This is just something I'm curious in. I read lotr when i was seven, a bit too young to really understand it, and read it again when i was ten and got it better.

All my friends didn't read the book until the film came out. Is this an accurate reflection of the general weal of lotr readers?

Kaltia I just saw the film a few weeks ago and have now bought all three books so yes that probably is the general trend.

I read the book when I was 14/15. Which is 2/3 years before I saw the movie.

I read the books when I was 14 and thoroughly enjoyed them. I am 40 now and haven't read them again since.
I loved the movie. :D

The books are better than the movie because not all the scenes were in the movie. For example, the Wood Elves weren't included in the movie.

or Tom Bombadil [img]smile.gif[/img]

I started to read Lotr when I was about 10, shortly after reading the Hobbit. I got about half way through The Two Towers before losing interest...having said that, when I read Interview With the Vampire, I stopped halfway through to read the Belgariad and the Malloreon (10 books in total) then finished Iwtv...so I might still read the rest of Lotr...

Yeah, I read the books after the movie. I think that was the sixth time through though.

Oh and the wood elves are in the film, you just dont see as much of them.

I'm still annoyed that they cut out Tom Bombadil and a good deal of the movie. PLUS got some parts wrong. They made Bree look exceptionally hostile and unpleasant towards the four Hobbits except for the tavern owner, in the book I DEFINITELY remember Bree being described as a nice and cheerful place where OTHER Hobbits lived in addition to the humans.

Oh, and Sam's pony actually had a medium-sized role in the book, but it was hardly even seen twice in the movie.

Lets face it - you can't have everything from the book in the film

I've read the books so many times that I (almost) know it by heart) - I even wrote a major project about Middle-Earth in (the equvilent of) highschool.