comment: >
  
  They're literally incomparable
  This thread should just be called "I like LotR more than Star Wars" because that's the only take someone can have with any substance
  The rampant attempts at comparing a sci-fi space adventure to a medieval fantasy epic that was made like 20+ years apart from eachother is pretty telling of their understanding of cinema lmao
context: I feel like this is just a fact. >
  
  Yea like this is as much a fact of life as death and taxes
  LOTR is the goat trilogy (Back to the Future second place)
  In regards to OP's comment "Not just the trilogy as a whole, but each chapter of the LOTR trilogy is a superior film to any Star Wars film" - i would maybe argue Empire is at least on par with the Fellowship (despite fellowship being my personal favourite of the three, I do concede its probably the weakest of the trilogy) >
  
  This is a fascinating thread & comments section honestly, people trying to objectively compare Back to the Future, Lord of the Rings, and Star Wars
  Like what a disservice to all three franchises by trying to paint them all with the same brush
  These movies can't be compared, it's kinda embarrassing and telling of everyones understanding of cinema to see this happening here lmfao
  The only thing they have in common is that they're a trilogy.  One is a time travel series, one is a space scifi adventure epic, and one is a medieval fantasy epic
  Like yikes guys lol >
  
  Is this unpopular? I hope not. >
  
  It may not be. I feel like I just came to the realization after watching them again. Hadn't watched them in years. They are superior in nearly every way. >
  
  Common knowledge >
  
  The fact that RotK got 10 oscars proves your opinion is actually popular. downvoted >
  
  Downvoted because not unpopular >
  
  Downvoted you because based on box office, cultural impact, and almost any other metric, Star Wars is by far the more popular trilogy. >
  
  What box office numbers do you compare? Here I can see Star Wars making 475k-775k original, 656k-1M prequels, and the Disney trilogy 1-2M. All LOTR and Hobbit movies made 900k-1M. So, on average per movie LOTR is higher.
  Cultural impact. How do you compare? Star Wars VS LOTR movies? Or LOTR book? If you include book then all modern fantasy stem from LOTR. >
  
  But also, so many more people could name five characters from Star Wars and not LOTR and not care about either
  Edit: with relation to the cultural impact thing >
  
  Do you have data to support that claim? >
  
  No data specifically, but I’d bet that if you walked down the street and asked people, there’d be minimum three that most would know from Star Wars (R2, Yoda, Vader, Chewie) whereas Gandalf would be well known by a large portion of those people, but I’m not sure how many more you’re average Joe Blow would know
  Edit: should’ve added to my original comment that it was entirely speculative and my opinion, based on who I know and what I’ve experienced >
  
  How old is you average Joe Blow? Was he an adult when LOTR was released? >
  
  Probably somewhere between 35-45
  Which still means that Star Wars had been around since he was born (or longer) >
  
  Then he watched SW when he was a little boy and LOTR when he was a teen or an adult. Can it be that SW characters imprinted on him earlier that's why he remembers them better? I'd also think SW characters are 'catchier' with the lightsabers and spaceships. But it's still far from saying SW is better or more important. >
  
  This is a fact. And a popular one. >
  
  This is just a fact, not an opinion :) >
  
  GROND GROND GROND GROND >
  
  I hate these comparisons.  The Original Star Wars Trilogy came out 20+ years before the Lord of the Rings Trilogy in movie theaters so of course LOTR has better special effects overall.  But without what George Lucas did with Star Wars, special effects in the movie industry wouldn’t be where it is today.  
  The stories are completely different and not very comparable.  I prefer one story over the other but that doesn’t mean it is better.