (Jan 14, 2006)

danthegenin said:
			
		

> i didnt see narnia(thought it was too corny)



You didn't see it though, so how would you TRULY know  .


----------



## rimpelcut (Jan 14, 2006)

narnia seriously sucked, the girl shot 2 arrows and the boy was a total pussy. Atleast harry potter does some crazy idiotic actions. 
Narnia is simple too big to fit into one movie.


----------



## FrouFrou (Jan 14, 2006)

i only watched hp, but narnia didn?t caught my attention anyway.


----------



## TheVileOne (Jan 14, 2006)

loco said:
			
		

> narnia seriously sucked, the girl shot 2 arrows and the boy was a total pussy. Atleast harry potter does some crazy idiotic actions.
> Narnia is simple too big to fit into one movie.



There are 7 books.  They simply adapted the first book, ONE BOOK, into one movie.  Care to say anything else that ridiculous?


----------



## crazymtf (Jan 14, 2006)

I want to see narnia still! So i voted for seeing Hp but not narnia but i probebly will like it alot.


----------



## Chairman (Jan 14, 2006)

I haven't watched HP yet but I'm sure it's better than Narnia. Not that Narnia was bad it's just... HP-movies are better cause I haven't read narnia and I have read HP soo....


----------



## dada blinks (Jan 15, 2006)

*Harry potter or narnia???*

i think that you cant compare harry potter and narnia because they have two different stories all together. yes in some ways they are similar but they cannot be compared together. they are both great movies and just saying but they would never be able to surpass lord of the rings harry potter has made four movis and lord of the rings have made three and still to this date lotr dvds and videos are still selling which one is better harry potter or narnia i think that harry potter will get the upper hand as poeple know from the earlier movies and narnia is new comer so either one could win. 

(i have watched a movie somewhere where two boys about 13 have bashed into the back of their mums cupboard to see if they can enter narnia weird or what!!!)


----------



## Chapster (Jan 15, 2006)

i've only seen harry potter so.... guess what i voted?


----------



## TheVileOne (Jan 15, 2006)

Chairman said:
			
		

> I haven't watched HP yet but I'm sure it's better than Narnia. Not that Narnia was bad it's just... HP-movies are better cause I haven't read narnia and I have read HP soo....



That logic really does absolutely nothing for me at all nor does it make any sense.


----------



## uncle jafuncle (Jan 15, 2006)

dada blinks said:
			
		

> i think that you cant compare harry potter and narnia because they have two different stories all together. yes in some ways they are similar but they cannot be compared together. they are both great movies and just saying but they would never be able to surpass lord of the rings harry potter has made four movis and lord of the rings have made three and still to this date lotr dvds and videos are still selling which one is better harry potter or narnia i think that harry potter will get the upper hand as poeple know from the earlier movies and narnia is new comer so either one could win.
> 
> (i have watched a movie somewhere where two boys about 13 have bashed into the back of their mums cupboard to see if they can enter narnia weird or what!!!)



Periods and paragraphs are your friend.

As for not being able to compare Narnia and Harry Potter...if you can't compare two childrens fantasy book film adaptions then what can you?


----------



## Neenah (Jan 15, 2006)

Narnia wins my movie of the month. ^__^


----------



## Scared Link (Jan 15, 2006)

Harry Potter, especailly the second one!


----------



## TheVileOne (Jan 16, 2006)

What was so great about the second one?  3 and 4 were worlds superior and much more darker and cool  .


----------



## Dark_wolf247 (Jan 16, 2006)

Harry Potter = So much win. Narnia can't compete.


----------



## anbutofu (Jan 16, 2006)

lol, i really wonder of all the HP fans, how many read the whole Narnia series?  i voted for HP in this poll, only because the 3rd and 4th movies were so strong.  the title of the thread wasnt detailed so im only assuming the maker meant the movies since they both relatively came out recently.  Narnia was a well made movie, but its obviously an adaptation from a book written a while back.  HP has the bigger budget and the star power that comes w/ such a budget. i mean name a well known actor from narnia?  **possible spoilers for those who have not seen the movie**Liam Nieson(spelling?aka:qui gon jin) was the voice of aslan, the white queen was played the borg queen in Star Trek and Mr.Tumnus was Leto Atreides III from Children of Dune... 
give Narnia a chance, i mean how about comparing the first HP movie to Narnia, then Narnia blows away HP then.
basically theyre both good books and movies, but how will you know unless you watch them?


----------



## Shadowscar (Jan 16, 2006)

I think that Harry Potter is better than Narnia because Narnia is two packed into one movie.


