I didn't vote in the poll because my answer is a bit more complicated than the options given. Like a few others here, I enjoy the discussion of the different series and their individual merits. Even a discussion of which books do a better job at one or two things is great, because it gets us digging into the books and the ideas behind them. That said, I don't think any discussion of which series is better is going to get anywhere because it's asking the wrong question. I happen to enjoy all three series (films and books) pretty much equally, but I go to them for different things. I usually read Narnia when I want something that is lighter and spiritually enriching; Middle-earth when I want epics and vast storylines with mythic backgrounds; and Harry Potter when I want something that is somewhere in between, both lighthearted and vast. I can't say that even a discussion of which books are better written would get anywhere, though a discussion about which films were made better might be a decent discussion if one had a clear, universal rubric by which to judge them all.

This depends on what you mean by comparison

I'm tired of the oh so lovely "which is better debate"... the "one stole this concept from the other" comments... However, they can be compared as literary pieces as works of fantasy... There are things they have in common and things that they don't... does this make one better? No... just means there's a fantasy book out there for a variety of tastes

I'm tired of "Harry Potter or LotR is better than Narnia" comparisons, because quite obviously they're wrong. But I'll debate anything and have a fun time doing it. I'd also like to discuss how different elements might have inspired another series, what they have in common, how they're fundamentally different, etc. So, I chose no.

I voted for I don't know.I feel that sometimes it does become annoying to hear everyone make the comparisons But, at other times I feel it very appropriate and I tend to my own comparisons when I am discussing Lord of the Rings, and I compare to Narnia, or the other way around.

Since, I have never read or watched Harry Potter I do not tend to make references to the series all.

But, I wish that people would take in mind that when they make these comparisons, to not over do them. The fact that they are overdone is some of my problems with them.

Most of the time, I don't mind the comparisons, but I can tell of one instance where it did annoy me.

When the Walden/Fox VDT movie came out, it received pretty mediocre to negative reviews. The worst part about it, though, is that people used the worst aspects of the movie to criticize C.S. Lewis in comparison to Tolkien and Rowling.

From Jeff Myers's Retrotimes review:

( http://metrotimes.com/watch/the-chronic ... -1.1075121)

"It's instructive to consider the care and craft that has gone into each successive Potter film while Narnia offers up only ever-diminishing returns. The truth is Voyage of the Dawn Treader makes little sense and, if true to the book, demonstrates what a poor dramatist C.S. Lewis was. Characters come and go, the magic is random and disconnected from any internal storytelling logic, and the children never really earn their victories but rather have them handed to them. The swords are little more than narrative props and too easily found, and Jesus ... er ... I mean, Aslan helps Eustace break free of a magical curse that should've offered dramatic rewards."

At least that review added the clause of 'if it's actually true to the book.'

The most egregious example comes from a review for which I can't locate the original link or text, but essentially said,

"The storyline of collecting 7 swords is remarkably similar to Rowling's 7 horcruxes quest. While I give Lewis some credit because his book was written first, there is a reason why Rowling's books and movies are so much more popular. Her 7 items quest is handled in a much superior way to Lewis's comparatively poor story."

I mean, wow. It was after that review that I realized bad adaptations of movies really can have a negative effect on the original author's legacy.

I even heard a positive review from Spill.com praising the movie for "sticking close to the book", even though they hadn't actually read it (they just assumed the movie stuck close to the book because the plotline was so different from a typical fantasy film). Which in a sense I guess is true, in that they didn't completely rewrite VDT to be a different movie, but they did try to include a typical fantasy film plotline inside VDT's already existing content, which isn't exactly...er...faithful.

"The storyline of collecting 7 swords is remarkably similar to Rowling's 7 horcruxes quest. While I give Lewis some credit because his book was written first, there is a reason why Rowling's books and movies are so much more popular. Her 7 items quest is handled in a much superior way to Lewis's comparatively poor story."

Oh, yikes!! No wonder people, here, went ballistic over those 7 swords! When reviewing a film it would be a good idea if the reviewer, at any rate, was thorough enough to read the book first to make his comments valid.

My chief beef about those comparisons was one review I read on Internet on Wombat, I think it was. This Australian reviewer was quite negative about VDT because, he said, he didn't want to listen to another Lion delivered sermon or a story about English toffs. No prizes for guessing his core beliefs, or lack of them is there? I guessed he had read at least one Narnia book, possibly VDT, and wasn't sure whether or not he had actually taken the trouble to watch any of the previous films, let alone VDT.

About the 7 horcruxes: yes, the hunt for these evil objects was exciting, and yes, this quest was a more dangerous, action-packed adventure, than the 7 swords stop-gap plot device. But JK Rowling had the strong advantage of being around to discuss the dramatisation of each film with Steve Kloves, who wrote the screenplays for all but one of the films, not to mention any directors who cared to ask her opinion. Unfortunately, C.S.Lewis could hardly be available for such an exercise, and Doug Gresham seems not to have had as cosy a relationship with Michael Apted during VDT filming.

I'm honestly tired of the comparisons just because Narnia can stand on its own and doesn't need to be compared to other successful fantasy books. Narnia is very unique and doesn't have similar plots to any of these stories. I understand why people would say, "If you like LOTR you would like Narnia" and I don't mind that. But when people make Narnia dependent on another series, I get upset.
(Although comparing the positive themes of Harry Potter to LOTR and Narnia was how I convinced my dad to read the HP books )