(January 21, 2004) — One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them, one ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them. The one ring has finally reached the end of its journey and has faded into the billowing fires of Mount Doom with the release of Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King . Based on the popular series of novels by J.R.R. Tolkien, The Lord of the Rings has achieved approval of fans and critics worldwide with exceptional reviews and high ticket and book sales. Capturing the aspect and feeling of Middle-Earth, planting you in the midst of Frodo and the fellowship, the popular series continues to gain more fans. But one question still remains––which are better: the books or the movies? Tolkien’s elaborate style of writing and his imagination weave a tale so picturesque and perfect the reader never stays in the realm of reality. From the quiet town of Hobbiton to the meadows of Rohan and the spectacular city of Minas Tirith, you travel with Tolkien. The Lord of the Rings has achieved many awards during the years since it was published in 1954 and has also been named one of the Books of the Century through readers’ polls on organizations such as BBC and Amazon. Still the book is bought and read by those who have not experienced the sheer exhilaration of the motion picture series, and never does it get old. While Tolkien entertained us through his literature, director Peter Jackson entertains us through his portrayal of the books on film. He gives us excitement, comedy, action and adventure––everything needed to grab the attention of the audience. With his brutal battles, enchanting scenery, talented actors and genius, he brings us the Lord of the Rings experience in a compressed version. To incorporate every little detail from the books into the movies would take more than a year to accomplish and definitely more than three hours to watch. According to Jackson, he made the movie using parts of the book that pertained to the movement of the ring towards its intended destination: Mount Doom. He also changed some parts of the book in the movie and excluded a couple of main occurrences. In the movie version of The Fellowship of the Ring characters Frodo, Sam, Meriadoc and Peregrin never meet the ancient being of Middle-Earth, Tom Bombadil. In the books, he saves the lives of the hobbits twice and is the only one who can hold the ring without succumbing to its entrancing evil. Also in The Return of the King , the love between Eowyn of Rohan and Faramir of Gondor is not shown apart from one scene in the end when Faramir stands alongside Eowyn as King Aragorn walks by. Also, the movie omits a major sequence that takes place at the very end when Saruman, the evil wizard, takes control of the Shire and the hobbits must fight back to regain their homeland. In the end, Frodo departs over sea to the west and, years after, Sam also goes overseas to the west, since he too had held the ring for some time. So far the movie trilogy has netted $2.4 billion and the number continues to rise as The Return of the King maintains its position as number one in the box office for its fourth consecutive week. But do the movies surpass the popularity of the books? When compared to movies, books are usually labeled the better of the two. After all, they are what inspired the movie. The Lord of the Rings case proves this true as the trilogy of books triumph over the movies.