----------



## crazymtf (Jan 16, 2006)

Harry potter 3 sucked in my opinion. I give it aroudn a 6.5. The first half was boring and nothing good happens. The werewolf part was nicly done, i especially like how it looked, skinny and far more evil then the book described him. The 2nd movie was better in both adoptation and i felt the whole movie had a good feeling to it. The forth HP movie was very good, My personal fav. out of them all. Narnia i still haven't seen but once i do i'll tell you my opinion.


----------



## TheVileOne (Jan 16, 2006)

A lot of great stuff happened in the first half like the Hipoogriff flight, the double-decker bus ride.  The Dementors and the Quidditch match.  I thought it was a wonderfully constructed movie.

I think you just have poor judgement of movies  .


----------



## MartialHorror (Jan 16, 2006)

I thought HP3 was okay. the book was much better.

But I found it to be a fine movie. My least favorite of the 4, though.


----------



## crazymtf (Jan 16, 2006)

I though it was the worst of the movies. The book was alot better and all but maybe it's cause i thought it was the worse book out of them all. 6.5 is a good score anyway, a little higher then when i first saw it. 

1 - 7.0
2 - 8.0
3 - 6.5 
4 - 8.5


----------



## FireEel (Jan 17, 2006)

I hated the third film...it was too unlike the third book.

Meanwhile, the fourth movie wasn't unlike the fourth book. Instead, what they did was simply to OMIT, and not CHANGE the stuff.

Oh yeah, and Harry Potter 4 rules in my opinion. Not that Narnia sucked though...


----------



## crazymtf (Jan 17, 2006)

^Agree 100% with ya.


----------



## Sakura (Jan 17, 2006)

who are you kidding? _harry potter owns narnia. _

narnia is too old for me and i don't like that sorta magic/fantasy.


----------



## MartialHorror (Jan 17, 2006)

Yeah, HP4 left out some stuff.

Which reeeaaallllllyyy brought in some heavy plotholes.

Didnt see how HP3 changed stuff.......only a few quirks at the end, which worked fine with me.


----------



## metronomy (Jan 17, 2006)

Hatty Potter, Narnia is pants, it is poorly edited and doesn't seem to go anywhere.

I've also read both books, and was not that much of a fan of the Narnia book.


----------



## crazymtf (Jan 17, 2006)

^ I didn't like the thrid HP book so maybe that's why i disliked the movie.


----------



## TheVileOne (Jan 18, 2006)

Eh, you whiney novel purists.

The last 2 Potter movies were very well done movies and great cinematic experiences.


----------



## yummysasuke (Jan 18, 2006)

Even though I hated all the Harry Potter movies, it still beats Narnia. Narnia just got too weird and annoying in the end, especially them four kids!!


----------



## TheVileOne (Jan 18, 2006)

I probably would've taken your post seriously if not for your signature and avatar  .


----------



## MartialHorror (Jan 18, 2006)

lol, he complains about it bing wierd when his sig contains two 12 year olds about to kiss. The Avy is just beyond that.


----------



## yummysasuke (Jan 18, 2006)

That's mean, judging my intelligence from the yaoi pics in my ava and sig. XD

But I do have to say that Lucy was annoying, Edmund was a weak little boy, Peter was boring, and that other girl (forgotten her name) was "Little Miss Goody". Can't stand characters like that!


----------



## Bya Bya (Jan 18, 2006)

I read all 'Narnia' books when I was 11 ^^ They are better than HP. But both latest HP movie and Narnia movie were good.


----------



## Niabingi (Jan 18, 2006)

Im sorry I just felt that like all Harry Potter films Goblet of fire was a let down I refuse to compromise and thats what the makers of HP films ask you to do constantly
the kids cant act so you let that slide
we have to omit certain events from the book cause of time so you let that slide
Everything is rushed to fit into a certain time scale so you let that slide
the "action" sequences are unnecessarily dragged out at the expense of scenes that would aid story development so you let that slide...

One example of awful editing in the film was when Barty Crouch dies it barely even happens I didnt understand what in the hell just went on one second they see him on the ground he could well have been sleeping nobody does or says anything to indicate that he is dead then all of a sudden a new scene... wtf?
And then Dumbeldore practically assaults Harry when his name comes out of the cup... did you put your name in harry tell me tell me?? baaaare agressive like I was just thinking alright alright calm down

So all in all Books then Harry Potter beats Narnia hands down but films its the other way round.. the Lucy in Narnia was such an amazing little actress she out the kids in Hp to shame everything she did felt really genuine like she is one of those kids who knows how to be in a moment (and may possibly also be a tad precocious)


----------



## D-angelLissa (Jan 21, 2006)

I would have to say Harry Potter was the better movie, not by much though. LotR tops both of them. It seems that each movie they come out with for HP is more and more different from the books.
I've never read any of the Narnia books so looking at it as just a movie, I'd have to say that it seemed a little prolonged at times. I did really like the music though.


