Go ahead, Thread says it all.

No, nobody here has ever read or watched what is possibly the most well-known work of high fantasy fiction.

Of course, Lord of the Rings is one the greatest. I've seen the movies countless times, but I'm really also tempted to read the books at some point. Who else has read the books?

Incredibly overrated series IMO. The second movie among the 5 or 6 movies I have walked away from.

After frequent urging I did start to read the books. The Hobbit was admittedly alright but soon I began to hate the series more and more but I forced myself every bit of the way so I would have this important part of pop culture in my head. But close to the end of third book, I think with only like 10 pages to go, I put the book down and could absolutely not stomache a second more of it.

One advantage of the movie is that it removes all of the interminable songs and poetry
Not that I will ever really advise anyone to skip the books, you should still read them if you liked the film

Yeah, I should probably read the books at some point. Just need to have time...
Can't believe you disliked it so much Contrary! I guess tastes differ and all but still.

I wasn't a big fan of the books. I read the first one but never got around to the second one due to lack of interest. The movies were pretty great though.

i read the hobbit at the age of six

it was slightly boring but otherwise okay until i got to the ending, where my tiny child-brain was traumatized by the shocking reality that CHARACTERS COULD DIE

never went back after that

From what I remember it's a far-too-long children's book!

True story

Obviously all fantasy is for children.
Calling Lord of the Rings a children's book is pretty clear proof you haven't read it, it would bore the hell out of most children.

it was meant to be a children's book. Tolkein's publisher wanted a nice sequel to the Hobbit and LOTR is what he got

i read it as a kid

It was originally conceived as a sequel to the Hobbit and then became its own three-book epic (even the shortest of which is almost 50% longer than the hobbit) which required retconning the original Hobbit story in order for it to even make sense as a sequel.
It was meant to be published alongside the Silmarillion, an impermeable book of poetry and mythology that would hold little interest even for many people who liked The Hobbit.
It includes hundreds of lines of songs and poetry that most kids would just dismiss as utterly boring, and many chapters of interminable politics.

But hey if you want to dismiss the world's third best selling novel of any genre as merely "a book for kids" go ahead.

Kids can read books written for adults, adults can read books written for kids. Some books are clearly written for children (the very hungry caterpillar) and some clearly for adults (fifty shades of grey), many (like this one) happily sit between.

I never said kids' books are bad.

I'm quite fond of the Lord of the ring series, even more fond of the Hobbit, thanks to my childhood of reading many many books, saw this topic when there was just the OP, didn't expect the negativity views honestly, rather curious to why, either way each to their own.

On a side note i say the LoTR games however have been rather lackluster lately.

I remember forcing myself to read this when I was 12, which took ages.
Then I read it again recently and man, was it good.
LotR games suffer because they all try to capture the epic scope and scale of LotR, and fail miserably.