----------



## crazymtf (Jan 21, 2006)

TheVileOne said:
			
		

> I probably would've taken your post seriously if not for your signature and avatar  .



And we should take you seriously with your avt? 

Every time i disagree with you you have to state your opinion about me. I love it, makes you look like a child who is not only half retarded but must insult me over the internet


----------



## Gunners (Jan 21, 2006)

Niabingi said:
			
		

> Im sorry I just felt that like all Harry Potter films Goblet of fire was a let down I refuse to compromise and thats what the makers of HP films ask you to do constantly
> the kids cant act so you let that slide
> we have to omit certain events from the book cause of time so you let that slide
> Everything is rushed to fit into a certain time scale so you let that slide
> ...



Yeh i doubt movie only watchers knew about the dementors sucking his soul, personally i didnt like the voice of voldemort, still better that the 3rd.

I need to see narnia movie, i dont want to rip it off the net for some reason, so i might have to wait untill dvd release.


----------



## link 2 oblivion (Jan 21, 2006)

I haven't watched Narnia yet but i expect a better out come than Harry Potter. I watched a old version of it and it was terrible but this one looks promising.


----------



## C?k (Jan 21, 2006)

Harry Potter is just awesome its 7 films in total 4 which were all equally just as good so far so im sure ONE film cant compete


----------



## NarutoMark (Jan 21, 2006)

i liked HP better, a couple of the actors in narnia i didnt care for( couple of the kids)


----------



## sharingan_clan213 (Jan 21, 2006)

i wouldnt know which. I think GOF.


----------



## Franckie (Jan 25, 2006)

I enjoyed myself a lot more while watching the Goblet of Fire. Narnia's pacing was a bit slow for me and the dialogue was monotonous, though I found it alright compared to most of the movies which came out in 05.


----------



## Ongakukage (Feb 16, 2007)

Harry Potter will always reign victorious. Unless he dies in the seventh book/movie...


----------



## Lemonade (Feb 16, 2007)

I would go with Harry Porter!
I liked Narnia but I wouldn't watch it again.


----------



## she<3's_uchihacest (Feb 16, 2007)

hp all the way. and narnia surpassing lotr is just beyond funny.


----------



## alkeality (Feb 16, 2007)

i prefer harry potter for books and narnia for movies


----------



## *Uchiha's stalker* (Feb 16, 2007)

Harry Potter kicks Narnia ass!


----------



## metal_uzumaki (Feb 16, 2007)

Harry Potter is way better than Narnia.


----------



## Lady Azura (Feb 17, 2007)

Harry Potter. I saw Narnia and I _did_ like it... it's just... I liked Harry Potter more.


----------



## Cuivreries (Feb 17, 2007)

_I've never seen or read Narnia, though I'm sure I'd like it - just not to the same extent as Harry Potter._


----------



## Ninja Chuchan (Feb 17, 2007)

I like Harry Potter better then Narnia


----------



## kitty*fox (Feb 17, 2007)

i voted hp. narnia was ok.  it had cool effects but it made me fall asleep. GoF had a nicely done warewolf scene.


----------



## Woodrokiro (Feb 17, 2007)

Harry Potter, though Narnia is good too. I just think Harry Potter is more humorous and has less cheesy conversation.


----------



## crospy (Feb 18, 2007)

Narnia was ok, got pretty bored half way through. I found GoF a lot more interesting and entertaining. I like HP a lot better than Narnia. Though, I found PoA a lot better than GoF.


----------



## Misa (Feb 18, 2007)

Harry Potter-It has more action and stuff~


----------



## Violent-nin (Feb 18, 2007)

I'd have to say Harry Potter for now, I didn't watch Narnia yet.


----------



## Violent-nin (Feb 18, 2007)

I'd have to say Harry Potter for now, I didn't watch Narnia yet.


----------



## sel (Feb 18, 2007)

narnia wasnt even that impressive; the only way that it could have been better was that the catholic church liked narnia and hated HP


----------



## Aruarian (Feb 18, 2007)

I preferred Narnia, to be honest. The HP movies contain lots of awesome stuff, but it's mostly just shite. They do not live up to the books.

Besides, Aslan. <3


----------



## daowz (Feb 18, 2007)

yeah the book is better but i still like harry potter better than narnia, i think the plot is better but they leave off many suffs


----------



## Wolfy (Feb 18, 2007)

Harry Potter FTW!


----------



## Pein (Mar 6, 2007)

harry potter ftw narnia was okay it just seemed to drag on and i hated the cast of narnia most of all i hated pedo fawn


----------

